Datasets:

BEE-spoke-data

/

napierone-pdf-raw

like 0

3492-pdf

## Knowledge Principles For Government Table Of Contents | | Foreword | 4 | |------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------|------| | Executive Summary | | 5 | | Why This Document Matters | | | | | | 7 | | How To Use This Document | 8 | | | Principles Overview | 12 | | | Principle 1 - Knowledge is a valued asset | | 14 | | Principle 2 - Knowledge needs the right environment in order to thrive | 15 | | | Principle 3 - Knowledge is captured where necessary and possible | 16 | | | Principle 4 - Knowledge is freely sought and shared | | 17 | | Principle 5 - Knowledge increases in value through re-use | 18 | | | Principle 6 - Knowledge underpins individual learning | | 19 | | Principle 7 - Knowledge underpins organisational learning | 20 | | ## Foreword The Civil Service is a knowledge business. It uses its collective knowledge to support the government of the day in implementing its commitments, delivering high quality public services and keeping the country safe. Making sure we maximise the knowledge of the Civil Service is something we are all responsible for. If we get this right we minimise the need to undertake expensive training or re-training as people move roles because the required knowledge is transferred in advance of their departure. We avoid wasting time 're-inventing wheels' and the drag it causes on Civil Service productivity because the expertise needed can be easily found. The creative spark generated by good knowledge sharing also helps departments to innovate to tackle the challenges they face. Civil servants are experienced in managing information, but knowledge does not have the same characteristics and ensuring that it is shared effectively requires a different approach. Departments also differ in size, organisation and culture - all factors which shape and constrain knowledge sharing - and what works for one is not guaranteed to work for another. This set of Knowledge Principles has therefore been designed by Knowledge and Information Management practitioners in government to assist their colleagues in developing strategies and plans to improve how knowledge is shared in their departments. The principles don't prescribe solutions, but instead provide a framework for considering the knowledge sharing issues that need to be addressed if the Civil Service is to be a world-leading knowledge organisation. As a result of the work I have been leading in government to address our information and knowledge management challenges I believe we have the potential to become such an organisation. These principles are a step on that journey and I commend them to you. Philip Rycroft 2nd Permanent Secretary, Head of UK Governance Group, Cabinet Office Executive Summary The key part knowledge plays in efficiently and effectively running departments is broadly well understood. How to achieve this in more consistent, predictable and controlled ways is less understood and subject to a variety of approaches and strategies. The nature of government and the operation of individual departments of state make a single pangovernment knowledge management (KM) strategy impractical. The GKIM Knowledge Management Working Group (KMWG) has therefore produced a set of Principles intended to inform a common overall approach to individual departmental strategies, while retaining the ability to flex the detail. This is consistent with the approach taken to Information Management, and the two documents - the Information Principles and this set of Knowledge Principles - form a companion set. Knowledge is not Information, although Information Management principles may be applied to captured knowledge. Knowledge capture, however, must not be seen as synonymous with, or a substitute for, a holistic knowledge management programme. Knowledge is the sum of experience, training, insight and education and is tacit, whereas information is tangible, captured, manipulated in information systems and subject to further interpretation. Knowledge is fluid and dynamic, in a constant state of creation and renewal. Exploiting it to best effect for the individual and organisation is a challenge, but one where success can deliver benefits integral to adapting, improving and innovating. The need for robust and active KM is amplified as Crown Servants become more mobile and move posts more often, reducing the constancy of knowledge and experience. The opportunity to share their knowledge and exploit it to the betterment of organisations can help reduce rework, repetition of mistakes and improve delivery time and performance of projects. As shown here, the Principles build into a hierarchy, with the core Principle at the bottom. If knowledge is not valued, KM will not attract the level of resource required for success. Principle 2 recognises that whereas Information Management has tangible items to manage, KM relates to the intangible substance of a person or organisation's awareness. Managing knowledge, therefore, is about working with people to create an environment where their knowledge is given freely and where they are supported and encouraged to share with and learn from others. Principles 3-5 draw on this. Large and geographically dispersed organisations are unlikely to consistently share knowledge face to face. In order for knowledge to be fully exploited and contribute to the benefit of the organisation, it must be nurtured and readily accessible. This requires techniques to socialise learning (eg through the concept of Communities of Practice); the application of social business software; mentoring programmes; and structured knowledgeelicitation techniques such as exit interviews. The advantage of making knowledge widely available is that organisations can exploit it to:  avoid re-work,  avoid repetition of bad practice / mistakes  improve processes / ways of working In this sense, knowledge increases its value by delivering benefit through sharing and re-use. Principles 6 and 7 build on the preceding ones as the foundation for individual and organisational learning, exploiting knowledge at both the individual and organisational level to become more effective and efficient, increase capability and achieve greater impact. It is intended that these Principles will be used by departments to inform discussions on Knowledge and form the central tenet of their Knowledge Strategies. Why This Document Matters The Information Principles1 clearly identify that Information is needed to inform policy development and make evidence based decisions, and can be used to drive efficiency and service improvement - enhancing public services, whilst at the same time reducing waste and improving value for money; the same is true of knowledge. Information and knowledge are inextricably connected in underpinning effective decision-making in government. Building on the Information Principles:  Information is hard fact - but the ability to use that information to deliver tangible effect comes from the way it is used by human beings; more specifically, how it is converted into knowledge.  Learning lessons, preventing duplication of errors and effort in the workplace, cannot be done from information alone. To be done successfully, lessons-learnt exercises must incorporate people's experience, insight, skills and how they bring them all together and subsequently share them. Much of an organisation's capital and organisational advantage resides in the minds of its employees. The little tricks, workarounds, understanding, experience, background and skills in an organisation are rarely captured, yet these, as much as hard information, contribute significantly to organisational competence. People leaving the organisation and taking this know-how with them can have a significant impact on its efficiency and effectiveness. The public sector has historically benefitted from a stable workforce with on the job training, creating an environment where knowledge has been passed on informally. However, the current workforce is much smaller, more mobile and tends to move jobs more regularly, often taking hard earned knowledge and experience with them. This is exacerbated by a demographic of people above their 40s and current staffing reductions which often result in older, more experienced people leaving. Given the importance of knowledge to the public sector, there is clearly a need for greater access to the latent knowledge of individuals, taking a strategic view on what knowledge is vital and using state of the art methods and, where appropriate, technologies to ensure that knowledge is effectively shared, captured and re-used. This document therefore presents, for the first time, an overarching set of Knowledge Principles for the UK public sector. These Knowledge Principles are intended to express timeless truths to which all public sector organisations can subscribe - but also to provide, as a corollary, concrete implications for organisations to consider when implementing KM programmes. The Principles are intended be bold and challenging and to set direction. They are not however intended to be directives. It is for each organisation to consider the Principles and to set the extent of their own ambition - interpreting the implications in the light of their own unique organisational context. The Principles provide high-level foundations and therefore their scope is intentionally broad. They apply to all knowledge that is created and re-used by a UK public sector organisation. They apply to both tacit and articulable knowledge, and to knowledge at all stages of its lifecycle2. The intention is that organisations across the public sector will become increasingly aligned in their use and management of knowledge, drawing their own local strategy and practices from a common set of Principles and best-practices. How To Use This Document This document is intended to be of interest and relevance to a wide readership. However it is specifically aimed at those responsible for creating Knowledge Management Strategies for UK Public Sector organisations. The purpose of the Principles is to provide a common and consistent set of themes and best practices resulting in a coherent approach to realising, and capitalising on, the value of knowledge for the UK Public Sector as a whole. Value of Knowledge to Citizens and Government The Principles are fundamentally based on realising the value of knowledge for the UK Public Sector. The principal drivers are therefore efficiency, service improvement, value for money, and innovation. Principles Structure Each Principle consists of the following parts:  Name - a brief, memorable title  Statement - a more descriptive explanation of what the Principle is about  Rationale - explaining why the Principle is important  Implications - highlighting concrete implications for organisations which arise from subscribing to the Principle. The implications are particularly important as they provide a checklist of topic areas which a Knowledge Strategy aligned with the Principles would be expected to cover. Each implication is supported by further text (in italics) which gives examples of what this might include. Resource Base The Principles are supported by a companion Resource Base. This lists extensive references and authoritative sources relating to each Principle. The Resource Base thus provides important further assistance for implementation of the Principles. The remainder of this document describes the Principles themselves.  The next chapter gives a brief overview of the Principles as a set, explaining how they form a logical hierarchy.  Then there is a chapter per Principle, explaining each Principle in detail.  Finally, an appendix provides a quick-reference checklist of each Principle and its implications. The following diagrams show how all this works: 1. 2. What is Knowledge? There are many definitions of knowledge derived from dictionaries or academic text books. As the specific context for this document is Knowledge Management, the definition put forward by Davenport & Prusak3 best fits the bill: ## "Knowledge Is A Fluid Mix Of Framed Experience, Value, Contextual Information And Expert Insight That Provides A Framework For Evaluating And Incorporating New Experiences And Information." Background It is generally accepted that knowledge cannot be managed in any conventional sense as it is the product of an individual's mental processes; and that what is actually meant by KM is the management of environment, cultures and behaviours to proactively stimulate knowledge creation and sharing. Thus, the definition of knowledge has to encompass three key elements: - The "mix" - The evaluation of new experiences and information - The incorporation of new experiences and information. The Mix Every individual has a unique mix of framed experience, value, contextual information and expert insight that informs their outlook. These are "deeply ingrained assumptions, generalizations, or even pictures or images that influence how we understand the world"4. The Evaluation Each individual's view of the world is slightly different and thus how they perceive, process and act upon information is based on and rooted in their individual experiences. The Incorporation "It [knowledge] originates **and is applied** in the mind of knowers" 5. The act of evaluating new experiences and information tests our existing views by supporting or challenging them. We weigh this up, evaluate it, and as a result incorporate all, some or none of it into our existing knowledge, thereby creating new knowledge. Organisational View In the same way as an individual has a unique view of the world, so an organisation has a unique shared view which it projects to the world. There may be different sub-cultures within the organisation, but in general terms these will ultimately coalesce into a single, coherent corporate view. The same factors apply: this time the mix is an aggregation of the individual views plus corporate history and experiences and is embodied not "only in documents or repositories but also in organisational routines, processes, practices and norms."6 Evaluation and subsequent incorporation of knowledge within the organisation can be from lessons learned, organisational methods / practices such as Communities of Practice (COPs), online forums and/or face-to-face briefings, eg Sharing New and Acquired Knowledge (SNAK) sessions. The individuals in an organisation should test and evaluate outputs from these, either formally or informally. The wider the distribution, the greater the exposure and testing. NOTE: One thing to bear in mind is that a limited number of personnel can disproportionately affect the shared view. This can be overt, where influential individuals seek to own/set the direction and cultures of an organisation. Alternatively, it can be an unintended consequence: for example the influence of films or television productions which alter historical fact to enhance dramatic effect, leaving an indelible - and erroneous - print on an entire culture. These are things that every organisation must be aware of. Knowledge is supported by, but is not Information Information is a tangible asset which can be managed by defined processes and ways of working: essentially, "hard" system activity. Knowledge however is not, it is an intangible asset, held in the minds of individuals. To share knowledge effectively requires "soft" skills which set the environment and influence the behaviours and cultures of both individuals and organisations. While effective information management is a key component of a comprehensive knowledge creation and sharing policy, organisations must recognise that knowledge cannot be handled simply by using ICT, IS and associated tools. ## Principles Overview Seven Principles have been identified. They build naturally into a hierarchy, as depicted in the diagram above. ## The Hierarchy Is Important As Each Principle Builds On That Which Has Gone Before. For Example, It Is Unlikely That Knowledge Can Be Re-Used Unless It Is Also Valued, Freely Shared And, Where Possible, Captured. Principles 1 and 2 provide the foundation on which all others depend. It is crucial that knowledge is valued as an asset and managed, protected, and exploited throughout its lifecycle. Governance should be light-touch with a consistent approach to risk assessment. Organisations should define roles and responsibilities and develop skills and capabilities. Principles 3 and 4 help to unlock the value inherent in knowledge. Captured knowledge needs to be fit for purpose in terms of its content, and transmission format. It increases in value when presented in standardised/open formats which can be linked to other information and/or authoritative sources; good information practice supports this. These two Principles allow knowledge to become truly pan-organisational, enabling all knowledge to be available regardless of geographic location, or proximity in organisational networks NOTE: There are differing views on whether captured knowledge should be categorised as knowledge or as information; notwithstanding these views, without the ability to share knowledge other than verbally, its value is inevitably restricted. Facilitating knowledge sharing by providing tools such as collaborative workspaces and encouraging formal and informal networking also helps to spread knowledge. This makes it available for wider organisational benefit. With these pre-requisites in place organisations can begin to achieve the next Principle: re-use. Reuse both avoids wasteful duplication, and provides the means to extract value in new and innovative ways. The top layer builds on all of the layers below, emphasising the relationship between knowledge management and learning. These become the two final Principles: knowledge seeking underpinning individual learning; and knowledge sharing underpinning organisational learning. ## Principle 1 - Knowledge Is A Valued Asset Statement Knowledge Is An Asset Which Is Fundamental To The Efficient And Effective Delivery Of Public Services. This Principle Emphasises The Importance Of An Organisation Recognising That The Seeking And Sharing Of Knowledge Leads To Better Outcomes, Including:  Increased collaboration  Improved quality of evidence-based decisions and continuous improvement  Enhanced speed of decision making and provision of advice  Reduced duplication of effort  Increased business resilience Organisations need to understand their need for knowledge and value that knowledge in business terms. They should appreciate that it is through knowledge that they deliver value and impact. In parallel with other assets (eg buildings, machinery, people, money), knowledge needs to be fully and appropriately exploited for maximum business benefit. Rationale Valuing knowledge as an asset is the basis on which all other knowledge Principles depend. It is essential to establish a culture where knowledge is valued if people are to share and capture knowledge freely and if the leadership of organisations are to promote knowledge management and support staff in such activity. Implications for Knowledge Management Strategy - There is a declaration from the organisation clearly acknowledging and establishing the importance of knowledge to the business. - The importance of knowledge is reflected in organisational policies and practices. - Tacit and explicit knowledge assets need to be considered, and given equal weight. Principle 2 - Knowledge needs the right environment in order to thrive Statement In order for knowledge to thrive, it requires appropriate behaviours and cultures, fostered and adopted by leaders and individuals alike, which encourage the free sharing of knowledge to the advantage of individuals, the organisation and citizens. Leaders must allocate time, acknowledge contributions and ensure a no-blame, no ridicule ethos prevails. Individuals must respond positively, using the opportunity to seek out and share knowledge. In order to develop the environment, there are many tools and techniques available. Good tools, such as an organisation-wide collaborative environment, can facilitate knowledge sharing, provided their use is explained, promoted and encouraged, not coerced. Likewise, making the physical environment conducive to collaboration and the "chance encounter", via breakout areas, soft seating, coffee points etc is helpful, but leaders need to encourage use of these spaces and ensure everyone knows informal meetings, conversations and discussions are sanctioned. Organisations must avoid the temptation to view these tools as a solution in themselves. Rationale Establishing culture, policies and practices that encourage diverse knowledge sharing ensures that knowledge has the potential to be utilised as fully as possible across an organisation. It also enables the capture and re-use of knowledge. Implications for Knowledge Management Strategy - The management of knowledge is a combination of soft skills and effective resource management. - Knowledge sharing should be recognised and rewarded. - Expectations of a need to share knowledge are set at all levels. - Knowledge sharing across the organisation is monitored and reviewed. - Tools to support knowledge sharing are provided and promoted. Principle 3 - Knowledge is captured where necessary and possible Statement Capturing of knowledge turns that which is held tacitly in the heads of members of staff into explicit, recorded knowledge. It is important to note that not all knowledge needs to be (or indeed can be) captured in this way. That said, some knowledge - particularly that which has widespread application and/or long-term value, and/or is likely to be transient in its availability - should be captured if possible. Knowledge can be captured in a range of different ways. Capture should:  be as efficient as possible  match techniques to situations  maximise potential for re-use (easy to find, easy to access). ## Captured Knowledge Needs To Be Refreshed: Identifying Ownership And Associated Responsibilities, As With Information Assets, Is A Key Part Of This. Rationale Capturing Knowledge Increases Its Potential For Re-Use. It Is A More Efficient Way To Enable Such Reuse Where The Knowledge Has Wider Application, And Particularly In Circumstances Where It Is At Risk Of Being Lost To The Organisation, For Example Through The Loss Of Experienced Staff. Implications For Knowledge Management Strategy - The organisation needs to understand which vital and potentially transient knowledge it needs for its business and ensure efforts are made to capture it - A range of capture techniques should be evaluated and promulgated - Captured knowledge needs to be owned and refreshed - Tools for knowledge capture should be provided and promoted. NOTE: - Knowledge capture is not synonymous with knowledge management, and organisations should be wary of over-reliance on knowledge capture programmes. Only a small proportion of collective corporate and/or individual knowledge relative to the whole can ever be captured effectively. Good KM programmes must acknowledge and address knowledge sharing and organisational learning to be properly effective. - Knowledge is not static. Databases of captured knowledge can become (a) unwieldy and (b) outdated unless they are regularly reviewed and refreshed. Organisations should consider ways of feeding captured knowledge back into the business to improve processes and practices. Principle 4 - Knowledge is freely sought and shared Statement Knowledge is an asset that develops from the intellectual activity of individuals - which can be brought together to form Organisational Knowledge. Knowledge cannot be *demanded* from an individual in any sense that would ensure a full and total disclosure. Instead organisations must create a culture, supported by leadership and individual behaviours, which encourages the free seeking and sharing of knowledge for the benefit of all. To realise its full benefit knowledge needs to be shared freely, otherwise it is of limited value, benefiting only its keeper. This Principle highlights the importance of developing ways to share knowledge, to move from a perspective that 'knowledge is power' to one where 'knowledge sharing' is power. Knowledge sharing should not be codified or constrained, unless there are over-riding security considerations. Knowledge can be relevant in unlikely or disparate ways and sharing should be maximised where possible, to uncover these hidden linkages. Rationale The value of knowledge is in the amalgamation of an individual's experience, thought processes, education and training, together with the information to which they are exposed. Only the individual knows the full extent of that knowledge and the reasoning behind any conclusions they draw from it, and therefore non-freely-given knowledge can never generate the confidence or assurance that it is either accurate or complete. Implications for Knowledge Management Strategy - Knowledge management is a combination of soft skills and effective resource management. - Leaders do not try to pressurise individuals into disclosing knowledge. - Leaders should foster a culture where knowledge sharing is viewed as empowering. ## Note: - Shared knowledge needs to be credible. Encouraging rather than demanding knowledge-sharing is likely to elicit more credible, reliable output. - Knowledge differs from person to person. Sharing knowledge widely allows for quality checking and for understanding to be tested and, where necessary, clarified. ## Principle 5 - Knowledge Increases In Value Through Re-Use Statement The Value Of Knowledge Can Be Multiplied By Re-Use. This Requires Thinking Outside Traditional Silos And Proactively Looking For Opportunities To Re-Use. Promoting A Culture Of Knowledge-Sharing Facilitates This Approach. Aspects Of Re-Use Include: Internal re-use - making sure that full value is gained from using knowledge within the organisation in areas of both obvious and less immediately obvious applicability. External re-use - sharing knowledge with others across organisational boundaries, particularly within the public sector or more generally with private businesses and citizens. Re-use involves considering what knowledge an organisation can make available to others, but it also involves looking at what others have on offer, and how an organisation might itself re-use this external knowledge. Whilst this Principle strongly encourages re-use, it is important to appreciate that, as with information, re-use does require a careful risk-based judgement to be made with regard to exploiting vs protecting sensitive knowledge, as well as consideration of the costs and benefits involved, and any rights or other commercial considerations. The ability to govern the dissemination, capture, storage and retrieval of information is key to the ability to share explicit knowledge across an organisation regardless of geographical or functional dispersion. Rationale This Principle again builds on what has gone before. No significant re-use of knowledge will be achieved unless it is effectively sought, shared and, where necessary and possible, captured. Knowledge re-use presents opportunities for cost and time savings and efficiencies. The practice of re-using knowledge helps embed a culture of learning7 within an organisation, promoting a continuous improvement approach and enhancing the quality of decision-making. Good knowledge management requires time and resource, and is therefore not a zero-cost activity. Tangible return on investment comes from maximising the value of organisational knowledge through appropriate and innovative re-use. Implications for Knowledge Management Strategy - Opportunities to proactively offer knowledge re-use are identified - An approach is established for discovering re-useable knowledge. - An approach is established for promoting re-useable knowledge. ## Principle 6 - Knowledge underpins individual learning Statement Knowledge is the cornerstone of learning, both classroom and workplace based. The understanding of learning needs, the content of the learning and the assimilation of the learning either come from an individual / team's knowledge or add to an individual / team's knowledge. Real value lies in on the job learning - the opportunity to supplement training / education with up to date knowledge from someone doing the job. This is what makes apprenticeships so effective - the blend of classroom and on the job learning. Exposure to "new" knowledge, experience and skills is assimilated by the individual to form fresh knowledge - the very definition of learning. Rationale We cannot learn as individuals if we cannot either experience new things or be exposed to knowledge gleaned through benefiting from others' experiences and skills. We need this to add to or challenge our own understanding of the world, our own knowledge. Without sharing and access to others' knowledge the opportunities to learn are significantly diminished. Implications for Knowledge Management Strategy - Exposure to others' knowledge is essential for an individual to learn. - Learning is a key benefit of sharing knowledge. - Knowledge is a key enabler in developing educational and learning courses. ## Principle 7 - Knowledge Underpins Organisational Learning Statement Organisational Learning In This Context Is The Ability Of The Organisation To Benefit From The Collective Knowledge Of Its Individuals, And Apply It Through Training, Changes In Procedures / Policies / Ways Of Working / Technology To Improve Effectiveness And Efficiency. Thus There Is A Direct Correlation Between Sharing And Re-Use Of Knowledge And Improvements In The Organisation. Rationale Establishing Culture, Policies And Practices That Encourage Diverse Knowledge Sharing Ensures That Knowledge Has The Potential To Be Utilised As Fully As Possible Across An Organisation. It Also Enables The Capture And Re-Use Of Knowledge. Implications For Knowledge Management Strategy - Knowledge management is explicitly recognised as a core component of organisational learning, - Knowledge management is a combination of soft skills and effective resourcing. - Knowledge sharing and seeking should be recognised and rewarded. - The expectation that knowledge will be shared and re-used is embedded at all levels. - Knowledge sharing across the organisation is monitored and reviewed. - Tools to support knowledge sharing are provided.

en

1179-pdf

## 1. During the month of November, the following exceptions to the recruitment and consultancy freeze (above £20k) have been considered by the Chief Executive, in his capacity as Accounting Officer. 2. The details are shown below: | Decision | Approval | |-------------------------|-------------| | date | | | Ref: No. & | | | directorate | | | Summary of | | | application | | | Consultancy/ | | | recruit | | | 149 | | | Additional operations | | | advice | | | 14 November | | | 2011 | | | External | | | recruitment | | | Approved | | | RPP | | | | | | 146 | | | Consultancy | Approved | | Compilation of bottom | | | up efficiency evidence | | | from previous studies | | | 14 November | | | 2011 | | | RPP | | | £58,750 | | | 147 | | | Consultancy | Approved | | Further development | | | of asset stewardship | | | monitoring | | | 14 November | | | 2011 | | | RPP | | | £58,750 | | | 148 | | | 14 November | | | 2011 | | | External | | | recruitment | | | Not approved | | | RME | | | Recruitment of Grade | | | E Competition and | | | Consumer Policy | | | 151 | | | Independent audit of | | | PR13 financial model | | | Consultancy | Approved | | 22 November | | | 2011 | | | RME | | | £60,000 | | | 150 | | | 28 November | | | 2011 | | | Recruitment of Director | | | of Performance | | | External | | | recruitment | | | Approved | | | RPP | | | 152 | | | 28 November | | | 2011 | | | Secondments from ITS | | | Leeds | | | External | | | recruitment | | | Approved | | | RME | | 3. The Accounting Officer refused one request for external recruitment on 14 November 4. The Director of Corporate Services approved 1 application for

en

3817-pdf

The National Archives Education Service Medicine on the Western Front Preparation materials for virtual classroom and video conference (KS4) ## Contents Teacher's notes 3 Mystery Document: 4 Sorting Activity: 5 Document 1: 6 Document 2: 8 Document 3: 10 ## Teacher'S Notes Students do not need to do any work in preparation for this virtual classroom. However, if there are students who have visual impairments and may have difficulty viewing the screen during the session, please enlarge copies of the documents for them to refer to. ## Teacher Preparation  Print out enough copies of the Mystery Document for the class.  Print out the sorting activity (no need to cut out).  Print out enough of Documents 1, 2 and 3 for the class (including their transcripts.) The class will be split into three groups, each looking at a different document. ## Useful Links Further source material relating to Medicine on the Western Front can be found in a two part collection on The National Archives' website: http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/medicine-on-the-western-front-part-one/ http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/medicine-on-the-western-front-part-two/ Letters of servicemen who enlisted from the Great Western Railway can be found in two collections on The National Archives' website: http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/letters-first-world-war-1915 http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/letters-first-world-war-1916-18/ Great War soldier's record is a lesson for use in the classroom. Great War 1914- 1918 website on the themes of outbreak, experience, peacemaking and remembrance. ## Mystery Document Sorting Activity 1. A soldier's medical sheet completed by a doctor. 2. An interview with a soldier recorded thirty years after the war. 3. A letter home from a soldier. 4. A panorama photograph of the trenches. 5. A field medical card filled in by a stretcher bearer. 6. An army unit's war diary. ## Document 1: Mh106/2138 Transcript For Expeditionary Forces Only. Army Form W 3243 A. K.L.M.C. Hospital Blackpool State from which Force - France Serial No in A. & D. Book - T.F. 1535 Trp, Batty or Coy. - Regimental No. - Rank: 2nd Lieutenant Name: Standley .T. Age: 22 Total Service: 3 2/12 State Service with Field Force in Months (last period only if more than one) 3 months (a) Date of arrival at Hospital as an admission - (b) As a transfer (state where from) 28/12/17 4th London General Date of discharge to duty - Date of discharge by change of disease - Date of discharge as an invalid - Date of death - Date of transfer (state where to) 9/4/18 Comm Depot, Ripon. No of days under treatment - 102 Observations: - To be filled in by the Medical Officer in charge of case. Disease: * Shell Shock Operations: Result of operation: Complications in order of occurrence Loss of sleep Headaches, tremors of hands and tongue. Palpitations and Exaggerated reflexes. Improvement under Electro Massage treatment, + able to walk 2 miles now. No A.F. w2/18 received. [Signatures] Signature of Medical Officer * To be in accordance with the Official Nomenclature One of these Red cards is to be completed for every Expeditionary Force patient received into hospital. Black cards for U.K. troops. (6297) Wt. W1151/H4035 750,000 5/17 McA & W Ltd (E1266) Forms/W. 3243 A/1 ## Document 2: Wo399/98580 Transcript From T. Standley 2Lt. 1/2/18 187451 7th Battalion Leicester Regiment Imperial Hydro St Annes on Sea To the Secretary, War Office F.3. Dept. Sir, I have the honour to forward this my application for a wound gratuity. I was blown up by a shell on October 10th causing me to be brought to England with Shock. I have been in Hospital 4 months and my nerves are still very shaky. I am still suffering with pains in the Head, troubled sleep and Palpitation of the Heart. My first medical board was at 4th London General Hospital about 19/12/17 my second at Kings Lancashire Military Convalescent Hospital 22/1/18 when I was granted a further stay for treatment. I have the honour to be Sir Your obedient servant T. Standley. 2 Lt. ## Document 3: Wo32/4748 Transcript Forms of Treatment The establishment of an atmosphere of cure is the basis of all successful treatment, the personality of the physician is, therefore, of the greatest importance. While recognising that each individual case of war neurosis must be treated on its merits, the Committee are of opinion that good results will be obtained in the majority by the simplest forms of psychotherapy, i.e. explanation, persuasion and suggestion, aided by such physical methods as baths, electricity and massage though these act chiefly by suggestion. Rest of mind and body is essential in all cases. The Committee are of opinion that the production of the hypnoidal state and deep hypnotic sleep, while beneficial as a means of conveying suggestions or eliciting forgotten experiences are useful in selected cases, but in the majority they are unnecessary and may even aggravate the symptoms for a time. They do not recommend psycho-analysis in the Freudian sense. In the state of convalescence, re-education and suitable occupation of an interesting nature are of great importance. If the patient is unfit for further military service, it is considered that every endeavour should be made to obtain for him suitable employment on his return to active life. ## Did You Know? The National Archives Education Service also offers free taught sessions onsite in Kew and online. You can book a free **Virtual Classroom** session, an online lesson where students can use individual computers to interact with our Education Officers and explore original documents without needing to travel to The National Archives. You will need computers or tablets for your students to work on either individually or in pairs. A free **Video Conference** session allows our Education Officers to teach through your projector, leading discussions and guiding students through activities based around original documents. All you need is a computer with a projector, webcam and microphone to set up this web-chat with us. Our **Onsite Workshops** are available for free here at The National Archives and allow students to experience genuine original documents reflecting over 1000 years of history. From Elizabeth I's signature to the telegrams of the sinking Titanic, students love the wow-factor of being able to see real history on the desk in front of them. Find out more: 🌏 www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education f www.facebook.com/TheNationalArchivesEducationService ✉ education@nationalarchives.gov.uk

en

1124-pdf

## 1. During the month of August 2012, the following exceptions to the recruitment and consultancy freeze have been considered by the Chief Executive, in his capacity as Accounting Officer. 2. The details are shown below: | Decision | Approval | |------------------------|-------------| | date | | | Ref: No. & | | | directorate | | | Summary of | | | application | | | Consultancy/ | | | recruitment | | | 212 | | | Efficient enhancement | | | expenditure review for | | | PR13 | | | Consultancy | Approved | | 1 August | | | 2012 | | | RPP | | | £150,000 | | | 214 | | | Recalibration of | | | Schedule 8 | | | performance regime | | | Consultancy | Approved | | RME | | | 6 August | | | 2012 | | | £108,000 | | | | | | 215 | | | Recruitment | Approved | | 8 August | | | 2012 | | | RPP | | | Grade B Rail Delivery | | | Manager | | | | | | 213 | | | Consultancy | Approved | | 13 August | | | 2012 | | | RPP | | | Innovation Study | | | £114,000 | | | | | | 217 | | | Generic E-C | | | recruitment scheme | | | Recruitment | Approved | | 16 August | | | 2012 | | | CS | | | | | 3. In addition, the Director or Deputy Director of Corporate Operations

en

2040-pdf

## # Council Tax Support And Housing Benefits City Of York Council Internal Audit Report 2017/18 ## Summary And Overall Conclusions Introduction York's Council Tax Support (CTS) scheme currently provides eligible working-age applicants with a discount up to 77.5% off their council tax bill, while pension-age applicants receive a 100% discount. Housing Benefit (HB) provides eligible applicants with a financial contribution towards payment of their rent. Currently, this is paid directly to the rent account of council tenants. Private or housing association tenants can receive it via BACS or have it paid directly to their landlords. Residents who receive HB but still struggle to pay their rent may also apply for Discretionary Housing Payments (DHPs). The council has a total budget of £256K for DHPs. The 2016/17 audit reviewed management controls for DHPs, but did not carry out detailed analysis. Therefore, this audit will consider them in more detail. The council aims to reduce fraud and error in CTS and HB applications and awards through a number of processes and mechanisms, such as real-time salary information from HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC). At the time of the 2016/17 audit, these were being brought in to replace the structured interventions strategy. This audit will also consider the effectiveness of these new measures. ## Objectives And Scope Of The Audit The purpose of this audit was to provide assurance to management that procedures and controls within the system will ensure that:  Discretionary Housing Payments are prioritised and awarded using consistently applied criteria and with sufficient authorisation.  The Discretionary Housing Payments budget is monitored effectively.  Processes and mechanisms are in place to reduce fraud and error in council tax support and housing benefit claims.  Sufficient information is available to management to assess the effectiveness of these fraud and error reduction processes and mechanisms. ## Key Findings Dhps As a discretionary scheme, the council's policy and guidance for awarding DHPs need to be flexible and the criteria broad enough so as not to unreasonably restrict the decision making process. Nevertheless, there are certain criteria that applicants must meet to be eligible for financial assistance. It was found that DHPs had been awarded using the correct criteria as required by the Department for Work & Pensions (DWP) and by appropriate council officers. However, the council's policy and guidance document was last updated in September 2013. The DWP's DHP manual has been updated several times since then, with the most recent update in March 2018, Officers stated they are aware of the recent changes and are planning to review their policy and guidance. There is currently no formal quality assurance process in place to ensure that applications and reviews are handled consistently and appropriately by officers. Implementing quality assurance would make the process more robust should there be a legal challenge or complaint to the council or Local Government Ombudsman. The DWP and the council require that disputed decisions on DHPs are reviewed by an independent officer. However, these cases are not identified in the monitoring information, and therefore it was not possible to confirm that the process was being followed. ## Fraud And Error A well established quality assurance process is in place to minimise processing error and the council employs a range of mechanisms which provide an effective means of identifying fraud and error in housing benefit and council tax support claims. As well as receiving and making use of real time data on earnings, pensions and benefit entitlement from the HMRC and from the DWP (i.e. RTI, ATLAS, HBMS, CIS and WURTI) a suite of operational reports is available, with reports being run on a daily, weekly and monthly basis to further assist in fraud and error reduction. Regular and comprehensive management information is produced for the purposes of monitoring customer contact, workload and claims processing but there is a lack of management information on the effectiveness of the fraud and error detection mechanisms currently in operation. ## Overall Conclusions The arrangements for managing risk were good with few weaknesses identified. An effective control environment is in operation, but there is scope for further improvement in the areas identified. Our overall opinion of the controls within the system at the time of the audit was that they provided Substantial Assurance. ## 1 Dhp Policy And Guidance Issue/Control Weakness Risk The council's DHP policy and guidance document is out of date. The council's policy and processes are not consistent with the DWP's guidance. ## Findings Although the council has a DHP policy and guidance document, it has not been reviewed since September 2013. Since then, the DWP has made several updates to its DHP manual to reflect welfare reforms and include guidance on best practice. The most recent update was completed in March 2018. Officers stated that they are aware of the latest update and are planning to conduct a review. ## Agreed Action 1.1 The DHP policy and guidance will be reviewed and updated to ensure it is consistent with the DWP's DHP manual. ## 2 Quality Assurance And Appeals Processes Issue/Control Weakness Risk Decisions on DHPs are made inconsistently or not following the council's policy and guidance. There is no formal quality assurance process to ensure consistency in decision making and monitoring information does not allow the identification of review cases. ## Findings Discussion with officers found that there is no spot-checking or formal quality assurance (QA) process, although officers stated they will discuss applications with each other if they are unsure of how to proceed. Without a QA process, however, management cannot gain the necessary assurance that policy and procedures are being applied appropriately and consistently, and that decisions are being made correctly. A new online form for DHP applications, introduced in May 2018, will enable a QA process to be more easily conducted. The DWP requires that disputed decisions are reviewed by an independent officer. The council's guidance and processes meet this requirement. However, the DHP Record maintained by the Technical Officers does not distinguish between review cases and standard applications, nor does it state the names of the officers involved. Therefore, it was not possible to confirm whether or not disputes were reviewed by an independent officer. Agreed Action 2.1 Priority 3 Responsible Officer Housing Benefits Manager A quality assurance process will be implemented for DHPs. This will include determining a set percentage of applications to review, checks to conduct, recording results and taking actions to address errors. It will be undertaken by an officer more senior than the Technical Officers who carry out the assessments. Timescale September 2018 Agreed Action 2.2 Priority 3 The annual DHP Record maintained by the Technical Officers will be amended to distinguish between review cases and standard applications and to show who assessed the original application and who reviewed the decision. Responsible Officer Housing Benefits Manager Timescale September 2018 ## 3 Management Information On Fraud And Error Reduction Mechanisms Issue/Control Weakness Risk There is limited management information on the effectiveness of the fraud and error reduction mechanisms in operation. Ineffective use of resources or decisions made without reliable information. ## Findings The Benefits service employs a range mechanisms and makes use of available services (i.e. CIS and WURTI) to assist in the reduction of fraud and error in Housing Benefit and Council Tax Support claims. As well as routinely reviewing RTI and ATLAS notifications and assessing HBMS referrals, the service also produces a suite of operational reports which are designed to assist in the identification of errant and potentially fraudulent claims. In addition, online forms for customers to self-report changes in circumstances have been recently developed. Some management information is already being produced on the outcome of RTI notifications, HBMS referrals and on the volume of selfreported changes in circumstances but this information is not recorded and reported in a consistent and coordinated way. In the case of operational reports, these are simply worked through by officers and no record exists on which to note the outcome of the assessment performed. This lack of consistent and consolidated management information means that there is no clear means by which to analyse how effectively resources are being deployed on these mechanisms. ## Agreed Action 3.1 A report will be generated on a monthly basis from Northgate, based on change source values held on the system that records the number of claims reviewed and the outcome of these reviews. This data will be monitored by the Housing Benefits Manager. The report was implemented prior to finalisation of the audit. ## Audit Opinions And Priorities For Actions Audit Opinions Audit work is based on sampling transactions to test the operation of systems. It cannot guarantee the elimination of fraud or error. Our opinion is based on the risks we identify at the time of the audit. Our overall audit opinion is based on 5 grades of opinion, as set out below. Opinion Assessment of internal control | High Assurance | |--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | Substantial | | Assurance | | Overall, good management of risk with few weaknesses identified. An effective control environment is in | | operation but there is scope for further improvement in the areas identified. | | | | Reasonable | | Assurance | | Overall, satisfactory management of risk with a number of weaknesses identified. An acceptable control | | environment is in operation but there are a number of improvements that could be made. | | Limited Assurance | | Overall, poor management of risk with significant control weaknesses in key areas and major | | improvements required before an effective control environment will be in operation. | | No Assurance | | Overall, there is a fundamental failure in control and risks are not being effectively managed. A number of | | key areas require substantial improvement to protect the system from error and abuse. | | | ## Priorities For Actions Priority 1 A fundamental system weakness, which presents unacceptable risk to the system objectives and requires urgent attention by management. Priority 2 A significant system weakness, whose impact or frequency presents risks to the system objectives, which needs to be addressed by management. Priority 3 The system objectives are not exposed to significant risk, but the issue merits attention by management. Where information resulting from audit work is made public or is provided to a third party by the client or by Veritau then this must be done on the understanding that any third party will rely on the information at its own risk. Veritau will not owe a duty of care or assume any responsibility towards anyone other than the client in relation to the information supplied. Equally, no third party may assert any rights or bring any claims against Veritau in connection with the information. Where information is provided to a named third party, the third party will keep the information confidential.

en

2419-pdf

## Notice Of Penalty Determination Year ended 5 April 9999 REPRINT_REFERENCEXXX RECIPIENT_NAME_LINE_1_MAX_35_CHARSX RECIPIENT_NAME_LINE_2_MAX_35_CHARSX ADDRESS_LINE_1_MAX_35_CHARSXXXXXXXX ADDRESS_LINE_2_MAX_35_CHARSXXXXXXXX ADDRESS_LINE_3_MAX_35_CHARSXXXXXXXX ADDRESS_LINE_4_MAX_35_CHARSXXXXXXXX ADDRESS_LINE_5_MAX_35_CHARSXXXXXXXX POSTCODE Issued by OFFICER_IN_CHARGEXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX OFFICE_NAME_MAX_35_CHARSXXXXXXXXXXX OFFICE_ADDRESS_LINE_1_MAX_35_CHARSX OFFICE_ADDRESS_LINE_2_MAX_35_CHARSX OFFICE_ADDRESS_LINE_3_MAX_35_CHARSX OFFICE_ADDRESS_LINE_4_MAX_35_CHARSX OFFICE_ADDRESS_LINE_5_MAX_35_CHARSX POSTCODE This is not the address for payments. See overleaf. Phone 08457 143 143 Fax 99999999999999999999 Date of issue 99 Monthxxxx 9999 Penalty number 999/999/9/999999/99/9999999999 Amount payable £99999.99 About this notice You are required by law to send starter and leaver forms, P45 (Part 1), P45 (Part 3), P46, P46(Pen) and P46(Expat), to us online; via the Internet or Electronic Data Interchange (EDI). As you have not sent all of your starter and leaver forms to us online you are now liable to a penalty. This notice gives details of that penalty. If you have an agent or professional adviser you should show them this notice immediately. If you do not understand why you have received this notice please ask me about it. My details are shown above. How the penalties are worked out We have worked out your penalty based on the number of paper starter and leaver forms that you sent us during the quarter ended 5 Monthxxxx 9999; the table overleaf gives more details. Based on that figure, your penalty is £99999.99. Payment You should pay the amount shown on or before 99 Monthxxxx 9999, using the payslip below. The notes overleaf give more information about *Paying HMRC*. ECS394(B)(einyr) M Please detach payslip here M HMRC 07/09 Penalties for not filing starter and leaver forms online We send you a penalty notice when you do not file your starter and leaver forms online. The amount of penalty we charge is based on the number of paper forms that you send us. The table below gives details. Penalty (£) Number of paper starter and leaver forms included in the quarter 1–5 0 6–49 100 50–149 300 150–299 600 300–399 900 400–499 1,200 500–599 1,500 Appeals If you want to appeal you should write to us within 30 days of the date the original Notice of Penalty Determination was issued, stating the grounds for the appeal. If you think you have a reasonable excuse for failing to send your starter and leaver forms online, please explain this. If you think there are good reasons to reduce the penalty amount please say why. We will, if possible, try to settle your appeal by agreement with you. If we cannot do this, we will write and tell you why and offer you a review by a person not previously involved in your appeal. We will also tell you about your right to appeal to an independent tribunal. For more information about *review* and *appeals*, go to www.hmrc.gov.uk or ask us for our factsheet HMRC1. | 600–699 | 1,800 | |---------------|---------| | 700–799 | 2,100 | | 800–899 | 2,400 | | 900–999 | 2,700 | | 1,000 or more | 3,000 | Print How to pay here, coordinates for top left corner X = 11mm Y = 87mm

en

4541-pdf

## Guidance For Environmental Permit Applications: Part B6.5 - Discharging treated domestic sewage effluent up to 15 cubic meters (15m3) a day into ground or up to 20 cubic meters a day to surface water ## Please read these guidance notes carefully before you fill in the forms. All relevant guidance documents can be found on our website. This guidance will help you complete part B6.5 of the application form pack. Where you see the term 'document reference' on the form, give the document references and send the documents with the application form when you've completed it. If you submit documents that are not required, please note that they are not assessed. How to contact us: If you need help filling in this form, please contact us by: General phone enquiries: 0300 065 3000 (Monday to Friday, 8am to 6pm). Email: ymholiadau@cyfoethnaturiolcymru.gov.uk /enquiries@naturalresourceswales.gov.uk Website: www.cyfoethnaturiol.cymru / www.naturalresources.wales Where to send your application: You can send your application by email or in the post. We can process applications more quickly, if we receive them by email (electronically). Send your completed application form to: Email: canolfanderbyntrwyddedau@cyfoethnaturiolcymru.gov.uk / permitreceiptcentre@naturalresourceswales.gov.uk Post: Canolfan Derbyn Trwyddedau, Cyfoeth Naturiol Cymru, Ty Cambria, 29 Heol Casnewydd, Caerdydd, CF24 0TP Permit Receipt Centre, Natural Resources Wales, Cambria House, 29 Newport Road, Cardiff, CF24 0TP Contents 1 About you 2 About this application 3 Your management system 4 Your site plan 5 About your discharge 6-10 About the receiving environment 11 Payment 12 The Data Protection Act 1998 13 Confidentiality and national security 14 Declaration What am I applying for? You are applying for an environmental permit to discharge sewage effluent of 20 cubic metres a day or less to a surface water (water discharge activity) or 15 cubic metres a day to ground (groundwater activity). ## Note: Before Filling In This Form You Should Check That You Need An Environmental Permit For Your Activities Rather Than An Exemption. If you want to discharge treated sewage effluent to a river, stream, estuary or the sea and the volume is 5 cubic metres per day or less you might be eligible for an exemption rather than a permit. If you want to discharge sewage effluent to groundwater via a drainage field or infiltration system and the volume is 2 cubic metres per day or less you might be eligible for an exemption rather than a permit. Whilst most householders with a sewage effluent discharge will be able to register for an exemption, we may not be able to accept a registration if the discharge is close to a nature conservation area. You will not be able to register a discharge to groundwater if it falls within a groundwater Source Protection Zone 1. We will check for this when you apply to register. Which form(s) do I have to complete? You need to fill in one complete form for **each discharge** you are applying for. Application checklist This is what you will need to send in addition to your application form. See the table, below. ## Section/ question reference Details of document Section 1, question 1b Details of additional individuals if more than one person is going to be named on the permit Section 2, question 2a Details of any pre-application discussions with us before your application Section 4 Site plan for your sewage treatment facility Section 5, question 5d Explanation as to why you cannot discharge your effluent to a sewer if the boundary of any premises served by the sewage treatment facility is within a publically sewered area (i.e. 30m of a sewer for a single domestic property). You must show the extra cost of connecting to a sewer compared to the treatment you propose, and the sewerage undertaker's formal response to your Water Industry Act Section 106 application Section 5, question 5e Calculations to show the maximum volume of effluent you will discharge in a day (if there is not enough space on the form) Section 5, question 5f Design details of 'other' treatment systems (if there is not enough space on the form) Section 11 Application fee Section 13 If applicable, a letter giving reasons why you wish to claim confidentiality ## Definition Of Domestic Sewage Effluent Sewage must be solely domestic in origin and contain no trade effluent (as defined in Section 221 of the Water Resources Act 1991). For the purpose of this guidance, 'domestic sewage' means sewage from residential settlements and services that originates predominantly from human metabolism and from household activities. This includes waste water from cooking, washing up and clothes washing at guest houses, hotels, pubs and restaurants where these relate solely to activities on those premises. For instance, sewage from a guest house preparing meals for its guests and washing its own bedding qualifies as 'domestic sewage'. Waste water from a site preparing food for consumption elsewhere, or washing bedding on behalf of another person does not qualify as 'domestic sewage'. ## 1 About You 1A What Type Of Applicant Are You? Fill in the details of each operator to be named on the permit. We can only issue permits to named individuals, an organisation of individuals, or a registered company or other corporate body. ## An Individual, Or A Group, Or An Organisation Of Individuals If more than one individual will be named on the permit, the details for each additional individual required by 1a and the address required by 1b must be provided on a separate sheet. Please tell us the document reference you have given this sheet in the space provided. We can only issue permits to named individuals. We cannot issue a permit to a partnership. We therefore need details of each person in the partnership. Limited Liability Partnerships - do not fill in this section, you must fill in the company section instead. ## A Company Give us the company registration number and date your company was registered. ## Unregistered Corporate Bodies If you are an unregistered corporate body, you will need to give us evidence that you are a legal body. You then need to go to section 1c on the form. ## 1B Your Address All applicants must give us this. If you are applying as a limited company, give the address of the registered office. If applicable, complete section 1c of the form. If not continue to section 2. ## 1C Agent Or Others Acting On Behalf Of The Applicant It will help us if there is someone we can contact if we have any questions about your application. If you do not name anyone here we will contact whoever is named in answer to 1a The person you name should have the authority to act on your behalf. They can be an agent rather than you but only the applicant or applicants named in 1a are able to sign the declaration in section 14. You then need to go to section 2 on the form. ## 2 About This Application 2A Have You Spoken To Us About This Application? If you have had discussions with us before your application was submitted give details on a separate sheet and tell us the reference number you have given it. We will then be able to refer back to the information you've already given us and discussions we have had with you, which will help us to determine your application. You can get further guidance on pre-application discussion by calling 0300 065 3000 or by downloading it from our guidance webpages. ## 2B Where Is The Sewage Treatment Facility? (Name, Address, Postcode And National Grid Reference) What Is A Sewage Treatment Facility? The sewage treatment facility is the water discharge activity or groundwater activity and includes all the equipment essential to undertake that activity. The facility is the footprint of that equipment, the discharge pipe and outlet. For discharges to ground, the area occupied by the drainage field/infiltration system will also be part of the facility. In many cases, the discharge to water or ground will be made outside the physical boundary of the treatment site. We want you to provide the address of the sewage treatment plant or septic tank in answer to question 2b. ## What Is A Sewage Treatment Plant? Often called 'package' plants, these sewage treatment plants are like mini sewage works and produce much cleaner effluent than septic tanks. For this reason, effluent from package treatment plants can normally be discharged to surface waters such as rivers or streams. Package treatment plants are more sophisticated than septic tanks and require a source of power as well as regular maintenance. They also accumulate solid matter (sludge) that is settled out from the sewage and require desludging about once every year. ## What Is A Septic Tank? A septic tank is a simple tank that is usually buried in the ground; it has an inflow of sewage from the house and an outflow from the tank. The septic tank allows solid matter to settle in the tank and liquids to flow out. The outflow from the septic tank requires further treatment and this is normally achieved by it soaking into the ground, where bacteria in the soil complete the treatment process. Normal maintenance for a septic tank would be removal of the accumulated solid matter (sludge) from the bottom of the tank. This is known as desludging and is usually required about once every year. If you have a septic tank that discharges directly to surface water, you will need to apply for a permit to make the discharge but if granted, this will almost certainly require you to upgrade to a treatment plant. We will usually allow up to 12 months to complete an upgrade, although this depends on individual circumstances. ## 2C National Grid Reference For The Centre Of Your Sewage Treatment Facility We want you to provide the 12-character national grid reference consisting of two letters followed by 10 numbers (for example AB 12345 67890) of the centre of the sewage treatment plant or septic tank in answer to question 2c. To find out the 12-digit grid reference, you can search on the UK Grid Reference Finder website, which you can be accessed via our website. ## 3 Your Management System Your permit requires you (as the operator) to ensure that you manage and operate your activities in accordance with a written management system. You must have an effective, written management system in place that identifies and reduces the risk of pollution. A copy of the management system and the permit should be kept where it is easily accessible. If you are applying to operate a small sewage treatment facility there are toolkits available to help you decide what factors you need to consider in your management system and what actions you may need to carry out and record. You can get them by calling 0300 065 3000 or by downloading them from our guidance webpages. ## If You Have A Water Discharge Activity Use The Toolkit Below:  Management toolkit for operators holding a standalone permit for the discharge of up to 20 cubic metres per day of secondary treated sewage effluent to surface waters. ## If You Have A Groundwater Activity Use The Toolkit Below:  Management toolkit for operators holding a standalone permit for the discharge of up to 20 cubic metres per day of sewage effluent via an infiltration system to groundwater. The following is a summary of the main points you will find in the toolkits: ## For All Operators If your sewage treatment facility is operating normally or not and which routine checks you may have to make, for example, is the power on, is the motor running? Do you know how to restart the system if there is a power or other failure? The supplier of the system or maintenance contractor should be able to advise on checks specific to the plant in question. These checks should be made and recorded as necessary. Do you have a service and maintenance contract in place with a contractor who is trained and competent to maintain and service your particular treatment plant? Service frequency should be in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. Sewage treatment plants require periodic de-sludging and you should have a contract in place to undertake this when required. Keep a record of the checks you have completed that are set out in your checklist along with any additional checks you have made. This could be recorded in a diary or alternatively you could adapt the form provided in the toolkits referred to above to create a record sheet. If you have a maintenance contract with a contractor, keep a record of any work carried out on your treatment plant by them. If invoices state the work carried out these will be sufficient. You need to understand what your treatment plant is designed to do, what its limitations are and the restrictions on its use (for example, chemicals which may prevent it from working properly). Anyone who inspects, maintains or repairs the system must be adequately trained and competent to do so. You should be aware of accidents or emergencies that may adversely affect the performance of your treatment plant and be aware of how to deal with them, this may involve contacting your supplier or maintenance engineer depending on the extent of the problem. You will also need to record any complaints made to you in connection with the operation of your facility. ## For A Group Of Domestic Residential Properties With A Permit To Discharge If the treatment plant is shared with others (for example multiple houses) you are all jointly responsible for the proper operation of the plant, but you only need one management system. You should designate at least one person to have the knowledge required to ensure that the plant is being effectively operated and maintained. If you have a contract with a manufacturer or service company to maintain your treatment plant then you need to record this. ## For An Establishment Such As A Hotel, Pub Or Campsite You and/or your staff will need to be able to have the necessary skills to ensure the sewage treatment facility is effectively operated and maintained. However you may employ a contractor to undertake some of these tasks. Tick the box to confirm that your management system will meet our requirements. You then need to go to section 4 on the form. ## 4 Your Site Plan For water discharge activity permits your site plan must show the sewage treatment facility (the sewage treatment plant, the outlet pipe and outlet location but not the properties served by the facility). The sewage treatment plant should be shown edged in green and the outlet pipe can be shown as a green line. For groundwater activity permits your site plan must show the sewage treatment facility/septic tank and the area of the drainage field/infiltration system used to discharge the effluent to ground, and the pipework connecting them (but not the properties served by the facility). The sewage treatment plant/septic tank should be shown edged in green as should the drainage field/infiltration system which should be shown as well and as accurately as available records allow. The outlet to a watercourse should also be clearly marked on the plan, as should any sample point identified in answer to 5g. The properties served by the facility are not part of the facility and do not have to be shown edged in green. If you are sending us a paper copy of your site plan it must be either A3 or A4 size. Alternatively you can send us an electronic copy via email or on CD. ## Copyright Issue Please note that some plans and maps will have copyright issues. Unless you are using your own maps or plans or have paid for the copyright (for example with Ordnance Survey) you may not have the right to reproduce the map or plan. You then need to go to section 5 on the form. ## 5 About The Discharge/Effluent 5A What Type Of Premises Does Your Sewage Treatment Facility Serve? Tell us what type of premises your sewage treatment facility serves. If it is more than one domestic property, the number of properties, for example, three houses or three flats. ## 5B When Did Your Discharge Start (New Or Existing)? Tell us if your discharge is existing (before 1 April 2010) or new (after 1 April 2010). If you are applying to regulate a facility that is replacing an existing unregulated facility (i.e. you are replacing an existing discharge from a septic tank with a discharge from a package treatment plant) then we would consider this to be a new discharge. If your discharge has been existing since 1 April 2010 and you are not replacing/upgrading the system then you do not need to complete sections 5c and 5d but you must provide the date the sewage treatment facility was installed as accurately as you can. ## 5C How Far Away Is The Nearest Sewer (In Metres)? We will not grant a permit to discharge sewage effluent to surface water or to ground if we consider that you could have reasonably connected to a foul sewer provided by your sewerage undertaker (water company) or a private sewer connected to a foul sewer. You will need to check sewer records with your sewerage undertaker (usually your local water company) and also check to see if a connection is feasible to any private sewers if a foul sewer is not readily available. This question requires you to measure the shortest distance between any boundary of all premises served by the sewage treatment facility and the nearest foul sewer and/or private sewer. ## 5D You Must Explain Why You Cannot Discharge Your Effluent Into A Sewer. Where feasible, you should connect to a public or private sewer, unless the distance to the nearest sewer connection point (calculated above) is **greater** than the number of premises served multiplied by a distance of 30 metres. Use the following formula to help you calculate this; ## Distance To Nearest Sewer From Closest Boundary Point > Number Of Premises Served X 30 Metres If the facility is serving non-residential premises then you will need to calculate an equivalent number of premises based on the maximum daily discharge volume as stated in section 5e. The following formula should be used to calculate this; Equivalent number of premises = Maximum daily discharge volume (in litres) / 750 Where you are proposing a discharge from a private sewage treatment system in an area where it appears reasonable to discharge your effluent into a sewer, you must send us evidence that you have formally approached the sewerage undertaker, and send us their response regarding connection under s98 or s106 of the Water Industry Act 1991. You must send us this evidence with your application. Lack of capacity, or the existence of any plans to improve capacity, in the sewer are not valid reasons for a sewerage undertaker to refuse connection under section 106 WIA 1991. Where a sewerage undertaker refuses to allow connection under s106 on the grounds of lack of capacity the operator may appeal to Ofwat. We may refuse to issue a water discharge activity or groundwater activity permit in such circumstances. For new discharges you must also show the difference in cost between connection to the foul sewer and cost of purchase and installation of your proposed treatment facility. This should be evidenced with a formal quotation from a water company approved contractor. This should include, but not be limited to, details of: ## Foul Sewer Connection Costs Sewer pipe; Pumping equipment, pump and sump pump, if necessary; Digging up of roadside verges, roads or land on the route to the sewer; Road closure costs, if necessary; Legal easements to cross land, if necessary; Initial connection and annual charges from the sewerage undertaker. ## Proposed Treatment Facility Costs Purchase; Installation; Maintenance; Annual subsistence fees (subsistence fees do not apply to discharges of treated domestic sewage effluent of five cubic metres (m3) or less a day). Your justification must also include details of any physical obstacles: for example, roads, railways, rivers or canals, impeding your connection to a sewer. You can find additional guidance on connection to sewers in 'Technical Guidance Note 7.01 How to comply with your environmental permit'. You can get this by calling 0300 065 3000 or by downloading it from our guidance webpages. ## 5E What Is The Maximum Volume Of Effluent You Will Discharge In A Day (In Cubic Metres)? You must ensure that you provide a volume you can always comply with. This volume should not be based on average daily consumption over a period of time (i.e. a week/month/season) but should be based on the maximum potential volume that will be discharged in any one given day. The table below helps you calculate the maximum daily discharge from a single domestic property. Number of bedrooms in your house Daily Volume (cubic metres per day) 1 to 3 1 4 to 6 1.5 7 to 8 2 How to calculate the maximum daily discharge volume from multiple domestic properties - summary from 'Flows and Loads 4' - Sizing Criteria, Treatment Capacity for Small Wastewater Treatment Systems (Package Plants)' is published by British Water (ISBN: 978-1-903481-10-3) and is available from British Water on their website. To calculate the maximum daily volume to be discharged from your sewage treatment facility you must first calculate the population (P) connected to the facility and then multiply this figure by the typical usage given in flows and loads 4 (i.e. 150 litres is the standard daily flow per person in a residential premises). The volume you have calculated by this method will be in litres a day so you must then divide this figure by 1000 to show the volume in cubic metres a day. The maximum daily discharge volume in cubic metres a day = P × 150/1000." A single house with up to and including 3 bedrooms will have a population (P) of 5 people (5 P). For a single house with more than 3 bedrooms, add 1 P for each additional bedroom to the minimum single house value of 5 P, for example: a house with 3 bedrooms P = 5 a house with 4 bedrooms P = 6 (5+1) a house with 6 bedrooms P = 8 (5+3) For groups of small 1 and 2 bedroom houses or flats: a flat with 1 bedroom P = 3 a flat with 2 bedrooms P = 4 For sewage treatment facilities serving more than one house calculate the total P by adding together the P values for each individual house, for example: for two houses (one 3 bedrooms and one 4 bedrooms) the total P = 11 (5+6) If the calculated total P for a group of houses exceeds 12 P then some reduction may be made to allow for the balancing effects on daily flow of a group of houses (round up not down). Where the total P is in the range 13–25 multiply the total by 0.9 to give an adjusted P value, for example: if there are four four-bedroom houses the total P will be 24 (4 × 6) and the adjusted P will be 22 (24 × 0.9 = 21.6) Where the total P is in the range 26–50 multiply the total by 0.8 to give an adjusted P value, for example: if there are four three-bedroom houses and three four-bedroom houses the total P will be 38 (4 × 5 and 3 × 6) and the adjusted P will be 31 (38 × 0.8 = 30.4) The above assessments of population (P) should be used for both existing and new properties. Larger luxurious houses tend to have higher water consumption figures and holiday homes may have higher occupancy rates than residential properties. ## 5F What Type Of Sewage Treatment System Will You Be Using To Treat Your Effluent? Tick one box to show what sewage treatment plant you will be using to treat your effluent. If you tick 'other' please give us more details about the system in the box provided or on a separate sheet. If you have a package sewage treatment plant, the plant manufacturer or supplier and/or documentation explaining the plant and its maintenance requirements should enable you to identify if it meets BS12566. If you have a sewage treatment plant which is not to BS12566 or a septic tank, you must describe the treatment plant as best you can. For a new treatment plant, the supplier or manufacturer should be able to provide details. For existing systems you may only be able to say that the treatment plant is made up of a settlement tank followed by a filter bed followed by another settlement tank for example. It is advisable that you have the relevant permissions (i.e. a granted permit) prior to purchasing and installing the proposed treatment system. ## 5G Sample Point Location This is the sample point used to assess compliance with any water quality emission limits on your permit. You must ensure that it allows a representative sample of the discharge to be obtained. You must also ensure that your discharge passes through the sampling point at all times. The sample point can be where the effluent meets the receiving environment only in cases where no other effluent is added before this point, for example a discharge from another sewage treatment plant or a discharge of surface water drainage. ## Note For Small Existing Discharges To Ground Only; If you are applying for a permit for an existing discharge of treated sewage effluent of not more than 5 cubic metres a day to ground (for example using a drainage field/infiltration system) which does not already have a sample point we will not expect you to provide one. ## 5H Discharge Point Location Provide the grid reference for the discharge point location which is the point at which the effluent is released into the receiving environment. For surface water discharges (i.e. tidal or non-tidal watercourses or lake/pond) - This is the location where the discharge is made from the outlet pipe to the surface water. On some occasions discharges are made via surface water sewers owned by someone else before they discharge into a receiving water. Where this is the case the outlet will be the point where the surface water sewer meets the river, stream, ditch or canal. For discharge into or onto land - This is the location where the effluent from the treatment system enters the infiltration system. ## 5I Where Will Your Effluent Discharge To? Sewage effluents are usually discharged to one location in one receiving environment. If your effluent discharges to more than one location in a different receiving environment, for example to a drainage field or to a non-tidal river (under different circumstance), you will need to complete all relevant appendices for each discharge point and explain the different circumstances under which each is discharged. You need to make sure that you have all the necessary permissions in addition to an Environmental Permit to discharge, for example the permission from landowners for pipework to cross their land or the Canal and Rivers Trust if you want to discharge into a canal that they manage. Complete the relevant section below and then continue to section 11. ## 6 Discharges To A River, Stream, Ditch Or Canal (Non-Tidal Watercourse) 6a The name will usually be shown on an Ordnance Survey map. If the receiving water is unnamed, please indicate the named watercourse into which it flows, for example 'an unnamed tributary of the River Wye' 6b. Tick the appropriate box. 6c We prefer effluent to discharge to watercourses which flow all year. Discharging to a seasonally dry watercourse may cause the effluent to pond which can cause odour and other local problems. 6d Most effluents pass along a dedicated pipe and are discharged via an outlet to a receiving water. In some cases effluents may be discharged into a surface water sewer owned by someone else before they discharge into a receiving water. If you have ticked yes in answer to question 6d you must give the grid reference where your discharge enters the surface water sewer. ## 7 Discharges Into Land (Drainage Field/Infiltration System) 7a Confirm if the drainage field/infiltration system is new (on or after 1 April 2010) or existing (before 1 April 2010). If the infiltration is new you must answer all of the questions in section 7. However if the infiltration system is existing answer questions 7b-7f if you are able to, if not leave them blank and continue to question 7g. 7b A drainage field/infiltration system is a restricted and well-defined area of ground designed to allow liquid to drain into the surrounding soil. It typically includes a system of sub-surface perforated pipe. We would expect new infiltration systems to be built to BS 6297:2007 + A1:2008. If yours is not constructed to this standard, you must submit the following details:  location of the infiltration system  surface area  depth  construction materials used  the bottom invert level in relation to the water table. ## 7C Provide The Date That You Carried Out The Required Percolation Tests 7d It is important that we know what your percolation value (Vp) is. BS 6297:2007 +A1:2008 states that 'a drainage field/infiltration system for disposal should only be used when percolation tests indicate average values of Vp between 15 and 100'. The minimum value of 15 ensures that effluent cannot percolate too rapidly into the ground, potentially resulting in the pollution of groundwater. If your Vp is below this figure you may be required to add an additional 700mm deep layer of medium or coarse, washed sand, laid on a permeable geotextile membrane, below the standard granular fill distribution layer. You will have to agree to design your drainage field/infiltration system on the basis of this recommendation. ## Use The Following Information To Help You Carry Out A Percolation Test (Applies To New Infiltration Systems Only):  Avoid carrying out this test in extreme weather conditions such as drought, frost and heavy rain.  Excavate at least two holes 300mm square to a depth 300mm below the proposed invert level (bottom of pipe) of the infiltration pipe and space them evenly along the proposed line of the subsurface irrigation system.  Fill each hole with water to a depth of at least 300mm and allow to seep away overnight.  Next day, refill each hole with water to a depth of at least 300mm and observe the time in seconds for the water to seep away from 75% full to 25% full (i.e. a depth of 150mm).  Divide this time by 150. This answer gives the average time in seconds (Vp) required for the water to drop 1mm.  The test should be carried out at least three times with at least two trial holes. The average figure from the tests should be taken. ## This Is The Percolation Value Vp (In Seconds).  The average figure for the percolation value (Vp) is obtained by summing all the values and dividing by the number of values used.  Drainage field disposals should only be used when percolation tests indicate average values of Vp between 15 and 100 and the preliminary assessment of the trial hole tests has been favourable.  The minimum value of 15 ensures that untreated effluent cannot percolate too rapidly into groundwater.  Where Vp is above the limit of 100, effective treatment is unlikely to take place in a drainage field as there will be inefficient soakage in this location which may lead to sewage ponding on the surface. 7e Provide the surface area of your infiltration system. For domestic premises, the floor area of the drainage field (A in square metres) required may be calculated from: A = p × Vp × 0.25 for septic tanks A = p × Vp × 0.20 for package sewage treatment plants where p is the number of people served by the tank (this should be the maximum number of people that could live in the house). Vp is the percolation value described above. If in doubt, consult your professional advisor or local authority building control officer for advice. Use the following calculations:  For sewage treatment plant: Vp (percolation value) × P(number of inhabitants) × 0.20 = surface area  For septic tank: Vp (percolation value) × P(number of inhabitants) × 0.25 = surface area ## 8 Discharges To Tidal River, Tidal Stream, Estuary Or Coastal Waters 8a Usually the name will be shown on an Ordnance Survey map. If the receiving water is unnamed, please indicate the named watercourse into which it flows; for example, 'an unnamed tributary of the River Wye' or 'coastal waters of Red Wharf Bay' 8b Tick the appropriate box. 8c The mean low water spring tide mark for coastal waters and tidal estuaries can usually be found on Ordnance Survey maps. Where reasonably possible, we prefer that discharges are made below this point to prevent effluent flowing across beaches, exposed river beds or mud flats and so on. If your discharge is being made above the mean low spring tide mark you must give reasons for this. 8d Most effluents pass along a dedicated pipe and are discharged via an outlet to a receiving water. In some cases effluents may be discharged into a surface water sewer owned by someone else before they discharge into a receiving water. If this is the case you must give the grid reference where your discharge enters the surface water sewer. ## 9 Discharges To A Lake Or Pond Use this section when you will be discharging your effluent into an existing lake or pond. A discharge to a lake or pond which does not discharge into a river or watercourse or another pond which discharges into a river or watercourse does not require a permit unless a Notice has been served under paragraph 5 of Schedule 21 of the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010. If you are unsure whether or not you will require a permit for a discharge to a pond or lake you should contact us on 0300 065 3000. 9a Usually the name will be shown on an Ordnance Survey map. ## 10 Discharges Onto Land Use this section where you are using a constructed disposal area to discharge your effluent onto land. 10a tick the appropriate box 10b This is the total area covered by the reed bed/grass plot/pond/wetland. 10c Tick the appropriate box 10d If you ticked yes to the well, spring or borehole being used for supply water, provide details of this in the box provided. ## 10E Tick The Appropriate Box 11 Payment 11a Give a date when you want the permit for this effluent to start. You cannot discharge your effluent prior to the start date on your permit unless you contact us and ask us to change (bring forward) your start date. Subsistence fee charges will start on this date, even if you have not started to discharge, unless you contact us to change (delay) the start date. Please use the Administrative Variation application form (part C0.5) for this. 11e Select the method you will be using to pay for your application: Cheques and postal orders: These should be made payable to Natural Resources Wales and crossed 'A/c Payee'. Send it to us with your completed application form and any relevant supporting documents. Post-dated cheques will not be accepted. Note: cheques will be processed once the application is confirmed as duly made, this will normally be within 10 working days unless information is missing. Payment by credit or debit card: We can accept payments by Visa, MasterCard or Maestro cards only. Please complete the required details in the separate form CC1. Payment by electronic transfer: Make sure you use the right payment information. Failure to quote your reference number (this can be the customer reference, permit reference or an application reference generated at pre-application stage) or to forward to us your payment details, including applicant name, payment amount and full payment reference number, may result in a delay in processing your payment and therefore your application. ## Information On Charges We consult widely on changes to our charging schemes and tariffs. These require government approval before being implemented. You can get further information about the bases of our charges, our consultation processes and any current or recent consultations from our website. You then need to read section 12 on the form. ## 12 The Data Protection Act 1998 Make sure you understand how we will use the information you provide to us. You then need to read section 13 on the form. ## 13 Confidentiality And National Security Confidentiality Only tick this box if you are very certain that you wish information to be confidential. This is likely to delay your application. Confidential information is information that is commercially or industrially confidential in relation to any person. Information may only be withheld from the public registers where the regulator judges that it may be commercially or industrially confidential. When this occurs a statement must be placed on the register indicating the existence of that information. Confidentiality is unlikely to be applicable for a small-scale sewage discharge except for information about exdirectory telephone numbers. In those cases please write to tell us that information should not go on the public register. You can find guidance on confidentiality in 'Core environmental permitting guidance' published by Defra and available from our Guidance webpages. Please ensure that you include a copy of your supporting statement detailing why you are requesting confidentiality and what information you believe should be kept confidential. We advise you to have a preapplication discussion with area staff before deciding if anything is confidential information. We will have to assess your statement and therefore your application will take longer to determine. ## National Security Ensure you enclose with the application a letter stating that you have written to the Welsh ministers to claim national security for your application. You can find guidance on national security in 'Core environmental permitting guidance' published by Defra and available from our guidance webpages. You cannot apply for national security via this application. We will not be able to progress your application until we receive the decision from the Welsh ministers and therefore it is highly likely to delay your application. We will not include the information in the public register unless the Welsh ministers decides that it should be included. You then need to complete section 14 on the form. ## 14 Declaration Each individual who is applying for their name to appear on the permit must complete this declaration, you will have to print a separate copy of each page for each additional individual to complete. Ensure a **relevant person** makes the declaration. Relevant people means each applicant (individual), and in the case of a company, a director, manager, company secretary or any similar officer or employee listed on current appointments in Companies House. In the case of a Limited Liability Partnership (LLP), it includes any partner. Each individual (or individual trustee) who is applying for their name to appear on the permit must complete this declaration, you will have to fill in a separate copy of this page for each additional individual to complete. You do not have to sign the application with your handwritten signature. By ticking the box in question 15b and providing your details below it, you are confirming that you are an applicant and that the information in the application is true to the best of your knowledge and belief. Also that you understand that the application may be refused or approval withdrawn if you give false or incomplete information. If you deliberately make a statement that is false or misleading in order to get approval you may be prosecuted.

en

4681-pdf

## Population In Custody Monthly Tables May 2010 England And Wales Ministry Of Justice Statistics Bulletin Published 30 June 2010 ## Population In Custody May 2010 - Key Points Resumption Of Publication And Use Of New Data Source Publication of the monthly population in custody bulletin was suspended from August 2009 to March 2010 due to technical problems relating to the supply of data for statistical purposes. Publication of the bulletin was resumed in April 2010 as announced on the MoJ website http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/populationincustody.htm Figures in the resumed bulletin are based on a new data source, consistent with the published weekly prison figures. In order to provide a consistent comparison with the previous year, data for 2009 has also been taken from the new data source, which means that these figures will not match the monthly 2009 data published previously. The total prison population given for May 2009 is 41 lower than the figure previously published. ## Population In Custody (Prisons, Secure Training Centres And Secure Children'S Homes)  The population in custody on 31 May 2010 was 85,500, a rise of 2,200 from a year earlier. The population in prisons was 85,000 (a rise of 2,200 from a year earlier), in Secure Training Centres (STCs) it was 270 and in Secure Children's Homes (SCHs) it was 170. ## Population In Prison  The male prison population increased by 3 per cent (up 2,100) to 80,700 and the female prison population increased by 2 per cent (up 80) to 4,300 in May 2010 compared to May 2009.  The adult population in prison was 73,400 at 31 May 2010, an increase of 3 per cent (up 2,000) from a year earlier. Over the same time period the number of 15 to 17 year olds fell 21 per cent (down 450) to 1,700 and the young adult prison population (see definitions) increased 7 per cent (up 630) to 10,000 at 31 May 2010.  It was expected that the withdrawal of the end of custody early release scheme would add between 1,000 and 1,200 to the daily prison population by the end of May 2010.  The remand population in prison fell 2 per cent from 13,200 in May 2009 to 13,000 in May 2010 (down 280). Within this total, the untried population fell 4 per cent (down 370) to 8,400 and the convicted unsentenced population rose 2 per cent (up 90), to 4,600.  There were 71,000 sentenced(1) prisoners at 31 May 2010, an increase of 4 per cent from a year earlier (up 3,000). There were increases in those serving sentences of all sentence lengths except 6 months to less than 12 months, which fell by 1 per cent (down 30). The number of prisoners serving a sentence of less than 6 months rose 17 per cent between May 2009 and May 2010 (up 660) and those serving sentences of 4 years or more increased by 6 per cent (up 1,400). The number of prisoners serving indeterminate sentences (Life sentences and indeterminate sentences for public protection - IPPs) increased by 8 per cent (up 930) to reach 13,000. ##  There were 5,300 recall prisoners at 31 May 2010, down 440 from a year earlier.  In terms of offence groups, amongst the remand population the largest proportionate increases since May 2009 were for other offences (up 130, 7 per cent), drug offences (up 70, 4 per cent) and sexual offences (up 30, 3 per cent). The largest proportionate falls since May 2009 were seen in those serving sentences for motoring offences (down 30, 31 per cent), fraud and forgery (down 70, 14 per cent) and robbery (down 170, 11 per cent).  Amongst the sentenced(1) prison population the largest proportionate increases were for theft and handling (up 780, 25 per cent), other offences (up 1,180, 19 per cent) and sexual offences (up 1,140, 14 per cent) from May 2009. The largest proportionate decreases since May 2009 were for those serving sentences for fraud and forgery (down 420, 21 per cent), motoring offences (down 140, 13 per cent) and burglary (down 560, 8 per cent).  The prison population was 110 per cent of the 'In Use CNA' (77,600) at 31 May 2010. (1) Includes recalls and excludes fine defaulters (see Table 2) ## Notes Data Sources And Quality The data presented in this brief are drawn from the prison administrative IT systems. Although care is taken when processing and analysing the returns, the detail collected is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large-scale recording system. While the figures shown have been checked as far as practicable, they should be regarded as approximate and not necessarily accurate to the last whole number shown in the tables. They are fit to be used for purposes of looking at trends and for comparing the relative magnitude of components. The prison population information is now drawn from a single prison source. Although different from the source used up to June 2009, it contains the same details for individual inmates such as date of birth, sex, religion, ethnic origin, custody type, offence, reception and discharge dates and, for sentenced prisoners, sentence length. These data are collected on a central database and are used to produce all the analyses in this publication. The overall reliability of the sentence length data has increased, but in a small number of cases sentence length data is missing and has been imputed. Sentence lengths have been imputed for around 1,500 cases in the May 2010 dataset. As a different data source is now being used for this publication, data for 2009 will not match the monthly 2009 data published previously. There are also two changes to the presentation of the data:  The numbers in each sentence length band now exclude recalls which are shown as a separate subgroup within the total sentenced population (previously recalls were included in the relevant sentence length bands).  The sentenced population groups "less than or equal to 6 months" and "greater than 6 months to less than 12 months" have been slightly revised to "less than 6 months" and "6 months to less than 12 months" respectively as a result of using the new data source. Unless otherwise stated, numbers in the text have been rounded for ease of reading using the following rules: Numbers of 100,000 and over are rounded to the nearest 1,000 Numbers from 1,000 - 99,999 are rounded to the nearest 100 Numbers from 10 - 999 are rounded to the nearest 10 Numbers under 10 are unrounded. Information on the population in STCs and SCHs has been supplied by the Youth Justice Board. All figures are provisional pending publication of the annual Offender Management Caseload Statistics. ## Definitions Population in custody - this includes those held in prison establishments, police cells under Operation Safeguard, secure training centres (STCs) and secure children's homes (SCHs). All coverage is for England and Wales. Population in prison - this includes those held in prisons in England and Wales, including the three removal centres (where people are held under immigration powers prior to removal from the UK) of Dover, Haslar and Lindholme. Sentenced population - this includes those sentenced to an immediate custodial sentence and fine defaulters. Immediate custodial sentence - this does not include fine defaulters but does include recalls. Adult prisoners - these are prisoners aged 21 years and over. Young adults - these are prisoners aged 18 to 20, but including 21 year old prisoners who were aged 20 or under at conviction who have not been reclassified as part of the adult population Indeterminate sentences - these cover life sentences and indeterminate sentences for public protection (IPP). Recalls - these are prisoners who are returned to custody having broken the terms of their licence. ## Contact Points For Further Information Current and previous editions of this publication are available for download at www.justice.gov.uk/publications/populationincustody.htm . Future reports will be published on a monthly basis. Spreadsheet files of the tables contained in this document are also available for download from this address. Press enquiries should be directed to the Ministry of Justice press office: Tel: 020 3334 3536 Other enquiries about these statistics should be directed to: Ministry of Justice Justice Statistics Analytical Services 7th Floor 102 Petty France London SW1H 9AJ Tel: 020 3334 3737 General enquiries about the statistical work of the Ministry of Justice can be e-mailed to: statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk General information about the official statistics system of the UK is available from www.statistics.gov.uk © Crown copyright Produced by the Ministry of Justice Alternative formats are available on request from statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk | | | | | May-09 | May-10 | |-----------------------------------------------------|---------|--------|--------|----------|----------| | Males | Females | Total | Males | Females | Total | | Males | Females | Total | | | | | All population in custody | | | | | | | 83,229 | | | | | | | 4,343 | | | | | | | 78,886 | | | | | | | 82,815 | | | | | | | 4,242 | | | | | | | 78,573 | | | | | | | Prisons | | | | | | | 0 | | | | | | | 0 | | | | | | | Police cells | | | | | | | 170 | | | | | | | 33 | | | | | | | 137 | | | | | | | SCHs | | | | | | | 244 | | | | | | | 68 | | | | | | | 176 | | | | | | | STCs | | | | | | | All population in prison | | | | | | | 78,573 | 4,242 | 82,815 | 80,695 | 4,323 | 85,018 | | 3 | 2 | 3 | | | | | Remand | | | | | | | 12,471 | 765 | 13,236 | 12,144 | 814 | 12,958 | | -3 | 6 | -2 | | | | | Untried | 8,241 | 510 | 8,751 | | | | Convicted unsentenced | 4,230 | 255 | 4,485 | | | | Sentenced | | | | | | | 64,565 | 3,418 | 67,983 | 67,498 | 3,465 | 70,963 | | 5 | 1 | 4 | | | | | 99 | | | | | | | 10 | | | | | | | 89 | | | | | | | Fine defaulter | | | | | | | 3,968 | | | | | | | 340 | | | | | | | 3,628 | | | | | | | Less than 6 months | | | | | | | 3,253 | | | | | | | 291 | | | | | | | 2,962 | | | | | | | 6 months to less than 12 months | | | | | | | 20,503 | | | | | | | 1,201 | | | | | | | 19,302 | | | | | | | 12 months to less than 4 years | | | | | | | 22,337 | | | | | | | 986 | | | | | | | 21,351 | | | | | | | 4 years or more (excluding Indeterminate sentences) | | | | | | | 12,101 | | | | | | | 371 | | | | | | | 11,730 | | | | | | | Indeterminate sentences | | | | | | | 5,722 | | | | | | | 219 | | | | | | | 5,503 | | | | | | | Recalls | | | | | | | Non-criminal prisoners | | | | | | | 1,537 | 59 | 1,596 | 1,053 | 44 | 1,097 | | -31 | * | -31 | | | | | All adult population in prison | | | | | | | 71,347 | | | | | | | 3,771 | | | | | | | 67,576 | | | | | | | 10,662 | | | | | | | 639 | | | | | | | 10,023 | | | | | | | Remand | | | | | | | 7,077 | | | | | | | 429 | | | | | | | 6,648 | | | | | | | Untried | | | | | | | 3,585 | | | | | | | 210 | | | | | | | 3,375 | | | | | | | Convicted unsentenced | | | | | | | 59,203 | | | | | | | 3,076 | | | | | | | 56,127 | | | | | | | Sentenced | | | | | | | 98 | | | | | | | 10 | | | | | | | 88 | | | | | | | Fine defaulter | | | | | | | 3,230 | | | | | | | 291 | | | | | | | 2,939 | | | | | | | Less than 6 months | | | | | | | 2,423 | | | | | | | 254 | | | | | | | 2,169 | | | | | | | 6 months to less than 12 months | | | | | | | 16,375 | | | | | | | 1,056 | | | | | | | 15,319 | | | | | | | 12 months to less than 4 years | | | | | | | 20,597 | | | | | | | 923 | | | | | | | 19,674 | | | | | | | 4 years or more (excluding Indeterminate sentences) | | | | | | | 11,416 | | | | | | | 354 | | | | | | | 11,062 | | | | | | | Indeterminate sentences | | | | | | | 5,064 | | | | | | | 188 | | | | | | | 4,876 | | | | | | | Recalls | | | | | | | Non-criminal prisoners | | | | | | | 1,426 | 56 | 1,482 | 982 | 42 | 1,024 | | -31 | * | -31 | | | | | All 15 -17 year olds in prison | | | | | | | 2,052 | 62 | 2,114 | 1,630 | 32 | 1,662 | | -21 | * | -21 | | | | | Remand | | | | | | | 500 | 17 | 517 | 461 | 5 | 466 | | -8 | * | -10 | | | | | Untried | 364 | 14 | 378 | | | | Convicted unsentenced | 136 | 3 | 139 | | | | 1,595 | | | | | | | 45 | | | | | | | 1,550 | | | | | | | Sentenced | | | | | | | 0 | | | | | | | 0 | | | | | | | Fine defaulter | | | | | | | 181 | | | | | | | 10 | | | | | | | 171 | | | | | | | Less than 6 months | | | | | | | 363 | | | | | | | 7 | | | | | | | 356 | | | | | | | 6 months to less than 12 months | | | | | | | 759 | | | | | | | 17 | | | | | | | 742 | | | | | | | 12 months to less than 4 years | | | | | | | 155 | | | | | | | 6 | | | | | | | 149 | | | | | | | 4 years or more (excluding Indeterminate sentences) | | | | | | | 61 | | | | | | | 3 | | | | | | | 58 | | | | | | | Indeterminate sentences | | | | | | | 76 | | | | | | | 2 | | | | | | | 74 | | | | | | | Recalls | | | | | | | Non-criminal prisoners | | | | | | | 2 | 0 | 2 | | | | | 1 | 0 | | | | | | 1 | | | | | | | * | * | * | | | | | All young adults in prison | | | | | | | 8,945 | 409 | 9,354 | | | | | 1,948 | 109 | 2,057 | | | | | Remand | | | | | | | Untried | 1,229 | 67 | 1,296 | | | | Convicted unsentenced | 719 | 42 | 761 | | | | 6,888 | | | | | | | 297 | | | | | | | 7,185 | | | | | | | Sentenced | | | | | | | Fine defaulter | | | | | | | 1 | | | | | | | 0 | | | | | | | Less than 6 months | 518 | | | | | | 39 | 557 | | | | | | 6 months to less than 12 months | | | | | | | 437 | 30 | 467 | | | | | 12 months to less than 4 years | | | | | | | 3,241 | 128 | | | | | | 3,369 | | | | | | | 4 years or more (excluding Indeterminate sentences) | 1,528 | 57 | | | | | 1,585 | | | | | | | Indeterminate sentences | 610 | | | | | | 14 | 624 | | | | | | Recalls | 553 | | | | | | 29 | | | | | | | 582 | | | | | | | Non-criminal prisoners | | | | | | | 109 | 3 | 112 | 70 | 2 | 72 | | -36 | * | -36 | | | | Young adults are those aged 18 - 20 and those 21 year olds who were aged 20 or under at conviction who have not been reclassified as part of the adult population * indicates that one or both of the comparative numbers are less than 50 which could give rise to misleading percentage changes Percentage change 2009 to 2010 85,460 4,398 81,062 3 1 3 85,018 4,323 80,695 3 2 3 0 0 0 0 * * * 173 22 151 10 * 2 269 53 216 23 -22 10 7,858 526 8,384 -5 3 -4 4,286 288 4,574 1 13 2 121 14 107 22 * 20 4,626 459 4,167 17 35 15 3,227 285 2,942 -1 -2 -1 20,963 1,171 19,792 2 -2 3 23,713 976 22,737 6 -1 6 13,033 385 12,648 8 4 8 5,280 175 5,105 -8 -20 -7 73,373 3,854 69,519 3 2 3 10,545 712 9,833 -1 11 -2 6,807 458 6,349 -4 7 -4 3,738 254 3,484 4 21 3 61,804 3,100 58,704 4 1 5 112 14 98 14 * 11 3,821 404 3,417 18 39 16 2,456 240 2,216 1 -6 2 16,751 1,020 15,731 2 -3 3 21,635 909 20,726 5 -2 5 12,325 363 11,962 8 3 8 4,704 150 4554 -7 -20 -7 367 3 370 1 * -2 94 2 96 -31 * -31 1,195 27 1,168 -25 * -25 0 0 0 0 * * * 131 6 125 -28 * -27 270 8 262 -26 * -26 574 7 567 -24 * -24 139 1 138 -10 * -7 55 3 52 -10 * -10 26 2 24 * * * 9,546 437 9,983 7 7 7 1,850 97 1,947 -5 -11 -5 1,142 65 1,207 -7 -3 -7 708 32 740 -2 * -3 7,626 338 7,964 11 14 11 1 9 0 9 * * * 625 49 674 21 * 21 464 37 501 7 * 6 3,494 144 3,638 8 13 8 1,873 66 1,939 22 16 23 634 19 653 5 * 4 527 23 550 -5 * -5 | May-09 | May-10 | |--------------------------------|----------| | Percentage change 2009 to 2010 | | | Immediate | | | custodial | | | sentence | | | Remand (includes recalls) | | | All prisoners | 13,236 | | Violence against the person | 3,427 | | Sexual offences | 1,092 | | Robbery | 1,533 | | Burglary | 1,501 | | Theft and Handling | 915 | | Fraud and Forgery | 475 | | Drug offences | 1,803 | | Motoring offences | 89 | | Other offences | 1,916 | | Offence not recorded | 485 | | 64,476 | | | 12,471 | | | All male prisoners | | | 18,671 | | | 3,246 | | | Violence against the person | | | 8,076 | | | 1,072 | | | Sexual offences | | | 8,320 | | | 1,464 | | | Robbery | | | 7,122 | | | 1,460 | | | Burglary | | | 2,721 | | | 825 | | | Theft and Handling | | | 1,699 | | | 407 | | | Fraud and Forgery | | | 9,555 | | | 1,682 | | | Drug offences | | | 1,042 | | | 89 | | | Motoring offences | | | 5,783 | | | 1,779 | | | Other offences | | | 1,487 | | | 447 | | | Offence not recorded | | | 3,408 | | | 765 | | | All female prisoners | | | 844 | | | 181 | | | Violence against the person | | | 58 | | | 20 | | | Sexual offences | | | 340 | | | 69 | | | Robbery | | | 200 | | | 41 | | | Burglary | | | 347 | | | 90 | | | Theft and Handling | | | 274 | | | 68 | | | Fraud and Forgery | | | 121 | 876 | | Drug offences | | | 24 | | | 0 | | | Motoring offences | | | 378 | | | 137 | | | Other offences | | | 67 | | | 38 | | | Offence not recorded | | Immediate custodial sentence Remand (includes recalls) Immediate custodial sentence Remand (includes recalls) 12,958 70,842 -2 4 -8 4 3,152 20,249 3 14 1,124 9,276 -11 3 1,368 8,877 -9 -8 1,373 6,764 2 25 931 3,843 -14 -21 410 1,557 4 5 1,871 10,971 -31 -13 61 926 7 19 2,044 7,336 29 -33 624 1,043 67,391 12,144 5 -3 4 -8 19,335 2,971 14 2 9,196 1,097 3 -10 8,593 1,313 -7 -8 6,617 1,338 24 0 3,387 829 -19 -16 1,375 343 6 3 10,128 1,739 -13 -33 910 60 19 6 6,877 1,885 -35 27 973 569 3,451 814 1 6 8 0 914 181 38 * 80 27 -16 -20 284 55 -27 * 147 35 31 13 456 102 -34 -1 182 67 9 -4 132 843 * * 16 1 21 16 459 159 4 * 70 55 | May-09 | May-10 | |--------------------------------|----------| | Percentage change 2009 to 2010 | | | Immediate | | | custodial sentence | | | Remand | | | (includes recalls) | | | Immediate | | | custodial | | | sentence | | | Remand (includes recalls) | | | Immediate | | | custodial | | | sentence | | | Remand (includes recalls) | | | All adult prisoners | 10,662 | | -1 | 4 | | -8 | 3 | | Violence against the person | 2,724 | | 3 | 12 | | Sexual offences | 955 | | 3 | | | -10 | | | 6,769 | | | 881 | | | 6,587 | | | 982 | | | Robbery | | | -9 | | | -10 | | | 5,617 | | | 1,026 | | | 6,197 | | | 1,145 | | | Burglary | | | 29 | | | 3 | | | 3,437 | | | 790 | | | 2,658 | | | 766 | | | Theft and Handling | | | -21 | | | -12 | | | 1,519 | | | 393 | | | 1,921 | | | 447 | | | Fraud and Forgery | | | 5 | | | 4 | | | 10,156 | | | 1,646 | | | 9,663 | | | 1,587 | | | Drug offences | | | -12 | | | -31 | | | 836 | | | 53 | | | 950 | | | 77 | | | Motoring offences | | | 21 | | | 9 | | | 6,226 | | | 1,732 | | | 5,154 | | | 1,584 | | | Other offences | | | Offence not recorded | 395 | | 34 | -28 | | 10,023 | 56,039 | | All adult male prisoners | | | -2 | 5 | | -9 | 3 | | 2,580 | 16,326 | | Violence against the person | | | 2 | 12 | | 937 | 7,688 | | Sexual offences | | | 4 | | | -9 | | | 6,540 | | | 839 | | | 6,314 | | | 927 | | | Robbery | | | -9 | | | -11 | | | 5,483 | | | 996 | | | 6,016 | | | 1,114 | | | Burglary | | | 29 | | | 2 | | | 3,013 | | | 700 | | | 2,335 | | | 687 | | | Theft and handling | | | -19 | | | -14 | | | 1,342 | | | 330 | | | 1,650 | | | 385 | | | Fraud and Forgery | | | 6 | | | 3 | | | 9,362 | | | 1,527 | | | 8,837 | | | 1,482 | | | Drug offences | | | -11 | | | -32 | | | 822 | | | 52 | | | 927 | | | 77 | | | Motoring offences | | | 21 | | | 8 | | | 5,808 | | | 1,590 | | | 4,816 | | | 1,469 | | | Other offences | | | Offence not recorded | 365 | | 32 | -29 | | All adult female prisoners | 639 | | 11 | 1 | | 6 | 7 | | Violence against the person | 144 | | * | 27 | | Sexual offences | 18 | | -16 | | | * | | | 229 | | | 42 | | | 273 | | | 55 | | | Robbery | | | -26 | | | * | | | 134 | | | 30 | | | 181 | | | 31 | | | Burglary | | | 31 | | | 14 | | | 424 | | | 90 | | | 323 | | | 79 | | | Theft and handling | | | -35 | | | 2 | | | 177 | | | 63 | | | 271 | | | 62 | | | Fraud and Forgery | | | -4 | | | 13 | | | 794 | | | 119 | | | 826 | | | 105 | | | Drug offences | | | * | | | * | | | 14 | | | 23 | 1 | | Motoring offences | 0 | | 24 | | | 23 | | | 418 | | | 142 | | | 338 | | | 115 | | | Other offences | | | Offence not recorded | 30 | | * | -2 | | May-09 | May-10 | |--------------------------------|----------| | Percentage change 2009 to 2010 | | | Immediate | | | custodial sentence | | | Remand | | | (includes recalls) | | | Immediate | | | custodial | | | sentence | | | Remand (includes recalls) | | | Immediate | | | custodial | | | sentence | | | Remand (includes recalls) | | | All aged 15-17 | 517 | | -10 | -25 | | 0 | -20 | | Violence against the person | 152 | | * | -11 | | Sexual offences | 27 | | -28 | | | -30 | | | 305 | | | 98 | | | 422 | | | 141 | | | Robbery | | | -28 | | | -5 | | | 186 | | | 60 | | | 260 | | | 63 | | | Burglary | | | -43 | | | * | | | 75 | | | 21 | | | 131 | | | 19 | | | Theft and Handling | | | * | | | * | | | 2 | | | 0 | | | 3 | | | 1 | | | Fraud and Forgery | | | -25 | | | * | | | 60 | | | 41 | | | 80 | | | 36 | | | Drug offences | | | * | | | * | | | 6 | | | 0 | | | 16 | | | 3 | | | Motoring offences | | | -16 | | | * | | | 165 | | | 46 | | | 197 | | | 52 | | | Other offences | | | Offence not recorded | 23 | | * | * | | 500 | 1,550 | | All males aged 15-17 | | | -8 | -25 | | 4 | -19 | | 144 | 375 | | Violence against the person | | | * | -11 | | 27 | 73 | | Sexual offences | | | -27 | | | -30 | | | 299 | | | 97 | | | 412 | | | 139 | | | Robbery | | | -28 | | | -3 | | | 186 | | | 60 | | | 257 | | | 62 | | | Burglary | | | -42 | | | * | | | 73 | | | 20 | | | 126 | | | 18 | | | Theft and handling | | | * | | | * | | | 2 | | | 0 | | | 3 | | | 0 | | | Fraud and Forgery | | | -23 | | | * | | | 60 | | | 41 | | | 78 | | | 36 | | | Drug offences | | | * | | | * | | | 6 | | | 0 | | | 16 | | | 3 | | | Motoring offences | | | -16 | | | * | | | 161 | | | 46 | | | 191 | | | 51 | | | Other offences | | | Offence not recorded | 20 | | * | * | | All females aged 15-17 | 17 | | * | * | | * | * | | Violence against the person | 8 | | * | * | | Sexual offences | 0 | | * | | | * | | | 6 | | | 1 | | | 10 | | | 2 | | | Robbery | | | * | | | * | | | 0 | | | 0 | | | 3 | | | 1 | | | Burglary | | | * | | | * | | | 2 | | | 1 | | | 5 | | | 1 | | | Theft and handling | | | * | | | * | | | 0 | | | 0 | | | 0 | | | 1 | | | Fraud and Forgery | | | * | | | * | | | 0 | | | 0 | | | 2 | | | 0 | | | Drug offences | | | * | | | * | | | 0 | | | 0 | 0 | | Motoring offences | 0 | | * | | | * | | | 4 | | | 0 | | | 6 | | | 1 | | | Other offences | | | Offence not recorded | 3 | | * | * | | May-09 | May-10 | |--------------------------------|----------| | Percentage change 2009 to 2010 | | | Immediate | | | custodial sentence | | | Remand | | | (includes recalls) | | | Immediate | | | custodial | | | sentence | | | Remand (includes recalls) | | | Immediate | | | custodial | | | sentence | | | Remand (includes recalls) | | | All young adults | 2,057 | | -5 | 11 | | -11 | 13 | | Violence against the person | 551 | | 9 | 61 | | Sexual offences | 110 | | 9 | | | -5 | | | 1,803 | | | 389 | | | 1,651 | | | 410 | | | Robbery | | | 11 | | | -2 | | | 961 | | | 287 | | | 865 | | | 293 | | | Burglary | | | 19 | | | -8 | | | 331 | | | 120 | | | 279 | | | 130 | | | Theft and Handling | | | * | | | * | | | 36 | | | 17 | | | 49 | | | 27 | | | Fraud and Forgery | | | 10 | | | 2 | | | 755 | | | 184 | | | 688 | | | 180 | | | Drug offences | | | -16 | | | * | | | 84 | | | 8 | | | 100 | | | 9 | | | Motoring offences | | | 17 | | | -5 | | | 945 | | | 266 | | | 810 | | | 280 | | | Other offences | | | Offence not recorded | 67 | | -3 | -51 | | 1,948 | 6,887 | | All male young adults | | | -5 | 11 | | -11 | 13 | | 522 | 1,970 | | Violence against the person | | | 9 | 59 | | 108 | 315 | | Sexual offences | | | 10 | | | -5 | | | 1,754 | | | 377 | | | 1,594 | | | 398 | | | Robbery | | | 12 | | | -1 | | | 948 | | | 282 | | | 849 | | | 284 | | | Burglary | | | 16 | | | -9 | | | 301 | | | 109 | | | 260 | | | 120 | | | Theft and handling | | | * | | | * | | | 31 | | | 13 | | | 46 | | | 22 | | | Fraud and Forgery | | | 10 | | | 4 | | | 706 | | | 171 | | | 640 | | | 164 | | | Drug offences | | | -17 | | | * | | | 82 | | | 8 | | | 99 | | | 9 | | | Motoring offences | | | 17 | | | -4 | | | 908 | | | 249 | | | 776 | | | 259 | | | Other offences | | | Offence not recorded | 62 | | -5 | -53 | | All female young adults | 109 | | -11 | 14 | | * | 22 | | Violence against the person | 29 | | * | * | | Sexual offences | 2 | | * | | | * | | | 49 | | | 12 | | | 57 | | | 12 | | | Robbery | | | * | | | * | | | 13 | | | 5 | | | 16 | | | 9 | | | Burglary | | | * | | | * | | | 30 | | | 11 | | | 19 | | | 10 | | | Theft and handling | | | * | | | * | | | 5 | | | 4 | | | 3 | | | 5 | | | Fraud and Forgery | | | * | | | * | | | 49 | | | 13 | | | 48 | | | 16 | | | Drug offences | | | * | | | * | | | 2 | | | 1 | 0 | | Motoring offences | 0 | | * | | | * | | | 37 | | | 17 | | | 34 | | | 21 | | | Other offences | | | Offence not recorded | 5 | | * | * | Figures for immediate custodial population includes recallees, but excludes fine defaulters * indicates that one or both of the comparative numbers are less than 50 which could give rise to misleading percentage changes ## Table 3: Young Population In Prison: By Type Of Custody And Sex 31 May 2010 Total - under 18 18 19 20 21 Total Young Adults 15 16 17 All young population in prisons Remand Untried Convicted unsentenced 38 31 7 144 115 29 284 224 60 466 370 96 611 406 205 626 363 263 583 360 223 127 78 49 1,947 1,207 740 Sentenced 95 330 770 1,195 1,384 2,448 2,739 1,393 7,964 Fine defaulter 0 0 0 0 2 4 3 0 9 Immediate custodial sentence (includes recalls) 95 330 770 1,195 1,382 2,444 2,736 1,393 7,955 Non-criminal prisoners 0 0 1 1 15 19 20 18 72 All young male population in prisons Remand Untried Convicted unsentenced 38 31 7 144 115 29 279 221 58 461 367 94 587 390 197 589 341 248 556 339 217 118 72 46 1,850 1,142 708 Sentenced 95 330 743 1,168 1,314 2,347 2,634 1,331 7,626 Fine defaulter 0 0 0 0 2 4 3 0 9 Immediate custodial sentence (includes recalls) 95 330 743 1,168 1,312 2,343 2,631 1,331 7,617 Non-criminal prisoners 0 0 1 1 15 19 20 16 70 All young female population in prisons Remand Untried Convicted unsentenced Sentenced Fine defaulter Immediate custodial sentence (includes recalls) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 2 27 0 27 5 3 2 27 0 27 24 16 8 70 0 70 37 22 15 101 0 101 27 21 6 105 0 105 9 6 3 62 0 62 97 65 32 338 0 338 Non-criminal prisoners 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 Young adults are those aged 18 - 20 and those 21 year olds who were aged 20 or under at conviction who have not been reclassified as part of the adult population ## Table 4: Cna And Population By Sex And Establishment Establishment In use CNA1 Total Population Males Altcourse 794 1,234 Acklington 946 930 Ashfield 400 228 Ashwell 184 211 Aylesbury 421 434 Belmarsh 800 875 Buckley Hall 350 381 Blundeston 481 520 Bedford 315 475 Blantyre House 122 121 Bristol 424 582 Birmingham 1,083 1,438 Bullingdon 879 1,126 Bure 491 460 Brinsford 545 541 Bullwood Hall 220 220 Brixton 606 753 Chelmsford 554 671 Cardiff 548 794 Cookham Wood 143 132 Coldingley 494 510 Castington 400 172 Channings Wood 698 722 Canterbury 195 296 Dartmoor 572 590 Dovegate 1,060 1,131 Durham 606 927 Doncaster 713 1,094 Dorchester 146 228 Deerbolt 513 489 Dover 316 313 Erlestoke 470 464 Sheppey Cluster (Standford Hill) 464 439 Everthorpe 603 676 Exeter 316 509 Sheppey Cluster (Elmley) 825 1,022 Forest Bank 1,064 1,361 Ford 557 523 Frankland 859 820 Feltham 762 672 Full Sutton 596 590 Featherstone 642 654 Garth 812 842 Gloucester 225 302 Guys Marsh 497 544 Grendon/ Spring Hill 573 552 Glen Parva 652 751 Gartree 677 674 Hollesley Bay 345 341 Huntercombe 360 136 Hewell* 1,173 1,344 Holme House 1,033 1,077 Hindley 440 328 Hull 723 984 High Down 999 1,094 Highpoint 920 938 Haslar 124 122 Haverigg 622 632 Isle of Wight** 1,564 1,577 Kirkham 590 588 Kennet 175 342 Kirklevington Grange 283 280 Lancaster 159 241 Leicester 210 341 Leeds 829 1,127 Lancaster Farms 480 492 Lowdham Grange 900 840 Lindholme 1,054 1,102 Lincoln 436 632 Long Lartin 622 618 Latchmere House 207 198 Liverpool 1,176 1,308 ## Table 4: Cna And Population By Sex And Establishment | Establishment | In use CNA | |------------------------------------------|--------------| | 1 | | | Total | | | Population | | | Littlehey | 993 | | Lewes | 495 | | Leyhill | 532 | | Moorland/Moorland Open | | | 2 | | | 987 | 1,024 | | Manchester | 949 | | Maidstone | 565 | | Mount | 747 | | Edmunds Hill | 379 | | Nottingham | 654 | | Northallerton | 137 | | North Sea Camp | 318 | | Norwich | 625 | | Onley | 710 | | Peterborough | | | 3 | | | 480 | 604 | | Portland | 463 | | Preston | 453 | | Parc | 838 | | Kingston (Portsmouth) | 199 | | Pentonville | 909 | | Rochester | 724 | | Reading | 190 | | Rye Hill | 600 | | Ranby | 969 | | Risley | 1,050 | | Stafford | 741 | | Stoke Heath | 576 | | Stocken | 779 | | Sheppey Cluster (Swaleside) | 1,112 | | Shepton Mallet | 165 | | Swinfen Hall | 604 | | Sudbury | 581 | | Swansea | 240 | | Shrewsbury | 184 | | Thorn Cross | 322 | | Usk/ Prescoed | 320 | | Verne | 572 | | Wellingborough | 638 | | Winchester | 499 | | Wakefield | 748 | | Wealstun | 555 | | Woodhill | 656 | | Warren Hill | 222 | | Wayland | 957 | | Wymott | 1,113 | | 1,160 | | | Werrington | 160 | | Wolds | 320 | | Whitemoor | 448 | | Wormwood Scrubs | 1,176 | | Whatton | 734 | | Wandsworth | 1,107 | | Wetherby | 408 | | TOTAL | 72,940 | ## Table 4: Cna And Population By Sex And Establishment | Establishment | In use CNA | |------------------------------------------|--------------| | 1 | | | Total | | | Population | | | Females | | | Askham Grange | 126 | | Bronzefield | 527 | | Drake Hall | 315 | | Downview | 358 | | East Sutton Park | 98 | | Eastwood Park | 326 | | Foston Hall | 283 | | Holloway | 496 | | Low Newton | 267 | | Morton Hall | 392 | | New Hall | 386 | | Peterborough | | | 3 | | | 360 | 363 | | Send | 282 | | Styal | 447 | | TOTAL | 4,663 | | Male and female establishment TOTAL | 77,603 | | Police cells | *** | | Establishment and Police cell TOTAL | 77,603 | 1 In Use CNA - Certified Normal Accommodation that is available for immediate use, excludes damaged cells, cells affected by building works and cells taken out of use due to staff shortages 2 Data for Moorland/Moorland Open has been combined 3 Peterborough is a dual purpose prison for men and women * HMP Hewell was created by an amalgamation of the three former prisons, Blakenhurst, Brockhill and Hewell Grange on 25 June 2008 ** HMP Isle of Wight was created by an amalgamation of the three former prisons, Albany, Camp Hill and Parkhurst on 1st April 2009 *** On 31st May 2010 up to 400 police cells available under operation safeguard which are not included in the CNA figure

en

3306-pdf

## Internal Audit Report 2017-18 Onboarding Process June 2018 To: Interim Assistant Chief Executive Strategic HR Lead Operations Director (CSG) Strategic HR Director (CSG) Operations Director (CSG) Business Manager (CSG) Service Analyst (CSG) Inspection and Improvement Lead, Family Services From: Senior Audit Executive We would like to thank management and staff of CSG & LBB for their time and co-operation during the course of the internal audit. ## Cross Council Assurance Service Executive Summary | | | | Assurance level | Number of recommendations by risk category | |----------|------|--------|---------------------|------------------------------------------------| | Critical | High | Medium | Low | Advisory | | Limited | | | | | | - | 1 | 3 | - | 1 | ## Scope Onboarding is the process by which the most suitable new starters are recruited and integrated into the established culture and operations of the Council to optimise the achievement of the Council's objectives. As part of the Ofsted Improvement Plan the target timescale for recruitment within Family Services (FS) is 60 working days from conditional offer to employee start date. This review will focus on the assessment of control processes from the decision to recruit until the induction of new Council starters. ## Summary Of Findings Pre-employment checks for starters are undertaken on a timely basis. There is also a sound system in place to ensure that all starters commence their employment with the Council within 60 days of Conditional Offer Letter being sent. FS Recruitment adheres to a controlled and centralised process, that is driven by performance management. All information gathered during the various stages of FS recruitment are retained in a clear and concise manner by CSG HR. We identified the following issues as part of the audit: - New Starter Induction (Finding 1, High) - We were unable to confirm attendance at Induction training for 14/19 (74%) of our sample of new starters. Nonattendance for induction sessions is not alerted to the responsible line managers. A 'Site Welcome Pack' for new starters, prepared by the Estates Facilities Management team and covering key areas including fire emergency health and safety procedures, is not communicated to new starters. - Interview and Selection Process (Finding 2, Medium) - Declaration forms are not always signed and sent to HR, as per the Recruitment and Selection Policy. Evaluation forms are not regularly completed during interviews and sent to HR for retention. - Evaluation: Performance Management (Finding 3, Medium) - Key dates for various stages of the evaluation process are not always recorded by HR. Performance measurement of the timeliness of the evaluation process is currently not in place outside of Family Services. - Pre-employment checks (Finding 4, Medium)- Documents retained by the Council are not always date/time stamped to confirm that originals were seen. ## Advisory Finding: We were unable to verify that all new starters within our sample had their IT needs met upon their start date. We suggest that management: - Request data relating to IT set-up from new starters, i.e. whether IT set-up had been achieved for starters at start date. - Communicate negative trends where applicable to CSG IT colleagues to drive improvements in the IT set-up process within the recruitment process. ## 2. Findings, Recommendations And Action Plan | | | | |------|---------|-------| | Ref | Finding | Risks | | Risk | | | ## 1. New Starter Induction (Operating Effectiveness): If starters are not inducted properly within set timeframes **then** there is a risk that the starter may not All new starters are invited to attend Corporate Starter Induction (CSI) training by the CSG Learning and Development (LD) Officer once they have started. understand and comply with the Council's policies, processes and practices and statutory requirements thereby failing to become fully We selected 15 Council starters (both FS and non-FS) and 4 Family Services new starters (recruited as part of the campaign) from January-December 2017 to ensure that they had attended CSI training. competent in their jobs and the working environment at the earliest stage. If new starters are not properly inducted **then** this could give rise to underperformance resulting in dismissals or capability processes which can be time consuming, costly and have a negative impact on service delivery. We were unable to confirm attendance for 10/15 (67%) new starters, and 4/4 (100%) new starters in Family Services (FS). The names could not be located on attendance sheets provided by the CSG LD Officer for our review. CSG LD indicated that there was no monitoring of attendance beyond the initial invites and recording on attendance sheets, so non-attendance would not be escalated/alerted to the relevant Council line managers to ensure that starters attended CSI training later. Attendance sheets for 2017-18 CSI training sessions were not retained consistently, in line with the Council's retention policy. Our review has also found that a 'Site Welcome Pack' for new starters is available on the Intranet. This pack is customised for different sites, for instance NLBP and Barnet House and has been created by the Facilities Management Team to induct starters on key areas such as Display Screen Equipment and fire emergency health and safety procedures, recycling processes, the escalation of building issues and IT contact details. The Pack is currently not being circulated to new starters as line managers were unaware that the documentation was available. Note 1: Since the start of the audit, the Learning and Development team have returned to the Council as an in-house team and are no longer part of CSG. category Agreed action High Corporate Induction Training: a) Induction training attendance records will be retained for referral in line with the Council's Records Retention and Disposal Policy [updated June 2014], 2 years in terms of paragraph 3.6.18 b) A protocol will be agreed between CSG HR and LBB so that HR BPs will follow up non-attendance. The data will be provided by LBB LDO. ## Recruitment And Selection Training: c) The Learning and Development Officer will build a segment into the quarterly Managerial recruitment & selection training which specifies that managers are responsible for ensuring that employees attend the corporate induction and should monitor attendance. ## Welcome Site Pack: d) LBB will agree a protocol in conjunction with CSG for ensuring that new employees are made aware of the relevant Site Welcome Pack (created and managed by CSG Estates- Facilities Management) when commencing their employment with the Council ## Responsible Officer: HR Consultant Learning and Development Officer | | | | |------|--------------|-------| | Ref | Finding | Risks | | Risk | | | | | Target date: | | ## 2. Interview And Selection Process (Operating Effectiveness) Recruitment Declaration Form The Recruitment and Selection Policy (March 2016) states that if a member of staff is a close relative, a friend, an acquaintance, a Councillor or have had any form of relationship either present or past with a job candidate, the relationship must be declared to the relevant Assistant Director or Director and the member of staff must not be involved in any related recruitment and selection decisions, for example interview and evaluation processes. All members of the interview panel are required to complete a "Recruitment Declaration Form" (RDF) to state that there is no close family relationship between them and the applicants. The form should be sent to CSG HR. We selected 15 Council starters from January-December 2017 to ensure that RDF had been completed consistently. We found that: If the interview and selection process is biased, **then** the process will fail to identify the most suitable candidate, thereby selecting a candidate with sub-optimal skill sets for the role. If the candidate evaluation process is not objective, **then** there could be a risk of discrimination leading to reputational damage and financial penalties associated with failure to comply with statutory requirements. If the candidate evaluation process is not undertaken, **then** there could be a risk of discrimination leading to reputational damage and financial penalties associated with failure to comply with statutory requirements or the recruitment of the sub-optimum candidate. - For 9/15 (60%) cases, HR confirmed that managers on the interview panel did not sign and send them a declaration form prior to conducting the interview. - For 6/15 (40%) cases, RDF documentation had not been provided to us for review at the date of the draft report, including the 4/4 cases in Family Services. We tested a further 4 starters in FS who were employed as part of the Recruitment Campaign called Bouncebackability, a specific campaign running from October 2017 until March 2018 to drive recruitment in FS as part of the OFSTED improvement plan. We found that none (0/4) RDF had been sent to HR by recruiting managers, confirming a lack of awareness of the relevant policy. We also found that there was no process for CSG HR to proactively prompt recruiting managers to submit RDFs. Note 2: Following the transfer of the L&D function back to LBB, the recruitment and selection training is being redesigned to category Agreed action 31 July 2018 Medium a) LBB will update and simplify the policy and guidance framework in relation to recruitment and onboarding. Responsible officer: Strategic HR Lead Target date: 20 September 2018 b) As part of action a) the Recruitment and Selection Policy will be reviewed and updated. LBB will update Paragraph 5.2 to emphasize that all officers and panel members involved in a specific recruitment and selection process should formally declare/ confirm the existence or absence of any close/family relationships, as defined, by completing the Recruitment Declaration Form in full. The Policy will also make reference to the Interview Assessment Form to encourage a consistent approach across the Council. ## Responsible Officer: Strategic Hr Lead Target Date: 20 September 2018 c) A recruitment process map, defining the roles and responsibilities between CSG HR and LBB will be developed and communicated to those involved in a recruitment process. For example, | | | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------|---------|-------| | Ref | Finding | Risks | | Risk | | | | ensure it best meets the needs of recruiting managers and will be | | | | reinstated during Q2. | | | | | | | ## Candidate Evaluation Forms Sheets (Operating Effectiveness): The TAS Shortlisting and Interview Guidance states that evaluations for candidates processed through TAS - the E- recruitment system used by CSG HR to manage recruitment exercises - must be recorded in TAS by the recruiting manager and interview panel members. Interview questions are created in the system and panel members score interview responses to arrive at a recruitment decision. Apprentice and Family Service recruitments are currently not managed through TAS. For all recruitment undertaken outside of TAS candidate evaluations should therefore be retained and sent to the appropriate HR Business Partner by the recruiting manager. We selected 15 Council starters from January-December 2017 to ensure that evaluation forms had been completed We found that: - 8/15 (60%): Candidate evaluation forms had not been provided for our review at the date of the draft report - 1/15 (7%): Candidate evaluation forms were completed by the interview panel however had not been sent to HR for their records. We also selected a further 4 starters within Family Services who were employed as part of the Recruitment Campaign. We found that 3/4 (75%) candidate evaluation was completed and sent to HR as expected. However: - 1/4 (25%): Evaluation forms had not been provided for our review at the date of the draft report so Internal Audit were unable to confirm whether candidate evaluation forms were completed for this FS starter category Agreed action the process map will define the responsibility for the completion of the recruitment declaration form and the retention of the documentation relating to the evaluation and scoring (for instance, the candidates' evaluation forms). This is part of the Vacancy Filler recruitment system implementation which is underway and is due to be completed at the end of August. However, managers will still be responsible for retaining recruitment documentation. ## Responsible Officer: Strategic Hr Director, Csg Target Date: End Of September 2018 Recruitment And Selection Training: d) The Learning and Development Officer will build a segment into the quarterly Managerial recruitment & selection training to reiterate that all officers and panel members involved in a specific recruitment and selection process should formally declare/ confirm the absence of any close/family relationships. e) Managers will not be involved in any stage of the recruitment and selection process if they do not attend the Recruitment and Selection training. | Ref | |--------------------------------------------------------------------| | Risk | | We also identified that there were no controls in HR to prompt the | | recruiting manager to submit the completed candidate evaluation/ | | scoring sheets where applicable. | | | ## Policies And Procedures There is an Interview Assessment Form available on the Intranet for referral to guide recruiting managers on scoring and assessment of interview candidates. Recruiting managers interviewed however were not aware of the form and the form was not used widely. The Council's "Recruitment and Selection" policy available on the Intranet also did not specifically refer to the Interview Assessment Form as we would have expected. ## General: Council management noted the need to consolidate, update and simplify the policy and guidance framework in relation to recruitment and onboarding, currently available on the Council's intranet. 3 Evaluation: Performance Management (Operating Effectiveness): If evaluation processes are not undertaken on a timely basis **then** there is a risk of lost opportunities to recruit the most suitable and Non-Family Services (NFS) There were no formal targets for NFS recruitment. Evaluation Process timescale: We tested a combined total of 19 starters to identify the total amount of days it took from closing date of advert/ shortlisting date to the date conditional offer letter was sent to the new starter. competent candidates as they may secure employment elsewhere, of current and future substandard or sub-optimum service delivery and thus, a negative candidate experience leading to LBB not being perceived as an employer of choice. Out of the 19 starters, we were able to retrieve information for only 10 and the results were as follows: Advert closing/ Number of Sampl e ref shortlisting date Date conditional days category Agreed action Responsible officer: Strategic HR Lead Target date: 20 September 2018 Medium a) CSG HR will capture performance data covering the end to end onboarding process for Non-Family Services recruitments and measure actual performance for a sample of starters to identify trends and take action where necessary. Note: We understand that this will be introduced alongside the introduction of the new e-recruitment system 'Vacancy Filler'. b) Onboarding performance measures for the KPI 'Time to Hire', e.g. target timescales for each stage of the process, will be introduced and | Ref | Finding | Risks | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------|------------| | Risk | | | | category | | | | Agreed action | | | | offer | letter | | | monitored to improve the recruitment | | | | process, end to end. | | | | sent | | | | Responsible officer: | | | | 1 | 31/10/2016 | 30/11/2016 | | Strategic HR Director | | | | 2 | 23/10/2017 | 01/11/2017 | | | | | | Target date: | | | | 3 | 21/10/2016 | 09/01/2017 | | TBC- depends on contract negotiations | | | | | | | | 4 | 04/06/2017 | 26/07/2017 | | 5 | 30/05/2017 | 29/06/2017 | | 6 | 04/11/2016 | 02/12/2016 | | 7 | 09/10/2017 | 31/10/2017 | | 8 | 09/10/2017 | 10/11/2017 | | 9 | 05/10/2017 | 20/10/2017 | | 10 | 10/10/2017 | 08/12/2017 | | In accordance with the Non- Standard Indicator, derived from the | | | | Recruitment Project Brief used by Family Services, an average of | | | | 8 days should be taken from advert closing/ shortlisting date to the | | | | day conditional offer (evaluation process) is sent. Only 1 (10%) out | | | | of the 10 starters' evaluation process met this criterion. | | | While delays may be attributable to areas of the HR process which are the responsibility of Council staff, Internal Audit's view is that CSG has some responsibility for ensuring the smooth running of the HR process end to end and that introduction of related performance measures may support improvements in the recruitment process, end to end. The latest outturn (Q2 of 17/18) of the HR Output Specification 'All HR KPI 19' - *'User satisfaction with HR Service'* had failed, | | | | |------|---------|-------| | Ref | Finding | Risks | | Risk | | | confirming in our view the need to strengthen the performance management of the HR service. ## 4. Pre- Employment Checks (Operating Effectiveness) If retained copies of documents are not individually date/ time stamped by a staff member of HR, **then** there is a risk that the he/ she did not see the original documents, leading to the possibility of candidates using Once a candidate is selected, a Conditional/Provisional Offer letter is sent to them. The offer is subject to the receipt of various preemployment checks that are relevant to their job role, so according to the Council's Pre-employment check and references policy, checks include: | fraudulent | documents | |---------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------| | - | Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) | | qualification certificates) to secure | | | employment at the Council. | | | - | Right to Work | | - | Identity (ID) | | - | Health and Mental Fitness | | - | Eligibility | | - | References | | - | Qualifications (such as Health & Care Professions Council | | registration for social workers) | | The Council is required to see original documents and retain copies of various documents such as photo IDs and proof of address. Copies of each document should be signed and dated by the relevant HR staff member to state that originals were seen. This audit specifically focused on ID checks, DBS and reference checks. We selected 15 Council starters from January - December 2017 to ensure that the above pre-employment checks had been completed. We found that: | - | |-----------------------------------------------------| | were retained by HR however confirmation of having | | inspected original documents and the date inspected | | were not recorded. | - For 2/15 (13%) starters: Proof of ID Checks and references has not been provided for our review at the date of the draft report. category Agreed action Medium a) CSG HR will instruct staff to sign and date starter identification documentation to confirm that the original documents had been inspected and the date of the inspection for referral where necessary. b) CSG HR will confirm that the proof of identification checks and references have been completed for the 2 starters that had not been provided at the date of the draft report. ## Responsible Officer: Strategic Hr Director Target Date: We believe we have already implemented this but will follow up and confirm by Mid July | Ref | |---------------| | Risk | | category | | Agreed action | ## Performance Measures: Timeliness Of Pre-Employment Checks: We calculated the time it took from Conditional offer to start date for 15 non-Family Services starters. We found that: | - | |---------------------------------------------------------| | conditional offer was sent even when all the pre- | | employment checks were undertaken on time. This | | exceeds the 60-day target required for Family Services | | starters. This example was where an individual was on 3 | | months' notice. | - 3/15 (20%) starters: Data to calculate the actual timeframes from conditional offer to start was not available for calculation. Our checks for Family Services timeframes confirmed that the 60- day target was achieved for 4/4 (100%) starters. Monthly reports in regards with CSG HR meeting the 60- day recruitment target criterion is sent by Lucy Bailey (CSG HR Operations Director) to Yogita Popat (Quality Improvement Manager), to claim the £250 fee, per new starter in FS. ## Appendix 1: Definition Of Risk Categories And Assurance Levels In The Executive Summary Risk rating Immediate and significant action required. A finding that could cause: Critical  - Life threatening or multiple serious injuries or prolonged work place stress. Severe impact on morale & service performance (e.g. mass strike actions); or - Critical impact on the reputation or brand of the organisation which could threaten its future viability. Intense political and media scrutiny (i.e. front-page headlines, TV). Possible criminal or high profile civil action against the Council, members or officers; or - Cessation of core activities, strategies not consistent with government's agenda, trends show service is degraded. Failure of major projects, elected Members & Senior Directors are required to intervene; or - Major financial loss, significant, material increase on project budget/cost. Statutory intervention triggered. Impact the whole Council. Critical breach in laws and regulations that could result in material fines or consequences. Action required promptly and to commence as soon as practicable where significant changes are necessary. A finding that could cause: High  - Serious injuries or stressful experience requiring medical many workdays lost. Major impact on morale & performance of staff; or - Significant impact on the reputation or brand of the organisation. Scrutiny required by external agencies, inspectorates, regulators etc. Unfavourable external media coverage. Noticeable impact on public opinion; or - Significant disruption of core activities. Key targets missed, some services compromised. Management action required to overcome medium-term difficulties; or - High financial loss, significant increase on project budget/cost. Service budgets exceeded. Significant breach in laws and regulations resulting in significant fines and consequences. A finding that could cause: Medium  - Injuries or stress level requiring some medical treatment, potentially some workdays lost. Some impact on morale & performance of staff; or - Moderate impact on the reputation or brand of the organisation. Scrutiny required by internal committees or internal audit to prevent escalation. Probable limited unfavourable media coverage; or - Significant short-term disruption of non-core activities. Standing orders occasionally not complied with, or services do not fully meet needs. Service action will be required; or - Medium financial loss, small increase on project budget/cost. Handled within the team. Moderate breach in laws and regulations resulting in fines and consequences. A finding that could cause: Low  - Minor injuries or stress with no workdays lost or minimal medical treatment, no impact on staff morale; or - Minor impact on the reputation of the organisation; or - Minor errors in systems/operations or processes requiring action or minor delay without impact on overall schedule; or - Handled within normal day to day routines; or - Minimal financial loss, minimal effect on project budget/cost. ## Level Of Assurance Substantial There is a sound control environment with risks to key service objectives being reasonably managed. Any deficiencies identified are not cause for major concern. Recommendations will normally only be Advice and Best Practice.  Reasonable  An adequate control framework is in place but there are weaknesses which may put some service objectives at risk. There are Medium priority recommendations indicating weaknesses but these do not undermine the system's overall integrity. Any Critical recommendation will prevent this assessment, and any High recommendations would need to be mitigated by significant strengths elsewhere. Limited There are a number of significant control weaknesses which could put the achievement of key service objectives at risk and result in error, fraud, loss or reputational damage. There are High recommendations indicating significant failings. Any Critical recommendations would need to be mitigated by significant strengths elsewhere.  No  There are fundamental weaknesses in the control environment which jeopardise the achievement of key service objectives and could lead to significant risk of error, fraud, loss or reputational damage being suffered. ## Appendix 2 - Analysis Of Findings | Critical | High | Medium | Low | Total | |------------------------------------------|---------|-----------|--------|----------| | Area | | | | | | D | OE | D | OE | D | | Role definition and publication | | | | | | | | | | | | - | - | - | - | - | | - | | | | | | Evaluation process | | | | | | | | | | | | - | - | - | - | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | 1 | - | - | | | | 1 | | | | | | Pre- employment and role specific checks | | | | | | | | | | | | - | - | - | - | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | 1 | - | - | | | | 1 | | | | | | New starter set up | | | | | | | | | | | | - | - | - | - | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | - | | | | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | - | | | | | | New starter induction | | | | | | - | - | - | 1 | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | - | - | - | | | | 1 | | | | | | Performance management | | | | | | | | | | - | | 1 | | | | | | Total | - | - | - | 1 | | | | | | | ## Key: - Control Design Issue (D) - There is no control in place or the design of the control in place is not sufficient to mitigate the potential risks in this area. - Operating Effectiveness Issue (OE) - Control design is adequate; however, the control is not operating as intended resulting in potential risks arising in this area. ## Timetable Terms of reference agreed: Fieldwork commenced: Fieldwork completed: Draft report issued: Management comments received: Final report issued: 26th January 2018 5th February 2018 30 May 2018; 26 April 2018 6 July 2018 22 June 2018 and 3 July 2018 18 June 2018 ## Appendix 3 - Identified Controls | Area | Objective | |-------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------| | | | | 1. For council staff - when the department identifies a need | | | | | | Role definition | | | and | | | publication | | | for hiring for a role, the manager will liaise with CSG HR. | | | The manager will ensure that there is a job description | | | that is up to date (when needed, HR can assist with this). | | | | | | 2. The recruiting manager uses the TAS system to fill in | | | various fields relating to the vacancy. Once all details | | | regarding the advertisement of the vacancy is inputted by | | | TAS, it will have to be approved by the: | | | Senior Management | | | Finance | | | Human Resources | | | | | | The role requirements are | | | correctly defined and the | | | appropriate channels for | | | vacancy marketing are | | | used to ensure optimum | | | outreach to increase the | | | response rates from the | | | most suitable potential | | | candidates. Role definition | | | and publication are | | | undertaken within defined / | | | agreed time scales to | | | expedite completion of the | | | recruitment process. | | | | | | And in that specific order as the approval from one, triggers the | | | workflow to the next. Where TAS is not used, the S.M / Finance | | | approval is received prior to completing the starter form to HR. | | | | | | 3. Family Services previously used TAS, however, they now | | | advertise through their own Family Services website. FS | | | Team liaise with HR who work alongside. | | | | | | 4. CSR HR advertises the vacancy on a variety of websites- | | | also with the help of TMP (advertisement company) and | | | other specialist recruitment agencies. | | | | | | | | | | | | If | | | the council fails to: | | | | | | - identify the role | | | requirements correctly | | | | | | - advertise the role via the | | | most appropriate and | | | relevant channels | | | | | | then | | | there is a risk that the | | | most suitable candidate | | | may not be attracted and | | | recruited leading to sub- | | | optimal delivery and | | | potential over reliance on | | | temporary staff and | | | financial loss. | | | If | | | key recruitments tasks | | | are not completed in a | | | timely fashion | | | then | | | there is | | | a risk of on-going | | | substandard/sub-optimum | | | service delivery and general | | | management | | | frustration/discontent while | | | the post remains vacant. | | If the interview and selection process is biased, **then** the process will fail to identify the most suitable candidate, 1. For Non-FS, all applications are received by HR Belfast and forwarded to managers to shortlist. Once shortlisted, the candidates are invited to the interview. For FS, all applications are received by HR Barnet via a mailbox. The managers are sent the applications to shortlist. thereby selecting a candidate with sub-optimal skill sets for the role. Evaluation There is an independent process. All conflicts of interest during interviews/selection are declared and taken into account to avoid bias. Council management undertakes the evaluation of candidates promptly in line with agreed timescales to expedite completion of the recruitment process 2. The interview panel members are required to sign a recruitment declaration form to state that they have no form of relationship either past or present, or is a close relative, friend or acquaintance of the candidate. 3. During the interview, candidate evaluation forms are completed. The candidates are evaluated on a scoring basis. The candidate with the highest score is selected. This is then uploaded onto TAS, and where TAS is not used, it is sent to CSG HR to be retained. (Of 7/15 cases tested, evaluation forms had been completed and were retained/held in TAS) 4. A Recruitment and New starter process document is available for FS to ensure that all processes are undertaken within set timelines. 1. Conditional offer letter is sent to the candidate, stating that All required role specific preemployment checks are the offer is subject to pre-employment checks Preemployment and role 2. Information on medical checks are sent along with the undertaken, for example, DBS and HCPC checks where specific checks conditional offer letter, along with list of documentation the candidate needs to present before the Council. 3. Certain documents are copied and retained after HR If pre-employment and role specific checks are not undertaken, **then** there is a risk that the most competent staff will not be recruited leading to sub-optimal delivery, non- adherence to policies and procedures, harm, and financial loss. necessary as well as reference checks. Any delays in response of these checks are followed up by responsible members of HR staff. Related checks are identifies the originals. completed in agreed 4. Copies are signed and dated to confirm that originals were timeframes. seen by the HR member of staff. 5. All relevant documents are copied and relevant prior to applying for a DBS check. 6. DBS checks are undertaken either in standard or enhanced form, depending on the level required for the role. 7. Requests for references are sent to two previous employers. 8. All HCPC certificates are identified. Checks are also done via the HCPC website to ensure that the registration status is valid. 1. Manager logs a call on the IT self-service system to set up New starters are given the appropriate access to the If new starters are not set-up promptly in line with New starter set up required equipment and log ins for the starter. Council resources promptly, 2. Manager ensures that any delays are followed up timeframes and correctly in their working environment, including systems and physical access, for example the then there is a risk: appropriately. 3. On the first day, starter has all equipment and log ins set required information relating to laptop, telephone, system log in and building access is - Of delayed and suboptimal service delivery and financial loss due to inefficiency. up and ready to use. communicated to appropriate personnel/department (via a There are set-up performance measures for Family Services to drive timely IT set-up. single point of coordination). Defined contractual timeframes for new starter set up are achieved. Of loss of capable staff and in the long term of Barnet Council not being considered an 'employer of choice' compromising future recruitment exercises through not being regarded as professional in their approach to recruitment. 1. Information of all new starters are effectively passed onto New starter induction the training provider. 2. Training provider ensures that all starters are invited to All starters are inducted correctly and promptly into the organisation by line managers. Starters attend the appropriate corporate training. attend induction. 3. Attendance sheets are present on the day for attendees to Local and corporate induction training attendance is recorded and monitored and nonsign. 4. Attendance sheets are examined to identify nonattendance is followed up by the line manager If starters are not inducted properly within set timeframes then there is a risk that the starter may not understand and comply with the Council's policies, processes and practices, statutory requirements thereby failing to become fully competent in to their jobs and the working environment at the earliest stage. attendance. This is later alerted to the relevant line managers. 5. Line managers ensure that starters attended induction If new starters are not properly inducted then this could give rise to underperformance without delay. resulting in dismissals or capability processes which can be time consuming, costly and have a negative impact on service delivery. ## Appendix 4 - Internal Audit Roles And Responsibilities Limitations inherent to the internal auditor's work We have undertaken the review of *Onboarding Process,* subject to the limitations outlined below. ## Internal Control Internal control systems, no matter how well designed and operated, are affected by inherent limitations. These include the possibility of poor judgment in decision-making, human error, control processes being deliberately circumvented by employees and others, management overriding controls and the occurrence of unforeseeable circumstances. Specifically, we will not: The audit will not cover the onboarding process for new starters at Schools nor will it review arrangements relating to the implementation of the new recruitment system which is due to be introduced in early 2018/19. Our assessment of controls is for the period specified only. Historic evaluation of effectiveness is not relevant to future periods due to the risk that: - the design of controls may become inadequate because of changes in operating environment, law, regulation or other; or - the degree of compliance with policies and procedures may deteriorate. Responsibilities of management and internal auditors It is management's responsibility to develop and maintain sound systems of risk management, internal control and governance and for the prevention and detection of irregularities and fraud. Internal audit work should not be seen as a substitute for management's responsibilities for the design and operation of these systems. We endeavour to plan our work so that we have a reasonable expectation of detecting significant control weaknesses and, if detected, we shall carry out additional work directed towards identification of consequent fraud or other irregularities. However, internal audit procedures alone, even when carried out with due professional care, do not guarantee that fraud will be detected. Accordingly, our examinations as internal auditors should not be relied upon solely to disclose fraud, defalcations or other irregularities which may exist.

en

3573-pdf

Leisure @ Cheltenham - Code of practice for CCTV Usage 1.1. Management of the scheme 1.2. A risk assessment has been carried out to assess the need and requirements of CCTV systems within Leisure @ Cheltenham and its associated facilities. The 16 cameras have been sited to capture images which are relevant to the purposes for which Leisure @ Cheltenham and its facilities have been established. This risk assessment is reviewed on an annual basis by the General Manager / Operations Manager. 1.3. 16 Cameras covering all major entrance / exits and cash handling areas of the centre have been sited to capture images which are relevant to the purpose for which Leisure @ Cheltenham has been established. 1.4. 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. 1.5. Leisure@ Cheltenham owners, users and any visitors to the control, monitoring and recording facilities will be required to sign a formal confidentiality declaration. They will treat any viewed and/or written material as being strictly confidential and will undertake not to divulge it to any other person. 1.6. Those who have authorised access (General Manager, Senior Managers, Duty Managers) 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: (a) To ensure personal safety of public and staff (b) To protect the Council buildings and their assets (c) To support the Police (d) To assist in identifying, apprehending and prosecuting offenders (e) To protect members of the public and private property (f) To assist in managing the facility 1.7. Scheme and Signage 1.8. This scheme aims to provide surveillance of the public areas within Leisure @ Cheltenham, 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 (Leisure @ Cheltenham), the purposes of the scheme (Crime prevention and public safety) and a contact telephone number (01242 528764) 1.9. 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. 1.10. Point of contact 1.11. The Code of Practice for Leisure @ Cheltenham informs the public on how to make contact with the owners of the scheme (Leisure @ Cheltenham) and for additional information write to: Operations Manager 1.12. Release of information to the public 1.13. 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. 1.14. 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. 1.15. Individuals may request to view information concerning them held on record in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998. 1.16. Information on how to obtain an application form can be found on Cheltenham Borough Council web site www.cheltenham.gov.uk or by writing to Customer Relations. (Please see appendix C for a copy of the form) 1.17. Release of information to statutory prosecuting bodies 1.18. The policy is to assist statutory prosecuting bodies such as the Police, and statutory authorities with powers to prosecute and facilitate the legitimate use of the information derived from the scheme. 1.19. Statutory bodies may have access to information permitted for disclosure on application to the owner of the scheme or the manager (Stephen Petherick), these applications must be in writing and provide the reasons and statement of purpose, according with the objectives of the scheme and conditions outlined above. 1.20. The information will be treated as evidential exhibits. 1.21. System Registration 1.22. 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. 1.23. Accountability 1.24. Leisure @ Cheltenham 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. 1.25. 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 Leisure @ Cheltenham directly by writing to the General Manager. 1.26. A copy of the Code of Practice will be made available to anyone on request by contacting the CCTV system owner (General Manager or Operations Manager) 1.27. CCTV Control Management And Operation 1.28. Access to the monitoring and recording areas will be strictly controlled by the Duty Manager on site. 1.29. Only those persons with a legitimate purpose will be permitted access to the Control, Recording and Monitoring system. 1.30. The system Manager (Operations Manager) or in his/her absence the Duty Manager, is authorised to determine who has access to the monitoring area. This will normally be: - Authorised Personnel (including Council Representatives) - Police officers requiring to view a particular incident, or intelligence or evidential purposes. These visits will take place by prior appointment. - Engineers and cleaning staff (These people will receive supervision throughout their visit) 1.31. Inspectors/Auditors may visit the monitoring and recording facility without prior appointment. 1.32. Organised visits by authorised persons are to be conducted in controlled circumstances. All visitors to the monitoring and recording area, including Police Officers, will be required to sign a visitors log and a declaration of confidentiality. 1.33. Observation and recording of incidents 1.34. Recording will be throughout a 24 hour period. The system will be monitored on the basis of operational necessity. Images will be held for 7 days and then over recorded. 1.35. Privacy And Disclosure Issues 1.36. 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. 1.37. The following principles must be adhered to: 1.38. 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 1.39. Images not required for the purposes of the scheme will not be retained longer than necessary 1.40. The Duty 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 1.41. Monitors displaying images from areas in which individuals would have an expectation of privacy will not be viewed by anyone other than authorised persons. 1.42. Recorded material will only be used for the purposes defined in the objectives of this policy 1.43. Access to recorded material will be in accordance with policy and procedures 1.44. Information will not be disclosed for commercial purposes and entertainment purposes 1.45. All access to the medium on which the images are recorded will be documented 1.46. Access to recorded images will be restricted to those staff who need to have access in order to achieve the purpose(s) of using the equipment 1.47. Viewing of the recorded images should, where possible take place in a restricted area (control room) 1.48. Access to recorded images 1.49. Access to recorded images will be restricted to the General / 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. 1.50. Monitoring employees 1.51. When you install CCTV in a workplace, such as an office, it is likely to capture pictures of employees, even if they are not the main subject of surveillance. If the purpose of the CCTV is solely to prevent and detect crime, then you should not use it for monitoring the amount of work done or compliance with company procedures. If there is a breach in Council / Site procedures then this can be used for reference / evidence purposes. 1.52. You may get requests to disclose information captured by the CCTV system from employees or HR GoSS because of on-going disciplinary action, disclosure should only be made if this is consistent with the registered purpose for the system. 1.53. In some cases, it may be appropriate to install CCTV specifically for workforce monitoring. You should go through the decision making process in section 4 of the Information Commissioners code, take advice from HR GoSS and consider whether it is justified. In particular, consider whether better training or greater supervision would be a more appropriate solution 1.54. The overt monitoring of any employee using CCTV can only be done with the consent of the Director and after consultation with HR GoSS 1.55. The covert monitoring of employees must not take place unless it has been specifically authorised in advance using the codes of practice, guidance and procedures under The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 . There is no covert monitoring that takes place on this site. 1.56. Access to data by third parties 1.57. Access to images by third parties will only be allowed in limited and prescribed circumstances. Disclosure will be limited to the following:- - Law enforcement agencies where the images recorded would assist in a specific criminal enquiry - Prosecution agencies - Legal representatives. 1.58. The media, where it is assessed by the Police that the public's assistance is needed in order to assist in the identification of victim, witness or perpetrator in relation to a criminal incident. As part of that assessment the wishes of the victim of an incident should be taken into account. 1.59. The people whose images have been recorded and retained (Data Subject) unless disclosure to an individual would prejudice the criminal enquiries or criminal proceedings. 1.60. Recorded Material Management 1.61. Images, that are 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. 1.62. Recorded material should be of high quality. In order for recorded material to be admissible in evidence total integrity and continuity must be maintained at all times. 1.63. Security measures will be taken to prevent unauthorised access to, alteration, disclosure, accidental loss or destruction of recorded material. 1.64. 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. 1.65. Images retained for evidential purposes will be retained in a secure place where access is controlled - safe in control room, or locked cupboard in the management office. 1.66. The system records features such as the location of the camera and/or date and time reference. 1.67. 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. 1.68. Recorded Material Register 1.69. There will be a register documenting the access to recorded media. 1.70. Documentation 1.71. Log books must be sequential in order that pages or entries cannot be removed and full and accurate records kept. 1.72. Administrative documents The following shall be maintained: - Media tracking register - occurrence/incident book - visitors register - maintenance of equipment, whether routine or breakdown - list of installed equipment Action Plan Task Action Completed Disposal of Records Design a disposal of records log sheet for CCTV 12/02/14 Check if system is registered Contact the customer relations team As soon as CoP has been produced Karen Watson will then add to register Visitors log to control room and CCTV Create visitor log book and declaration of confidentiality 12/02/14 Access to images Record and create file 12/02/14 Need to confirm with BP timescales Rang 12/02/14 but on holiday for one week. Service level document retention

en

0911-pdf

## Active For Life: The English Federation Of Disability Sport Strategy Message From The English Federation Of Disability Sport Honorary President we need to ensure disabled people are not only interested in being more active, but that the opportunities are so widespread that everyone can choose something which is right for them. "Being active is important in all our lives whether a disabled person or not. Sport can play a huge role in the life of someone disabled- building your confidence, allowing you to meet likeminded people but most of all it gives you a goal. It allows you to do something that you love. Everybody should be able to get involved in the sport of their choice and EFDS is working hard to make this possible" Martine Wright, sitting volleyball Disabled people deserve the same rights to be active as everybody else, no matter whether they want to make use of their local gym or become an elite athlete. This is why organisations like the English Federation of Disability Sport have such an important role to play. Our work towards equality in sport means disabled people will be able to access more positive opportunities in sport and physical activity. The English Federation of Disability Sport will continue to work with partners and friends, new and established, to ensure this can happen. The organisation's strategy is a major step on an important journey to change perceptions, increase participation and empower disabled people in sport. We are confident this ongoing journey will enable more disabled people to be active for life. "Take chances. Take the opportunities while they're there. You grab them, you never know what will happen. Just enjoy it." Tom Minchington, athlete I hope you will join me in supporting English Federation of Disability Sport's work over the coming years. Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson DBE Undoubtedly, in 2012 this country delivered an amazing showcase of sport. The Paralympic Games on home soil meant more recognition was given to disabled people at the highest level in sport. As we all strive to build on the momentum which the Games created, ## Active For Life: The Efds Strategy Introduction The English Federation of Disability Sport (EFDS) is the strategic lead in sport and physical activity for disabled people in England. In addition to being a funded National Partner of Sport England, EFDS, as a Federation, provides a platform for collaborative working across England and the main impairment groups. Our full Members include National Disability Sport Organisations (NDSOs) and Regional Federations. As a Federation, EFDS seeks to be more than the sum of its parts. To do this, we bring together the energy and expertise which exists within our Member organisations and partners in England. This unique position in England enables us to be the authoritative voice for disabled people in sport and physical activity. In this long term Strategy, EFDS has set out a clear vision and ambitious outcomes which, we hope will be shared by the wider "sector" following further consultation. The document will provide a clear route map to guide the focus and impact of EFDS over the next five years. Again, it is important to understand that we mean the whole "EFDS family" as we set out the collective impact we seek to achieve. We apply a broad and inclusive definition of the word "sport" as follows: ability to carry out normal day to day activities. It is a characteristic feature or attribute within an individual which is long term and may, or may not, be the result of disease, genetics or injury. includes a wide range of other terms including exercise, fitness, recreation and a wide range of structured, unstructured, competitive and just plain fun sporting opportunities. - It is important to remember that not all impairments are obviously identifiable or may be hidden. "... all forms of physical activity that contribute to physical fitness, mental well-being and social interaction. These include: play; recreation; organised, casual or competitive sport and indigenous sports and games." Whilst we believe the terminology that we are using is the most relevant at this point in time, we will constantly consult disabled people to ensure that the language we use connects to their interests and aspirations. (UN Inter-Agency Task Force on Sport for Development and Peace (2003)) Language and terminology can often be a barrier rather than an aid to understanding. Therefore throughout the document it will maintain clear and simple language by defining our terms as follows: - We will use the Social Model of Disability. This will be applied to the way we work and the language we use. The Social Model was developed by disabled people and to show the structures within society as the problem. We too believe disability is caused by the barriers in society and the way it is organised. This discriminates against people with impairments and excludes them from positive involvement or participation. By applying the Social Model to our work, we identify disabled people as active citizens in sport and exercise. The application of this in sport means we still recognise the use of impairment groupings in competition structures and pathways. Our strong focus is on the real benefits for disabled people from direct participation in sport and physical activity. However, we also actively encourage and enable disabled people to take part in all aspects of sport, whether as volunteers or paid employees. This includes taking up key roles as volunteers, leaders, coaches and teachers in the sector. - In line with the agreed definition above, when we use the words "sport and physical activity", this definition - The Equality Act 2010 determines a person as disabled by the effect that impairment has on that person's The summary diagram (page 7 and 8) provides a simple diagram of the key messages in the strategy. An effective organisation EFDS will ensure that all aspects of our operation meet the highest standards. The Board, Membership and all staff will ensure that our impact is underpinned by: - Strong shared values (as above). Values and ways of working EFDS has agreed five clear values which will guide the way we work. In all that we do, EFDS will: - Good leadership and governance. - Place **disabled people** at the heart of our work. - Continual learning and development for the paid and volunteer workforce. - Focus on how we **influence** the behaviour and actions of others. - Sufficient and sustainable income streams. - Be a good **partner**, achieving greater impact through collaboration. - Excellent financial and administrative support. - Inspire and innovate finding new and creative solutions. - Remain **focused on outcomes** - real world impact. ## Disabled People Are Active For Life Outcomes The above Vision is translated into two broad **Strategic Outcomes**. The main bodies involved in developing and delivering 'sport' services for disabled people will work together to achieve these broad outcomes: ## Enhanced Health And Wellbeing For All Disabled People (I.E. Physical, Mind, Social And Emotional Health) A More Equal Society In Which Disabled People Can Achieve More Through Increased Opportunities And Choice The above broad Strategic Outcomes are broken down into the following shared sport and physical activity specific outcomes to provide a focus for our work in increasing the participation and retention of disabled people in sport: | 1. Provider commitment | 2. Pathways and progress | 3. Personal development | |-----------------------------|-------------------------------|----------------------------| are supporting disabled people to participate in 'sport' and progress to the level they choose of disabled people is enhanced through 'sport' The following two drivers will enable the achievement of the above **Vision** and Outcomes An effective process for engaging disabled people in sport with all stakeholders that continuously strengthens opportunity and participation. A clear focus on impact based on: 1. Engagement of disabled people 4. Engagement and collaboration from national to local 2. Research, insight and marketing 5. Strong advocacy - changing attitudes and behaviour 3. Sport and physical activity development expertise 6. Directly providing services and participation opportunities ## Vision And Outcomes We see two broad (wider than sport) outcomes which will result from increased participation in sport and physical activity by disabled people: EFDS has a simple Vision of a future where: - Enhanced health and wellbeing for all disabled people ## "Disabled People Are Active For Life". This outcome focuses on the improved wellbeing and quality of life for disabled people. It aspires to social, emotional and psychological wellbeing as well as physical health. - A more equal society in which disabled people can achieve through increased opportunities and choice We do not assume that all disabled people will be active although that would be fantastic! Our aspiration is to see equality in sport whereby disabled people are just as likely to be active as non-disabled people. At the moment in England, four out of five disabled people are not taking part in any sport or physical activity each week. Nondisabled people's participation rates are more than twice the level of disabled people. To achieve our vision where disabled people are active for life, they need to be recognised within society much more positively. This is a position where the physical, logistical and psychological barriers to participation are removed. If disabled people are to exercise genuine choice, then the opportunities open to them need to be as comprehensive as those available to non-disabled people. EFDS is the strategic lead for sport and physical activity in England. It is important to identify how our work and those of our partner organisations can help achieve this vision and lead to wider changes in society and for disabled people specifically. the desire exists, there must be the opportunity to progress to international competition (including but not exclusively through the Paralympics). ## 3. Personal Development We have identified five sport and physical activity specific outcomes which will both guide our work and define how we will make a difference. These are: Whilst all stakeholders are important, National Governing Bodies of sport will play a critical role in providing opportunities for people to participate in sport. Therefore EFDS will work closely with them and other providers of sport and physical activity to help strengthen their offers and ensure the relevance to a broader range of disabled people. ## The Confidence And Self-Esteem Of Disabled People Is Enhanced Through Sport And Physical Activity 1. Provider Commitment 2. Pathways And Progress More People And Organisations Are Supporting Disabled People To Participate In Sport And Physical Activity Disabled People Can Access The Sport Of Their Choice Throughout Their Lives And Progress To The Level They Choose This focuses on the state of mind of individual disabled people. It is based on the knowledge that low confidence and self-esteem can often prevent people seeking opportunities to become active. However, evidence shows that participation in sport helps to drive a positive cycle of increased confidence and self esteem which in turn heightens the hunger for more active participation. The focus here is on ensuring the opportunities are available for disabled people to initially engage with sport at the relevant level as well as providing opportunities and pathways to enable individuals to progress to the level they are willing and capable of achieving. ## 4. Public Perception Attitudes Regarding Disabled People And The Sports They Take Part In Are Positive The supply of quality sport and physical activity opportunities will need to expand rapidly if it is to respond to the growing demand from disabled people. It must be recognised that the network of organisations and individuals involved in providing opportunities for disabled people is vast and not only includes National Governing Bodies of sport but also Disabled People's Organisations, sports organisations, the media, volunteers and of course, disabled people themselves. This focuses on attitudes within society For some people the choice may involve participating in relatively informal local sport, physical activity or exercise. However, where the potential and both towards disabled people in general but also to the sport and physical activity in which they take part. EFDS is passionate about seeing a change in attitudes across society towards disabled people and their participation in sport. In an ideal world, sport and physical activity will be seen as being just as much a "normal" part of life for a disabled person as it is for a non-disabled person. Sport would be seen as "just sport" whether it is a high profile "mainstream" sport like Premiership football or an inclusive game of sitting volleyball at a local school or community centre. Won't it be great when the coverage of sport involving disabled people is just as widespread in the media as any other sport! ## 5. Participation For Life The Experience Of Sport And Physical Activity Is Positive, Beneficial And Enjoyable Throughout life and regardless of impairment, participating in sport or any physical activity will always be a choice rather than a requirement. Like all things, the more positive, beneficial and enjoyable the experience (especially the first time), the greater the likelihood of an individual coming back for more and recommending the experience to others. ## Strategic Aims (2012-2017) and other partners that lead to improvement in the infrastructure of sport and the products and services available for disabled people. To realise the Vision and Outcomes set out above by 2017, EFDS will be recognised for having achieved the following aims: 5. Work collaboratively with disabled people and develop an effective platform for their engagement with sport and physical activity. 1. Provide strategic leadership and direct support to get more disabled people participating in sport and physical activity. 6. Ensure the provision of pathways to participation for disabled people in sport and physical activity through a dedicated events programme. 2. Be recognised and respected as the authoritative voice for disabled people in sport and physical activity in England. 7. Influence and support the health and fitness industry to provide high quality inclusive services and provision. 3. Be the central resource for research evidence relating to disabled people and sport. 8. Promote and develop specific programmes and activities to support the growth in participation of young disabled people within sport and physical activity. 4. Ensure that strong and effective engagement processes and partnerships are in place with National Governing Bodies (NGBs), County Sport Partnerships (CSPs), National Disability Sport Organisations (NDSOs) 9. Generate significant additional income and funding opportunities to support the participation of disabled people in sport and physical activity. ## A Working System For Engaging Disabled People In Sport Whilst EFDS is not directly accountable for the work of these identified stakeholders, EFDS provide direct support and guidance to help them identify and fulfil their respective roles. EFDS will support NGBs and CSPs to better engage with disabled people and organisations that are representative of and for disabled people. We will support this through tested marketing methods to increase awareness of sport for disabled people, provide further opportunities and attract more disabled people to participate in sport. EFDS will develop and champion an effective and functioning sports system that engages with disabled people and is inclusive. It will provide a platform that leads to increased and sustained participation by disabled people in sport and physical activity. The key components that contribute to having a successful sports system in place are: - The recognition and understanding of the roles that key stakeholders/players can and do play, which contribute to engagement and the effective delivery of sport for disabled people. - Clearly defined activities and functions that can directly increase levels of participation in sport and physical activity by disabled people. EFDS will provide the sports sector with expert knowledge of participation patterns and consumer demand from disabled people. This reaches deeper into existing markets and highlights new ones for growth. We will build on existing commissioned research which enables delivery partners to drive up participation in a way that is relevant to the sport infrastructure. Our research will connect the sports sector to disabled people and will measure the impact of inclusive sports provision as well as building the case for further investment into sport for disabled people. EFDS will continue to work closely with national and local providers to improve the supply of opportunities, which increase the number of disabled people participating in sport. In addition, we will help build demand from disabled people who wish to participate in sport. We will do this through the development of effective pathways for disabled people to participate in sport. Our work will ensure existing local sport systems and infrastructures provide an inclusive environment with targeted outcomes to help increase the number of disabled people participating in sport. In particular, we will seek to support the NGB and CSP infrastructure in the development of sport for disabled people ensuring those organisations provide an equitable and inclusive approach. - An effective engagement mechanism with the non-sport sector that leads to more disabled people participating in sport and physical activity. A focus on disabled people as customers Current research, from a range of external sources, provides EFDS with the foundations of understanding disabled people in sport: Insight and understanding - A skeleton map of the sector set-up, from grass roots to elite participation, derived from combining research from various academic sources. Individually such research focuses on niche areas of interest but when viewed collectively, provides a usable baseline to identify key areas of on-going concern. - Participation rates of disabled people in sport taken from Sport England Active People Survey and DCMS Taking Part Survey. EFDS are aware that in order to be fully successful they must place disabled people at the heart of all of our work. Through engagement with disabled people and Disabled People's Organisations we will ensure that we have the strongest possible understanding of the very wide range of interests and aspirations. The gathered insight will be used to support and strengthen our internal functions. However, due to limitations associated with the research, the outputs and relevance for the disability sport sector is limited. This means there are significant knowledge gaps which still need to be filled in order to provide the most effective service. - The drivers and barriers to participation, as well as the perceptions and beliefs of society toward disabled people taken from Sport England Active People Survey, Sport Satisfaction Survey and Life Opportunity Survey, DCMS Taking Part Survey and EFDS Understanding the Barriers to Participation research. With this support, we can provide focused, relevant and actionable recommendations to organisations and individuals who seek to increase the participation of disabled people in sport and physical activity. EFDS is committed to identifying the key areas of focus for future research and working together with other stakeholders. This ensures research is conducted in a timely and effective manner, answering key questions to provide concise, relevant and actionable outputs. - An understanding of young disabled people's exposure to and experience of sport, as well as the limitations and frustrations toward access as they grow older, taken from Sport England's Young Disabled People and Sport and Active People Survey. ## Effective Marketing And Communications like non-disabled people, have various lifestyles, motivations and experiences. Moving forward, the triggers, actions, lifestyles and motivations of individual disabled people are four areas which upon EFDS will concentrate. Insight and market research is important for one key reason. It is pointless delivering something which does not respond to a need or demand. Once we have this evidence, we can deliver ourselves and advise others on more customer-focused programmes which respond to a need. Until we develop an ideal behaviour change model for our audiences, we know a useful starting point is using an adapted marketing approach for our own work. The commonly known marketing Loyalty Ladder which we call Engagement Ladder can be used for customers or stakeholders. It takes, in marketing terms, the prospects on a journey to hopefully a champion or advocate. We have deliberately left out the audience for the ladder as it works for many whether consumer (disabled people) or stakeholder (e.g. National Governing Body of sport). Marketing effectively then means we can satisfy and anticipate the customer needs. In an ideal world, we could personalise everything we do to ensure every individual's needs are satisfied. However, for any organisation, this is too time-consuming and definitely too costly. If EFDS is to establish real value in the services we deliver, we need to determine market segmentations which work effectively. We know segmenting disabled people into wide impairment groups or demographic features does not work. One wheelchair user is not the same as the next one, just like not every woman is the same. Disabled people, ## 1. Research And Insight Delivery Priorities (2012-2014) The strategic plan and aims set out previously will be underpinned by clear delivery plans, which identify the way in which respective EFDS service areas will contribute to achieving the vision and outcomes. - To understand the perceptions disabled people have of themselves and their abilities and what impact that has on their confidence and self-esteem (generally and specifically in sport). The following outlines our key, early delivery priorities to March 2014. - To identify the key benefits disabled people gain from sport. - To understand the barriers to participation and how these can be/ have been overcome. - To gain a better understanding of the sporting opportunities and pathways available and any gaps that currently exist or areas of frustration that prevent participation/progression. ## 2. Marketing And Communications 4. Events 3. Sports Development And Engagement - To promote the wider benefits of sport and exercise through the relevant channels for both consumer and stakeholder. - To provide a platform for community based sports opportunities for disabled people to participate in sport. - To provide strategic leadership and support that leads towards getting more disabled people participating in sport and physical activity, in particular, in partnership with the NGBs and CSPs. - To satisfy the needs of those who support the end users by providing offers to use sport and exercise as a way to enhance life skills. - To identify progression routes specifically for disabled athletes and where appropriate, provide opportunities through a range of events. - To work collaboratively with the wider network of disabled people and develop an effective platform for engagement with sport and physical activity (also for NDSOs/Inclusive Fitness Initiative). - To provide channels for the end consumer to share their needs, positive experiences and better practices in sport and exercise. - To develop and nurture volunteers and provide workforce development opportunities directly and indirectly in partnership with other volunteering agencies. - To ensure strong and effective partnerships are in place with NGBs, NDSOs, CSPs, Regional Forums/ Federations and other partners that improve the infrastructure of sport and the quality of their products and services for disabled people. - To develop an agreed collaborative approach with EFDS and NDSOs to connect the disability population into NGBs interventions and targets. ## 5. Physical Activity 6. Children And Young People 7. Income Generation And Fundraising - To develop and implement a fundraising strategy for EFDS. - To develop a long term strategy identifying new areas of development to support the growth of young disabled people participating within physical activity, PE and sport. - To influence and support the health and fitness industry to provide high quality inclusive services and increase the number of disabled people participating in physical activity (demand). - To identify funding for participation pathways and core funding that support disabled people in sport. - To develop new funding partnerships and nurture existing ones. - To grow the role of physical activity within the EFDS core offer and brand family and secure funding resources specifically around disability and inclusion within physical activity. - To support fundraisers and maximise income opportunities. - To support key landscape partners on the engagement of young disabled people within PE and sport including the development and delivery of an inclusive PE programme throughout the UK impacting on curriculum development and initial teacher training. - To successfully develop and manage physical activity programmes (e.g. IFI Mark) in line with delivery plans and funding partner requirements. - To provide insight and good practice to all Sport England funded partners on engagement of young disabled people within activity, PE and sport. - To identify and advocate evidence based benefits of physical activity for disabled people. English Federation Of Disability Sport SportPark- Loughborough University 3 Oakwood Drive Loughborough Leicestershire LE11 3QF Tel 01509 227750 Fax 01509 227777 Email federation@efds.co.uk Website www.efds.co.uk The English Federation of Disability Sport is a registered charity. CRN 1075180

en

3366-pdf

## Data Advisory Group (Dag) Date 24 March 2011 Venue London Councils, Room 4 Meeting Chair Nick Brenton Contact Officer: Glyn Parry Telephone: 02079349730 Email: glyn.parry@londoncounsils.gov.uk ## Attendees: Nick Brenton (Chair) Association of London Directors of Children's Services Gareth Ashcroft Young People's Learning Agency (YPLA) Parmjit Sahons London Borough of Hounslow Rob Atkins London Borough of Islington Dave Pether Connexions London West Clare Oatham National Apprenticeship Service (NAS) Phil Rossiter London Borough of Wandsworth Margaret Brightman London Borough of Lewisham Andrew Pearse Westminster City Council Michelle Harris London Borough of Southwark Andrew Mackey London Borough of Hackney Kate Welsh London Borough of Greenwich Eryl Shaw London Borough of Lambeth Mark Urban London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham Alim Abdul London Borough of Harrow Kuljit Bisal London Borough of Harrow Glyn Parry (note taker) 14-19 Regional Planning Group (RPG) ## Items 1. Welcome And Introductions 1.1 The group greeted new members and welcomed the increased local authority (LA) representation. ## Item 2. Notes Of The Last Meeting 2.1 The notes of the last meeting (12 November 2010) were agreed - all actions have been completed or are underway. ## Item 3. Rpg Remit/Policy Developments 3.1 GP informed the DAG that following the RPG Review, the Board has agreed to change the RPG's name to London Councils: Young People's Educ*ation and Skills*. All branding online will change on 08 April 2011. The new constitution will be formally agreed at the next Board meeting and published on the London Councils website; a current draft is available on the website at: http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/London%20Councils/Item2.YPESConstitutionMar11.pdf. 3.2 GP summarised the revised role of the Young People's Education and Skills team as follows:-  To provide pan-London leadership for 14-19 education and training provision in relation to the current and future need of learners and employers  To support local authorities in undertaking their statutory functions  To assist other stakeholders in planning, policy and provision 3.3 GP tabled a paper to the DAG setting-out all the responses relating to data that were gathered in the RPG Review. RA stressed the importance of distinguishing between the roles of the RPG and YPLA concerning data, which could sometimes be fuzzy. The meeting agreed that the YPLA's role was primarily concerned with the provision of data, whilst RPG's was centred on signposting and analysis of the data. AP1: GA and GP to ensure clarity over the YPLA and RPG's role concerning data is evident in relevant communications/projects ## Item 4. Ypla Data Offer 4.1 GA summarised the data offer that will be made available to local authorities in 2011. A selection of reports will be produced under three themes (understanding the learning landscape/achievement and progression/participation of young people) staggered over the course of the year to coincide with the timeliness of data. Full details are in the briefing note circulated to the group prior to the meeting: http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/London%20Councils/Item4YPLADataOffer.DOC.pdf. 4.2 The narrative reports will be a concise summary spread over four pages. They will initially be shared on the Provider Gateway, and released on the YPLA website at a later date. GA confirmed that Academies and Learners with Learning Difficulties or Disabilities (LLDD) data will be included in the narrative reports, and that out-of-borough figures will be covered in the residency reports (even for boroughs bordering London). 4.3 The YPLA will also develop future data releases by:  Adopting new visualisation tools  Launching an 'extranet' to replace the Provider Gateway  Scoping the possibility of segmenting the recipients of data into relevant groups  Improving the transparency of allocations data (especially success rates) by creating an 'Open Book' of data to work with schools to improve its quality 4.4 The group emphasised the importance of involving relevant LA staff in the Open Book exercise as well as staff within schools. AP2: GA to ensure that the YPLA communicates with relevant LA staff in regard to the Open Book exercise 4.5 GP raised the issue that the school success rates on the YPLA website (published as a result of a journalist's Freedom of Information Act request) were now out-of-date, and requested that they should be replaced with the final rates that were used for the allocations. AP3: GA to pass the request back to the relevant YPLA staff and alert the group of the outcome 4.6 NB asked what the plans were to share data related to the careers service. DP confirmed that Connexions would also produce residency based data and NEET data would be produced for the academic year. A reduced collection of management information (MI) would be published. ## Item 5. Rpg Data Analysis 5.1 GP summarised the activity planned by the RPG to support LAs in their use of data. Two key workstrands were identified and agreed to by the DAG:  14-19 and London, An Evidence Base: consisting of the three pan-London narratives plus supplementary evidence captured over the course of the spring and summer  Intelligent London: a data portal on the London Councils website devoted to opening-up data related to young people, their education and progression through to employment and presenting it in accessible/appealing ways AP4: GP to work with the YPLA to complete each of the three pan-London narratives, compile any supplementary evidence, and produce the full Evidence Base by September 2011 AP5: GP to continue to develop the Intelligent London website and provide access to DAG members for a pilot testing stage AP6: GP to set-up an online forum space for DAG on the Communities of Practice website and send an invite to the forum to all members ## Item 6. Rpg Data Projects 6.1 16-18 modelling: The Greater London Authority (GLA) Data Management and Analysis Group (DMAG) were commissioned by the RPG over a year ago to complete a 16-18 student modelling exercise. GP updated the group that DMAG still hasn't produced any outputs despite formal letters and emails requesting that the work is completed. DMAG did commit to delivering the work by 18 March 2011 in their last communication but this deadline was missed. AP7: RPG to escalate the issue within the GLA and explore the possibility of requesting the return of the £20,000 paid to the GLA for the project AP8: NB to contact the DMAG team to apply further pressure on them to deliver 6.2 Special Educational Needs (SEN)/LLDD data: GP updated the group on the progress of the SEN cohort mapping project. The National Pupil Dataset (NPD) team has now provided the SEN, School Action and School Action Plus year group cohort (years 7 -11) numbers from 2006/07 - 2009/10. The YPLA has conducted an initial analysis of Key Stage 4 Year 11 learner numbers. AP9: GP to work with the YPLA to produce the historic year group leaner numbers for years 7-11 between 2006/07 - 2009/10. This dataset can then be used as the basis for creating projections for post-Year 11 LLDD numbers 6.3 Travel to Success: GP confirmed that the Travel to Success project had been completed. DAG fed back how useful the data had been and that the packs had been well received in LAs. ## Item 7. Any Other Business 7.1 DAG discussed the future of the Choice website and what will happen to the data contained within it. AP10: GP to find out more information regarding the future of Choice and data connected to it and inform DAG 7.2 GP raised the issue of ensuring that there were adequate numbers of Provider Gateway users in each LA, since this is the main route through which LAs will access the data provided by the YPLA and that many current users may be leaving LAs as a result of restructuring. AP11: GA to provide GP with a list of all current Provider Gateway users and compare it to RPG's record of who is leaving LAs to determine which LAs may need to assign new users to the Gateway 7.3 GA informed the DAG that the current Data Protocol each individual LA has with the YPLA will expire at the end of March. The YPLA and RPG are working together to create one overall new Data Protocol that can be signed by RPG on behalf of all LAs (as was done with the Skills Funding Agency). The DAG agreed that this approach was sensible and should be pursued. AP12: GP and GA to work together to agree a revised Data Protocol to be signed by the RPG

en

1355-pdf

## EVALUATING CHANGES IN BANK LENDING TO UK SMES OVER 2001-12 - ONGOING TIGHT CREDIT? Econometric analyses using data from the UK Survey of SME Finances and the SME Finance Monitor APRIL 2013 Prepared for the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills by: Angus Armstrong a.armstrong@niesr.ac.uk, E Philip Davis e_philip_davis@msn.com and p.davis@niesr.ac.uk, Iana Liadze i.liadze@niesr.ac.uk, Cinzia Rienzo c.rienzo@niesr.ac.uk National Institute of Economic and Social Research London ## Acknowledgments We gratefully acknowledge assistance from Stuart Fraser of Warwick Business School, advice from colleagues at BIS and suggestions from participants in seminars at BIS and NIESR. ## Executive Summary Background The availability of bank finance to small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) is important to allow SMEs to start up and finance investment for growth. There has been widespread comment regarding the continued difficulty SMEs perceive in obtaining external finance since the financial crisis of 2008. This followed a period in which credit was more widely available in the early to mid 2000s. BIS commissioned this project to develop an understanding of the changes in lending to SMEs from 2001-12; to identify the extent to which bank lending has contracted since 2008, and to identify whether SMEs were disproportionately affected in their ability to access finance. An important focus of the research was also to identify SME characteristics associated with greater difficulties in accessing finance. Methodology The project used data from a series of SME surveys that provide detailed information on the characteristics of a sample of UK SMEs, their owners and experiences of obtaining finance1. Using econometric models, which included controls for SME characteristics and risk factors, indicators of changes in the supply of bank lending over the time period abstracting from borrower risk could be obtained. Key findings SMEs have faced a more challenging environment for accessing credit after the financial crisis of 2008 and subsequent recession. Even controlling for risk factors, rejection rates for both overdrafts and term loans were significantly higher in the period from 2008-9 onwards, which is indicative of constraints to the supply of credit. The evidence suggests greater credit restrictions for term loans than overdrafts. Firm characteristics associated with greater likelihood of rejection included higher credit risk rating, previous financial delinquency and lower sales levels, whilst older more established businesses were less likely to be rejected. Margins for both overdrafts and term loans were also significantly higher in the period from 2008-9 onwards, even controlling for risk, as cuts in the Bank of England base rate were not fully transferred on to SME borrowers. However there was no significant increase over time in the likelihood of an SME with given risk characteristics having to provide collateral. Whilst arrangement fees were high during 2008-9, they subsequently returned to levels that were not significantly different from the period before 2008. The tightening in credit since 2008-9 has disproportionately affected low and average risk SMEs (based on Dun and Bradstreet credit scores). However there was no significant change over this period in the likelihood of rejection for SMEs rated as above (e.g. greater than) average risk. This suggests banks viewed lending to the safer categories of SMEs as relatively more risky in the period after the financial crisis than they did before, although the pattern is also suggestive of a partial withdrawal from SME lending as an asset class. After 2009 there was also an increase in the proportion of SMEs rated as above average credit risk due to the effects of the recession on sales, profitability and asset prices. Effects of ethnic origin of the owner on lending to SMEs were detected, with black entrepreneurs more likely to be refused credit. The newly-nationalised banks in 2008-9 were more willing to provide SME credit overall than were other institutions. Time series modelling reveals that greater uncertainty in economic conditions appears to have had greater negative effect on lending to SMEs compared to the corporate sector as a whole. This suggests economic uncertainty as has prevailed since 2008-9 leads to a general shift away from higher risk SME lending towards lending to larger businesses. Overall, we suggest that the research is indicative of a shortage of finance for SMEs, reflecting banks' attitudes to risk and their own pressures to delever combined with banks' market power in the SME sector. Although demand is also probably subdued, there is a high level of discouragement from application for lending as well as high rejection rates and margins on credit after controlling for risk. If the situation is not resolved, output, investment and employment will be lower than would otherwise be the case, with adverse effects on economic performance in the short and longer term. ## 1. Introduction Access to finance for small and medium enterprises (SMEs) is key to the recovery and long term growth of the UK economy. The principal providers of external finance are the major UK banks. Accordingly, the financial crisis was bound to have an impact on SME finance through the failure and partial nationalisation of banks, higher bank funding costs and the subsequent recession. More than five years since the start of the crisis an important issue for policy makers is whether the tightening of credit terms by banks has been sustained beyond that which can be justified by changes in the riskiness of borrowers. Are creditworthy firms even now finding finance significantly more difficult to obtain? And if so, what are the characteristics of SMEs that are subject to such constraints? If there is evidence of a supply constraint, this is of relevance to policy makers as the banking sector would be imposing a cost on the rest of the economy. In this paper we present our assessment of these questions based on an analysis of the UK Survey of SME Finances (UKSMEF) for 2004, 2008 and 2009, and its successor the SME Finance Monitor (SMEFM) which is quarterly from 2011Q1 to 2012Q2. Our assessment follows two lines of enquiry: (1) the characteristics of SMEs likely to face supply of credit constraints; and (2) distinguishing cyclical and structural changes in lending conditions, mainly using indicators of uncertainty at a macroeconomic level. We treat overdrafts (mainly used for working capital) as separate from term loans (more likely to be used for investment finance) throughout the analysis. Our main results are:  Controlling for risk, the rejection rates for loans and overdrafts have risen further since 2008-9.  Controlling for risk, there is a sustained high level of overdraft and loan margins since 2008-9.  Particularly for term loans, the rejection rate has increased significantly since 2008- 9 for low and average risk firms and not significantly for high risk firms.  Collateral requirements and arrangement fees have not increased.  Renewals finance appears to have been more strongly affected by credit rationing since 2011 than applications for new finance.  Uncertainty proxies affect the volume of SME lending more than they do large firm lending, as does risk adjusted capital adequacy. However, causality cannot be discerned. ## 1.1 Credit Rationing And Intermediation For Smes2 The supply of bank credit to SMEs has distinct characteristics compared to larger businesses. First, lending to SMEs is generally riskier as they are often young businesses, they often have less collateral available for security and they are less likely to have pricing power in their product markets. At a time when capital preservation is key, banks may be more reluctant to accept credit risk. Second, SMEs are often more opaque than larger firms because they have lower reporting requirements, have less need for formal reporting structures and are subject to less outside monitoring by equity investors. This creates some important information issues. Third, the collateral or assets used to secure loans are likely to be less liquid as they are more firm-specific and even location-specific and involve incomplete contracts. These difficulties mean that the cost of bankruptcy (such as specific and not easily marketable assets) and loss on asset disposal may be greater for smaller than larger firms. The role of banks in the economy is best seen in the context of institutional mechanisms to overcome information difficulties. This implies a comparative advantage for banks over securities markets for financing certain types of information-intensive borrowers with less marketable collateral. This comparative advantage entails imperfect substitutability between bank and market finance for SMEs and implies that availability of finance from banks per se may affect real decisions for SMEs such as investment. Any degree of pricing or monopoly power over SMEs implies that problems in the banking system will have a greater impact on SME lending due to the lack of alternative sources of finance from non-bank sources. Asymmetries of information are substantial for SMEs - the lender faces a problem of screening and monitoring borrowers. First, the lender needs to choose borrowers of high credit quality before the loan is granted, to minimise losses due to default, when it may not be possible to distinguish good and bad risks. This raises the problem of adverse selection. Second, the lender must monitor the borrower after the loan is granted, to ensure that the borrower is not acting contrary to the lender's interests. For example, the borrower might divert the funds to high-risk activities that reduce the probability that the loan will be repaid: the problem of moral hazard. As screening and monitoring are costly to the lender, the price of credit (including both the interest rate and non-price terms) will tend to be higher, i.e. there will be increased price rationing of credit, for SMEs where information and incentive problems are greater. The profit maximising lender may even seek to impose quantitative restrictions on the amount of debt the borrower can obtain, so-called "equilibrium quantity rationing of credit", because higher interest rates may give a further stimulus to adverse selection and risk taking (Stiglitz and Weiss 1981).3 The key is that the interest rate offered to borrowers influences the riskiness of loans in two main ways. First, borrowers willing to pay high interest rates may, on average, be worse risks. They may be willing to borrow at high rates because the probability that they will repay is lower than average. This is again the problem of adverse selection. Second, as the interest rate increases, borrowers who were previously 'good risks' may undertake projects with lower probabilities of success but higher returns when successful—the problem of moral hazard, that the incentives of higher interest rates lead borrowers to undertake riskier actions. Whereas price rationing is indicated by loan margins, quantity rationing is likely to be shown mainly by loan rejection rates. It is worth adding that there may be distinctions between supply of overdraft finance (mainly used for working capital) and term loan finance (mainly used for investment projects). Higher costs of credit, quantitative credit rationing or lack of collateral will have adverse effects on overall economic performance, since SMEs' investment will tend to be limited to what is available from holdings of liquidity and flows of internal finance (Campello et al (2010) show evidence for the US). SMEs with strong balance sheets will invest more readily than those dependent on external finance. Fraser (2012b) for the UK shows that lack of working capital boosted the likelihood of SME failure and induced lower sales growth in 2008-9. Overlaying the borrower characteristics set out above as reasons for credit rationing there may also be effects from risk aversion on the part of lending officers, which leads them to refuse identical loan requests when uncertainty is high. As suggested by Baum et al (2002), uncertainty may have a major effect on SME lending since uncertainty will increase perceptions of costly default risk. Accordingly, banks may withdraw from higher risk lending such as lending to SMEs as well as real estate lending when there is heightened uncertainty, and revert to a more conservative distribution between loans and securities. The authors found this pattern empirically in the US for household sector loans and real estate loans but not for aggregate corporate lending. In this context, it has been widely suggested in the UK that there has been a regime shift from risk loving to risk aversion on the part of bank lending officers in respect of corporate lending generally owing to the "shock" of the financial crisis and that this pattern may not be reversed even when market and economic indicators of uncertainty decline. This pattern may of course be underpinned by other factors such as tighter ongoing and expected capital adequacy requirements on SME lending e.g Basel 3 as well as losses in capital during the crisis and recession and withdrawal of small and foreign banks from the market in the wake of the crisis. Within SME loans, a priori considerations suggest that in periods of uncertainty banks may prefer overdrafts to loans since the degree of control is greater4, the term is shorter and the terms may be used to protect existing exposures rather than to add new risks. ## 1.2 Research Methodology 1.2.1 Descriptive Presentation We begin with a series of charts which show the data to be used in the project. These utilise the various surveys of SME finance, namely the UKSMEF for 2004, 2008 and 2009, and its successor the SMEFM quarterly from 2011Q1 to 2012Q2. As recorded in Fraser (2012a), UKSMEF provides detailed information on the characteristics of SMEs, their owners and experiences of obtaining finance. The surveys are based on large, representative samples of UK businesses with less than 250 employees. The 2004, 2008 and 2009 surveys form a longitudinal panel survey. Of the 3,964 firms covered, 1,707 firms (43%) were observed in 2 or more surveys. In total there are 6,250 observations: 2,500 in the 2004 survey and 3,750 in the 2008 and 2009 surveys.5 UKSMEF was succeeded by the SMEFM financed by the major banks and undertaken by BDRC Continental. The survey is undertaken each quarter with about 5,000 interviews of different SMEs. Quotas were set by business size, sector and region, to a carefully constructed sample design which ensured that sufficient interviews were conducted with SMEs of all sizes to allow for robust analysis. The results have then been weighted to be representative of SMEs with up to 250 employees and a turnover of less than £25 million. The interview respondent was the person identified as the main financial decision maker at the business. For further details see BDRC (2012). Unfortunately the SMEFM omits some variables included in the UKSMEF while adding others. In particular, UKSMEF includes both renewals and new loans together while SMEFM allows them to be treated separately. Using SMEFM data together with the UKSMEF where possible, we extend the sample in earlier work by Fraser (2012a) to include observations for 2010-12. Using these charts we are illustrate changes over time in the key dependent variables in work on SME finance, namely interest rate margins over base rate, rejection rates, collateral, applications and arrangement fees. We also show some key underlying factors over time, notably the proportion of firms applying for overdraft or loan finance and firms' credit ratings. An important assumption is that we have included renewals and new facilities for loans and overdrafts together in the 2001-12 data since these cannot be separated in the UKSMEF, while also showing some separate charts with and without renewals for the 2010-12 period. In line with Fraser (2012a), the rejections rate is defined as the rate at which firms that actually applied for finance were refused credit either by being refused completely or not receiving as much credit as they requested (we omit from the denominator firms that did not apply for credit). Looking ahead, the data are suggestive of a continued tightening in the supply of credit to SMEs since 2008-9, with particular higher rejection rates and continuing high margins apparent in 2010-12. We note however that charts can only be suggestive, do not show causality, and omit key variables which affect the temporal pattern, which are incorporated in econometric work. ## 1.2.2 Characteristics Of Smes Likely To Face Supply Of Credit Constraints In our econometric work, we follow the methodology of Fraser (2012a) in terms of estimation of the determinants of rejection, margins, arrangement fees and collateral for both overdrafts and term loans for those firms seeking finance. This is done for the periods 2001-4, 2005-7, 2008-9, 2010-11 and 2011-12, where results are defined relative to 2001- 4. Rejection and collateral are zero-one variables and are estimated by probit, interest rate margins are estimated using two stage least squares (number of employees or sales as a firm-size variable used as an instrument6 for loan size) and arrangement fees (as a proportion of loan/overdraft size) are continuous positive variables with a substantial proportion of zeroes and are estimated by tobit. Whereas the data used in Fraser (2012a) is a panel, when combined with the later SMEFM survey this is a pooled sample. In all of these regressions we control for firm risk using available variables from Fraser (ibid) in addition to other relevant controls such as for firm size. This is an important inclusion as this resolves an important source of endogeniety where credit risk is ignored in other studies of credit supply. Fraser included firm assets (relevant for collateral), number of finance providers and length of relationship (relevant for relationship lending), Dun and Bradstreet risk ratings (as a direct measure of lending risk), missed loan repayments and unauthorised overdrafts (associated with delinquency), return on assets and the debt-assets ratio (financial ratios used in credit scoring) and sales, age of business, legal status, VAT registration, owner's educational qualification, gender and ethnicity (business and owner characteristics used in credit scoring) as controls. However, some of these key variables used by Fraser (2012a) are not present in the latest datasets, such as assets, debt, VAT registration, ethnicity7 and length of relationship with bank. Absence of debt and assets implies we cannot use the debt/assets and return on assets measures. These omitted variables account for some of the differences between our results and Fraser (2012a). We then further identify the characteristics of SMEs which are more vulnerable to having credit applications rejected or on worse terms (margins, fees, collateral) by further estimation using cross section on the SME Finance Monitor dataset alone for 2010-12. Over 2010-12 we include additional controls such as profitability, speed of growth, performance pay and importers/exporters as possible underlying factors. The dataset also allows division between new lending and renewals. The variable "discouragement from applying for finance" which is solely present in the 2010-12 surveys is assessed alongside similar factors using the definitions in BDRC (2012), the main one of which is where an SME did not (or will not) apply to borrow because it had been put off directly (via informal enquiries with the bank) or indirectly (expectation of such a rejection). There are three other definitions of discouragement based on the principle of borrowing8, process of borrowing9 and current economic condition10. In this econometric section we undertake various additional tests, including assessing the differences between risk classes in unexplained changes in credit conditions; looking over the period up to 2009 at the differences between types of banks in lending behaviour; and assessing differences in lending to ethnic groups. ## 1.2.3 Uncertainty And Changes In Lending Conditions The next part of the analysis is to establish the extent to which whether changes in credit is likely to be affected by uncertainty. Uncertainty is used as a key non-cyclical variable (in terms of variation in expected credit losses) while other variables capture cyclical effects per se. This work involves both macro and micro datasets. We use the British Bankers Association lending to small business data series (turnover up to £1m) from 1990-2012, as shown in Bank of England (2012a). This is a sample of smaller firms than in the SME surveys described above. The derived measure of uncertainty is tested alongside standard determinants of bank lending as in Barrell et al (2009) and Davis and Liadze (2012) for the series SME lending, SME term lending, SME overdraft lending, unincorporated business lending,11 and as a control, total lending to private non-financial corporations. Turning to micro work, building on Section (2) we incorporate uncertainty into the analysis by estimating various regressors, such as conditional12 volatility measures13 derived from monthly data on changes in share prices (as in Davis 2011), GDP growth and inflation as also in Byrne and Davis (2005a). The use of volatility generated regressors does not suffer the endogeneity problems of other generated regressors. We test whether these uncertainty measures can help to explain differences in rejection rates, collateral, margins and fees in the different periods (bearing in mind such macro factors are common to all firms in the sample) in addition to the overall economic conditions as shown by firm characteristics. This allows a distinction between the level of activity and uncertainty associated with this activity and provide some insight into the nature of credit using as a basis the regressions for the 2001-12 period noted in Section (2) above. Conceptually, it can be argued that the control variables in the model allow for the short term economic conditions and expectations in each period, although a possible exception is bank capital adequacy (levels of risk weighted capital adequacy and headroom over trigger ratios), which can influence spreads and lending conditions independently of firm factors or uncertainty per se (see Barrell et al (2009), Davis and Liadze (2012)). with too many terms and conditions, I thought we would be asked to provide too much security, did not want to go through application process, find bank forms and literature hard to understand. uncertainty is an important one. As argued in Byrne and Davis (2005a), the key is the distinction originally due to Knight between risk and uncertainty. Risk can be defined as the danger that a certain contingency will occur, a measure often related to future events susceptible to being reduced to objective probabilities, while uncertainty is a term applied to expectations of a future event to which probability analysis cannot be applied, such as a change in policy regime or a financial crisis. ## 1.2.4 Warranted Further Research Before concluding this section, we note that a further desirable step in analysis of SME lending is to provide alternative instruments to test for the endogeniety of the findings in the study and provide comparable identification procedures. The purpose of this analysis is of course to identify demand and supply, although we recognise that all identification strategies necessarily have their limitations. In this analysis we include an independent measure of credit risk which is omitted in some other studies. Alternative strategies may underestimate the size of the constraints due to the 'weak instruments problem'.14 If the shorter data set in panel form is used, possible candidates could include instruments which are firm specific such as previous rejection rates in applying for credit (i.e. using previous values as an instrument for current values); one can also use bank-specific characteristics of the lender (as in Jimenez et al (2012), cross country or regional assessments of economic developments (as in Holton et al 2012), or bank concentration by region (Merciarca et al 2009). However, this would exclude the most recent data in the SMEFM data set. Unfortunately the nature of the surveys and related data make these infeasible. In particular, the survey ceases to be a panel after 2009 and hence previous rejection rates cannot be traced. Also after 2009 the bank making the loan is no longer specified in the survey available to the authors, and the long series of Bank of England agents' scores are not available by region. Unlike recent work such as Hempell and Sorensen (2010) and Sovago (2011) we also do not have data from bank lending surveys to complement the firm survey data. A decomposition of lending rate changes between credit risk, funding costs and the residual that could have been helpful for identification has only been found feasible for household lending (Button et al 2010). Finally, whereas the variable "discouragement" from applying for loans is potentially helpful in identification of supply and demand, it is only consistently available since 2010 and hence cannot be used for our principal data period 2001-12. This is an important area of further research and development of the SME survey in that until the issue notion of a supply constraint is fully demonstrated, the validity of analysis in this area will remain in doubt. That said, we concur largely with Fraser (2012a) that the effects found for loan applications in the main results of our paper "seem to be genuine supply-side effects since the econometric models included extensive controls relating to the risk profile of the business/owner and their financial relationships" (ibid p66). ## 2. Trends In The Data Charts are presented in two ways. The top charts cover 2001-12 combining the UKSMEF and the first and fifth wave of the SMEFM for 2010-11 and 2011-12 respectively. The lower charts cover the 2010-12 for all five waves of the SMEFM survey available at the time of the analysis. All charts include renewals as well as new lending, unless otherwise stated. ## (B) 2010-12 By Waves The proportion of firms applying for debt finance across the sample has declined since 2008-9 according to Chart 1(a), both for overdrafts and for term loans. Chart 1 (b) shows that in the 2010-12 period there has also been a consistent reduction in the proportion of firms seeking credit, although it has flattened out since the third wave. Note that application is not necessarily an accurate measure of demand since some firms may be deterred from application despite having positive financing needs (the difference being "discouragement" as defined in the SME Finance Monitor survey since 2010, see below). Furthermore the composition of firms applying for and receiving credit is changing over time, as analysed in the econometrics in Section 3. ## (A) 2001-12 (B) 2010-12 By Waves Credit ratings15 within the sample have worsened in the period 2010-12 compared to the earlier periods, with a higher proportion of firms falling into the above average risk category (Chart 2a). Minimal, low and average risk classes have all fallen relative to the 2009 survey, with the fall in low risk being part of a trend throughout the 2000s. A somewhat higher percent of firms have been non-rated. A similar albeit slight upward trend in above average risk and reduction in low risk is apparent in the waves from 2010-12 (Chart 2(b)). Omitting credit risk from an analysis of bank credit would bias the results to suggest a greater supply problem. In common with all the other charts, rejection rates in Chart 3 include renewals. The rejection rate is defined as the proportion of firms which applied for credit and were either refused outright or received less credit than they requested, as a proportion of firms applying (in line with Fraser 2012a). The data suggest a dramatic rise in the rejection rate as a proportion of applications in 2010-12, reaching the highest levels in the latest survey of any period since 2001. The shift is accentuated by its combination with a falling level of applications (Chart 1). An upward trend is apparent in the 2010-12 data, with rejection rates reaching their highest points for both overdrafts and loans in the most recent wave up to June 2012. Includes data on SMEs with bank debt. ratings are commonly used as background for decisions on lending. Other factors underlying lending may include macroeconomic forecasts, "soft" information about the firm such as quality of management, and the bank's desired portfolio of assets across different sectors. ## (B) 2010-12 By Waves Includes data on SMEs with bank debt. Loan and overdraft margins are calculated as a difference between interest rates charged on loans/overdrafts and Bank of England bank rate at the time of an interview. It is recognised that bank funding costs can be quite different from the bank rate e.g. the LIBOR spread has been much higher than in past decades. However, the higher funding costs are likely to reflect uncertainty and concern over the condition of banks and to this extent are reflected in the spread as a cost transferred to borrowers rather than absorbed by banks.16 ## (A) 2001-12 Includes data on SMEs with bank debt; excludes SMEs with margins greater than 30pp. 16 We note that banks' funding costs are also influenced by a number of other factors including maturity of ## (B) 2010-12 By Waves Includes data on SMEs with margins information provided; excludes SMEs with margins greater than 30pp. Debt margins for borrowing firms fell in 2010-11 from a peak in 2008-9 for term loans, before rising again to their second highest level in 2011-12. For overdrafts the cost of credit was marginally higher in 2010-12 than in 2008-9 (Chart 4a). Within the recent waves a rise is apparent in margins, peaking in the most recent wave for term loans and in the previous wave for overdrafts (Chart 4b). The margins for overdrafts tend to be lower than for loans, consistent with a lower level of control over the borrower for loans, but there is a degree of convergence in recent periods. The overall pattern in Chart 4 may again be affected by changes in the composition of borrowers over time. Includes data on SMEs with bank debt. Chart 5 shows the term loan margins to have returned in 2012 to the peak previously observed in 2009 (these patterns cannot be derived for overdrafts). The cost of credit is shown to be extremely high, and we note from the macro data shown in Chart 15 that the importance of term loan finance in value terms is far greater than that of overdrafts. ## Chart 6: Arrangement Fees (A) 2001-12 (B) 2010-12 By Waves Arrangement fees in real terms fell from 2008-9 onwards for loans but have been steadier for overdrafts (Chart 6a). However, the apparent fall in term loan fees may have been offset by a rise in the frequency of payment and a rise in non standard fees and charges. In the five waves of the SME Finance Monitor (Chart 6b) arrangement fees for loans have been on an increasing trend between the second and the fourth waves, with a reduction observed in the last wave. Fees for term loans are consistently higher than for overdrafts, although this may reflect the size of transactions. Chart 7 shows that fees in 2011 were higher than at any time since 2005. Overdraft fees peaked in 2007-8 but stood at a high level within the sample period also in 2011-12, while percentage fees for term loans have come down from highs in 2008-9 (Chart 8). Percentage fees for loans picked over 2006-2009 and have since returned to the levels seen prior to 2006 (Chart 9). Fees can provide an alternative to higher interest rates when margins are low, as they were in the period up to 2008 (Chart 4a). ## 2010-12 By Waves Collateral protects the lender against default so may be expected to rise when there is financial stress. That said, the percentage of loans having collateral requirements are shown in Chart 10a to be structurally around 55% for term loans, although a lower figure is shown for 2010-11, possibly reflecting the devaluation of collateral in the wake of the crisis. Overdraft collateral requirements are more cyclical with a sharp rise in 2011-12 to the highest level observed since 2008-9 and the second highest in the sample. The detailed figures for the waves (Chart 10b) shows a peak in the last wave in our sample up to June 2012 for both overdrafts and term loans, suggesting a recent tightening of collateral requirements. Collateral requirements for term loans in 2011 and 2012 are higher than at any time since 2005 (Chart 11). ## Chart 12: Bank Debt Rejection Rates 2010-12 With And Without Renewals Including Renewals Excluding Renewals Renewals Only Excluding Renewals Renewals Only In Charts 12-13 we compare the key variables with and without renewals for the SME Finance Monitor over 2010-12. Chart 12 shows that as one would expect there is a higher rate of rejection if renewals are excluded. However, the figures excluding renewals are not consistent with earlier surveys which is why we consistently use data for including renewals, unless otherwise stated. That said, there is much more of an upward trend in the rejection rate including renewals than excluding them. So while credit may be consistently tight for new loans it appears to be increasingly tight for renewals as shown in the third part of the chart. Chart 13 shows a similar pattern with a rise in margins being more pronounced with than without renewals, although it is also apparent for new lending for term loans. These patterns imply that renewals, that may be of loans previously made under easy conditions prior to 2007, are facing increasingly tougher conditions (although our regressions will be more conclusive since they control for borrower characteristics). Chart 14 shows trends in the four definitions of discouragement including renewals in each case17. It can be seen that informal enquiries (the most informative measure of discouragement, which we focus on in our econometrics) and the procedure of borrowing are the most important ones. The denominator is the number of firms that chose to answer questions in this field. There seems to be a slight downtrend for loans while there is no clear trend for overdrafts (the first two surveys did not ask this question for overdrafts). ## Discouragement For Loans The micro data referred to above is complemented by macro data from the BBA (adjusted since June 2006 by BIS to avoid series breaks in the data). Quarterly data before June 2006 are estimated by NIESR based on annual series. These data refer to SMEs with a turnover of up to £1 million. Chart 15 shows that there has indeed been a boom and bust in SME term lending in recent years albeit driven largely by construction and real estate activities, while overdraft volume has remained subdued. Looking back, we can see that overdraft lending has declined even in nominal terms consistently since 1991, while term lending rose to a peak in 2009. Note that there may be effects from the ceiling of £1 million on turnover, as the "real" size of a firm with such a turnover is obviously quite a lot smaller in 2012 than it was in 1990. The pattern of net lending over time is shown in Chart 16, which shows annual percentage changes in the total. There have been numerous periods when the volume of SME lending has declined, including not only 2010-12 but also over 2002 and from 1991-1997. Falls in overdraft volumes have of course been much more persistent than for term lending, as Chart 15 has already shown. In the most recent period, the decline in overdrafts began in 2008Q4 while that for term loans only started in 2010Q2. Since 2011Q3 the decline in term lending has been more rapid than that for overdrafts. ## 3. Econometric Results 3.1 Characteristics Of Smes Likely To Face Supply Of Credit Constraints Turning to econometric analysis, our principal results are from the micro regressions following Fraser (2012a) which are shown in Tables 1-12. Rejection, collateral and discouragement are zero-one variables and are estimated by probit. Margins are estimated using instrumental variables with the endogenous variable loan size being instrumented for by size variables (sales or employment).18 Arrangement fees (as a proportion of loan/overdraft size) are continuous positive variables with a substantial proportion of zeroes and are estimated with tobit model. We undertook regressions over two samples, firstly the 2001-12 period using the data up to 2009 from UKSMEF and then waves 1 and 5 of the SMEFM (we do not include the whole data from SMEFM to maintain a balanced sample over time). This was estimated relative to 2001-4. The second sample is all the data from waves 1-5 of the SME Finance Monitor estimated relative to the first wave. To ensure unbiased results we employ robust or bootstrap standard errors (Wooldridge,2006). ## 3.1.1 Results For 2001-12 Our main results for the 2001-12 sample are with similar variables to Fraser (2012a) as detailed above. In practice some of his variables were omitted due to data problems in extending the sample to 2012, including assets, debt/assets, VAT registration, length of relationship with bank and ethnicity19, and these omissions will help explain differences from his results. All regressions are for the sample including renewals, except for certain 2010-12 results where renewals could be excluded. We commence with regressions for rejection rates of firms applying for loans or overdrafts over the full data period: Table 1: Rejection rates 2001-12 |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value) | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |-------------------------|----------------------|-------------|---------|--------------| | Bank debt applications | | | | | | Applications in 2005‐07 | ‐0.410** | (0.000) | ‐0.267 | (0.055) | | Applications in 2007‐08 | 0.124 | (0.165) | 0.272 | (0.061) | | Applications in 2008‐09 | 0.162 | (0.074) | 0.582** | (0.001) | | Applications in 2010‐11 | ‐0.00376     (0.960) | 0.653** | (0.000) | | | Applications in 2011‐12 | 0.238** | (0.003) | 0.840** | (0.000) | | Sales | | | | | 18 The endogeneity of loan size means that loan size and margins are determined simultaneously, since the size of loan has direct effect on margins. In regression analysis this leads to bias of the estimated effect. The use of instrumental variables allows for consistent estimate overcoming the endogeneity. However, for an instrumental variable to be valid it must be correlated with the endogenous variable and uncorrelated with both the dependent variable and the error term. In this specific case, sales or employment are correlated with size of loan but are not correlated with margins, meaning they do not have a direct effect on them. 19 Ethnicity was only included in the last wave of the SMEFM survey, separate results are presented at the end of this section. |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value) | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |-----------------------------------------------------|----------------------|-------------|----------|--------------| | Sales: £50,000‐£99,999 | ‐0.298** | (0.005) | ‐0.313 | (0.053) | | Sales: £100,000‐£499,999 | ‐0.274** | (0.003) | ‐0.147 | (0.279) | | £500,000‐£999,999 | ‐0.242* | (0.022) | ‐0.152 | (0.325) | | £1m‐£4,999,999 | ‐0.434** | (0.000) | ‐0.348* | (0.022) | | £5m or more | ‐0.223 | (0.064) | ‐0.568** | (0.001) | | Risk rating | | | | | | Low | 0.144 | (0.157) | 0.130 | (0.356) | | Average | 0.312** | (0.002) | 0.314* | (0.023) | | Above average | 0.629** | (0.000) | 0.356* | (0.016) | | Undetermined | | | | | | 0.617** | (0.000) | 0.419* | (0.030) | | | Financial delinquency | | | | | | Loan default | 0.746** | (0.000) | 0.108 | (0.589) | | Unauthorized overdraft borrowing | 0.687** | (0.000) | 0.276** | (0.001) | | Business Age | | | | | | 2‐6 years | ‐0.427** | (0.000) | ‐0.587** | (0.001) | | 7‐15 years | ‐0.752** | (0.000) | ‐0.828** | (0.000) | | More than 15 years | ‐0.889** | (0.000) | ‐1.000** | (0.000) | | Other business characteristics | | | | | | Ltd Co | | | | | | 0.132 | (0.087) | 0.0534 | (0.625) | | | Partnership | 0.0565 | (0.546) | ‐0.150 | (0.287) | | Limited Liability Partnership | 0.148 | (0.340) | ‐0.0615 | (0.815) | | Highest Qualification | | | | | | Undergraduate | 0.00332 | (0.963) | ‐0.0679 | (0.527) | | Postgraduate | 0.0139 | (0.881) | ‐0.186 | (0.156) | | Gender | | | | | | Female | ‐0.0640 | (0.372) | ‐0.234* | (0.035) | | Industry | | | | | | Agriculture, hunting and forestry/ fish | | | | | | ‐0.0460 | (0.742) | ‐0.117 | (0.554) | | | Construction | 0.0925 | (0.394) | 0.202 | (0.179) | | Wholesale / retail | | | | | | 0.0540 | (0.623) | 0.139 | (0.364) | | | Hotels and restaurants | 0.477** | (0.000) | 0.173 | (0.271) | | Transport, storage and communication | 0.151 | (0.222) | 0.0672 | (0.679) | | Real estate, renting and business activ | 0.0881 | (0.408) | 0.107 | (0.480) | | Health and social work | ‐0.0240 | (0.865) | ‐0.0545 | (0.769) | | Other community, social and personal ser.   ‐0.0498 | (0.695) | 0.0415 | (0.810) | | | Region | | | | | | | | | | | | East Midlands | 0.0113 | (0.928) | 0.0518 | (0.760) | | London | 0.225* | (0.056) | ‐0.0141 | (0.936) | | North East | ‐0.129 | (0.303) | ‐0.421* | (0.023) | | Northern Ireland | ‐0.0401 | (0.765) | ‐0.131 | (0.450) | | North West | ‐0.158 | (0.211) | ‐0.313 | (0.085) | | Scotland | ‐0.0320 | (0.794) | ‐0.266 | (0.143) | | South East | 0.0524 | (0.660) | ‐0.0541 | (0.737) | | South West | ‐0.0937 | (0.431) | ‐0.153 | (0.340) | | Wales | 0.0746 | (0.538) | ‐0.0454 | | | (0.782) | | | | | | West Midlands | ‐0.00436     (0.971) | ‐0.151 | (0.342) | | | Yorkshire & Humberside | ‐0.0998 | (0.460) | ‐0.660** | (0.002) | | |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value) | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |--------------|----------|--------------|-------------|---------|--------------| | Sales | | | | | | | Constant | ‐0.829** | (0.000) | ‐0.699* | (0.012) | | | Observations | 4731 | | 2501 | | | Notes: Dependent variable is the probability of rejection of an application for finance. Effects are measured relative to: bank debt applications in 2001-2004; sales: £49,999 or less; risk rating: minimal; loan default: 0-4 number of times unable to make repayments; unauthorised overdraft borrowing: 0-2 number of times has exceeded its overdraft limits; business age: less than 2 years; industry: manufacturing; region: East. Other business characteristics and highest qualification are 0/1 dummies. Significance levels at 5% are indicated by * and 1% by **. Method: probit estimation with robust standard errors. The results for overdrafts over 2001-12 in Table 1 show that controlling for business characteristics related to the firm's risk profile, there are significantly lower rejection rates for overdrafts in 2005-7 than in 2001-4, and much higher ones in 2008-09 (significant at the 10% level) and 2011-12. Other significant determinants of rejection for overdrafts are firm size (higher sales mean a lower rejection rate) and risk (average and above average risk - as well as no risk rating - imply more frequent rejection than low risk or minimal risk which is the default). It is interesting that "no rating" is classed similar to high risk according to the data, showing the importance of asymmetric information in lending to the sector. Delinquency, i.e. loan default in the past as well as unauthorised overdraft borrowing, lead to significantly higher rejection rates, while older firms on which there is better information are less likely to be rejected. This may relate also to a longer relationship with the bank, although due to data problems the latter cannot be tested. We also have a significant effect for hotels and restaurants, which may be due to this sector being among the least profitable and having worse than average risk among other industries as reported in the SME Finance Monitor report for the first quarter of 2012 (BDRC 2012). Results for term lending rejection in Table 1 are similar to overdrafts. There is again a strong positive effect on rejection for applications during 2008-09 and 2011-12, and also in 2010-11. The rejection rate for those applying in 2010-12 is higher than in 2008-9 and in the case of 2011-12 significantly higher. This is suggestive of tighter credit conditions, after controlling for firm risk, to which SMEs are vulnerable owing to the degree of market power banks enjoy in this sector. As regards control variables, risk, age and unauthorised overdraft borrowing again come to the fore. Firm size is again negatively related to rejection, but is significant only for firms with sales of over £5 million. Differences in the time variables from Fraser (2012a), with generally larger effects in our results, are likely to be due to omission of some of his control variables, which are not available in the SMEFM dataset for 2010-12 (although we do add to his dataset by including regional variables). We ran the regression separately for the categories low, average and high risk to see whether the credit rationing effects suggested by Table 1 apply to all risk-groups or only certain ones. The results are shown in Table 1(a). Control variables are not reported in Table 1(a), but they were included in the regression. There is a significant increase in rejection for overdrafts over 2001-4 in 2011-12 and 2008- 9, controlling for other characteristics, for the average risk group only. There is a significant effect for loans in 2008-9 and 2011-12 for both the low and the average risk category and in 20010-11 only for the low risk category. This is a potentially important finding since it shows that it is not the highest risk category that has undergone a significant change in the probability of rejection. The pattern suggests that the high risk firms have had a broadly unchanged rate of rejection, for given firm characteristics, except for boosts to lending in the boom period - also apparent for overdrafts of low risk firms - and a negative effect for overdrafts in 2010-11. It is the lower risk firms that have borne the brunt of higher rejection rates in the period since the crisis, especially in the term loan market. These data are consistent with a partial withdrawal by banks from SME lending as an overall asset class, perhaps due to uncertainty, risk aversion or tightening of regulation. | | | |   | Low risk  | Average risk  | Above average risk  | |-----------------|-----------|------|-----------|-------------|-----------------|-----------------------| | | Overdraft | Loan | Overdraft | Loan | Overdraft | Loan | | Applications in | | | | | | | | 2005‐07 | | | | | | | | ‐0.642* | | | | | | | | (0.006) | | | | | | | | ‐0.252 | | | | | | | | (0.361) | | | | | | | | ‐0.260 | | | | | | | | (0.099) | | | | | | | | ‐0.119 | | | | | | | | (0.571) | | | | | | | | ‐0.621* | | | | | | | | (0.004) | | | | | | | | ‐0.632 | | | | | | | | (0.064) | | | | | | | | Applications in | | | | | | | | 2007‐08 | | | | | | | | 0.153 | | | | | | | | (0.348) | | | | | | | | 0.403 | | | | | | | | (0.079) | | | | | | | | 0.205 | | | | | | | | (0.151) | | | | | | | | 0.456* | | | | | | | | (0.043) | | | | | | | | 0.00611 | | | | | | | | (0.977) | | | | | | | | ‐1.006 | | | | | | | | (0.063) | | | | | | | | Applications in | | | | | | | | 2008‐09 | | | | | | | | ‐0.197 | | | | | | | | (0.313) | | | | | | | | 0.805* | | | | | | | | (0.009) | | | | | | | | 0.531* | | | | | | | | (0.001) | | | | | | | | 0.564 | | | | | | | | (0.085) | | | | | | | | ‐0.246 | | | | | | | | (0.261) | | | | | | | | ‐0.894 | | | | | | | | (0.096) | | | | | | | | Applications in | | | | | | | | 2010‐11 | | | | | | | | 0.0153 | | | | | | | | (0.920) | | | | | | | | 0.635* | | | | | | | | (0.005) | | | | | | | | 0.0955 | | | | | | | | (0.499) | | | | | | | | 1.058** | | | | | | | | (0.000) | | | | | | | | ‐0.334* | | | | | | | | (0.032) | | | | | | | | 0.259 | | | | | | | | (0.230) | | | | | | | | Applications in | | | | | | | | 2011‐12 | | | | | | | | 0.244 | | | | | | | | (0.161) | | | | | | | | 1.009** | | | | | | | | (0.000) | | | | | | | | 0.367* | | | | | | | | (0.014) | | | | | | | | 1.039** | | | | | | | | (0.000) | | | | | | | | ‐0.0541 | | | | | | | | (0.738) | | | | | | | | 0.396 | | | | | | | | (0.079) | | | | | | | Note: Control variables shown in Table 1 are included in the regressions. p-values is parenthesis. As a further experiment, we sought to test whether there is an overall increase in risk aversion by allowing for a higher rate of rejection for a given level of risk in the period since 2008 than 2001-7 (not illustrated). In fact the dummies for this were not significant, suggesting that banks may have focused on specific categories of SMEs or at specific times in their process of deleveraging and lowering levels of balance sheet risk, rather than simply tightening standards across the board since 2008. |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value)  | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |--------------------------|--------------|--------------|----------|--------------| | Bank debt applications | | | | | | Applications in 2005‐07 | ‐1.369** | (0.000) | ‐0.962** | (0.005) | | Applications in 2007‐08 | ‐1.136** | (0.000) | ‐0.669 | (0.141) | | Applications in 2008‐09 | | 1.388** | (0.000) | 3.246** | | Applications in 2010‐11 | 1.874** | (0.000) | 2.221** | (0.000) | | Applications in 2011‐12 | 1.630** | (0.000) | 2.307** | (0.000) | | Sales | | | | | | Sales: £50,000‐£99,999 | ‐0.468 | (0.278) | ‐1.825* | (0.025) | | Sales: £100,000‐£499,999 | | | | | | ‐0.327 | (0.471) | ‐1.613* | (0.046) | | | £500,000‐£999,999 | ‐0.394 | (0.450) | ‐2.008* | (0.038) | | £1m‐£4,999,999 | ‐0.436 | (0.521) | ‐2.278 | (0.057) | | £5m or more | ‐0.270 | (0.763) | ‐2.662 | (0.117) | | Risk rating | | | | | | Low | 0.142 | (0.333) | 0.535 | (0.066) | | Average | 0.152 | (0.366) | 0.679 | (0.051) | | Above average | 0.603** | (0.008) | 0.840 | (0.072) |   Overdraft (p‐value) Loan  (p‐value)  Undetermined    0.0651      (0.867)     1.602*    (0.041)  Financial Delinquency  Loan default     2.157      (0.100)    ‐1.044      (0.198)  Unauthorized overdraft borrowing     0.391*    (0.030)    ‐0.288      (0.272)  Business Age  2‐6 years    ‐0.714      (0.294)    ‐0.795      (0.565)  7‐15 years    ‐0.668      (0.318)    ‐1.476      (0.253)  More than 15 years    ‐0.687      (0.306)    ‐1.148      (0.376)  Other business characteristics  LtdCo     0.144      (0.483)     0.525      (0.235)  Partnership    0.0763      (0.738)     0.105      (0.771)  Limited libpart    0.0119      (0.968)     0.653      (0.341)  Highest Qualification  Undergraduate   ‐0.0948      (0.546)  ‐0.0029      (0.993)  Postgraduate    0.0893      (0.613)    ‐0.131      (0.752)  Gender  Female    ‐0.188      (0.373)     0.437      (0.217)  Industry  Agriculture, hunting and forestry/ fish          ‐0.436     (0.098)    ‐0.960     (0.067)  Construction    ‐0.111      (0.620)     0.884     (0.052)  Wholesale / retail   ‐0.0152      (0.941)    0.0602      (0.882)  Hotels and restaurants   ‐0.0412      (0.884)    ‐0.318      (0.504)  Transport, storage and communication   ‐0.0542      (0.810)    0.0533      (0.903)  Real estate, renting and business activ     0.106      (0.608)     0.593      (0.141)  Health and social work    ‐0.493     (0.075)    0.0415      (0.943)  Other community, social and personal ser.   ‐0.0133      (0.961)     0.812      (0.182)  Region  East Midlands     0.193      (0.432)    0.0717      (0.909)  London     0.418     (0.099)     0.353      (0.619)  North East     0.165      (0.487)    ‐0.927*    (0.020)  Northern Ireland     0.393      (0.139)    ‐0.555      (0.275)  North West   ‐0.0316      (0.897)    ‐0.315      (0.489)  Scotland   ‐0.0517      (0.822)   ‐0.0550      (0.906)  South East     0.387      (0.148)    ‐0.690      (0.150)  South West     0.130      (0.584)     0.131      (0.754)  Wales     0.460     (0.096)     0.450      (0.488)  West Midlands    0.0449      (0.858)    ‐0.804     (0.078)  Yorkshire & Humberside      0.115      (0.654)     0.107      (0.838)  Log loan    ‐0.329      (0.113)    0.0239      (0.965)  Collateral    0.0332      (0.843)    ‐0.748      (0.248)  Constant     6.142**   (0.001)     4.588      (0.385)  Observations  2150    649    Notes: Dependent variable is the margin over base rate. Effects are measured relative to: bank debt applications in 2001-2004; sales: £49,999 or less; risk rating: minimal; loan default: 0-4 number of times unable to make repayments; unauthorised overdraft borrowing: 0-2 number of times has exceeded its overdraft limits; business age: less than 2 years; industry: manufacturing; region: East. The endogenous variable loan size is instrumented by size of employment. Other business characteristics and highest qualification are 0/1 dummies. *,** indicate significance at 5% and 1% correspondingly. Estimated by two stage least squares with robust standard errors20. Excludes SMEs with margins greater than 30pp. Turning to margins (Table 2) in 2001-12, our estimates are generated by two stage least squares with robust standard errors. Employment is used to instrument loan size as discussed in footnotes 6 and 19 above. We have a time pattern which is similar for loans and overdrafts, with significantly lower margins than in 2001-4 prevailing in 2005-7 and 2007-8 controlling for firm characteristics, but much higher levels in 2008-9, 2010-11 and 2011-12. The time effects peak in 2010-11 for overdrafts and in 2008-9 for loans, but the second highest level for loans is in 2011-12. This suggests application for an overdraft is seen as a risk factor for firms of any size. There are some industry effects, with higher margins for sectors seen as risky e.g. construction (significant at just above 5%.level). 21 As for rejection, differences in the time variables from Fraser (2012a), with generally larger effects, are likely to be due to omission of some of his control variables, which are not available in the SMEFM dataset for 2010-12. As regards the control variables, firm risk affects margins for both overdrafts and loans, with above average risk leading to higher margins. Unauthorised overdraft borrowing increases margins for subsequent overdrafts, as would be expected. Higher sales (i.e. larger firms) lead to lower margins for loans but not for overdrafts. Controlling for firm characteristics, the incidence of collateral requirements for overdrafts (Table 3) is significantly higher in 2008-9 than in 2001-4 but lower in 2005-7 and also 2010-11. The incidence in 2011-12 was similar to 2001-4, suggesting that collateral is not being used in an exceptional manner to control credit demand. There are no significant time effects for term loans. Higher sales and legal status as a limited company lead to collateral being required more frequently as does higher risk. The former may relate to availability of collateral in larger and incorporated firms. The risk effect is of course more likely to be for direct protection of the lender, as is a positive effect of unauthorized overdraft borrowing on collateral requirements in overdrafts. There are a number of industry effects that in some cases differ between overdrafts and loans (bearing in mind that the baseline is manufacturing that may also have different collateral requirements for these two types of finance). Regional effects are also apparent. |    | Overdraft  | (p‐value) | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |--------------------------|--------------|-------------|----------------------|--------------| | Bank debt Applications | | | | | | Applications in 2005‐07 | ‐0.296** | (0.000) | 0.0988 | (0.285) | | Applications in 2007‐08 | ‐0.0380 | (0.595) | ‐0.0763 | (0.483) | | Applications in 2008‐09 | 0.684** | (0.000) | 0.104 | (0.470) | | Applications in 2010‐11 | ‐0.187** | (0.002) | ‐0.0734 | (0.461) | | Applications in 2011‐12 | 0.0872 | (0.212) | 0.000526     (0.996) | | | Sales | | | | | | Sales: £50,000‐£99,999 | 0.200 | (0.058) | ‐0.132 | (0.441) | | Sales: £100,000‐£499,999 | | | | | | 0.564** | (0.000) | 0.308* | (0.038) | | | £500,000‐£999,999 | 0.703** | (0.000) | 0.467** | (0.004) | |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value) | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |-----------------------------------------------------|--------------|-------------|----------------------|--------------| | £1m‐£4,999,999 | 0.801** | (0.000) | 0.367* | (0.021) | | £5m or more | 0.751** | (0.000) | 0.463** | (0.006) | | Risk rating | | | | | | Low | 0.155* | (0.023) | 0.00451 | (0.964) | | Average | 0.251** | (0.000) | ‐0.0587 | (0.581) | | Above average | 0.305** | (0.000) | ‐0.124 | (0.317) | | Undetermined | 0.150 | (0.286) | ‐0.0864 | (0.661) | | Financial delinquency | | | | | | Loan default | ‐0.0703 | (0.793) | 0.746** | (0.008) | | Unauthorized overdraft borrowing | 0.161* | (0.016) | ‐0.0462 | (0.529) | | Business Age | | | | | | 2‐6 years | ‐0.129 | (0.417) | 0.164 | (0.444) | | 7‐15 years | ‐0.0779 | (0.609) | 0.187 | (0.371) | | More than 15 years | 0.159 | (0.293) | 0.316 | (0.129) | | Other business characteristics | | | | | | Ltd Co | 0.539** | (0.000) | 0.341** | (0.001) | | Partnership | 0.0900 | (0.250) | 0.0458 | (0.683) | | Limited Liability Partnership | 0.450** | (0.000) | ‐0.0704 | (0.735) | | Highest Qualification | | | | | | Undergraduate | 0.0198 | | | | | (0.742) | ‐0.0164 | (0.855) | | | | Postgraduate | ‐0.102 | (0.178) | ‐0.0550 | (0.595) | | Gender | | | | | | Female | ‐0.0709 | (0.248) | 0.0166 | (0.861) | | Industry | | | | | | Agriculture, hunting and forestry/ fish | 0.537** | (0.000) | 0.455** | (0.007) | | Construction | 0.0608 | (0.483) | 0.0464 | (0.738) | | Wholesale / retail | 0.0521 | (0.550) | 0.189 | | | (0.137) | | | | | | Hotels and restaurants | ‐0.291** | (0.007) | 0.386** | (0.008) | | Transport, storage and communication | ‐0.0953 | (0.334) | | | | 0.146 | (0.327) | | | | | Real estate, renting and business activ | ‐0.123 | (0.149) | ‐0.0184 | (0.888) | | Health and social work | ‐0.257* | (0.027) | 0.461** | (0.003) | | Other community, social and personal ser.    ‐0.136 | (0.163) | 0.249 | (0.087) | | | Region | | | | | | East Midlands | 0.0183 | (0.861) | 0.0372 | (0.806) | | London | ‐0.0142 | (0.893) | 0.0502 | (0.748) | | North East | ‐0.0526 | (0.603) | 0.000152     (0.999) | | | Northern Ireland | | | | | | 0.232* | (0.028) | 0.133 | (0.399) | | | North West | ‐0.0922 | (0.368) | 0.176 | (0.216) | | Scotland | 0.0737 | (0.461) | 0.242 | (0.106) | | South East | ‐0.0163 | (0.869) | 0.257 | (0.085) | | South West | 0.0774 | (0.419) | 0.334* | (0.015) | | Wales | 0.00301 | (0.976) | 0.356* | (0.016) | | West Midlands | 0.153 | (0.115) | ‐0.0791 | (0.585) | | Yorkshire & Humberside | 0.143 | (0.183) | 0.242 | (0.103) | | Constant | ‐1.266** | (0.000) | ‐0.975** | (0.001) | | Observations | | | | | | 3943 | | 1731 | | | Notes: Dependent variable is probability that firm will be required to provide collateral to obtain finance. Effects are measured relative to: bank debt applications in 2001-2004; sales: £49,999 or less; risk rating: minimal; loan default: 0-4 number of times unable to make repayments; unauthorised overdraft borrowing: 0- 2 number of times has exceeded its overdraft limits; business age: less than 2 years; industry: manufacturing; region: East. Other business characteristics and highest qualification are 0/1 dummies. *,** indicate significance at 5% and 1% correspondingly. Estimated by probit with bootstrap standard errors. Table 4: Arrangement fees as a share of size of overdraft/loan for 2001-12 |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value) | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |-----------------------------------------|-----------------------|-------------|----------------------|--------------| | Bank debt Applications | | | | | | Applications in 2005‐07 | 0.00202 | (0.576) | 0.00651 | (0.341) | | Applications in 2007‐08 | 0.0103** | (0.000) | 0.00709 | (0.471) | | Applications in 2008‐09 | 0.00802* | (0.013) | 0.0262 | (0.122) | | Applications in 2010‐11 | 0.0109** | (0.000) | ‐0.00428 | (0.420) | | Applications in 2011‐12 | 0.0146** | (0.000) | ‐0.00246 | (0.694) | | Sales | | | | | | Sales: £50,000‐£99,999 | 0.00744 | (0.260) | 0.0110 | (0.429) | | Sales: £100,000‐£499,999 | 0.00517 | | | | | (0.498) | 0.0220 | (0.096) | | | | £500,000‐£999,999 | 0.00807 | (0.362) | 0.00597 | (0.655) | | £1m‐£4,999,999 | 0.00894 | (0.417) | 0.00412 | (0.805) | | £5m or more | 0.0192 | (0.286) | ‐0.00275 | (0.880) | | Risk rating | | | | | | Low | 0.00403 | (0.180) | 0.0155* | (0.035) | | Average | 0.00503* | (0.024) | 0.0188**   (0.009) | | | Above average | 0.00866**   (0.002) | 0.0170* | (0.026) | | | Undetermined | 0.00600 | (0.533) | 0.0338 | (0.364) | | Financial delinquency | | | | | | Loan default | 0.0143 | | | | | (0.250) | 0.0101 | (0.647) | | | | Unauthorized overdraft borrowing | ‐0.00118 | (0.562) | 0.0205* | (0.010) | | Business Age | | | | | | 2‐6 years | ‐0.00410 | (0.670) | 0.0206 | (0.520) | | 7‐15 years | ‐0.00139 | (0.888) | 0.00328 | (0.909) | | More than 15 years | 0.00137 | (0.895) | 0.00369 | (0.899) | | Other business characteristics | | | | | | Ltd Co | 0.00596* | (0.024) | 0.00362 | (0.700) | | Partnership | 0.00374 | (0.181) | 0.000330     (0.978) | | | Limited Liability Partnership | | | | | | 0.0249 | (0.183) | 0.00723 | (0.614) | | | Highest Qualification | | | | | | Undergraduate | ‐0.00270 | (0.171) | ‐0.0133* | (0.015) | | Postgraduate | ‐0.00174 | (0.684) | ‐0.0163* | (0.010) | | Gender | | | | | | Female | 0.00199 | (0.492) | ‐0.00576 | (0.420) | | Industry | | | | | | Agriculture, hunting and forestry/ fish | 0.00124 | (0.735) | 0.0384 | (0.103) | | Construction | ‐0.000499     (0.865) | ‐0.00871 | (0.129) | | | Wholesale / retail | 0.000497 | (0.839) | 0.000437     (0.931) | | | Hotels and restaurants | ‐0.00122 | | | | | (0.714) | 0.00361 | (0.670) | | | | Transport, storage and communication | 0.00960 | (0.174) | ‐0.00283 | (0.553) | | Real estate, renting and business activ | 0.00114 | (0.634) | 0.00159 | (0.812) | |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value) | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |-----------------------------------------------------|-----------------------|----------------------|----------------------|--------------| | Health and social work | 0.000656 | (0.873) | 0.00498 | (0.742) | | Other community, social and personal ser.  ‐0.00116 | (0.720) | 0.000956     (0.895) | | | | Region | | | | | | East Midlands | ‐0.000630     (0.821) | ‐0.00311 | (0.657) | | | London | ‐0.00344 | (0.203) | 0.0159 | (0.293) | | North East | ‐0.00144 | (0.690) | 0.00587 | (0.634) | | Northern Ireland | 0.00331 | (0.668) | 0.000801     (0.956) | | | North West | 0.00172 | (0.678) | ‐0.0105 | (0.103) | | Scotland | 0.000763 | (0.792) | ‐0.0119 | (0.090) | | South East | 0.00409 | (0.131) | 0.0190 | (0.249) | | South West | | | | | | 0.000979 | (0.716) | ‐0.00356 | (0.568) | | | Wales | 0.0000733     (0.977) | ‐0.00102 | (0.876) | | | West Midlands | ‐0.000889     (0.739) | ‐0.00711 | (0.242) | | | Yorkshire & Humberside | ‐0.00408 | (0.135) | ‐0.00741 | (0.307) | | Log loan | ‐0.00675* | (0.018) | 0.00184 | (0.583) | | Collateral | 0.00904** | (0.000) | 0.00776 | (0.069) | | Constant | 0.0496** | (0.001) | ‐0.0570 | (0.274) | | Observations | 2866 | | 1235 | | Notes: Dependent variable is the arrangement fee as a proportion of the size of the facility. Effects are measured relative to: bank debt applications in 2001-2004; sales: £49,999 or less; risk rating: minimal; loan default: 0-4 number of times unable to make repayments; unauthorised overdraft borrowing: 0-2 number of times has exceeded its overdraft limits; business age: less than 2 years; industry: manufacturing; region: East. Other business characteristics and highest qualification are 0/1 dummies. *,** indicate significance at 5% and 1% correspondingly. Estimated by tobit with robust standard errors. Excludes ratios greater than 9 for loans and greater than 6 for overdrafts. Arrangement fees for overdrafts are higher in 2007-12 than in 2001-4, controlling for firm characteristics (Table 4). They are also higher for firms with higher risk. Loan size is negatively related to proportionate fees (implying "economies of scale" in provision) while incidence of collateral increases it (perhaps reflecting costs of valuation and documentation). For term loans the fee rate shows no significant unexplained change and rates are higher for firms with unauthorised overdraft borrowing and higher than minimal risk. ## 3.1.2 Results For 2010-12 We now turn to the results for 2010-12 only, taking all of the observations from the SMEFM only. The time effects are measured relative to the first survey in Q2 2011. The SMEFM permits inclusion of other relevant variables not included in the UKSMEF, namely lower speed of growth22, export orientation and whether there is performance pay23. |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value)  | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |-----------------------------------------|--------------|--------------|---------|--------------| | Bank debt Applications | | | | | | Applications in Q3 2011 | 0.132 | (0.127) | 0.109 | (0.343) | | Applications in Q4 2011 | 0.133 | (0.151) | 0.189 | (0.093) | | Applications in Q1 2012 | 0.0188 | (0.839) | 0.0988 | (0.392) | | Applications in Q2 2012 | 0.222* | (0.012) | 0.172 | (0.139) | | Sales | | | | | | £50,000‐£99,999 | ‐0.205 | (0.092) | ‐0.165 | (0.316) | | £100,000‐£499,999 | ‐0.286* | (0.009) | ‐0.107 | (0.453) | | £500,000‐£999,999 | ‐0.290* | (0.020) | ‐0.324* | (0.047) | | £1m‐£4,999,999 | ‐0.448** | (0.000) | ‐0.367* | (0.017) | | £5m or more | | | | | | ‐0.483* | (0.001) | ‐0.682** | (0.000) | | | Risk rating | | | | | | Low | 0.223* | (0.043) | 0.160 | (0.266) | | Average | 0.175 | (0.111) | 0.353* | (0.010) | | Above average | 0.494** | (0.000) | 0.517** | (0.000) | | Undetermined | 0.468* | (0.001) | 0.384* | (0.034) | | Financial Delinquency | | | | | | Loan default | 0.611** | (0.000) | 0.0985 | (0.577) | | Unauthorised overdraft borrowing | 0.422** | (0.000) | 0.0966 | (0.359) | | Business Age | | | | | | | | | | | | 2‐6 years | 0.470** | (0.000) | 0.473** | (0.000) | | 7‐15 years | 0.0751 | (0.279) | 0.133 | (0.138) | | More than 15 years | | | | | | Other business  Characteristics | | | | | | LtdCo | ‐0.0227 | (0.794) | ‐0.163 | (0.145) | | Partnership | ‐0.230 | (0.055) | ‐0.131 | (0.369) | | Limited libpart | ‐0.571* | (0.007) | ‐0.589* | (0.029) | | Highest Qualification | | | | | | | | | | | | Undergraduate | ‐0.136 | (0.139) | ‐0.0454 | (0.682) | | Postgraduate | 0.0874 | (0.399) | ‐0.126 | (0.339) | | Gender | | | | | | | | | | | | Female | 0.0589 | (0.459) | ‐0.174 | (0.108) | | Industry | | | | | | Agriculture, hunting and forestry/ fish | 0.0760 | (0.618) | ‐0.262 | (0.188) | | Construction | 0.229 | (0.064) | 0.373* | (0.016) | | Wholesale / retail | 0.0461 | (0.729) | 0.00232 | (0.989) | 22 The variable captures firms which grew at less than 30% a year in the past 3 years. 23 Performance pay can be seen as reflecting a go-ahead business albeit one which may be vulnerable to risk taking. |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value)  | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |-------------------------------------------|--------------|--------------|----------|--------------| | Hotels and restaurants | 0.391* | (0.008) | 0.202 | (0.223) | | Transport, storage and communication | 0.201 | (0.149) | 0.157 | (0.352) | | Real estate, renting and business activ | 0.169 | (0.180) | 0.0205 | (0.893) | | Health and social work | 0.0903 | (0.574) | 0.117 | (0.506) | | Other community, social and personal ser. | 0.0894 | (0.531) | 0.273 | (0.105) | | Region | | | | | | East Midlands | 0.217 | (0.183) | 0.262 | (0.223) | | London | 0.135 | (0.332) | ‐0.122 | (0.507) | | North East | 0.0450 | (0.742) | ‐0.0794 | (0.664) | | Northern Ireland | | | | | | 0.0584 | (0.676) | ‐0.0067 | (0.971) | | | North West | 0.0664 | (0.647) | ‐0.185 | (0.342) | | Scotland | 0.0102 | (0.942) | ‐0.0751 | (0.680) | | South East | ‐0.233 | (0.166) | 0.147 | (0.448) | | South West | 0.0512 | (0.699) | ‐0.0332 | (0.850) | | Wales | 0.169 | (0.209) | 0.0767 | (0.666) | | West Midlands | 0.213 | (0.099) | 0.0965 | (0.575) | | Yorkshire & Humberside | | | | | | 0.111 | (0.493) | ‐0.201 | (0.341) | | | Lower speed of growth | ‐0.130 | (0.103) | ‐0.0837 | (0.392) | | Export | 0.115 | (0.182) | 0.0825 | (0.470) | | Performance pay | 0.0543 | (0.437) | 0.0327 | (0.708) | | Constant | ‐1.474** | (0.000) | ‐1.051** | (0.000) | | Observations | 3279 | | 1682 | | Notes: Dependent variable is the probability of rejection of an application for finance. Effects are measured relative to: quarters Q1-Q2 2011; sales: £49,999 or less; risk rating: minimal; loan default: 0-4 number of times unable to make repayments; unauthorised overdraft borrowing: 0-2 number of times has exceeded its overdraft limits; business age: less than 2 years; industry: manufacturing; region: East; lower speed of growth: over 30% a year for the past three years. Other business characteristics, export, performance pay and highest qualification are 0/1 dummies. Business age "more than 15 years" omitted because of collinearity. *,** indicate significance at 5% and 1% correspondingly. Estimated by probit with robust standard errors. Concerning rejection rates (Table 5) there is a significantly higher rate in wave 5 (Q2 2012) for overdrafts than in wave 1 (Q2 2011), controlling for firm characteristics. Other results are broadly consistent with those for 2001-12 shown in Table 1. For example, rejection is less for larger SMEs with higher sales, and is highest for firms with above average risk as well as without credit ratings (who may be new and without a track record). There is a higher rejection rate for firms with age 2-6 years than for those less than 2 years old, which contrasts with the results in Table 1. It may be that the younger firms are not applying for credit owing to discouragement, also firm formation in the two years to 2011-12 was probably low and firms 2-6 years old include those which grew in the boom years of easy credit from 2005-7 (Tables 1-2). As regards industry effects, we find a high rejection rate for construction relative to the baseline which is manufacturing. The additional variables (lower speed of growth, export orientation and performance pay) are not significant. An alternative regression with a dummy variable indicating whether a firm applying for overdraft or loan is applying for a new or a renewal, do not change the main estimates and coefficients for renewal are negative and significant for both overdraft and loan. Margins (Table 6) have only one significant (at 10%) time effect, for the fourth wave when overdrafts were significantly more expensive, allowing for other firm characteristics. These are similar to Table 2 for 2001-12 with a positive effect of firm risk and negative effect of firm size on margins. Unauthorised overdraft borrowing again boosts overdraft margins. Unlike the longer period, loan size has a significant negative effect on overdraft margins, while collateral reduces margins for term loans (at 10% significance level). There are some significant effects of the additional variables in the SMEFM, with low growth reducing margins on term loans, perhaps because the rapidly growing firms are also likely to be small and high-risk. |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value)  | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |-----------------------------------------|--------------|--------------|---------|--------------| | Bank debt Applications | | | | | | Applications in Q3 2011 | 0.0587 | (0.783) | ‐0.0418 | (0.924) | | Applications in Q4 2011 | 0.235 | (0.330) | ‐0.234 | (0.570) | | Applications in Q1 2012 | 0.545 | (0.067) | 0.108 | (0.818) | | Applications in Q2 2012 | 0.0098 | (0.974) | 0.616 | (0.283) | | Sales | | | | | | £50,000‐£99,999 | ‐1.463 | (0.074) | ‐1.133 | (0.390) | | £100,000‐£499,999 | ‐1.216 | (0.127) | ‐1.351 | (0.238) | | £500,000‐£999,999 | ‐1.602* | (0.048) | ‐3.070 | (0.051) | | £1m‐£4,999,999 | ‐1.479 | (0.123) | ‐4.184* | (0.018) | | £5m or more | | | | | | ‐1.423 | (0.236) | ‐5.933* | (0.016) | | | Risk rating | | | | | | Low | ‐0.242 | (0.282) | 0.871* | (0.024) | | Average | 0.374 | (0.120) | 0.731 | (0.147) | | Above average | 0.760* | (0.027) | 1.052* | (0.045) | | Undetermined | ‐0.281 | (0.558) | 0.868 | (0.339) | | Financial Delinquency | | | | | | Loan default | 0.476 | (0.722) | ‐1.844 | (0.070) | | Unauthorised overdraft borrowing | 0.764** | (0.010) | 0.649 | (0.291) | | Business Age | | | | | | | | | | | | 2‐6 years | ‐0.257 | (0.598) | 0.0261 | (0.975) | | 7‐15 years | ‐0.0400 | (0.851) | 0.108 | (0.755) | | More than 15 years | | | | | | Other business  Characteristics | | | | | | LtdCo | ‐0.436 | (0.226) | ‐0.120 | (0.869) | | Partnership | ‐0.408 | (0.271) | ‐1.129 | (0.096) | | Limited libpart | ‐0.524 | (0.204) | ‐0.735 | (0.354) | | Highest Qualification | | | | | | | | | | | | Undergraduate | 0.523 | (0.085) | ‐0.0463 | (0.919) | | Postgraduate | 0.176 | (0.458) | ‐0.0689 | (0.875) | | Gender | | | | | | | | | | | | Female | ‐0.306 | (0.282) | ‐0.503 | (0.218) | | Industry | | | | | | Agriculture, hunting and forestry/ fish | ‐1.048** | (0.005) | ‐1.475* | (0.026) | | Construction | 0.353 | (0.391) | 1.395 | (0.060) | | Wholesale / retail | 0.233 | (0.517) | 0.895 | (0.129) | | Hotels and restaurants | ‐0.102 | (0.838) | ‐0.731 | (0.316) | | Transport, storage and communication | ‐0.416 | (0.366) | 0.468 | (0.517) | | Real estate, renting and business activ | 0.0194 | (0.964) | ‐0.268 | (0.610) | | Health and social work | ‐0.913 | (0.067) | ‐0.444 | (0.629) | |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value)  | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |------------------------|--------------|--------------|---------|--------------------------------------| | ‐0.0492 | (0.919) | 0.321 | (0.633) | Other community, social and personal | | ser. | | | | | | Region | | | | | | East Midlands | 0.343 | (0.400) | 0.421 | (0.543) | | London | 0.289 | (0.466) | 1.406 | (0.116) | | North East | 0.114 | (0.711) | 0.261 | (0.624) | | Northern Ireland | 0.0130 | (0.969) | 0.100 | (0.856) | | North West | 0.297 | (0.531) | 1.014 | (0.215) | | Scotland | 0.279 | (0.449) | 0.522 | (0.270) | | South East | 0.255 | (0.599) | ‐0.123 | (0.840) | | South West | 0.324 | (0.371) | 0.510 | (0.431) | | Wales | 0.323 | (0.303) | 1.435 | (0.096) | | West Midlands | 0.186 | (0.634) | 0.192 | (0.751) | | Yorkshire & Humberside | ‐0.0911 | (0.789) | 0.176 | (0.767) | | Log of loan | ‐0.664* | (0.021) | 0.623 | (0.294) | | Lower speed of growth | ‐0.202 | (0.462) | ‐0.877* | (0.020) | | Export | 0.303 | (0.095) | 0.315 | (0.385) | | Performpay | 0.0507 | (0.768) | 0.187 | (0.584) | | Collateral | 0.381* | (0.029) | ‐1.367 | (0.065) | | Constant | 12.21** | (0.000) | 0.508 | (0.932) | | Observations | 956 | | 393 | | Notes: Dependent variable is the margin over base rate. Effects are measured relative to: quarters Q1-Q2 2011; sales: £49,999 or less; risk rating: minimal; loan default: 0-4 number of times unable to make repayments; unauthorised overdraft borrowing: 0-2 number of times has exceeded its overdraft limits; business age: less than 2 years; industry: manufacturing; region: East; Lower speed of growth: over 30% a year for the past three years. The endogenous variable loan size is instrumented by employment size. Other business characteristics, export, performance pay, collateral and highest qualification are 0/1 dummies. Business age "more than 15 years" omitted because of collinearity. *,** indicate significance at 5% and 1% correspondingly. Estimated by two stage least squares with robust standard errors. Excludes SMEs with margins greater than 30pp. |   | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |-------------------------|-------------|-------------|---------|--------------| | Bank debt Applications | | | | | | Applications in Q3 2011 | 0.0208 | (0.764) | ‐0.0758 | (0.535) | | Applications in Q4 2011 | ‐0.0518 | (0.489) | ‐0.0600 | (0.619) | | Applications in Q1 2012 | ‐0.0263 | (0.714) | 0.0421 | (0.741) | | Applications in Q2 2012 | 0.287** | (0.000) | 0.105 | (0.405) | | Sales | | | | | | £50,000‐£99,999 | 0.272* | (0.031) | ‐0.0202 | (0.924) | | £100,000‐£499,999 | 0.472** | (0.000) | 0.271 | (0.134) | | £500,000‐£999,999 | 0.723** | (0.000) | 0.520* | (0.010) | | £1m‐£4,999,999 | 0.757** | (0.000) | 0.506* | (0.007) | | £5m or more | 0.836** | (0.000) | 0.691** | (0.001) | | Risk rating | | | | | | | | | | | | Low | 0.0491 | (0.513) | 0.0167 | (0.894) | | Average | 0.228* | (0.003) | ‐0.0242 | (0.850) | | Above average | 0.196* | (0.020) | ‐0.0441 | (0.754) | | Undetermined | 0.184 | (0.132) | 0.174 | (0.369) | |   | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |-------------------------------------------|-------------|-------------|----------|--------------| | Financial Delinquency | | | | | | Loan default | 0.0584 | (0.742) | 0.261 | (0.296) | | Unauthorised overdraft borrowing | 0.177* | (0.014) | 0.235 | (0.060) | | Business Age | | | | | | 2‐6 years | ‐0.244* | (0.006) | ‐0.116 | (0.451) | | 7‐15 years | ‐0.114* | (0.042) | ‐0.0437 | (0.648) | | More than 15 years | | | | | | Other business  Characteristics | | | | | | LtdCo | 0.505** | (0.000) | 0.640** | (0.000) | | Partnership | 0.119 | (0.228) | 0.201 | (0.219) | | Limited libpart | 0.310* | (0.022) | 0.621* | (0.009) | | Highest Qualification | | | | | | | | | | | | Undergraduate | 0.116 | (0.097) | 0.353* | (0.004) | | Postgraduate | ‐0.127 | (0.122) | ‐0.0779 | (0.572) | | Gender | | | | | | Female | 0.0193 | (0.778) | 0.0278 | (0.809) | | Industry | | | | | | Agriculture, hunting and forestry/ fish | 0.583** | (0.000) | 0.560* | (0.003) | | Construction | 0.157 | (0.110) | 0.293 | (0.094) | | Wholesale / retail | 0.0893 | (0.378) | 0.137 | (0.417) | | Hotels and restaurants | ‐0.104 | (0.394) | 0.579* | (0.002) | | Transport, storage and communication | | | | | | 0.125 | (0.268) | 0.437* | (0.021) | | | Real estate, renting and business activ | 0.0178 | (0.855) | 0.376* | (0.018) | | Health and social work | ‐0.173 | (0.179) | 0.255 | (0.186) | | Other community, social and personal ser. | ‐0.116 | (0.294) | 0.376* | (0.043) | | Region | | | | | | East Midlands | ‐0.118 | (0.372) | ‐0.199 | | | (0.416) | | | | | | London | ‐0.203 | (0.067) | ‐0.159 | (0.391) | | North East | ‐0.0800 | (0.459) | ‐0.0819 | (0.654) | | Northern Ireland | | | | | | ‐0.0990 | (0.359) | 0.0139 | (0.941) | | | North West | 0.0298 | (0.799) | 0.170 | (0.400) | | Scotland | ‐0.252* | (0.025) | ‐0.0790 | (0.665) | | South East | ‐0.101 | (0.415) | 0.0423 | (0.849) | | South West | ‐0.0607 | (0.550) | ‐0.0755 | (0.679) | | Wales | ‐0.167 | (0.123) | ‐0.0602 | (0.750) | | West Midlands | ‐0.119 | (0.249) | ‐0.341 | (0.059) | | Yorkshire & Humberside | ‐0.0160 | (0.900) | 0.355 | (0.091) | | Lower speed of growth | 0.118 | (0.094) | 0.292* | (0.008) | | Export | 0.103 | (0.133) | ‐0.139 | (0.257) | | Performpay | 0.195** | (0.000) | 0.0829 | (0.388) | | Constant | ‐1.397** | (0.000) | ‐1.405** | (0.000) | | Observations | 3095 | | 1058 | | Notes: Dependent variable is probability that firm will be required to provide collateral to obtain finance. Effects are measured relative to: quarters Q1-Q2 2011; sales: £49,999 or less; risk rating: minimal; loan default: 0-4 number of times unable to make repayments; unauthorised overdraft borrowing: 0-2 number of times has exceeded its overdraft limits; business age: less than 2 years; industry: manufacturing; region: East; lower speed of growth: over 30% a year for the past three years. Other business characteristics, export, performance pay and highest qualification are 0/1 dummies. Business age "more than 15 years" omitted because of collinearity. *,** indicate significance at 5% and 1% correspondingly. Estimated as probit with robust standard errors. In terms of collateral (Table 7), there is a significant demand effect for Wave 5, suggesting a tightening of conditions given firm risk. As in Table 3, higher sales imply a greater likelihood that collateral will be demanded, probably reflecting that collateral is greater for larger firms, and also collateral probabilities are higher for limited companies and limited liability partnerships. Higher risk firms and those having unauthorised overdrafts need more commonly to raise collateral for overdrafts while this is not the case for loans. Younger firms have a greater likelihood of requiring collateral which was not the case for the sample in Table 3. There are also some effects from educational level, industries and regions. We find that firms that are not high growth are more likely to have collateral requirements as are those with performance pay schemes. If these patterns are sustained, these requirements could limit the growth of these categories of firm in the future if availability of such collateral is limited. |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value) | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |----------------------------------|--------------|-------------|-----------|--------------| | Bank debt Applications | | | | | | Applications in Q3 2011 | 0.00108 | (0.706) | 0.000404 | (0.877) | | Applications in Q4 2011 | ‐0.00225 | (0.253) | 0.00223 | (0.444) | | Applications in Q1 2012 | 0.000881 | (0.680) | 0.00200 | (0.465) | | Applications in Q2 2012 | 0.000964 | (0.649) | ‐0.00120 | (0.644) | | Sales | | | | | | £50,000‐£99,999 | ‐0.00604 | (0.147) | 0.00180 | (0.770) | | £100,000‐£499,999 | ‐0.00362 | (0.384) | 0.00335 | (0.436) | | £500,000‐£999,999 | 0.000372 | (0.945) | 0.0103* | (0.043) | | £1m‐£4,999,999 | 0.00152 | (0.754) | 0.00576 | (0.217) | | £5m or more | 0.00916 | (0.158) | 0.00733 | (0.225) | | Risk rating | | | | | | | | | | | | Low | 0.000653 | (0.833) | 0.000312 | (0.909) | | Average | ‐0.00283 | (0.367) | ‐0.00210 | (0.512) | | Above Average | ‐0.00198 | (0.595) | 0.00111 | (0.733) | | Undetermined | ‐0.00353 | (0.454) | 0.00621 | (0.268) | | Financial Delinquency | | | | | | Loan default | 0.000793 | (0.902) | ‐0.00215 | (0.588) | | Unauthorised overdraft borrowing | ‐0.00283 | (0.147) | 0.00490 | (0.135) | | Business Age | | | | | | | | | | | | 2‐6 years | 0.00113 | (0.806) | 0.00579 | (0.108) | | 7‐15 years | ‐0.00250 | (0.145) | ‐0.000817 | (0.695) | | More than 15 years | | | | | | Other business  Characteristics | | | | | | LtdCo | ‐0.00392 | (0.246) | 0.00127 | (0.713) | | Partnership | ‐0.00348 | (0.381) | 0.00255 | (0.522) | | Limited libpart | ‐0.00117 | (0.809) | 0.0000460 | (0.991) | | Highest Qualification | | | | | | | | | | | | Undergraduate | ‐0.00157 | (0.471) | ‐0.00300 | (0.154) | | Postgraduate | ‐0.00261 | (0.321) | 0.00125 | (0.658) | | Gender | | | | | | | | | | | |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value) | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |-------------------------------------------|--------------|-------------|------------|--------------| | Female | 0.00224 | (0.449) | ‐0.00161 | (0.520) | | Industry | | | | | | Agriculture, hunting and forestry/ fish | ‐0.00360 | (0.256) | 0.000721 | (0.868) | | Construction | ‐0.00241 | (0.320) | 0.000814 | (0.824) | | Wholesale / retail | ‐0.00110 | (0.671) | 0.00510 | (0.131) | | Hotels and restaurants | 0.00284 | (0.530) | 0.00347 | (0.372) | | Transport, storage and communication | ‐0.00272 | (0.352) | ‐0.00202 | (0.641) | | Real estate, renting and business activ | ‐0.00205 | (0.450) | 0.00408 | (0.283) | | Health and social work | | | | | | ‐0.00326 | (0.303) | 0.00233 | (0.551) | | | Other community, social and personal ser. | 0.00356 | (0.425) | ‐0.00222 | (0.546) | | Region | | | | | | East Midlands | 0.00130 | (0.873) | 0.000964 | (0.848) | | London | ‐0.00213 | (0.436) | 0.00413 | (0.415) | | North East | ‐0.00198 | (0.535) | 0.00484 | (0.225) | | Northern Ireland | 0.000727 | (0.866) | 0.00338 | (0.400) | | North West | ‐0.00313 | (0.362) | 0.00123 | (0.734) | | Scotland | ‐0.00480 | (0.134) | ‐0.000327 | (0.933) | | South East | ‐0.00337 | (0.338) | 0.00386 | (0.552) | | South West | | | | | | ‐0.00224 | (0.380) | ‐0.000398 | (0.922) | | | Wales | 0.000375 | (0.910) | 0.000983 | (0.832) | | West Midlands | ‐0.00328 | (0.263) | ‐0.00240 | (0.552) | | Yorkshire & Humberside | ‐0.00557 | (0.199) | ‐0.000462 | (0.915) | | Lower speed of growth | 0.00257 | (0.225) | ‐0.00392 | (0.137) | | Export | ‐0.000169 | (0.937) | 0.000768 | (0.724) | | Performpay | 0.000775 | (0.713) | 0.00211 | (0.355) | | Log loan | ‐0.00613** | (0.000) | ‐0.00316** | (0.000) | | Collateral | 0.00713** | (0.001) | 0.00827** | | | (0.000) | | | | | | Constant | 0.0811** | (0.000) | 0.0321* | (0.005) | | Observations | 1664 | | 489 | | Notes: Dependent variable is the arrangement fee as a proportion of the size of the facility. Effects are measured relative to: quarters Q1-Q2 2011; sales: £49,999 or less; risk rating: minimal; loan default: 0-4 number of times unable to make repayments; unauthorised overdraft borrowing: 0-2 number of times has exceeded its overdraft limits; business age: less than 2 years; industry: manufacturing; region: East; lower speed of growth: over 30% a year for the past three years. Other business characteristics, export, performance pay, collateral and highest qualification are 0/1 dummies. Business age "more than 15 years" omitted because of collinearity. *,** indicate significance at 5% and 1% correspondingly. Estimated as tobit with robust standard errors. Excludes ratios greater than 9 for loans and greater than 6 for overdrafts. For term loans (Table 8), businesses with sales size between £500,000 and £999,999 paid higher arrangement fees than businesses with sales of less than £49,999, which may reflect a trade-off between fees and margins. SMEs with collateral requirements for both term loans and overdrafts paid higher arrangement fees, which could be due to costs of valuation and/or because these borrowers are higher risk. As in Table 4, large loans bear lesser fees as a proportion of the loan size. ## Table 9: Discouragement For 2010-12 – Informal Enquiries |   | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |-------------------------------------------|-------------|-------------|----------|--------------| | Bank debt Applications | | | | | | Applications in Q3 2011 | | | ‐0.116 | (0.329) | | Applications in Q4 2011 | ‐0.0299 | (0.799) | ‐0.390* | (0.002) | | Applications in Q1 2012 | 0.101 | (0.382) | ‐0.123 | (0.288) | | Applications in Q2 2012 | | | ‐0.196 | (0.084) | | Sales | | | | | | £50,000‐£99,999 | 0.0574 | (0.734) | ‐0.267 | (0.054) | | £100,000‐£499,999 | 0.179 | (0.260) | ‐0.0208 | (0.870) | | £500,000‐£999,999 | 0.280 | (0.186) | ‐0.119 | (0.454) | | £1m‐£4,999,999 | 0.115 | (0.544) | ‐0.0378 | (0.799) | | £5m or more | 0.273 | (0.227) | ‐0.0195 | (0.920) | | Risk rating | | | | | | | | | | | | Low | 0.330 | (0.096) | 0.489* | (0.004) | | Average | 0.222 | (0.245) | 0.460* | (0.005) | | Above Average | 0.442* | (0.022) | 0.577** | (0.001) | | Undetermined | 0.576* | (0.008) | 0.429* | (0.025) | | Financial Delinquency | | | | | | Loan default | 0.679* | (0.019) | 0.226 | (0.182) | | Unauthorised overdraft borrowing | 0.238 | (0.118) | 0.383** | (0.000) | | Business Age | | | | | | | | | | | | 2‐6 years | 0.154 | (0.273) | 0.148 | (0.184) | | 7‐15 years | 0.0297 | (0.811) | 0.0415 | (0.652) | | More than 15 years | | | | | | Other business  Characteristics | | | | | | LtdCo | 0.109 | (0.430) | ‐0.0128 | (0.907) | | Partnership | 0.0995 | (0.652) | ‐0.377* | (0.027) | | Limited libpart | 0.0517 | (0.891) | ‐0.335 | (0.193) | | Highest Qualification | | | | | | | | | | | | Undergraduate | ‐0.186 | (0.190) | ‐0.0383 | (0.732) | | Postgraduate | ‐0.205 | (0.220) | 0.0663 | (0.604) | | Gender | | | | | | | | | | | | Female | ‐0.00529 | (0.968) | ‐0.216* | (0.045) | | Industry | | | | | | Agriculture, hunting and forestry/ fish | ‐0.0578 | (0.827) | 0.0803 | (0.687) | | Construction | 0.0101 | (0.962) | 0.0167 | (0.911) | | Wholesale / retail | 0.183 | (0.414) | ‐0.00801 | (0.961) | | Hotels and restaurants | 0.374 | (0.115) | ‐0.00368 | (0.983) | | Transport, storage and communication | 0.289 | (0.221) | ‐0.00387 | (0.983) | | Real estate, renting and business activ | 0.194 | (0.366) | 0.184 | (0.225) | | Health and social work | | | | | | ‐0.0259 | (0.923) | ‐0.298 | (0.101) | | | Other community, social and personal ser. | ‐0.0804 | (0.744) | ‐0.0555 | (0.757) | | Region | | | | | | East Midlands | ‐0.565* | (0.039) | 0.0727 | (0.736) | | London | ‐0.494* | (0.028) | 0.00900 | (0.961) | | North East | ‐0.481* | (0.036) | ‐0.196 | (0.303) | |   | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |------------------------|-------------|-------------|----------|--------------| | Northern Ireland | ‐0.377 | (0.077) | ‐0.133 | (0.480) | | North West | ‐0.281 | (0.238) | ‐0.0242 | (0.903) | | Scotland | ‐0.186 | (0.429) | 0.145 | (0.457) | | South East | ‐0.361 | (0.167) | ‐0.0663 | (0.756) | | South West | 0.146 | (0.505) | 0.104 | (0.596) | | Wales | ‐0.415* | (0.044) | ‐0.00118 | (0.994) | | West Midlands | ‐0.308 | (0.136) | 0.152 | (0.392) | | Yorkshire & Humberside | 0.158 | (0.524) | 0.526* | (0.009) | | Lower speed of growth | 0.00389 | (0.976) | 0.187* | (0.049) | | Export | 0.198 | (0.197) | ‐0.107 | (0.332) | | Perform pay | 0.0959 | (0.419) | 0.252* | (0.004) | | Constant | ‐0.817* | (0.023) | ‐0.791* | (0.007) | | Observations | 774 | | 1243 | | Notes: Dependent variable is probability of the firm being discouraged from applying for finance because it had been put off directly (via informal enquiries with the bank) or indirectly (expectation of such a rejection). Effects are measured relative to: quarters Q1-Q2 2011 for loans and Q2 2012 for overdrafts; sales: £49,999 or less; risk rating: minimal; loan default: 0-4 number of times unable to make repayments; unauthorised overdraft borrowing: 0-2 number of times has exceeded its overdraft limits; business age: less than 2 years; industry: manufacturing; region: East; lower speed of growth: over 30% a year for the past three years. Other business characteristics, export, performance pay and highest qualification are 0/1 dummies. Business age "more than 15 years" omitted because of collinearity. *,** indicate significance at 5% and 1% correspondingly. Estimated as probit with robust standard errors. Regressions for the main discouragement variable is shown in Table 9, where the SME did not (or will not) apply to borrow because it had been put off directly (via informal enquiries with the bank) or indirectly (expectation of such a rejection). There are lower probabilities of discouragement for term loans in the later periods than in Q2 2011 (albeit at 10% significance level in Q2 2012), controlling for other firm characteristics. Indicators of discouragement include high risk and delinquency in the past, while female gender reduces the probability of discouragement of this type. It is notable that according to the equation, slower firm growth as well as performance pay are significant factors in discouraging application for term loans. For slower growth this may reflect the lesser extent of need for borrowing while performance pay may have links to banks' perceptions of risk. Further results for alternative measures of discouragement are shown in Appendix 3. Discouragement by principle of borrowing (Table A.3.1.) is most common for partnerships (at 10% significance level) and for those with some university education, while again women are less likely to be discouraged. For difficulties with the borrowing procedure (Table A.3.2) overdraft borrowing is discouraged by higher risk and for partnerships, while for loans it is lower speed of growth and performance pay. Finally, there are few significant indicators for issues with the economic situation (Table A.3.3). Looking at all four indicators together the time effects suggest lower discouragement for term loans in some of the later waves than in Wave 1, while there are no significant differences in the three waves for which data for overdrafts are available except for Table A.3.3 which implies that the probability of discouragement due to the economic situation is greater in Q2 2012 than in Q4 2011. ## 3.1.3 Results For 2010-12 With And Without Renewals In Tables 10 and 11 we provide a comparison of the loan application variables for regressions with and without renewals for 2010-12 (the regressions without renewals are shown in detail in Appendix 4). ## (A) With Renewals | | | | | | | | | Rejection rates  | Margins  | |-------------------------|-----------------------------------|----------------------|---------|-----------|----------|-----------|-----------|--------------------|------------| | | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan | (p‐value) | | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan | (p‐value) | | Quarters | | | | | Quarters | | | | | | Q3 2011 | | | | | | | | | | | 0.132 | (0.127) | 0.109 | (0.343) | | | | | | | | Q 3 2011 | | | | | | | | | | | 0.0587 | (0.783) | ‐0.0418 | (0.924) | | | | | | | | Q4 2011 | | | | | | | | | | | 0.133 | (0.151) | 0.189 | (0.093) | | | | | | | | Q4 2011 | | | | | | | | | | | 0.235 | (0.330) | ‐0.234 | (0.570) | | | | | | | | Q1 2012 | | | | | | | | | | | 0.0188 | (0.839) | 0.0988 | (0.392) | | | | | | | | Q1 2012 | | | | | | | | | | | 0.545 | (0.067) | 0.108 | (0.818) | | | | | | | | Q2 2012 | | | | | | | | | | | 0.222* | (0.012) | 0.172 | (0.139) | | | | | | | | Q2 2012 | | | | | | | | | | | 0.0098 | (0.974) | 0.616 | (0.283) | | | | | | | | Collateral requirements | Informal enquiries discouragement | | | | | | | | | | | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loans | (p‐value) | | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan | (p‐value) | | Quarters | | | | | Quarters | | | | | | Q3 2011 | | | | | | | | | | | 0.0208 | (0.764) | ‐0.0758      (0.535) | | | | | | | | | Q 3 2011 | | | | | | | | | | | | | ‐0.116 | (0.329) | | | | | | | | Q4 2011 | | | | | | | | | | | ‐0.0518 | (0.489) | ‐0.0600      (0.619) | | | | | | | | | Q4 2011 | | | | | | | | | | | ‐0.0299 | (0.799) | ‐0.390* | (0.002) | | | | | | | | Q1 2012 | | | | | | | | | | | ‐0.0263 | (0.714) | 0.0421      (0.741) | | | | | | | | | Q1 2012 | | | | | | | | | | | 0.101 | (0.382) | ‐0.123 | (0.288) | | | | | | | | Q2 2012 | | | | | | | | | | | 0.287** | (0.000) | 0.105 | (0.405) | | | | | | | | Q2 2012 | | | | | | | | | | | | | ‐0.196 | (0.084) | | | | | | | ## (B) Without Renewals | | | | | | | | | Rejection rates  | Margins  | |-------------------------|-----------------------------------|-----------|--------|-----------|----------|-----------|-----------|--------------------|------------| | | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan | (p‐value) | | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan | (p‐value) | | Quarters | | | | | Quarters | | | | | | Q3 2011 | ‐0.00518 | (0.973) | 0.118 | (0.503) | Q3 2011 | 0.998 | (0.056) | ‐1.292 | (0.466) | | Q4 2011 | ‐0.263 | (0.130) | 0.106 | (0.560) | Q4 2011 | 0.828 | (0.122) | ‐0.476 | (0.732) | | Q1 2012 | ‐0.179 | (0.274) | ‐0.025 | (0.890) | Q1 2012 | 0.283 | (0.603) | ‐0.660 | (0.761) | | Q2 2012 | 0.0569 | (0.730) | 0.206 | (0.246) | Q2 2012 | ‐0.488 | (0.394) | 1.509 | (0.441) | | Collateral requirements | Informal enquiries discouragement | | | | | | | | | | | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loans | (p‐value) | | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan | (p‐value) | | Quarters | | | | | Quarters | | | | | | Q3 2011 | 0.447* | (0.003) | ‐0.248 | (0.247) | Q3 2011 | | | ‐0.211 | (0.105) | | Q4 2011 | 0.130 | (0.432) | ‐0.342 | (0.112) | Q4 2011 | ‐0.0358 | (0.767) | ‐0.549** | (0.000) | | Q1 2012 | 0.0918 | (0.554) | ‐0.005 | (0.982) | Q1 2012 | 0.0594 | (0.619) | ‐0.236 | (0.063) | | Q2 2012 | 0.556** | (0.000) | 0.002 | (0.992) | Q2 2012 | | | ‐0.347* | (0.005) | Table 10(a) offers evidence for tight conditions for overdrafts in the Q1 2012 (higher margins, significant at 10% level) and Q2 2012 (greater incidence of rejection and collateral), which is less apparent for the results without renewals. This is again suggestive of a tightening for renewals per se (apart from collateral requirements in Q2 2012). Meanwhile in Table 11 the coefficients are similar for discouragement with both data sets. ## (A) With Renewals | | | | | | |   | Principle of borrowing  |   | Process of borrowing  | |----------|--------------------|-----------|--------------------|-----------|----------|-----------|---------------------------|------|-------------------------| | | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan | (p‐value) | | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan | (p‐value) | | Quarters | | | | | Quarters | | | | | | Q3 2011 | | | | | | | | | | | | | ‐0.313* | (0.015) | | | | | | | | Q3 2011 | | | | | | | | | | | | | ‐0.292* | (0.013) | | | | | | | | Q4 2011 | | | | | | | | | | | ‐0.115 | (0.407) | ‐0.354* | (0.009) | | | | | | | | Q4 2011 | | | | | | | | | | | ‐0.0273 | (0.815) | ‐0.297* | (0.016) | | | | | | | | Q1 2012 | | | | | | | | | | | 0.116 | (0.369) | ‐0.361* | (0.004) | | | | | | | | Q1 2012 | | | | | | | | | | | 0.105 | (0.360) | ‐0.382** | (0.001) | | | | | | | | Q2 2012 | | | | | | | | | | | | | ‐0.538** | (0.000) | | | | | | | | Q2 2012 | | | | | | | | | | | | | ‐0.499** | (0.000) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Economic situation | | Informal enquiries | | | | | | | | | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan | (p‐value) | | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan | (p‐value) | | Quarters | | | | | Quarters | | | | | | Q3 2011 | | | | | | | | | | | | | ‐0.147 | (0.265) | | | | | | | | Q3 2011 | | | | | | | | | | | | | ‐0.116 | (0.329) | | | | | | | | Q4 2011 | | | | | | | | | | | ‐0.380* | (0.012) | ‐0.222 | (0.109) | | | | | | | | Q4 2011 | | | | | | | | | | | ‐0.0299 | (0.799) | ‐0.390* | (0.002) | | | | | | | | Q1 2012 | | | | | | | | | | | 0.134 | (0.315) | 0.0217 | (0.860) | | | | | | | | Q1 2012 | | | | | | | | | | | 0.101 | (0.382) | ‐0.123 | (0.288) | | | | | | | | Q2 2012 | | | | | | | | | | | | | 0.0162 | (0.895) | | | | | | | | Q2 2012 | | | | | | | | | | | | | ‐0.196 | (0.084) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ## (B) Without Renewals | | | | | | |   | Principle of borrowing  |   | Process of borrowing  | |----------|--------------------|-----------|--------------------|-----------|----------|-----------|---------------------------|----------|-------------------------| | | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan | (p‐value) | | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan | (p‐value) | | Quarters | | | | | Quarters | | | | | | Q3 2011 | | | ‐0.350* | (0.014) | Q3 2011 | | | | | | | | ‐0.300* | (0.020) | | | | | | | | Q4 2011 | ‐0.0815 | (0.569) | ‐0.356* | (0.018) | Q4 2011 | | | | | | 0.0266 | (0.824) | ‐0.292* | (0.032) | | | | | | | | Q1 2012 | 0.158 | (0.236) | ‐0.392* | (0.004) | Q1 2012 | | | | | | 0.145 | (0.219) | ‐0.374* | (0.003) | | | | | | | | Q2 2012 | | | ‐0.594** | (0.000) | Q2 2012 | | | | | | | | ‐0.491** | (0.000) | | | | | | | | | Economic situation | | Informal enquiries | | | | | | | | | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan | (p‐value) | | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan | (p‐value) | | Quarters | | | | | Quarters | | | | | | Q3 2011 | | | ‐0.186 | (0.205) | Q3 2011 | | | ‐0.211 | (0.105) | | Q4 2011 | ‐0.391* | (0.013) | ‐0.276 | (0.074) | Q4 2011 | ‐0.0358 | (0.767) | ‐0.549** | (0.000) | | Q1 2012 | 0.153 | (0.267) | 0.00282 | (0.984) | Q1 2012 | 0.0594 | (0.619) | ‐0.236 | (0.063) | | Q2 2012 | | | 0.0693 | (0.610) | Q2 2012 | | | ‐0.347* | (0.005) | ## 3.1.4 Results For Ethnicity And Bank Characteristics Ethnicity is a variable which featured in Fraser (2012a) and it is clearly of interest to assess whether credit restrictions apply unevenly across ethnic groups. Research for the US (Asiedu et al 2012) showed forms of discrimination for Black and Hispanic-owned SMEs in 1998 and 2003. We could not use ethnicity as a control variable in the regressions above because it is omitted from all the waves of the SMEFM except the last one in Q2 2012. Hence, we would simply have omitted crucial time periods if this variable had been included. Nevertheless we can undertake some tests of discrimination by running regressions solely on Q2 2012 and also on the 2001-9 plus Q2 2012 data periods.24 The results (measured relative to white British applicants) are shown in Table 12 below. ## (A) Q2 2012 Data Only | | | | | | |   | Rejection rates  | Margins  | |---------------|-------------------------|----------------|---------|-----------|-----------|-----------|--------------------|------------| | | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan | (p‐value) | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan | (p‐value) | | ‐0.0291 | (0.922) | 0.162 | (0.633) | 0.745 | (0.595) | ‐0.751 | (0.343) | White non | | British | | | | | | | | | | Mixed | 0.639 | (0.284) | | | 2.698* | (0.028) | ‐1.608 | (0.245) | | Asian | 0.692 | (0.133) | 0.642 | (0.250) | ‐2.932* | (0.028) | 13.94** | (0.000) | | Black | 1.620* | (0.026) | ‐0.757 | (0.396) | 3.545 | (0.125) | ‐3.330 | (0.052) | | Chinese&Other | | | | | | | ‐21.75** | (0.000) | | Observations | 569 | | 285 | | 138 | | 56 | | | | Collateral requirements | Discouragement | | | | | | | | | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan | (p‐value) | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan | (p‐value) | | 0.137 | (0.622) | ‐0.506 | (0.185) | 0.475 | (0.180) | 0.115 | (0.731) | White non | | British | | | | | | | | | | Mixed | | | ‐0.726 | (0.251) | ‐0.225 | (0.773) | ‐0.298 | (0.720) | | Asian | 1.211* | (0.022) | | | ‐0.00688 | (0.987) | 0.741 | (0.077) | | Black | | | | | | | ‐0.835 | (0.279) | | Chinese&Other | | | | | | | | | | Observations | 529 | | 176 | | 258 | | 270 | | | | | | | | | | | | ## (B) 2001-9 And Q2 2012 Data | | | | | | |   | Rejection rates  | Margins  | |---------------------|-------------------------|-----------|---------|---------------------|-------------------|--------------------|--------------------|------------| | | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan | (p‐value) | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan | (p‐value) | | White non British | | | | | | | | | | 0.0651     (0.620) | | | | | | | | | | ‐0.142 | (0.445) | ‐0.339 | (0.092) | ‐0.264     (0.623) | | | | | | Mixed | | | | | | | | | | 0.299 | (0.271) | 0.438 | (0.313) | ‐0.642 | (0.134) | ‐1.706     (0.331) | | | | Asian | | | | | | | | | | 0.101 | (0.524) | 0.0549 | (0.812) | ‐0.176 | (0.631) | 1.527     (0.291) | | | | Black | | | | | | | | | | 0.655*    (0.020) | ‐0.381 | (0.401) | 2.832 | (0.231) | 0.538     (0.730) | | | | | Chinese&Other | | | | | | | | | | ‐0.0296     (0.934) | ‐0.00454    (0.993) | 1.181 | (0.315) | ‐0.0792     (0.940) | | | | | | Observations | | | | | | | | | | 3739 | | 2022 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1766 | | 502 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Collateral requirements | | | | | | | | | | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan | (p‐value) | | | | | | White non British | | | | | | | | | | 0.113 | | | | | | | | | | (0.291) | ‐0.0628 | (0.672) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Mixed | | | | | | | | | | ‐0.282 | (0.302) | ‐1.417* | (0.010) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Asian | | | | | | | | | | 0.113 | (0.459) | 0.236 | (0.256) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Black | | | | | | | | | | ‐0.221 | (0.617) | 0.602 | (0.238) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Chinese&Other | | | | | | | | | | ‐0.915*    (0.003) | 0.171 | (0.665) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Observations | | | | | | | | | | 3123 | | 1468 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 24 Estimated by OLS with robust standard errors.  We consider the results for Q2 2012 to be less reliable given the small number of observations; hence we focus on results that are also borne out in the longer series including 2001-9 data. The consistent result is that black people are more likely than British white people to be rejected for overdraft facilities. A similar finding, at a high level of significance, was found in Fraser (2012a). The wider sample also shows significantly lower collateral requirements for Chinese people for overdrafts and for mixed ethnic background for loans. As a further experiment we undertook the main regressions for 2001-9 only with an extra variable for bank types (these data are not available for 2010-12). The categories distinguished are the major banks, the small banks, and the major banks that were nationalised in 2008 (the last being only distinct in the 2008-9 period). Since we only use the UKSMEF data, which is in panel form, we employ panel probit estimation with robust standard errors and random effects. Table 13 suggests that the newly-nationalised major banks rejected proportionately fewer applications and charged lower margins in 2008-9, compared to the major banks that were not nationalised. The result, which holds despite the fact that the nationalised banks were under greater pressure to delever, suggests that differences in governance are dominant in determining willingness to lend. Meanwhile small banks had a higher rejection rate than major banks and also tended to request less collateral. | | | | | | |   | Rejection  | Margins  | |---------------|------------|------------------|---------|-----------|-----------|-----------|--------------|------------| | | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan | (p‐value) | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan | (p‐value) | | Small | 0.374* | (0.003) | 0.0777 | (0.717) | ‐0.236 | (0.251) | ‐0.346 | (0.430) | | Major nat'sed | ‐0.262 | (0.169) | ‐1.072* | (0.016) | ‐0.498 | (0.227) | ‐2.238* | (0.026) | | | Collateral | Arrangement Fees | | | | | | | | | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan | (p‐value) | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan | (p‐value) | | Small | ‐0.296* | (0.016) | ‐0.182 | (0.305) | ‐0.00292 | (0.534) | 0.0112 | (0.273) | | Major nat'sed | 0.0477 | (0.852) | 0.0337 | (0.925) | 0.00326 | (0.619) | ‐0.0038 | (0.858) | | | | | | | | | | | Using the bank lending data we can also assess to what extent there is a change in market structure over the period up to 2008-9, with for example a withdrawal by small banks. In fact, as shown in Table 14 there is no evidence of this in terms of simple shares of lending. The large banks have a consistent share of around 85% while the small banks have a share of 15% and this is sustained also in 2008-9. More recent data are not available. Hence at least for 2008-9 we cannot suggest that a shift in market structure might be a factor underlying the rise in margins and rejection rates. |   |   | 2001‐4  | 2005‐7  | 2007‐8  | 2008‐9  | |--------|--------|-----------|-----------|-----------|-----------| | Large | Number | 891 | 455 | 271 | 45 | | | Share | 0.86 | 0.83 | 0.87 | 0.34 | | Small | Number | 143 | 90 | 42 | 20 | | | Share | 0.14 | 0.17 | 0.13 | 0.15 | | Large | Number | 0 | 0 | 0 | 66 | | Natsed | Share | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.5 | Before concluding this section, we highlight the fact that we explored the robustness of the results by performing several specification tests. The SMEs provide weights to ensure that the samples are representative of all SMEs in the UK. To account for that, we re-estimated the main econometric results and find that using the weights does not substantially change the results. Therefore, we decided not to weight the econometric analysis. For the main estimation for margins using 2001-2012 data, we adopted as an instrumental variable for the endogenous variable loan size the size of employment. In the first stage of the two stage least squares procedure (not reported but available upon request), loan size appears to be highly and positively correlated with the size of employment. This shows its suitability as an instrument for loan size for both overdraft and loan. Finally, we tested the heteroskedasticity in the model errors and find that the null hypothesis of homogeneity of errors was to be rejected, implying the presence of heterogeneity and the need for robust standard error procedure which is used in most of our regressions to avoid bias. We used bootstrap procedure. ## 3.2 Uncertainty And Changes In Lending Conditions The second part of the analysis is to establish whether changes in credit are likely to be affected by uncertainty. Uncertainty is used as a key non-cyclical variable (in terms of variation in expected credit losses) likely to affect both supply and demand for credit, while other variables capture cyclical effects per se. This work involves both macro and micro datasets. As noted, Baum et al (2002) show that uncertainty leads banks to withdraw from higher risk business in the US, because uncertainty will increase perceptions of default risk. Accordingly, banks may withdraw from higher risk lending such as lending to SMEs as well as real estate lending when there is heightened uncertainty, and revert to a more conservative distribution between loans and securities. We test whether a similar pattern is apparent in the UK for aggregate SME lending. Macro estimation work looks at the volume of lending at a macro level based on the data in Charts 15-16 as well as the aggregate PNFC lending data and the national accounts data for unincorporated business lending.25 We estimate lending as an error correction equation depending on corporate profits and the cost of lending (long real rate augmented by the corporate-government spread), as in Barrell et al (2009) and Davis and Liadze (2012). To this we add the uncertainty proxy conditional variance of share price changes based on a GARCH (1,1) equation for quarterly changes in share prices as used in Byrne and Davis (2005).26 Technically, a sensible macroeconomic regression in error correction form requires trended variables to be entered as differences or ratios (a trended variable is said to have a "unit root" or be I(1), a non-trended variable is "stationary" or I(0)). As shown in the unit root tests27, all variables are I(1) other than the conditional variance (entered as a level) and unincorporated business loans (I(2) over a short sample) and the conditional variance which is stationary (I(0)). We accordingly enter the real lending variables as differences, the variance as a level and also for economic reasons we include the long rate as a level (interest rates cannot be trended in the long run). SME overdraft  Unincorporate Business  Dependent variable: Log difference of lending to:  All firms   (PNFCs)  SME total  SME term  loans     Constant  0.0765** (3.9)  ‐0.038* (‐2.2)  ‐0.016 (‐0.5)  ‐0.065* (‐2.2)  ‐0.0309 (1.6)  Log real loans(‐1)‐ log   real profitability (‐1)  ‐0.029* (‐2.5)  ‐0.059** (‐5.2)  ‐0.032* (‐1.6)  ‐0.029** (‐3.6)  ‐0.058** (3.6)  Long term real lending   rate (‐1)  ‐0.0046** (‐2.8)  0.0022 (0.9)  0.00005 (0.02)  0.0016 (0.4)  ‐0.0014 (0.9)  Log difference of real   loans (‐4)  0.408** (4.6)  0.124 (1.3)  0.055 (0.5)  0.1552 (1.4)  0.596** (6.4)  Conditional variance of   share prices (‐4)  ‐1.11 (‐1.1)  ‐2.279* (‐2.4)  ‐2.124* (‐2.1)  ‐3.239 (‐1.9)  ‐2.208** (3.3)  R‐bar2  0.289  0.333  0.081  0.173  0.6  SE  0.022  0.022  0.023  0.039  0.015  Period  1991Q2‐ 2012Q2  1991Q2‐ 2012Q2  1991Q2‐ 2012Q2  1991Q2‐ 2012Q2  1999Q1‐ 2012Q2  Note: t-stat in parenthesis;*,** indicate 5% and 1% significance levels correspondingly; estimated by OLS. Data sources: BBA, BIS, Bank of England Interpreting these results, we see that in this specification the negative uncertainty effect on lending is greater and more significant for SME lending and for unincorporated businesses than for aggregate corporate lending. This is suggestive of a greater sensitivity of small firm lending to underlying uncertainty than is that of larger firms; when perceptions of uncertainty increase, the banks cut back on SME lending. One explanation for this pattern may be that there is a greater degree of monopoly power for SME lending on the part of banks, while large firms have the option of accessing the bond market (Davis 2001) which limits price and quantity rationing of credit by banks to large firms. A complementary explanation may be that periods of uncertainty have a greater impact on the default risk of SMEs - and the quality of information - than large firms. And of course we may also be 27 Unit Root tests  Level  Difference  Log real corporate loans  ‐1.01  ‐9.4**  Log real SME loans  ‐2.6  ‐3.5**  Log real SME overdrafts  ‐2.6  ‐3.9**  Log real SME term loans  ‐0.8  ‐4.6**  ‐1.9  ‐2.1  Log  real  unincorporated  business  loans  Log real corporate profits  ‐0.9  ‐19.9**  Real long yield to corporate  ‐1.6  ‐13.3**  Conditional  variance  of  share  price  differences  ‐4.1**  ‐13.5**  Note: t-stat; *,** indicate 5% and 1% significance levels correspondingly capturing demand side effects whereby demand for loans declines during periods of uncertainty since future profitability of investment projects is less certain. Meanwhile, there is in each case a significant long run relation between corporate profits and lending stocks, and for PNCFs the long term real interest rate is significant also. We tried alternative uncertainty proxies namely conditional volatility of inflation and growth in the macro regressions (again derived from GARCH (1,1) estimation) and the results are reported in Table 15a. The table is read across for the effect of each alternative type of uncertainty for each type of lending, with the overall specification being as in Table 15. It can be seen that economic growth uncertainty has a similar effect to share price volatility, with a significant impact on the types and total of SME lending as well as on unincorporated business lending, and again no effect on lending to all firms. On the other hand, there is a weaker effect of inflation conditional volatility, with an impact largely on unincorporated business lending. Inflation  conditional  volatility  Growth  conditional  volatility   Type of aggregate lending  Banking  sector RA  capital  adequacy  Share  price  conditional  volatility  All firms  ‐1.111    (0.239)  ‐0.029    (0.022)  ‐0.003    (0.37)  ‐0.004    (0.113)  SME overdraft  ‐3.239*    (0.05)  0.021    (0.336)  ‐0.015**    (0.001)  ‐0.012**    (0.003)  SMEs  ‐2.28*    (0.015)  ‐0.012    (0.34)  ‐0.007**    (0.006)  ‐0.007**    (0.002)  SME term loans  ‐2.124*    (0.037)  ‐0.025    (0.054)  ‐0.008*    (0.031)  ‐0.007**    (0.01)  Unincorporated business  ‐2.265**    (0.002)  ‐0.051**    (0.000)  ‐0.007**    (0.006)  ‐0.007**    (0.002)  Note: Other variables, not shown, are as in Table 15; p-values in parenthesis. Table 15a also reports results for the effect of the risk adjusted capital adequacy of the banking system. Whereas for an individual bank it may be anticipated that lower capital adequacy would lead to less lending (i.e. a positive relationship) it is also the case that tighter regulation as evidenced by higher capital adequacy can entail higher spreads (Barrell et al 2009) and tighter credit conditions owing to a higher capital charge on lending. The latter effect seems to be predominant in the sample overall, with a negative impact of capital adequacy on lending. This is evidence of a further structural effect on lending, although further research would be needed to fully verify it. Using our micro dataset we can incorporate uncertainty as an independent variable in the various regressions, albeit only as a constant in each time period (2001-4, 2005-7, 2007-8, 2008-9, 2010-11 and 2011-12). We omit the application variables as they are collinear with uncertainty. In effect, the application variables show the unexplained variation in lending conditions beyond that shown by the characteristics - which we are seeking to explain alternatively here by variations in uncertainty. The results should be seen as tentative pending use of a dataset with a more detailed distribution of observations over time. |   | Rejection rates  | Collateral  | Margins  | Arrangement fees  | |-------------|--------------------|---------------|------------|---------------------| | Volatility | | | | | | measures | | | | | | Overdraft | Loan | Overdraft | Loan | Overdraft | | 0.0028** | 0.0819** | | | | | (0.003) | | | | | | 0.181** | | | | | | (0.000) | | | | | | 0.148** | | | | | | (0.000) | | | | | | ‐0.007 | | | | | | (0.874) | | | | | | 0.195** | | | | | | (0.003) | | | | | | 0.599** | | | | | | (0.000) | (0.000) | | | | | 0.006* | | | | | | (0.026) | | | | | | Conditional | | | | | | variance of | | | | | | GDP | | | | | | growth | | | | | | 0.307** | | | | | | (0.009) | | | | | | 17.19 | | | | | | (0.390) | | | | | | 104.7** | | | | | | (0.000) | | | | | | 0.374 | | | | | | (0.985) | | | | | | 184.1** | | | | | | (0.000) | | | | | | 106.8 | | | | | | (0.150) | | | | | | 0.0046 | | | | | | (0.988) | | | | | | 2.353 | | | | | | (0.060) | | | | | | Conditional | | | | | | variance of | | | | | | share | | | | | | prices | | | | | | 0.908** | | | | | | (0.000) | | | | | | 2.432** | | | | | | (0.000) | | | | | | 0.818** | | | | | | (0.000) | | | | | | ‐0.168 | | | | | | (0.523) | | | | | | 6.962** | | | | | | (0.000) | | | | | | 8.266** | | | | | | (0.000) | | | | | | 0.0185** | | | | | | (0.000) | | | | | | 0.009 | | | | | | (0.622) | | | | | | Conditional | | | | | | variance of | | | | | | inflation | | | | | | 0.0838** | | | | | | (0.001) | | | | | | 0.277** | | | | | | (0.000) | | | | | | 0.0500* | | | | | | (0.015) | | | | | | ‐0.0343 | | | | | | (0.315) | | | | | | 0.978** | | | | | | (0.000) | | | | | | 1.023** | | | | | | (0.000) | | | | | | 0.0017** | | | | | | (0.006) | | | | | | ‐0.0012 | | | | | | (0.638) | | | | | Memo:  Capital adequacy Note: regressions include standard control variables as in Tables 1-4. p-values in parenthesis. These results should be seen as very tentative since we are in effect seeking to explain shifts in lending conditions using one observation per period over 6 data periods.28 That said, they provide evidence of correlation between uncertainty and changes in rejection, margins, collateral and fees that are not explained by firm level risk variables. This is especially the case for overdrafts; effects are less strong for term loans, with no uncertainty effect for collateral requirements, for example. The conditional variance of GDP growth is the most frequently significant uncertainty proxy, followed by inflation and share prices. As was the case for macroeconomic data, the capital adequacy ratio of the banking system has a positive effect on indicators of credit tightening, affecting all the variables significantly except collateral and fees for term loans. ## 4. Conclusions Our assessment suggests that there is clear evidence of ongoing tight credit supply conditions in 2010-12, well after the height of the economic crisis in 2008/09. Margins in particular are historically high, even controlling for firm risk, including for overdrafts in 2008-9. Rejection rates allowing for risk have increased even compared to 2008-9, suggesting quantity as well as price rationing of credit especially for term loan finance. Banks have simply chosen to reject many applications, which economic theory suggests may relate to poorer information - although it may also link to risk aversion as well as regulatory and market pressures to shrink their balance sheets. The rejection rate has increased particularly for low and average risk firms and not significantly for high risk firms. Banks may have viewed lending to the safer categories of SMEs as relatively more risky in the period after the financial crisis than they did before, although the pattern is also suggestive of a partial withdrawal from SME lending as an asset class. The evidence suggests greater restriction in term loans than overdrafts. This maybe because overdraft facilities are to protect existing bank exposures. Arrangement fees for overdrafts on the other hand were significantly higher in earlier periods than in 2011-12. Looking at the detailed results for 2010-12, for a number of key variables, the 2010-12 pattern in some degree upward trending or U shaped, suggesting adverse situation in the last survey in our sample, namely June 2012. The rejection rate for overdrafts and the collateral demands both peak in that period for example, and the margin for overdrafts in March 2012. These trends are apparent both in charts and in regression results. There is evidence in 2010-12 suggestive of a particular tightening for renewals finance, with for example significant results for rejection and margins in 2012 being present with renewals but not for new loans only. Ethnic origins cannot be tested over the whole dataset but results are consistently suggestive of ongoing higher rejection rates for black SME owners. Results for bank types, which can only be undertaken over 2001-9 with the current dataset, show that the partially nationalised major banks rejected proportionately fewer applications and charged lower margins in 2008-9, compared to other major banks. Meanwhile small banks had a higher rejection rate than major banks and also tended to request less collateral. Uncertainty as measured by the conditional volatility of share prices and growth apparently has a greater influence on SME lending than on all-firm lending to the corporate sector as a whole. This may signal a shift away from higher risk lending such as to SMEs as long as uncertainty persists. There is some tentative evidence of an uncertainty effect on firm-byfirm data. The uncertainty variable may be capturing inter alia the structural shift to risk aversion that took place for bank lending officers during the financial crisis. Overall, we suggest that the research is indicative of a shortage of finance for SMEs, reflecting banks' attitudes to risk and their own pressures to delever combined with banks' market power in the SME sector. Although demand is also probably subdued, there is a high level of discouragement from application for lending as well as high rejection rates and margins on credit after controlling for risk. If the situation is not resolved, output, investment and employment will be lower than would otherwise be the case, with adverse effects on economic performance in the short and longer term. ## 5. References Aghion, P., and Bolton, P. (1992), 'An Incomplete Contract Approach to Bankruptcy and the Financial Structure of the Firm', Review of Economic Studies. Asiedu E, Freeman J and Nti-Addae A (2012) "Access to Credit by Small Businesses: How Relevant Are Race, Ethnicity, and Gender?" American Economic Review: Papers & Proceedings 2012, 102(3): 532–537. Barrell R, Davis E P, Fic T, Holland D, Kirby S, Liadze I (2009), "Optimal regulation of bank capital and liquidity: how to calibrate new international standards, FSA Occasional Paper No 38. Baum C F, Caglayan M and Ozkan N (2002), "The impact of macroeconomic uncertainty on bank lending behaviour", University of Liverpool Working Paper. Bank of England (2012a), "Trends in lending, January 2012", Bank of England, London. BDRC (2012), "SME finance monitor Q1 2012" BDRC Continental. Bester, H. (1985), 'Screenings vs. Rationing in Credit Markets with Imperfect Information', American Economic Review, 75: 850–5. Bolton, P. (1990), 'A Theory of Secured Debt: Contracting with Multiple Creditors', mimeo. Button, R, Pezzini, S and Rossiter, N (2010), 'Understanding the price of new lending to households', Bank of England Quarterly Bulletin, 50/3, 172–82. Byrne J and Davis E P (2005), "Investment and uncertainty in the G-7", Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 141/1 Campello M, Graham J and Harvey C (2010), "The real effects of financial constraints, evidence from a financial crisis", Journal of Financial Economics, 97, 470-487. Davis E P (1991), "Bank credit risk", Bank of England Working paper No 1. Davis E P (2001), "Multiple Avenues of Intermediation, Corporate Finance and Financial Stability", IMF Working Paper 01/115. Davis E P (2011), "New International Evidence on Asset-Price Effects on Investment, and a Survey for Consumption", OECD Economic Studies, 8, 1-50. Davis E P and Liadze I (2012), "Modelling and simulating the banking sectors of the US, Germany and the UK", NIESR Discussion paper no. 396. Diamond, D. (1984), "Financial Intermediation and Delegated Monitoring", Review of Economic Studies, 51, 393-414. Diamond, D. (1991), "Monitoring and reputation; the choice between bank loans and directly placed debt", Journal of Political Economy, 99, 401-19. Fama, E.F. (1985), "What's different about banks?", Journal of Monetary Economics, 15, 29-39. Fraser S (2005), "UK Survey of SME Finances 2004". Colchester, Essex: UK Data Archive [distributor]:SN 5326. Fraser S (2012a), "The impact of the financial crisis on bank lending to SMEs", Report prepared for the BIS/Breedon Review. Fraser S (2012b), "Are entrepreneurs financially constrained? A new test based on finance gaps", CSME Working paper. Gurley, J., and Shaw, E. (1960), Money in a Theory of Finance, Brookings Institution, Washington, DC. Hart, O. and Moore, J. (1989), 'Default and Renegotiation, a Dynamic Model of Debt', The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 113, No. 1. (Feb., 1998), pp. 1-41. Hellwig, M. (1977), "A Model of Borrowing and Lending with Bankruptcy", Econometrica 45, 1879-1906. Hellwig, M. (1991), "Banking, Financial Intermediation and Corporate Finance". In ed. A Giovannini and C P Mayer, "European Financial Integration", Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Hempell H and Sorenson C (2010), The impact of supply constraints on bank lending in the Euro Area, crisis induced crunching?" ECB Working Paper Series 1262 November 2010. Holton S, Lawless M, MCCann F (2012), "Credit demand, supply and conditions a tale of three crises", Central Bank of Ireland mimeo. Hoshi, T., A. Kashyap and D. Scharfstein (1993), "The Choice between Public and Private Debt; an Analysis of Post Deregulation Corporate Financing in Japan", *Working Paper,* No. 4211, National Bureau of Economic Research. Jimenez G, Ongena S, Peydro J-L, Saurina J (2012), "Credit supply versus demand, bank and firm balance sheet channels in good and crisis times", CENTER Working paper 2012- 005, Tilburg University. Lewis, M.K. (1991), "Theory and Practice of the Banking Firm", in "Surveys in Monetary Economics Vol. II" ed. C J Green and D T Llewellyn; Oxford; Basil Blackwell. Mayer, C. P. (1988), 'New Issues in Corporate Finance', European Economic Review, 32: 1167–88. Mercierca S, Schaeck K and Wolfe S (2009), "Bank Market Structure, Competition, and SME Financing Relationships in European Regions", Journal of Financial Services Research. 36, 137-155. Sovago S (2011), "Identifying supply and demand in the Hungarian corporate loan market", MNB Occasional Paper 94. Stiglitz, J.E. and Weiss, A.M. (1981), "Credit rationing in markets with incomplete information", American Economic Review, 71.393-410. Stiglitz, J. E and Weiss, A. (1986), 'Credit Rationing and Collateral',. in J. Edwards et al. (eds.), Recent Developments in Corporate Finance, Cambridge Univ. Press. Stock J H, Wright J H and Yogo M (2002), "A survey of weak instruments and weak identification in Generalised Method of Moments", Journal of Business Economics and Statistics, 20, 518-529. Wooldridge J (2006), "Introductory econometrics, a modern approach, 3rd edition", Thomson. ## Appendix Appendix 1: Theories Of Intermediation The traditional theory of intermediation relies on the presence of economies of scale, which benefit specialized intermediaries (Gurley and Shaw 1960). Economies of scale arise from indivisibilities and non-convexities in transaction technologies which restrict diversification and risk-sharing under direct financing via securities markets-investments. On the liabilities side, they can be seen as providing a form of liquidity insurance to riskaverse depositors against liquidity risk (i.e. their need for cash in the future), if it is assumed these individuals are 'small' and risks cancel over the population. There are also economies of scale in the provision of payments services. On the assets side, banks can lend more easily than SMEs and individuals, owing to their ability to manage investments at lower cost. (As a corollary, any reductions in fixed costs of direct financing will increase markets' comparative advantage.) Economies of scale omit the key influences on lending arising from information problems which are endemic to SMEs, to which we now turn. As regards screening and monitoring per se, banks may have informational advantages over securities markets arising from ongoing credit relationships, from knowledge of the borrower's deposit history (Fama 1985), and use of transaction services (Lewis 1991). The intangible nature of this information makes it difficult to transmit to markets or other lenders, hence credit relationships are typically costly to transfer. A consequence of non transferability, which buttresses banks' positions, is that such investments are typically held on the banks' own books, and a single bank may often be the only creditor of a firm. As noted by Diamond (1984) this will avoid free rider problems typical of securities markets, which discourage monitoring, owing to the public good features of information about a borrower. Even abstracting from such problems, it also reduces the costly duplication of information collection that should otherwise be reflected in loan pricing. But it may also involve monopolistic exploitation of the dominant position. An extension of the monitoring paradigm (Diamond 1991) suggests that for those borrowers, such as large, established companies, with a reputation for repaying debt, it is a capital asset (as it facilitates borrowing at low cost) which would depreciate in the case of non repayment. This offers some protection to the lender against moral hazard, as well as reducing the need for screening. This may make bank monitoring unnecessary, enabling the firm to access securities markets. But it will not apply to most SMEs. In contrast, younger companies have no reputation to lose, entailing a need for bank monitoring. High net worth, by enabling collateral to be pledged, may similarly protect lenders against moral hazard and adverse selection, as poor investment otherwise entails a risk that assets will be lost (Hoshi et al 1993). On the other hand, low net worth is typical of SMEs and means the borrower little collateral to pledge, either to reduce difficulties of screening, or to offset the risks in the transaction. Banks will have an advantage in such cases, given the increased importance of monitoring. Control theories of intermediation highlight the key feature of debt contracts which help reduce moral hazard, namely that the borrower controls corporate assets except in the case of default, when such control passes to the lender (Hart and Moore 1989, Aghion and Bolton 1992). Such control prevents the borrower, for example, from threatening to repudiate the debt in order to reduce the interest rate (Hellwig 1977). The amount of external finance available under `control' will depend on creditors' managerial abilities, which may be greater for banks than markets. Second, it varies with costs of co-ordinating creditors and of bankruptcy more generally, which may be less for banks than for bondholders if there are free rider problems to the involvement of the latter in corporate restructuring (Bolton 1990). Third, it varies with other forms of control that lenders can exert over borrowers. For example, control may be extended to the borrower's behaviour in non default circumstances by aspects of the debt contract, such as covenants, collateral, and short maturity, which again banks may be well placed to oversee and are typically imposed on SMEs. A final issue for all lenders is the realisability of assets (how specific they are to their current use) - a particular issue with SMEs. Focus on control in banking is often dubbed "transactions banking", where borrowers and lenders maximise returns from each individual transaction rather than from a continuing relationship, and which is considered to be relevant for UK banks. Commitment or "relationship banking" is an alternative means to minimise the risks in the debt contract, which can be developed when incumbent lenders and borrowers share information not available to other potential lenders (Mayer 1988, Hellwig 1991). This sharing of information enables lenders to undertake to provide finance to the borrower even during times of financial difficulty, in return for which the borrower undertakes to remain with the lender (and to pay a premium) during normal times. Whereas bond market investors may be unable to develop such information and financing links, 'relationship' banks in countries such as Germany may be well placed to do so. But it is not typical of SME lending in the UK. ## Appendix 2: Alternative Measures Of Discouragement |   | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |-------------------------------------------|-------------|-------------|----------|--------------| | Bank Debt Applications | | | | | | Applications in Q3 2011 | | | ‐0.313* | (0.015) | | Applications in Q4 2011 | ‐0.115 | (0.407) | ‐0.354* | (0.009) | | Applications in Q1 2012 | 0.116 | (0.369) | ‐0.361* | (0.004) | | Applications in Q2 2012 | | | ‐0.538** | (0.000) | | Sales | | | | | | £50,000‐£99,999 | ‐0.390* | (0.039) | ‐0.342* | (0.033) | | £100,000‐£499,999 | ‐0.379* | (0.041) | ‐0.194 | (0.178) | | £500,000‐£999,999 | ‐0.347 | (0.139) | 0.0587 | (0.735) | | £1m‐£4,999,999 | ‐0.377 | (0.078) | ‐0.0499 | (0.764) | | £5m or more | | | | | | ‐0.579* | (0.024) | ‐0.0839 | (0.703) | | | Risk rating | | | | | | Low | 0.0563 | (0.810) | ‐0.0825 | (0.650) | | Average | ‐0.0543 | (0.808) | 0.142 | (0.402) | | Above average | 0.362 | (0.110) | 0.106 | (0.543) | | Undetermined | 0.394 | (0.112) | 0.190 | (0.353) | | Financial Delinquency | | | | | | Loan default | 0.196 | (0.527) | 0.0257 | (0.888) | | Unauthorized overdraft borrowing | ‐0.0517 | (0.766) | ‐0.0460 | (0.686) | | Business Age | | | | | | 2‐6 years | ‐0.160 | (0.310) | ‐0.0807 | (0.512) | | 7‐15 years | ‐0.0994 | (0.469) | ‐0.174 | (0.088) | | More than 15 years | | | | | | | | | | | | Other business  Characteristics | | | | | | LtdCo | 0.111 | (0.496) | ‐0.0719 | (0.567) | | Partnership | 0.442 | (0.073) | ‐0.162 | (0.401) | | Limited libpart | ‐0.0471 | (0.904) | 0.0169 | (0.952) | | Highest Qualification | | | | | | Undergraduate | 0.352* | (0.020) | ‐0.0190 | (0.879) | | Postgraduate | 0.164 | (0.378) | | | | 0.0986 | (0.481) | | | | | Gender | | | | | | | | | | | | Female | ‐0.285 | (0.080) | ‐0.265* | (0.037) | | Industry | | | | | | Agriculture, hunting and forestry/ fish | 0.00790 | (0.979) | 0.0208 | (0.922) | | Construction | 0.171 | (0.467) | ‐0.0930 | (0.567) | | Wholesale / retail | 0.172 | (0.514) | ‐0.120 | (0.501) | | Hotels and restaurants | ‐0.299 | (0.301) | ‐0.233 | (0.228) | | Transport, storage and communication | ‐0.0738 | (0.788) | ‐0.0537 | (0.775) | | Real estate, renting and business activ | 0.164 | (0.498) | ‐0.241 | (0.149) | | Health and social work | | | | | | 0.115 | (0.710) | ‐0.189 | (0.361) | | | Other community, social and personal ser. | 0.424 | (0.109) | ‐0.309 | (0.133) | | Region | | | | | | East Midlands | ‐0.366 | (0.231) | ‐0.0681 | (0.783) | |   | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |------------------------|-------------|-------------|----------|--------------| | London | ‐0.621* | (0.019) | 0.0675 | (0.743) | | North East | ‐0.149 | (0.570) | 0.104 | (0.623) | | Northern Ireland | ‐0.524* | (0.036) | 0.114 | (0.586) | | North West | ‐0.131 | (0.612) | 0.115 | (0.603) | | Scotland | 0.0720 | (0.782) | 0.203 | (0.350) | | South East | ‐0.692* | (0.042) | 0.0749 | (0.757) | | South West | ‐0.253 | (0.311) | 0.127 | (0.562) | | Wales | ‐0.0629 | (0.776) | 0.288 | (0.124) | | West Midlands | ‐0.390 | (0.091) | 0.0991 | (0.616) | | Yorkshire & Humberside | | | | | | 0.0415 | (0.879) | ‐0.230 | (0.327) | | | Lower speed of growth | 0.0739 | (0.613) | 0.257* | (0.019) | | Export | 0.253 | (0.144) | ‐0.00219 | (0.986) | | Performance pay | 0.430** | (0.001) | 0.127 | (0.196) | | Constant | ‐0.912* | (0.025) | ‐0.557 | (0.083) | | Observations | 774 | | 1243 | | Notes: Dependent variable is probability of the firm being discouraged from applying for finance because the owner did not want to lose control of business, prefer to seek alternative sources. Effects are measured relative to: quarters Q1-Q2 2011 for loans and Q2 2012 for overdrafts; sales: £49,999 or less; risk rating: minimal; loan default: 0-4 number of times unable to make repayments; unauthorised overdraft borrowing: 0- 2 number of times has exceeded its overdraft limits; business age: less than 2 years; industry: manufacturing; region: East; lower speed of growth: over 30% a year for the past three years. Other business characteristics, export, performance pay and highest qualification are 0/1 dummies. Business age "more than 15 years" omitted because of collinearity. *,** indicate significance at 5% and 1% correspondingly. Estimated as probit with robust standard errors. |   | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |----------------------------------|-------------|-------------|----------|--------------| | Bank debt applications | | | | | | Applications in Q3 2011 | | | ‐0.292* | (0.013) | | Applications in Q4 2011 | ‐0.0273 | (0.815) | ‐0.297* | (0.016) | | Applications in Q1 2012 | 0.105 | (0.360) | ‐0.382** | (0.001) | | Applications in Q2 2012 | | | ‐0.499** | (0.000) | | Sales | | | | | | £50,000‐£99,999 | 0.0775 | (0.637) | ‐0.192 | (0.159) | | £100,000‐£499,999 | ‐0.245 | (0.125) | 0.118 | (0.349) | | £500,000‐£999,999 | ‐0.285 | (0.169) | ‐0.0809 | (0.600) | | £1m‐£4,999,999 | ‐0.0309 | (0.865) | ‐0.151 | (0.300) | | £5m or more | | | | | | ‐0.207 | (0.350) | ‐0.259 | (0.178) | | | Risk rating | | | | | | Low | 0.194 | (0.313) | ‐0.0869 | (0.576) | | Average | 0.411* | (0.025) | 0.0974 | (0.510) | | Above average | 0.415* | (0.025) | 0.102 | (0.501) | | Undetermined | 0.0768 | (0.718) | 0.0565 | (0.751) | | Financial Delinquency | | | | | | Loan default | ‐0.150 | (0.602) | 0.130 | (0.430) | | Unauthorized overdraft borrowing | 0.191 | (0.206) | 0.00695 | (0.943) | | Business Age | | | | | | 2‐6 years | 0.0709 | (0.608) | ‐0.0611 | (0.578) | |   | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |-------------------------------------------|-------------|-------------|---------|--------------| | 7‐15 years | 0.177 | (0.144) | ‐0.0304 | (0.737) | | More than 15 years | | | | | | Other business  Characteristics | | | | | | LtdCo | 0.112 | (0.411) | ‐0.125 | (0.249) | | Partnership | 0.573* | (0.010) | 0.0842 | (0.610) | | Limited libpart | 0.330 | (0.335) | ‐0.286 | (0.250) | | Highest Qualification | | | | | | Undergraduate | 0.191 | (0.161) | 0.0329 | (0.764) | | Postgraduate | 0.237 | (0.141) | 0.235 | (0.058) | | Gender | | | | | | Female | 0.110 | (0.391) | ‐0.0968 | (0.365) | | Industry | | | | | | Agriculture, hunting and forestry/ fish | | | | | | 0.307 | (0.232) | 0.187 | (0.338) | | | Construction | 0.281 | (0.182) | 0.120 | (0.417) | | Wholesale / retail | 0.231 | (0.296) | 0.135 | (0.398) | | Hotels and restaurants | ‐0.0153 | (0.948) | 0.0680 | (0.689) | | Transport, storage and communication | 0.0762 | (0.755) | ‐0.0913 | (0.600) | | Real estate, renting and business activ | 0.139 | (0.517) | 0.0180 | (0.904) | | Health and social work | ‐0.0465 | (0.865) | 0.124 | (0.493) | | Other community, social and personal ser. | | | | | | 0.190 | (0.431) | ‐0.274 | (0.126) | | | Region | | | | | | East Midlands | ‐0.461 | (0.083) | ‐0.220 | (0.309) | | London | ‐0.229 | (0.300) | 0.111 | (0.538) | | North East | ‐0.363 | (0.112) | ‐0.0186 | (0.920) | | Northern Ireland | ‐0.412 | (0.057) | 0.157 | (0.390) | | North West | ‐0.216 | (0.357) | 0.232 | (0.231) | | Scotland | ‐0.223 | (0.356) | 0.116 | (0.541) | | South East | ‐0.464 | (0.079) | ‐0.0885 | | | (0.673) | | | | | | South West | ‐0.316 | (0.153) | ‐0.0885 | (0.639) | | Wales | ‐0.0291 | (0.889) | 0.207 | (0.207) | | West Midlands | ‐0.0980 | (0.644) | ‐0.0930 | (0.591) | | Yorkshire & Humberside | ‐0.191 | (0.448) | ‐0.156 | (0.426) | | Lower speed of growth | 0.243 | (0.053) | 0.222* | (0.017) | | Export | ‐0.256 | (0.102) | 0.0956 | (0.374) | | Performance pay | 0.117 | (0.309) | 0.196* | (0.025) | | Constant | ‐0.793* | (0.024) | ‐0.0497 | (0.858) | | Observations | 774 | | 1243 | | Notes: Dependent variable is probability of the firm being discouraged from applying for finance because the owner thought it would be too expensive, too much hassle, loan facilities come with too many terms and conditions, I thought we would be asked to provide too much security, did not want to go through application process, find bank forms and literature hard to understand. Effects are measured relative to: quarters Q1-Q2 2011 for loans and Q2 2012 for overdrafts; sales: £49,999 or less; risk rating: minimal; loan default: 0-4 number of times unable to make repayments; unauthorised overdraft borrowing: 0-2 number of times has exceeded its overdraft limits; business age: less than 2 years; industry: manufacturing; region: East; lower speed of growth: over 30% a year for the past three years. Other business characteristics, export, performance pay and highest qualification are 0/1 dummies. Business age "more than 15 years" omitted because of collinearity. *,** indicate significance at 5% and 1% correspondingly. Estimated as probit with robust standard errors. |   | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |-------------------------------------------|-------------|-------------|----------|--------------| | Bank debt applications | | | | | | Applications in Q3 2011 | | | ‐0.147 | (0.265) | | Applications in Q4 2011 | ‐0.380* | (0.012) | ‐0.222 | (0.109) | | Applications in Q1 2012 | 0.134 | (0.315) | 0.0217 | (0.860) | | Applications in Q2 2012 | | | 0.0162 | (0.895) | | Sales | | | | | | £50,000‐£99,999 | 0.183 | (0.349) | 0.190 | (0.197) | | £100,000‐£499,999 | ‐0.262 | (0.186) | 0.0965 | (0.504) | | £500,000‐£999,999 | ‐0.335 | (0.199) | ‐0.00872 | (0.960) | | £1m‐£4,999,999 | ‐0.158 | (0.503) | ‐0.0626 | (0.705) | | £5m or more | | | | | | ‐0.323 | (0.245) | 0.0282 | (0.895) | | | Risk rating | | | | | | Low | ‐0.0465 | (0.837) | 0.0328 | (0.850) | | Average | ‐0.285 | (0.199) | 0.0690 | (0.676) | | Above average | ‐0.279 | (0.199) | 0.123 | (0.467) | | Undetermined | ‐0.324 | (0.209) | ‐0.133 | (0.508) | | Financial Delinquency | | | | | | Loan default | ‐0.399 | (0.290) | ‐0.202 | (0.288) | | Unauthorized overdraft borrowing | ‐0.135 | (0.501) | ‐0.140 | (0.204) | | Business Age | | | | | | 2‐6 years | 0.0666 | (0.670) | ‐0.0760 | (0.532) | | 7‐15 years | ‐0.0880 | (0.551) | ‐0.00352 | (0.972) | | More than 15 years | | | | | | | | | | | | Other business  Characteristics | | | | | | LtdCo | ‐0.0626 | (0.714) | ‐0.0418 | (0.727) | | Partnership | 0.390 | (0.137) | 0.0261 | (0.886) | | Limited libpart | ‐0.0174 | (0.968) | ‐0.00442 | (0.987) | | Highest Qualification | | | | | | Undergraduate | 0.0367 | (0.827) | ‐0.0566 | (0.644) | | Postgraduate | 0.127 | (0.530) | | | | ‐0.0838 | (0.541) | | | | | Gender | | | | | | | | | | | | Female | 0.0787 | (0.638) | 0.0162 | (0.890) | | Industry | | | | | | | | | | | | Agriculture, hunting and forestry/ fish | 0.388 | (0.237) | ‐0.252 | (0.253) | | Construction | 0.478 | (0.078) | ‐0.0385 | (0.813) | | Wholesale / retail | 0.220 | (0.464) | ‐0.192 | (0.283) | | Hotels and restaurants | 0.482 | (0.102) | ‐0.326 | (0.088) | | Transport, storage and communication | 0.0777 | (0.821) | 0.105 | (0.573) | | Real estate, renting and business activ | 0.0111 | (0.969) | ‐0.148 | (0.365) | | Health and social work | | | | | | ‐0.243 | (0.531) | 0.0382 | (0.845) | | | Other community, social and personal ser. | 0.174 | (0.565) | ‐0.154 | (0.426) | | Region | | | | | | East Midlands | ‐0.372 | (0.263) | ‐0.501* | (0.046) | | London | ‐0.544 | (0.051) | ‐0.327 | (0.092) | | North East | ‐0.402 | (0.168) | ‐0.155 | (0.428) | |   | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |------------------------|-------------|-------------|---------|--------------| | Northern Ireland | 0.0685 | (0.782) | ‐0.0769 | (0.691) | | North West | ‐0.0817 | (0.772) | ‐0.241 | (0.261) | | Scotland | ‐0.347 | (0.236) | ‐0.317 | (0.132) | | South East | ‐0.114 | (0.736) | ‐0.577* | (0.017) | | South West | ‐0.155 | (0.561) | ‐0.126 | (0.540) | | Wales | ‐0.226 | (0.394) | ‐0.143 | (0.422) | | West Midlands | ‐0.463 | (0.077) | ‐0.155 | (0.403) | | Yorkshire & Humberside | 0.224 | (0.431) | 0.0660 | (0.747) | | Lower speed of growth | 0.133 | (0.397) | 0.164 | (0.113) | | Export | ‐0.213 | (0.288) | 0.105 | (0.374) | | Performance pay | 0.329* | (0.021) | 0.0813 | (0.407) | | Constant | ‐0.932* | (0.036) | ‐0.618* | (0.039) | | Observations | 774 | | 1243 | | Notes: Dependent variable is probability of the firm being discouraged from applying for finance because the owner thought this is not the right time to apply for borrowing. Effects are measured relative to: quarters Q1- Q2 2011 for loans and Q2 2012 for overdrafts; sales: £49,999 or less; risk rating: minimal; loan default: 0 -4 number of times unable to make repayments; unauthorised overdraft borrowing: 0-2 number of times has exceeded its overdraft limits; business age: less than 2 years; industry: manufacturing; region: East; lower speed of growth: over 30% a year for the past three years. Other business characteristics, export, performance pay and highest qualification are 0/1 dummies. Business age "more than 15 years" omitted because of collinearity. *,** indicate significance at 5% and 1% correspondingly. Estimated as probit with robust standard errors. ## Appendix 3: Pooled Regressions For 2010-12 Without Renewals |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value)  | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |-------------------------------------------|--------------|--------------|---------|--------------| | Quarters | | | | | | Q3 2011 | ‐0.00518 | (0.973) | 0.118 | (0.503) | | Q4 2011 | ‐0.263 | (0.130) | 0.106 | (0.560) | | Q1 2012 | ‐0.179 | (0.274) | ‐0.0248 | (0.890) | | Q2 2012 | 0.0569 | (0.730) | 0.206 | (0.246) | | Sales | | | | | | £50,000‐£99,999 | ‐0.353 | (0.069) | 0.0221 | (0.922) | | £100,000‐£499,999 | ‐0.279 | (0.136) | 0.0614 | (0.770) | | £500,000‐£999,999 | ‐0.348 | (0.129) | ‐0.0824 | (0.748) | | £1m‐£4,999,999 | ‐0.475* | (0.029) | ‐0.111 | (0.636) | | £5m or more | | | | | | ‐0.434 | (0.120) | ‐0.784* | (0.006) | | | Risk rating | | | | | | Low | 0.338 | (0.096) | 0.524* | (0.023) | | Average | 0.255 | (0.194) | 0.463* | (0.037) | | Above Average | 0.711** | (0.000) | 0.720* | (0.002) | | Undetermined | 0.437 | (0.079) | 0.646* | (0.023) | | Financial Delinquency | | | | | | Loan default | 0.718* | (0.007) | 0.411 | (0.104) | | Unauthorised overdraft borrowing | 0.389* | (0.004) | 0.146 | (0.414) | | Business Age | | | | | | 2‐6 years | 0.245 | (0.111) | 0.484* | (0.005) | | 7‐15 years | ‐0.147 | (0.258) | ‐0.0289 | (0.834) | | More than 15 years | | | | | | Other business  Characteristics | | | | | | LtdCo | ‐0.242 | (0.123) | ‐0.327 | (0.052) | | Partnership | ‐0.746** | (0.000) | ‐0.225 | (0.345) | | Limited libpart | ‐1.244* | (0.001) | ‐0.487 | (0.257) | | Highest Qualification | | | | | | | | | | | | Undergraduate | ‐0.224 | (0.213) | 0.0576 | (0.736) | | Postgraduate | 0.0817 | (0.674) | 0.0436 | (0.841) | | Gender | | | | | | Female | 0.0193 | (0.893) | ‐0.218 | (0.163) | | Industry | | | | | | Agriculture, hunting and forestry/ fish | ‐0.0426 | (0.879) | ‐0.167 | (0.576) | | Construction | ‐0.00219 | (0.992) | 0.563* | (0.013) | | Wholesale / retail | ‐0.138 | (0.576) | 0.110 | (0.687) | | Hotels and restaurants | ‐0.0277 | (0.913) | 0.390 | (0.118) | | Transport, storage and communication | 0.322 | (0.173) | 0.138 | (0.561) | | Real estate, renting and business activ | 0.289 | (0.208) | 0.222 | (0.302) | | Health and social work | 0.0273 | (0.923) | ‐0.0890 | (0.717) | | Other community, social and personal ser. | 0.0312 | (0.899) | 0.134 | (0.576) | | Region | | | | | | East Midlands | 0.124 | (0.683) | 0.364 | (0.269) | | London | 0.0665 | (0.802) | ‐0.165 | (0.577) | | North East | ‐0.121 | (0.655) | ‐0.237 | (0.422) | |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value)  | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |------------------------|--------------|--------------|---------|--------------| | Northern Ireland | ‐0.249 | (0.360) | 0.152 | (0.602) | | North West | ‐0.246 | (0.381) | ‐0.216 | (0.474) | | Scotland | ‐0.0520 | (0.844) | ‐0.350 | (0.216) | | South East | ‐0.517 | (0.070) | 0.167 | (0.567) | | South West | 0.0906 | (0.720) | ‐0.195 | (0.494) | | Wales | ‐0.200 | (0.423) | 0.161 | (0.558) | | West Midlands | ‐0.0348 | (0.887) | 0.0338 | (0.901) | | Yorkshire & Humberside | 0.125 | (0.691) | 0.380 | (0.258) | | Lower speed of growth | ‐0.0110 | (0.933) | 0.0156 | (0.911) | | Export | 0.210 | (0.186) | 0.0765 | (0.654) | | Performpay | ‐0.199 | (0.130) | 0.00948 | (0.943) | | Constant | ‐0.317 | (0.428) | ‐1.093* | (0.010) | | Observations | 732 | | 645 | | Notes: Dependent variable is the probability of rejection of an application for finance. Effects are measured relative to: quarters Q1-Q2 2011; sales: £49,999 or less; risk rating: minimal; loan default: 0-4 number of times unable to make repayments; unauthorised overdraft borrowing: 0-2 number of times has exceeded its overdraft limits; business age: less than 2 years; industry: manufacturing; region: East; lower speed of growth: over 30% a year for the past three years. Other business characteristics, export, performance pay and highest qualification are 0/1 dummies. Business age "more than 15 years" omitted because of collinearity. *,** indicate significance at 5% and 1% correspondingly. Estimated as probit with robust standard errors. |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value)  | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |----------------------------------|--------------|--------------|---------|--------------| | Quarters | | | | | | Q3 2011 | 0.998 | (0.056) | ‐1.292 | (0.466) | | Q4 2011 | 0.828 | (0.122) | ‐0.476 | (0.732) | | Q1 2012 | 0.283 | (0.603) | ‐0.660 | (0.761) | | Q2 2012 | ‐0.488 | (0.394) | 1.509 | (0.441) | | Sales | | | | | | £50,000‐£99,999 | 0.282 | (0.857) | ‐3.088 | (0.370) | | £100,000‐£499,999 | ‐1.272 | (0.247) | ‐4.093 | (0.202) | | £500,000‐£999,999 | ‐0.698 | (0.521) | ‐11.57 | (0.087) | | £1m‐£4,999,999 | ‐1.578 | (0.232) | ‐9.746 | (0.076) | | £5m or more | | | | | | ‐1.288 | (0.447) | ‐15.33 | (0.134) | | | Risk rating | | | | | | Low | ‐1.902** | (0.003) | 2.125 | (0.267) | | Average | ‐0.203 | (0.732) | 3.578 | (0.282) | | Above average | ‐0.594 | (0.328) | 4.145 | (0.240) | | Undetermined | ‐2.162* | (0.028) | ‐1.000 | (0.692) | | Financial Delinquency | | | | | | Loan default | 2.365** | (0.004) | ‐4.757 | (0.182) | | Unauthorised overdraft borrowing | 0.870 | (0.091) | 4.380 | (0.053) | | Business Age | | | | | | 2‐6 years | ‐0.178 | (0.833) | 0.421 | (0.858) | | 7‐15 years | ‐0.363 | (0.522) | 1.690 | (0.407) | | More than 15 years | | | | | | Other business  Characteristics | | | | | | LtdCo | ‐0.904 | (0.135) | ‐1.962 | (0.509) | | Partnership | ‐0.944 | (0.261) | ‐3.939 | (0.197) | |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value)  | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |-------------------------------------------|--------------|--------------|---------|--------------| | Limited libpart | ‐0.0625 | (0.946) | ‐3.270 | (0.371) | | Highest Qualification | | | | | | Undergraduate | 0.948 | (0.052) | ‐1.999 | (0.498) | | Postgraduate | 0.415 | (0.358) | ‐0.155 | (0.923) | | Gender | | | | | | Female | ‐0.521 | (0.411) | ‐0.568 | (0.609) | | Industry | | | | | | Agriculture, hunting and forestry/ fish | ‐1.607 | (0.098) | ‐0.928 | (0.619) | | Construction | 0.962 | (0.225) | 0.962 | (0.634) | | Wholesale / retail | 1.239* | (0.044) | 1.904 | (0.463) | | Hotels and restaurants | 0.626 | (0.249) | ‐1.211 | (0.692) | | Transport, storage and communication | ‐0.171 | (0.779) | 0.625 | (0.821) | | Real estate, renting and business activ | 0.438 | (0.538) | 0.696 | (0.692) | | Health and social work | ‐1.393 | (0.147) | ‐3.154 | (0.414) | | Other community, social and personal ser. | 0.0934 | (0.879) | 0.328 | (0.871) | | Region | | | | | | East Midlands | 2.481 | (0.050) | ‐0.524 | (0.871) | | London | 1.047 | (0.355) | 1.298 | (0.576) | | North East | 1.138 | (0.067) | ‐0.711 | (0.739) | | Northern Ireland | 0.212 | (0.761) | 0.552 | (0.762) | | North West | ‐0.226 | (0.822) | ‐1.078 | (0.696) | | Scotland | 0.285 | (0.647) | ‐1.738 | (0.493) | | South East | ‐0.0416 | (0.959) | ‐1.550 | (0.469) | | South West | 0.913 | (0.129) | ‐0.0461 | (0.982) | | Wales | ‐0.126 | (0.842) | 1.776 | (0.318) | | West Midlands | 1.667* | (0.041) | 2.862 | (0.177) | | Yorkshire & Humberside | ‐0.585 | (0.399) | ‐0.934 | | | (0.808) | | | | | | Lower speed of growth | ‐1.194 | (0.073) | ‐1.197 | (0.489) | | Export | 0.402 | (0.332) | 0.829 | (0.551) | | Performpay | ‐0.141 | (0.722) | ‐0.437 | (0.682) | | Collateral | 0.694 | (0.097) | ‐3.042 | (0.233) | | Log of loan | ‐0.529 | (0.238) | 2.954 | (0.314) | | Constant | 11.61* | (0.016) | ‐18.97 | (0.454) | | Observations | 201 | | 135 | | Notes: Dependent variable is the margin over base rate. Effects are measured relative to: quarters Q1-Q2 2011; sales: £49,999 or less; risk rating: minimal; loan default: 0-4 number of times unable to make repayments; unauthorised overdraft borrowing: 0-2 number of times has exceeded its overdraft limits; business age: less than 2 years; industry: manufacturing; region: East; lower speed of growth: over 30% a year for the past three years. The endogenous variable loan size is instrumented by employment size. Other business characteristics, export, performance pay, collateral and highest qualification are 0/1 dummies. Business age "more than 15 years" omitted because of collinearity. *,** indicate significance at 5% and 1% correspondingly. Estimated as TSLS with robust standard errors. Excludes SMEs with margins greater than 30pp. |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value)  | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |----------|--------------|--------------|----------|--------------| | Quarters | | | | | | Q3 2011 | 0.447* | (0.003) | ‐0.248 | (0.247) | | Q4 2011 | 0.130 | (0.432) | ‐0.342 | (0.112) | | Q1 2012 | 0.0918 | (0.554) | ‐0.00547 | (0.982) | |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value)  | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |-------------------------------------------|--------------|--------------|---------|--------------| | Q2 2012 | 0.556** | (0.000) | 0.00234 | (0.992) | | Sales | | | | | | £50,000‐£99,999 | 0.237 | (0.313) | ‐0.0221 | (0.947) | | £100,000‐£499,999 | 0.428 | (0.050) | 0.261 | (0.396) | | £500,000‐£999,999 | 0.738* | (0.003) | 0.454 | (0.210) | | £1m‐£4,999,999 | 0.918** | (0.000) | 0.512 | (0.119) | | £5m or more | 1.085** | (0.000) | 0.684* | (0.045) | | Risk rating | | | | | | Low | 0.115 | (0.492) | 0.288 | (0.182) | | Average | 0.377* | (0.022) | ‐0.0870 | (0.695) | | Above average | 0.395* | (0.028) | ‐0.0564 | (0.818) | | Undetermined | 0.286 | (0.236) | 0.156 | (0.650) | | Financial Delinquency | | | | | | Loan default | ‐0.173 | (0.566) | ‐0.414 | (0.344) | | Unauthorised overdraft borrowing | 0.317* | (0.027) | 0.419 | (0.065) | | Business Age | | | | | | 2‐6 years | ‐0.104 | (0.534) | ‐0.235 | (0.366) | | 7‐15 years | ‐0.141 | (0.235) | ‐0.101 | (0.548) | | More than 15 years | | | | | | Other business  Characteristics | | | | | | LtdCo | 0.661** | (0.000) | 0.676* | (0.003) | | Partnership | 0.380 | (0.074) | 0.132 | (0.663) | | Limited libpart | 0.336 | (0.234) | 0.739 | (0.068) | | Highest Qualification | | | | | | Undergraduate | 0.0750 | (0.608) | 0.504* | (0.014) | | Postgraduate | ‐0.173 | (0.312) | ‐0.357 | (0.181) | | Gender | | | | | | | | | | | | Female | 0.222 | (0.125) | 0.154 | (0.415) | | Industry | | | | | | Agriculture, hunting and forestry/ fish | 0.825* | (0.003) | 0.209 | (0.499) | | Construction | 0.288 | (0.165) | 0.272 | (0.337) | | Wholesale / retail | 0.00004 | (1.000) | ‐0.541 | (0.106) | | Hotels and restaurants | ‐0.0739 | (0.761) | 0.333 | (0.281) | | Transport, storage and communication | ‐0.126 | (0.586) | ‐0.0561 | (0.855) | | Real estate, renting and business activ | 0.260 | (0.215) | 0.129 | (0.614) | | Health and social work | 0.0344 | (0.901) | ‐0.213 | (0.500) | | Other community, social and personal ser. | ‐0.110 | (0.623) | 0.0936 | (0.763) | | Region | | | | | | | | | | | | East Midlands | ‐0.501 | (0.076) | ‐0.130 | (0.770) | | London | ‐0.764* | (0.002) | ‐0.647* | (0.045) | | North East | ‐0.361 | (0.140) | ‐0.0785 | (0.809) | | Northern Ireland | ‐0.523* | (0.031) | ‐0.407 | (0.243) | | North West | ‐0.496 | (0.056) | 0.0975 | (0.776) | | Scotland | ‐0.498* | (0.045) | ‐0.273 | (0.351) | | South East | ‐1.002** | (0.000) | ‐0.372 | (0.344) | | South West | ‐0.594* | (0.012) | ‐0.368 | (0.270) | | Wales | ‐0.600* | (0.011) | ‐0.112 | (0.716) | | West Midlands | ‐0.480* | (0.029) | ‐0.0831 | (0.789) | | Yorkshire & Humberside | ‐0.478 | (0.073) | ‐0.0125 | (0.975) | |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value)  | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |-----------------------|--------------|--------------|---------|--------------| | Lower speed of growth | 0.298* | (0.025) | 0.337 | (0.059) | | Export | 0.179 | (0.245) | ‐0.258 | (0.225) | | Performpay | ‐0.0279 | (0.816) | 0.148 | (0.389) | | Constant | ‐1.801** | (0.000) | ‐1.019* | (0.043) | | Observations | 784 | | 391 | | Notes: Dependent variable is probability that firm will be required to provide collateral to obtain finance. Effects are measured relative to: quarters Q1-Q2 2011; sales: £49,999 or less; risk rating: minimal; loan default: 0-4 number of times unable to make repayments; unauthorised overdraft borrowing: 0-2 number of times has exceeded its overdraft limits; business age: less than 2 years; industry: manufacturing; region: East; lower speed of growth: over 30% a year for the past three years. Other business characteristics, export, performance pay and highest qualification are 0/1 dummies. Business age "more than 15 years" omitted because of collinearity. *,** indicate significance at 5% and 1% correspondingly. Estimated as probit with robust standard errors. ## Table A.4.4 Discouragement For 2010-12 Without Renewals - Informal Enquiries |   | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |----------------------------------|-------------|-------------|----------|--------------| | Quarters | | | | | | Q3 2011 | | | ‐0.211 | (0.105) | | Q4 2011 | ‐0.0358 | (0.767) | ‐0.549** | (0.000) | | Q1 2012 | 0.0594 | (0.619) | ‐0.236 | (0.063) | | Q2 2012 | | | ‐0.347* | (0.005) | | Sales | | | | | | £50,000‐£99,999 | 0.0740 | (0.669) | ‐0.297* | (0.040) | | £100,000‐£499,999 | 0.204 | (0.209) | 0.0081 | (0.952) | | £500,000‐£999,999 | 0.266 | (0.222) | ‐0.168 | (0.335) | | £1m‐£4,999,999 | 0.140 | (0.472) | ‐0.0638 | (0.689) | | £5m or more | 0.164 | (0.487) | ‐0.0488 | (0.822) | | Risk rating | | | | | | | | | | | | Low | 0.353 | (0.089) | 0.459* | (0.012) | | Average | 0.220 | (0.270) | 0.390* | (0.025) | | Above average | 0.442* | (0.028) | 0.588* | (0.001) | | Undetermined | 0.572* | (0.011) | 0.500* | (0.014) | | Financial Delinquency | | | | | | Loan default | 0.685* | (0.019) | 0.280 | (0.125) | | Unauthorized overdraft borrowing | 0.272 | (0.078) | 0.345* | (0.002) | | Business Age | | | | | | 2‐6 years | 0.194 | (0.178) | 0.121 | (0.317) | | 7‐15 years | 0.0480 | (0.710) | 0.0309 | (0.760) | | More than 15 years | | | | | | | | | | | | Other business  Characteristics | | | | | | LtdCo | 0.0675 | (0.632) | 0.0253 | (0.829) | | Partnership | 0.0963 | (0.671) | ‐0.353 | (0.064) | | Limited libpart | 0.0535 | (0.887) | ‐0.393 | (0.157) | | Highest Qualification | | | | | | | | | | | | Undergraduate | ‐0.242 | (0.099) | 0.0182 | (0.883) | | Postgraduate | ‐0.228 | (0.197) | 0.0705 | (0.608) | | Gender | | | | | | Female | ‐0.0197 | (0.883) | ‐0.279* | (0.021) | |   | Overdraft | (p‐value) | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |-------------------------------------------|-------------|-------------|---------|--------------| | Industry | | | | | | Agriculture, hunting and forestry/ fish | ‐0.0592 | (0.826) | 0.124 | (0.578) | | Construction | ‐0.0387 | (0.860) | 0.00131 | (0.994) | | Wholesale / retail | 0.179 | (0.444) | 0.00845 | (0.964) | | Hotels and restaurants | 0.315 | (0.205) | 0.00941 | (0.960) | | Transport, storage and communication | 0.301 | (0.215) | 0.0305 | (0.877) | | Real estate, renting and business activ | 0.181 | (0.417) | 0.115 | (0.500) | | Health and social work | ‐0.135 | (0.633) | ‐0.311 | (0.127) | | Other community, social and personal ser. | | | | | | ‐0.0262 | (0.918) | 0.0188 | (0.924) | | | Region | | | | | | East Midlands | ‐0.569* | (0.041) | 0.157 | (0.504) | | London | ‐0.511* | (0.029) | 0.167 | (0.415) | | North East | ‐0.541* | (0.024) | ‐0.0916 | (0.667) | | Northern Ireland | ‐0.399 | (0.065) | ‐0.0351 | (0.867) | | North West | ‐0.351 | (0.148) | 0.125 | (0.580) | | Scotland | ‐0.192 | (0.430) | 0.196 | (0.375) | | South East | ‐0.357 | (0.176) | 0.0533 | (0.821) | | South West | | | | | | 0.0532 | (0.814) | 0.238 | (0.274) | | | Wales | ‐0.414* | (0.049) | 0.0974 | (0.609) | | West Midlands | ‐0.334 | (0.114) | 0.256 | (0.195) | | Yorkshire & Humberside | 0.162 | (0.525) | 0.587* | (0.009) | | Lower speed of growth | 0.0156 | (0.905) | 0.186 | (0.072) | | Export | 0.264 | (0.096) | ‐0.0724 | (0.565) | | Performance pay | 0.0782 | (0.526) | 0.187 | (0.058) | | Constant | ‐0.785* | (0.032) | ‐0.760* | (0.017) | | Observations | 738 | | 1050 | | Notes: Dependent variable is probability of the firm being discouraged from applying for finance because it had been put off directly (via informal enquiries with the bank) or indirectly (expectation of such a rejection). Effects are measured relative to: quarters Q1-Q2 2011 for loans and Q2 2012 for overdrafts; sales: £49,999 or less; risk rating: minimal; loan default: 0-4 number of times unable to make repayments; unauthorised overdraft borrowing: 0-2 number of times has exceeded its overdraft limits; business age: less than 2 years; industry: manufacturing; region: East; lower speed of growth: over 30% a year for the past three years. Other business characteristics, export performance pay and highest qualification are 0/1 dummies. Business age "more than 15 years" omitted because of collinearity. *,** indicate significance at 5% and 1% correspondingly. Estimated as probit with robust standard errors. |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value)  | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |-------------------|--------------|--------------|----------|--------------| | Quarters | | | | | | Q3 2011 | | | ‐0.350* | (0.014) | | Q4 2011 | ‐0.0815 | (0.569) | ‐0.356* | (0.018) | | Q1 2012 | 0.158 | (0.236) | ‐0.392* | (0.004) | | Q2 2012 | | | ‐0.594** | (0.000) | | Sales | | | | | | £50,000‐£99,999 | ‐0.337 | (0.077) | ‐0.300 | (0.068) | | £100,000‐£499,999 | ‐0.327 | (0.081) | ‐0.183 | (0.228) | | £500,000‐£999,999 | ‐0.380 | (0.122) | ‐0.0514 | (0.788) | | £1m‐£4,999,999 | ‐0.260 | (0.232) | ‐0.121 | (0.502) | |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value)  | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |-------------------------------------------|--------------|--------------|---------|--------------| | £5m or more | ‐0.524* | (0.048) | ‐0.104 | (0.672) | | Risk rating | | | | | | Low | 0.136 | (0.579) | 0.0331 | (0.870) | | Average | 0.0075 | (0.974) | 0.229 | (0.219) | | Above average | 0.458 | (0.053) | 0.194 | (0.307) | | Undetermined | 0.506* | (0.048) | 0.210 | (0.344) | | Financial Delinquency | | | | | | Loan default | 0.164 | (0.597) | 0.0764 | (0.698) | | Unauthorized overdraft borrowing | ‐0.0504 | (0.776) | ‐0.0207 | (0.870) | | Business Age | | | | | | 2‐6 years | ‐0.157 | (0.326) | ‐0.111 | (0.404) | | 7‐15 years | ‐0.112 | (0.429) | ‐0.222* | (0.049) | | More than 15 years | | | | | | | | | | | | Other business  Characteristics | | | | | | LtdCo | 0.0589 | (0.721) | ‐0.0650 | (0.625) | | Partnership | 0.473 | (0.056) | ‐0.223 | (0.309) | | Limited libpart | ‐0.0982 | (0.798) | 0.147 | (0.612) | | Highest Qualification | | | | | | Undergraduate | 0.416* | (0.007) | 0.00807 | (0.953) | | Postgraduate | 0.189 | (0.331) | 0.0943 | (0.534) | | Gender | | | | | | Female | ‐0.255 | (0.120) | ‐0.344* | (0.016) | | Industry | | | | | | | | | | | | Agriculture, hunting and forestry/ fish | ‐0.0861 | (0.775) | ‐0.0957 | (0.682) | | Construction | 0.0555 | (0.818) | ‐0.263 | (0.142) | | Wholesale / retail | 0.0654 | (0.810) | ‐0.333 | (0.097) | | Hotels and restaurants | ‐0.381 | (0.204) | ‐0.359 | | | (0.084) | | | | | | Transport, storage and communication | | | | | | ‐0.140 | (0.613) | ‐0.162 | (0.425) | | | Real estate, renting and business activ | 0.0684 | (0.783) | ‐0.275 | (0.129) | | Health and social work | 0.0440 | (0.890) | ‐0.247 | (0.277) | | Other community, social and personal ser. | 0.320 | (0.239) | ‐0.367 | (0.101) | | Region | | | | | | East Midlands | ‐0.360 | (0.244) | ‐0.0008 | (0.998) | | London | ‐0.635* | (0.023) | 0.178 | (0.438) | | North East | ‐0.112 | (0.678) | 0.226 | (0.338) | | Northern Ireland | ‐0.531* | (0.037) | 0.135 | (0.561) | | North West | ‐0.142 | (0.590) | 0.180 | (0.472) | | Scotland | 0.0466 | (0.862) | 0.289 | (0.229) | | South East | ‐0.704* | (0.040) | 0.229 | (0.384) | | South West | | | | | | ‐0.277 | (0.288) | 0.271 | (0.260) | | | Wales | ‐0.0622 | (0.784) | 0.321 | (0.127) | | West Midlands | ‐0.361 | (0.127) | 0.238 | (0.273) | | Yorkshire & Humberside | 0.00484 | (0.986) | ‐0.346 | (0.194) | | Lower speed of growth | 0.0688 | (0.642) | 0.232 | (0.050) | | Export | 0.167 | (0.351) | ‐0.0692 | (0.618) | | Performance pay | 0.449** | (0.001) | 0.141 | (0.198) | | Constant | ‐0.933* | (0.025) | ‐0.512 | (0.150) | |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value)  | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |--------------|--------------|--------------|---------|--------------| | Observations | 738  | | 1050  | | Notes: Dependent variable is probability of the firm being discouraged from applying for finance because the owner did not want to lose control of business, prefer to seek alternative sources. Effects are measured relative to: quarters Q1-Q2 2011 for loans and Q2 2012 for overdrafts; sales: £49,999 or less; risk rating: minimal; loan default: 0-4 number of times unable to make repayments; unauthorised overdraft borrowing: 0- 2 number of times has exceeded its overdraft limits; business age: less than 2 years; industry: manufacturing; region: East; lower speed of growth: over 30% a year for the past three years. Other business characteristics, export, performance pay and highest qualification are 0/1 dummies. Business age "more than 15 years" omitted because of collinearity*,** indicate significance at 5% and 1% correspondingly. Estimated as probit with robust standard errors. ## Table A.4.6 Discouragement For 2010-12 Without Renewals - Procedure Of Borrowing |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value)  | Loan  | (p‐value) | |-----------------------------------------|--------------|--------------|----------|-------------| | Quarters | | | | | | Q3 2011 | | | ‐0.300* | (0.020) | | Q4 2011 | 0.0266 | (0.824) | ‐0.292* | (0.032) | | Q1 2012 | 0.145 | (0.219) | ‐0.374* | (0.003) | | Q2 2012 | | | ‐0.491** | (0.000) | | Sales | | | | | | £50,000‐£99,999 | 0.104 | (0.539) | ‐0.176 | (0.214) | | £100,000‐£499,999 | ‐0.225 | (0.165) | 0.107 | (0.426) | | £500,000‐£999,999 | ‐0.293 | (0.169) | ‐0.188 | (0.267) | | £1m‐£4,999,999 | ‐0.0304 | (0.870) | ‐0.192 | (0.221) | | £5m or more | ‐0.159 | (0.485) | ‐0.250 | (0.236) | | Risk rating | | | | | | | | | | | | Low | 0.237 | (0.231) | ‐0.0300 | (0.860) | | Average | 0.454* | (0.017) | 0.0626 | (0.694) | | Above average | 0.443* | (0.020) | 0.172 | (0.293) | | Undetermined | 0.114 | (0.601) | 0.0904 | (0.634) | | Financial Delinquency | | | | | | Loan default | ‐0.146 | (0.612) | 0.133 | (0.451) | | Unauthorized overdraft borrowing | 0.141 | (0.359) | ‐0.0492 | (0.650) | | Business Age | | | | | | 2‐6 years | 0.0459 | (0.744) | ‐0.169 | (0.154) | | 7‐15 years | 0.144 | (0.250) | ‐0.0943 | (0.342) | | More than 15 years | | | | | | | | | | | | Other business  Characteristics | | | | | | LtdCo | 0.0848 | (0.542) | ‐0.123 | (0.289) | | Partnership | 0.571* | (0.013) | 0.0954 | (0.611) | | Limited libpart | 0.304 | (0.374) | ‐0.279 | (0.298) | | Highest Qualification | | | | | | | | | | | | Undergraduate | 0.187 | (0.182) | 0.0235 | (0.848) | | Postgraduate | 0.223 | (0.189) | 0.231 | (0.085) | | Gender | | | | | | Female | 0.149 | (0.256) | ‐0.0778 | (0.507) | | Industry | | | | | | Agriculture, hunting and forestry/ fish | | | | | | 0.335 | (0.204) | 0.117 | (0.588) | | | Construction | 0.313 | (0.156) | 0.0949 | (0.565) | |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value)  | Loan  | (p‐value) | |-------------------------------------------|--------------|--------------|---------|-------------| | Wholesale / retail | 0.263 | (0.256) | 0.126 | (0.485) | | Hotels and restaurants | ‐0.0321 | (0.897) | 0.108 | (0.562) | | Transport, storage and communication | 0.0642 | (0.798) | ‐0.100 | (0.599) | | Real estate, renting and business activ | 0.132 | (0.553) | 0.0029 | (0.986) | | Health and social work | 0.0654 | (0.817) | 0.134 | (0.504) | | Other community, social and personal ser. | 0.214 | (0.393) | ‐0.244 | (0.218) | | Region | | | | | | | | | | | | East Midlands | ‐0.409 | (0.131) | ‐0.322 | (0.170) | | London | ‐0.250 | (0.274) | 0.101 | (0.616) | | North East | ‐0.346 | (0.142) | ‐0.138 | (0.505) | | Northern Ireland | ‐0.417 | (0.060) | 0.117 | (0.567) | | North West | ‐0.153 | (0.522) | 0.317 | (0.149) | | Scotland | ‐0.161 | (0.519) | 0.234 | (0.276) | | South East | ‐0.453 | (0.090) | ‐0.0467 | (0.840) | | South West | ‐0.323 | (0.160) | 0.0522 | (0.802) | | Wales | 0.0164 | (0.939) | 0.206 | (0.262) | | West Midlands | | | | | | ‐0.0748 | (0.732) | ‐0.162 | (0.403) | | | Yorkshire & Humberside | ‐0.194 | (0.451) | ‐0.112 | (0.606) | | Lower speed of growth | 0.254* | (0.046) | 0.179 | (0.077) | | Export | ‐0.258 | (0.113) | ‐0.0319 | (0.795) | | Performance pay | 0.105 | (0.375) | 0.201* | (0.037) | | Constant | ‐0.871* | (0.015) | 0.0466 | (0.878) | | Observations | 738 | | 1050 | | Notes: Dependent variable is probability of the firm being discouraged from applying for finance because the owner thought it would be too expensive, too much hassle, loan facilities come with too many terms and conditions, I thought we would be asked to provide too much security, did not want to go through application process, find bank forms and literature hard to understand. Effects are measured relative to: quarters Q1-Q2 2011 for loans and Q2 2012 for overdrafts; sales: £49,999 or less; risk rating: minimal; loan default: 0-4 number of times unable to make repayments; unauthorised overdraft borrowing: 0-2 number of times has exceeded its overdraft limits; business age: less than 2 years; industry: manufacturing; region: East; lower speed of growth: over 30% a year for the past three years. Other business characteristics, export, performance pay and highest qualification are 0/1 dummies. Business age "more than 15 years" omitted because of collinearity. *,** indicate significance at 5% and 1% correspondingly. Estimated as probit with robust standard errors. |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value)  | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |-------------------|--------------|--------------|---------|--------------| | Quarters | | | | | | Q3 2011 | | | ‐0.186 | (0.205) | | Q4 2011 | ‐0.391* | (0.013) | ‐0.276 | (0.074) | | Q1 2012 | 0.153 | (0.267) | 0.00282 | (0.984) | | Q2 2012 | | | 0.0693 | (0.610) | | Sales | | | | | | £50,000‐£99,999 | 0.0472 | (0.813) | 0.215 | (0.156) | | £100,000‐£499,999 | ‐0.282 | (0.165) | 0.107 | (0.482) | | £500,000‐£999,999 | ‐0.344 | (0.200) | ‐0.110 | (0.568) | | £1m‐£4,999,999 | ‐0.136 | (0.572) | ‐0.0913 | (0.608) | | £5m or more | ‐0.361 | (0.208) | ‐0.0318 | (0.894) | | Risk rating | | | | | | | | | | | |   | Overdraft  | (p‐value)  | Loan  | (p‐value)  | |-------------------------------------------|--------------|--------------|---------|--------------| | Low | ‐0.0600 | (0.797) | 0.0414 | (0.828) | | Average | ‐0.345 | (0.137) | 0.0706 | (0.691) | | Above average | ‐0.290 | (0.196) | 0.118 | (0.518) | | Undetermined | ‐0.370 | (0.153) | ‐0.126 | (0.555) | | Financial Delinquency | | | | | | Loan default | ‐0.340 | (0.374) | ‐0.194 | (0.336) | | Unauthorized overdraft borrowing | ‐0.0708 | (0.727) | ‐0.143 | (0.239) | | Business Age | | | | | | 2‐6 years | 0.0904 | (0.572) | ‐0.0816 | (0.534) | | 7‐15 years | ‐0.119 | (0.441) | ‐0.0197 | (0.859) | | More than 15 years | | | | | | | | | | | | Other business  Characteristics | | | | | | LtdCo | ‐0.0284 | (0.870) | ‐0.0492 | (0.699) | | Partnership | 0.392 | (0.145) | 0.0219 | (0.916) | | Limited libpart | ‐0.0335 | (0.939) | 0.0754 | (0.791) | | Highest Qualification | | | | | | Undergraduate | 0.0922 | (0.593) | 0.0359 | (0.789) | | Postgraduate | 0.175 | (0.408) | ‐0.0472 | (0.748) | | Gender | | | | | | Female | 0.0258 | (0.881) | 0.0267 | (0.835) | | Industry | | | | | | Agriculture, hunting and forestry/ fish | | | | | | 0.405 | (0.226) | ‐0.249 | (0.301) | | | Construction | 0.441 | (0.115) | ‐0.203 | (0.264) | | Wholesale / retail | 0.212 | (0.495) | ‐0.242 | (0.227) | | Hotels and restaurants | 0.493 | (0.110) | ‐0.393 | (0.057) | | Transport, storage and communication | 0.0645 | (0.854) | 0.0552 | (0.789) | | Real estate, renting and business activ | ‐0.0393 | (0.893) | ‐0.219 | | | (0.231) | | | | | | Health and social work | | | | | | ‐0.416 | (0.333) | ‐0.158 | (0.470) | | | Other community, social and personal ser. | 0.00412 | (0.990) | ‐0.240 | (0.268) | | Region | | | | | | East Midlands | ‐0.496 | (0.173) | ‐0.368 | (0.169) | | London | ‐0.480 | (0.096) | ‐0.223 | (0.308) | | North East | ‐0.340 | (0.267) | ‐0.0970 | (0.663) | | Northern Ireland | 0.100 | (0.696) | ‐0.0842 | (0.700) | | North West | ‐0.0533 | (0.855) | ‐0.177 | (0.472) | | Scotland | ‐0.410 | (0.173) | ‐0.142 | (0.546) | | South East | ‐0.0925 | (0.788) | ‐0.389 | (0.135) | | South West | | | | | | ‐0.216 | (0.446) | ‐0.0399 | (0.862) | | | Wales | ‐0.178 | (0.515) | ‐0.0309 | (0.878) | | West Midlands | ‐0.407 | (0.133) | ‐0.107 | (0.607) | | Yorkshire & Humberside | 0.213 | (0.477) | 0.0848 | (0.716) | | Lower speed of growth | 0.167 | (0.293) | 0.180 | (0.108) | | Export | ‐0.213 | (0.299) | ‐0.0262 | (0.850) | | Performance pay | 0.381* | (0.010) | 0.144 | (0.181) | | Constant | ‐0.944* | (0.038) | ‐0.619 | (0.059) | | Observations | 738 | | 1050 | | Notes: Dependent variable is probability of the firm being discouraged from applying for finance because the owner thought this is not the right time to apply for borrowing. Effects are measured relative to: quarters Q1- Q2 2011 for loans and Q2 2012 for overdrafts; sales: £49,999 or less; risk rating: minimal; loan default: 0 -4 number of times unable to make repayments; unauthorised overdraft borrowing: 0-2 number of times has exceeded its overdraft limits; business age: less than 2 years; industry: manufacturing; region: East; lower speed of growth: over 30% a year for the past three years. Other business characteristics, export, performance pay and highest qualification are 0/1 dummies. Business age "more than 15 years" omitted because of collinearity. *,** indicate significance at 5% and 1% correspondingly. Estimated as probit with robust standard errors. ## © Crown Copyright 2013 You may re-use this information (not including logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. Visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence, write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk. This publication available from www.gov.uk/bis Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to: Department for Business, Innovation and Skills 1 Victoria Street London SW1H 0ET Tel: 020 7215 5000 If you require this publication in an alternative format, email enquiries@bis.gsi.gov.uk, or call 020 7215 5000. BIS/13/857

en

0369-pdf

Disclosure ref: 29 Sent: 30th May 2019 ## Freedom Of Information Act 2000 Request The offences that can be prosecuted in relation to the carrying of an offensive weapons; and statistics regarding youths ## Request 1. Please disclose the offences which can be prosecuted in relation to the carrying of offensive weapons; 2. Please disclose the number of youths prosecuted in 2016, 2017 and 2018 where the principle offence was one of those identified in the first part of this request; 3. Please provide a breakdown showing the CPS area which prosecuted the offences and a breakdown showing the type of offence; 4. Please disclose the ages of those prosecuted. Response The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) publishes legal guidance relating to violent crime on its website titled 'Offensive Weapons, Knives, Bladed and Pointed Articles' wherein reference is made to the circumstances described in Question one of your request. As the information is readily available on our website we are not obliged to respond to Question one under section 22 of the FOI Act (Information available by other means). Please see the attached section 17 notice which explains this exemption in detail. For ease of reference, please click on the link below which will take you to this guidance: https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/offensive-weapons-knives-bladed-and-pointed-articles The CPS does not hold records relating to 'offensive weapons' as a principle offence category. A central record of the number of youths (defendants aged under 17), prosecuted with offences involving 'offensive weapons' is therefore not held. Crown Prosecution Service, Information Management Unit, Floor 8, 102 Petty France, London SW1H 9AJ United Kingdom www.cps.gov.uk To firstly ascertain the number of youths prosecuted during the years specified with offences involving 'offensive weapons' and to further ascertain the CPS Area involved and age of the youth, a manual search of all cases in which a youth was prosecuted would be required. As an indication of the work this would involve prosecutions were completed against a total of 30,239 youth defendants in 2018 alone. 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 relating to in excess of 30,239 defendants would exceed the appropriate limit. Consequently, we are not obliged to comply with parts two to four of your request. Under Section 16 of the FOI Act we have an obligation to advise what, if any information may assist you with your request. Data held by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) may be able to assist you as data is held relating to the relevant Police Force and can also be filtered in relation to a defendant's age. The MoJ's Criminal Justice Statistics can be accessed via the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/criminal-justice-system-statistics-quarterly-december-2017 Information Management Unit 020 3357 0899 IMU@cps.gov.uk

en

2456-pdf

## Embedding Digital Continuity In Your It Environment This guidance relates to: Stage 1: Plan for action Stage 2: Define your digital continuity requirements Stage 3: Assess and address risks to digital continuity Stage 4: Maintain digital continuity This guidance should be read before you start to manage digital continuity. The full suite of guidance is available on The National Archives' website. ## © Crown Copyright 2017 You may re-use this information (excluding logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-governmentlicence or email psi@nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk. Where we have identified any third-party copyright information, you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This publication is available for download at nationalarchives.gov.uk. Contents 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Who is this guidance for? .......................................................................................................... 4 1.2 What is the purpose of this guidance? ........................................................................................ 4 2 Building digital continuity requirements into the technical lifecycle ..................................................... 5 2.1 Procurement supplier management ............................................................................................ 5 2.2 Systems development and testing .............................................................................................. 5 2.3 Embed into your technical architecture ...................................................................................... 5 2.4 File format migration ................................................................................................................ 6 3 Understanding IT services ................................................................................................................ 6 3.1 Understanding your business requirements ................................................................................. 7 3.2 Developing an IT Service Catalogue ............................................................................................ 7 3.3 Configuration management ....................................................................................................... 7 4 Managing IT services ........................................................................................................................ 8 4.1 Your team ............................................................................................................................... 8 4.2 Multi-disciplinary working ......................................................................................................... 8 4.3 Project management................................................................................................................. 8 4.4 Change management ................................................................................................................ 9 4.5 Service management ................................................................................................................ 9 5 Next steps .................................................................................................................................... 10 5.1 Developing a single enterprise architecture ............................................................................... 10 ## 1 Introduction Digital continuity is the ability to use your information in the way you need, for as long as you need. If you do not actively work to ensure digital continuity, your information can easily become unusable. Digital continuity can be put at risk by changes in your organisation, management processes or technology. You need to manage your information carefully over time and through changes to maintain the usability you need. Managing digital continuity protects the information you need to do business. This enables you to operate accountably, legally, effectively and efficiently. It helps you to protect your reputation, make informed decisions, avoid and reduce costs, and deliver better public services. If you lose digital information because you haven't managed your digital continuity properly, the consequences can be as serious as those of any other information loss. ## 1.1 Who Is This Guidance For? This guidance is aimed at Heads of Information Technology (IT). It will help you to ensure all the component parts that make up your IT environment work together to maintain the digital continuity of your information. Corresponding guidance in *Incorporating Digital Continuity into your IT Strategy* provides a more high-level guide on why and how to embed digital continuity within an organisation's overall IT strategy. ## 1.2 What Is The Purpose Of This Guidance? This guidance will support you to embed digital continuity thinking into your organisation's IT operational management. It details the overarching principles that are required to ensure that you are embedding digital continuity in the design and management of your IT operations. By embedding digital continuity into your IT operational management, you can ensure you are well placed to reduce your chances of encountering digital continuity issues in the future, and ensure you are able to respond to future challenges in the way you need to use your information. This guidance forms part of a suite of guidance that The National Archives has delivered as part of a digital continuity service for government, in consultation with central government departments. You should already understand the basic principles of digital continuity and recognise the need to manage this within your organisation. Your organisation may also have identified its business requirements and the services it needs to provide, and mapped and recorded the information assets and the technology supporting these services. This guidance will support you in maintaining your digital continuity, over time and through change, which is the final stage of our four-stage process of managing digital continuity. ## 2 Building Digital Continuity Requirements Into The Technical Lifecycle Information has a lifecycle that is different to that of the technology in which it is created or stored. The use that business needs from its information will often outlive the technology that is currently supporting it. An IT strategy has to cater for these overlapping lifecycles. If you do not consider this and plan the development of your architecture around retaining the usability of your information, your technology may stop you working with it in the way that you need to. As Head of IT, it is your responsibility to ensure that your IT is supporting your business services. You do this by the active management of an IT Service Catalogue (see Section 3.2) ## 2.1 Procurement Supplier Management Information assets age rapidly; data volumes can double every few years and technology changes at a faster rate than ever before. Establishing an *Information Asset Register* (IAR) in an ICT Services Contract enables all parties to maintain a shared understanding of the information and its required business use so that the impact of change may be assessed and mitigations agreed where necessary. See *Digital Continuity in ICT Services Procurement and Contract Management* for more detail. ## 2.2 Systems Development And Testing It is important to plan for digital continuity when designing new systems and enhancing existing systems. You must develop front-end applications and back-end databases in accordance with best practice guidelines. The availability and usability of business information (e.g. through applications, databases, websites) is affected by the quality of development and testing undertaken. It is important that you include provision for digital continuity requirements into all development and testing (usability, regression and security) procedures and processes. For more information about managing your technical infrastructure as well as your IT strategy, see Incorporating Digital Continuity into your IT Strategy. ## 2.3 Embed Into Your Technical Architecture Technology needs to support the business and not drive the business. Developing an enterprise architecture entwines your information architecture with your technical architecture. Mapping your IT services and IT systems to the business services and information they support will enable effective management of your technology lifecycle and technical architecture. This is best tracked through the creation and management of a Configuration Management Database, which captures the relationships and dependencies over time between IT components and the people, processes and business services they support. ## 2.4 File Format Migration The information your organisation needs will be held in a variety of formats. Each individual piece of information may itself be held in several formats so that it can meet a number of usage requirements. When converting file formats you will either: i. Need to replace one format with another. For example, this may be due to changes to the software tools that are used in your organisation, a move away from legacy formats that are at risk of obsolescence, or changes to the standard format your organisation uses to publish online. ii. Need to create an additional version in a different file format to meet your usability requirements. For example, a brochure was created in a desktop publishing format, but it must be converted into an additional format which can be published online. There are a number of different drivers for each type of conversion. You should review your file formats periodically to assess whether any of them hold risks to your information. You can also pro-actively convert file formats to reduce the risk of digital continuity loss. Maintaining the digital continuity of your information means ensuring it is complete, available and usable, over time and through change. It means making sure that your business has the information it needs, and that the technology enables the information to be used in the way business needs it to be. To maintain your digital continuity you may need to convert file formats, as file formats naturally age and can become more risky, but also because your business may change how it needs to use its information, or because your technology environment changes. If you do not pro-actively convert your formats, you may find that you are no longer able to access or use your information in the way that you need, or that to do so you are locked in to using particular pieces of software. However, when replacing formats you may be planning to remove support for the older file formats, and potentially deleting the original files altogether, which holds its own risks - so you must make sure your process and testing are comprehensive. The National Archives' file profiling tool DROID can help you to understand what information you have, where it is, how old it is and technical information about the format. ## 3 Understanding It Services 3.1 Understanding Your Business Requirements You need to know what information is required by each business service and where that information is stored. You also need to understand the business value of that information. Use your IAR to understand what information you hold and how the technology needs to support this. See *Identifying Information Assets and Business Requirements* for guidance on identifying and recording the business requirements of the information you have. ## 3.2 Developing An It Service Catalogue IT services are made up of information assets, people, processes, procedures, documentation, and technical components. These should be managed and monitored through the provision of an IT Service Catalogue, Service Level Agreements and using your IAR. As you develop your catalogue you should endeavour to standardise and simplify your environment wherever possible, considering open standards and decreasing the reliance on bespoke or legacy systems. For more information on this please see Incorporating Digital Continuity into Your IT Strategy. ## 3.3 Configuration Management Configuration management is the process responsible for maintaining information about individual components required to deliver an IT service, including their relationships with one another. A configuration management system is a set of tools and databases that are used to manage your IT services' configuration data. Developing a configuration management process with a configuration management system to support it is an important step towards achieving digital continuity, as you will be able to accurately understand and track the relationships, dependencies, costs, risks and impacts to all business information and the technical and non-technical components that deliver this information. ## 4 Managing It Services 4.1 Your Team Your greatest assets, but also your biggest risks, in your technical environment are the people that design and maintain your IT systems and services. The risks from staff changing jobs or leaving your organisation are ever-present. The ability to maintain an understanding and control over your IT systems through this constant change is critical. You need to consider the importance of:  creating and maintaining support and configuration documentation (see section 3.3)  technical training  system handover training  maintaining awareness of this through training sessions and good communication ## 4.2 Multi-Disciplinary Working Communication and awareness is essential in achieving digital continuity. In practical terms, IT and IM teams must break out of their traditional silos and learn to work together. Technology must support business needs and deliver and protect business information. Shared management controls such as the IAR and the IT Service Catalogue are critical in achieving this wider awareness and joint control. Change boards (e.g. IT Change Advisory Board) are other crucial management controls where IT and IM managers need to share digital continuity risks and issues. As Head of IT, you must ensure that all IT boards (e.g. Change Advisory Board) have an information management specialist on them, and you should seek to ensure that all information management boards have an IT representative on them. ## 4.3 Project Management Structured business change (e.g. resulting from Machinery of Government changes, or annual business planning reviews) needs to be planned and implemented through programme and project management. Project managers can build digital continuity requirements into business change initiatives, including them within:  project plans  stage reviews  work packages  risk logs  escalation procedures You will also need to establish a clear digital continuity responsibility within a project team's roles (typically would expect to be within the IT and IM role on the project team). ## 4.4 Change Management Change management is the process responsible for controlling the lifecycle of all changes. The primary objective of change management is to enable you to make beneficial changes, with minimum disruption to the delivery of business services. Planning for change means managing your information and supporting technology in a way that leaves you better positioned to respond to inevitable changes with agility and flexibility, and in a way that minimises the risks that come with change. This means ensuring that digital continuity is reflected in your business plans and strategies as well as policies and risk and change management processes. See *Digital Continuity for Change Managers*. ## 4.5 Service Management IT Service Management is a process developed in order to align the delivery of IT services with the needs of the business. This is reflected in Service Levels Agreements (SLA) with supporting Operational Level Agreements (OLA). You need to make sure that digital continuity is built in to the OLA that underpin agreed service levels with customers. You also need to make sure all SLA and OLA are included in a configuration management system. ## 5 Next Steps 5.1 Developing A Single Enterprise Architecture Having a single enterprise architecture will enable you to support decision making during business change. An enterprise architecture brings together business models (e.g. process models and technical models (e.g. systems architectures or data models), which makes it easier to trace the impact of organisational change on the systems, and also the business impact of changes to the systems. Developing a single enterprise architecture also helps define the critical architectural elements and the dependencies between them. Applications based on these models can then query the underlying architectural information, providing a simple and strong mechanism for tracing strategies to organisational and technological impacts. Used in conjunction with an IT Service Catalogue and a configuration management system, it will also provide support for:  re-use and innovation  identifying efficiencies in workloads and roles  the sharing and transparency agenda  simplification of processes and procedures  standardisation of technology (de-cluttering and reducing complexity)

en

0269-pdf

## The Office Of Rail And Road 143Rd Board Meeting 09:00-12:45 TUESDAY 30 JANUARY 2018 ONE KEMBLE STREET, LONDON WC2B 4AN Non-executive members: Stephen Glaister (Chair), Tracey Barlow, Anne Heal, Bob Holland, Michael Luger, Justin McCracken, Graham Mather Executive members: Joanna Whittington (Chief Executive), John Larkinson (Director Railway Markets and Economics), Ian Prosser (Director Railway Safety), Graham Richards (Director Railway Planning and Performance). In attendance: Dan Brown (Director Strategy and Policy), Russell Grossman (Director Communications), Freya Guinness (Director Corporate Operations and Organisational Development), Juliet Lazarus (Director Legal Services and Competition), Tess Sanford (Board Secretary) Other ORR staff in attendance are shown in the text. Item 1 WELCOME AND APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE 1. The chair welcomed everyone to the meeting. David Franks had sent apologies. Item 2 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST 2. As the board were already aware, David Franks had recused himself from all board business as a result of a job offer overseas which, if confirmed, meant his conflicts of interest would be unmanageable. Item 3 APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MINUTES AND MATTERS ARISING 3. The minutes of the meetings in November and December were agreed and signed by the chair. 4. The update on matters arising was noted. ## Item 4: Headlines And Regular Reports 5. Ian Prosser updated the Board on: ongoing investigations into the Sandilands tram incident and the successful industry summit which had begun to address RAIB's recommendations by agreeing priorities and approach. Some immediate introduction of in-cab technology to improve driver alertness was being considered. Progress on developing a national framework relating to second crew members on passenger services which would be consulted on by RSSB. A successful level crossing visit with Lillian Greenwood MP, chair of the Transport Select Committee. The interim report on building regulations and fire safety following the Grenfell Tower fire which advocated a risk based approach. 6. Graham Richards reported on: the forthcoming May timetable change and its likely impact and major delay incidents on Wessex route over the last two periods which were still being reviewed, and Christmas works. On roads, the board had received the RIS2 quarterly update and he reported on progress towards a SoFA for highways. The board discussed the importance of monitoring and improving 'time to recover' for rail and road incidents. The board noted plans to continue to improve regular reporting on Highways England's performance. 7. John Larkinson reported on the first year of our responsibilities in Northern Ireland and work in hand to improve their financial reporting; publications relating to PR18, challenges to our approach on the enforcement of DPPPs, access applications and TSC's hearing into the East Coast franchise as part of their infrastructure investment inquiry. 8. Freya Guinness presented progress against the business plan and highlighted risks around the level of forecast underspend and headlines from the report. Jennifer Webber, Lisa O'Brien and Tracy Larby joined the meeting for this report 9. Russell Grossman presented the six monthly communications update. The board discussed the degree to which as public debate arises the ORR should be more active in drawing attention to our evidence base. They also discussed the increasing importance of engaging regional stakeholders as NR embeds route devolution and noted plans to run stakeholder workshops regionally around ORR's developing business plan. 10. Joanna Whittington reported on a recent BNC1 meeting, the forthcoming recruitment of the UK's delegate to the Intergovernmental Commission and matters relating to safety in the tunnel. She also reported a successful meeting with the DfT and others on the future regulation of HS2, and on the appointment of four permanent deputy directors - two of whom were internal promotions, and one secondee to work on the NR licence project. ## Item 5 Hs1 Pr19 Feras Alshaker joined the meeting for this item. 11. The board discussed the approach to PR19, noting the importance of building sufficient funds to maintain the asset base and the work on international comparators. ## Item 6 Competition Tom Cole, Lisa Thurston and Steve Armitage joined the meeting for this item 12. The board had previously agreed a competition strategy to demonstrate ORR's competence and ability to drive change through the use of its competition powers. 13. The paper set out the conclusions of a market review and sought board agreement to open a market study into the supply of ticketing equipment and systems with a principal focus on procurement strategies and RDG accreditation processes. This was not a matter reserved to the board but would be ORR's first use of the power for some time and board understanding and approval was therefore considered important in establishing ORR's approach. 14. The board discussed the proposal and considered the size of the relevant market, the apparent harm, potential for innovation and new entrants. The board recalled our finding that 1 in 5 passengers bought the wrong ticket from a vending machine and noted the scope for improvement through technology. It was possible that the study would not find anything actionable, or that doing the study in itself would provoke change in behaviours. Handling plans would address these possible outcomes. 15. The board agreed that the study should go ahead, noting the market sensitivity of this decision and the importance of confidentiality and correct handling of the process. Board members would be told when the study was announced. ## Item 7 Pr18 Chris Hemsley and Carl Hetherington joined the meeting for this item 16. Chris Hemsley gave an update on progress noting that a SoFA had been issued by the Scottish Government, that the risk profile for the programme remained broadly stable with challenges around business plan development and scorecards, and uncertainty about NR's flexibility to move funds between years and routes. The rest of this item (paras 17-20) have been redacted until after the draft determination is published ## Item 8 Safety - International 21. Ian Prosser's paper set out the way that ORR uses international work to develop its own inspectors capability as well as supporting other nations in delivering safer railways. 22. The board agreed to the value of the work and noted the criteria applied by the Chief Inspector to each country's approach. The board noted that one additional critierion would be that we would not work with any nation which sought to apply restrictions on the basis of gender (or other irrelevant characteristic) to the inspectors doing the work. 23. Agreements with individual countries would continue to be referred to the board as reserved matters. Item 9 RAILWAY FUTURES - CYBER SECURITY James Walker, Matt Westlake and Johnny Schute joined the meeting for this item. 24. The paper set out the current framework of national responsibilities for cyber security on transport. The board discussed the implications for ORR and the action plan, particularly around safety management systems, software updates and physical security of data assets. At this time there were no additional resource requirements. DfT had incorporated physical and cyber security for land systems in one team, while CAA would include cyber in their existing security responsibilities. The board stressed the importance of clarity between ORR and DfT about their mutual roles and responsibilities. It would be important for this work to continue at pace. 25. The board asked the audit and risk committee to consider cyber risk [Action]. Item 10 FEEDBACK FROM COMMITTEES ## 26. Bob Holland reported that the ARC had received a report showing that 93% of audit recommendations had been completed, and considered a project initiation document for the relocation of the London office - which would be circulated to the board for background next month. [Action] 27. Michael Luger reported that the RENCO had received a report from the staff survey and the executive's action plan in response including some organisational development initiatives. It had also discussed NED skills in the light of David Franks' likely departure. The staff survey was on the February board agenda. Item 11 ANY OTHER BUSINESS 28. Tess Sanford updated the board on emerging plans for a regional visit to Leeds in February. 29. Juliet Lazarus offered NEDs a briefing on the structure and purpose of the NR Licence in preparation for the proposed restructure which was on the February agenda. This was accepted [Action] 30. The board noted the items circulated below the line.

en

1010-pdf

## Certification Information For Annex I Of Commission Implementing Regulation (Eu) 2018/6591 List Of Third Countries And Parts Of The Territory Of Third Countries A From Which The Entry Into Great Britain Of Consignments Of Equidae And Of Semen, Ova And Embryos Of Equidae Is Authorised ISO- Code Third country Code of the part of the territory of the third country Description of the part of the territory of the third country SG TA Re- En Imports Imports Transit Specific conditions SEMEN O/E Equidae RH RH RH ES RE + EBP RH RE EBP 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 BE Belgium BE-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X BG Bulgaria BG-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X CZ Czechia CZ-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X DK Denmark DK-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X DE Germany DE-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X EE Estonia EE-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X IE Ireland IE-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X EL Greece EL-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X ES Spain ES-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X FR France FR-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X HR Croatia HR-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X IT Italy IT-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X CY Cyprus CY-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X 1 References to European Union legislation within this document are references to direct EU legislation which has been retained in Great Britain (retained EU law as defined in the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018). LV Latvia LV-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X LT Lithuania LT-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X LU Luxembourg LU-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X HU Hungary HU-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X MT Malta MT-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X NL Netherlands NL–0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X AT Austria AT-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X PL Poland PL-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X PT Portugal PT-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X RO Romania RO-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X SI Slovenia SI-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X SK Slovakia SK-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X FI Finland FI-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X SE Sweden SE-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X LI Liechtenstein LI-0 Whole Country A X X X X X X X X X X NO Norway NO-0 Whole Country A* X X X X X X X X X X a Where official regionalisation applies in accordance with Article 13(2)(a) of Directive 2009/156/EC. * Specific derogations for EU member States and Norway may be found in the appropriate health certificates. | Health certificates may be found | here | |-------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | | LEGEND TO ANNEX I: | | | Animal/Product | Categories/conditions | | RH | Registered horses as defined in Article 2(c) of this Regulation. | | ES | Equidae for slaughter as defined in Article 2 of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/262. | | RE | Registered equidae as defined in Article 2 of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/262. | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | EBP | Equidae for breeding and production as defined in Article 2 of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/262. | | SEMEN | Semen of the equine species collected in accordance with Article 17(2)(b)(ii) of Directive 92/65/EEC, to be read as if "in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 26" were omitted. | | O/E | | | Ova and embryos of the equine species collected or produced in accordance with Article 17(2)(b)(ii) of Directive 92/65/EEC, to be read as if "in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 26" | | | were omitted. | | | | | | Columns | Information / Description of commodity | | 1-4 | | | 5 | | | 6 | | | 7 | | | 8 | | | 9 | | | 10 | | | 11 | | | 12 | | | 13 | | | 14 | | | 15 | | | 16 | | | | | | Boxes | | | X | | | Entry authorised | | | - | | | Entry not authorised | | | Sanitary Groups | | | | Sanitary Group | Specific animal health guarantees required for entry of equidae into Great Britain | |----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | A | | equine infectious anaemia, equine viral arteritis | | B | | equine infectious anaemia, equine viral arteritis, glanders, dourine | | C | | | | | equine infectious anaemia, equine viral arteritis, Eastern and Western equine encephalomyelitis, vesicular stomatitis | | | D | | equine infectious anaemia, equine viral arteritis, glanders, dourine, Eastern and Western equine encephalomyelitis, Venezuelan equine encephalomyelitis, vesicular stomatitis | | E | | equine infectious anaemia, equine viral arteritis, glanders, dourine, African horse sickness | | F | | equine infectious anaemia, dourine, African horse sickness | | G | | equine infectious anaemia, equine viral arteritis, glanders, dourine, Japanese encephalitis | | | | |

en

1277-pdf

# The Department For Business, Energy, And Industrial Strategy Gender Pay Gap Report Report for 2020 December 2020 ## © Crown Copyright 2020 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk. Where we have identified any third-party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at: enquiries@beis.gov.uk ## Contents Foreword from the Permanent Secretary _________________________________________ 4 Introduction _______________________________________________________________ 5 2020 Headline figures _______________________________________________________ 6 The data - BEIS and the Executive Agencies _____________________________________ 7 The data - BEIS and the Executive Agencies ___________________________________ 7 2020 Gender make up of the Department (BEIS and Executive Agencies) ___________ 8 The data - Core BEIS ______________________________________________________ 8 Gender make-up of the Department (Core BEIS) _______________________________ 9 Organisational Context _______________________________________________________ 9 Closing the gender pay gap __________________________________________________ 10 Our processes: recruiting, retaining, and developing a diverse workforce _____________ 10 Performance Management _______________________________________________ 11 Flexible Working _______________________________________________________ 11 Shared Parental Leave __________________________________________________ 11 Learning, Development and Talent _________________________________________ 12 Diversity and Inclusion __________________________________________________ 13 Conclusion _______________________________________________________________ 14 Next Steps _____________________________________________________________ 14 Holding ourselves to account _______________________________________________ 14 Declaration _______________________________________________________________ 15 Annex A - BEIS group figures (including Executive Agencies) _______________________ 16 Gender pay gap (in favour of men): __________________________________________ 16 The proportion of men and women employees paid a bonus: ______________________ 16 Proportion of men and women employees in each quartile BEIS group figures (including Executive Agencies) ______________________________________________________ 17 Annex B - core BEIS figures (excluding Executive Agencies) ________________________ 18 The proportion of men and women employees paid a bonus: ______________________ 18 Proportion of men and women employees in each quartile CORE BEIS figures (excluding Executive Agencies) ______________________________________________________ 19 ## Foreword From The Permanent Secretary This report sets out our gender pay gap and what we are doing to close it. Diversity and inclusion are critical values for us. They make us a better Department - a better employer, that makes better and more innovative decisions, and can better protect the economic prosperity of the UK. Addressing the gender pay gap, in particular by ensuring greater representation of women at senior levels, is a very important part of this journey. Over the past few years, we have taken concerted action to tackle the gender pay gap within the department and this has helped reduce the gender pay gap significantly from the point the department was created. However, this year's figures show a small increase from 2019. I am proud of how BEIS colleagues have worked to support each other with kindness, compassion, and flexibility during the unprecedented year we have had, and see the results in that context. Looking ahead, we are committed to ensuring the progress we have made since 2017 does not reverse. This year we launched our refreshed Diversity and Inclusion Strategy. This focuses not only on who we are (which is often what we see directly reflected in "the stats"), but also how we behave and how we ensure all our people feel valued and supported. We introduced new measures this year, including the use of software which enables us to produce job adverts that attract more diverse candidates and avoid gendered language, independent panel member training to tackle unconscious bias and promote diverse thought, and the use of specialist recruitment channels to promote our flexible working opportunities and inclusive working culture. In 2021 we will monitor the impact of these steps and ensure that these measures are delivering the results we expect. Our pay gap is caused by women being more represented at lower grades, and less represented at higher grades. I am pleased that women make up 47% of our Senior Civil Service, but we know that there is still more to do. Data will play a key role in our approach, particularly in terms of recruitment and talent data analysis, to help us improve our gender balance in our talent pipeline. We know that what happens at the team level is vital in ensuring that everyone in BEIS has what they need to make diversity and inclusion work, so we will measure and regularly review representation of women in different parts of the organisation and support teams with local action plans. We will also offer support and development opportunities for women through sponsorship and mentoring, and we will work closely with our Women Empowered Network, ensuring that they are involved in influencing the department's decision-making. I am committed to ensuring that BEIS continues to support women to achieve their potential so that we can capitalise on our diverse talent and represent the communities we serve. This will support our vision of building a stronger, greener future for the UK, and continuing to make BEIS a great place to work. Sarah Munby, Permanent Secretary ## Introduction The Department for Business, Energy, and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) has prepared this report as part of the legal requirement for public authorities to publish their gender pay gap on an annual basis. In 2017, the government introduced world-leading legislation that made it statutory for organisations with 250 or more employees to report annually on their gender pay gap. Government departments are covered by the Equality Act 2010 (Specific Duties and Public Authorities) Regulations 2017 which came into force on 31 March 2017. These regulations underpin the Public Sector Equality Duty and require relevant organisations to publish their gender pay gap by 30 March annually. This includes the mean and median gender pay gaps; the mean and median gender bonus gaps; the proportion of men and women who received bonuses; and the proportions of men and women employees in each pay quartile. The gender pay gap shows the difference in the average pay between all men and women in a workforce. If a workforce has a particularly high gender pay gap, this can indicate there may be several issues to deal with, and the individual calculations may help to identify what those issues are. The gender pay gap is different to equal pay. Equal pay deals with the pay differences between men and women who carry out the same jobs, similar jobs, or work of equal value. It is unlawful to pay people unequally because they are a man or a woman. BEIS supports the fair treatment and reward of all staff irrespective of gender. The Civil Service, including BEIS, wants to create a diverse and representative workplace, supporting an inclusive, flexible, modern, and connected Civil Service. Encouraging openness, challenge, innovation, and excellence, in everything we do. This report fulfils the department's reporting requirements, analyses the figures in more detail and sets out what we are doing to close the gender pay gap in the organisation. ## 2020 Headline Figures This is the fourth year BEIS have published Gender Pay Gap figures. For context, we have therefore included the figures from previous years (2017, 2018 and 2019) in our analysis (the full data is set out in annexes A and B). Please note when comparing to previous years, this is the second year we have presented the data to a decimal point to bring us in line with other government departments. The headline 2020 Gender Pay Gap figures (for BEIS including Executive Agencies) show a mean gender pay gap of 10.2% and a median gender pay gap of 10.7%. | Gender Pay Gap | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | |---------------------------|---------|---------|---------|---------| | Mean gender pay gap | 12% | 11% | 10.1% | 10.2% | | Median gender pay gap 15% | 14% | 10.2% | 10.7% | | For core BEIS, so excluding Executive Agencies, the headline 2020 Gender Pay Gap figures show a mean gender pay gap of 5.9%, and the median gender pay gap of 13.5%. | Gender Pay Gap | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | |---------------------------|---------|---------|---------|---------| | Mean gender pay gap | 9% | 5% | 5.5% | 5.9% | | Median gender pay gap 15% | 13% | 12.7% | 13.5% | | Disappointingly the gap has marginally widened within BEIS for 2020 due to changes in the composition of the Department's workforce. Comparing the gender make-up of the department in 2019 to 2020, we can see an increase in women at AO and EO grades, whereas the proportion of women in grades HEO and above has decreased. The figures show that of those employed across BEIS, 51% of men are at Grade 7 or above, compared to 45% of women. As the GPG calculations look at the total workforce, the departmental pay gap in BEIS can be attributed to an uneven split of men and women by grade - with more men occupying higher grades. ## The Data - Beis And The Executive Agencies The Gender Pay Gap regulations require BEIS to include its five Executive Agencies in the published figures as they are not separate legal entities. The data published on GOV.UK therefore includes Core BEIS, Companies House, the Insolvency Service, the Intellectual Property Office, the Met Office, and the UK Space Agency. This year, the data collection and publication process for the Annual Civil Service Employment Survey (ASCES) is being aligned to accommodate GEO regulations and methodology for Gender Pay Gap reporting. This report provides our gender pay gap, using the Government Equalities Office methodology, on the snapshot date of 31 March 2020. For bonuses, we used the period of 1 April 2019 to 31 March 2020, which was the 12 months preceding the snapshot date. ## The Data - Beis And The Executive Agencies The Gender Pay Gap for BEIS including Executive Agencies for 2020 is a mean pay gap of 10.2% and a median pay gap of 10.7%. The mean bonus gap is 12.9% and the median bonus gap is 15.8% These figures have fluctuated over the last four reporting years but are in line with previous years. The proportion of men who received a bonus is 87.5% and the proportion of women is 86.2%. there has been a year on year increase since first reporting in 2017. As demonstrated by the table below, the pay gap seems to be driven by an uneven gender split by grade. There are more men in higher grades and more women in lower grades. ## 2020 Gender Make Up Of The Department (Beis And Executive Agencies) Grade % of grade that are men % of grade that are women Number of men (% of men who work in this grade) Number of women (% of women who work in this grade) AA/AO 472 (8.5%) 895 (17.4%) 34.5% 65.5% EO 625(11.2%) 812 (15.8%) 43.5% 56.5% HEO/SEO/FS 2527(45.3%) 2038 (39.7%) 55.4% 44.6% G6/7 1782(31.9%) 1245 (24.2%) 58.9% 41.1% SCS 177(3.2%) 138(2.7%) 56.2% 43.8% Total 5582(52.1%) 5129 (47.9%) 52.1% 47.9% ## The Data - Core Beis For core BEIS (excluding the Executive Agencies), the mean pay gap is 5.9% and the median pay gap is 13.5%. As in previous years, the pay gap seems to be driven by an uneven gender split by grade, with more women occupying roles in lower grades, and more men occupying roles in higher grades (see table below). The differences have widened in 2020, leading to a widening of the gender pay gap. Gender make-up of the Department (Core BEIS) 2020 Gender make-up of the department (core BEIS) Grade % of grade that are men % of grade that are women Number of women (% of women who work in this grade) Number of men (% of men who work in this grade) AA/AO 39 (1.7%) 54 (2.6%) 41.9% 58.1% EO 161 (7.2%) 238 (11.6%) 40.4% 59.6% HEO/SEO/FS 901 (40.2%) 836 (40.9%) 51.9% 48.1% G6/7 1008 (44.9%) 807 (39.5%) 55.5% 44.5% SCS 134 (6%) 110 (5.4%) 54.9% 45.1% Total 2243 (52.3%) 2045 (47.7%) 52.3% 47.7% ## Organisational Context BEIS is committed to developing and embedding a truly inclusive culture where Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) are a core part of all decision making, policy creation and delivery, and the Department's working environment. This will help us to deliver policies for UK businesses with an understanding of and focus on real-world outcomes which create an economy for everyone. This will also help us to develop and retain a diverse and talented workforce, improving overall outcomes by maximising diversity, which will be reflected in the thoughts and actions of those working in BEIS. Our ambition is to become a role model for business and the Civil Service; taking individual and collective action to ensure effective outcomes for everyone in the UK and make BEIS a great place to work. ## Closing The Gender Pay Gap Our Processes: Recruiting, Retaining, And Developing A Diverse Workforce At BEIS, we abide by the recruitment principles of fair and open competition with candidate's selection based on merit and with accountability to the Civil Service Commission. To ensure fairness we use the following methods: ## Mandatory Mixed Gender Sifts And Interview Panels Blind sifting: where all identifiable characteristics are removed Use of specialist recruitment channels, such as VERCIDA, to advertise jobs at all levels and encourage a diverse pool of applicants. In 2020 we have posted 130 job adverts with 47 applicants applying from this website. A subscription with Working Mums, a jobs board that advertises part time and flexible Working for parents, with a focus on mothers; our subscription includes a profile page about BEIS and positive advertisement of our flexible working policies. In 2019-2020 we have advertised 83 jobs, with 392 applications from the website. A profile established on the Civil Service careers website that was checked for gender neutral tones and representation Continued use of success profiles in our recruitment processes, which is based on a flexible framework to assess candidates against a range of elements using a variety of selection methods. Moving away from a purely competency-based system of assessment, success profiles aim to increase the opportunity of finding the right person for the job, driving up performance and improving diversity and inclusion. We have trained numerous staff at BEIS to use success profiles effectively in the recruitment process to deliver these aims. ## Holding Focus Groups And Workshops Investigating How We Can Embed D&I Strategies Throughout Out Recruitment Processes Advertise all jobs as available for flexible working, full-time, job share or part time unless this is a very strong business case not to We have acquired a contract with Textio; an augmented advert writing tool that helps people write inclusive job adverts. Textio suggests changes to get a more qualified and diverse candidate pool with a focus on increasing gender-neutral language in adverts. Textio scores adverts out of 100 and we are aiming for all our adverts to be at least 90 or above. As of April 2020, we have 561 users and have had 1,287 job ads written and edited on textio. We have rolled out Independent panel member training to increase understanding and awareness of the role of the independent panel members at interviews. This involves understanding unconscious bias and promoting diverse thought and opinion to ensure inclusion is embedded at the interview stage. We work closely with the D&I team to ensure our processes and guidance are constantly reviewed and aligned with emerging policies such as the race action plan and other diversity projects. ## Performance Management The performance management policy and process emphasise the importance of quality conversations between staff and their managers with a focus on development. Diversity and inclusion remain a key priority for the Department and throughout 2019/20 we have monitored performance outcomes and the distribution of reward to ensure diversity considerations are accounted for. It has been just over two years since BEIS launched its performance management system in April 2018 and the feedback it has received has been positive. Now that the system has been embedded, we are undertaking an internal review to ensure that benefits of our performance management approach are fully realised and we embed a culture of continuous policy improvement. ## Our Focus For 2020/21 Will Be: To analyse our data and feedback following the performance management review and produce a report and action plan based on the findings. To continue work to improve diversity outcomes and tackle any disparities identified for individuals with protected characteristics. ## Flexible Working BEIS offers family friendly policies including flexible working, maternity, paternity and parental leave. We also offer job share, term-time and part time working, reduced hours and compressed hours opportunities. ## Shared Parental Leave The BEIS Shared parental leave policy provides parents with the opportunity to share the care of their baby/child in the first year following birth/adoption, while balancing their work and retaining their link to the labour market. Take up of Shared parental leave has been positive, with an increase in 2020. Shared Parental leave take up in BEIS (number of cases) 2017 25 2018 36 2019 31 2020 35 ## Learning, Development And Talent Learning And Development The Department's Women Empowered Network offers peer support and developmental opportunities to equip their members with the skills and knowledge they need to reach the levels to which they aspire, to improve the pipeline to all grades and to empower members to take learning and development into their own hands. BEIS offers a range of cross-government talent and positive action schemes, including Crossing Thresholds, a 12-month career mentoring programme for women to develop their career in a structured and supportive environment. The programme is aimed at AO-G6 staff and is delivered through facilitated modules, mentoring sessions, and peer support groups. BEIS has supported Positive Action Pathways, a scheme for those in under-represented groups, including women. The one-year programme comprises development workshops, action learning sets, and on-the-job learning. PAP is at the time of writing under review and intake has paused. All talent programmes are promoted through the Department's diversity networks, including the BEIS Women Empowered Network's, to encourage those from under-represented groups to apply. All talent programmes aim to overcome barriers and help women and others compete on equal footing for progression or other Civil Service talent schemes. Our learning offer has adapted to the changes imposed by Covid-19 and we feel that has meant greater accessibility and increased opportunities for those with caring responsibilities. Many learning programmes are now broken into shorter, more frequent sessions; all are delivered virtually, some are recorded, and many are accompanied by online resources that can be used at any time. Altogether they give a flexibility that is of value to those for whom travelling into work for training that began early in the morning and finished late afternoon meant attendance was difficult. Finally, our learning offer includes coaching, a hugely effective, motivational, and supportive intervention available through Civil Service Learning to every individual. We also have a range of one-to-one opportunities, including - Mentoring, matching of individuals with experts and role models - Reverse mentoring in which a person from an underrepresented group or background mentors a senior civil servant. - We also have an opportunity for EOs-G7 in Pairing for Performance, which provides SCS with tailored, high-quality feedback from EOs-G7 on how our SCS act and present themselves. ## Diversity And Inclusion Our Inclusive Culture BEIS aims to embed D&I into all our key decisions on policy, procedure, and process. BEIS's vision is to capitalise on difference to solve some of the most important and complex policy challenges facing the country, business, and the environment. We believe diversity and inclusion are the right thing to do, and that they make us a more innovative and welcoming Department which is a better employer, makes better decisions, and can better protect the economic prosperity of the UK. Earlier this year BEIS launched its new Diversity & Inclusion Strategy, which focuses on ensuring that we are diverse in our identity and thought, that we are inclusive of difference, and that we are capitalising on difference in our work. This will include making sure that our internal processes are as inclusive as possible, and that different parts of BEIS have the tools to make D&I work in the context of their areas. For example, we have already launched a Workplace Empathy Development Programme to help define inclusive behaviours in teams and foster a culture where it is safe to challenge. We continue to utilise and monitor the initiatives introduced in 2019 to make our recruitment processes more inclusive. This includes Textio, a piece of software analysing job adverts, and continuing to build on our Diverse Panels initiative to ensure interviews are more inclusive and representative. We also have an SCS Sponsorship Scheme in place to support women, BAME and disabled G6/7 staff who aspire to become part of the Senior Civil Service. We will continue to monitor progress and the impact of initiatives against our representation targets and data. Each Director General Group will also monitor progress against their own localised representation goals and action plans. ## Working With Our Diversity Networks BEIS Diversity Networks also continue to play an important role in supporting our D&I activity across the Department. Since the Department's formation, the networks have shared the desire to celebrate difference and to improve the working lives of our people. BEIS Diversity Networks are actively consulted about policies and processes within the department before they are introduced. We have an active Women Empowered Network which aims to empower, inspire, and connect women across the Department and partner agencies to achieve an inclusive and fair workplace culture. ## Conclusion Next Steps The Department will continue to assess progress on the initiatives in place and will: Monitor and review the use of Textio in internal and external recruitment, conducting analysis on the impact on underrepresented groups. Monitor representation data against our internal targets on a quarterly basis Understand the impact of the SCS sponsorship on women, BAME and disabled G6/7 staff who aspire to become part of the Senior Civil Service and continue to support D&I initiatives. Monitor outcomes of performance management and develop an action plan to address the outcomes of the policy review. ## Holding Ourselves To Account Working alongside HR colleagues and the wider business we will continue to analyse salary, D&I, talent, and recruitment data, monitoring the progression and acknowledging any trends to help reduce the gender pay gap in BEIS. Through D&I scorecards, each Director General Group has set local goals and actions, keeping themselves and their team accountable and focused on their personalised objectives whilst keeping in mind the wider D&I work happening in BEIS. These are reviewed on an annual basis, allowing groups to reflect, evaluate and adapt their goals, alongside the wider business. The Department will act where possible to address the widening of the gap through pay policy and decisions. Analysis has shown that recent pay awards (below SCS) have not contributed to the widening of the gender pay gap, however we will continue to assess the impact of pay awards and other departmental pay actions (such as starting salaries) on the Gender Pay Gap. We will consider in more detail the effect of specialist pay groupings on the gender pay gap, where a premium is paid for certain skill and challenge areas where recruitment is male dominated, ensuring we provide support for the recruitment and attraction of more diverse field of candidates. At the top of the organisation, we will work towards a gender balance at the highest paid roles and take action to address any pay anomalies through the Senior Civil Service pay award. We believe the above actions will help BEIS to reduce the gender pay gap. ## Declaration We confirm that data reported by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy is accurate and has been calculated according to the requirements and methodology set out in the Equality Act 2010 (Specific Duties and Public Authorities) Regulations 2017. Chief Operating Officer Corporate Services: Doug Watkins BEIS Permanent Secretary: Sarah Munby ## Annex A - Beis Group Figures (Including Executive Agencies) Gender Pay Gap (In Favour Of Men): | Pay gap / Bonus gap | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | |------------------------|---------|---------|---------|-------------------------| | Mean gender pay gap | 12% | 11% | 10.1% | 10.2% | | Median gender pay gap | 15% | 14% | 10.2% | 10.7% | | 12% | 15% | 12.7% | 12.9% | Mean bonus gender pay | | gap | | | | | | 15% | 27% | 17.9% | 15.8% | Median bonus gender pay | | gap | | | | | ## The Proportion Of Men And Women Employees Paid A Bonus: | Employees | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | |--------------|---------|---------|-------------| | Men | 80% | 83% | 83.4% 87.5% | | Women | 76% | 84% | 83.7% 86.2% | Proportion of men and women employees in each quartile BEIS group figures (including Executive Agencies) Quartile 2017 2018 2019 2020 Women Men Women Men Women Men Women Men Lower quartile 60% 40% 47% 53% 60% 40% 61% 39% Lower middle quartile 46% 54% 59% 41% 47% 53% 47% 53% Upper middle quartile 40% 60% 37% 63% 39% 61% 41% 59% Upper quartile 39% 61% 40% 60% 41% 59% 40% 60% ## Annex B - Core Beis Figures (Excluding Executive Agencies) | Pay gap / Bonus gap | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | |-----------------------------|---------|---------|---------|---------| | Mean gender pay gap | 9% | 5% | 5.5% | 5.9% | | Median gender pay gap | 15% | 13% | 12.7% | 13.5% | | Mean bonus gender pay gap | 3% | 1% | 2.7% | 6.5% | | Median bonus gender pay gap | 0% | -5% | -2.5% | 7.7% | The proportion of men and women employees paid a bonus: | Employees | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | |--------------|---------|---------|-------------| | Men | 71% | 73% | 73.0% 86.7% | | Women | 71% | 77% | 73.8% 85.9% | ## Proportion Of Men And Women Employees In Each Quartile Core Beis Figures (Excluding Executive Agencies) | Quartile | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | |----------------|-----------------------------------|---------|---------|---------| | | | | | | | Women | Men Women Men Women Men Women Men | | | | | Lower quartile | 58% | 42% 54% | 46% 54% | 46% 53% | | Lower middle | | | | | | quartile | | | | | | 48% | 52% 43% | 57% 47% | 53% 50% | 50% | | Upper middle | | | | | | quartile | | | | | | 44% | 56% 44% | 56% 47% | 53% 44% | 56% | | Upper quartile | 42% | 58% 45% | 55% 43% | 57% 43% | This publication is available from: www.gov.uk/beis If you need a version of this document in a more accessible format, please email enquiries@beis.gov.uk. Please tell us what format you need. It will help us if you say what assistive technology you use.

en

2067-pdf

## Data Works: General Website Statistics All Users 100.00% Sessions Number and type of visitor Top 10 pages viewed User Type Users Page Pageviews Unique Pageviews New Visitor 5,868 / Returning Visitor 1,111 /dataset /dataset/council-performance /council-performance-overview/ Views by device type /dataset/calderdale-imd-2015-results-at-lsoa--neighbourhood-and-ward Device Category Sessions Pageviews /blog/ desktop 9,507 58,557 /topic mobile 1,555 3,664 /dataset/park-ward tablet 547 1,708 /dataset?page=2 /dataset/councillor-allowances-and-expenses ## Total Number Of Sessions 11,609 Number Of Page Views By Source / Medium % of Total: 100.00% (11,609) (direct) / (none) ## Number Of Pages / Session google / organic ## 5.51 Avg for View: 5.51 (0.00%) webmarshal.home / referral connect / referral ## Average Session Duration bing / organic ## 00:04:25 Avg for View: 00:04:25 (0.00%) t.co / referral westyorkshireobservatory.org / referral ## Average Page Duration links.govdelivery.com / referral ## 00:00:59 Avg for View: 00:00:59 (0.00%) thornhill / referral Percentage of bounce back ## 39.10% Avg for View: 39.10% (0.00%) ## Number Of Sessions And Session Duration Percentage Of Sessions Are New  Sessions Session Duration 120 120 ## 50.81% Avg for View: 50.81% (0.00%) 60 | 6,787 | 4,918 | |---------|---------| | 4,514 | 2,583 | | 770 | 446 | | 737 | 545 | | 511 | 237 | | 495 | 356 | | 468 | 314 | | 438 | 204 | | 397 | 311 | | 380 | 225 | 12h 12h 6h | Country | Sessions | |--------------|------------| | Avg. Session | | | Duration | | | United Ki | | | ngdom | | | 10,855 | 00:04:40 | | United St | | | ates | | | 487 | 00:00:09 | | Japan | 22 | | Canada | 20 | | India | 20 |

en

0229-pdf

## Teifi And North Ceredigion Management Catchment Summary Date ## Contents | 1.Background to the management catchment summary | | 3 | |--------------------------------------------------------|-----|-----| | | | | | 2. The Teifi and North Ceredigion Management Catchment | | 4 | | | | | | 3. Current Status of the water environment | 8 | | | | | | | 4. The main challenges | | 11 | | | | | | 5. Objectives and measures | 13 | | | | | | | 6. Water Watch Wales | 21 | | | | | | | | | | ## 1. Background To The Management Catchment Summary This management catchment summary supports the 2015 updated Western Wales River Basin Management Plans (RBMP). Along with detailed information on the Water Watch Wales (WWW) website, this summary will help to inform and support delivery of local environmental improvements to our groundwater, rivers, lakes, estuaries and coasts. Information on WWW can be found in Section 6. Natural Resources Wales has adopted the ecosystem approach from catchment to coast. This means being more joined up in how we manage the environment and its natural resources to deliver economic, social and environmental benefits for a healthier, more resilient Wales. It means considering the environment as a whole, so that all those with an interest in the catchment weigh up the evidence and set priorities for the many competing demands on our natural resources in a more integrated way and achieve our shared ambition for the place. The Water Framework Directive (WFD) provides a major overarching framework for river basin management. The Floods Directive sets out a strategic approach to flood risk management planning. An updated Flood Risk Management Plan (FRMP) has been produced in parallel to the 2015 updated **Western Wales RBMP Summary**. The FRMP details how we propose to manage flood risk across the river basin district by prioritising those communities that are most at risk of flooding and detailing the measures we intend to take to manage their risk. The FRMP and the RBMP together will shape important decisions, direct investment and action, and deliver significant benefits to society and the environment. ## 2. The Teifi And North Ceredigion Management Catchment Figure 1. Teifi And North Ceredigion Management Catchment The area covered by this management catchment summary includes the catchment areas of the rivers Rheidol, Ystwyth, Clarach, Aeron and Teifi. The area stretches from Ceibwr Bay, west of Cardigan, in the south-west to the feeder streams of Nant-y-Moch Reservoir in the north, and encompasses the western fringes of the Cambrian Mountains. The larger urban areas are the coastal towns of Cardigan and Aberystwyth and Lampeter, 10 miles inland on the Teifi. The river catchments are varied and quite distinctive. The Rheidol and Ystwyth rise in the Cambrian Mountains and descend through rocky valleys, tracts of coniferous forest and, in the case of the Rheidol, a series of mountain lakes and reservoirs, before meandering through the glacial gravels, deciduous woodland and low lying pasture of the floodplain to the sea. The Rheidol is a regulated, heavily modified river, as part of the Rheidol hydroelectric scheme, with a single major tributary, whereas the Ystwyth is flashy and has numerous small tributaries. The Aeron has its source at Llyn Eiddwen and flows for some 17km to the sea at Aberaeron. The Clarach has the typical features of an upland river with exposed boulders, rapids and waterfalls in the upper reaches while in the lower reaches the river is characterised by riffles and pools. The Teifi, at 122km, is one of the longest rivers in South West Wales. Its source is Llyn Teifi in the Cambrian Mountains at an altitude of 455m AOD from where it descends steeply through moorland and forestry to the geologically and ecologically important basin of Cors Caron. The river continues through rural areas largely supporting dairy and mixed stock farms. Rocky, tree-lined sections are a feature of the catchment and a number of impressive gorges, particularly at Maesycrugiau, Alltycafan, Henllan and Cilgerran, add significant environmental and landscape value. The falls on the Teifi at Cenarth are a spectacular attraction under high flows, and are famous as a location for watching salmon leaping and elvers migrating. The area is generally sparsely populated, but much of the historic development has occurred on the flat land adjacent to watercourses and the coast. It is therefore at risk from flooding and has experienced flooding in the past. Flood defences have been constructed at a number of sites and these defences now form an important part of the urban infrastructure. The Teifi valley is mainly rural with agriculture and forestry accounting for the majority of land usage. Large dairy units predominate in the lower reaches of the Teifi, with mixed dairy and livestock rearing present in the middle reaches. In the upper area, the poorer soil conditions restrict agriculture to livestock rearing on rough grazing and improved pastures. There is little significant industry in the area, as it is largely agricultural. Dairy farming predominates on the coastal plain, while the uplands favour sheep rearing and forestry. A large part of the area is susceptible to acidification of surface water due to local geology and soils having poor buffering capacity. Most industrial activity is situated around Aberystwyth and Aberaeron, such as small timber treatment plants, quarries and industrial estates. The topology of the area, with steep valleys lends itself to hydroelectric generation. The Rheidol hydropower plant is the largest of its kind in England and Wales made up of an interconnected group of reservoirs, dams, pipelines, aqueducts and power stations, covering an area of 162 square kilometres, and an annual energy production of about 85 GWh. Government incentives to encourage the installation of renewable energy systems to meet the EU target of producing 15% of the UK's energy from renewables by 2020 has seen the installation of a number of small hydropower schemes, especially in the north of the county along with several water bottling plants. Any new installation must be carefully assessed to ensure it is compliant with legislation and that there are no detrimental impacts to the local environment. Historically, industrial activity was more extensive and included metal mine works which extracted lead, copper, zinc and silver. These abandoned metal mines are largely located in the north of the area and the upper Teifi and these left a legacy of spoil tips, contaminated land and metalliferous contamination of watercourses, which impacts river quality. The mines do however have special ecological and historical interest in their own right so restoration schemes need to be carefully planned to balance all interests. The Teifi supports a nationally important salmon and sea trout (sewin) fishery, which includes one of the few remaining coracle fisheries in the UK. Sea trout are the predominant migratory salmonid, with a large number of salmon also reported. Currently the Teifi salmon stock is assessed as 'Probably at Risk' in 2015 and forecast to remain 'Probably at Risk' in 2020. Sea trout are assessed as 'Probably not at Risk'1. The Rheidol, Ystwyth and Aeron also support salmon, sea trout and brown trout. There are also a number of thriving still water fisheries that have developed for trout and coarse fish. Commercial fishing for sea fish such as herring and bass, takes place and crab and lobster potting is practised along the coast. Angling and tourism are increasingly important sources of income to the area, with visitors being attracted by the high quality of the landscape and countryside and the 13 EU designated bathing waters dotted along the coastline of Cardigan Bay, where bottlenose dolphins, porpoises and grey seals may be spotted. According to the Ceredigion County Council STEAM report tourism was worth £298 million to the local communities in 2011. The Teifi is a particularly beautiful river and is designated as a Special Area of Conservation. It flows through Cors Caron, a lowland raised bog with a distinctive plant community and aquatic invertebrates unique to the area. In February 2014, a Teifi and North Ceredigion management catchment workshop was held at Aberystwyth University. During this event the benefits of the catchment were captured. These included:  Tourism  Hydropower opportunities  Culture and heritage features  Natural beauty and landscape  Biodiversity, wildlife and habitats  Recreation and leisure opportunities  Internationally recognised conservation features We continue to work in collaboration with a range of partners and sectors in innovative ways so that we can achieve even more together. A flavour of some of the projects that have been delivered within this management catchment over the last 3 years together with projects in development are included as case studies through this document. For further information on projects please refer to WWW. Case study - Salmonid Habitat Restoration Project Afonydd Cymru with Teifi Rivers Trust received funding from Natural Resources Wales' 2012/13 Living Wales Fund to deliver 5 Habitat Restoration schemes along the Cerdin, a tributary of Afon Teifi in the Llandysul area. The Cerdin was identified as having a moderate classification under the Water Framework Directive because of low densities of salmonids and issues with diffuse agricultural pollution. Along this stretch cattle access to the river contributed to poaching and increased sedimentation. By providing controlled stock access to keep the cattle to a defined area and reducing time spent in the river the project aimed to fence along identified sections, add crossing points, drinking bays and swing gates. Since the instalment of the habitat schemes the river bank has had an opportunity to naturally regenerate reducing the likelihood of bank erosion during high flows and helping reduce sedimentation which will keep more of the river's gravel beds free of sediment and available to spawning fish and therefore increasing the chances for salmonid spawning success. All of this was achieved with the help of Dr Ian Thomas and considerable effort from the Teifi Rivers Trust volunteers. ## 2.1 Key Facts 2 We Use The Term Water Bodies To Help Understand And Manage The Water Environment. A Water Body Is Part, Or The Whole, Of A River, Lake, Estuary, Ground Water Or Coastal Water. The number and type of water bodies in the management catchment is shown in the table below. | Number of water bodies | Natural | Artificial | Heavily Modified | Total | |----------------------------|------------|---------------|---------------------|----------| | River* | 60 | 0 | 2 | 62 | | Lake | 5 | 0 | 2 | 7 | | Coastal | 1 | | | | | 0 | | | | | | 0 | 1 | | | | | Estuarine | 1 | | | | | 0 | | | | | | 1 | 2 | | | | | Groundwater | 2 | | | | | 0 | 0 | | | | | 2 | | | | | | Total | 69 | 0 | 5 | 74 | *River water bodies includes canals and surface water transfers There are areas in the catchment where the water environment is recognised as being of particular importance, including rare wildlife habitats, bathing waters or areas around drinking water sources. These areas are known collectively as protected areas and are detailed in the table below. | Protected Area | Number | |---------------------------------------|-----------| | Bathing Waters | 12 | | Drinking Water Protected Areas | 8 | | Natura 2000 and Ramsar sites | 10 | | Nitrate Vulnerable Zones | 0ha | | Shellfish Waters | 0 | | Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive | | | - Sensitive areas | | | 0 | | 3. Current Status of the water environment We assess the condition of water bodies through monitoring which produces an annual classification. The current status for each water body is shown in figure 2. Note, since 2009, we have updated some of the systems we use to classify water bodies, including changes to some standards and water body boundaries. Within this management catchment 22% of surface water bodies are at good overall classification status, 67% at moderate and 11% at poor overall status. There are no water bodies at high or bad overall status. Case study - Lampeter Dulas Fish Easement Project The Afon Dulas is a substantial tributary located on the Teifi catchment. The Teifi supports an internationally re-known rod fishery for migratory salmonids. The Dulas is an important spawning tributary, flowing into the main River Teifi at Lampeter. Prior to the works, a disused railway bridge on the Afon Dulas at Olmarch, posed an almost total barrier to salmon, sewin and eels seeking to ascend the Dulas. The culvert obstruction is likely to have been a factor contributing to the reach being classified as 'Poor' under the Water Framework Directive (WFD). The fish easement works, involve raising the downstream water level by means of 3 block stone pre-barrages formed into an upstream crescent shape to centralise flow. Each weir has a dropped stone in the centre to provide an obvious route for fish passage. The combined effect of the weirs was to raise the tail water by 750mm, allowing fish to pass upstream without hindrance. By improving connectivity to a network of smaller tribs, spawning and juvenile habitat of approximately 4km has been made more accessible above the culvert. This project will help towards the Natural Resources Wales meeting its WFD objectives. 4. The main challenges We have carried out a programme of investigations to better understand the causes as to why water bodies are failing to meet the required standards. The results of our findings are summarised in Figure 3. The reasons for not achieving good status are listed under the Surface Water Management Issues (SWMI) in line with the updated RBMP. The graph below shows the number of water bodies listed under each SWMI to give an indication of the main issues in the management catchment, each water body may have more than one reason for not achieving good status. ## Figure 3. Reason For Not Achieving Good Status In The Teifi And North Ceredigion Management Catchment Our investigations have identified 16 river water bodies that are failing because of abandoned metal mines, these include water bodies in the Teifi, Ystwyth, Rheidol and Clarach catchments and another 10 that are very likely to be failing. Agriculture and rural land management is a reason for failure on 10 water bodies including Teifi, Melindwr, Aeron and Carrog and is very likely to be a reason for failure on 12 others**. Artificial barriers** which prevent fish migrating and reaching their spawning grounds are the reason for failure in two rivers including the Clettwr and Piliau and are very likely to be a reason for failure in the Arberth, Dulas and Mydyr. Acidification from air pollution is a reason for failure in The Teifi Pools and in eight river water bodies in the uplands of the Ystwyth and Rheidol. There are three water bodies in the Rheidol where coniferous forestry is a reason for failure because the plantations exacerbate acidification. **Discharges from wastewater treatment works** are identified as a reason for failure on four water bodies including the Drywi. Other rivers in the Teifi and Rheidol catchments are very likely to have this as a reason for failure. Unsewered domestic wastewater (septic tanks) have been identified on four water bodies including the Carrog, Camddwr and Ystwyth. This is a problem particular to this area of Wales where many villages and properties are not on the sewer network The Rheidol is a heavily modified water body and the surface water abstraction for hydropower is a confirmed reason for failure for the Castell and Hengwm. 4.1 Feedback on challenges We need to work together to ensure the overall aims of the Water Framework Directive are met, in order to work together effectively we need to agree on the issues and solutions. The following section includes some of the issues that were raised as part of the catchment workshop and the RBMP consultation; however it is not a full list.  Flooding.  Forestry - acidification.  Rural land management and diffuse pollution from agriculture.  Pollution from abandoned mines.  Diffuse pollution from urban areas.  Re-introduction of the European Beaver, *Castor fiber*.  Marine litter  Decline in aquatic habitats and species Case study - Himalayan balsam eradication project on the Ystwyth. A project to eradicate Himalayan balsam from the upper and mid sections of the Ystwyth is now in its 6th year, and considerable success has been achieved thus safeguarding the habitat at Grogwynion SAC and SSSI sites as well as restoring native flora on the undesignated sections of river. The programme is gradually working downstream with a view to achieving total eradication of Himalayan balsam on the Ystwyth in the future. In addition, since 2012 the control of Japanese knotweed has also been included in the project. In conjunction with the removal of Himalayan balsam and Japanese knotweed, the project also involves raising awareness of these plants and their adverse impacts by encouraging the local communities to look for it, report it and help control it. This is being progressed by the production of posters, leaflets and press releases. 5. Objectives and measures This section outlines what we are aiming to achieve and the measures that need to be put in place. We aim to develop a single integrated programme of measures by 2021 that meets Water Framework Directive objectives, including: ##  Prevent Deterioration In Status Water Body Status Will Not Be Allowed To Deteriorate From The Current Reported Status.  Achieve The Objectives For Protected Areas Achieve The Standards Set By The Relevant Directive Under Which They Were Designated. For Water Dependent Natura 2000 Sites We Will Aim To Achieve Conservation Objectives, Achieving Good Status By 2021 Is A Milestone Towards This Objective.  Aim To Achieve Good Overall Status For Surface And Ground Waters Implement Measures To Achieve Good Overall Status Where They Are Technically Feasible And Not Disproportionately Costly. 5.1 Measures We have reviewed the reasons why water bodies are failing to achieve objectives and identified required measures. Measures are divided into two groups: National measures apply to the whole of Wales, or the United Kingdom. In general these set the legislative, policy or strategic approach. Examples include a national ban on using a particular chemical or a national strategy for prioritising and funding the remediation of abandoned mines. A list of planned national measures is available in the updated RBMP and Water Watch Wales, Local measures are specific to the river basin district or a part of it. For example, the removal of invasive plants along a length of designated river or a local campaign targeting misconnections across an industrial estate. Many of the actions listed will also have multiple benefits. For example, sustainable urban drainage (SuDs) schemes help to reduce urban pollution, sewage pollution and changes to water levels. The table below summarises the types of local measures required for the management catchment, including those identified for protected areas. The high level categories describe the types of action required and broadly the options that are available, including voluntary and regulatory measures. At the local scale some of the options described might not be considered appropriate. There is overlap between some categories. The table also shows the number of water bodies that require the measure type, the water body numbers in this table should be used as a guide to show the significance of the issue in the catchment, and these numbers will change through the course of the 6 year programme. Up to date Reasons for Not Achieving Good (RNAGs) data is available on WWW and should be referred to before scoping local measures. .Measure Description No. of water bodies Acidification restoration 3 Emissions controls and upland restoration: blocking drainage, restoring blanket bog, within forestry plantation blocking forest drains and establishing native trees within the riparian zone, liming options. Some overlap with "address air pollution". .Measure Description No. of water bodies Address air pollution 41 Emissions controls to reduce nitrogen and acidic deposition. Some overlap with "acidification restoration". Address point source pollution 36 Investigate and regulate pollution from point sources. Overlaps with "reduce pollution from sewage discharges" and "other waste water discharges". Complete first cycle investigation All ongoing WFD investigations from first cycle programme. 2 3 Drainage and water level management Investigate and implement changes to land drainage regimes and structures to restore water levels. Improve fish passage and habitat Remove or modify barriers to fish passage 35 Improve flows and water levels 36 Reduce impacts of regulated flows and abstractions, restore more natural flow regimes, implement options to improve water levels, such as water efficiency and recycling measures, alternative sources and supplies. 36 Manage invasive non-native species Eradication and/or management of invasive non-native species in line with current national invasive species Action Plans. Includes biosecurity good practice, such as "CHECK-CLEAN-DRY" and Be Plant Wise. 10 Mine water and contaminated land remediation Coal and metal mine, and contaminated land remediation - including passive and active mine water treatment, capping of spoil, removal of wastes to landfill, and channel diversion 2 Mitigate impacts of flood and coastal defences Reduce impacts of flood defence structures and operations - improve connectivity, habitat, and morphology by implementing options through capital and maintenance programmes, such as soft engineering, opening culverts, upgrading tidal flaps, changing dredging and vegetation management. Includes the national habitat creation programme to address coastal squeeze. 3 Mitigate impacts of shipping, navigation and dredging Assess and implement options for adapting dredging regimes and reducing the impacts of physical modifications. New Investigation 60 Includes investigations for all new failures, deterioration, and drinking water protected areas. Other sustainable land and marine management practices Includes measures to mitigate impacts from construction and maintenance of 2 .Measure Description No. of water bodies infrastructure, including within military training sites. 1 Reduce impacts of other physical modifications Improve connectivity, habitat and morphology through soft engineering and restoration techniques. 1 Reduce pollution from other waste water discharges Reduce pollution from other (non-sewage) point sources, both regulated and unregulated. Investigate and implement basic pollution prevention measures, including provision of up to date advice and guidance, such as correct handling and storage of chemicals and waste, management of trade effluent, and regulation. 4 Reduce pollution from septic tanks Target actions to ensure septic tanks are maintained correctly. Where necessary issue formal works notices to owners to relocate or replace tanks and soakaways. 5 Reduce pollution from sewage discharges Reducing pollution from continuous and intermittent discharges, includes additional treatment at sewage treatment works (e.g. phosphate stripping), investigating and tackling sewer blockages, and implementing sustainable drainage to reduce surface water drainage to sewers. 3 Specific habitat and feature works Restoration and/or conservation of specific habitat and features, including natural (e.g. caves, geological outcrops) and human structures (e.g. bridges, ruins). 4 Sustainable access and recreation management Reduce the impacts of erosion, disturbance and damage from both water-based and terrestrial access, including tackling illegal offroading. 49 Sustainable agricultural practices Implement basic and additional measures such as correct management of slurry, silage, fuel oil, and agricultural chemicals; clean and dirty water separation; nutrient management planning; buffer strips and riparian fencing; cover crops and soil management. In N2k sites changes to grazing regimes may be required, includes scrub management. Within NVZs comply with storage and spreading regulations. 1 Sustainable fisheries management Includes measures for both freshwater and marine fisheries to reduce and mitigate impacts Sustainable woodland and forestry management Restore the riparian zone, disconnect forest drains, monitor the effectiveness of the 5 12 .Measure Description No. of water bodies principle risks associated with forestry and use forestry and woodland to reduce diffuse pollution. 1 Tackle misconnections and urban diffuse pollution Investigate and solve misconnections to surface water drains (at residential and commercial properties) and implement sustainable drainage schemes (SuDs) to reduce diffuse pollution. Waste management Includes appropriate management of spoil and sludge, illegal fly-tipping and litter 4 Details for specific local measures can be found on WWW, some examples of actions already under way include:  Schemes to improve fish passage and habitat.  We are reviewing discharge permits and abstraction licenses to reduce the impact on the water environment.  Local authorities are working with us to find and resolve misconnections.  Natural Resources Wales is improving forest management to reduce the impact of acidification and protect rivers from sediment and remove barriers to fish migration.  Agricultural visits to provide advice and guidance. Our agricultural Catchment Officers work alongside landowners to improve land management for the benefit of the water environment.  Minewater remediation schemes are, and will be key measures in the Teifi, Ystwyth, Rheidol and Clarach catchments. ## 5.2 Feedback on priorities and solutions Concerns on current status raised as part of the consultation and at the workshop have been highlighted in Section 3, solutions and priorities were also discussed. Of the issues raised the following were flagged as priorities:  Flooding. Suggested solutions: Slow rate of upland drainage (e.g. Pumlumon 'living landscapes' project and Teifi Wildwood project which includes bog habitat regeneration and ditch blocking); embargo on further floodplain development; use floodplain for habitat creation and flood storage. Natural Flood Management.  Forestry - acidification. Suggested solutions: Liming of soil, upland lakes and rivers, as appropriate; more deciduous woodland planting.  Rural land management / diffuse pollution. Suggested solutions: Greater provision of suitable width buffer strips and green corridors; modelling run-off to identify beneficial tree-planting areas; improve policy relating to Glastir; illustrate financial savings of best practise where possible to incentivise; training volunteers for walkover surveys.  Abandoned mine pollution. Suggested solutions: Pragmatic view by regulators of standards achievable, given funding available; further research to better understand water chemistry and conservation interests.  Urban diffuse pollution. Suggested solutions: Reduction in impermeable surfacing; increased urban treeplanting; improve SUDS awareness and design integration; better regulatory tools.  **European Beaver re-introduction**. Suggested solutions: Controversial topic requiring solid evidence base to allay concerns over appropriate management.  Marine litter Suggested solutions: Better use of Regulations - polluter pays principle. Marine protection zones.  Decline in aquatic habitats and species Suggested solutions: restoration of peat bogs and ditch blocking to reduce sediment load, riparian habitat restoration to act as buffer strip from land runoff and help prevent erosion. ## 5.3 Target areas for 2015-21 We have worked across Natural Resources Wales to develop an affordable programme of local and national measures, based upon our current understanding of existing resources. Our focus is:  Preventing deterioration in all water bodies  Within the Western Wales RBD - improving compliance with good overall status in 21 water bodies that are currently moderate/poor, and also improving 4 poor water bodies to moderate.  Targeting measures locally in an integrated way to deliver environmental improvements in WFD water bodies and Protected Areas, including areas protected for water habitats and species.  Identifying where element level improvements will be achieved during the second cycle, but where further measures will be required to deliver an overall ecological status change.  Developing our approach to natural resource management by working at a local catchment level and capturing the wider benefits delivered through WFD. ## Nrw Will Target To Achieve An Improvement In Status By 2021 | Water body ID | |-------------------------------------------------| | Details | | | | GB110062043510 | | Fflur - headwaters to confluence | | with Teifi | | Good by 2021 | | GB110062039130 | | Hirwaun - headwaters to | | confluence with Teifi | | Moderate by | | 2021 | | GB110063041450 | | Aeron - confluence with Gwili to | | tidal limit | | Good by 2021 | | For further | | information on | | the target | | water bodies | | please refer to | | WWW | | | | GB110063041520 | | Wyre Fach - headwaters to | | confluence with Wyre | | GB110063041530 Wyre - headwaters to tidal limit | Investigations programme All water bodies for which the cause of adverse impact is as yet unknown require investigation. This applies in the case of both failing water bodies and those that have deteriorated over the first cycle. Natura 2000 programme - actions underway/planned The RBMP programme of measures must include any measures necessary to achieve compliance with standards and objectives for Natura 2000 (N2K) sites listed in the register of protected areas. The list below is a summary of sites where Prioritised Improvement Plans (PIP) measures are planned /underway. It does not summarise all the required actions. (Further information can be obtained by contacting NRW: enquiries@naturalresourceswales.gov.uk) The number of planned actions is low partly because it is difficult to assess what might be funded beyond 2015/16. Our ambition for the second cycle will develop as opportunities/resources become available. We have identified a further 19 priority actions in the Teifi and North Ceredigion Management Catchment which can be taken forward when opportunities arise. We have also worked with stakeholders to develop and plan a number of strategic actions to support delivery of N2K objectives. These are included within the updated Programme of Measures The table below shows the Natura 2000 sites that have actions that are planned or underway, further information on the actions can be found on the WWW website. N2k site Planned Underway Afon Teifi / River Teifi 3 Flood Risk Management Plan Actions Further information on local measures is available in the catchment summary section of the updated FRMP. Know Your River - Salmon and Sea Trout Catchment Plan NRW collects a range of specific salmonid data for management purposes and this is presented in the local Salmon and Sea Trout Catchment Summaries. Salmonid specific tools, measures and data acquisition such as electrofishing results, declared catches and annual salmon egg deposition estimates are used to guide ongoing investment in fish passage and habitat restoration schemes. The summaries are updated annually and ensure that there is effective prioritisation in waterbodies to improve salmonid fisheries. The planned actions are always delivered in association with partners and contribute to enhancement and protection of this valuable resource in Wales. Further information can be obtained by contacting NRW: enquiries@naturalresourceswales.gov.uk) Water company programme Within the 2015 RBMP; there are a number of measures required of Water Companies. A funding allocation for these measures was included in company business plans submitted to Ofwat for the 2015-20 period. Natural Resources Wales and the Environment Agency have recently published a revised National Environment Plan detailing all water company measures. The National Environment Programme details improvements required to comply with all water quality legislation. An outline of the measures included within this management catchment can be found in the table below, further information can be found on the WWW website. Table 6. Water company investigations and improvement schemes | Water body ID | Name | |-------------------------------------|-------------------------| | | | | GB110062043540 | | | Teifi - headwaters to | | | confluence with Meurig | No deterioration scheme | | GB110062039170 | | | Arberth - headwaters to | | | confluence with Teifi | | | GB110062039110 | | | Ceri - headwaters to | | | confluence with Teifi | | | GB110062039250 | | | Brefi - headwaters to | | | confluence with Teifi | | | Investigation to be carried out, | | | where water company assets | | | contribute to failure to achieve | | | GES | | | Multiple | Nant y Moch and others | | Investigations into risks to | | | drinking water quality | | | GB651009030000 Cardigan Bay Central | | | Investigations into impact from | | | assets on designated bathing | | | beaches. | | | | | ## 5.4 Alternative Objectives We Have Identified 41% Of Water Bodies Where Because Of The Nature Of The Problem Or The Required Measures We Propose An Extended Deadline Or Less Stringent Objective (Less Than Good). In Each Case We Have Provided A Justification. | Water body | |----------------------------------------------| | objective | | | | Justifications | | | | Number of | | water bodies | | | | | | 17 | | | | Extended | | deadline | | | | | | Cause of | | adverse | | impact | | unknown | | | | Piliau - headwaters to confluence with Teifi | | Mwldan | | | | Gido - headwaters to tidal limit | | Mydyr - headwaters to confluence with | | Aeron | | Drywi - headwaters to tidal limit | | Arth - headwaters to tidal limit | | Aeron - headwaters to confluence with | | Gwili | | Mynach - headwaters to confluence with | | Rheidol | | Castell - headwaters to confluence with | | Rheidol | | Water body | |--------------------------------------------| | objective | | | | Justifications | | | | Number of | | water bodies | | | | Llechwedd Mawr - HW to Nant y Moch | | reservoir | | Cwmnewydion - headwaters to conf with | | Ystwyth | | Magwr - headwaters to confluence with | | Ystwyth | | Llanfihangel - headwaters to conf with | | Ystwyth | | Nant-y-moch Reservoir | | Llyn Llygad Rheidol | | Llynnoedd Ieuan | | Pond y Gwaith | | Ecological | | recovery time | | 5 | | Mynach - headwaters to confluence with | | Rheidol | | Rheidol - conf with Llechwedd-mawr to | | conf with Castell | | Llechwedd Mawr - HW to Nant y Moch | | reservoir | | Hengwm - headwaters to Nant y Moch | | reservoir | | Ystwyth - headwaters to conf with | | Cwmnewydion | | Background | | conditions | | 2 | | Mynach - headwaters to confluence with | | Rheidol | | Llechwedd Mawr - HW to Nant y Moch | | reservoir | | | | 4 | | | | Less | | stringent | | objective | | | | Unfavourable | | balance of | | costs and | | benefits | | Melindwr - headwaters to confluence with | | Rheidol | | Bow Street Brook - headwaters to conf with | | Clarach | | Hirwaun - headwaters to confluence with | | Teifi | | Llyn Hir | | 2 | | | | Teifi and Coastal Ceredigion | | North Ceredigion Rheidol Area | | | | No known | | technical | | solution is | | available | 5.5 Opportunities for partnerships There are several external funding opportunities, which could support projects that contribute towards Water Framework Directive outcomes. Each fund has its own priorities, budgetary allocation and application process. Types of funding for consideration include:  Lottery funding - such as Heritage Lottery Fund, Postcode Lottery and BIG Lottery Fund which have a range of programmes from £5000 up to £millions.  Charities, trusts & foundations - there are many of these operating and they often have a specific focus - either geographically or topically and will support local charities and projects.  Businesses and sponsorship opportunities - including making the most of the Welsh carrier bag charge!  Public bodies - local authorities, Welsh Government, UK Government and NRW may have annual funding opportunities or one-off competitions for their priority areas.  Crowd funding - gathering support from a wide range and number of funders, often including individuals and usually using the internet to raise awareness for a specific project needing funds.  Trading - increasingly funders are looking to support organisations with longer term sustainability in mind so developing trading opportunities can be something to consider too. Your local County Voluntary Council and Wales Council for Voluntary Action will have up to date information on opportunities such as these as well as a host of other support available. 6. Water Watch Wales During the implementation phase of the 2009 RBMP many of our partners and stakeholders requested access to data and information to assist them in helping to deliver local environmental improvements. Many stakeholders felt that the first plan was difficult to navigate and access information at a local scale. Consequently with both the support and input from the river basin district liaison panels a web based tool has been developed called **Water Watch Wales.** This is an interactive spatial web-based tool that provides supporting information and data layers. We will continue to develop this tool and see it as a critical link between the more strategic RBMP and local delivery. It enables the user to access information on:  classification data at the water body scale  reasons for not achieving good status  objectives  measures/actions, including protected area information  partnership projects Data can be retrieved in a number of formats (spreadsheets and summary reports). A user guide together with frequently asked questions is included with the tool and can be accessed from a link on the home page. Link to home page: waterwatchwales.naturalresourceswales.gov.uk ## Published by: Natural Resources Wales Cambria House 29 Newport Road Cardiff CF24 0TP 0300 065 3000 (Mon-Fri, 8am - 6pm) enquiries@naturalresourceswales.gov.uk www.naturalresourceswales.gov.uk © Natural Resources Wales All rights reserved. This document may be reproduced with prior permission of Natural Resources Wales

en

3016-pdf

## Huawei Cyber Security Evaluation Centre (Hcsec) Oversight Board Annual Report 2019 A report to the National Security Adviser of the United Kingdom March 2019 ## Annual Report Part I: Summary 1. This is the fifth annual report from the Huawei Cyber Security Evaluation Centre (HCSEC) Oversight Board. HCSEC is a facility in Banbury, Oxfordshire, belonging to Huawei Technologies (UK) Co Ltd (Huawei UK), whose parent company, Huawei Technologies Co Ltd, is a Chinese headquartered company which is now one of the world's largest telecommunications providers. 2. HCSEC has been running for eight years. It opened in November 2010 under a set of arrangements between Huawei and Her Majesty's Government (HMG) to mitigate any perceived risks arising from the involvement of Huawei in parts of the United Kingdom's (UK) critical national infrastructure. HCSEC provides security evaluation for a range of products used in the UK telecommunications market. Through HCSEC, the UK Government is provided with insight into Huawei's UK strategies and product ranges. The UK's National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC, and previously Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ)), as the national technical authority for information assurance and the lead Government operational agency on cyber security, leads for the Government in dealing with HCSEC and with Huawei more generally on technical security matters. 3. The HCSEC Oversight Board, established in 2014, is chaired by Ciaran Martin, the Chief Executive Officer of the NCSC, and an executive member of GCHQ's Board with responsibility for cyber security. The Oversight Board continues to include a senior executive from Huawei as Deputy Chair, as well as senior representatives from across Government and the UK telecommunications sector. The structure of the Oversight Board has not changed significantly, but membership has changed in 2018. Mainly, this is due to staff rotations in both HMG and Huawei positions. 4. The Oversight Board has now completed its fifth full year of work. In doing so it has covered several areas of HCSEC's work over the course of the year. The full details of this work are set out in Part II of this report. In this summary, the main highlights are: i. **New secure premises for HCSEC completed** - the previously reported acquisition of new premises for HCSEC had experienced some commercial delays, but has now completed successfully and the new facilities are fully operational; ii. The NCSC Technical Competence Review found that the capability of HCSEC has improved in 2018, and the quality of staff has not diminished, meaning that technical work relevant to the overall mitigation strategy can be performed at scale and with high quality; iii. The fifth independent audit of HCSEC's ability to operate independently of **Huawei HQ has been completed**, with - again - no high or medium priority findings. The audit report identified one low-rated finding, relating to delivery of information and equipment within agreed Service Level Agreements. Ernst & Young concluded that there were no major concerns and the Oversight Board is satisfied that HCSEC is operating in line with the 2010 arrangements between HMG and the company; iv. Further significant technical issues have been identified in Huawei's engineering processes, leading to new risks in the UK telecommunications networks; v. No material progress has been made by Huawei in the remediation of the issues reported last year, making it inappropriate to change the level of assurance from last year or to make any comment on potential future levels of assurance. 5. The key conclusions from the Oversight Board's fifth year of work are: i. In 2018, **HCSEC fulfilled its obligations** in respect of the provision of software engineering and cyber security assurance artefacts to the NCSC and the UK operators as part of the strategy to manage risks to UK national security from Huawei's involvement in the UK's critical networks; ii. However, as reported in 2018, HCSEC's work has continued to identify concerning issues in Huawei's approach to software development bringing significantly increased risk to UK operators, which requires ongoing management and mitigation; iii. **No material progress** has been made on the issues raised in the previous 2018 report; iv. The Oversight Board continues to be able to provide only limited assurance that the long-term security risks can be managed in the Huawei equipment currently deployed in the UK; v. The Oversight Board advises that it will be difficult to appropriately risk-manage future products in the context of UK deployments, until the underlying defects in Huawei's software engineering and cyber security processes are remediated; vi. At present, the Oversight Board has not yet seen anything to give it confidence in Huawei's capacity to successfully complete the elements of its transformation programme that it has proposed as a means of addressing these underlying defects. The Board will require sustained evidence of better software engineering and cyber security quality verified by HCSEC and NCSC; vii. Overall, the Oversight Board can only provide limited assurance that all risks to UK national security from Huawei's involvement in the UK's critical networks can be sufficiently mitigated long-term. This page is intentionally left blank ## Huawei Cyber Security Evaluation Centre Oversight Board 2018 Annual Report Part Ii: Technical And Operational Report This is the fifth annual report of the Huawei Cyber Security Evaluation Centre (HCSEC) Oversight Board. The report may contain some references to wider Huawei corporate strategy and to non-UK interests. It is important to note that the Oversight Board has no direct locus in these matters and they are only included insofar as they could have a bearing on conclusions relating directly to the assurance of HCSEC's UK operations. The UK Government's interest in these non-UK arrangements extends only to ensuring that HCSEC has sufficient capacity to discharge its agreed obligations to the UK. Neither the UK Government, nor the Board as a whole, has any locus in this process otherwise. ## Introduction 1. This is the fifth annual report from the Huawei Cyber Security Evaluation Centre (HCSEC) Oversight Board. HCSEC is a facility in Banbury, Oxfordshire, belonging to Huawei Technologies (UK) Co Ltd (Huawei UK), whose parent company is a Chinese headquartered company, Huawei Technologies Co Ltd, which is now one of the world's largest telecommunications providers. 2. HCSEC has been running for eight years. It opened in November 2010 under a set of arrangements between Huawei and HMG to mitigate any perceived risks arising from the involvement of Huawei in parts of the UK's critical national infrastructure. HCSEC provides security evaluation for a range of products used in the UK market. Through HCSEC, the UK Government is provided with insight into Huawei's UK strategies and product ranges. The UK's National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC, and previously GCHQ), as the national technical authority for information assurance and the lead Government operational agency on cyber security, leads for the Government in dealing with HCSEC and with Huawei more generally on technical security matters. 3. The HCSEC Oversight Board, established in 2014, is chaired by Ciaran Martin, the Chief Executive Officer of the NCSC, and an executive member of GCHQ's Board with responsibility for cyber security. The Oversight Board continues to include a senior executive from Huawei as Deputy Chair, as well as senior representatives from across Government and the UK telecommunications sector. The structure of the Oversight Board has not changed significantly, but membership has changed in the year 2017-18. Mainly, this is due to staff rotations in both HMG and Huawei positions. 4. This fifth annual report has been agreed unanimously by the Oversight Board's members. As with last year's report, the Board has agreed that there is no need for a confidential annex, so the content in this report represents the full analysis and assessment. 5. The report is set out as follows: I. Section I sets out the Oversight Board terms of reference and membership; II. Section II describes HCSEC staffing, skills, recruitment and accommodation; III. Section III covers HCSEC technical assurance, prioritisation and research and development; IV. Section IV summarises the findings of the 2018 independent audit; V. Section V brings together some conclusions. ## Section I: The Hcsec Oversight Board: Terms Of Reference And Membership 1.1 The HCSEC Oversight Board was established in early 2014. It meets quarterly under the chairmanship of Ciaran Martin, the Chief Executive of the NCSC and an executive member of GCHQ's Board at Director General level. Mr Martin reports directly to GCHQ's Director, Jeremy Fleming, and is responsible for the agency's work on cyber security. 1.2 The role of the Oversight Board is to oversee and ensure the independence, competence and overall effectiveness of HCSEC as part of the overall mitigation strategy in place to manage the risks presented by Huawei's presence in the UK and to advise the National Security Adviser on that basis. The National Security Adviser will then provide assurance to Ministers, Parliament and ultimately the general public as to whether the risks are being well managed. 1.3 The Oversight Board's scope relates only to products that are relevant to UK national security risk. Its remit is twofold and covers: - first, HCSEC's assessment of Huawei's products that are deployed or are contracted to be deployed in the UK and are relevant to UK national security risk which is determined at the NCSC's sole and absolute discretion; and - second, the independence, competence and therefore overall effectiveness of HCSEC in relation to the discharge of its duties. 1.4 The Board has an agreed Terms of Reference, a copy of which is attached at Appendix A. There have been no changes to the terms of reference this year and the remit and objectives of the Oversight Board remain unchanged. The Oversight Board is responsible for providing an annual report to the National Security Adviser, who will provide copies to the National Security Council and the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament (ISC). ## The Board'S Objectives For Hcsec 1.5 The Oversight Board's four high-level objectives for HCSEC remained consistent with those reported previously and are: - To provide security evaluation coverage over a range of UK customer deployments as defined in an annual HCSEC evaluation programme; - To continue to provide assurance to the UK Government by ensuring openness, transparency and responsiveness to Government and UK customer security concerns; - To demonstrate an increase in technical capability, either through improved quality of evaluations output or by development of bespoke security related tools, techniques or processes; - For HCSEC to support Huawei Research and Development to continue to develop and enhance Huawei's software engineering and cyber security competence. ## The Hcsec Oversight Board: Business April 2018-February 2019 1.6 This report covers the technical work undertaken from January 2018 until December 2018. The Oversight Board meeting in March 2018 was covered in the previous report. In its five meetings since the publication of the 2018 Annual Report, the Oversight Board has: - Provided regular corporate updates on Huawei UK; - Discussed future technology trends and how they may affect the work of the Oversight Board; - Been supplied with regular updates on HCSEC recruitment, staffing and accommodation plans; - Received a detailed report on technical visits to Huawei HQ in Shenzhen and Shanghai by the NCSC Technical Director and technical team, some with UK operators, to discuss technical issues; - Taken further evidence around the root causes of the significant software engineering and cyber security problems that came to light last year; - Taken further evidence on Huawei's proposed remediation for the significant software engineering and cyber security problems, and judged them to be inadequate; - Commissioned a fifth HCSEC management audit of the independence of the Centre. ## Section Ii: Hcsec Staffing 2.1 This section provides an account of HCSEC's staffing and skills, including recruitment and retention. ## Staffing And Skills 2.2 The NCSC leads for HMG in dealing with HCSEC and the company more generally on technical security matters. The NCSC, on behalf of HMG, sponsors the security clearances of HCSEC's staff. The general requirement is that all staff must have Developed Vetting (DV) security clearance, which is the same level required in Government to have frequent, uncontrolled access to classified information and is mandatory for members of the intelligence services. New recruits to HCSEC are managed under escort during probation pending completion of their DV clearance period, which is typically six months. 2.3 Staffing at HCSEC has increased in line with expectations for the year 2018. By the end of the calendar year, staff numbers were 38 (taking 'offer accepted' as the point of employment). 2.4 It remains critical that HCSEC continues to recruit technical cyber security specialists to manage attrition and succession. This continued excellent progress has been driven by the ongoing personal involvement of HCSEC leadership and represents a significant amount of work. 2.5 Once again, this year a significant number of potential recruits were sifted out due to clearance requirements. Furthermore, one candidate that passed initial sifting and was employed by HCSEC subsequently failed DV clearance and was removed from the centre. The small risk associated with this person was adequately managed through the supervision and oversight provided during their probationary employment period. ## Accommodation 2.6 The previous report spoke of a successful search for new accommodation for HCSEC to cope with the required expansion, but also of delays in its completion. The delays alluded to in that report came to pass for reasons associated with the building configuration and the logistics of the move. However, the process was successfully concluded this year. All HCSEC staff transitioned to the new facility and IT and representative customer networks were installed by November 2018. The incurred delays were not in any way the result of Huawei HQ's inaction or interference. 2.7 The new facility has been designed to accommodate securely the sensitive work that HCSEC undertakes, whilst also ensuring that Huawei intellectual property protection standards are addressed. The building has been assessed as sufficiently secure by HMG security teams and has also gained accreditation by Huawei HQ teams for its suitability to hold all Huawei source code. 2.8 The new accommodation will support the deployment of concurrent reference networks, allowing both product and solution evaluations to proceed at pace. It also facilitates increased development activity to support the significant number of products needing assessment. 2.9 It should be noted that HCSEC's 2018 budget is 160% of the 2017 budget, although a proportion of this is related to moving costs and other one-off charges. 2.10 Overall, good progress has been made on accommodation, staffing and skills during 2018. Quarterly monitoring by the Oversight Board has shown no cause for concern in the number of staff and their skills. The delay to the new accommodation is unfortunate but the move has been completed successfully with no significant impact on the work of HCSEC. ## ~~~~~ Section Iii(A): Hcsec Technical Assurance 3.1 2018 is the fifteenth year of the Government's active management of Huawei's presence in the UK's telecommunications networks, the eighth year of the Government's extended risk management programme for Huawei in the UK and the fifth year of the Oversight Board. In the previous four reports, the Oversight Board included some of the underlying technical detail concerning the results of evaluations conducted of Huawei products that year. This was necessary to enable the Board to provide clear and comprehensive assurance to the National Security Adviser. This report, covering Oversight Board activities between March 2018 and February 2019 but reporting on technical work between January 2018 and December 2018, updates the technical position laid out in the previous reports and, where necessary, elaborates further in order to explain the conclusions the Oversight Board has reached on technical assurance and HCSEC effectiveness, as well as its views on how the risks identified can be mitigated in the future. The Oversight Board considers it necessary to provide the technical detail contained in this report in order to fulfil its reporting function. In particular, the Oversight Board considers that provision of this detail is necessary to explain and substantiate its decision to reduce the level of assurance compared to previous years and also to help those operators not currently represented on the Oversight Board to understand the risks they may face in their networks. This section comprises NCSC's report to the Oversight Board and is split into two parts. The first provides an overview of the work performed by HCSEC and the high-level findings taken from this, along with conclusions about the technical assurance and HCSEC's effectiveness. The second part provides detailed technical information intended to help readers understand why the conclusions here have been reached. ## Hcsec Evaluation Process 3.2 HCSEC's assessment programme in 2018 continued the product and solution evaluation split of recent years. In 2018, 39 product evaluations were completed, and 3 solution evaluations were completed, with another scheduled to finish in early 2019. Overall, this is broadly as per the programme agreed at the start of the year. The evaluations covered products and architectures for five UK operators. This tempo was maintained despite the inclusion of significant amounts of non-evaluation work in support of Oversight Board actions and the move to new premises. 3.3 The NCSC has a stated objective of requiring HCSEC to perform a product evaluation on every relevant product in the UK at least every two years which is, on average, being met. HCSEC's product evaluation pipeline remains configured to achieve this. The Oversight Board is confident that continued attention from HCSEC seniors will ensure that there are sufficient appropriately skilled staff to continue to meet the NCSC objective. HCSEC staff must be capable of achieving security clearance and have the requisite skills, meaning the pool of available talent is small. HCSEC's move to new premises will help service the evaluation pipeline as there is sufficient space and infrastructure to maintain multiple representative networks concurrently, removing much of the tear down and build up time for evaluation work. 3.4 The evaluation process continues to uncover both point vulnerabilities and more strategic architectural and process issues, as detailed later in this section. Huawei continues with their remediation work; the feedback provided by HCSEC to UK operators, NCSC and Huawei R&D continues to be of high quality and the HCSEC technical staff continue to assist the Huawei R&D teams in their remediation efforts. ## Hcsec Programme Build And Prioritisation 3.5 The risk-based prioritisation scheme detailed in previous Oversight Board reports has continued to be applied during 2018. The programme build process remains broadly the same as in previous years. The UK operators, NCSC and HCSEC set priorities for HCSEC collaboratively. This is necessary to balance the sometimes competing constraints and requirements to achieve the best overall benefit for the UK, for example not allowing any particular operator to unfairly dominate the programme of work due to commercial pressures. The final programme is signed off by the NCSC Technical Director or NCSC Technical Director for Telecommunications on behalf of the Oversight Board and kept under review during the year by HCSEC. Where HCSEC believes modifications to the programme are necessary, a light-touch process involving the NCSC and the relevant operators is used to manage and approve any modifications. As well as servicing the evaluation pipeline, HCSEC has done significant work in support of the Oversight Board's objective levied in the previous report to support Huawei R&D in its efforts to enhance Huawei's software engineering and cyber security competence and so begin to remedy the underlying issues identified in this and previous reports. 3.6 Little has changed in terms of high-level prioritisation of equipment, although the scale and scope of Huawei's involvement in the UK telecoms sector means there is a significant pipeline of work for HCSEC to manage. At present, HCSEC manages that pipeline well, consistently meeting the expectations of NCSC and the UK operators. The results of HCSEC's work is reported directly to the operators and they are expected to feed them into their corporate risk management processes. ## Overview Of Hcsec Technical Work And High-Level Findings 3.7 Significant technical work has been done in 2018 by HCSEC and also by NCSC, which has undertaken the audit for the Oversight Board envisaged by paragraph 3.3 of the Terms of Reference. Details of that work are provided in the second half of this section, but the high-level conclusions and findings are provided here for convenience. - Four products have been provided by Huawei to test binary equivalence. Work to validate them by HCSEC is still ongoing but has already exposed wider flaws in the underlying build process which need to be rectified before binary equivalence can be demonstrated at scale. The NCSC has advised the Oversight Board that the priority should be to rectify these underlying flaws as part of Huawei's transformation plan. Unless and until this is done it is not possible to be confident that the source code examined by HCSEC is precisely that used to build the binaries running in the UK networks. - Due to various build-related issues, it is hard to be confident that different deployments of similar Huawei equipment are broadly equivalently secure. For example, it is difficult to be confident that vulnerabilities discovered in one build are remediated in another build through the normal operation of a sustained engineering process. The ability to do so, and the end-to-end assurance that a particular source code set is precisely that used to build a particular binary would normally be satisfied as a side effect of a modern software engineering process. - Huawei's configuration management improvements, which have been driven by the UK community since 2010, have not been universally applied across product and platform development groups or across configuration item types (source code, build tools, build scripts etc). Without good configuration management, there can be no end-to-end integrity in the products as delivered by Huawei, and limited confidence in Huawei's ability to understand the content of any given build or in their ability to perform true root cause analysis of identified issues. - Huawei continues to use an old and soon-to-be out of mainstream support version of a well-known and widely used real time operating system supplied by a third party. Huawei has separately purchased a premium long-term support agreement from the vendor to address vulnerabilities in a commercially viable manner in the future, but the underlying cyber security risks brought about by the single memory space, single user context security model remain. NCSC believes there is currently no credible plan to reduce the risk in the UK of the use of this real time operating system. Huawei's own equivalent operating system is subject to many of the same Huawei development processes as other components and NCSC currently has insufficient evidence to make a judgement on the software engineering quality and cyber security implications of this component. Furthermore, it employs more modern memory and security models and so integration with the existing product running on the operating system brings risk. This means that moving to this real time operating system may not improve the situation long-term, while bringing integration risk to the UK operators. Work continues between Huawei, HCSEC, the UK operators and NCSC to develop a realistic plan to reduce the long-term risk in the UK networks due to the use of this old, third-party real time operating system. However, NCSC remains concerned about the time elapsed since discovery of this issue without a credible plan being presented. - Analysis of Huawei's wider software component lifecycle management revealed flaws that cause significant cyber security and availability risks. This is a significant finding and more detail is provided in the second part of this section. Remediation of the existing codebase where this is an issue and of the flawed processes that allowed it to happen systemically will require significant rectification. - A software engineering and cyber security trend analysis was performed by HCSEC comparing subsequent major versions of the software for the LTE eNodeB. The later version was intended to incorporate all Huawei's improvements and therefore, on average, should have been objectively better than the previous version. While there were improvements, the general software engineering and cyber security quality of the product continues to demonstrate a significant number of major defects. The NCSC therefore remains concerned that Huawei's software engineering and cyber security competence and associated processes are failing to improve sufficiently. - The Oversight Board tasked Huawei with providing a plan to remediate the software engineering and cyber security issues in the LTE eNodeB product development and sustained engineering, to be reviewed by NCSC with the support of the UK operators. The plan presented was unacceptable to NCSC and UK operators. The NCSC currently is not confident that Huawei is able to remediate the significant problems it faces. - In response to the defects identified in its engineering processes Huawei presented to the Oversight Board its intent to transform its software engineering process through the investment of $2 billion over five years. However, this proposed investment, while welcome, is currently no more than a proposed initial budget for as yet unspecified activities. Although formal oversight of Huawei's global transformation plan does not fall within the scope of Oversight Board activities, the Board will wish to see details of the transformation plan and evidence of its impact on products being used in UK networks before it can be confident it will drive change. Unless and until a detailed plan has been provided and reviewed, it is not possible to offer any degree of confidence that the identified problems can be addressed by Huawei. - HCSEC has continued to find serious vulnerabilities in the Huawei products examined. Several hundred vulnerabilities and issues were reported to UK operators to inform their risk management and remediation in 2018. Some vulnerabilities identified in previous versions of products continue to exist. ## Conclusion: Hcsec Competence 3.8 NCSC continues to believe that the UK mitigation strategy, which includes HCSEC performing technical work and the Oversight Board providing assurance as two components, is the best way to manage the risk of Huawei's involvement in the UK telecommunications sector. The discovery of the issues exposed in this report are an indication of the model working properly. Huawei currently continues to engage with this process. 3.9 The work of HCSEC in 2018 has continued capability development in the underpinning tooling necessary to provide understanding and technical security artefacts to the UK operators and NCSC. Through 2018, HCSEC has continued to find issues in Huawei products, demonstrating their continued ability to discover weaknesses in the Huawei product set. Furthermore, 2018 has seen HCSEC expend significant effort in analysing Huawei R&D claims and effectively reverse engineering root cause issues out of an exceptionally complex and poorly controlled development and build process. This takes exceptional technical skill and insight. 3.10 HCSEC continues to have world-class security researchers who are creating new tools and techniques to provide the UK community understanding of the software engineering and cyber security implications of Huawei's unique software engineering and cyber security processes in the complex sphere of telecommunications. 3.11 In terms of core cyber security work, the number of vulnerabilities and issues reported to UK operators has risen to several hundred. Given the increase in the number of product evaluations performed in 2018 (39 over 27 in 2017) this number is broadly in line with previous years. Some serious vulnerabilities reported in previous evaluations continue to persist in newer versions. 3.12 The character of vulnerabilities has not changed significantly between years, with many vulnerabilities being of high impact (equivalently, a high base CVSS score and a relevant operational context), including unprotected stack overflows in publicly accessible protocols, protocol robustness errors leading to denial of service, logic errors, cryptographic weaknesses, default credentials and many other basic vulnerability types. Despite Huawei mandating application of its secure coding standards across R&D, extensive use of commercial static analysis tools and Huawei's insistence that risky code has been refactored, there has been little improvement in the objective software engineering and cyber security quality of the code delivered for assessment by HCSEC and onward to the UK operators. 3.13 The significant risk in the UK telecommunications infrastructure brought about by Huawei's equipment will continue to need to be managed by the UK operators and significant work will be required from all parties involved to reduce that risk in existing equipment over time. NCSC and the UK operators will continue to work with Huawei to create a credible and sustainable remediation plan for the equipment in the UK. Huawei has agreed that the remediation of the equipment in the UK is independent of any other work Huawei may do and will occur in a timely manner. The Oversight Board will judge the effectiveness of HCSEC's part in this as part of normal business. It is not clear that similar plans could be made for equipment new to the UK, as explained in this report. 3.14 These risks are not due to any issue with HCSEC's staffing and capabilities, which continue to be world-class. The Oversight Board will be looking to HCSEC to provide an independent view on any changes Huawei choose to make to their development process and to determine the efficacy of any software engineering and cyber security uplifts on the final products as deployed. 3.15 The NCSC believes that HCSEC remains competent in the areas of technical security necessary to advise the operators, NCSC and the Oversight Board as to the product and solution risks admitted by the use of Huawei products in the UK telecoms infrastructure. The NCSC's report to the Oversight Board is that HCSEC continues to provide unique, world-class cyber security expertise to assist the Government's ongoing risk management programme around the use of Huawei equipment with the UK operators. ## Conclusion: Implications For The Uk National Security Risk 3.16 The work of HCSEC summarised above reveals serious and systematic defects in Huawei's software engineering and cyber security competence. For this reason, NCSC continues to advise the Oversight Board that it is only appropriate to provide limited technical assurance in the security risk management possible for equipment currently deployed in the UK, since NCSC has not yet seen a credible remediation plan. Even this limited assurance is possible only on the basis that, thanks largely to the work of HCSEC, the defects in Huawei equipment are fairly well understood in the UK. Given that knowledge, in extremis, the NCSC could direct Huawei on remediation for equipment currently in the UK. This should not be taken to minimise the difficulty in doing so or to suggest that this would be a sustainable approach. In some cases, remediation will also require hardware replacement (due to CPU and memory constraints) which may or may not be part of natural operator asset management and upgrade cycles. 3.17 Given both the shortfalls in good software engineering and cyber security practice and the currently unknown trajectory of Huawei's R&D processes through their announced transformation plan, it is highly likely that security risk management of products that are new to the UK or new major releases of software for products currently in the UK will be more difficult. On the basis of the work already carried out by HCSEC, the NCSC considers it highly likely that there would be new software engineering and cyber security issues in products HCSEC has not yet examined. 3.18 Poor software engineering and cyber security processes lead to security and quality issues, including vulnerabilities. The number and severity of vulnerabilities discovered, along with architectural and build issues, by the relatively small team in HCSEC is a particular concern. If an attacker has knowledge of these vulnerabilities and sufficient access to exploit them, they may be able to affect the operation of the network, in some cases causing it to cease operating correctly. Other impacts could include being able to access user traffic or reconfiguration of the network elements. However, the architectural controls in place in most UK operators limit the ability of attackers to engender communication with any network elements not explicitly exposed to the public which, with other measures in place, makes exploitation of vulnerabilities harder. These architectural controls and the operational and security management of the networks by the UK operators will remain critically important in the coming years to manage the residual risks caused by the engineering defects identified. These findings are about basic engineering competence and cyber security hygiene that give rise to vulnerabilities that are capable of being exploited by a range of actors. NCSC does not believe that the defects identified are a result of Chinese state interference. ## Section Iii(B): Supporting Technical Evidence Binary Equivalence And Software Consistency 3.19 It has always been part of the mitigation strategy to ensure that the source code examined by HCSEC is precisely that which is compiled to the binaries executing in UK network equipment. Without a process to show that the source code and build environments examined by HCSEC uniquely produce the binary deployed in the UK's networks, it is impossible to provide end-to-end assurance in the security and integrity of the products in use. Binary equivalence was seen to be an interim step to gaining that assurance in the face of Huawei's extremely complex build process. It is worth noting that the assurance of the source to binary link in no way confers an assurance on either engineering quality or security. The previous Oversight Board report detailed progress on the new process for achieving binary equivalence, that is being able to build a product from source in HCSEC to a binary equivalent to (not necessarily identical to) the General Availability (GA) version produced by Huawei R&D in China. In the previous report, it was recorded that a single product - a broadband head end - had successfully had a repeatable build created and deployment of this version was expected imminently. Unfortunately, no UK operator has been able to deploy this version due to version specific dependencies that cannot be satisfied in the UK deployments today. 3.20 The expectation set in the previous report was that the remaining three pilot products from the LTE, EPC and optical transmission product lines would have become commercially available, repeatable GA builds within the first half of 2018. While binaries have been delivered by Huawei R&D over the course of the year and marked as GA by Huawei, the separate validation work by HCSEC has not completed. The validation work on the EPC product was just beginning at the end of 2018 and the optical transmission product has been rescheduled to begin in 2019. As with all HCSEC programme changes, these were agreed with NCSC on behalf of the Oversight Board. 3.21 HCSEC was tasked with understanding the issues confronting Huawei in creating repeatable builds. The issue in all cases is with Huawei's underlying build process which provides no end-to-end integrity, no good configuration management, no lifecycle management of software components across versions, use of deprecated and out of support tool chains (some of which are non-deterministic) and poor hygiene in the build environments, many of which cannot be easily recreated by HCSEC. It is unclear whether there is any utility in continuing the binary equivalence programme given the fundamental issues in the underlying build process and the customer management and engineering processes that drive it. HCSEC and NCSC have agreed that effort would be better expended in re-engineering the build process from scratch, as part of a wider software engineering and cyber security transformation. It remains the NCSC intent that all products deployed in the UK will have repeatable builds and that HCSEC will be able to routinely show equivalence between the binary installed in UK networks and the binary that can be built from the source code held by HCSEC, as is usual with a well-managed software engineering process. The recent work with the four pilot products demonstrates that this is currently impractical at any useful scale given Huawei's current build process. The NCSC has advised the Oversight Board that it will only be possible to offer limited assurance for equipment currently deployed in the UK unless and until the build process has fundamentally changed. 3.22 There remain concerns among the UK operator community about the consistency of similarly versioned software as delivered by Huawei. In some cases, builds are tested in operator intended final configuration - which are supplied by operators - before release by Huawei. While this improves reliability in the intended configuration, it may mask the serious issues detailed in this report which will affect network performance when the configurations are perturbed, or vulnerabilities exploited, causing security or availability impacts on the networks. True consistency across operators requires the issues in this report to be remediated. ## Configuration Management 3.23 As detailed in the 2018 report, the Oversight Board and NCSC asked Huawei R&D to do more of the mandraulic work required by the binary equivalence programme, with HCSEC moving to a role where it provided validation. As this work progressed, more and more unexpected artefacts were produced by the R&D team. HCSEC were asked to perform an analysis to expose the underlying systemic issues that led to the problems encountered. They discovered the following defects: - Configuration management of virtual machines used during the build process is poor. Specifically, virtual machines were not clean at build start, with many containing (sometimes irrelevant) source code, artefacts of previous builds and other detritus. - Configuration management of the build environment - including toolchains - is poor and sometimes non-existent. Tools are installed multiple times in a build environment, or in environments where they are not needed. Many tools are significantly out of support and have undesirable properties, for example nondeterministic compilation or optimization based on environment variable values. - Configuration management of source code is poor. This manifests in two broad areas. Firstly, configuration management is not applied consistently between development teams. Product code is managed differently to platform code and both are managed differently to third-party components. Secondly, the integration into the overall product architecture is very poor, with multiple copies and versions of components, apparently identically versioned components containing significant differences, circular dependencies between components and some components regressing in version between overall product increments. ## 3.24 NCSC (then CESG) first demanded proper configuration management from Huawei in 2010 and the company has been investing in the process since then, with earlier Oversight Board reports detailing Huawei's work in this area. However, artefacts have been discovered as a result of the various technical work undertaken during the intervening time suggesting that this roll out has not been consistent across the company and that configuration items have not been rationalised during the work. In 2016, HCSEC wrote a report outlining many of these issues in response to an NCSC request, but these findings were rejected by Huawei at the time. From the subsequent work done by HCSEC and NCSC under the auspices of the Oversight Board, it is now clear that the issues identified in the 2016 report remain and are systemic across the product lines in the company. As a result of these issues, the NCSC has advised the Oversight Board that, at present, there is no end-to-end integrity in the products as delivered by Huawei, and limited confidence in Huawei's ability to understand the content of any given build or in their ability to perform true root cause analysis of identified issues. ## Third-Party Component Support Issue 3.25 Significant effort has been invested by all parties in fully understanding the issue raised in the previous report about support for a particular third-party software component. This issue relates to various old and soon-to-be out of mainstream support versions of a widely used third-party real time operating system, which Huawei has chosen to continue to use within products whose end of life date is significantly longer. Continuing to use products which rely on old software components (including but not limited to the operating system) attracts risk for operators. Furthermore, the operating system in question is based on a single memory space, single user model (as was prevalent at its time of design), which further increases risk as a single vulnerability in any process running under this operating system is sufficient to allow compromise of any component running in the same operating system instance. Huawei has purchased a separate premium long-term support agreement from the vendor to address vulnerabilities in a commercially viable manner in the future, but the underlying cyber security risks brought about by the single memory space, single user context security model remain. It is industry good practice to keep components up to date and to upgrade versions in line with vendor releases. The Oversight Board and UK operators have made it clear that long-term reliance on this operating system in the UK is unacceptable and an upgrade path must be created. At the time of writing, NCSC has not seen a credible plan from Huawei for the mitigation of this issue and an upgrade path to a supportable operating system with a security model appropriate for a modern carrier-grade telecommunications system. Operators will continue to have to do extraordinary work to mitigate the ongoing risk until a credible plan is enacted. ## Wider Component And Lifecycle Management Issue 3.26 At the June 2018 Oversight Board meeting, held at Huawei's facility in Shanghai, a technical follow up day was added to the end of the meeting to better understand the wider component and lifecycle management strategy, including the operating system issue detailed above. 3.27 The first piece of work was around Huawei's intent to move off the operating system that is soon-to-be out of mainline support to their own real time operating system, based on the open source Linux kernel. Following its review in Shanghai the NCSC concluded that it did not have sufficient evidence to be confident in the longterm sustained engineering of Huawei's own real time operating system. There are integration risks with the existing application code being ported to a more modern operating system memory and security model. This gives rise to a cross-operator risk which needs careful attention to remediate, especially as new hardware may be required in some cases. Work needs to be done to weigh the known risks of a dated operating system with the risks of a change to a different operating system and all that entails. This is an extremely difficult position for operators. More detail is presented later. 3.28 The second piece of work was to determine whether the wider component and lifecycle management showed similar issues. Since the Oversight Board meeting was held in Shanghai, it was possible to have engineers present to perform actions on the live development systems to show real-time evidence. Huawei presented the intended process and some high-level evidence to show it was being followed. NCSC then selected a commonly used component, the OpenSSL library, and specific queries were performed on the Huawei development database. This showed that there were an unmanageable number of versions of OpenSSL permitted to be used in products, including versions that are not on the main development train, that have known vulnerabilities and that are unsupported. The conclusion reported back to the Oversight Board is that Huawei's basic engineering process does not correctly manage either component usage or the lifecycle sustainment issues, leaving products unsupportable in general. 3.29 The Oversight Board made clear at the September meeting that this was unacceptable and reiterated the demand that had been made over the previous 12 months for Huawei to fundamentally transform its software engineering and cyber security processes. ## Improvement Testing On Lte Enodeb 3.30 At the June 2018 Oversight Board meeting, held at Huawei's facility in Shanghai, HCSEC was tasked with performing an analysis of the software engineering and cyber security quality change between two versions of the LTE eNodeB. Under Huawei's planned implementation, the improvement process being carried out was intended to be generally embedded around the time the later release was code complete. Delivery of this report to NCSC was deferred in order to give time for Huawei to provide an improvement plan but was requested by NCSC at the September board meeting due to a lack of progress in identifying underlying root causes or moves to change the development process. 3.31 It would have been unrealistic to expect the later version of the software to be flawless, but NCSC hoped to see a broad and consistent improvement. The review revealed that code duplication has been reduced significantly between the two versions and there was a significant reduction in the number of copies of one open source component. Unfortunately, the general software engineering and cyber security quality of the product continues to demonstrate a significant number of major defects: - Extensive non-adherence to basic secure coding practices, including Huawei's own internal standard, mandated since 2013, making vulnerabilities much more likely. The extent of this had reduced between versions but remained a cause for concern; - Extensive incorrect use of safe memory manipulation functions, significantly increasing the likelihood of memory safety vulnerabilities. The extent of this had reduced between versions but remained a cause for concern; - Extensive misuse of signed/unsigned typing and casting to different variable sizes when performing arithmetic operations including on bounds calculations, significantly increasing the likelihood of integer overflow and underflow vulnerabilities and associated buffer sizing vulnerabilities; - Poor management of software component imports, making supportability and lifecycle security very difficult; - Inappropriate suppression of warnings from static analysis tools, potentially hiding vulnerabilities; - Extensive use of inherently insecure and prohibited memory manipulation functions, further increasing the likelihood of memory safety vulnerabilities. The extent of this had reduced between versions but remained a cause for concern; - Unmanageable build process, including toolchains that are out of date. 3.32 Two specific examples, taken from the extensive report, illustrate the scale of the issues discovered. 3.33 The report analysed the use of the commonly used and well maintained open source component OpenSSL. OpenSSL is often security critical and processes untrusted data from the network and so it is important that the component is kept up to date. In the first version of the software, there were 70 full copies of 4 different OpenSSL versions, ranging from 0.9.8 to 1.0.2k (including one from a vendor SDK) with partial copies of 14 versions, ranging from 0.9.7d to 1.0.2k, those partial copies numbering 304. Fragments of 10 versions, ranging from 0.9.6 to 1.0.2k, were also found across the codebase, with these normally being small sets of files that had been copied to import some particular functionality. There were also a large number of files, again spread across the codebase, that had started life in the OpenSSL library and had been modified by Huawei. 3.34 In the later version, there were only 6 copies of 2 different OpenSSL versions, with 5 being 1.0.2k and one fork from a vendor SDK. There remained 17 partial copies of 3 versions, ranging from 0.9.7d to 1.0.2k. The fragments from the 10 different versions of OpenSSL remained across the codebase as do the OpenSSL derived files that have been modified by Huawei. More worryingly, the later version appears to contain code that is vulnerable to 10 publicly disclosed OpenSSL vulnerabilities, some dating back to 2006. This shows the lack of maintainability and security resulting from the poor configuration management, product architecture and component lifecycle management. 3.35 The report also analysed the adherence of the product to part of Huawei's own secure coding guidelines, namely safe memory handling functions. The binary image on one of the public-facing processing boards in the eNodeB was analysed for the use of direct invocation of memcpy()-like, strcpy()-like and sprintf()-like functions in their safe and unsafe variants. This board handles communication with untrusted interfaces and it would be expected to be coded in a robust and defensive manner. This is especially true in this case because of the lack of operating system mitigations. ## 3.36 In Summary: - There were over 5000 direct invocations of 17 different safe memcpy()-like functions and over 600 direct invocations of 12 different unsafe memcpy()-like functions. Approximately 11% of the direct invocations of memcpy()-like functions are to unsafe variants. - There were over 1400 direct invocations of 22 different safe strcpy()-like functions and over 400 direct invocations of 9 different unsafe strcpy()-like functions. Approximately 22% of the direct invocations of strcpy()-like functions are to unsafe variants. - There were over 2000 direct invocations of 17 different safe sprintf()-like functions and almost 200 direct invocations of 12 different unsafe sprintf()-like functions. Approximately 9% of the direct invocations of sprintf()-like functions are to unsafe variants. 3.37 These numbers do not include any indirect invocation, such as through function pointers and the like. It is worth noting these unsafe functions are present in the binary and therefore pose real risk. 3.38 Analysis of relevant source code worryingly identified a number pre-processor directives of the form "#define SAFE_LIBRARY_memcpy(dest, destMax, src, count) memcpy(dest, src, count)", which redefine a safe function to an unsafe one, effectively removing any benefit of the work done to remove the unsafe functions in the source code. There are also directives which force unsafe use of potentially safe functions, for example of the form "#define ANOTHER_MEMCPY(dest,src,size) memcpy_s((dest),(size),(src),(size))". 3.39 This sort of redefinition makes it harder for developers to make good security choices and the job of any code auditor exceptionally hard. These are only examples, but show that Huawei's own internal secure coding guidelines are not routinely followed in this product and, in some cases, developers may be actively working to hide bad coding practice rather than fix it. 3.40 This analysis in total shows that there remain significant issues to be addressed in Huawei's software engineering and cyber security development. ## Lte Improvement Plan 3.41 At the September 2018 Oversight Board meeting, board members were becoming increasingly concerned about the lack of progress made by Huawei in remediating the basic issues discovered by HCSEC and NCSC. In particular, the lack of progress in creating a credible plan to mitigate the significant installed base of unsupportable software in the UK over the previous 12 months had become critical. In order to focus effort, the Oversight Board requested a plan to remediate a single product, eventually chosen to be the LTE eNodeB. Huawei were given until October 19th 2018 - subsequently extended to October 26th - to provide a credible plan for the remediation of the eNodeB. The intent was to ensure that discussion could be had between Huawei, HCSEC, the UK operators and NCSC and improvement made before the December Oversight Board meeting where the plan was to be discussed. 3.42 The majority of the document presented was a security analysis of the eNodeB functions, drawn mainly from NIST SP800-187. There was an acknowledgement of the problems that had been discovered by HCSEC and NCSC and some attempts to describe basic remediation, but the document mainly described Huawei's current processes and their intended outcomes, rather than the reality of what had been observed in the shipped products and the underlying root causes. A small section of the report was concerned with a plan for changes to be made to Huawei's development process. Unfortunately, the plan as delivered did not address the scale of the problem encountered and did not fundamentally address the underlying software engineering competence issue. Huawei were given another four weeks to present a plan at a meeting with NCSC and the UK operators. The Huawei presentation at that meeting showed that no substantive progress had been made. At the time of writing, NCSC has seen no credible plan from Huawei for remediation of the eNodeB or any other Huawei product in use in the UK. ## Huawei Transformation 3.43 After the meeting to discuss the LTE eNodeB improvement plan, NCSC wrote to Huawei on behalf of the Oversight Board once again seeking a credible plan for both tactical remediation of the products already deployed in the UK and for a wider transformation programme that would make recurrence of these issues less likely in the future. NCSC made clear that without such a plan, there could be no long-term confidence in Huawei's technology or Huawei's ability to support operators in its secure use long-term. 3.44 Huawei accepted the criticism of their software engineering and cyber security processes and promised to invest $2 billion over five years in a company-wide transformation that will contain and mitigate the concerns raised by the Oversight Board. Clearly, any such investment must be supported by a plan which includes measurable outcomes. Although formal oversight of Huawei's global transformation plan does not fall within the scope of the Oversight Board activities and it does not expect to report on wider matters that do not relate to UK cyber security risk, the Board will wish to see sufficient details of Huawei's transformation of its software engineering and cyber security processes to enable it to assess to the extent to which they effectively contain and mitigate the risks it has identified. Sustained evidence of its impact on the products being used in the UK will be required before the Board can reassess its level of assurance, especially given the threat environment and increasing complexity of the technology involved. In the meantime, NCSC will advise the Oversight Board that it can continue to provide only limited assurance in the security of the currently deployed equipment in the UK. NCSC and the UK operators will continue to work with Huawei to create a credible and sustainable remediation plan for the equipment in the UK, independent of any wider Huawei transformation. In extremis, NCSC could direct Huawei as to how to remediate the specific products already in the UK infrastructure outside of Huawei's normal development and support process, allowing for a reduction in the risk present in the UK to a more reasonable level. This is not a sustainable response and only a good practice software engineering and cyber security development process could provide the basis of assurance in the future. 3.45 Importantly, NCSC cannot currently predict the likely technical construction and characteristics of Huawei's future products, created during and after the transformation. Furthermore, given that Huawei's development process is inconsistent across product groups, NCSC cannot assume that findings from the product portfolio in use in the UK translate to other products. The UK's mitigation strategy for the use of Huawei equipment in the UK telecommunication sector, of which HCSEC and the Oversight Board is one part, expects industry good practice software engineering and cyber security development and support processes as a basis. Huawei currently does not meet that basic expectation. As a result of the operation of HCSEC, the UK operators and NCSC have significant, detailed knowledge of the risks arising out of the currently deployed Huawei equipment. Significant new equipment where the same level of detail is not available and assumptions based on existing knowledge cannot be reused (due to inconsistent development practices), will make that risk management harder. 3.46 Given the scale of the issues, significant and sustained evidence of improvement across multiple versions and multiple products will be necessary to begin to build confidence in Huawei's software engineering and cyber security quality and development processes. A single 'good' build will provide no confidence in the longterm security and sustainability of the product in the real world. Huawei's public statements about their transformation plan state that it will take five years. NCSC's Technical Director considers that this is broadly in line with a best-case estimate. The Oversight Board acknowledges that when it comes to reporting progress on matters relating to UK cybersecurity risk in future annual reports it will continue to take into account any representations from Huawei that particular matters are commercially sensitive and/or do not relate to UK cybersecurity risk. It will continue to pay due regard to any such representations provided always that it is able to properly discharge its obligations to report on risks to UK cybersecurity as required by its terms of reference included in Appendix A. ~~~~~ ## Section Iv: The Work Of The Board: Assurance Of Independence 4.1 This section focuses on the more general work of the Oversight Board beyond its oversight of the technical assurance provided by HCSEC. For the fifth year running, the Board commissioned and considered an audit of HSCEC's required operational independence from Huawei HQ. This was the most effective way, in the Board's view, of gaining assurance that the arrangements were working in the way they were designed to work in support of UK national security. The principal question for examination by the audit was whether HCSEC had the required operational independence from Huawei HQ to fulfil its obligations under the set of arrangements reached between the UK Government and the company in 2010. The independent audit does not seek to comment on the quality of any technical work - from either HCSEC or Huawei HQ - and detailed technical findings are not relevant to the independence of operation of HCSEC. This section provides an account of the process by which the audit took place, and a summary of the key findings. ## Appointing Ernst & Young As Auditors 4.2 Ernst & Young LLP (E&Y) were appointed to carry out the first HCSEC audit in 2014, following a rigorous process during which GCHQ invited three audit houses to consider undertaking the management audit and sought their recommendation as to the appropriate audit standard and process to be followed. E&Y undertook the second audit in 2015 and in 2016, at the NCSC's instigation, they were retained to provide audit services for the subsequent three years, that is until November 2019. E&Y's Annual Management Audit was conducted in accordance with the International Standard on Assurance Engagements (ISAE) 3000. 4.3 The Oversight Board agreed a three-stage approach to the audit, which broadly followed that of previous years: i. An initial phase to assess the control environment and agree the scope and key issues for review. This phase was completed by November 2018; ii. A second phase to run a rehearsal audit of the design and operation of the controls in place to support the independent operation of HCSEC. This phase was completed during November 2018; iii. A final audit phase comprising the full year end audit during December 2018, with the report presented in January 2019. ## The Nature And Scope Of The Audit 4.4 The audit assessed the adequacy and the operation of processes and controls designed to enable the staff and management of HCSEC to operate independently of undue influence from elsewhere in Huawei. The principal areas in scope were: Finance and Budgeting; HR; Procurement; Evaluation Programme Planning; Cooperation and Support from elsewhere in Huawei; and Evaluation Reporting. For all the review areas listed, E&Y took into account that the operation of HCSEC must be conducted within the annual budget agreed between Huawei and HCSEC. 4.5 The Oversight Board agreed some exclusions to the scope of the audit. Specifically, they agreed that the audit would not: - Opine as to the appropriateness of the overall governance model adopted to support the testing of Huawei products being deployed in the UK Critical National Infrastructure; - Assess the technical capability of HCSEC, the competency of individual staff or the quality of the performance of technical testing; - Assess physical access to HCSEC or logical access to its IT infrastructure. Nor would it look at the resilience of the infrastructure in place or at Disaster Recovery or Business Continuity planning. ## Headline Audit Findings 4.6 The HCSEC Annual Management Audit January 2019 comprised a rigorous evidence-based review of HCSEC processes and procedures. The audit report was produced by a team of DV cleared staff from Ernst & Young; the fieldwork was conducted by an experienced Manager and led by a Senior Manager. A Partner with Internal Audit subject matter knowledge acted as quality reviewer, and a second review of the final report was performed by an Ernst & Young Associate Partner. 4.7 In summary, Ernst & Young concluded that there were no major concerns about the independent operation of HCSEC. The audit report's principal conclusion said: "With the exception of the findings below [one finding rated as 'Low'], the controls evaluated were considered to be effective as per the control descriptions and agreed test procedures. In some instances, it was noted that there is the opportunity to further strengthen the control regime or to improve the efficiency of the audit process and these have been noted below as "advisory" recommendations as opposed to identified control deficiencies" ## Control Weakness 4.8 In summary, the area of control weakness identified, and the agreed response, relate to the following area: ## I. Rfis Returned Outside Sla Period Requests for information made to Huawei were not always returned inside the stated SLA period, which is 12 weeks for hardware and 30 days for software source code. This was reported as an advisory recommendation in the previous audit but has continued into this year. ## While there is some 'slack' in the HCSEC plan to accommodate late delivery, HCSEC RFIs should be updated to include a 'required by' date and any breach of delivery should be escalated. ## Advisory Notices 4.9 Two advisory notices were also identified by the audit. ## I. Review Of Progress Against Evaluation Plan 4.10 A formal regular review of progress against the evaluation plan has not been continued this year. The review observed that regular SMT meetings were held in which any issues with evaluation progress could be raised, however the weekly evaluation progress report which has been completed in previous years has not been performed. 4.11 The regular reporting of evaluation status should be reinstated. This provides a record of the work of HCSEC and serves to highlight clearly any delays and their causes. ## Ii. Rigour Of Auditable Information 4.12 Sample based testing identified a few instances where records had not been properly maintained - although in each case it was determined that the related control was still operating effectively. The review identified a purchase order that had been processed without all the correct approvals being recorded and some suppliers on the HCSEC supplier list incorrectly marked as inactive when active contracts were in place. 4.13 HCSEC's current processes should be rigorously followed. ## Prior Year Issues And Current Status 4.14 **Appendix B** provides a summary of the issues and observations from the previous year's report, published in 2018. ## Overall Oversight Board Conclusions Of The Audit 4.15 Taking the audit report in its totality, the HCSEC Oversight Board has concluded that the report provides important, external reassurance from a globally respected company that the arrangements for HCSEC's operational independence from Huawei Headquarters are operating robustly and effectively, and in a manner consistent with the 2010 arrangements between the Government and the company. Three issues - one low-rated finding and two advisory issues - have been identified. Given the scope of the audit, this is entirely consistent with the wider findings in this report. ## Section V: Conclusions 5.1 The Oversight Board has now completed its work during this period. Its five meetings and its work out of Committee have provided a useful enhancement of the governance arrangements for HCSEC. 5.2 The Oversight Board has concluded that in the year 2018, HCSEC fulfilled its obligations in respect of the provision of software engineering and cyber security assurance artefacts to the NCSC and the UK operators as part of the strategy to manage risks to UK national security from Huawei's involvement in the UK's critical networks. 5.3 However, as reported in 2018, HCSEC's work continues to identify significant, concerning issues in Huawei's approach to software development bringing significantly increased risk to UK operators, which requires ongoing management and mitigation. Operators will need to take into account the mitigations required as a result of the extensive vulnerability and software engineering and cyber security quality information provided by the work of HCSEC. 5.4 No material progress has been made on the issues raised in the 2018 report and further issues have come to light in this year's report. The Oversight Board continues to be able to provide **only limited assurance** that the long-term security risks can be managed in the Huawei equipment currently deployed in the UK. The Oversight Board notes in particular the following advice from NCSC: i. That there remains no end-to-end integrity of the products as delivered by Huawei and limited confidence on Huawei's ability to understand the content of any given build and its ability to perform true root cause analysis of identified issues. This raises significant concerns about vulnerability management in the long-term; ii. That Huawei's software component management is defective, leading to higher vulnerability rates and significant risk of unsupportable software; iii. That although the review of subsequent major versions of the eNodeB showed improvements in code duplication and a significant reduction in the number of copies of the OpenSSL component, the general software engineering and cyber security quality of the product continues to demonstrate a significant number of major defects. 5.5 The Oversight Board advises that it will be difficult to appropriately risk manage future products in the context of UK deployments, until Huawei's software engineering and cyber security processes are remediated. The Oversight Board currently has not seen anything to give it confidence in Huawei's ability to bring about change via its transformation programme and will require sustained evidence of better software engineering and cyber security quality verified by HCSEC and NCSC. 5.6 Huawei's transformation plan could in principle be successful, bringing Huawei's software engineering and cyber security processes up to current industry good practice. Huawei's own public estimates are that this transformation will take three to five years. The Oversight Board would require NCSC assessment of evidence of sustained change across multiple versions of multiple products in order to have confidence in success - a single version of a single product with better objective engineering quality and security does not guarantee a successful and sustainable change across the company, or even in that individual product group. 5.7 The evidence of sustained change is especially important as similar strongly worded commitments from Huawei in the past have not brought about any discernible improvements. The Oversight Board note in particular the commitments first made in Huawei's 2012 cyber security whitepaper (accessible at https://wwwfile.huawei.com/-/media/corporate/pdf/cyber-security/cyber-security-white-paper- 2012-en.pdf) and repeated subsequently. Therefore, significant and sustained evidence will be required to give the Oversight Board any confidence that Huawei's transformation programme will bring about the required change. 5.8 It should be made clear that the Oversight Board's statement of limited assurance is not a comment on the security of the UK's networks today, which is a matter for individual operators, Ofcom, DCMS and NCSC. It is assurance as to whether HCSEC can continue to provide security relevant artefacts to inform UK stakeholders as part of the mitigation strategy. The oversight provided for in our mitigation strategy for Huawei's presence in the UK is arguably the toughest and most rigorous in the world. This report does not, therefore, suggest that the UK networks are more vulnerable than last year. Indeed, the significant technical insight provided by HCSEC to the UK operators allows them to plan more effective mitigations. The report from the Oversight Board states only that Huawei's development and support processes are not currently conducive to long-term security risk management and, at present, the Oversight Board has seen nothing to give confidence in Huawei's capacity to fix this. 5.9 These conclusions of the Oversight Board do not presage in any way the review of telecoms supply arrangements in the UK currently being carried out by DCMS on behalf of Government with the aim of ensuring there is an effective policy framework in place for the deployment of secure and resilient 5G and full fibre networks. DCMS has stated that the review will carefully consider the Oversight Board's findings and conclusions on technical assurance, alongside other evidence, in the development of policy. But the review will be based on a diverse set of evidence of which the Oversight Board conclusions are only a part. 5.10 Finally, it should also be noted that the Oversight Board wishes to emphasise that it has no remit to direct or influence the purchasing decisions of the UK operators. They must individually manage the risk in their own networks, with support from Ofcom, DCMS and NCSC. 5.11 The Oversight Board hopes that this report continues to add to Parliamentary - and through it, public - knowledge of the operation of the arrangements and the transparency with which they are operated. ~~~~~ ## Appendix A: Terms Of Reference For The Huawei Cyber Security Evaluation Centre Oversight Board 1. Purpose This Oversight Board will be established to implement recommendation two of the National Security Adviser's Review of the Huawei Cyber Security Evaluation Centre (HCSEC). The Oversight Board's primary purpose will be to oversee and ensure the independence, competence and therefore overall effectiveness of HCSEC and it will advise the National Security Adviser on this basis. It will work by consensus. However, if there is a disagreement relating to matters covered by the Oversight Board, GCHQ, as chair, will have the right to make the final decision. The Board is responsible for assessing HCSEC's performance relating to UK product deployments. It should not get involved in the day-to-day operations of HCSEC. ## 2. Scope Of Work 2.1 In Scope The Oversight Board will focus on: - HCSEC's assessment of Huawei products that are deployed or are contracted to be deployed in the UK and are relevant to UK national security risk. - The independence, competence and therefore overall effectiveness of HCSEC in relation to the discharge of its duties. ## 2.2 Out Of Scope - All products that are not relevant to UK national risk; - All products, work or resources for non UK-based deployment, including those deployed outside the UK by any global CSPs which are based in the UK; - The commercial relationship between Huawei and CSPs; and - HCSEC's foundational research (tools, techniques etc.) which will be assessed and directed by GCHQ. ## 3. Objectives Of The Oversight Board 3.1 Annual Objectives And Report To The National Security Adviser To provide a report on the independence, competence and effectiveness of HCSEC to the National Security Adviser on an annual basis, explicitly detailing to what extent HCSEC has met its in-year objectives as set by the Board. This will draw upon the Annual Management Audit, the Technical Competence Review and will specifically assess the current status and the long-term strategy for resourcing HCSEC. All UK CSPs that have contracted to use HCSEC for assurance in the context of management of UK national risk for deployments shall be consulted. In the event of a change to the operation of HCSEC, or the emergence of any other factor that affects HCSEC's security posture, HCSEC will report this to the Oversight Board in a timely manner. GCHQ [or any other member of the Oversight Board] shall also be expected to inform the Oversight Board of any factor which appears to affect the security posture of HCSEC. ## 3.2 Commission Annual Management Audit To assure the continued independence of HCSEC from Huawei HQ, the Oversight Board will commission a management audit to be performed by security cleared UK auditors; this will be funded by UK Government. The scope of the audit shall be as set out in the Huawei HQ Letter of Authorisation (Operational Independence) to HCSEC (as set out in Annex 3), or other agreed standards, as agreed by the Oversight Board. This will include the independence of budget execution and whether HCSEC were provided with the timely information, products and code to undertake their work. The Oversight Board will ensure the scope of any such audit is appropriate and the auditor shall be agreed by the Chair and Deputy Chair. The audit report mentioned in section 3.2 and 3.3 shall be treated as confidential information and subject to section 9. ## 3.3 Commission Technical Competence Review To provide assurance that the functions performed by HCSEC are appropriate in terms of the wider risk management strategy as defined by GCHQ and the CSPs. The Oversight Board will commission GCHQ to undertake an audit of the technical competence of the HCSEC staff, the appropriateness and completeness of the processes undertaken by HCSEC and the strategic effects of the quality and security of Huawei products relevant to UK national security risks. GCHQ as part of the annual planning process will advise HCSEC of any enhancements in technical capability they wish to see developed by them within the year. ## 3.4 Process To Appoint Senior Management Team The Oversight Board will agree the process by which GCHQ will lead and direct the appointment of senior members of staff of HCSEC. However, the Oversight Board will not be directly involved but will receive updates on any developments from GCHQ. ## 3.5 Timely Delivery The Oversight Board will agree the formalisation of the existing arrangements for code, products and information to be provided by Huawei HQ to HCSEC to ensure that the completion of evaluations are not unnecessarily delayed. ## 3.6 Escalation / Arbitrator For Issues Impacting Hcsec Board members should inform the Oversight Board in a timely manner in the event that an issue arises that could impact the independence, effectiveness, resourcing or the security posture of HCSEC. Under these circumstances the Board may convene an extraordinary meeting. ## 4. Oversight Board Membership The Board will initially consist of the following members. Membership will be reviewed annually. The National Security Advisor will appoint the Chair of the Board. Membership with then be via invitation from the Chair. - GCHQ - Chair (Ciaran Martin, CEO NCSC) - Huawei HQ - Deputy Chair (Ryan Ding, Executive Director of the Board) - Huawei UK Managing Director - Huawei UK Communications Director - HCSEC Managing Director - Cabinet Office Director, Cyber Security, National Security Secretariat - NCSC Technical Director - Whitehall Departmental representatives: (Deputy Director, Head of Telecoms Security, DCMS, Head of Cyber Policy Hub, Office for Security and Counter Terrorism, Home Office) - Current CSP representatives: BT CEO Security; Director Group Security, Vodafone There will be up to 4 CSP representatives at any one time. CSPs are appointed to represent the industry view on an advisory capacity to the board1. In the case of an actual or perceived commercial conflict of interest or prospect of commercial advantage the relevant CSP will be expected to recuse themselves from the relevant board discussion. CSPs that do not sit on the Oversight Board will receive regular updates and information from the Secretariat and they can feed in comments and requirements through the Secretariat. The Secretariat will ensure that no information which would be deemed commercially sensitive between CSPs is circulated to the member CSPs. Non-member CSPs may be invited to attend on an ad hoc basis. ## 5. Meeting Frequency And Topics It is expected that the Oversight Board will meet three times per year, more frequently if required. - Meeting One - will be to set the high level objectives of HCSEC as relevant to the scope of the Oversight Board, based on CSP contractually confirmed requirements to HCSEC. - Meeting Two - mid-year will be to assess progress of HCSEC in achieving their objectives - Meeting Three - end of year will be to assess the delivery of objectives, and to review the findings of the Annual Management Audit and the Technical Competence Review to develop the annual report for the National Security Adviser. ## 6. Reporting The Oversight Board will provide an annual report to the National Security Adviser addressing the topics set out at paragraph 3.1. The National Security Adviser will provide copies of this report to the National Security Council and a summary of key points to the Chairman of the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament. All reports will be classified according to the sensitivity of their contents and will be distributed at the discretion of the National Security Adviser. ## 7. Modification To The Oversight Board Terms Of Reference (Tors) The Board's intent is that these Terms of Reference are modified only when absolutely necessary. The following process shall be used to amend the Terms of Reference when necessary: - Any modification to the Terms of Reference requires a specific topic on the Oversight Board Agenda and must be discussed at a face-to-face meeting. - The proposed changes and text should be distributed to the OB members at least 7 working days in advance of the meeting; - The proposed amendment shall be discussed at the Oversight Board meeting and may be amended after all members have reached a consensus. - The final text of the amendment shall be formally confirmed in writing by all Oversight Board members. Upon final agreement, updated Terms of Reference will be distributed to all Oversight Board members. ## 8. Secretariat GCHQ will provide the secretariat function. ## 9. Non-Disclosure Obligation Without prejudice to paragraph 6, all information provided to any Oversight Board Member or third-party (together a "receiving party") in connection with the operation of the Oversight Board shall be treated as confidential information which shall not be copied, distributed or disclosed in any way without the prior written consent of the owner of the information. This obligation shall not apply to any information which was in the public domain at the time of disclosure otherwise than by the breach of a duty of confidentiality. Neither shall it apply to any information which was in the possession of a receiving party without obligation of confidentiality prior to its disclosure to that party. Nor shall it apply to any information which a receiving party received on a nonconfidential basis from another person who is not, to the knowledge and belief of the receiving party, subject to any duty not to disclose that information to that party. Nor shall it prevent any receiving party from complying with an order of Court or other legal requirement to disclose information. ## Appendix B Issues Raised In The 2017-2018 Audit And Current Status The 2018-2019 Audit reviewed progress against addressing the following two issues and two advisories that were highlighted in the 2017-2018 report. ## I. Request And Retain Evaluation Plan Sign-Off The internal NCSC process was further strengthened to ensure appropriate formal sign-off of the evaluation plan. The 2018 Audit confirmed that the formal approval by NCSC of the HCSEC plan is retained. ## Ii. Budget Setting And Ongoing Financial Review HCSEC internal processes were updated to address this issue. The 2018 audit confirmed that the HCSEC budget setting process is followed with formal sign-off from each SMT member recorded and retained. iii. RFIs returned outside SLA period This finding remains unresolved and a similar finding was reported this year. ## Iv. Monitoring Of Spend Versus Budget Has Not Been Well Maintained Over The Audit Period HCSEC internal processes were updated to address this issue. The 2018 audit confirmed that regular budget monitoring has been performed with available evidence of monthly review.

en

4755-pdf

Telephone 020 7282 2193 Fax 020 7282 2042 E-mail john.larkinson@orr.gsi.gov.uk 4 November 2010 To holders of GB station licences and passenger SNRPs Dear licence and SNRP holder, ## Rail Passengers' Rights And Obligations Regulation (Pro): Notice Of Changes To Station Licences And Passenger Snrps We wrote to you on 11 June 2010 explaining the changes we were proposing to make to your station licence (issued under the Railways Act 1993 (the Act)) and/or your passenger train statement of national regulatory provisions (SNRP) issued under the Railway (Licensing of Railway Undertakings) Regulations 2005. We are now issuing this notice to make those changes. The changes take effect immediately. The changes and who they affect are set out in schedules 1 to 4 of this notice: - Schedule 1 covers changes to station licences; - Schedule 2 covers changes to GB passenger SNRPs held by charter operators; - Schedule 3 covers changes to all other GB passenger SNRPs (apart from Eurostar's); and - Schedule 4 covers changes to Eurostar's passenger SNRP and its station licence. We are making these changes under powers given to us on 25 June 20101 to ensure compliance with the PRO2. Although we could make these changes without your consent, we wanted to hear your views first. I would like to thank all those who responded to our consultation. We received several helpful comments asking for clarification on particular points and about how we will enforce the new obligations. As a result of these we have made one change to our proposals in respect of condition 3. ## Pro Regulation DBS questioned why we referred back to the EU legislation rather than the UK transposition instrument in the definition of PRO Regulation. This is because the PRO Regulation is directly applicable in all member states and does not require any national implementing measures before taking effect in UK law. The statutory instruments relate to specific articles that require decisions by the individual member states. ## Enforcement Policy Network Rail asked how we would use our powers to enforce the PRO. As these are now licence obligations, we will follow our economic enforcement policy and penalties statement3, concentrating on serious and systemic failures. The process in place envisages that most complaints will be directed to Passenger Focus or London TravelWatch in the first instance and that they will draw our attention to any serious or systemic non-compliance. However, we may also investigate complaints made directly to us; indeed, we must do so if there is a specific complaint about a potential licence breach. ## Condition 3 - Through Ticketing And Network Benefits Several people commented on the proposal to include a new paragraph 3 in condition 3 that followed closely article 29 of the PRO. This would have required operators to inform passengers of their rights and obligations under the PRO. ATOC questioned whether this should be included as it thought it went further than is required and could incur extra costs. Others questioned how we expected operators to make the information available and whether they would have to cover extra costs producing leaflets. We have reconsidered this idea. The proposed obligation will be superfluous when work to update the National Conditions of Carriage (NCoC) to reflect the PRO is complete. Therefore, we will not include it. We think it is important passengers can understand their rights and obligations when buying a ticket, so we encourage the industry to quickly finalise changes to the NCoC to avoid confusion. ## Charter Operators DBS questioned whether charter operators should be obliged in condition 3 to comply with article 9 of the PRO. This requires railway undertakings and ticket vendors to offer, where available, tickets, through tickets and reservations. We consider that they are obliged to do so because charter operators are not exempt and article 9 applies to railway undertakings and ticket vendors equally. However, we note DBS's comment that charter operators normally work at arm's length from passengers, with tickets sold through an intermediary. In such situations, we would normally expect to focus our attention on the party responsible for selling the tickets. We will be contacting ticket vendors later to check they understand their obligations. DBS questioned how we would enforce compliance with article 9, relating to through ticketing, given charter services do not normally offer through ticketing. Article 9 only applies where through tickets are available, so we would not expect to take any action in such circumstances. ## Condition 5 - Dependent Persons Arriva Trains noted that ORR will have to ensure compatibility between this provision and the Secretary of State's code of practice. We agree, and we have discussed the need to update the code of practice to reflect PRO requirements with the Department of Transport. However, it is important to note when revising disabled people's protection policies that the PRO obligations have been in force since 4 December 2009 so if there is a conflict between them, the PRO requirements must take precedence. I am placing a copy of this letter on our website and on our public register for all affected licence and SNRP holders. We will also update all relevant licences and SNRPs on our website. Yours sincerely John Larkinson ## Schedule 1: Station Licences The station licences subject to this schedule 1, with date of issue and reference numbers, are: | Station licence holder | Date and | |---------------------------|-----------------| | number | | | | Station licence | | holder | | | Date and | | | number | | | Arriva Trains Wales Ltd | | | | | | 3 Dec 03 | | | UK0320030016 | | | 28 Mar 06 | | | UK0320060005 | | | | | | London and South | | | Eastern Railway Ltd | | | | | | c2c Rail Ltd | | | | | | 14 Dec 94 | | | UK0319940007 | | | 26 Mar 04 | | | UK0320040006 | | | | | | London Eastern | | | Railway Ltd (National | | | Express East Anglia) | | | | | | 30 Apr 95 | | | UK0319950015 | | | 7 Nov 07 | | | UK0320070026 | | | | | | Chiltern Railway Company | | | Ltd | | | | | | | | | London Overground | | | Rail Operations Ltd | | | | | | 24 Mar 10 | | | UK0320100002 | | | 17 Jul 03 | | | UK0320030013 | | | | | | DB Regio Tyne and Wear | | | Ltd | | | | | | | | | Merseyrail Electrics | | | 2002 Ltd | | | 26 Oct 09 | | | UK0320090004 | | | 31 Mar 94 | | | UK0319940004 | | | | | | East Coast Main Line | | | Company Ltd | | | | | | | | | Network Rail | | | Infrastructure Ltd | | | East Midlands Trains Ltd | | | | | | 6 Nov 07 | | | UK0320070019 | | | | | | Northern Rail Ltd | | | | | | 26 Nov 04 | | | UK0320040016 | | | | | | First Capital Connect Ltd | | | | | | 29 Mar 06 | | | UK0320060008 | | | | | | Rail for London Ltd | | | | | | 25 Oct 07 | | | UK0320070017 | | | | | | First Greater Western Ltd | | | | | | 28 Mar 06 | | | UK0320060002 | | | | | | Southern Railway Ltd | | | 11 Sep 09 | | | UK03200901(02) | | | | | | First ScotRail Ltd | | | | | | 11 Oct 04 | | | UK0320040012 | | | 26 Jan 07 | | | UK0320070004 | | | | | | | | | Stagecoach South | | | Western Trains Ltd | | | 28 Jan 04 | | | UK0320040002 | | | 26 Mar 02 | | | UK0320020003 | | | | | | First/Keolis Transpennine | | | Ltd | | | | | | | | | Tyne & Wear | | | Passenger Transport | | | Executive | | | | | | 2 Sep 94 | | | UK0319940006 | | | 23 Apr 03 | | | UK0320030008 | | | | | | Glasgow Prestwick | | | International Airport Ltd | | | | | | | | | Wensleydale Railway | | | PLC | | | | | | 7 Nov 07 | | | UK0320070023 | | | 28 Apr 95 | | | UK031995 0013 | | | | | | London and Birmingham | | | Railway Ltd | | | | | | | | | West Coast Trains | | | Ltd (Virgin Trains) | | | | | | | | | | 31 March 1994 | | UK0320040009 | | | London Underground | | | Limited | | ## Modifications The modifications for each station licence listed in this schedule 1 are: Insert between the definitions of LTUC and the RPC: "the PRO Regulation" means Regulation (EC) No. 1371/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on rail passengers' rights and obligations. and to article 19(1) of the PRO Regulation Insert after 'section 71B of the Act' at 5(2): Insert after 'Part I of the Act' in paragraph 1: including the handling of complaints made about an alleged infringement of the PRO Regulation ## Schedule 2: Charter Train Operators' Passenger Snrps The statements of national regulatory provisions (SNRPs) subject to this schedule 2, with date of issue and reference numbers, are: | SNRP holder | |--------------------------| | number | | Direct Rail Services Ltd | | | | 28 Nov 2005 | | UK02 2005 0024 | | | | GB Railfreight Ltd | | | | 23 Jun 2009 | | UK02 2009 0001 | | | | Rail Express Systems Ltd | | | | 28 Nov 2005 | | UK02 2005 0071 | | | | West Coast Railway | | Company Ltd | | 28 Nov 2005 | | UK02 2005 0079 | | | ## Modifications The modifications for each SNRP listed in this schedule 2 are: Insert: Condition 3: Passenger rights Insert between the definitions of LTUC and the RPC: "the PRO Regulation" means Regulation (EC) No. 1371/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on rail passengers' rights and obligations. | Insert new condition and title | Condition 3: Passenger rights | |-----------------------------------|------------------------------------------------| | Insert new paragraph 1: | 1. Not used. | | Insert new paragraph 2: | 2. The SNRP holder shall comply with article 9 | | of the PRO Regulation. | | Insert after 'section 71B of the Act' at 5(2): and to articles 19 and 20(1) of the PRO Regulation Insert after 'Part I of the Act' at paragraph 1: including the handling of complaints made about an alleged infringement of the PRO Regulation ## Schedule 3: Passenger Snrps The statements of national regulatory provisions (SNRPs) subject to this schedule 3, with date of issue and reference numbers, are: | SNRP holder | Date and | |----------------------------|-------------| | number | | | SNRP holder | Date and | | number | | | Arriva Trains Wales Ltd | | | | | | 28 Nov 05 | | | UK02 2005 0011 | | | | | | London Eastern Railway Ltd | | | | | | 28 Nov 05 | | | UK02 2005 0057 | | | | | | 7 Nov 2007 | | | UK02 2007 0012 | | | | | | Broadway Rail Ltd | | | | | | 20 Sep 06 | | | UK02 2006 0007 | | | London Overground Rail | | | Operations Ltd | | | | | | C2C Rail Ltd | | | | | | 28 Nov 05 | | | UK02 2005 0015 | | | Northern Rail Ltd | | | | | | 28 Nov 05 | | | UK02 2005 0067 | | | | | | 28 Nov 05 | | | UK02 2005 0019 | | | OQS Rail Ltd | | | | | | 20 Sep 06 | | | UK02 2006 0010 | | | | | | Chiltern Railway Company | | | Ltd | | | 20 Sep 06 | | | UK02 2006 0006 | | | Orchard Rail Ltd | | | | | | 20 Sep 06 | | | UK02 2006 0011 | | | | | | East Coast Main Line | | | Company Ltd | | | East Midlands Trains Ltd | | | 6 Nov 2007 | | | UK02 2007 0009 | | | Rail for London Ltd | | | | | | 25 Oct 2007 | | | UK02 2007 0008 | | | | | | First Capital Connect Ltd | | | 29 Mar 06 | | | UK02 2006 0004 | | | | | | SOLR1 Ltd | | | | | | 10 Oct 2007 | | | UK02 2007 0006 | | | | | | First Greater Western Ltd | | | 28 Mar 06 | | | UK02 2006 0002 | | | | | | SOLR2 Ltd | | | | | | 10 Oct 2007 | | | UK02 2007 0007 | | | | | | First ScotRail Ltd | | | 28 Nov 05 | | | UK02 2005 0035 | | | | | | South Eastern Trains Ltd | | | 28 Nov 05 | | | UK02 2005 0077 | | | 28 Nov 05 | | | UK02 2005 0039 | | | | | | Southern Railway Ltd | | | 11 Sep 09 | | | UK02 2009 0002 | | | First/Keolis Transpennine | | | Ltd | | | | | | 26 Jan 07 | | | UK02 2007 0001 | | | Golding's Rail Ltd | | | | | | 20 Sep 06 | | | UK02 2006 0008 | | | | | | Stagecoach South Western | | | Trains Ltd | | | 4 Jun 07 | | | UK02 2007 0003 | | | | | | Strutton Rail Ltd | | | 20 Sep 06 | | | UK02 2006 0012 | | | Grand Central Railway | | | Company Ltd | | | | | | 28 Nov 05 | | | UK02 2005 0083 | | | Hay's Rail Ltd | | | | | | 20 Sep 06 | | | UK02 2006 0009 | | | | | | West Coast Trains | | | Ltd (Virgin Trains) | | | Hull Trains Ltd | | | | | | 28 Nov 05 | | | UK02 2005 0055 | | | | | | Westminster Rail Ltd | | | 20 Sep 06 | | | UK02 2006 0013 | | | 19 Mar 2008 | | | UK02 2008 0001 | | | | | | London and Birmingham | | | Railway Ltd | | | | | | 7 Nov 2007 | | | UK02 2007 0011 | | | | | | Wrexham Shropshire and | | | Marylebone Railway | | | Company Ltd | | | 28 Mar 06 | | | | | | UK02 2006 0003 | | | XC Trains Ltd | | | 7 Nov 2007 | | | | | | UK02 2007 0010 | | | | | | London and South Eastern | | | Railway Ltd | | | | | ## Modifications The modifications for each SNRP listed in this schedule 3 are: Passenger rights, Between 'Condition 3:' and 'Through Tickets', insert: Insert between the definitions of LTUC and the RPC: "the PRO Regulation" means Regulation (EC) No. 1371/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on rail passengers' rights and obligations. | Insert after 'Condition 3:': | Passenger rights, | |---------------------------------|---------------------| | and the PRO Regulation | | Insert after 'tickets' at the end of condition 3(1)(d): Insert after 'as shall have been approved by the Secretary of State': or are required to ensure arrangements reflect the provisions of the PRO Regulation listed in paragraph 2 Insert new paragraph 2: 2. The SNRP holder shall comply with article 9 of the PRO Regulation. Insert after 'section 71B of the Act' at 5(2): and to articles 19 and 20(1) of the PRO Regulation Insert after 'Part I of the Act' at paragraph 1: including the handling of complaints made about an alleged infringement of the PRO Regulation ## Schedule 4: Eurostar The statement of national regulatory provisions (SNRPs) and station licence subject to this schedule 4, with date of issue and reference numbers, are: | SNRP holder | Date and | |------------------------|------------------------| | number | | | | Station licence | | holder | | | Date and | | | number | | | Eurostar International | | | Limited | | | | | | 28 Nov 2005 | | | UK0220050027 | | | | | | | Eurostar International | | Limited | | | | | | 31 March 1994 | | | UK0319940001 | | | | | The modifications to the **SNRP** listed in this schedule 4 are: Insert: Condition 3: Passenger rights Insert between the definitions of LTUC and the RPC: | " | the PRO Regulation" means Regulation (EC) | |----------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------| | No. 1371/2007 of the European Parliament and | | | of the Council of 23 October 2007 on rail | | | passengers' rights and obligations | . | | Insert new condition and title: | Condition 3: Passenger rights | |--------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------| | Insert new paragraph 1: | 1. Not used. | | Insert new paragraph 2: | 2. The SNRP holder shall comply with articles 4- | | 10, 15-18 and 28-29 of the PRO Regulation. | | and to articles 19 to 24 of the PRO Regulation Insert after 'section 71B of the Act' at 5(2): Insert after 'customers and potential customers' in paragraph 1: and shall comply with article 27 of the PRO Regulation Insert after 'Part I of the Act' in paragraph 1: including the handling of complaints made about an alleged infringement of the PRO Regulation The modifications to the **station licence** listed in this schedule 4 are: Insert as appropriate: Condition 3: Passenger rights Insert between the definitions of LTUC and the RPC: "the PRO Regulation" means Regulation (EC) No. 1371/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on rail passengers' rights and obligations. | Insert new condition and title | Condition 3: Passenger rights | |-----------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------| | Insert new paragraph 1: | 1. Not used. | | Insert new paragraph 2: | 2. The SNRP holder shall comply with articles 18 | | and 29 of the PRO Regulation. | | Insert after 'section 71B of the Act' at 5(2): and to articles 19(1), 21, 22 and 24 of the PRO Regulation Insert after 'the Channel Tunnel Act 1987' in paragraph 1: including the handling of complaints made about an alleged infringement of the PRO Regulation

en

1447-pdf

## Sir Nicholas Macpherson - Permanent Secretary, Hm Treasury Business Expenses - July-September 2011 DATES Total Cost £ DESTINATION PURPOSE TRAVEL OTHER (Including Hospitality Given) Air Rail Taxi/Car Accommodation/ Meals 09.06.11 London Official meeting £144.70 £144.70 06.07.11 London Official meetings £47.48 £47.48 19.09.11 Brussels Official meetings 251.22 19.65 8.81 £279.68 27.09.11 London Official meeting 10.60 £10.60 Hospitality Received Date Organisation Name Type of Hospitality Received 12.07.11 HSBC Dinner 13.07.11 British Bankers' Association Reception 01.09.11 Rothschild Breakfast 16.09.11 Reuters Breakingviews Lunch Dinner 22.09.11 Brunswick Group LLP/Wall Street Journal Europe 27.09.11 Royal Academy of Arts Viewing (and spouse) ## Tom Scholar - Second Permanent Secretary, Hm Treasury Business Expenses - July–September 2011 DATES Total Cost £ DESTINATION PURPOSE TRAVEL OTHER (Including Hospitality Given) Air Rail Taxi/Car Accommodation/ Meals 23.05.11 London Official meeting £13.00 £13.00 29.06.11 Oxford Official meeting £23.50 £23.50 Paris Official meetings £371.00 £60.43 £387.15 £818.58 05.07.11- 07.07.11 Paris Official meetings £298.00 £94.92 £392.92 16.07.11- 17.07.11 Hospitality Received Date Organisation Name Type of Hospitality Received 06.07.11 Financial Stability Board Dinner 12.07.11 HSBC Dinner 13.07.11 British Bankers' Association Reception 14.07.11 Barclays Lunch 15.07.11 Deloitte Lunch 06.09.11 Lloyds Banking Group PLC Dinner 08.09.11 Chatham House Dinner 13.09.11 Lloyds Banking Group PLC Reception ## Michael Ellam - Director General, International And Finance, Hm Treasury Business Expenses - July–September 2011 DATES Total Cost £ DESTINATION PURPOSE TRAVEL OTHER (Including Hospitality Given) Air Rail Taxi/Car Accommodation/ Meals Brussels Official meetings £12.58 £198.00 £210.58 30.06.11- 01.07.11 Official meetings £655.60 £264.76 £178.30 £360.86 £1459.52 07.07.11- 12.07.11 Poland, Paris and Brussels 15.07.11 Dublin Official meetings £353.88 £36.00 £90.52 £480.40 Official meetings £5,752.13 £36.00 £69.95 £36.49 £5,894.57 25.07.11 Washington and Mexico Official meetings £834.30 £26.05 £65.39 £207.25 £1,132.99 01.09.11- 02.09.11 Paris and Frankfurt Brussels Official meetings £279.00 £216.86 £495.86 05.09.11- 06.09.11 Marseille Official meetings £124.21 £35.80 £537.25 £697.26 08.09.11- 10.09.11 Brussels and Paris Official meetings £362.50 £96.00 £8.60 £467.10 11.09.11- 13.09.11 Poland Official meetings £460.20 £18.00 £11.94 £157.72 £2.95 £650.81 15.09.11- 17.09.11 Washington Official meetings £5,367.73 £5,367.73 21.09.11- 25.09.11 28.09.11 Brussels Official meetings £309.00 £309.00 ## Hospitality Received | Date | Organisation Name | Type of Hospitality Received | |----------|-----------------------|---------------------------------| | 07.09.11 | KKR & Company LP | Lunch | | 14.09.11 | Associated Newspapers | Lunch | | | | | ## Andrew Hudson - Director General, Public Services, Hm Treasury Business Expenses - July–September 2011 DATES Total Cost £ DESTINATION PURPOSE TRAVEL OTHER (Including Hospitality Given) Air Rail Taxi/Car Accommodation/ Meals 30.09.11 Yeovil and Taunton Official meetings £62.50 £62.50 ## Dave Ramsden - Director General And Chief Economic Adviser, Hm Treasury Business Expenses - July-September 2011 DATES Total Cost £ DESTINATION PURPOSE TRAVEL OTHER (Including Hospitality Given) Air Rail Taxi/Car Accommodation/ Meals 15.06.11 London Official meeting £10.00 £10.00 16.06.11 London Official meeting £5.00 £5.00 08.08.11 London Official meeting £53.78 £53.78 06.09.11 London Official meeting £16.20 £16.20 Scotland Official meetings £46.00 £98.26 £144.26 15.09.11- 16.09.11 19.09.11 Berlin Conference £17.90 £29.00 £15.25 £62.15 Hospitality Received Date Organisation Name Type of Hospitality Received 05.07.11 Institute of Economic Affairs Dinner 27.07.11 Goldman Sachs Dinner and gave a presentation 20.09.11 Kiel Institute, Berlin Dinner and gave a speech ## Jonathan Taylor –Director General, Financial Services And Stability, Hm Treasury Business Expenses - July-September 2011 DATES Total Cost £ DESTINATION PURPOSE TRAVEL OTHER (Including Hospitality Given) Air Rail Taxi/Car Accommodation/ Meals 21.07.11 Norwich Official meeting £32.00 £32.00 Hospitality Received Date Organisation Name Type of Hospitality Received 05.07.11 British Bankers' Association Dinner 06.07.11 City UK Reception 13.07.11 British Bankers' Association Reception 19.07.11 Financial Markets Law Committee Reception 18.08.11 Royal Bank of Scotland Lunch 24.08.11 Aviva Lunch 25.08.11 City UK Lunch 15.09.11 QCA Dinner 22.09.11 Close Brothers Group plc Lunch 28.09.11 DLA Piper UK Dinner 30.09.11 Fidelity International Breakfast ## Edward Troup –Director General, Budget Tax And Welfare, Hm Treasury Business Expenses - July-September 2011 DATES Total Cost £ DESTINATION PURPOSE TRAVEL OTHER (Including Hospitality Given) Air Rail Taxi/Car Accommodation/ Meals 11.07.11 Oxford Official meeting £23.90 £23.90 Paris Seminar £129.00 £40.00 £387.52 £556.52 11.09.11- 13.09.11 Hospitality Received Date Organisation Name Type of Hospitality Received 25.07.11 KPMG Reception 29.09.11 The Association of Taxation Technicians Lunch Mark Bowman –Director, Strategy, Planning and Budget, HM Treasury Business Expenses - July–September 2011 No expenses were incurred during this period. Hospitality Received Mark did not receive any hospitality during this period. ## Alison Cottrell - Corporate Services Director, Hm Treasury Business Expenses - July–September 2011 DATES Total Cost £ DESTINATION PURPOSE TRAVEL OTHER (Including Hospitality Given) Air Rail Taxi/Car Accommodation/ Meals 21.07.11 Norwich Official meeting £32.00 £9.00 £41.00 14.09.11 Norwich Official meeting £43.00 £6.00 £49.00 30.09.11 Norwich Official meeting £43.00 £6.00 £49.00 Hospitality Received Date Organisation Name Type of Hospitality Received 05.07.11 British Bankers' Association Dinner 13.09.11 Lloyds Banking Group PLC Reception ## Julian Kelly - Group Director, Finance And Commercial, Hm Treasury Business Expenses - July–September 2011 DATES Total Cost £ DESTINATION PURPOSE TRAVEL OTHER (Including Hospitality Given) Air Rail Taxi/Car Accommodation/ Meals 21.07.11 Norwich Official meetings £32.00 £32.00 14.09.11 Norwich Official meetings £43.00 £6.00 £49.00 30.09.11 Norwich Official meetings £43.00 £6.00 £49.00 Hospitality Received Date Organisation Name Type of Hospitality Received 02.08.11 Royal Bank of Scotland Dinner

en

3356-pdf

Neighbourhood Planning & Local Planning Service Redesign & Capacity Building Fund DCLG Grant Feedback Report Bath & North East Somerset Council July 2016 ## Introduction • £10,500 Grant funding awarded to B&NES Council in Jan 2016 after a competitive bidding process • The Proposal was to "Pilot Approach supporting Neighbourhood Planning groups developing projects which deliver multiple benefits (using CIL/s106 spend)". Including: • Additional Officer support to deliver this new funding model • Preparation of Case Studies • Dissemination at conferences etc. • This report outlines the 4 Case Studies we have prepared. ## Case Study Overview | Case Study | NDP Status | |--------------------------|--------------| | 1: Bathampton | | | Riverside Linear | | | Park | | | Underway | £5k Capital | | Fund/Community Design | | | Process | | | 2: Freshford Village | | | Recreation & Play | | | Park | | | Adopted | £16k s106 | | Funding/Community Design | | | Process | | | 3: West Clews | | | Recreational Play | | | Park | | | Underway | £37k s106 | | Funding/Community Design | | | Process | | | Submission | | | draft | | | 4: Chew Magna | | | King George V | | | Playing Field | | | £18k s106 | | | Funding/Community Design | | | Process | | Implemented March 2016 Design Process Complete March 2016 Implemented March 2016 Design Process Underway March 2016 # Case Study 1: Bathampton Riverside Linear Park Project ## Before And After Before: Disconnect between Batheaston High Street and Bathampton Meadows and cycle route beyond. Limited public access. After: Improved connectivity to walk and cycle between Batheaston and Bath. Links the villages of Batheaston and Bathampton. Improved public access and a new Riverside Park. Shared community project bringing together volunteers from two parishes (200 volunteer hours so far). ## The Community Vision Batheaston Vision Plan (2009) identified an opportunity for a new pedestrian and cycle bridge and shared path to connect the village to Bathampton and Bath via National Cycle Route 4 along the Kennet and Avon towpath. This was then funded by the Dept. for Transport's Local Sustainable Transport Fund supported by B&NES Council Transport team. Batheaston Parish Council is currently preparing a Neighbourhood Plan (designated in 2013), they identified potential community projects. Potential to create a new Riverside Park for the commununity to enjoy was identified. ## The Brief • The Spend: £5,000 funding from B&NES Council River Corridor Fund (Council owned land, as shown on right in red). • Delivery: Capital Fund to be delivered as community spend, with volunteer and community support key to the project. • Capital Project: Create a new linear park with new planting, seating/picnic tables, community notice boards etc. and a landscape design created by the shared route and pedestrian bridge. • Management: Riverside Park to be managed by the Parish Councils and their working party of volunteers going forward. • Context: Pilot supported by the WaterSpace partnership - who have a remit to identify and deliver projects which revitalise waterways. NB This part is not yet implemented - future phase, which funding is being sought for. Bathampton Riverside Linear Park Project Project delivered in March 2016 Bathampton Partners: Parish Council ## Quotes "It all looks really superb. Previously under appreciated, there are now many plans being progressed by both the volunteers and Parish Councils to take advantage of this wonderful local asset. A total of 200 volunteer hours has been put into the project to date" Peter Fear, Bathampton and Batheaston River and Footpath Friends "The energy and commitment of local volunteers in progressing the vision for Bathampton Riverside is impressive. They are creating a wonderful amenity for residents and visitors alike, as well as space for wildlife." Project Coordinator - Avon Frome Partnership "Volunteers from both Batheaston and Bathampton have been working tirelessly to improve the appearance of the riverside area, and where new benches and community noticeboards have now been installed. It is looking great." Project Coordinator - River Avon, Bath & North East Somerset Council Case Study 2: Freshford Village Recreation & Play Park Freshford & Limpley Stoke Neighbourhood Plan Frontrunner Group with DCLG Freshford Village Partners: Memorial Hall Parish Council ## Community Spend Model The Project The creation of a fully renovated playground space for the Freshford community. Project design and neighbourhood consultation have been completed, construction to be implemented Summer 2016. The Neighbourhood Plan Community Vision: 7.3.06 The playgrounds in Freshford and Limpley Stoke are important sources of play and recreation by the children in the community and they will continue to be improved and upgraded by the respective Parish Councils. ## Neighbourhood Plan Community Facilities & Assets Community Spend Model The Play Area Project is located at Community Facility 2 on this map. # Project Location Os Grid Ref: 378,423M, 160,086M ## Community Spend Model Existing Play Area "Nearing the end of its safe life, rotting and corroding" Parish Clerk ## Project Design Concept "We have invited all members of the community to provide their ideas for new play equipment" Parish Clerk ## Quotes "The enhanced playspace behind Freshford Memorial Hall will offer a significant benefit to the local community." "Given the importance of play in the development of a child, any space which gives a child free reign to do just that should be seen a crucial component in a child's life." "Provides a social focal point for carers to meet and socialise promoting community spirit." " A good playground will also help to increase customers to the adjacent Galleries community shop" # Case Study 3: Midsomer Norton Outdoor Gym at West Clews Midsomer Norton Recreation Ground Trust Partners: ## Community Spend Model Project Summary West Clewes Recreation Ground is the home of a new free-to-use outdoor gym and a short running track for people in the town and surrounding. Midsomer Norton Town Council, manages the ground as the Trustee of Midsomer Norton Recreation Ground Trust, and has implemented the project to complement their Neighbourhood Plan objectives using S106 Greenspace Planning Obligation contributions. The Neighbourhood Plan Community Vision: Midsomer Norton Neighbourhood Plan Draft Objectives include : "Expanding and developing opportunities for events and activities to be held inpublic spaces" and "Ensuring the level of health facilities and infrastructure meets the needs of our growing community." ## West Clews Recreation Ground Project Location OS Grid Ref: 366,514m, 154,558m ## Statement From The Project Manager And Parish Clerk, Clive Stillwell The new Outdoor Gym at West Clewes in Midsomer Norton has been installed on land that Midsomer Norton Town Council holds in trust for the local community. The project was initiated to widen the appeal and use of the land which, as well as being home to a local football club who lease part of the land from the Trust, offers a children's play area and free car park. After seeking initial designs and quotes, the Town Council held a consultation event with the preferred bidder and the public which helped finalise the apparatus to be included. A 40m running track, seven exercise stations and a "boot camp" workout frame were included in the final design. Two of the stations are inclusive in their design, allowing wheelchair users to take advantage of the facility which is easily accessible via a level tarmac path from the car park. A submission to B&NES Council for S106 funds was successful and the project was completed in May 2016. Most of the current use is by individuals who may not have joined a formal Gym Club but want to improve their fitness. In addition, the Town Council has made the facility available to organised groups who will be charged a modest fee for access. Each station has a unique QR code attached along with basic instructions for use. Accessing the QR Code downloads a complete video showing how to use the equipment which is based on weight resistance rather than hydraulics, reducing the maintenance burden and ensuring that it can be used safely by anyone over the age of 14. ## Project Delivered 2016 Case Study 4: Chew Magna King George V Playing Field Partners: ## Project Summary The proposal is to provide a modern, safe and pleasant play area that will be more extensively used by the local community. The key features of the proposed development are; • Replacement of the existing children's play area with a new bespoke multi-play design • Inclusion of a 'Nest Swing' suitable for young children and disabled children • Replacement of wet-pour surface and new layout to ensure the complete play area complies with latest safety standards • Picnic area for use by all age groups to encourage greater use of area • Development of a 'Nature' area for use by the local primary school ## The Neighbourhood Plan Community Vision: Facilities - maintain and enhance good quality, accessible facilities, including community, leisure and recreational facilities, such as local pubs and shops, thus ensuring that the diverse economic and social vitality is sustained and enhanced. This must be in keeping with the character and distinctiveness of the seven parishes. Policy BF3a Enhancing Community Facilities The Neighbourhood Plan will support planning applications to upgrade or replace any of the community facilities within the Plan Area, subject to it not interfering with any existing ecological function on or near the site. ## Consultation & Quotes The parish council has undertook an extensive survey with the local primary school and children's groups including Chew Mums social media site to understand the needs of the village. In total they have received around 100 responses. "The King George V playing fields in Chew Magna is the main 'Green Space' area in the village but it's use has been declining in recent years. " "Play equipment does not meet the latest safety standards " Chew Mums ## Project Design Concept Lessons Learnt • Support from local partnerships to help with consultation, delivery and design processes on the ground is invaluable • The approach to community design works in areas that have built capacity and consensus via Neighbourhood Planning and that have clear community priorities • Communities need support with procurement and concept development to get multi-benefits • Capturing the projects as case studies is a useful exercise for reflection and can be used to celebrate achievements of the volunteers involved • Volunteer hours is a major resource, and can help sustainable maintenance of community assets (taking pressure off stretched Council maintenance budgets), but community design requires up-front investment of officer time. ## Thank You! To DCLG for this grant which enabled us to increase B&NES Council support to these projects, prepare case studies and disseminate this learning.

en

0893-pdf

## Accessions To Repositories Introduction The Accessions To Repositories Survey Provides A Unique Insight Into Archival Collecting Across The Uk And Elsewhere. In the latest survey, we received reports from a variety of archival institutions who responded with details of thousands of new collections acquired and accessioned in 2018. We estimate that UK repositories took in over 300,000 files and boxes. This represents millions of personal papers, letters, diaries, and even 13th-century manuscripts. The survey also includes digital deposits such as business records, photographs and oral history projects. By combining all of this data, we can analyse variations in accessions by region and type of repository, as well as estimate the scope of digital preservation across the sector. The Accessions to Repositories Survey also provides an overview of emerging and enduring themes in new or accruing collections, from war and conflict to scientific discovery. A variety of famous authors feature in the 2018 survey, such as Lee Child, Samuel Beckett, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and Daphne du Maurier. Other well-known figures include poet Moniza Alvi, the rock band Super Furry Animals, and the transgender activist Alice Purnell. There are records reflecting contemporary society and attitudes towards slavery, mental health and immigrant experiences. The details of the survey published on Discovery help researchers locate new material and, while accessions are not always immediately available for viewing, making descriptive information available can stimulate research interest and allow archives to gauge the demand for new or uncatalogued collections. Highlights from the survey, showcased on Twitter with #NewInArchives and featured on this report's poster, celebrate archives and the work they do and underline the way collections reflect and enrich society. ## Scale Of Collecting We received reports from 256 archives, who described details of 15,156 new collections accessioned in 2018. 35 archive services purchased a total of 83 collections that were up for sale and 75 repositories accessioned more than 300 collections of Public Records. While the institutions participating in the survey correspond to only about 10% of repositories with entries in the ARCHON directory, it is a representative sample of institutions actively collecting new material. 2225 South West 1975 South East 1348 East 1303 London 1219 West Midlands 1190 North West 1157 Wales 1084 Yorkshire 1079 Scotland 986 East Midlands 777 North East 96 Ireland ## Digital Accessions In 2018, archives were able to provide information on 539 digital collections, constituting 6.3 terabytes in total. This represented 3.6% of all reported accessions. In comparison, the volume of this data in 2017 was 5.8 terabytes from 281 collections, which made up 1.8% of the total reported. Many digital collections remain hybrids, with a digital element listed alongside a set of physical records, but the volume accessioned has varied significantly by region and by repository type. For national and university collections in 2018, roughly 8.2% of accessioned collections were digital. For specialist repositories this was 15%, and for local archives it was 1.6%. Although local archives took in 179 of the 539, or just over 30% of all digital collections, this is relatively small compared to the total volume of their collecting. Overall, the number of digital accessions continues to be rather low considering the growing amount of digital material being created. The largest single digital accession was a mixed collection of tapes, cine films and unedited footage including 1534GB of digital material, collected by the Public Record Office of Northern Ireland. The next largest was Hull University Archives' accession of 1220GB of images and video files documenting events and activities from the 2017 Hull City of Culture. ## Keywords National and university accessions continue to focus on political and military records, but the analysis also highlights the cultural content of their collections. Overall collecting, however, is dominated by local record offices' focus on council, church and school records. | Type | 2018 Keywords | Count | 2017 Keywords | Count | |------------|-----------------|---------|------------------|---------| | Special | nursing | 109 | watermills | 21 | | | hospital | 107 | windmills | 19 | | | digital | 76 | medicine | 13 | | | canal | 63 | childbirth | 11 | | | royal | 60 | midwifery | 11 | | | college | 54 | LGBT | 11 | | University | university | 180 | theatre | 110 | | | history | 108 | higher education | 72 | | | oral | 73 | music | 37 | | | Oman | 69 | university | 37 | | | interview | 65 | education | 36 | | | renaissance | 63 | literature | 35 | | National | war | 100 | British Army | 90 | | | royal | 79 | House of Commons | 45 | | | British | 77 | procedure | 40 | | | army service | 73 | family history | 30 | | | history | 68 | House of Lords | 28 | | | family | 66 | Royal Navy | 23 | | Local | church | 1257 | religion | 276 | | | school | 935 | education | 256 | | | parish | 835 | local government | 221 | | | council | 734 | parish | 180 | | | st (saint) | 709 | parish records | 180 | | | accounts | 693 | business | 180 | | All | church | 1312 | | | | | school | 1013 | | | | | parish | 845 | | | | st (saint) | 804 | | | | | council | 774 | | | | ## 21St Century Records created this century constitute a range of material, including both born-digital and more traditional archival material. They range from records relating to LGBTQ organisations to material created by community and heritage projects. Twentieth-century records cover diverse themes and are the largest group of 2018 accessions. They shed light on lifestyles and mental health, scientific advancements, social and political movements, as well as major events that defined the century. ## 19Th Century Highlights Records of the nineteenth century collected in 2018 are an eclectic mix, with themes ranging from health and social issues to religion and science. They also touch on more political themes including records related to colonial rule and maritime and naval endeavours. Many of the eighteenth-century documents accessioned in 2018 relate to family and estate papers, manorial documents and maps and plans. But there are also records relating to war, maritime expansion, farming and predicting the harvest. Few records accessioned in 2018 relate to the seventeenthcentury, but several interesting examples are featured on the inside poster. Sixteenth-century records primarily include collections of deeds, but there are also those that speak to aspects of local life and political statements. ## Medieval Medieval texts collected in 2018 represent an interesting mix of the devotional and the secular. ## New In Archives Journal Of Alick Smith, Patient At Brookwood Asylum Surrey History Centre Themes in this little volume, handwritten and illustrated between 1912 and 1922, range from the impact of the First World War, to the hospital cats and fortunes of the cricket team. Over the course of his stay, Alick's feelings about the institution changed from considering it 'a little corner of Hell' to one of tolerance and even appreciation. ## Drawings Of Parts For Oberon Class Submarines Cumbria Archive And Local Studies Centre, Barrow These intricate drawings were deposited with the archive service when plans to build a Submarine Heritage Centre in Barrow-in-Furness fell through. The heritage centre would have celebrated the town's illustrious submarine-building history but these records still remain to remember that heritage. ## Glass Negatives Of Prisoners From Hm Prison Lewes East Sussex Record Office These negatives, dating 1898-1916, were used for education within the prison. Some images show prisoners dressed in the typical uniform decorated with broad arrows to hinder escape and act as a badge of shame. Other images depict those who have just been arrested, still dressed in their own clothes and some looking highly respectable. More examples of accessions from 2018 can been seen on the poster... ## About The Survey The Accessions To Repositories Survey Is Conducted Annually To Find Out What Archive Services Have Added To Their Collections In The Previous Year. Information from the participating archives is gathered in spreadsheets. This format provides a crucial structure that allows us to pull all the data together and to analyse the information as a whole. The analysis in this publication takes into account the full set of data that archive services return for the survey. Discovery users can view summaries of these new collections and other record creator based descriptions alongside full catalogues. This gives users an unrivalled overview of collections primarily relating to British history, but with some material of a global scope. We publish highlights on our website at: nationalarchives.gov.uk/accessions with selections searchable via the Discovery service: nationalarchives.gov.uk/ discovery If you are interested in contributing to the next Accessions to Repositories survey, please visit our website: nationalarchives.gov.uk/archives-sector/ projects-and-programmes/accessions Thank you to all of the archives that contributed to the 2018 Accessions to Repositories Survey, including those who kindly provided images for use in this report. ## © Crown Copyright 2019 This publication is licenced under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence Where we have identified any third-party copyright information, you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to asd@nationalarchives.gov.uk

en

2207-pdf

Central Department for Transport (DfT) ## Contents | | | Statement of commitment | | | | 2 | |---------------------------------------|--------------------------------|-----------------------------|-----|-----|-----|---------| | IMA background | | | | | | 2 | | Executive summary | | | | | 3 | | | Good practice and key highlights | | | 5 | | | | | Recommendations to address risk areas | | 6 | | | | | | | Key findings of the assessment | | | 7 | | | | Annex A - Recommendations in full | 13 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ## Statement Of Commitment  Before each Information Management Assessment (IMA) we recommend that a statement of commitment to the assessment process is published. The following statement from the Permanent Secretary was published by the Central Department for Transport (referred to as DfT throughout this report) in advance of the IMA as part of an internal news item highlighting the importance of proper record keeping. 'In May the Central Department will be subject to an independent assessment of our Information Management by The National Archives. This is part of the regular programme of assessments that The National Archives conduct to review information, records and knowledge management standards within Government. It is an opportunity to demonstrate the significant progress made since our last assessment in 2009, and to help shape ongoing work to modernise our recordskeeping systems and processes. If you have been contacted by the Information & Security Division to take part, then please do give them your full support. DfT recognises the importance of meeting its corporate obligations to effectively manage, protect and exploit the information it creates and holds. The final report that The National Archives produces will help Exco support all aspects of knowledge and information management across the Department. This will help ensure that our information, knowledge and records are appropriately captured, managed and preserved, and information risks and sensitivities are appropriately handled'. IMA background The first IMA of DfT was formally closed in 2014. The 2017 IMA reassessment involved a detailed review of supporting documentation followed by interviews with senior staff, specialists and practitioners in the department's London offices between 8 and 11 May 2017. Additional interviews with key staff were conducted by telephone later in the month. This report provides a summary of the good practice and risks we identified focussing on high priority findings. ## Executive Summary  There are 10 performance headings embedded in this IMA report. DfT receives a satisfactory rating under five headings. This rating indicates an approach that is positioned to support efficiency and effectiveness and compliance with legal obligations and responsibilities.  In addition, DfT receives one high priority 'Development area' rating, and four medium priority 'Development area' ratings. A development area rating indicates a key issue or gap in process or governance that may trigger a range of risks.  Positive approaches and key improvements made since the last IMA are included in the highlights section below on page 5. ## Ratings Received Ranked By Priority | Priority | Report section | Performance | |------------------|-------------------|---------------------------------------| | Rating | | | | Development area | High | 1.1 Communicating and realising value | To improve performance under this heading DfT needs to:  build on the good start made through the information management modernisation project and put in place a defined plan to improve the department's information and records management culture. This should tackle known and potential areas of weakness and build on the good practice that already exists.  establish a joined-up strategic vision for the effective management and exploitation of information and records to drive and direct necessary improvement work. | Priority | Report section | Performance | |------------------|-------------------|-----------------------------------------------| | Rating | | | | Development area | Medium | 2.1 Supporting information through technology | | Development area | Medium | 2.2 Digital continuity and IT change | | Development area | Medium | 3.1 Recognising information risk | | Development area | Medium | 3.3 Providing guidance | To improve performance under these headings DfT needs to:  provide an improved foundation for staff to manage and exploit information by continuing to invest energy in improving the DfT IT environment. DfT should consider the proportionate use of technical controls to help shape good practice and should formally work to roll-out SharePoint Online with the planned introduction of Office 365.  put in place concrete plans to ensure that digital information remains complete, available and usable for business needs. This should include the department's information assets and other datasets held in bespoke systems.  review central definitions of information and records management related risk and ensuring this type of risk is covered explicitly in the department's information risk policy.  improve guidance to staff on what records they need to keep and publish retention schedules as recommended in Sir Alex Allan's 2014 Records Review report.1 | Priority | Report section | Performance | |--------------|-------------------|----------------------------------------| | Rating | | | | Satisfactory | Low | 1.2 Managing information as an asset | | Satisfactory | Low | 3.2 Establishing control | | Satisfactory | Low | 3.4 Measuring impact | | Satisfactory | Low | 4.1 Oversight of records and selection | | Satisfactory | Low | 4.2 Implementing disposal decisions | To maintain performance under these headings, DfT needs to:  utilise its existing information asset governance framework to identify and manage a wider range of risks to information assets including those related to retention and usability.  put in place an effective basis for information management governance in the new IT environment with responsibility for local championing of good practice and administrative support allocated.  ensure a proportionate monitoring regime is put in place so that bad practice can be challenged and good practice can be promoted and rewarded.  gain a better understanding of digital holdings with support from The National Archives.  put in place a plan for the appraisal, selection and transfer of digital records. IMA reports and departmental action plans are published on The National Archives' website at: nationalarchives.gov.uk/information-management/our-services/imareports-action-plans.htm Good practice and key highlights The following are among the areas of good practice identified at the time of the assessment. They include approaches that other government organisations may find helpful in mitigating information and records management related risks: ## Highlights Of The 2017 Ima  Many of the staff we spoke to understood the importance of managing information effectively. We saw evidence that a number of business areas were proactively working to encourage good practice through Friday filing initiatives, discussion in team meetings and use of incentives and rewards. Backing from senior staff was also evident. Some Deputy Directors were seen to be actively reinforcing messaging from BROs, ensuring the importance of taking action was recognised.  DfT delivered a records management improvement plan in 2016/17. A key focus was establishing a supported BRO network. This was enabled through building and maintaining a community. An annual BRO conference is now established and BROs are supported through regular communications and newsletters.  The information modernisation project was a further output from the records management improvement plan. The project has senior support and has a clear focus on improving DfT's ability to manage and exploit its information through the introduction of SharePoint Online. DfT has worked to define business requirements for information and records management. It plans to use third-party software to help address areas where these are not currently met by the standard product.  DfT has taken an important first step by defining key digital continuity outcomes in its future information principles. These set out key risk factors including the impact of change and the differing lifecycle of information and the technology that hosts it. The need to maintain the digital continuity of information during migration between systems is emphasised in the migration strategy and information management modernisation project papers for the Executive Committee.  One risk captured on a risk register at Director General Group level clearly defines the role that poor information management practice could have on the business's ability to make effective decisions and comply with corporate and legal obligations. It highlights the potential effect of this in terms of increased difficulty finding key legacy documents, including wasted staff time. Mitigating actions focus on work to improve information management culture and embracing opportunities offered by the coming move to SharePoint.  DfT required its agencies to complete The National Archives' IMA self-assessment questionnaire in advance of the IMA to enable a whole department approach to measuring capability and mitigating risk. 2  Review services continue to be provided by the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) on a shared service basis. We saw good evidence of active planning to ensure future workloads are distributed effectively and peaks and troughs are avoided. DCLG review staff have built up a considerable knowledge of DfT. Records are looked at prefix level. Reviewers look at disposal agreements and Official Selection Policies and also the history of what records have previously been transferred to The National Archives. ## Recommendations To Address Risk Areas Full Details Can Be Found In Annex A (See P. 00) | Recommendation | To address a high-priority development area rating | |------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------| | | | | 1 | | | | | | Establish a programme of work to establish and embed the | | | right information management culture. This should be closely | | | integrated with planned IT change. | | | | | | 2 | | | | | | Establish and communicate a clear vision and strategy for | | | information management. | | | | | | | To address a medium-priority development area rating | | | | | 3 | | | | | | Apply continued focus to the delivery of an improved IT | | | environment that will make good information management | | | practice easier to achieve. | | | | | | 4 | | | | | | Build on the work to embed digital continuity as part of the | | | proposed information principles, putting in place concrete plans | | | for Knowledge and Information Management (KIM) and IT staff | | | to deliver digital continuity and information management | | | priorities. | | | | | | 5 | | | | | | Review corporate descriptions of information and records | | | management related risk to ensure causes and mitigating | | | actions reflect the wider current and future IT environment, | | | including the planned introduction of Office 365. | | | | | | 6 | | | | | | Engage with the business and establishing more concrete and | | | tailored principles for capturing and managing information and | | | records. | | | | | | | To maintain a satisfactory rating | | | | | 7 | | | | | | Build on the existing information asset governance framework | | | and seek opportunities to surface and manage information and | | | records management related risks to information assets. | | | | | | 8 | | | | | | Strengthen arrangements for information management | | | governance and oversight of performance in the new IT | | | environment. | | | | | | 9 | | | Increase oversight of digital information and develop a process | | | for its appraisal, selection and transfer. | | ## Key Findings Of The Assessment 1 The Value Of Information Key Developments Since The Last Ima:  A 2016-17 Records Management Improvement plan has delivered a renewed focus on the Business Records Officer network and provided impetus to the department's Information Management Modernisation project. | Performance heading | Performance rating | Priority | |---------------------------------------|------------------------|--------------| | 1.1 Communicating and realising value | Development area | High | | | | |  At the time of the IMA, a number of key individuals at board level who were identified as particularly supportive had left or were about to leave the department. DfT should realise the Information Management Modernisation project objective of appointing a senior business champion for information management. This would help ensure continuity and provide a formal basis for senior sponsorship of future knowledge and information management initiatives. **See recommendation 1**  DfT has no agreed vision or strategy for information management to provide impetus and drive good practice in overall terms. As discussed below, the Information Management Modernisation project is well-placed to direct work to replace the department's shared drives. However, the new SharePoint Online platform that is being introduced is only one component of the department's IT environment. DfT needs to establish an overall approach to encourage and enable the effective management of information in all locations and help inform consistent decision making. While we saw some evidence that information management requirements had been factored into change processes, these may be missed if objectives are not formalised and communicated. The Information Management Modernisation project's future information management principles may provide a solid starting point for this work. **See recommendation 2**  A number of senior interviewees identified improving the department's information and records management culture as a priority. While we saw a number of positive examples of business areas that were actively working to promote information and records management as an important activity to staff, practice is not consistent across the department. A strong emphasis on information and records management culture is needed to help ensure expected benefits are achieved from planned IT changes. A programme of work should be put in place to support this. DfT should draw on good practice examples of programmes run by IMA programme members including Welsh Government and HM Treasury. See recommendation 1 Performance heading Performance rating Priority 1.2 Managing information as an asset Satisfactory Low  DfT has adopted an active approach to Information Asset Owner (IAO) engagement. This uses questionnaires and face-to-face interviews to ensure responsibilities are understood. It is introducing a new tool to help gain a better and more objective understanding of the confidentiality, integrity and availability related risks to which its information assets are subject. DfT also adopts a proactive approach to training and upskilling IAOs.  However, while DfT's approach for supporting IAOs is broadly good, we note that it is not currently making the most of its information asset register. This includes logging key details such as the significance of the asset and the format information is held in or specific criteria relating to retention. Information Security and Knowledge and Information Management (KIM) staff, should work together to ensure risks relating to lifecycle management and digital continuity of information assets are monitored. This includes information assets held outside the SharePoint Online and Office 365 environment. **See recommendation 7** ## 2 Digital Information And Supporting Technology Key Developments Since The Last Ima:  DfT has worked proactively to enforce limits on personal drives and has stopped adding to its substantial legacy archive of 80 million emails. A project to reduce the archive saw emails from prior to 2010 captured or destroyed before the process was stopped due to the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse.  DfT has conducted analysis to understand the age and format of its digital information. It has identified corrupted and untrustworthy metadata in its early digital records. These were not selected for transfer to The National Archives. Performance heading Performance rating Priority 2.1 Supporting information through technology Development area Medium  DfT recognises that while governance rules establish how shared drives should be used, the current shared drive environment does not meet key requirements for records systems set out in the Section 46 Code of Practice. While DfT has made some key steps in addressing risks relating to storage of information outside corporate spaces, management of current email is an ongoing area of concern. No meaningful controls are in place to help limit storage capacities. DfT holds a volume nearly equivalent to its legacy email archive in current mailboxes (70 million emails), with more than 1000 mailboxes holding more than the recommended current limit of 2GB. **See recommendations 3**  DfT has clearly invested a considerable amount of effort in establishing business requirements for information and records management. We saw positive evidence that these have underpinned work to introduce SharePoint Online. This is progressing ahead of the planned introduction of Office 365. While the introduction of SharePoint Online offers the opportunity to improve DfT's capability, we emphasise that these two pieces of work should be formally aligned. This is required to support a whole IT environment approach to information capture and storage and to minimise the risk raised by increased access to personal repositories. **See recommendation 3** Performance heading Performance rating Priority 2.2 Digital continuity and IT change Development area Medium  DfT is working to address a number of digital continuity related risk areas ahead of migration. This includes file-path length and the existence of email stubs in the file plan. However, digital continuity is not yet embedded on a business-as-usual basis in departmental planning and there is no programme of work in place to protect information that may be at risk. Key potential risk areas include the retention of information in the wider Office 365 environment and in existing and legacy email holdings. The need to hold data and information over the long term, including, for example, content held and used by DfT's accident investigation teams, also needs to be considered. KIM and IT teams need to work together to define how the digital continuity will be ensured in practice, and to deliver the migration strategy goal of defining usability requirements following the migration. See recommendation 4  For the migration itself, DfT should ensure a clear policy is in place in relation to information identified as being at risk of digital continuity loss including nonidentifiable file formats. See recommendation 4  Historically, the KIM team has lacked a formal route in to the IT procurement process. The situation was expected to improve due to recent governance changes. DfT must ensure that business requirements for information and records management, including digital continuity, are considered routinely. See recommendation 4 ## 3 Information Risk, Governance And Oversight Key Developments Since The Last Ima:  An information risk policy was produced in 2012 and an audit of records management was conducted in 2014. This included consideration of compliance with policies and procedures.  An information management modernisation project board is in place, which is chaired by the Head of the Digital Service division. | Performance heading | Performance rating | Priority | |----------------------------------|------------------------|-------------| | 3.1 Recognising information risk | Development area | Medium | | | | |  DfT places a strong corporate focus on cyber-security and personal information related risks. DfT should ensure descriptions of these risks reflect the potential impact of information and records management practice. **See recommendation 5**  Though we saw evidence of business areas taking ownership of the risk of noncompliance with information and records management policy (see good practice and key highlights, p. 5), DfT's information risk policy does not cover information and records management. This needs to be updated to provide a definition of this type of risk and the structures for managing it, including business ownership and the role of the KIM team and Departmental Records Officer (DRO). See recommendation 5  Corporate descriptions of information and records management-related risk causes and mitigating actions do not reflect the wider current and future IT environment, including the planned introduction of Office 365. This should be addressed and the impact and likelihood should be reassessed in light of this report. **See recommendation 5**  DfT also needs to define the risk of a failure to ensure digital information remains usable. **See recommendation 5** Performance heading Performance rating Priority 3.2 Establishing control Satisfactory Low  At the time of the IMA, links between information assurance and KIM staff and colleagues in IT appeared informal. Following the foundation of the Digital Service division, DfT now needs to support and enable more formal communication through membership of governance boards. **See recommendation** 8  Historically, the Business Records Officer (BRO) role has not provided a fully effective means of ensuring consistent compliance with policy. Recent work to increase the effectiveness of the role (see good practice and key highlights, p. 5) has delivered tangible benefits. DfT plans to review the role. In the meantime, it should ensure the role continues to be supported and developed to drive the right culture. **See recommendation 8**  DfT has identified a requirement to nominate senior information champions within Director General Groups during delivery of the information management project. Following the model of other IMA programme members such as HM Treasury (which has done so on a best practice basis) DfT should consider embedding this role on a business as usual basis. To help drive and embed an effective culture in the long-term, DfT should establish the link between this role and the BRO role and any successor to it. In doing so, it should give consideration to the split between system administration and driving positive behaviours across the IT environment as a whole. **See recommendation 8** Performance heading Performance rating Priority 3.3 Providing guidance Development area Medium  DfT has a high-level information and records management policy. This includes summary principles on what records to keep. DfT should take the opportunity offered by the move to SharePoint Online to work with business areas to establish more concrete and tailored guidance on what needs to be kept in practice. Data and key outputs from data analytics should be brought explicitly within scope. DfT should publish its retention schedules publicly in accordance with the recommendation made in Sir Alex Allan's 2014 *Records Review* report. See recommendation 6  As noted above, email management is an ongoing area for improvement. Although requirements related to policy submissions did appear to be understood, in wider terms, staff were not always clear which emails needed to be captured and by whom, or that email chains where relevant need to be captured as well as attachments. DfT also needs to ensure clear principles are established for staff in relation to handling of drafts and documenting context around key decisions taken. We saw evidence that in some cases staff are capturing final decisions only. **See recommendation 6**  DfT should promote clear principles in both cases as part of the recommended department-wide work to embed the right information management culture. It should also provide a stronger push on information and records management as part of the induction and leavers process. Information management policy should set clear expectations for all staff including managers, clearly communicating responsibilities. **See recommendations 6** Performance heading Performance rating Priority 3.4 Measuring Impact Satisfactory Low  DfT asks BROs to complete an annual self-assessment questionnaire, which is used to inform KIM team priorities for the following year. A range of KIM criteria have also been added to the management assurance questionnaire. However, DfT currently lacks an objective means of monitoring compliance with policy, supporting standards, procedures and guidelines as recommended by the Section 46 Code of Practice. The risks raised by this are to an extent mitigated by the current direct engagement with business areas in preparation for the coming migration to SharePoint Online. Beyond this, a robust monitoring regime needs to be established to underpin work to improve information and records management culture. **See recommendation 8** ## 4 Records, Review And Transfer Key Developments Since The Last Ima:  The KIM team has started an audit of paper files held in the business to ensure it has a clear idea of what is held. Performance heading Performance rating Priority 4.1 Oversight of records and selection Satisfactory Low  DfT has a good understanding of records held in its shared drives. It is also able to subject its legacy email holdings to scrutiny using e-Discovery tools.  However, the KIM team has less oversight over information held outside its shared drives. This includes information assets and other datasets. In line with the recommended establishment of a holistic strategic vision for information management, DfT should broaden its definition of a record to cover information in all formats and locations. **See recommendation 9** Performance heading Performance rating Priority 4.2 Implementing disposal decisions Satisfactory Low  DfT is currently compliant with the Public Records Act in terms of paper records. The 2016-17 Records Management work plan included a requirement to analyse and assess technical and resource requirements for digital transfer, but DfT has yet to identify how this will happen in practice. It needs to engage with The National Archives in defining requirements, including for early transfer where desirable, to maintain a satisfactory rating under this heading. See recommendation 9  Routine disposal of current digital information in line with retention schedules has been happening to a limited degree only. However, DfT plans to address this through the different treatments to records held in the shared drives through the migration process, including disposal of redundant, obsolete and trivial information. This will include any information assessed as being past its disposal date.  DfT is not destroying legacy material in view of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse. It needs to identify a clear plan for disposal of information held outside the shared drives, including information assets, data and its email holdings including its email legacy. Clarifying its risk appetite for information risks, including those related to disposal, may be helpful here. **See recommendation 9** ## Annex A - Recommendations In Full  Recommendations consist of an overall outcome to be delivered through the period of DfT IMA action plan and a set of supporting actions that will help DfT address the recommendation. ## High-Priority Recommendations 1 Dft To Establish A Programme Of Work To Establish And Embed The Right Information Management Culture In The New It Environment. This Should Be Closely Integrated With Planned It Change. This Would Be Supported By:  Drawing on good practice examples of work to improve culture and behaviours from organisations in the IMA programme, including HM Treasury and Welsh Government.  Appointing an overall board-level champion for information and records management to lend support to planned initiatives.  Ensuring a focus on recognised issues and risk areas such as improving how staff work with and manage email, the retention of drafts and key context, and the unnecessary capture and retention of ephemeral material. ## 2 Dft To Establish And Communicate A Clear Vision And Strategy For Information Management. This Would Be Supported By:  Using the information management modernisation project's future information principles as a starting point.  Adopting a format-blind approach that encompasses data and records management outcomes.  Establishing concrete plans to socialise and implement the strategy. ## Medium-Priority Recommendations 3 Dft To Apply Continued Focus To The Delivery Of An Improved It Environment That Will Make Good Information Management Practice Easier To Achieve This Would Be Supported By:  Formally establishing the link between the information management modernisation project and the forthcoming roll out of the wider Office 365 environment.  Adopting a whole IT environment approach to information architecture and information capture and storage, with consideration given to proportionate use of controls to help shape behaviours and limit the potential for bad practice. ## 4 Dft To Build On The Work To Embed Digital Continuity As Part Of The Proposed Information Principles, Putting In Place Concrete Plans For Kim And It Staff To Deliver Digital Continuity And Information Management Priorities. This Would Be Supported By:  Ensuring digital continuity principles are applied to the whole IT environment, including the wider Office 365 environment, current and legacy email holdings.  Ensuring that consideration of retention and digital continuity are factored into the IT procurement process as standard.  Putting in plan a clear policy in relation to the migration of information at risk of digital continuity loss including non-identifiable formats. ## Dft To Review Corporate Descriptions Of Information And Records Management Related Risk To Ensure Causes And Mitigating Actions Reflect The Wider Current And Future It Environment, Including The Planned Introduction Of Office 365. This Would Be Supported By:  Reviewing the impact and likelihood of the risk and ensuring scrutiny at a directorate as well as a divisional level.  Updating the information risk policy to provide a clear steer on information and records management related risk, including structures and roles for managing it. DfT should consider extending this to business ownership of compliance related risk, drawing on best practice examples that already exist within the department.  Defining the risks related to digital continuity and logging these at an appropriate level.  Ensuring the role of information and records management is factored in to definitions of other information related risks including those relating to cyber security and loss of personal and sensitive information. ## 6 Dft To Engage With The Business And Establishing More Concrete And Tailored Principles That Establish What Information Staff Need To Capture And Keep This Would Be Supported By:  Reviewing information and records management policy to ensure key requirements set out in the Section 46 Code of practice are factored in.  Paying particular attention to key areas such as email chains, drafts, evidence of decision and key context.  Ensuring consistent coverage of information and records management as part of induction and leavers processes.  Clearly establishing required behaviours for all staff including managers and senior staff in information management policy.  Publishing retention schedules on GOV.UK in line with recommendations in Sir Alex Allan's *Records Review.* ## 7 Dft To Build On The Existing Information Asset Governance Framework And Seek Opportunities To Surface And Manage Information And Records Management Related Risks To Information Assets. This Would Be Supported By:  Ensuring KIM and information security staff work together to ensure risks relating to disposal of information assets are identified and monitored.  Ensuring KIM and information security staff work together to identify and monitor risks relating to digital continuity of information assets and datasets, especially bespoke data sets held outside the core system that needs to be held over the long term. ## 8 Dft To Strengthen Arrangements For Information Management Governance And Oversight Of Performance In The New It Environment This Would Be Supported By:  Appointing business champions for information management on a business as usual basis, beyond the SharePoint Online roll-out period.  Defining the relationship between this role and the BRO role (or its successor) to allow system administration and promotion of required behaviours across the IT environment as a whole. In the meantime DfT should continue to support the BRO role.  Ensuring information management representation on IT, data and digital focussed governance boards.  Establishing requirements for a robust monitoring regime once the new IT environment is in place to map the maturity and capability of business areas. DfT needs to ensure good practice can be shared and poorly performing areas can be identified and targeted. ## Dft To Increase Oversight Of Digital Information And Develop A Process For Its Appraisal, Selection And Transfer. This Would Be Supported By:  Ensuring a clear vision of what information needs to be in scope across the IT environment as a whole. Datasets and data analytics outputs should be factored in.  Establishing a plan for the information held outside the shared drives including its email legacy and for ensuring material that should form part of the record is captured.  Engaging with The National Archives and cross-government work around the sensitivity review of digital information.  Working with The National Archives to establish a plan for the routine transfer of digital records. This should include identification of material that would benefit from transfer before deadlines established by the Public Records Act.

en

4153-pdf

# Diabetes Prevention Programme, 2017-18 Diagnoses And Demographics England 11 July 2019 ## Introduction The NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHS DPP) is a joint commitment from NHS England, Public Health England and Diabetes UK to deliver, at scale, evidence based behavioural interventions that can prevent or delay the onset of Type 2 diabetes in adults who have been identified as having non-diabetic hyperglycaemia. ## Non-Diabetic Hyperglycaemia Non-diabetic hyperglycaemia refers to blood glucose levels that are above normal but not in the diabetic range (HbA1c 42-47 mmol/mol (6.0-6.4%) or fasting plasma glucose 5.5-6.9 mmol/l). People with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia are at increased risk of developing Type 2 diabetes. They are also at increased risk of other cardiovascular conditions. This report uses data collected alongside the National Diabetes Audit (NDA) for the period January 2017 to March 2018 inclusive. This report is for England only. Unlike the NDA, it does not include information on Wales. ## Registrations There are 2.9 million people in England with diagnosed Type 2 diabetes, and 1.3 million with recorded non-diabetic hyperglycaemia. The National Cardiovascular Intelligence Network (NCVIN) estimates there are 4 million people with Type 2 diabetes and 5 million people with nondiabetic hyperglycaemia in England: Estimates of CVD prevalence at www.gov.uk Notes: 1. People included: aged 15 years and over (with a known, valid date of birth). 2. People included: registered at a GP practice that participated in NDA 2017-18. ## Nhs Diabetes Prevention Programme Invitation To Attend And Uptake Of Offer Referrals to - and attendances at - DPP behavioural change courses are sometimes recorded in GP records, but the data is not complete. ## Future Plans The GP record data shows that • 160,475 people are offered attendance on a prevention course. • 57,180 of these people decline the offer. Once data from the Diabetes Prevention Programme providers has been linked to the GP data that forms the basis of this report, a more complete picture of referrals and attendance will be available. ## Notes: People With Non-Diabetic Hyperglycaemia Demographics Non-Diabetic Hyperglycaemia: Age / Sex Notes: 1. Data taken from ONS 'Estimates of the population for the UK, England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland' for mid- 2017. 2. People included: those who are aged 15 years and over (with a known, valid date of birth). 3. People included (NDH, T2DM): registered at a GP practice that participated in NDA 2017-18. 4. People included (T2DM): those in NDA 2017-18 who did not have type 1 diabetes. The non-diabetic hyperglycaemia population and the Type 2 diabetes population are similar to one another, though a higher proportion of men have Type 2 diabetes. Both populations are markedly older than the general population. ## Non-Diabetic Hyperglycaemia: Ethnicity | Ethnicity | White | Asian | Black | Mixed | Other | Unknown | |---------------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|-----------| | Number | 867,940 | 125,800 | 47,360 | 12,980 | 12,470 | 227,945 | | Percent | 67.0 | 9.7 | 3.7 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 17.6 | | Registrations | | | | | | | 15.4% of people recorded with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia are known to be from black, Asian and ethnic minority groups Notes: 1. People included: All ages 2. People included: registered at a GP practice that participated in NDA 2017-18. 3. 'Unknown' includes people where the ethnicity was Unknown or Not Stated. hyperglycaemia have a lower age distribution than white people. ## Non-Diabetic Hyperglycaemia: Age / Ethnicity Non-Diabetic Hyperglycaemia: Deprivation Notes: 1. People included: All ages 2. People included (NDH, T2DM): registered at a GP practice that participated in NDA 2017-18. 3. People included (T2DM): those in NDA 2017-18 who did not have type 1 diabetes. People with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia are found in similar numbers across deprivation quintiles: there is only a slight gradient change from most to least deprived. People with type 2 diabetes are more often found in more deprived areas: there is a clear decrease from the most to least deprived quintiles. ## Non-Diabetic Hyperglycaemia: Bmi The distribution of normal, overweight and obese BMI is similar amongst people with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia and people with Type 2 diabetes. The proportion of people in the 'healthy' weight category (BMI < 25) is slightly higher in the NDH population than in the Type 2 diabetes population. ## Non-Diabetic Hyperglycaemia: Bmi / Ethnicity Notes: 1. Data taken from Health Survey for England, 2017: Adult and Child overweight and obesity. 2. People included: All ages 3. People included (NDH, T2DM): registered at a GP practice that participated in NDA 2017-18. 4. People included (T2DM): those who did not have type 1 diabetes. 5. People included (from Health Survey for England): aged 16 years and over with height / weight measurements (age-standardised). ## Impact Of Behaviour Change Programmes Current Limitations And Future Plans There is not yet sufficient data to make an assessment on whether the behaviour change programmes are having an impact on reducing weight, progression to Type 2 Diabetes and other cardiovascular risk factors. This will be investigated in future reports on the Diabetes Prevention Programme. ## Future Plans The GP data will be linked to the behaviour change programme provider data at person level in order to investigate the full journey of diagnosis through education and subsequent outcomes. ## Diabetes Prevention Programme, 2017-18 Prepared In Collaboration With: The Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership (HQIP). The National Diabetes Audit (NDA) is part of the National Clinical Audit and Patient Outcomes Programme (NCAPOP) which is commissioned by the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership (HQIP) and funded by NHS England. HQIP is led by a consortium of the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges, the Royal College of Nursing and National Voices. Its aim is to promote quality improvement, and in particular to increase the impact that clinical audit has on healthcare quality in England and Wales. HQIP holds the contract to manage and develop the NCAPOP Programme, comprising more than 30 clinical audits that cover care provided to people with a wide range of medical, surgical and mental health conditions. The programme is funded by NHS England, the Welsh Government and, with some individual audits, also funded by the Health Department of the Scottish Government, DHSSPS Northern Ireland and the Channel Islands. NHS Digital is the trading name for the Health and Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC). NHS Digital managed the publication of the 2017-18 annual report. Diabetes UK is the charity leading the fight against the most devastating and fastest growing health crisis of our time, creating a world where diabetes can do no harm. Supported by: The National Cardiovascular Intelligence Network (NCVIN) is a partnership of leading national cardiovascular organisations which analyses information and data and turns it into meaningful timely health intelligence for commissioners, policy makers, clinicians and health professionals to improve services and outcomes. ## Diabetes Prevention Programme, 2017-18 Published By Nhs Digital Part Of The Government Statistical Service Responsible Statistician Peter Knighton, Principal Information Analyst ## For Further Information Digital.Nhs.Uk 0300 303 5678 Enquiries@Nhsdigital.Nhs.Uk Copyright © 2019, the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership, National Diabetes Audit. All rights reserved. This work remains the sole and exclusive property of the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership and may only be reproduced where there is explicit reference to the ownership of the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership. This work may be re-used by NHS and government organisations without permission.

en

3761-pdf

NATION..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................1 Base : All respondents REGION .........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................3 Base : All respondents URBANITY .....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................7 Base : All respondents CABLE AREA.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................9 Base : All respondents DEPRIVATION LEVEL.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................11 Base : All respondents SE. GENDER ...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................13 Base : All respondents SF. AGE OF RESPONDENT.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................15 Base : All respondents SG (QZ8). What is the occupation of the main wage earner in your household? CODE SOCIAL GRADE. (SINGLE CODE)..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................17 Base : All respondents QZ5 (SG). WORKING STATUS...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................19 Base : All respondents QZ6 (SH). HOUSEHOLD STATUS..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................23 Base : All respondents SH (SI). Total number in household (including respondent and any children)............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................25 Base : All respondents SJ. Total number of children in household (under 18), including respondent (if respondent is under 18) .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................27 Base : All respondents SK (SM). Can you speak or write in Welsh at all?.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................29 Base : All respondents in Wales QB1. SHOWCARD Which of the following do you, or does anyone in your household, have in your home at the moment? (MULTICODE)..........................................................................................................................................................................................................31 Base : All respondents QB2. SHOWCARD And do you personally use...? (MULTICODE).............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................35 Base : Those who have access to any of listed devices at home QB3 (QB4). SHOWCARD Which games console/s do you or does anyone in your household have at the moment? (MULTICODE) ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................39 Base : Those who have access to a games console at home QB4 (QB5). SHOWCARD Which, if any, of these do you use your games console for? (MULTICODE) ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................41 Base : Those who have access to a games console at home QC1. Is there a landline phone in your home that can be used to make and receive calls? (SINGLE CODE) PROMPTED....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................43 Base : All respondents QC2 (QC2A). Do you ever use this landline phone at home yourself to make or receive calls, for internet access or both? (MULTICODE)...........................................................................................................................................................................................................45 Base : Those with a landline phone at home QC3 (QC28). SHOWCARD Which of these do you consider to be your MAIN method of making and receiving telephone calls? (SINGLE CODE)..............................................................................................................................................................................................47 Base : All respondents QC4 (QC28A). SHOWCARD And thinking about when you are at home, which is your MAIN method of making and receiving telephone calls? (SINGLE CODE).....................................................................................................................................................................49 Base : All respondents QC5 (QC21B). SHOWCARD Which of these do you consider is your main supplier? (SINGLE CODE) ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................51 Base : Those with a landline phone at home QC6A (QC13A). SHOWCARD Thinking about your home phone service only, please use this card to say how satisfied you are with the overall service provided by (MAIN SUPPLIER). (SINGLE CODE)...................................................................................................53 Base : Those with a landline phone at home QD1. How many mobile phones IN TOTAL do you AND members of your household use? (SINGLE CODE).........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................55 Base : All respondents QD2. Do you personally use a mobile phone? How many mobile phones with different telephone numbers do you use at least once a month? Please include any phones used for work or other purposes. (SINGLE CODE)....................................................................57 Base : All respondents QD3 (QD10). Which mobile network do you use most often? (SINGLE CODE) ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................59 Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone ## Qd4 (Qd24B). Do You Personally Use A Smartphone? If Unsure - A Smartphone Is A Phone On Which You Can Easily Access Emails, Download Files And Applications, As Well As View Websites And Generally Surf The Internet. Popular Brands Of Smartphone Include Blackberry, Iphone And Android Phones Such As The Htc Desire. ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................61 Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone QD5 (QD11). SHOWCARD Which of these best describes the mobile package you personally use most often? (SINGLE CODE) .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................63 Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone ## Qd6 (Qd11A). When You Signed Up For Your Current Mobile Contract Did You Get A Handset With The Contract Or Did You Only Get A Sim Card? (Single Code).........................................................................................................................................................................65 Base : Those who use a postpay/ contract mobile phone QD7A (QD4A). SHOWCARD How often, if at all, do you use your mobile phone to send or receive text messages? (SINGLE CODE).................................................................................................................................................................................................................67 Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone QD7B (QD4B). SHOWCARD And how often, it at all, do you use your mobile phone to make calls? (SINGLE CODE) ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................69 Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone QD8A (QD28A). SHOWCARD Which if any, of the following activities, other than making and receiving voice calls, do you use your mobile for? (MULTICODE).......................................................................................................................................................................71 Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone QD8B (QD28B) And, which of these activities have you used your mobile for in the last week? (MULTICODE)......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................79 Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone QD9 (QD28C). You said that you use your mobile phone to access the internet. Which one of these best describes where you use your mobile phone to access the internet? (SINGLE CODE) ...................................................................................................................87 Base : Those who use their mobile phone to access the internet QD10 (QD28D). Do you use any of the following types of apps or applications on your Smartphone? (MULTICODE)............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................89 Base : Those with a Smartphone QD11A (QD21A). SHOWCARD Thinking about your mobile phone service only, please use this card to say how satisfied you are with (MAIN SUPPLIER) for each of the following...The overall service provided by MAIN SUPPLIER. (SINGLE CODE) .......................91 Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone QD11J (QD21J). SHOWCARD Thinking about your mobile phone service only, please use this card to say how satisfied you are with (MAIN SUPPLIER) for each of the following...Reception/ accessing network. (SINGLE CODE)........................................................93 Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone QE1. Does your household have a PC, laptop, netbook or tablet computer? (MULTICODE OPTIONS 1-4 ONLY).................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................95 Base : All respondents QE2. Do you or does anyone in your household have access to the internet/ Worldwide Web at HOME (via any device, e.g. PC, mobile phone etc)? (SINGLE CODE)............................................................................................................................................................97 Base : All respondents QE3 (IN6). SHOWCARD Do you ever access the internet anywhere other than in your home at all? IF YES: Where is that? (MULTICODE) .......................................................................................................................................................................................................99 Base : All respondents QE4 (QE23). SHOWCARD And how often do you personally use the internet nowadays either at home or elsewhere? (SINGLE CODE)..........................................................................................................................................................................................................103 Base : Those who use the internet at home or elsewhere QE5 (QE9). SHOWCARD Which of these methods does your household use to connect to the internet at home? (MULTICODE)......................................................................................................................................................................................................................105 Base : Those with access to the internet at home QE6 (QE10). SHOWCARD And which of these is your MAIN method of connection? (SINGLE CODE)................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................107 Base : Those with access to the internet at home QE7 (QE22B). You mentioned that your household has a mobile broadband connection (connecting via a USB stick or dongle, or built-in 3G connectivity in a laptop or another device). Do you personally access the internet in this way, using mobile broadband? ..109 Base : Those in a household with mobile broadband QE8 (QE22C). Which one of these best describes where you use mobile broadband to access the internet? (SINGLE CODE) ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................111 Base : Those who use mobile broadband to access the internet QE9 (QE7). Which Internet Service Provider (ISP) does your household currently use as its MAIN supplier at home? (SINGLE CODE) ............................................................................................................................................................................................................113 Base : Those with access to the internet at home QE3B (QE10). How many people aged 16 or over in your household (including yourself) could access the fixed Broadband connection in your home if they wanted to?........................................................................................................................................................117 Base : Those with fixed broadband at home where there is more than one person in household QE3A (QE11). How many people aged 16 or over in your household (including yourself) could access the mobile Broadband connection in your home if they wanted to?.....................................................................................................................................................119 Base : Those with mobile broadband at home where there is more than one person in household QE12A (QE5A). SHOWCARD Which, if any, of these do you or members of your household use the internet for whilst at home? (MULTICODE).............................................................................................................................................................................................121 Base : Those with access to the internet at home QE12B (QE5B) SHOWCARD And, which, if any, of these activities have you or members of your household used the internet for in the LAST WEEK? (MULTICODE)..........................................................................................................................................................129 Base : Those with access to the internet at home QE13 (QENEW11) SHOWCARD What was the advertised speed of your main home internet connection when you took up your service? (SINGLE CODE)...........................................................................................................................................................................137 Base : Those who use broadband as their main method of connecting to the internet at home QE14 (QE11A). SHOWCARD What is the actual speed of your main home internet connection? (SINGLE CODE).............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................141 Base : Those who use broadband as their main method of connecting to the internet at home QE15 (QE11B). Can you tell me whether the actual speed of your main home internet connection is more than 512K? (SINGLE CODE)..........................................................................................................................................................................................................147 Base : Those unaware of their broadband connection speed QE16 (QE11C). Do you know how to find out what speeds you are getting on your computer at home? (SINGLE CODE)...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................149 Base : Those with broadband at home QE17 (QE12X). SHOWCARD You said you use a mobile USB stick or dongle to access the internet, thinking about the speed of your mobile broadband, is this faster, slower or about the same as you expected it to be when you first got it? (SINGLE CODE)........151 Base : Those with mobile broadband QE18A (QE8AA). SHOWCARD Thinking about your mobile broadband internet service, please use this card to say how satisfied you are with your main supplier for... The overall service provided by MAIN PROVIDER? (SINGLE CODE).........................................153 Base : Those with mobile broadband QE18B (QE8AB). SHOWCARD Thinking about your mobile broadband internet service, please use this card to say how satisfied you are with your main supplier for... The speed of your service while online (not just the connection)? (SINGLE CODE) ...................155 Base : Those with mobile broadband QE18C (QE8AC). SHOWCARD Thinking about your mobile broadband internet service, please use this card to say how satisfied you are with your main supplier for... The reliability of the service from MAIN PROVIDER? (SINGLE CODE)......................................157 Base : Those with mobile broadband QE19 (QE12). SHOWCARD Thinking about the speed of your household's fixed broadband internet, is this faster, slower or about the same as you expected it to be when you first got it? (SINGLE CODE) ............................................................................................159 Base : Those with fixed broadband at home QE20A (QE8A). SHOWCARD Thinking about your fixed broadband internet service, please use this card to say how satisfied you are with your main supplier for... The overall service provided by MAIN PROVIDER. (SINGLE CODE)...............................................161 Base : Those with fixed broadband at home QE20B (QE8B). SHOWCARD Thinking about your fixed broadband internet service, please use this card to say how satisfied you are with your main supplier for... The speed of your service while online (not just the connection)? (SINGLE CODE).........................163 Base : Those with fixed broadband at home QE20C (QE8C). SHOWCARD Thinking about your fixed broadband internet service, please use this card to say how satisfied you are with your main supplier for... The reliability of the service from MAIN PROVIDER? (SINGLE CODE)............................................165 Base : Those with fixed broadband at home QE21 (QE35). READ OUT DESCRIPTION OF WIRELESS ROUTER. Have you or anyone in your household ever used a fixed wireless internet connection at home? (SINGLE CODE).............................................................................................................................167 Base : Those with fixed broadband at home QE22 (QE24). SHOWCARD How likely are you to get internet access at home in the next 12 months? (SINGLE CODE)...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................169 Base : Those without internet access at home QE23A (QE25A). Why are you unlikely to get internet access at home in the next 12 months? (MULTICODE) UNPROMPTED..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................171 Base : Those unlikely to get internet access at home in the next 12 months QE23B (QE25B). And, which one of these reasons is your MAIN reason for not getting internet access at home? (SINGLE CODE) ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................175 Base : Those unlikely to get internet access at home in the next 12 months QE24 (QENI1). EXPLAIN SATELLITE BROADBAND Were you aware that satellite broadband is available? (SINGLE CODE) ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................179 Base : All respondents in Scotland and Wales QE25 (QE29). Before now, were you aware that you could make voice calls using the internet? (SINGLE CODE)...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................181 Base : All respondents QE26 (QE29A). And do you or anyone in your household have access to internet voice services at home? (SINGLE CODE).............................................................................................................................................................................................................................183 Base : All respondents QE27 (QE30). Have you or anyone in your household ever used one of these services to make voice calls using the internet at home? (SINGLE CODE) ...............................................................................................................................................................................185 Base : Those with access to internet voice services at home QE28 (QE31). Which supplier does/ did your household use to make voice calls using the internet? (SINGLE CODE)........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................187 Base : Those who have ever used internet voice services at home QH1A. SHOWCARD Which, if any, of these types of television does your household receive at the moment? (MULTICODE) ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................189 Base : All respondents QH1B. SHOWCARD And which of these do you consider is your MAIN type of television? (SINGLE CODE).......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................193 Base : All respondents QH2 (QH50). How many TV sets are there in ALL rooms of your house? (SINGLE CODE)...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................197 Base : Those with a TV in the household QH3 (QH51). SHOWCARD When did you last buy a TV set for the MAIN viewing room in your house? (SINGLE CODE)...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................199 Base : Those with a TV in the household QH4 (QH52). SHOWCARD Which, if any, of these features do you have on the MAIN TV in your house? (MULTICODE)...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................201 Base : Those with a TV in the household QG2. Is this ONE deal or package, or more than one? (SINGLE CODE) ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................243 Base : Those with a bundle of services, who receive any of these services as part of an overall deal or package ## Qg3 (Qg3A). Showcard Thinking About The Service Package You Consider To Be The Main One, Or The One Your Household Spends The Most On... Please Could You Tell Me Which Services Are Part Of This Deal Or Package You Have With The Same Supplier? (Multicode)............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................245 Base : Those with at least one deal or package with the same supplier QG4 (QG3B). Do you receive a discount or special deal for subscribing to this package of services? (SINGLE CODE).......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................247 Base : Those with at least one deal or package with the same supplier QG5 (QG3C). Do you receive one bill for this bundle of services, or more than one bill? (SINGLE CODE) ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................249 Base : Those with at least one deal or package with the same supplier QG6 (QG3D). Which supplier do you use for this package of services? (SINGLE CODE)......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................251 Base : Those with at least one deal or package with the same supplier QP1. SHOWCARD During an average week, on how many days do you listen to the radio (including listening at home, in the car, at work, via mobile phone, personal stereo)? (SINGLE CODE)...............................................................................................................255 Base : All respondents QP2A (QP11A). SHOWCARD How often, if at all, do you access the radio via - Traditional set with AM Stereo - either at home, in the car or on portable radio. (SINGLE CODE)..........................................................................................................................................259 Base : Those who listen to radio QP2B (QP11B). SHOWCARD How often, if at all, do you access the radio via - Traditional set with FM stereo - either at home, in the car or on portable radio. (SINGLE CODE) ..........................................................................................................................................261 Base : Those who listen to radio QP2C (QP11C). SHOWCARD How often, if at all, do you access the radio via - Mobile phone. (SINGLE CODE)................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................263 Base : Those who listen to radio QP2D (QP11D). SHOWCARD How often, if at all, do you access the radio via - Digital radio through TV. (SINGLE CODE)................................................................................................................................................................................................................................265 Base : Those who listen to radio QP2E (QP11E). SHOWCARD How often, if at all, do you access the radio via - Digital radio through the internet. (SINGLE CODE) ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................267 Base : Those who listen to radio QP2F (QP11F). SHOWCARD How often, if at all, do you access the radio via - DAB radio set. (SINGLE CODE)................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................269 Base : Those who listen to radio QP2G (QP11G) SHOWCARD How often, if at all, do you access the radio via - Car radio (FM). (SINGLE CODE)...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................271 Base : Those who listen to radio QP2H (QP11H) SHOWCARD How often, if at all, do you access the radio via - Car radio (AM). (SINGLE CODE)...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................273 Base : Those who listen to radio QP2I (QP11I) SHOWCARD How often, if at all, do you access the radio via - Car radio (DAB). (SINGLE CODE)...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................275 Base : Those who listen to radio ## Qp3 (Qb1). Do You, Or Does Anyone In Your Household, Have Digital Radio Channels In Your Home At The Moment - Whether Through A Specialist Dab Radio Receiver, Through A Digital Television Or Over The Internet? (Single Code).....................................................277 Base : All respondents ## Qp4 (Q1). Showcard Please Think About Any Radio Sets That You May Have At Home That Someone Listens To In Most Weeks. In Which Of These Rooms At Home Do You Have One Of These Radios That Someone Listens To In Most Weeks? (Multicode).....................279 Base : All respondents QP5 (Q2). In total, how many radio sets do you have in your home that you, or someone in your household, listen to in most weeks? (SINGLE CODE)...................................................................................................................................................................................283 Base : All respondents QP6 (Q3). Before today, had you heard of digital radios, sometimes called D-A-B radios? READ OUT EXPLANATION IF NECESSARY (SINGLE CODE)..............................................................................................................................................................................285 Base : All respondents QZ12 (QZNI1). Do you regard yourself as belonging to any particular religion? IF YES: Which religion, religious denomination or body do you belong?...................................................................................................................................................................................337 Base : All respondents in Northern Ireland All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Nation Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 England 1886 905 981 276 340 654 616 297 169 240 428 490 566 339 490 1886 - - - 84% 84% 84% 84% 83% 84% 83% 78% 78% 86% 91% 87% 85% 82% 81% 100% -% -% -% gh gh n pqr Scotland 197 94 102 25 36 67 69 40 23 18 20 41 55 39 61 - 197 - - 9% 9% 9% 8% 9% 9% 9% 10% 10% 6% 4% 7% 8% 10% 10% -% 100% -% -% j j oqr Wales 111 52 59 16 19 39 37 25 16 12 16 23 30 20 38 - - 111 - 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 7% 7% 4% 3% 4% 4% 5% 6% -% -% 100% -% j j opr Northern Ireland 62 30 32 10 13 21 18 16 10 10 9 11 18 14 19 - - - 62 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 2% 4% 5% 3% 2% 2% 3% 3% 3% -% -% -% 100% j opq Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Nation Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 England 1886 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1673 213 1067 806 1204 682 84% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 85% 73% 85% 82% 87% 84% j n Scotland 197 - - - - - - - - 164 33 100 96 100 96 9% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% 8% 11% 8% 10% 7% 12% m Wales 111 - - - - - - - - 88 23 61 50 78 33 5% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% 4% 8% 5% 5% 6% 4% i Northern Ireland 62 - - - - - - - - 39 23 32 30 - - 3% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% 2% 8% 3% 3% -% -% i Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Region Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 North East 96 47 48 16 21 32 27 14 9 7 14 24 22 20 30 96 - - - 4% 4% 4% 5% 5% 4% 4% 4% 4% 3% 3% 4% 3% 5% 5% 5% -% -% -% pqr North West 259 126 133 39 46 89 84 36 28 43 36 54 83 45 77 259 - - - 11% 12% 11% 12% 11% 11% 11% 9% 13% 15% 8% 9% 12% 11% 13% 14% -% -% -% j gj pqr Yorkshire 187 86 101 29 31 69 58 26 20 26 20 30 58 40 58 187 - - - 8% 8% 9% 9% 8% 9% 8% 7% 9% 9% 4% 5% 9% 10% 10% 10% -% -% -% j j k k k pqr East Midlands 163 77 86 23 26 60 54 26 13 25 35 34 48 37 44 163 - - - 7% 7% 7% 7% 6% 8% 7% 7% 6% 9% 7% 6% 7% 9% 7% 9% -% -% -% pqr West Midlands 197 96 102 30 33 67 68 36 23 22 38 51 53 35 58 197 - - - 9% 9% 9% 9% 8% 9% 9% 9% 10% 8% 8% 9% 8% 9% 10% 10% -% -% -% pqr East of England 210 105 106 30 44 69 68 38 15 24 65 61 55 40 55 210 - - - 9% 10% 9% 9% 11% 9% 9% 10% 7% 9% 14% 11% 8% 10% 9% 11% -% -% -% hi pqr London 280 137 143 46 57 103 75 33 25 39 106 86 93 35 66 280 - - - 12% 13% 12% 14% 14% 13% 10% 9% 12% 14% 22% 15% 14% 8% 11% 15% -% -% -% f g ghi mn m pqr South East 307 146 161 42 48 106 112 52 19 29 68 96 97 54 61 307 - - - 14% 14% 14% 13% 12% 14% 15% 14% 9% 10% 14% 17% 14% 13% 10% 16% -% -% -% h n n pqr South West 186 86 101 20 34 60 72 35 16 23 45 55 57 33 42 186 - - - 8% 8% 9% 6% 8% 8% 10% 9% 8% 8% 10% 10% 8% 8% 7% 10% -% -% -% pqr Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Region Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Wales 111 52 59 16 19 39 37 25 16 12 16 23 30 20 38 - - 111 - 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 7% 7% 4% 3% 4% 4% 5% 6% -% -% 100% -% j j opr Scotland 197 94 102 25 36 67 69 40 23 18 20 41 55 39 61 - 197 - - 9% 9% 9% 8% 9% 9% 9% 10% 10% 6% 4% 7% 8% 10% 10% -% 100% -% -% j j oqr Northern Ireland 62 30 32 10 13 21 18 16 10 10 9 11 18 14 19 - - - 62 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 2% 4% 5% 3% 2% 2% 3% 3% 3% -% -% -% 100% j opq Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Region Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 North East 96 - - - - - - - 96 89 7 48 47 58 37 4% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% 27% 5% 2% 4% 5% 4% 5% abcdefg j North West 259 - - - - - - - 259 245 14 147 106 159 100 11% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% 73% 12% 5% 12% 11% 11% 12% abcdefg j Yorkshire 187 - - - - - - 187 - 167 21 99 88 118 69 8% -% -% -% -% -% -% 100% -% 8% 7% 8% 9% 9% 9% abcdefh East Midlands 163 - - - 163 - - - - 138 25 102 61 123 40 7% -% -% -% 100% -% -% -% -% 7% 9% 8% 6% 9% 5% abcefgh n West Midlands 197 - - - - 197 - - - 176 21 102 93 125 72 9% -% -% -% -% 100% -% -% -% 9% 7% 8% 9% 9% 9% abcdfgh East of England 210 - - - - - 210 - - 169 42 127 82 149 61 9% -% -% -% -% -% 100% -% -% 9% 14% 10% 8% 11% 8% abcdegh i n London 280 280 - - - - - - - 280 - 163 114 94 186 12% 100% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% 14% -% 13% 12% 7% 23% bcdefgh j m South East 307 - 307 - - - - - - 267 40 184 123 226 81 14% -% 100% -% -% -% -% -% -% 14% 14% 15% 13% 16% 10% acdefgh n South West 186 - - 186 - - - - - 143 44 95 91 151 36 8% -% -% 100% -% -% -% -% -% 7% 15% 8% 9% 11% 4% abdefgh i n Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Region Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Wales 111 - - - - - - - - 88 23 61 50 78 33 5% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% 4% 8% 5% 5% 6% 4% i Scotland 197 - - - - - - - - 164 33 100 96 100 96 9% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% 8% 11% 8% 10% 7% 12% m Northern Ireland 62 - - - - - - - - 39 23 32 30 - - 3% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% 2% 8% 3% 3% -% -% i Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Urbanity Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Urban 1964 946 1018 299 371 681 613 338 193 248 413 485 581 349 549 1673 164 88 39 87% 87% 87% 91% 91% 87% 83% 89% 89% 89% 88% 86% 87% 84% 90% 89% 83% 79% 63% ef f f km pqr r r Rural 292 136 156 28 37 100 127 40 24 32 59 81 88 64 59 213 33 23 23 13% 13% 13% 9% 9% 13% 17% 11% 11% 11% 12% 14% 13% 16% 10% 11% 17% 21% 37% c cde n n o o opq Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Urbanity Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Urban 1964 280 267 143 138 176 169 167 334 1964 - 1106 848 1123 802 87% 100% 87% 77% 85% 89% 80% 89% 94% 100% -% 88% 86% 81% 99% bcdefgh c c cf cf bcdfg j m Rural 292 - 40 44 25 21 42 21 21 - 292 155 136 259 10 13% -% 13% 23% 15% 11% 20% 11% 6% -% 100% 12% 14% 19% 1% ah abdegh ah a aegh ah a i n Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Cable Area Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 TELEWEST 463 224 239 76 97 151 139 75 47 51 94 132 140 73 117 406 57 - - 21% 21% 20% 23% 24% 19% 19% 20% 22% 18% 20% 23% 21% 18% 19% 22% 29% -% -% m qr oqr NTL 741 357 384 121 144 234 242 143 57 100 176 181 216 137 207 699 18 13 12 33% 33% 33% 37% 35% 30% 33% 38% 26% 36% 37% 32% 32% 33% 34% 37% 9% 12% 19% e h h h pqr pq NEITHER 1052 501 551 130 167 396 359 160 112 129 202 253 313 203 283 782 122 98 51 47% 46% 47% 40% 41% 51% 49% 42% 52% 46% 43% 45% 47% 49% 47% 41% 62% 88% 81% cd cd gj o opr op Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Cable Area Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 TELEWEST 463 96 47 38 - 112 16 32 64 461 1 249 207 237 225 21% 34% 15% 21% -% 57% 8% 17% 18% 23% *% 20% 21% 17% 28% bcdfgh df df abcdfgh d df df j m NTL 741 110 159 16 71 24 102 61 154 706 35 410 329 441 288 33% 39% 52% 9% 43% 12% 49% 33% 44% 36% 12% 33% 33% 32% 36% ce aceg ceg aceg ce ceg j NEITHER 1052 74 101 131 92 61 92 94 136 797 255 601 447 703 298 47% 26% 33% 71% 57% 31% 44% 50% 38% 41% 87% 48% 46% 51% 37% abdefgh abefh abe abeh a i n Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Deprivation Level Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Low 1382 665 717 170 219 506 487 175 125 169 335 416 437 246 282 1204 100 78 - 61% 62% 61% 52% 54% 65% 66% 46% 58% 61% 71% 74% 65% 60% 46% 64% 51% 70% -% cd cd g g ghi lmn mn n pr r opr Medium 782 372 410 140 170 248 224 179 78 97 122 134 203 149 296 660 88 33 - 35% 34% 35% 43% 42% 32% 30% 47% 36% 35% 26% 24% 30% 36% 49% 35% 45% 30% -% ef ef hij j j k kl klm r oqr r High 30 14 16 7 7 6 11 8 4 4 7 4 11 4 11 22 8 - - 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 2% 1% 4% -% -% qr oqr Undefined 62 30 32 10 13 21 18 16 10 10 9 11 18 14 19 - - - 62 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 2% 4% 5% 3% 2% 2% 3% 3% 3% -% -% -% 100% j opq Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Deprivation Level Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Low 1382 94 226 151 123 125 149 118 217 1123 259 796 578 1382 - 61% 34% 74% 81% 76% 63% 71% 63% 61% 57% 89% 63% 59% 100% -% aegh aefgh aegh a ah a a i l n Medium 782 164 81 36 40 72 61 69 137 772 10 419 359 - 782 35% 59% 26% 19% 24% 37% 29% 37% 39% 39% 3% 33% 36% -% 96% bcdefgh bcd c bcd bcdf j m High 30 22 - - - - - - - 30 - 14 16 - 30 1% 8% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% 2% -% 1% 2% -% 4% bcdefgh j m Undefined 62 - - - - - - - - 39 23 32 30 - - 3% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% 2% 8% 3% 3% -% -% i Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Se. Gender Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Male 1082 1082 - 161 171 365 384 163 107 149 221 278 306 225 273 905 94 52 30 48% 100% -% 49% 42% 47% 52% 43% 49% 53% 47% 49% 46% 54% 45% 48% 48% 47% 48% b de g ln Female 1174 - 1174 167 237 415 355 215 110 131 251 288 363 188 335 981 102 59 32 52% -% 100% 51% 58% 53% 48% 57% 51% 47% 53% 51% 54% 46% 55% 52% 52% 53% 52% a f f i m m Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Se. Gender Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Male 1082 137 146 86 77 96 105 86 173 946 136 629 447 665 387 48% 49% 48% 46% 47% 48% 50% 46% 49% 48% 47% 50% 45% 48% 48% l Female 1174 143 161 101 86 102 106 101 182 1018 156 631 536 717 425 52% 51% 52% 54% 53% 52% 50% 54% 51% 52% 53% 50% 55% 52% 52% k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Sf. Age Of Respondent Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 16 - 17 47 30 18 47 - - - 2 - 7 5 8 17 10 13 40 4 3 2 2% 3% 1% 14% -% -% -% 1% -% 3% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% b def gh 18 - 24 280 131 149 280 - - - 51 20 17 44 43 103 53 82 236 22 14 9 12% 12% 13% 86% -% -% -% 14% 9% 6% 9% 8% 15% 13% 14% 13% 11% 12% 14% def ij k k k 25 - 34 408 171 237 - 408 - - 64 41 72 99 99 122 78 108 340 36 19 13 18% 16% 20% -% 100% -% -% 17% 19% 26% 21% 18% 18% 19% 18% 18% 18% 17% 20% a cef g 35 - 44 439 191 248 - - 439 - 56 41 64 136 126 133 83 96 367 36 22 13 19% 18% 21% -% -% 56% -% 15% 19% 23% 29% 22% 20% 20% 16% 19% 18% 20% 20% a cdf g gh n 45 - 54 342 175 168 - - 342 - 32 28 42 105 95 96 64 87 286 31 17 8 15% 16% 14% -% -% 44% -% 9% 13% 15% 22% 17% 14% 15% 14% 15% 16% 15% 14% cdf g ghi 55 - 64 334 170 164 - - - 334 60 28 37 65 105 92 57 80 285 24 16 8 15% 16% 14% -% -% -% 45% 16% 13% 13% 14% 19% 14% 14% 13% 15% 12% 14% 13% cde lmn 65 - 74 225 128 97 - - - 225 44 35 23 13 51 67 39 68 182 25 12 6 10% 12% 8% -% -% -% 30% 12% 16% 8% 3% 9% 10% 9% 11% 10% 13% 11% 9% b cde j ij j 75+ 181 87 95 - - - 181 69 25 18 5 39 39 30 73 149 20 9 4 8% 8% 8% -% -% -% 25% 18% 12% 6% 1% 7% 6% 7% 12% 8% 10% 8% 7% cde hij ij j klm Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Sf. Age Of Respondent Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 16 - 17 47 4 7 2 1 7 5 6 8 44 3 13 34 27 19 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 4% 2% 3% 2% 2% 1% 1% 3% 2% 2% d k 18 - 24 280 42 35 18 22 23 25 22 48 255 25 154 126 143 128 12% 15% 12% 10% 13% 12% 12% 12% 13% 13% 9% 12% 13% 10% 16% j m 25 - 34 408 57 48 34 26 33 44 31 68 371 37 296 110 219 177 18% 20% 16% 18% 16% 17% 21% 17% 19% 19% 13% 23% 11% 16% 22% j l m 35 - 44 439 63 65 35 33 37 40 38 57 390 48 338 97 269 157 19% 23% 21% 19% 20% 19% 19% 20% 16% 20% 17% 27% 10% 19% 19% l 45 - 54 342 39 41 25 27 30 29 31 64 290 52 276 66 238 96 15% 14% 13% 14% 16% 15% 14% 16% 18% 15% 18% 22% 7% 17% 12% l n 55 - 64 334 35 59 26 27 29 35 25 48 273 60 143 188 221 104 15% 13% 19% 14% 17% 15% 17% 13% 14% 14% 21% 11% 19% 16% 13% i k n 65 - 74 225 22 32 25 15 18 15 18 37 184 41 31 193 150 69 10% 8% 10% 13% 9% 9% 7% 10% 11% 9% 14% 2% 20% 11% 8% f i k 75+ 181 18 21 21 12 20 18 15 25 156 25 10 167 115 62 8% 6% 7% 11% 7% 10% 8% 8% 7% 8% 9% 1% 17% 8% 8% k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Sg (Qz8). What Is The Occupation Of The Main Wage Earner In Your Household? Code Social Grade. (Single Code) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 A 33 20 13 1 2 13 18 3 1 2 16 33 - - - 28 2 3 * 1% 2% 1% *% *% 2% 2% 1% *% 1% 3% 6% -% -% -% 2% 1% 2% *% cd ghi lmn r B 533 259 275 50 98 209 177 22 21 46 225 533 - - - 462 40 21 11 24% 24% 23% 15% 24% 27% 24% 6% 9% 16% 48% 94% -% -% -% 24% 20% 19% 18% c c c gh ghi lmn qr C1 669 306 363 119 122 230 198 65 64 98 147 - 669 - - 566 55 30 18 30% 28% 31% 36% 30% 29% 27% 17% 30% 35% 31% -% 100% -% -% 30% 28% 27% 29% ef g g g kmn C2 413 225 188 63 78 146 126 48 48 66 71 - - 413 - 339 39 20 14 18% 21% 16% 19% 19% 19% 17% 13% 22% 24% 15% -% -% 100% -% 18% 20% 18% 23% b gj gj kln o D 323 145 178 66 57 113 87 68 50 61 13 - - - 323 275 19 23 6 14% 13% 15% 20% 14% 14% 12% 18% 23% 22% 3% -% -% -% 53% 15% 9% 21% 10% def j j j klm pr opr E 285 128 157 29 51 71 134 172 34 6 1 - - - 285 215 42 15 12 13% 12% 13% 9% 13% 9% 18% 45% 16% 2% *% -% -% -% 47% 11% 22% 13% 20% cde hij ij j klm oq oq Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. SG (QZ8). What is the occupation of the main wage earner in your household? CODE SOCIAL GRADE. (SINGLE CODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 A 33 5 7 8 2 - 2 - 5 22 10 20 13 30 3 1% 2% 2% 4% 1% -% 1% -% 1% 1% 4% 2% 1% 2% *% eg eg efg i n B 533 82 89 47 32 51 58 30 73 462 71 361 169 387 136 24% 29% 29% 25% 20% 26% 28% 16% 20% 24% 24% 29% 17% 28% 17% dgh dgh g g dg l n C1 669 93 97 57 48 53 55 58 105 581 88 417 251 437 213 30% 33% 32% 30% 29% 27% 26% 31% 30% 30% 30% 33% 25% 32% 26% l n C2 413 35 54 33 37 35 40 40 65 349 64 258 151 246 153 18% 12% 18% 18% 23% 18% 19% 22% 18% 18% 22% 21% 15% 18% 19% a a a i l D 323 42 39 23 32 28 32 28 50 286 37 199 121 152 165 14% 15% 13% 12% 19% 14% 15% 15% 14% 15% 13% 16% 12% 11% 20% c l m E 285 24 21 19 12 30 22 29 57 263 22 4 278 131 142 13% 9% 7% 10% 8% 15% 11% 16% 16% 13% 8% *% 28% 9% 17% abd abd abd j k m Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qz5 (Sg). Working Status Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Base for % 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Working full time (30hrs/wk+) 886 554 333 105 222 457 102 33 62 138 303 281 299 186 121 746 73 44 23 39% 51% 28% 32% 54% 59% 14% 9% 29% 49% 64% 50% 45% 45% 20% 40% 37% 40% 37% b f cf cf g gh ghi n n n Not working (i.e. under 8hrs/wk) - retired 482 250 231 * * 7 474 127 73 48 25 121 125 81 155 391 54 25 12 21% 23% 20% *% *% 1% 64% 34% 34% 17% 5% 21% 19% 20% 25% 21% 27% 23% 20% b cde ij ij j lm or Working part time (8-29 hrs/wk) 374 75 299 63 74 157 81 36 37 56 88 101 117 73 83 321 27 17 9 17% 7% 25% 19% 18% 20% 11% 10% 17% 20% 19% 18% 18% 18% 14% 17% 14% 15% 14% a f f f g g g n n Not working (i.e. under 8hrs/wk) - housewife/ disabled/ other 247 49 197 33 60 101 52 76 34 22 35 30 42 43 132 208 21 9 8 11% 5% 17% 10% 15% 13% 7% 20% 16% 8% 7% 5% 6% 10% 22% 11% 11% 8% 13% a f f ij ij kl klm q Not working (i.e. under 8hrs/wk) - unemployed (registered/not registered but looking for work) 137 88 49 31 34 51 21 74 7 8 5 10 18 11 98 109 13 8 7 6% 8% 4% 9% 8% 6% 3% 20% 3% 3% 1% 2% 3% 3% 16% 6% 7% 7% 11% b f f f hij j klm o Not working (i.e. under 8hrs/wk) - student 118 59 59 96 16 4 1 28 3 8 15 22 66 16 14 99 8 7 4 5% 5% 5% 29% 4% 1% *% 7% 2% 3% 3% 4% 10% 4% 2% 5% 4% 7% 6% def ef hij kmn Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qz5 (Sg). Working Status Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Don't know 13 6 6 - 2 3 8 3 - * 1 3 1 3 5 12 - * * 1% 1% 1% -% *% *% 1% 1% -% *% *% *% *% 1% 1% 1% -% *% *% Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qz5 (Sg). Working Status Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Base for % 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Working full time (30hrs/wk+) 886 119 129 66 62 69 91 66 145 792 94 886 - 540 323 39% 42% 42% 35% 38% 35% 43% 35% 41% 40% 32% 70% -% 39% 40% j l Not working (i.e. under 8hrs/wk) - retired 482 40 62 56 34 41 39 45 74 396 86 - 482 327 142 21% 14% 20% 30% 21% 21% 18% 24% 21% 20% 29% -% 49% 24% 18% abdefh a i k n Working part time (8-29 hrs/wk) 374 45 55 29 40 34 36 33 51 313 61 374 - 255 110 17% 16% 18% 16% 25% 17% 17% 18% 14% 16% 21% 30% -% 18% 14% acefh i l n Not working (i.e. under 8hrs/wk) - housewife/ disabled/ other 247 38 33 21 13 20 23 23 36 220 26 - 247 124 115 11% 14% 11% 11% 8% 10% 11% 13% 10% 11% 9% -% 25% 9% 14% k m Not working (i.e. under 8hrs/wk) - unemployed (registered/not registered but looking for work) 137 12 13 6 9 18 10 12 30 122 15 - 137 64 67 6% 4% 4% 3% 6% 9% 5% 6% 8% 6% 5% -% 14% 5% 8% abc c k m Not working (i.e. under 8hrs/wk) - student 118 24 15 9 4 14 11 8 14 110 8 - 118 63 51 5% 9% 5% 5% 3% 7% 5% 4% 4% 6% 3% -% 12% 5% 6% dh d j k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qz5 (Sg). Working Status Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Don't know 13 2 - - 1 2 2 - 5 11 2 - - 8 4 1% 1% -% -% *% 1% 1% -% 1% 1% 1% -% -% 1% 1% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qz6 (Sh). Household Status Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Base for % 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Being bought on mortgage 792 376 416 112 174 427 78 32 29 105 303 282 261 161 89 674 63 32 23 35% 35% 35% 34% 43% 55% 11% 9% 13% 38% 64% 50% 39% 39% 15% 36% 32% 29% 37% f cf cdf gh ghi lmn n n q q Owned outright by household 614 323 291 19 15 115 466 86 74 69 94 200 180 96 139 505 55 36 18 27% 30% 25% 6% 4% 15% 63% 23% 34% 25% 20% 35% 27% 23% 23% 27% 28% 32% 29% b cd cde gij lmn o Rented from Local Authority/ Housing Association/ Trust 461 201 259 70 92 148 152 178 66 45 19 20 91 91 259 369 61 21 10 20% 19% 22% 21% 22% 19% 20% 47% 30% 16% 4% 4% 14% 22% 43% 20% 31% 19% 16% a hij ij j k kl klm oqr Rented from Private Landlord 316 138 179 95 116 82 24 73 40 55 49 47 113 50 106 271 15 21 10 14% 13% 15% 29% 28% 10% 3% 19% 18% 19% 10% 8% 17% 12% 17% 14% 8% 18% 15% ef ef f j j j km k km p p p Other 30 16 14 14 10 4 2 1 4 5 4 6 11 5 8 29 - * * 1% 1% 1% 4% 2% 1% *% *% 2% 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% -% *% 1% ef ef g g pq Don't know 43 27 16 18 2 5 17 7 4 2 4 11 14 10 8 37 3 2 1 2% 3% 1% 6% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% 2% 2% b def de Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qz6 (Sh). Household Status Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Base for % 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Being bought on mortgage 792 76 117 65 59 62 82 64 149 696 96 653 134 533 237 35% 27% 38% 35% 36% 31% 39% 34% 42% 35% 33% 52% 14% 39% 29% a a a ae l n Owned outright by household 614 59 86 59 49 53 56 57 86 495 119 202 409 447 149 27% 21% 28% 32% 30% 27% 27% 31% 24% 25% 41% 16% 42% 32% 18% a a a i k n Rented from Local Authority/ Housing Association/ Trust 461 66 52 34 32 35 43 39 69 419 42 168 292 204 247 20% 24% 17% 18% 20% 18% 20% 21% 19% 21% 14% 13% 30% 15% 30% j k m Rented from Private Landlord 316 76 43 23 13 37 20 20 39 293 23 196 120 160 147 14% 27% 14% 12% 8% 19% 9% 11% 11% 15% 8% 16% 12% 12% 18% bcdefgh d cdfgh j l m Other 30 1 2 3 2 2 2 5 11 26 4 24 6 11 18 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 3% 3% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% a a l m Don't know 43 1 7 3 9 7 7 2 1 35 8 17 22 28 14 2% 1% 2% 1% 5% 4% 3% 1% *% 2% 3% 1% 2% 2% 2% acgh agh ah Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Sh (Si). Total Number In Household (Including Respondent And Any Children) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 1 362 183 178 14 34 84 230 151 49 37 18 60 104 47 151 280 48 23 11 16% 17% 15% 4% 8% 11% 31% 40% 23% 13% 4% 11% 16% 11% 25% 15% 24% 21% 17% c c cde hij ij j km klm or o 2 769 380 389 74 100 176 418 117 83 97 141 209 231 128 200 642 65 42 20 34% 35% 33% 23% 25% 23% 56% 31% 38% 35% 30% 37% 35% 31% 33% 34% 33% 38% 32% cde j m 3 450 200 250 106 122 165 56 51 38 50 132 130 135 91 93 381 36 22 11 20% 18% 21% 32% 30% 21% 8% 13% 17% 18% 28% 23% 20% 22% 15% 20% 18% 20% 17% ef ef f ghi n n n 4 450 211 239 84 93 246 28 36 27 58 137 134 134 97 85 390 35 14 11 20% 20% 20% 26% 23% 31% 4% 9% 12% 21% 29% 24% 20% 24% 14% 21% 18% 13% 18% f f df gh ghi n n n q 5+ 226 107 119 50 59 109 8 24 20 38 44 34 64 50 78 193 13 10 10 10% 10% 10% 15% 14% 14% 1% 6% 9% 14% 9% 6% 10% 12% 13% 10% 6% 9% 16% f f f g k k k p opq Mean number of people 2.8 2.7 2.8 3.3 3.2 3.2 1.9 2.2 2.5 2.9 3.1 2.8 2.8 3.0 2.6 2.8 2.5 2.5 2.9 f f f g gh ghi n n kln pq pq Standard deviation 1.36 1.34 1.37 1.26 1.45 1.33 .81 1.32 1.37 1.39 1.15 1.21 1.32 1.32 1.52 1.35 1.39 1.29 1.55 Standard error .02 .03 .03 .06 .06 .04 .02 .05 .07 .07 .05 .04 .04 .05 .05 .03 .06 .06 .07 Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. SH (SI). Total number in household (including respondent and any children) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 1 362 36 39 29 19 29 29 31 68 323 39 103 258 209 142 16% 13% 13% 16% 12% 15% 14% 16% 19% 16% 13% 8% 26% 15% 17% d k 2 769 86 116 66 63 64 67 69 112 650 119 383 380 511 237 34% 31% 38% 35% 38% 32% 32% 37% 32% 33% 41% 30% 39% 37% 29% i k n 3 450 62 60 29 40 36 45 35 73 405 45 313 132 269 170 20% 22% 20% 16% 25% 18% 21% 19% 21% 21% 16% 25% 13% 19% 21% c j l 4 450 68 53 51 30 36 47 37 66 393 57 324 126 282 157 20% 24% 17% 28% 19% 18% 22% 20% 19% 20% 20% 26% 13% 20% 19% bdeh l 5+ 226 28 39 11 11 32 22 15 35 194 32 138 88 110 106 10% 10% 13% 6% 7% 16% 11% 8% 10% 10% 11% 11% 9% 8% 13% cd acdgh m Mean number of people 2.8 2.9 2.9 2.7 2.7 3.0 2.9 2.7 2.7 2.8 2.8 3.1 2.4 2.7 2.9 cdgh l m Standard deviation 1.36 1.33 1.46 1.24 1.18 1.51 1.26 1.29 1.36 1.36 1.34 1.26 1.40 1.25 1.50 Standard error .02 .08 .09 .08 .08 .09 .08 .08 .09 .03 .04 .03 .03 .03 .05 Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Sj. Total Number Of Children In Household (Under 18), Including Respondent (If Respondent Is Under 18) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 None 1352 713 639 172 163 310 707 276 138 153 226 331 418 227 377 1114 133 69 36 60% 66% 54% 52% 40% 40% 96% 73% 64% 55% 48% 58% 62% 55% 62% 59% 68% 62% 58% b de cde hij ij m m or 1 401 166 235 98 109 168 26 44 33 50 110 110 116 83 93 341 28 23 10 18% 15% 20% 30% 27% 22% 4% 12% 15% 18% 23% 19% 17% 20% 15% 18% 14% 20% 16% a ef f f g gh n p 2 339 139 199 34 85 215 5 31 30 49 109 98 92 66 83 293 25 12 9 15% 13% 17% 10% 21% 28% 1% 8% 14% 18% 23% 17% 14% 16% 14% 16% 13% 10% 15% a f cf cdf g g gh q 3 118 51 67 16 32 68 1 16 10 19 23 21 37 26 33 101 7 6 4 5% 5% 6% 5% 8% 9% *% 4% 5% 7% 5% 4% 6% 6% 5% 5% 3% 5% 7% f f cf p 4 32 8 24 5 15 12 * 9 4 6 1 3 4 9 15 25 3 2 2 1% 1% 2% 1% 4% 2% *% 2% 2% 2% *% 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% 2% 2% 3% a f ef f j j kl kl o 5+ 14 4 10 2 5 6 - 2 3 2 3 3 2 2 7 13 1 * * 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% -% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% *% 1% 1% 1% *% *% 1% f f f Mean number of children .7 .6 .8 .8 1.1 1.1 .1 .5 .7 .9 .9 .7 .7 .8 .7 .7 .6 .6 .8 a f cf cf g gh gh kl p pq Standard deviation 1.06 .98 1.13 1.01 1.22 1.14 .28 1.04 1.14 1.16 1.01 .98 1.00 1.11 1.16 1.07 1.00 1.00 1.19 Standard error .02 .02 .03 .05 .05 .03 .01 .04 .06 .06 .04 .04 .03 .04 .04 .02 .05 .05 .05 Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. SJ. Total number of children in household (under 18), including respondent (if respondent is under 18) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 None 1352 179 180 106 104 110 122 114 198 1172 180 628 716 837 479 60% 64% 59% 57% 64% 56% 58% 61% 56% 60% 62% 50% 73% 61% 59% k 1 401 44 54 30 25 34 40 33 81 359 42 289 112 244 147 18% 16% 18% 16% 16% 17% 19% 17% 23% 18% 15% 23% 11% 18% 18% l 2 339 43 43 37 24 31 32 27 56 295 44 246 90 217 113 15% 15% 14% 20% 15% 16% 15% 14% 16% 15% 15% 19% 9% 16% 14% l 3 118 10 21 10 7 16 13 11 13 100 18 76 42 68 45 5% 4% 7% 6% 4% 8% 6% 6% 4% 5% 6% 6% 4% 5% 6% ah l 4 32 1 5 1 1 4 4 2 6 27 5 18 14 10 20 1% *% 2% 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 2% m 5+ 14 2 4 1 1 2 - 1 2 12 2 5 10 7 7 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% -% 1% *% 1% 1% *% 1% *% 1% Mean number of children .7 .6 .8 .8 .6 .9 .8 .7 .7 .7 .7 .9 .5 .7 .8 ad l m Standard deviation 1.06 1.02 1.14 1.06 1.03 1.18 1.05 1.06 1.01 1.06 1.11 1.06 1.05 1.01 1.14 Standard error .02 .06 .07 .07 .07 .07 .07 .07 .07 .02 .03 .03 .02 .02 .04 Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Sk (Sm). Can You Speak Or Write In Welsh At All? Base : All respondents in Wales GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b ~c ~d e f g ~h ~i ~j ~k l m n ~o ~p q ~r Unweighted total 493 244 249 66 69 166 192 121 66 49 67 98 148 108 139 - - 493 - Effective Weighted Sample 329 166 164 47 47 113 126 83 43 34 46 66 103 72 95 - - 329 - Total 111 52 59 16 19 39 37 25 16 12 16 23 30 20 38 - - 111 - Yes, and fluent 17 8 9 ** ** 5 7 3 ** ** ** ** 5 3 5 - - 17 - 15% 15% 15% ** ** 14% 19% 14% ** ** ** ** 17% 16% 13% -% -% 15% -% Yes, but not fluent 15 9 6 ** ** 5 5 2 ** ** ** ** 4 3 3 - - 15 - 13% 18% 10% ** ** 13% 13% 8% ** ** ** ** 14% 17% 9% -% -% 13% -% b No 80 35 44 ** ** 29 25 20 ** ** ** ** 21 13 30 - - 80 - 72% 67% 75% ** ** 74% 68% 79% ** ** ** ** 69% 67% 78% -% -% 72% -% Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. SK (SM). Can you speak or write in Welsh at all? Base : All respondents in Wales ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h i j k l m n Unweighted total 493 - - - - - - - - 241 252 218 272 372 121 Effective Weighted Sample 329 - - - - - - - - 218 234 149 196 236 93 Total 111 - - - - - - - - 88 23 61 50 78 33 Yes, and fluent 17 - - - - - - - - 7 10 9 8 14 2 15% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% 8% 41% 15% 15% 18% 7% i n Yes, but not fluent 15 - - - - - - - - 11 4 8 7 13 2 13% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% 13% 16% 14% 13% 16% 7% n No 80 - - - - - - - - 69 10 43 36 51 29 72% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% 79% 43% 71% 72% 65% 86% j m Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qb1. Showcard Which Of The Following Do You, Or Does Anyone In Your Household, Have In Your Home At The Moment? (Multicode) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 A DVD player 1639 783 856 246 299 595 500 259 166 221 326 404 480 321 434 1363 149 80 47 73% 72% 73% 75% 73% 76% 68% 69% 77% 79% 69% 71% 72% 78% 71% 72% 76% 72% 75% f f gj gj kln Video games console connected to a TV (e.g. Sony PlayStation, Nintendo Wii or Microsoft Xbox) 1106 525 581 228 275 493 110 129 95 135 281 278 326 228 274 930 88 54 34 49% 49% 49% 70% 67% 63% 15% 34% 44% 48% 59% 49% 49% 55% 45% 49% 45% 49% 54% ef f f g g ghi ln p An MP3 player/iPod 887 422 464 178 212 396 101 74 65 120 276 279 293 173 142 761 65 33 28 39% 39% 40% 54% 52% 51% 14% 19% 30% 43% 59% 49% 44% 42% 23% 40% 33% 30% 45% f f f g gh ghi mn n n pq pq Handheld/ portable games player (e.g. Nintendo DS, Sony PSP) 680 314 366 116 154 358 52 60 57 90 194 193 208 142 137 559 62 37 22 30% 29% 31% 36% 38% 46% 7% 16% 26% 32% 41% 34% 31% 34% 23% 30% 32% 34% 36% f f cdf g g ghi n n n o A recordable DVD player 594 295 299 72 101 221 200 53 54 75 183 208 210 94 82 527 28 25 14 26% 27% 25% 22% 25% 28% 27% 14% 25% 27% 39% 37% 31% 23% 14% 28% 14% 23% 22% c g g ghi mn mn n pqr p p A Blu Ray or HD (High Definition) DVD player 280 140 140 48 68 120 44 19 23 28 94 96 87 56 40 246 17 10 8 12% 13% 12% 15% 17% 15% 6% 5% 11% 10% 20% 17% 13% 14% 7% 13% 9% 9% 13% f f f g g ghi n n n pq E-reader - digital book reader (e.g. Kindle, Sony Reader, iRiver Reader) 96 48 47 13 20 46 17 4 6 12 29 37 31 15 13 81 8 4 3 4% 4% 4% 4% 5% 6% 2% 1% 3% 4% 6% 7% 5% 4% 2% 4% 4% 4% 5% f f g gh mn n Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qb1. Showcard Which Of The Following Do You, Or Does Anyone In Your Household, Have In Your Home At The Moment? (Multicode) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 None of these 222 103 119 19 23 42 139 76 18 17 21 29 62 34 97 177 25 14 6 10% 9% 10% 6% 6% 5% 19% 20% 8% 6% 4% 5% 9% 8% 16% 9% 13% 13% 10% cde hij j k klm Don't know 4 1 3 - 1 1 1 2 - - - * * 1 3 3 * 1 * *% *% *% -% *% *% *% 1% -% -% -% *% *% *% *% *% *% 1% *% Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QB1. SHOWCARD Which of the following do you, or does anyone in your household, have in your home at the moment? (MULTICODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 A DVD player 1639 149 238 149 105 170 149 128 277 1405 234 964 667 1016 576 73% 53% 77% 80% 64% 86% 71% 68% 78% 72% 80% 77% 68% 74% 71% adg adfg a abdfgh a a adg i l Video games console connected to a TV (e.g. Sony PlayStation, Nintendo Wii or Microsoft Xbox) 1106 103 144 96 96 106 113 91 182 971 135 751 348 683 389 49% 37% 47% 52% 59% 54% 54% 49% 51% 49% 46% 60% 35% 49% 48% a a abg a a a a l An MP3 player/iPod 887 103 145 79 55 77 103 66 132 766 120 633 252 554 305 39% 37% 47% 42% 33% 39% 49% 36% 37% 39% 41% 50% 26% 40% 38% adgh d adegh l Handheld/ portable games player (e.g. Nintendo DS, Sony PSP) 680 73 100 58 47 71 54 56 99 596 84 482 196 434 224 30% 26% 32% 31% 29% 36% 26% 30% 28% 30% 29% 38% 20% 31% 28% af l A recordable DVD player 594 91 106 51 35 40 75 45 84 505 89 364 228 415 166 26% 33% 35% 28% 22% 20% 35% 24% 24% 26% 30% 29% 23% 30% 20% degh degh degh i l n A Blu Ray or HD (High Definition) DVD player 280 22 52 22 19 25 29 20 56 247 33 202 78 194 78 12% 8% 17% 12% 12% 13% 14% 11% 16% 13% 11% 16% 8% 14% 10% ag a a l n E-reader - digital book reader (e.g. Kindle, Sony Reader, iRiver Reader) 96 8 17 8 5 8 8 7 20 82 14 73 23 62 31 4% 3% 5% 4% 3% 4% 4% 4% 6% 4% 5% 6% 2% 4% 4% l Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QB1. SHOWCARD Which of the following do you, or does anyone in your household, have in your home at the moment? (MULTICODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 None of these 222 46 27 16 19 16 14 21 19 204 18 59 160 117 99 10% 16% 9% 9% 11% 8% 6% 11% 5% 10% 6% 5% 16% 8% 12% bcefh h h j k m Don't know 4 - 1 2 - - - - - 3 1 1 3 1 3 *% -% *% 1% -% -% -% -% -% *% *% *% *% *% *% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qb2. Showcard And Do You Personally Use...? (Multicode) Base : Those who have access to any of listed devices at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3074 1494 1580 435 506 1137 996 536 348 376 574 734 918 626 796 1767 429 423 455 Effective Weighted Sample 2019 992 1027 278 319 764 686 338 213 253 419 493 603 420 511 1533 289 281 419 Total 2030 978 1052 309 384 738 600 300 199 262 452 537 607 379 508 1706 172 96 56 A DVD player 1467 717 750 226 273 517 452 228 151 202 288 368 429 277 393 1219 136 72 41 72% 73% 71% 73% 71% 70% 75% 76% 76% 77% 64% 69% 71% 73% 77% 71% 79% 74% 72% e j j j kl or Video games console connected to a TV (e.g. Sony PlayStation, Nintendo Wii or Microsoft Xbox) 699 394 305 194 222 244 40 83 58 83 169 174 214 135 177 590 53 37 19 34% 40% 29% 63% 58% 33% 7% 28% 29% 32% 37% 32% 35% 36% 35% 35% 31% 38% 34% b ef ef f gh p An MP3 player/iPod 580 297 283 155 175 197 52 48 35 71 174 177 203 117 84 503 36 22 20 29% 30% 27% 50% 46% 27% 9% 16% 18% 27% 38% 33% 33% 31% 17% 29% 21% 23% 35% ef ef f gh ghi n n n pq opq A recordable DVD player 451 230 221 45 76 164 167 44 47 61 122 154 172 64 60 403 19 19 10 22% 23% 21% 15% 20% 22% 28% 15% 24% 23% 27% 29% 28% 17% 12% 24% 11% 20% 18% c cde g g g mn mn n pr p p Handheld/ portable games player (e.g. Nintendo DS, Sony PSP) 328 170 158 84 98 126 19 28 31 32 95 93 105 70 60 271 27 20 10 16% 17% 15% 27% 26% 17% 3% 9% 15% 12% 21% 17% 17% 18% 12% 16% 16% 21% 17% ef ef f g gi n n n o A Blu Ray or HD (High Definition) DVD player 233 125 108 38 62 98 35 17 14 21 81 84 76 47 26 208 12 7 5 11% 13% 10% 12% 16% 13% 6% 6% 7% 8% 18% 16% 12% 12% 5% 12% 7% 7% 10% f f f ghi n n n pq E-reader - digital book reader (e.g. Kindle, Sony Reader, iRiver Reader) 60 34 26 7 14 25 14 3 5 8 18 19 21 13 7 52 3 3 2 3% 3% 2% 2% 4% 3% 2% 1% 2% 3% 4% 4% 3% 3% 1% 3% 2% 3% 3% g n n n Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qb2. Showcard And Do You Personally Use...? (Multicode) Base : Those who have access to any of listed devices at home | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |---------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | c | d | | Unweighted total | 3074 | 1494 | 1580 | 435 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 2019 | 992 | 1027 | 278 | | Total | 2030 | 978 | 1052 | 309 | | None of these | 131 | 46 | 85 | 10 | | 6% | 5% | 8% | 3% | 3% | | a | cd | cd | i | i | | Don't know | 10 | 1 | 9 | 1 | | *% | *% | 1% | *% | *% | | a | | | | | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qb2. Showcard And Do You Personally Use...? (Multicode) Base : Those who have access to any of listed devices at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3074 202 224 225 208 241 222 220 225 2163 911 1583 1479 1780 839 Effective Weighted Sample 2019 193 207 213 198 229 210 209 209 1662 404 1041 1041 1271 649 Total 2030 235 279 168 144 182 197 166 336 1757 273 1200 821 1264 710 A DVD player 1467 134 220 132 101 150 129 112 241 1261 207 862 600 913 514 72% 57% 79% 78% 70% 83% 66% 68% 72% 72% 76% 72% 73% 72% 72% adfg adfg a adfgh a a Video games console connected to a TV (e.g. Sony PlayStation, Nintendo Wii or Microsoft Xbox) 699 67 95 58 67 58 71 60 114 628 71 485 212 425 255 34% 29% 34% 35% 47% 32% 36% 36% 34% 36% 26% 40% 26% 34% 36% abcefgh j l An MP3 player/iPod 580 72 99 58 41 47 61 43 82 506 75 414 164 367 193 29% 31% 35% 35% 28% 26% 31% 26% 25% 29% 27% 35% 20% 29% 27% egh egh l A recordable DVD player 451 61 93 45 34 27 51 37 57 381 70 276 172 335 106 22% 26% 33% 27% 23% 15% 26% 22% 17% 22% 26% 23% 21% 27% 15% eh degh eh e eh n Handheld/ portable games player (e.g. Nintendo DS, Sony PSP) 328 41 46 34 28 30 23 27 43 292 35 232 94 212 106 16% 17% 17% 20% 19% 16% 12% 16% 13% 17% 13% 19% 11% 17% 15% fh f l A Blu Ray or HD (High Definition) DVD player 233 21 45 18 18 22 25 17 42 206 27 175 58 163 65 11% 9% 16% 11% 12% 12% 13% 10% 13% 12% 10% 15% 7% 13% 9% a l n E-reader - digital book reader (e.g. Kindle, Sony Reader, iRiver Reader) 60 6 13 5 4 6 5 7 6 51 9 46 14 38 20 3% 3% 5% 3% 3% 3% 2% 4% 2% 3% 3% 4% 2% 3% 3% l Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qb2. Showcard And Do You Personally Use...? (Multicode) Base : Those who have access to any of listed devices at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3074 202 224 225 208 241 222 220 225 2163 911 1583 1479 1780 839 Effective Weighted Sample 2019 193 207 213 198 229 210 209 209 1662 404 1041 1041 1271 649 Total 2030 235 279 168 144 182 197 166 336 1757 273 1200 821 1264 710 None of these 131 22 10 9 6 11 16 15 24 118 13 64 66 75 52 6% 9% 3% 5% 4% 6% 8% 9% 7% 7% 5% 5% 8% 6% 7% bd b bd k Don't know 10 1 3 1 2 1 - - 1 8 2 6 4 6 4 *% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% -% -% *% *% 1% 1% *% 1% *% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qb3 (Qb4). Showcard Which Games Console/S Do You Or Does Anyone In Your Household Have At The Moment? (Multicode) Base : Those who have access to a games console at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 1793 857 936 360 405 839 189 246 172 224 411 424 527 390 452 1020 253 230 290 Effective Weighted Sample 1181 562 619 230 258 571 130 152 102 150 300 282 345 263 294 898 168 156 268 Total 1208 577 631 242 298 545 124 140 102 152 314 308 358 244 299 1019 96 57 37 Nintendo Wii 618 269 348 93 160 311 53 62 46 77 184 172 203 125 117 510 52 39 18 51% 47% 55% 39% 54% 57% 42% 44% 46% 50% 59% 56% 57% 51% 39% 50% 54% 68% 48% a cf cf gh n n n opr Nintendo DS/ DSi/ DS Lite 510 219 291 77 116 272 45 42 44 72 142 132 161 107 111 415 48 30 17 42% 38% 46% 32% 39% 50% 36% 30% 44% 47% 45% 43% 45% 44% 37% 41% 50% 52% 47% a cdf g g g n o o X Box 360 456 242 215 113 113 200 30 52 35 66 110 104 126 107 119 379 44 20 13 38% 42% 34% 47% 38% 37% 24% 37% 35% 43% 35% 34% 35% 44% 40% 37% 46% 36% 34% b ef f f kl or PlayStation 3 291 139 153 69 73 129 20 25 24 33 73 80 83 62 66 248 18 14 12 24% 24% 24% 29% 25% 24% 16% 18% 23% 22% 23% 26% 23% 25% 22% 24% 19% 24% 32% f op PlayStation 2 270 129 140 57 54 135 23 33 23 35 72 64 86 51 69 216 29 17 8 22% 22% 22% 24% 18% 25% 19% 24% 22% 23% 23% 21% 24% 21% 23% 21% 30% 29% 23% d o o PlayStation Portable (PSP) 139 75 64 29 26 79 5 13 10 19 45 42 43 25 28 112 10 12 4 11% 13% 10% 12% 9% 14% 4% 9% 10% 12% 14% 14% 12% 10% 9% 11% 10% 22% 12% f df opr Other 19 11 8 6 5 8 - 4 2 2 2 2 5 4 7 16 2 1 * 2% 2% 1% 2% 2% 1% -% 3% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% *% j Don't know 30 8 21 2 3 19 6 7 2 3 7 6 9 5 9 26 2 1 1 2% 1% 3% 1% 1% 3% 5% 5% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% 2% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% a cd cd Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qb3 (Qb4). Showcard Which Games Console/S Do You Or Does Anyone In Your Household Have At The Moment? (Multicode) Base : Those who have access to a games console at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 1793 109 129 124 136 141 131 125 125 1276 517 1117 670 1001 502 Effective Weighted Sample 1181 104 119 118 131 135 124 120 116 989 222 737 466 722 394 Total 1208 129 165 101 101 113 121 101 190 1061 148 824 378 745 426 Nintendo Wii 618 37 90 58 54 58 64 52 97 532 86 445 169 426 174 51% 28% 55% 57% 54% 52% 53% 51% 51% 50% 58% 54% 45% 57% 41% a a a a a a a i l n Nintendo DS/ DSi/ DS Lite 510 40 77 46 36 61 50 34 71 448 62 358 150 339 154 42% 31% 47% 45% 35% 54% 41% 34% 38% 42% 42% 43% 40% 45% 36% ag a adfgh n X Box 360 456 48 65 41 32 47 34 41 71 410 47 304 149 266 177 38% 37% 40% 41% 32% 41% 28% 41% 37% 39% 32% 37% 39% 36% 42% f f f PlayStation 3 291 34 46 17 21 24 27 29 50 261 30 205 85 178 102 24% 26% 28% 17% 20% 21% 23% 29% 26% 25% 21% 25% 22% 24% 24% c c PlayStation 2 270 26 38 25 12 31 31 11 41 236 33 178 90 165 97 22% 20% 23% 25% 12% 27% 26% 11% 22% 22% 22% 22% 24% 22% 23% g dg dg dg dg dg PlayStation Portable (PSP) 139 29 24 7 7 10 2 7 26 123 15 93 45 88 46 11% 23% 14% 7% 7% 9% 2% 7% 14% 12% 10% 11% 12% 12% 11% cdefg f f f f f f Other 19 - 3 2 2 1 4 2 1 15 4 11 8 8 10 2% -% 2% 2% 2% 1% 3% 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% 2% 1% 2% Don't know 30 5 4 1 2 1 4 1 7 25 5 19 10 20 8 2% 4% 2% 1% 2% 1% 3% 1% 4% 2% 3% 2% 3% 3% 2% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qb4 (Qb5). Showcard Which, If Any, Of These Do You Use Your Games Console For? (Multicode) Base : Those who have access to a games console at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 1793 857 936 360 405 839 189 246 172 224 411 424 527 390 452 1020 253 230 290 Effective Weighted Sample 1181 562 619 230 258 571 130 152 102 150 300 282 345 263 294 898 168 156 268 Total 1208 577 631 242 298 545 124 140 102 152 314 308 358 244 299 1019 96 57 37 Online gaming 262 151 111 77 71 101 13 28 21 36 67 65 79 52 67 226 10 15 11 22% 26% 18% 32% 24% 19% 10% 20% 20% 24% 21% 21% 22% 21% 22% 22% 11% 26% 30% b def f f p p op Watching DVDs/ Blu Ray DVDs 227 111 115 64 62 89 12 33 22 34 56 57 66 51 53 182 25 10 10 19% 19% 18% 26% 21% 16% 10% 23% 22% 22% 18% 19% 18% 21% 18% 18% 26% 18% 27% ef f o oq Browsing the web/ internet 135 64 71 39 33 57 6 14 14 16 37 33 48 34 20 117 4 7 6 11% 11% 11% 16% 11% 10% 5% 10% 14% 10% 12% 11% 13% 14% 7% 11% 4% 13% 17% ef f n n p p op Watching programmes on BBC iPlayer 106 54 52 25 27 48 6 11 10 9 31 28 38 24 16 94 2 7 3 9% 9% 8% 10% 9% 9% 5% 8% 10% 6% 10% 9% 11% 10% 5% 9% 2% 12% 9% n n p p p Watching 'live' TV programmes/ content 52 29 23 16 13 21 2 6 3 5 18 16 19 11 7 47 1 2 2 4% 5% 4% 7% 4% 4% 2% 4% 3% 3% 6% 5% 5% 4% 2% 5% 1% 4% 6% p p None of these 685 312 373 112 160 335 77 76 58 83 190 172 202 131 180 578 60 32 15 57% 54% 59% 47% 54% 62% 62% 54% 57% 54% 60% 56% 56% 54% 60% 57% 62% 56% 42% cd c r r r Don't know 45 14 31 3 7 23 12 5 2 3 7 12 13 11 8 40 2 2 1 4% 2% 5% 1% 2% 4% 10% 3% 2% 2% 2% 4% 4% 5% 3% 4% 2% 3% 2% a c cde Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qb4 (Qb5). Showcard Which, If Any, Of These Do You Use Your Games Console For? (Multicode) Base : Those who have access to a games console at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 1793 109 129 124 136 141 131 125 125 1276 517 1117 670 1001 502 Effective Weighted Sample 1181 104 119 118 131 135 124 120 116 989 222 737 466 722 394 Total 1208 129 165 101 101 113 121 101 190 1061 148 824 378 745 426 Online gaming 262 18 46 24 23 19 28 28 40 234 28 177 84 160 92 22% 14% 28% 24% 23% 17% 23% 28% 21% 22% 19% 22% 22% 21% 21% ae ae Watching DVDs/ Blu Ray DVDs 227 19 38 25 16 19 17 23 26 201 26 153 72 136 81 19% 15% 23% 24% 16% 17% 14% 23% 13% 19% 18% 19% 19% 18% 19% fh Browsing the web/ internet 135 10 33 14 12 8 10 11 19 118 16 99 35 77 51 11% 8% 20% 13% 12% 7% 9% 11% 10% 11% 11% 12% 9% 10% 12% aefh Watching programmes on BBC iPlayer 106 6 26 14 10 6 5 7 20 94 12 76 30 76 26 9% 4% 16% 14% 10% 5% 4% 7% 10% 9% 8% 9% 8% 10% 6% aefg aef n Watching 'live' TV programmes/ content 52 5 15 6 5 3 2 4 7 45 7 36 16 35 14 4% 4% 9% 6% 5% 3% 2% 4% 3% 4% 5% 4% 4% 5% 3% ef None of these 685 86 81 50 52 73 57 57 122 605 80 471 210 431 238 57% 67% 49% 50% 52% 64% 47% 57% 64% 57% 54% 57% 56% 58% 56% bcdf bcdf bcdf Don't know 45 5 4 2 8 6 9 4 2 39 6 29 16 29 15 4% 4% 3% 2% 8% 5% 8% 4% 1% 4% 4% 3% 4% 4% 4% ch h Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qc1. Is There A Landline Phone In Your Home That Can Be Used To Make And Receive Calls? (Single Code) Prompted Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Can use to make and receive calls 1887 902 985 220 308 670 688 250 169 233 441 534 565 352 437 1593 155 87 51 84% 83% 84% 67% 76% 86% 93% 66% 78% 83% 93% 94% 84% 85% 72% 84% 79% 78% 82% c cd cde g g ghi lmn n n pq Can receive but not make calls/ incoming only 15 6 9 * 5 7 3 3 3 1 2 6 1 3 6 13 * 1 1 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 2% l op Line not working properly/ needs to be repaired 6 5 1 * 1 2 2 3 * - 2 * 1 3 1 4 1 * * *% *% *% *% *% *% *% 1% *% -% *% *% *% 1% *% *% 1% *% *% k No, do not have landline phone 348 169 179 107 94 101 47 122 45 46 27 27 102 56 164 276 40 23 10 15% 16% 15% 33% 23% 13% 6% 32% 21% 16% 6% 5% 15% 13% 27% 15% 20% 20% 15% def ef f hij j j k k klm o o Don't know * * - - - * - - - - * * - - - - - - * *% *% -% -% -% *% -% -% -% -% *% *% -% -% -% -% -% -% *% o Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qc1. Is There A Landline Phone In Your Home That Can Be Used To Make And Receive Calls? (Single Code) Prompted Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Can use to make and receive calls 1887 231 278 157 139 164 187 155 282 1628 259 1078 798 1196 639 84% 82% 90% 84% 85% 83% 89% 83% 80% 83% 89% 86% 81% 87% 79% acegh ah i l n Can receive but not make calls/ incoming only 15 - 1 2 3 - - 1 6 12 3 8 7 10 4 1% -% *% 1% 2% -% -% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% aef e Line not working properly/ needs to be repaired 6 - 1 1 - - 1 - 1 4 2 3 2 4 1 *% -% *% 1% -% -% *% -% *% *% 1% *% *% *% *% No, do not have landline phone 348 49 27 27 21 33 22 30 66 320 29 171 175 172 167 15% 18% 9% 15% 13% 17% 11% 16% 19% 16% 10% 14% 18% 12% 21% bf b b bf j k m Don't know * - - - - - - - - * - - * - - *% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% *% -% -% *% -% -% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qc2 (Qc2A). Do You Ever Use This Landline Phone At Home Yourself To Make Or Receive Calls, For Internet Access Or Both? (Multicode) Base : Those with a landline phone at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2943 1406 1537 305 399 1047 1192 486 318 349 564 742 875 598 728 1707 400 402 434 Effective Weighted Sample 1934 933 1002 198 252 706 814 307 198 232 414 498 580 399 465 1479 265 266 399 Total 1908 913 995 221 314 679 693 256 172 234 445 539 567 358 444 1610 156 89 53 Yes to make calls 1833 880 953 201 294 659 679 247 163 222 434 525 542 341 427 1549 147 87 50 96% 96% 96% 91% 94% 97% 98% 96% 95% 95% 97% 97% 96% 95% 96% 96% 94% 98% 96% cd cd p Yes to receive calls 1799 857 942 196 294 648 661 242 161 220 431 510 534 333 421 1517 146 85 51 94% 94% 95% 89% 94% 95% 95% 94% 93% 94% 97% 95% 94% 93% 95% 94% 93% 96% 96% c c Yes for internet access 1022 495 528 140 195 424 263 83 71 129 314 355 324 172 171 902 68 29 22 54% 54% 53% 64% 62% 62% 38% 32% 41% 55% 70% 66% 57% 48% 38% 56% 44% 33% 42% f f f g gh ghi lmn mn n pqr q q No do not use landline at home 33 18 15 11 8 7 7 7 3 6 3 3 9 8 12 32 1 * * 2% 2% 1% 5% 3% 1% 1% 3% 2% 3% 1% 1% 2% 2% 3% 2% 1% *% 1% ef j k k q Don't know 3 2 1 * 1 2 1 * 1 - - 1 1 1 * 3 - * * *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% -% -% *% *% *% *% *% -% *% *% Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qc2 (Qc2A). Do You Ever Use This Landline Phone At Home Yourself To Make Or Receive Calls, For Internet Access Or Both? (Multicode) Base : Those with a landline phone at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2943 204 228 217 212 223 215 211 197 2055 888 1438 1491 1751 758 Effective Weighted Sample 1934 194 210 206 201 212 203 200 182 1585 395 950 1055 1247 594 Total 1908 231 280 159 142 164 188 157 289 1644 263 1089 808 1210 645 Yes to make calls 1833 224 270 156 136 157 185 151 270 1578 255 1045 778 1163 620 96% 97% 96% 98% 96% 95% 99% 96% 93% 96% 97% 96% 96% 96% 96% h h Yes to receive calls 1799 222 262 154 137 156 175 151 261 1550 249 1027 764 1141 607 94% 96% 93% 97% 96% 95% 93% 96% 90% 94% 95% 94% 94% 94% 94% h h h h Yes for internet access 1022 167 165 99 57 77 121 101 115 879 143 670 347 656 344 54% 72% 59% 62% 40% 47% 64% 64% 40% 53% 54% 61% 43% 54% 53% bcdeh deh deh deh deh l No do not use landline at home 33 1 2 1 1 6 1 2 17 29 4 15 18 20 12 2% 1% 1% *% 1% 4% 1% 1% 6% 2% 2% 1% 2% 2% 2% abcdf abcdfg Don't know 3 - - - 1 1 2 - - 2 1 1 2 2 1 *% -% -% -% *% *% 1% -% -% *% *% *% *% *% *% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qc3 (Qc28). Showcard Which Of These Do You Consider To Be Your Main Method Of Making And Receiving Telephone Calls? (Single Code) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Landline phone at home 1147 524 622 57 119 375 596 186 127 131 255 313 329 204 301 955 104 63 26 51% 48% 53% 18% 29% 48% 81% 49% 59% 47% 54% 55% 49% 49% 50% 51% 53% 56% 42% a c cd cde gi l r r r Mobile phone 1032 521 511 260 282 381 109 167 87 144 202 227 323 201 281 872 83 43 34 46% 48% 44% 79% 69% 49% 15% 44% 40% 52% 43% 40% 48% 49% 46% 46% 42% 39% 55% b def ef f hj k k k q opq Landline phone at work 44 19 25 3 3 17 22 8 2 2 12 20 11 6 8 39 2 2 1 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 2% 3% 2% 1% 1% 3% 3% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% 2% 2% cd i ln Other 17 11 6 1 2 5 9 10 - 2 * 3 3 * 11 10 6 1 1 1% 1% 1% *% *% 1% 1% 3% -% 1% *% 1% *% *% 2% 1% 3% 1% 1% hj lm oqr Don't know 15 6 10 7 2 3 4 6 1 - 3 4 4 1 6 11 2 3 - 1% 1% 1% 2% *% *% 1% 2% *% -% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 2% -% def i or Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QC3 (QC28). SHOWCARD Which of these do you consider to be your MAIN method of making and receiving telephone calls? (SINGLE CODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Landline phone at home 1147 131 162 96 99 103 131 85 148 963 184 532 608 761 359 51% 47% 53% 51% 61% 52% 62% 46% 42% 49% 63% 42% 62% 55% 44% h h acgh h abcegh i k n Mobile phone 1032 135 130 88 60 89 74 97 198 935 97 692 335 579 419 46% 48% 42% 47% 37% 45% 35% 52% 56% 48% 33% 55% 34% 42% 52% df df f bdf bdef j l m Landline phone at work 44 3 16 2 3 3 3 3 6 35 10 24 20 31 13 2% 1% 5% 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 2% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% acefgh i Other 17 4 - 1 1 1 1 - 2 16 1 4 13 5 12 1% 1% -% *% *% 1% 1% -% 1% 1% *% *% 1% *% 1% k m Don't know 15 7 - - - 1 1 2 - 14 1 9 6 7 8 1% 3% -% -% -% *% 1% 1% -% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% bcdeh Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qc4 (Qc28A). Showcard And Thinking About When You Are At Home, Which Is Your Main Method Of Making And Receiving Telephone Calls? (Single Code) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Landline phone at home 1313 603 710 81 142 458 632 198 134 153 304 368 379 239 328 1094 123 65 31 58% 56% 60% 25% 35% 59% 85% 52% 62% 55% 64% 65% 57% 58% 54% 58% 63% 58% 50% a c cd cde g gi lmn r r r Mobile phone 897 457 440 238 261 312 86 161 82 126 159 187 278 171 261 760 66 41 30 40% 42% 37% 73% 64% 40% 12% 42% 38% 45% 34% 33% 42% 41% 43% 40% 33% 37% 49% b def ef f j j k k k p opq Internet voice service (VoIP) 12 5 7 * 2 2 8 3 * 1 6 4 5 2 1 10 * 1 * 1% *% 1% *% 1% *% 1% 1% *% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% *% 1% 1% e Other 13 7 6 1 1 5 7 7 - * * 2 3 * 8 8 4 1 1 1% 1% *% *% *% 1% 1% 2% -% *% *% *% *% *% 1% *% 2% 1% 1% hij m o Don't know 20 9 11 7 2 4 7 9 1 - 3 5 4 1 9 13 3 4 - 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 2% *% -% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 2% 3% -% e hij r or Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qc4 (Qc28A). Showcard And Thinking About When You Are At Home, Which Is Your Main Method Of Making And Receiving Telephone Calls? (Single Code) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Landline phone at home 1313 158 190 114 108 116 139 96 173 1108 205 658 647 853 430 58% 56% 62% 61% 66% 59% 66% 51% 49% 56% 70% 52% 66% 62% 53% gh gh agh h agh i k n Mobile phone 897 111 108 71 54 80 69 89 179 816 82 583 309 506 361 40% 40% 35% 38% 33% 40% 33% 47% 50% 42% 28% 46% 31% 37% 44% bcdf abcdef j l m Internet voice service (VoIP) 12 1 6 1 1 - - 1 1 9 3 5 6 8 3 1% *% 2% *% *% -% -% *% *% *% 1% *% 1% 1% *% ef Other 13 1 2 1 1 1 1 - 1 12 1 5 9 6 6 1% *% 1% *% *% 1% *% -% *% 1% *% *% 1% *% 1% Don't know 20 8 2 - - 1 1 2 - 19 1 9 11 9 11 1% 3% 1% -% -% *% 1% 1% -% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% bcdeh Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qc5 (Qc21B). Showcard Which Of These Do You Consider Is Your Main Supplier? (Single Code) Base : Those with a landline phone at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2943 1406 1537 305 399 1047 1192 486 318 349 564 742 875 598 728 1707 400 402 434 Effective Weighted Sample 1934 933 1002 198 252 706 814 307 198 232 414 498 580 399 465 1479 265 266 399 Total 1908 913 995 221 314 679 693 256 172 234 445 539 567 358 444 1610 156 89 53 BT 982 479 503 104 141 327 409 142 95 117 240 305 284 159 234 812 87 52 31 51% 52% 51% 47% 45% 48% 59% 55% 55% 50% 54% 57% 50% 44% 53% 50% 56% 59% 58% cde lm m o o Virgin Media (including NTL and Telewest) 359 168 191 47 82 135 95 49 27 47 86 96 100 78 85 322 23 6 7 19% 18% 19% 21% 26% 20% 14% 19% 16% 20% 19% 18% 18% 22% 19% 20% 15% 7% 14% f ef f pqr q q Talk Talk/Carphone Warehouse 213 113 100 16 20 90 87 23 26 24 42 42 74 48 49 177 17 13 5 11% 12% 10% 7% 6% 13% 13% 9% 15% 10% 9% 8% 13% 13% 11% 11% 11% 15% 10% cd cd gj k k r SkyTalk 201 88 112 24 52 84 40 20 15 30 56 57 59 45 39 170 13 11 6 11% 10% 11% 11% 17% 12% 6% 8% 9% 13% 12% 11% 10% 13% 9% 11% 9% 12% 12% f f f g g Post Office 18 8 10 * - 6 12 3 2 2 2 1 4 8 5 14 1 2 1 1% 1% 1% *% -% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% *% *% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% d kl o Kingston Communications 14 6 8 2 2 5 5 2 2 3 1 1 4 2 7 14 - * * 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% *% 1% 1% 2% 1% -% *% *% k Other 79 35 43 5 12 26 36 12 5 9 16 24 31 10 14 64 9 4 2 4% 4% 4% 2% 4% 4% 5% 5% 3% 4% 4% 4% 5% 3% 3% 4% 6% 4% 3% m Don't know 44 15 28 22 6 6 10 6 * 2 3 14 11 8 11 36 6 1 1 2% 2% 3% 10% 2% 1% 1% 2% *% 1% 1% 3% 2% 2% 3% 2% 4% 1% 2% def h q Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qc5 (Qc21B). Showcard Which Of These Do You Consider Is Your Main Supplier? (Single Code) Base : Those with a landline phone at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2943 204 228 217 212 223 215 211 197 2055 888 1438 1491 1751 758 Effective Weighted Sample 1934 194 210 206 201 212 203 200 182 1585 395 950 1055 1247 594 Total 1908 231 280 159 142 164 188 157 289 1644 263 1089 808 1210 645 BT 982 156 137 91 74 79 95 65 116 818 164 529 450 628 323 51% 68% 49% 57% 52% 48% 50% 41% 40% 50% 62% 49% 56% 52% 50% bcdefgh gh gh h i k Virgin Media (including NTL and Telewest) 359 25 52 23 29 45 40 28 81 342 17 219 136 206 146 19% 11% 19% 14% 20% 28% 21% 18% 28% 21% 6% 20% 17% 17% 23% a a abcg a abcg j m Talk Talk/Carphone Warehouse 213 24 27 17 21 15 21 18 34 181 32 124 89 144 64 11% 10% 10% 10% 15% 9% 11% 12% 12% 11% 12% 11% 11% 12% 10% SkyTalk 201 19 34 12 11 12 18 23 41 183 18 135 63 135 60 11% 8% 12% 8% 8% 7% 10% 14% 14% 11% 7% 12% 8% 11% 9% acde cde j l Post Office 18 1 1 1 2 3 - 1 6 16 2 5 12 10 7 1% *% *% *% 1% 2% -% *% 2% 1% 1% *% 2% 1% 1% f k Kingston Communications 14 - - - 1 - - 13 - 14 * 6 8 1 13 1% -% -% -% *% -% -% 8% -% 1% *% 1% 1% *% 2% abcdefh m Other 79 3 21 9 3 6 9 8 5 57 22 49 30 56 21 4% 1% 7% 6% 2% 4% 5% 5% 2% 3% 8% 4% 4% 5% 3% adh ah a a i Don't know 44 4 8 6 2 5 5 2 5 34 9 22 21 31 12 2% 2% 3% 4% 1% 3% 3% 1% 2% 2% 4% 2% 3% 3% 2% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qc6A (Qc13A). Showcard Thinking About Your Home Phone Service Only, Please Use This Card To Say How Satisfied You Are With The Overall Service Provided By (Main Supplier). (Single Code) Base : Those with a landline phone at home | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |---------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | c | d | | Unweighted total | 2943 | 1406 | 1537 | 305 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 1934 | 933 | 1002 | 198 | | Total | 1908 | 913 | 995 | 221 | | Very satisfied | 1078 | 498 | 579 | 112 | | 56% | 55% | 58% | 51% | 51% | | cde | ij | klm | r | r | | Fairly satisfied | 607 | 294 | 313 | 70 | | 32% | 32% | 31% | 32% | 35% | | f | f | gh | g | n | | Neither | 110 | 58 | 52 | 22 | | 6% | 6% | 5% | 10% | 5% | | f | f | g | n | q | | Fairly dissatisfied | 52 | 23 | 28 | 4 | | 3% | 3% | 3% | 2% | 5% | | f | kn | | | | | Very dissatisfied | 43 | 29 | 15 | 6 | | 2% | 3% | 1% | 3% | 2% | | b | i | i | | | | Don't know | 18 | 11 | 7 | 7 | | 1% | 1% | 1% | 3% | 2% | | ef | ef | | | | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qc6A (Qc13A). Showcard Thinking About Your Home Phone Service Only, Please Use This Card To Say How Satisfied You Are With The Overall Service Provided By (Main Supplier). (Single Code) Base : Those with a landline phone at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2943 204 228 217 212 223 215 211 197 2055 888 1438 1491 1751 758 Effective Weighted Sample 1934 194 210 206 201 212 203 200 182 1585 395 950 1055 1247 594 Total 1908 231 280 159 142 164 188 157 289 1644 263 1089 808 1210 645 Very satisfied 1078 103 160 80 92 98 114 95 160 954 124 589 484 679 374 56% 45% 57% 50% 64% 59% 61% 61% 56% 58% 47% 54% 60% 56% 58% a ac a ac ac a j k Fairly satisfied 607 86 88 62 42 52 60 42 85 500 107 369 233 390 196 32% 37% 32% 39% 29% 31% 32% 27% 29% 30% 41% 34% 29% 32% 30% g dgh i l Neither 110 28 14 10 3 4 7 6 23 92 18 64 46 78 29 6% 12% 5% 6% 2% 3% 3% 4% 8% 6% 7% 6% 6% 6% 5% bdefg de Fairly dissatisfied 52 4 9 6 3 5 4 9 6 46 6 31 21 30 20 3% 2% 3% 4% 2% 3% 2% 6% 2% 3% 2% 3% 3% 2% 3% a Very dissatisfied 43 10 6 1 2 1 3 2 12 37 6 28 15 23 19 2% 4% 2% 1% 2% 1% 2% 1% 4% 2% 2% 3% 2% 2% 3% ce ce Don't know 18 1 3 - - 4 1 2 3 15 3 9 9 12 6 1% *% 1% -% -% 2% *% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% cd Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd1. How Many Mobile Phones In Total Do You And Members Of Your Household Use? (Single Code) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 One (1.0) 461 223 238 39 68 118 237 147 68 45 24 75 122 71 194 361 55 30 14 20% 21% 20% 12% 17% 15% 32% 39% 31% 16% 5% 13% 18% 17% 32% 19% 28% 27% 23% cde hij ij j k klm o o Two (2.0) 926 441 485 100 226 322 278 106 92 135 243 260 298 165 204 797 63 44 22 41% 41% 41% 31% 55% 41% 38% 28% 43% 48% 51% 46% 45% 40% 34% 42% 32% 39% 36% cef c c g g gh n n n pr Three (3.0) 352 170 182 79 58 160 55 32 17 54 102 106 106 78 61 302 27 13 10 16% 16% 15% 24% 14% 20% 7% 8% 8% 19% 22% 19% 16% 19% 10% 16% 14% 12% 16% df f df gh gh n n n Four or more (4.0) 369 179 190 107 53 168 41 26 20 39 99 104 117 80 68 312 30 14 12 16% 17% 16% 33% 13% 22% 5% 7% 9% 14% 21% 18% 18% 19% 11% 17% 15% 13% 20% def f df g ghi n n n q None (0.0) 148 69 79 2 3 13 130 68 19 7 5 22 26 20 80 113 21 10 4 7% 6% 7% 1% 1% 2% 18% 18% 9% 2% 1% 4% 4% 5% 13% 6% 11% 9% 6% cde hij ij klm or Don't know * * - * - - * * - - - - - - * - * - * *% *% -% *% -% -% *% *% -% -% -% -% -% -% *% -% *% -% *% Mean mobiles in household 2.1 2.2 2.1 2.8 2.2 2.5 1.5 1.5 1.8 2.3 2.6 2.3 2.3 2.3 1.7 2.2 1.9 1.9 2.2 def f df g gh ghi n n n pq pq Standard deviation 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.06 .90 1.04 1.04 1.09 1.04 .97 .91 1.04 1.07 1.11 1.15 1.11 1.21 1.12 1.19 Standard error .02 .03 .03 .05 .04 .03 .03 .04 .05 .05 .04 .04 .03 .04 .04 .02 .05 .05 .05 MOBILE ONLY 334 160 174 105 93 99 38 111 45 46 27 26 101 55 152 270 34 21 9 15% 15% 15% 32% 23% 13% 5% 29% 21% 16% 6% 5% 15% 13% 25% 14% 17% 19% 15% def ef f hij j j k k klm Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QD1. How many mobile phones IN TOTAL do you AND members of your household use? (SINGLE CODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 One (1.0) 461 37 47 34 29 40 39 44 92 409 52 159 297 276 171 20% 13% 15% 18% 18% 20% 18% 23% 26% 21% 18% 13% 30% 20% 21% a ab abcd k Two (2.0) 926 116 149 80 69 72 89 79 142 795 131 588 335 605 299 41% 41% 48% 43% 43% 37% 42% 42% 40% 40% 45% 47% 34% 44% 37% e l n Three (3.0) 352 61 38 27 32 35 37 30 42 311 41 254 95 204 138 16% 22% 12% 14% 20% 18% 18% 16% 12% 16% 14% 20% 10% 15% 17% bch bh l Four or more (4.0) 369 47 65 31 24 34 38 24 49 313 56 249 120 222 135 16% 17% 21% 17% 15% 17% 18% 13% 14% 16% 19% 20% 12% 16% 17% gh l None (0.0) 148 19 9 14 9 16 7 11 29 135 12 11 136 75 69 7% 7% 3% 7% 5% 8% 3% 6% 8% 7% 4% 1% 14% 5% 8% b bf bf bf j k m Don't know * - - - - - - - - * * - * * - *% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% *% *% -% *% *% -% Mean mobiles in household 2.1 2.3 2.3 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.3 2.1 2.0 2.1 2.3 2.5 1.8 2.2 2.1 gh gh h gh i l Standard deviation 1.12 1.11 1.06 1.13 1.07 1.17 1.07 1.06 1.12 1.12 1.09 .97 1.18 1.09 1.17 Standard error .02 .07 .07 .07 .07 .07 .07 .07 .07 .02 .03 .02 .03 .02 .04 MOBILE ONLY 334 48 27 27 20 31 22 30 64 306 28 169 163 165 159 15% 17% 9% 14% 12% 16% 11% 16% 18% 16% 10% 13% 17% 12% 20% bf b b bf j k m Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd2. Do You Personally Use A Mobile Phone? How Many Mobile Phones With Different Telephone Numbers Do You Use At Least Once A Month? Please Include Any Phones Used For Work Or Other Purposes. (Single Code) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 No (0.0) 54 31 23 4 * 6 44 13 9 3 2 11 13 10 19 42 7 4 1 2% 3% 2% 1% *% 1% 6% 3% 4% 1% *% 2% 2% 2% 3% 2% 3% 4% 2% cde j ij 1 (1.0) 1881 894 987 293 371 692 526 282 178 239 425 468 576 355 482 1577 159 92 53 83% 83% 84% 89% 91% 89% 71% 75% 82% 85% 90% 83% 86% 86% 79% 84% 81% 82% 85% f f f g g gh n n 2 (2.0) 151 80 71 23 31 63 33 11 9 29 34 56 43 27 24 135 8 4 3 7% 7% 6% 7% 8% 8% 4% 3% 4% 10% 7% 10% 6% 7% 4% 7% 4% 4% 5% f f gh g ln n pq 3 (3.0) 17 6 11 5 2 3 7 5 1 2 5 6 10 1 1 15 1 1 * 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% *% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% n mn 4 or more (4.0) 5 2 3 1 * 4 - - 1 - 1 3 1 - 1 4 - 1 * *% *% *% *% *% 1% -% -% *% -% *% *% *% -% *% *% -% 1% *% f No mobiles in household (0.0) 148 69 79 2 3 13 130 68 19 7 5 22 26 20 80 113 21 10 4 7% 6% 7% 1% 1% 2% 18% 18% 9% 2% 1% 4% 4% 5% 13% 6% 11% 9% 6% cde hij ij klm or Mean mobiles used 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.1 .8 .8 .9 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 .9 1.0 .9 .9 1.0 f f f g gh gh mn n n pq p Standard deviation .45 .45 .46 .40 .32 .40 .54 .52 .47 .40 .38 .49 .44 .38 .46 .45 .45 .49 .43 Standard error .01 .01 .01 .02 .01 .01 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .01 .01 .01 .01 .02 .02 .02 Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QD2. Do you personally use a mobile phone? How many mobile phones with different telephone numbers do you use at least once a month? Please include any phones used for work or other purposes. (SINGLE CODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 No (0.0) 54 8 5 9 1 3 5 4 6 44 10 8 45 31 22 2% 3% 2% 5% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% 1% 5% 2% 3% bdeh k 1 (1.0) 1881 233 250 156 140 171 182 160 287 1631 250 1111 761 1163 665 83% 83% 81% 84% 86% 87% 86% 85% 81% 83% 85% 88% 77% 84% 82% l 2 (2.0) 151 20 38 6 12 6 13 10 31 134 16 114 36 100 47 7% 7% 13% 3% 7% 3% 6% 5% 9% 7% 6% 9% 4% 7% 6% e acefg ce ce l 3 (3.0) 17 - 3 1 1 2 4 2 2 14 3 14 3 8 9 1% -% 1% 1% *% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% a l 4 or more (4.0) 5 - 3 - 1 - - 1 - 5 * 3 2 4 1 *% -% 1% -% *% -% -% *% -% *% *% *% *% *% *% No mobiles in household (0.0) 148 19 9 14 9 16 7 11 29 135 12 11 136 75 69 7% 7% 3% 7% 5% 8% 3% 6% 8% 7% 4% 1% 14% 5% 8% b bf bf bf j k m Mean mobiles used 1.0 1.0 1.1 .9 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 .9 1.0 1.0 acdegh ce ce c c l n Standard deviation .45 .41 .52 .42 .44 .41 .44 .46 .46 .46 .43 .40 .48 .45 .47 Standard error .01 .03 .03 .03 .03 .02 .03 .03 .03 .01 .01 .01 .01 .01 .01 Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd3 (Qd10). Which Mobile Network Do You Use Most Often? (Single Code) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3091 1492 1599 450 535 1167 939 533 334 389 587 730 941 638 782 1786 425 416 464 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 986 1050 291 339 790 641 336 203 262 429 491 622 427 504 1551 286 281 427 Total 2054 981 1072 321 405 762 566 298 189 270 465 533 630 383 508 1731 168 97 57 O2 (formerly BTCellnet) 535 265 270 86 126 191 132 80 48 85 129 126 171 106 132 428 50 17 38 26% 27% 25% 27% 31% 25% 23% 27% 25% 31% 28% 24% 27% 28% 26% 25% 30% 18% 67% ef q q opq Orange 471 215 256 77 95 160 139 64 46 53 102 142 150 78 102 397 30 38 5 23% 22% 24% 24% 23% 21% 25% 21% 25% 20% 22% 27% 24% 20% 20% 23% 18% 39% 9% mn r r opr Vodafone 418 202 216 55 71 172 120 51 32 53 104 117 116 92 93 362 30 18 7 20% 21% 20% 17% 17% 23% 21% 17% 17% 20% 22% 22% 18% 24% 18% 21% 18% 19% 13% ln r r TMobile (formerly One2One) 247 118 129 47 42 92 66 42 25 28 54 58 76 39 75 223 15 9 1 12% 12% 12% 15% 10% 12% 12% 14% 13% 10% 12% 11% 12% 10% 15% 13% 9% 9% 1% m r r r Virgin Media/ Any Virgin 131 64 67 11 23 46 51 20 11 14 26 35 38 25 33 114 11 5 1 6% 7% 6% 3% 6% 6% 9% 7% 6% 5% 6% 7% 6% 7% 6% 7% 7% 5% 2% ce r r r 3 130 68 62 29 36 53 12 20 15 23 23 24 47 23 37 112 13 2 3 6% 7% 6% 9% 9% 7% 2% 7% 8% 9% 5% 4% 7% 6% 7% 6% 8% 2% 5% f f f k q q Tesco 73 28 45 11 7 32 23 11 10 12 19 20 19 13 21 54 13 5 1 4% 3% 4% 3% 2% 4% 4% 4% 5% 4% 4% 4% 3% 3% 4% 3% 8% 5% 2% d d or r Other 29 16 13 3 4 12 9 6 1 3 7 7 9 5 8 23 3 2 * 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 2% 2% *% r r Don't know 20 6 14 1 1 5 13 3 1 * 3 6 4 2 8 16 2 1 * 1% 1% 1% *% *% 1% 2% 1% *% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% cde Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QD3 (QD10). Which mobile network do you use most often? (SINGLE CODE) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3091 217 235 214 222 234 224 227 213 2190 901 1630 1449 1779 848 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 207 217 203 211 223 212 216 198 1685 397 1079 1021 1278 657 Total 2054 252 294 163 153 179 198 172 320 1785 269 1241 803 1276 721 O2 (formerly BTCellnet) 535 48 77 44 51 36 52 52 68 462 73 349 183 339 157 26% 19% 26% 27% 34% 20% 26% 30% 21% 26% 27% 28% 23% 27% 22% aeh aeh l n Orange 471 29 57 50 39 63 36 45 78 396 75 277 194 312 154 23% 11% 20% 30% 26% 35% 18% 26% 24% 22% 28% 22% 24% 24% 21% a abf a abdfgh a a i Vodafone 418 45 80 30 23 27 51 30 76 351 67 256 157 269 141 20% 18% 27% 19% 15% 15% 26% 17% 24% 20% 25% 21% 20% 21% 20% acdeg adeg de i TMobile (formerly One2One) 247 70 29 8 13 18 30 17 37 224 23 142 105 128 119 12% 28% 10% 5% 9% 10% 15% 10% 12% 13% 9% 11% 13% 10% 16% bcdefgh c c cd c j m Virgin Media/ Any Virgin 131 17 18 9 11 11 11 11 26 128 3 71 58 83 47 6% 7% 6% 6% 7% 6% 6% 6% 8% 7% 1% 6% 7% 7% 7% j 3 130 32 15 8 3 12 9 11 23 121 10 87 43 61 66 6% 13% 5% 5% 2% 7% 5% 7% 7% 7% 4% 7% 5% 5% 9% bcdefg d d d j m Tesco 73 5 13 10 6 7 4 4 6 61 12 32 40 51 21 4% 2% 4% 6% 4% 4% 2% 2% 2% 3% 4% 3% 5% 4% 3% afh k Other 29 3 3 2 5 4 1 2 5 26 3 20 9 17 12 1% 1% 1% 1% 3% 2% *% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% f Don't know 20 5 2 2 1 1 5 1 - 15 4 6 13 15 5 1% 2% 1% 1% *% *% 2% 1% -% 1% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% h k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd4 (Qd24B). Do You Personally Use A Smartphone? If Unsure - A Smartphone Is A Phone On Which You Can Easily Access Emails, Download Files And Applications, As Well As View Websites And Generally Surf The Internet. Popular Brands Of Smartphone Include Blackberry, Iphone And Android Phones Such As The Htc Desire. Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3091 1492 1599 450 535 1167 939 533 334 389 587 730 941 638 782 1786 425 416 464 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 986 1050 291 339 790 641 336 203 262 429 491 622 427 504 1551 286 281 427 Total 2054 981 1072 321 405 762 566 298 189 270 465 533 630 383 508 1731 168 97 57 Yes 620 319 301 155 175 225 65 49 36 89 206 205 206 103 106 544 35 28 13 30% 33% 28% 48% 43% 30% 11% 17% 19% 33% 44% 38% 33% 27% 21% 31% 21% 29% 23% b ef ef f gh ghi lmn mn n pr p No 1413 654 759 166 225 530 493 245 151 179 259 324 417 278 394 1168 133 68 44 69% 67% 71% 52% 56% 70% 87% 82% 80% 66% 56% 61% 66% 73% 78% 67% 79% 70% 77% a cd cde ij ij j kl kl oq o Don't know 21 9 12 * 5 7 8 4 2 2 1 4 7 2 8 19 * 1 * 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% *% 1% *% j Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd4 (Qd24B). Do You Personally Use A Smartphone? If Unsure - A Smartphone Is A Phone On Which You Can Easily Access Emails, Download Files And Applications, As Well As View Websites And Generally Surf The Internet. Popular Brands Of Smartphone Include Blackberry, Iphone And Android Phones Such As The Htc Desire. Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3091 217 235 214 222 234 224 227 213 2190 901 1630 1449 1779 848 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 207 217 203 211 223 212 216 198 1685 397 1079 1021 1278 657 Total 2054 252 294 163 153 179 198 172 320 1785 269 1241 803 1276 721 Yes 620 90 77 53 45 44 72 50 113 540 80 460 158 380 227 30% 36% 26% 33% 29% 24% 36% 29% 35% 30% 30% 37% 20% 30% 31% be be be l No 1413 162 210 110 106 134 122 117 207 1229 184 769 637 883 486 69% 64% 71% 67% 69% 75% 62% 68% 65% 69% 68% 62% 79% 69% 67% f afh k Don't know 21 1 7 - 2 1 4 5 - 16 5 13 8 13 8 1% *% 2% -% 1% *% 2% 3% -% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% ch ch aceh Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd5 (Qd11). Showcard Which Of These Best Describes The Mobile Package You Personally Use Most Often? (Single Code) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3091 1492 1599 450 535 1167 939 533 334 389 587 730 941 638 782 1786 425 416 464 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 986 1050 291 339 790 641 336 203 262 429 491 622 427 504 1551 286 281 427 Total 2054 981 1072 321 405 762 566 298 189 270 465 533 630 383 508 1731 168 97 57 Prepay/ Pay as you go 1028 467 561 148 172 308 400 210 130 132 125 201 286 190 350 838 99 53 37 50% 48% 52% 46% 42% 40% 71% 71% 69% 49% 27% 38% 45% 50% 69% 48% 59% 55% 65% a cde ij ij j k k klm o o oq Postpay/ monthly contract 1006 505 500 172 229 442 163 85 56 135 335 326 339 188 153 874 68 44 20 49% 51% 47% 53% 57% 58% 29% 29% 30% 50% 72% 61% 54% 49% 30% 50% 40% 45% 35% b f f f gh ghi lmn n n pr r Other 5 4 1 - 1 4 - - - - 3 4 1 - - 5 - - - *% *% *% -% *% 1% -% -% -% -% 1% 1% *% -% -% *% -% -% -% n Don't know 16 5 10 2 3 8 3 2 2 3 2 2 3 5 5 15 1 - * 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% -% *% Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QD5 (QD11). SHOWCARD Which of these best describes the mobile package you personally use most often? (SINGLE CODE) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3091 217 235 214 222 234 224 227 213 2190 901 1630 1449 1779 848 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 207 217 203 211 223 212 216 198 1685 397 1079 1021 1278 657 Total 2054 252 294 163 153 179 198 172 320 1785 269 1241 803 1276 721 Prepay/ Pay as you go 1028 107 141 78 77 101 99 103 132 875 153 476 547 642 349 50% 42% 48% 48% 50% 56% 50% 60% 41% 49% 57% 38% 68% 50% 48% ah abcfh i k Postpay/ monthly contract 1006 144 146 83 73 78 98 69 183 891 115 751 249 623 363 49% 57% 50% 51% 48% 44% 49% 40% 57% 50% 43% 60% 31% 49% 50% eg g g eg j l Other 5 1 1 - 1 - - - 2 5 - 4 1 3 2 *% *% 1% -% *% -% -% -% 1% *% -% *% *% *% *% Don't know 16 - 5 2 2 - 1 - 4 14 1 10 5 8 8 1% -% 2% 1% 1% -% 1% -% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% e Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd6 (Qd11A). When You Signed Up For Your Current Mobile Contract Did You Get A Handset With The Contract Or Did You Only Get A Sim Card? (Single Code) Base : Those who use a postpay/ contract mobile phone GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g ~h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 1339 686 653 210 290 620 219 128 82 186 406 414 465 259 201 831 171 178 159 Effective Weighted Sample 920 468 452 148 186 437 157 85 54 123 303 283 315 185 139 733 117 121 147 Total 1006 505 500 172 229 442 163 85 56 135 335 326 339 188 153 874 68 44 20 Handset and contract 868 434 434 149 204 386 129 70 ** 115 300 297 286 161 124 750 60 41 17 86% 86% 87% 87% 89% 87% 79% 82% ** 85% 90% 91% 84% 86% 81% 86% 88% 93% 84% f f g ln or SIM card only 108 57 52 18 21 46 23 14 ** 19 23 24 42 20 21 96 7 3 3 11% 11% 10% 10% 9% 10% 14% 16% ** 14% 7% 7% 12% 11% 14% 11% 10% 6% 14% j j k k q Don't know 30 15 14 5 4 10 11 2 ** 2 12 5 11 6 7 28 1 * * 3% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 6% 2% ** 1% 3% 2% 3% 3% 5% 3% 1% 1% 2% de k Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd6 (Qd11A). When You Signed Up For Your Current Mobile Contract Did You Get A Handset With The Contract Or Did You Only Get A Sim Card? (Single Code) Base : Those who use a postpay/ contract mobile phone ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b ~c d ~e f ~g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 1339 119 111 99 100 99 104 84 115 975 364 939 393 805 375 Effective Weighted Sample 920 114 104 95 96 95 99 81 109 780 162 641 293 587 302 Total 1006 144 146 83 73 78 98 69 183 891 115 751 249 623 363 Handset and contract 868 133 116 ** 59 ** 85 ** 158 767 101 659 206 534 317 86% 92% 80% ** 81% ** 88% ** 86% 86% 88% 88% 83% 86% 87% bd l SIM card only 108 4 26 ** 12 ** 6 ** 22 98 10 77 32 69 37 11% 3% 18% ** 17% ** 6% ** 12% 11% 9% 10% 13% 11% 10% af af a Don't know 30 7 3 ** 2 ** 6 ** 3 26 4 16 12 20 9 3% 5% 2% ** 3% ** 6% ** 2% 3% 3% 2% 5% 3% 2% k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd7A (Qd4A). Showcard How Often, If At All, Do You Use Your Mobile Phone To Send Or Receive Text Messages? (Single Code) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |-------------------------------------------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | c | d | | Unweighted total | 3091 | 1492 | 1599 | 450 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 2035 | 986 | 1050 | 291 | | Total | 2054 | 981 | 1072 | 321 | | Every day | 1186 | 547 | 640 | 282 | | 58% | 56% | 60% | 88% | 76% | | def | ef | f | gh | n | | Several times a week | 376 | 167 | 209 | 27 | | 18% | 17% | 20% | 8% | 17% | | c | cdf | c | r | | | At least once a week | 164 | 89 | 76 | 8 | | 8% | 9% | 7% | 2% | 4% | | cd | cde | j | | | | At least once a month | 86 | 48 | 37 | 3 | | 4% | 5% | 3% | 1% | 1% | | cd | cde | qr | | | | A few times a year | 57 | 31 | 25 | - | | 3% | 3% | 2% | -% | *% | | c | cde | j | r | | | Less than once a year | 16 | 9 | 8 | 1 | | 1% | 1% | 1% | *% | *% | | cde | opr | | | | | Never | 159 | 87 | 72 | * | | 8% | 9% | 7% | *% | 1% | | cd | cde | ij | ij | klm | | Don't know | 10 | 4 | 6 | 1 | | *% | *% | 1% | *% | *% | | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r | | | | | All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd7A (Qd4A). Showcard How Often, If At All, Do You Use Your Mobile Phone To Send Or Receive Text Messages? (Single Code) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3091 217 235 214 222 234 224 227 213 2190 901 1630 1449 1779 848 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 207 217 203 211 223 212 216 198 1685 397 1079 1021 1278 657 Total 2054 252 294 163 153 179 198 172 320 1785 269 1241 803 1276 721 Every day 1186 126 169 95 82 93 126 98 210 1043 143 827 358 723 425 58% 50% 58% 58% 54% 52% 64% 57% 66% 58% 53% 67% 45% 57% 59% ade ade l Several times a week 376 72 39 22 33 38 30 25 52 329 47 241 132 225 142 18% 28% 13% 14% 22% 21% 15% 14% 16% 18% 17% 19% 16% 18% 20% bcfgh bc bc At least once a week 164 22 26 17 16 20 12 14 15 140 24 83 77 109 52 8% 9% 9% 11% 11% 11% 6% 8% 5% 8% 9% 7% 10% 9% 7% h h h k At least once a month 86 7 13 7 10 7 9 6 14 69 17 35 50 56 28 4% 3% 4% 4% 6% 4% 5% 4% 4% 4% 6% 3% 6% 4% 4% i k A few times a year 57 4 14 2 3 4 4 7 13 48 9 18 39 40 17 3% 2% 5% 1% 2% 2% 2% 4% 4% 3% 3% 1% 5% 3% 2% k Less than once a year 16 5 2 1 * 2 1 1 1 15 2 3 14 11 5 1% 2% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% *% 2% 1% 1% k Never 159 16 30 18 8 10 15 21 13 132 27 28 130 103 51 8% 6% 10% 11% 5% 6% 7% 12% 4% 7% 10% 2% 16% 8% 7% h deh adeh k Don't know 10 1 1 - - 4 1 1 1 9 1 7 4 9 1 *% *% 1% -% -% 2% *% *% *% 1% *% 1% *% 1% *% cd Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd7B (Qd4B). Showcard And How Often, It At All, Do You Use Your Mobile Phone To Make Calls? (Single Code) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3091 1492 1599 450 535 1167 939 533 334 389 587 730 941 638 782 1786 425 416 464 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 986 1050 291 339 790 641 336 203 262 429 491 622 427 504 1551 286 281 427 Total 2054 981 1072 321 405 762 566 298 189 270 465 533 630 383 508 1731 168 97 57 Every day 1156 598 558 253 285 448 171 136 89 151 312 326 376 208 246 987 78 50 41 56% 61% 52% 79% 70% 59% 30% 46% 47% 56% 67% 61% 60% 54% 48% 57% 46% 51% 72% b def ef f g ghi mn n p opq Several times a week 445 184 261 46 81 190 128 69 45 67 96 93 131 90 131 361 46 29 9 22% 19% 24% 14% 20% 25% 23% 23% 24% 25% 21% 17% 21% 24% 26% 21% 28% 29% 16% a c c k k r or or At least once a week 212 88 123 13 26 73 100 46 26 29 36 51 52 47 62 174 25 10 3 10% 9% 12% 4% 6% 10% 18% 15% 14% 11% 8% 10% 8% 12% 12% 10% 15% 10% 6% c cde j j l l r or r At least once a month 133 64 68 6 10 33 83 31 12 15 15 40 33 20 40 115 10 5 2 6% 7% 6% 2% 3% 4% 15% 10% 6% 5% 3% 7% 5% 5% 8% 7% 6% 5% 4% c cde ij r A few times a year 79 39 40 3 2 11 64 12 13 6 5 17 27 13 22 70 5 3 1 4% 4% 4% 1% *% 1% 11% 4% 7% 2% 1% 3% 4% 3% 4% 4% 3% 3% 1% cde j ij r Less than once a year 8 3 5 - - * 8 * 1 1 1 4 3 * 1 7 * * * *% *% *% -% -% *% 1% *% 1% *% *% 1% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% cde Never 15 4 11 - 1 6 8 2 2 1 1 1 6 2 6 13 2 * * 1% *% 1% -% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% *% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% c k Don't know 7 2 5 1 1 2 4 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 5 1 * * *% *% *% *% *% *% 1% *% 1% *% *% *% *% 1% *% *% 1% *% *% Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd7B (Qd4B). Showcard And How Often, It At All, Do You Use Your Mobile Phone To Make Calls? (Single Code) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3091 217 235 214 222 234 224 227 213 2190 901 1630 1449 1779 848 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 207 217 203 211 223 212 216 198 1685 397 1079 1021 1278 657 Total 2054 252 294 163 153 179 198 172 320 1785 269 1241 803 1276 721 Every day 1156 156 174 87 81 87 122 74 207 1030 126 822 331 688 427 56% 62% 59% 53% 53% 49% 61% 43% 65% 58% 47% 66% 41% 54% 59% eg eg g g eg cdeg j l m Several times a week 445 67 48 34 33 41 38 44 57 386 59 276 163 276 160 22% 27% 16% 21% 21% 23% 19% 26% 18% 22% 22% 22% 20% 22% 22% bh b At least once a week 212 14 23 21 22 25 17 23 28 173 39 87 124 140 68 10% 6% 8% 13% 15% 14% 8% 13% 9% 10% 14% 7% 15% 11% 9% a abf ab a i k At least once a month 133 6 22 15 13 13 12 16 18 104 29 34 99 97 34 6% 2% 7% 9% 8% 8% 6% 9% 6% 6% 11% 3% 12% 8% 5% a a a a a i k n A few times a year 79 8 18 7 2 6 9 12 8 67 12 13 65 54 24 4% 3% 6% 4% 1% 3% 4% 7% 2% 4% 5% 1% 8% 4% 3% d d dh k Less than once a year 8 - 4 - 2 1 - 1 - 7 1 * 8 6 2 *% -% 1% -% 1% 1% -% *% -% *% *% *% 1% *% *% k Never 15 1 4 - 1 2 1 2 3 12 3 5 10 10 5 1% *% 1% -% *% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% k Don't know 7 - - - 1 4 1 - - 6 1 3 4 6 1 *% -% -% -% *% 2% *% -% -% *% *% *% *% *% *% abcgh Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd8A (Qd28A). Showcard Which If Any, Of The Following Activities, Other Than Making And Receiving Voice Calls, Do You Use Your Mobile For? (Multicode) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3091 1492 1599 450 535 1167 939 533 334 389 587 730 941 638 782 1786 425 416 464 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 986 1050 291 339 790 641 336 203 262 429 491 622 427 504 1551 286 281 427 Total 2054 981 1072 321 405 762 566 298 189 270 465 533 630 383 508 1731 168 97 57 Send/ receive text messages (SMS) 1805 844 962 312 392 705 396 245 159 251 437 475 564 339 427 1529 145 82 50 88% 86% 90% 97% 97% 93% 70% 82% 84% 93% 94% 89% 90% 89% 84% 88% 86% 84% 87% a ef ef f gh gh n n n Use your phone as a camera 1155 529 626 252 305 430 168 140 95 153 328 323 361 217 254 988 96 41 30 56% 54% 58% 78% 75% 56% 30% 47% 50% 57% 71% 61% 57% 57% 50% 57% 57% 43% 52% a ef ef f g ghi n n n q q q Send/ receive messages with pictures/ images 728 333 395 176 212 276 63 71 53 105 214 207 247 133 141 626 59 24 19 35% 34% 37% 55% 52% 36% 11% 24% 28% 39% 46% 39% 39% 35% 28% 36% 35% 25% 34% ef ef f gh gh n n n q q q Accessing the internet 583 296 287 153 174 220 35 58 35 84 187 190 196 101 95 517 29 23 14 28% 30% 27% 48% 43% 29% 6% 19% 19% 31% 40% 36% 31% 26% 19% 30% 17% 23% 24% ef ef f gh ghi mn n n pqr p Upload pictures to PC/laptop 464 223 241 121 136 174 34 47 21 63 151 157 154 82 72 415 23 13 14 23% 23% 22% 38% 34% 23% 6% 16% 11% 23% 33% 29% 24% 21% 14% 24% 14% 13% 24% ef ef f gh ghi mn n n pq pq Listen to music using MP3 function 353 191 162 129 114 97 13 47 24 44 102 91 126 61 74 306 25 11 10 17% 19% 15% 40% 28% 13% 2% 16% 13% 16% 22% 17% 20% 16% 15% 18% 15% 12% 18% b def ef f gh n q q Send/ receive emails (not SMS) 348 186 162 82 100 143 23 29 22 41 125 133 117 55 42 305 20 13 10 17% 19% 15% 26% 25% 19% 4% 10% 11% 15% 27% 25% 19% 14% 8% 18% 12% 14% 18% b ef ef f g ghi lmn n n p p Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd8A (Qd28A). Showcard Which If Any, Of The Following Activities, Other Than Making And Receiving Voice Calls, Do You Use Your Mobile For? (Multicode) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3091 1492 1599 450 535 1167 939 533 334 389 587 730 941 638 782 1786 425 416 464 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 986 1050 291 339 790 641 336 203 262 429 491 622 427 504 1551 286 281 427 Total 2054 981 1072 321 405 762 566 298 189 270 465 533 630 383 508 1731 168 97 57 Visiting social networking sites (e.g. Facebook) 343 156 187 107 120 106 10 39 21 40 110 99 125 63 55 312 12 11 8 17% 16% 17% 33% 30% 14% 2% 13% 11% 15% 24% 19% 20% 16% 11% 18% 7% 11% 14% ef ef f ghi n n n pq p Play games which come pre-installed, by yourself 331 178 153 105 122 88 16 41 20 43 99 86 115 58 72 295 17 9 10 16% 18% 14% 33% 30% 11% 3% 14% 10% 16% 21% 16% 18% 15% 14% 17% 10% 9% 18% b ef ef f gh pq pq Use IM/ Instant messaging 276 139 137 85 82 95 14 25 18 41 89 90 104 41 42 245 10 12 8 13% 14% 13% 27% 20% 13% 2% 8% 10% 15% 19% 17% 16% 11% 8% 14% 6% 13% 14% ef ef f g gh mn mn p p p Download applications or programs directly to your phone 256 135 121 76 92 73 14 23 11 37 96 83 90 48 35 229 10 9 8 12% 14% 11% 24% 23% 10% 2% 8% 6% 14% 21% 16% 14% 12% 7% 13% 6% 9% 14% ef ef f gh ghi n n n p p Record video clips using the phone 235 116 119 74 78 69 14 24 14 33 73 74 82 43 35 193 28 7 6 11% 12% 11% 23% 19% 9% 2% 8% 8% 12% 16% 14% 13% 11% 7% 11% 17% 7% 11% ef ef f gh n n n q oqr Listen to FM radio 219 128 92 66 66 68 20 31 17 41 38 44 75 40 59 194 12 7 6 11% 13% 9% 21% 16% 9% 3% 10% 9% 15% 8% 8% 12% 11% 12% 11% 7% 7% 11% b ef ef f hj k pq Send/ receive video clips 200 107 93 63 56 68 13 18 16 24 62 67 66 32 35 163 26 6 5 10% 11% 9% 20% 14% 9% 2% 6% 8% 9% 13% 12% 11% 8% 7% 9% 15% 6% 9% def ef f g mn n oqr Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd8A (Qd28A). Showcard Which If Any, Of The Following Activities, Other Than Making And Receiving Voice Calls, Do You Use Your Mobile For? (Multicode) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3091 1492 1599 450 535 1167 939 533 334 389 587 730 941 638 782 1786 425 416 464 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 986 1050 291 339 790 641 336 203 262 429 491 622 427 504 1551 286 281 427 Total 2054 981 1072 321 405 762 566 298 189 270 465 533 630 383 508 1731 168 97 57 Play games which come pre-installed, with others 165 102 63 49 53 56 8 16 12 19 57 48 59 32 26 148 7 4 5 8% 10% 6% 15% 13% 7% 1% 5% 7% 7% 12% 9% 9% 8% 5% 9% 4% 5% 8% b ef ef f ghi n n pq Accessing/ receiving news 158 99 59 31 58 60 9 9 11 18 74 76 53 19 10 145 5 4 4 8% 10% 5% 10% 14% 8% 2% 3% 6% 7% 16% 14% 8% 5% 2% 8% 3% 5% 7% b f ef f g ghi lmn mn n pq p Accessing/ receiving sports/ team news/ scores 141 106 35 29 51 55 6 9 11 18 66 60 55 16 9 131 4 3 3 7% 11% 3% 9% 13% 7% 1% 3% 6% 7% 14% 11% 9% 4% 2% 8% 2% 3% 5% b f ef f g ghi mn mn n pq Download a new video clip 79 55 23 25 28 21 5 4 9 11 30 28 26 15 10 66 9 1 2 4% 6% 2% 8% 7% 3% 1% 1% 5% 4% 6% 5% 4% 4% 2% 4% 5% 1% 4% b ef ef f g g g n n q q q Video streaming 75 55 20 25 32 16 2 6 7 10 24 22 32 10 11 67 3 3 2 4% 6% 2% 8% 8% 2% *% 2% 4% 4% 5% 4% 5% 3% 2% 4% 2% 3% 4% b ef ef f g mn Video calling 69 44 25 21 31 16 1 4 4 8 21 22 22 14 10 64 1 2 1 3% 4% 2% 6% 8% 2% *% 1% 2% 3% 4% 4% 4% 4% 2% 4% 1% 2% 2% b ef ef f g p Listen to Podcasts 63 44 19 12 29 16 6 4 3 5 25 21 28 8 6 56 2 2 3 3% 4% 2% 4% 7% 2% 1% 1% 2% 2% 5% 4% 4% 2% 1% 3% 1% 2% 5% b f ef ghi n mn p Using VoIP service e.g. Skype 57 40 17 21 23 9 4 8 5 11 15 15 30 9 4 52 2 2 2 3% 4% 2% 7% 6% 1% 1% 3% 3% 4% 3% 3% 5% 2% 1% 3% 1% 2% 4% b ef ef n n n p Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd8A (Qd28A). Showcard Which If Any, Of The Following Activities, Other Than Making And Receiving Voice Calls, Do You Use Your Mobile For? (Multicode) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3091 1492 1599 450 535 1167 939 533 334 389 587 730 941 638 782 1786 425 416 464 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 986 1050 291 339 790 641 336 203 262 429 491 622 427 504 1551 286 281 427 Total 2054 981 1072 321 405 762 566 298 189 270 465 533 630 383 508 1731 168 97 57 TV streaming 45 34 11 17 17 8 3 9 5 8 11 12 16 9 8 42 1 1 1 2% 3% 1% 5% 4% 1% 1% 3% 2% 3% 2% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 2% b ef ef q Other 16 9 7 1 1 10 5 1 3 2 6 7 6 2 1 12 1 3 * 1% 1% 1% *% *% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 4% *% n opr None of these 176 91 85 1 2 35 138 40 25 14 14 42 46 32 57 139 20 12 5 9% 9% 8% *% 1% 5% 24% 13% 13% 5% 3% 8% 7% 8% 11% 8% 12% 12% 9% cd cde ij ij l o o Don't know 2 2 * - - - 2 1 - - - - * 2 - 2 - * - *% *% *% -% -% -% *% *% -% -% -% -% *% *% -% *% -% *% -% Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd8A (Qd28A). Showcard Which If Any, Of The Following Activities, Other Than Making And Receiving Voice Calls, Do You Use Your Mobile For? (Multicode) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3091 217 235 214 222 234 224 227 213 2190 901 1630 1449 1779 848 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 207 217 203 211 223 212 216 198 1685 397 1079 1021 1278 657 Total 2054 252 294 163 153 179 198 172 320 1785 269 1241 803 1276 721 Send/ receive text messages (SMS) 1805 236 244 141 134 166 169 145 294 1575 230 1167 630 1113 643 88% 94% 83% 87% 88% 93% 85% 84% 92% 88% 85% 94% 78% 87% 89% bcdfg bcfg bfg l Use your phone as a camera 1155 141 163 88 90 89 115 89 213 1023 132 785 366 708 417 56% 56% 56% 54% 59% 50% 58% 52% 66% 57% 49% 63% 46% 56% 58% abceg j l Send/ receive messages with pictures/ images 728 94 98 52 51 47 86 50 147 657 71 533 191 442 267 35% 37% 33% 32% 33% 26% 43% 29% 46% 37% 26% 43% 24% 35% 37% e bcdeg bcdeg j l Accessing the internet 583 81 79 44 42 46 58 56 110 529 54 429 154 351 218 28% 32% 27% 27% 27% 26% 29% 33% 34% 30% 20% 35% 19% 28% 30% j l Upload pictures to PC/laptop 464 73 66 41 33 25 59 24 95 418 46 332 131 289 162 23% 29% 23% 25% 21% 14% 29% 14% 30% 23% 17% 27% 16% 23% 22% eg eg eg g eg eg j l Listen to music using MP3 function 353 57 45 24 23 20 38 35 64 322 31 230 123 207 135 17% 23% 15% 15% 15% 11% 19% 20% 20% 18% 11% 19% 15% 16% 19% cde e e e j l Send/ receive emails (not SMS) 348 46 69 31 27 22 29 29 52 311 37 282 66 214 125 17% 18% 23% 19% 18% 12% 15% 17% 16% 17% 14% 23% 8% 17% 17% ef l Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd8A (Qd28A). Showcard Which If Any, Of The Following Activities, Other Than Making And Receiving Voice Calls, Do You Use Your Mobile For? (Multicode) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3091 217 235 214 222 234 224 227 213 2190 901 1630 1449 1779 848 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 207 217 203 211 223 212 216 198 1685 397 1079 1021 1278 657 Total 2054 252 294 163 153 179 198 172 320 1785 269 1241 803 1276 721 Visiting social networking sites (e.g. Facebook) 343 49 54 28 27 22 40 24 69 315 27 253 90 206 129 17% 19% 19% 17% 17% 12% 20% 14% 22% 18% 10% 20% 11% 16% 18% e e eg j l Play games which come pre-installed, by yourself 331 57 52 24 22 32 36 28 45 305 25 234 97 179 142 16% 23% 18% 15% 14% 18% 18% 16% 14% 17% 9% 19% 12% 14% 20% cdh j l m Use IM/ Instant messaging 276 54 33 19 24 21 25 11 59 257 19 209 67 154 114 13% 21% 11% 12% 15% 12% 12% 7% 18% 14% 7% 17% 8% 12% 16% bcefg g g beg j l m Download applications or programs directly to your phone 256 27 40 26 19 16 26 18 56 231 25 201 55 156 92 12% 11% 14% 16% 12% 9% 13% 11% 17% 13% 9% 16% 7% 12% 13% e eg j l Record video clips using the phone 235 24 42 20 18 17 20 11 42 216 19 175 60 133 95 11% 9% 14% 12% 11% 9% 10% 6% 13% 12% 7% 14% 7% 10% 13% g g g j l Listen to FM radio 219 25 49 13 13 16 18 17 42 200 19 151 68 123 90 11% 10% 17% 8% 9% 9% 9% 10% 13% 11% 7% 12% 8% 10% 12% acdefg j l Send/ receive video clips 200 36 30 14 16 14 17 12 26 186 14 157 43 101 93 10% 14% 10% 8% 10% 8% 9% 7% 8% 10% 5% 13% 5% 8% 13% egh j l m Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd8A (Qd28A). Showcard Which If Any, Of The Following Activities, Other Than Making And Receiving Voice Calls, Do You Use Your Mobile For? (Multicode) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3091 217 235 214 222 234 224 227 213 2190 901 1630 1449 1779 848 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 207 217 203 211 223 212 216 198 1685 397 1079 1021 1278 657 Total 2054 252 294 163 153 179 198 172 320 1785 269 1241 803 1276 721 Play games which come pre-installed, with others 165 46 30 15 11 11 9 6 19 146 19 126 39 97 63 8% 18% 10% 9% 7% 6% 5% 3% 6% 8% 7% 10% 5% 8% 9% bcdefgh fg g l Accessing/ receiving news 158 34 25 17 12 10 20 9 19 142 16 135 23 91 63 8% 13% 9% 10% 8% 6% 10% 5% 6% 8% 6% 11% 3% 7% 9% egh l Accessing/ receiving sports/ team news/ scores 141 33 22 14 8 13 21 5 17 127 13 119 22 84 54 7% 13% 7% 8% 5% 7% 10% 3% 5% 7% 5% 10% 3% 7% 7% degh g g g dg l Download a new video clip 79 10 12 10 6 4 11 1 12 71 8 68 11 45 32 4% 4% 4% 6% 4% 2% 6% 1% 4% 4% 3% 5% 1% 3% 4% g g g g g g l Video streaming 75 15 13 11 1 3 4 5 16 69 7 63 13 39 34 4% 6% 4% 6% 1% 2% 2% 3% 5% 4% 3% 5% 2% 3% 5% de d def de l Video calling 69 13 11 5 3 3 9 4 16 63 6 59 10 32 35 3% 5% 4% 3% 2% 2% 5% 3% 5% 4% 2% 5% 1% 3% 5% de e l m Listen to Podcasts 63 7 14 7 4 3 6 4 11 54 9 50 13 42 19 3% 3% 5% 4% 3% 1% 3% 2% 3% 3% 3% 4% 2% 3% 3% e l Using VoIP service e.g. Skype 57 9 16 5 1 4 5 - 12 53 5 46 11 29 26 3% 4% 5% 3% *% 2% 2% -% 4% 3% 2% 4% 1% 2% 4% dg dg dg g g dg l Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd8A (Qd28A). Showcard Which If Any, Of The Following Activities, Other Than Making And Receiving Voice Calls, Do You Use Your Mobile For? (Multicode) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3091 217 235 214 222 234 224 227 213 2190 901 1630 1449 1779 848 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 207 217 203 211 223 212 216 198 1685 397 1079 1021 1278 657 Total 2054 252 294 163 153 179 198 172 320 1785 269 1241 803 1276 721 TV streaming 45 8 9 3 2 3 3 3 11 42 3 33 12 25 20 2% 3% 3% 2% 1% 2% 2% 2% 3% 2% 1% 3% 1% 2% 3% Other 16 - 5 1 1 - 1 1 2 15 2 10 6 9 7 1% -% 2% *% *% -% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% e None of these 176 10 35 19 10 9 20 21 14 149 27 43 132 120 51 9% 4% 12% 11% 7% 5% 10% 12% 5% 8% 10% 3% 16% 9% 7% aeh aeh aeh aeh k Don't know 2 1 1 - - - - - - 2 - - 2 * 2 *% *% *% -% -% -% -% -% -% *% -% -% *% *% *% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd8B (Qd28B) And, Which Of These Activities Have You Used Your Mobile For In The Last Week? (Multicode) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3091 1492 1599 450 535 1167 939 533 334 389 587 730 941 638 782 1786 425 416 464 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 986 1050 291 339 790 641 336 203 262 429 491 622 427 504 1551 286 281 427 Total 2054 981 1072 321 405 762 566 298 189 270 465 533 630 383 508 1731 168 97 57 Send/ receive text messages (SMS) 1625 748 877 294 380 650 302 217 139 228 410 427 515 305 378 1371 133 75 46 79% 76% 82% 91% 94% 85% 53% 73% 74% 84% 88% 80% 82% 80% 74% 79% 79% 77% 81% a ef ef f gh gh n n Use your phone as a camera 566 258 308 151 181 191 43 69 48 82 155 155 180 109 122 488 35 24 19 28% 26% 29% 47% 45% 25% 8% 23% 25% 30% 33% 29% 29% 28% 24% 28% 21% 24% 32% ef ef f g gh p pq Accessing the internet 423 220 203 114 146 140 22 43 25 60 135 139 150 72 62 378 19 15 11 21% 22% 19% 36% 36% 18% 4% 15% 13% 22% 29% 26% 24% 19% 12% 22% 11% 16% 18% b ef ef f gh gh mn mn n pq p Send/ receive messages with pictures/ images 341 162 179 93 106 119 23 29 27 50 102 101 118 59 64 300 20 11 11 17% 17% 17% 29% 26% 16% 4% 10% 14% 18% 22% 19% 19% 15% 13% 17% 12% 11% 19% ef ef f g gh n n pq pq Visiting social networking sites (e.g. Facebook) 285 128 157 97 104 80 4 34 18 36 89 81 101 58 46 259 12 7 7 14% 13% 15% 30% 26% 11% 1% 11% 10% 13% 19% 15% 16% 15% 9% 15% 7% 7% 13% ef ef f ghi n n n pq pq Send/ receive emails (not SMS) 259 143 117 66 80 96 17 22 18 27 99 99 97 35 28 227 15 8 9 13% 15% 11% 21% 20% 13% 3% 7% 10% 10% 21% 19% 15% 9% 5% 13% 9% 8% 16% b ef ef f ghi mn mn n q pq Listen to music using MP3 function 234 128 106 98 78 51 7 39 17 32 57 58 87 36 53 202 18 6 8 11% 13% 10% 30% 19% 7% 1% 13% 9% 12% 12% 11% 14% 9% 10% 12% 11% 6% 13% b def ef f m q q Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd8B (Qd28B) And, Which Of These Activities Have You Used Your Mobile For In The Last Week? (Multicode) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3091 1492 1599 450 535 1167 939 533 334 389 587 730 941 638 782 1786 425 416 464 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 986 1050 291 339 790 641 336 203 262 429 491 622 427 504 1551 286 281 427 Total 2054 981 1072 321 405 762 566 298 189 270 465 533 630 383 508 1731 168 97 57 Upload pictures to PC/laptop 216 113 103 65 77 61 13 26 12 31 62 73 65 43 35 193 7 7 9 10% 12% 10% 20% 19% 8% 2% 9% 7% 12% 13% 14% 10% 11% 7% 11% 4% 7% 16% ef ef f gh n n n pq opq Play games which come pre-installed, by yourself 178 103 75 61 57 50 10 23 14 23 51 45 65 36 33 164 3 4 7 9% 10% 7% 19% 14% 7% 2% 8% 8% 8% 11% 8% 10% 9% 6% 9% 2% 4% 12% b ef ef f n pq pq Use IM/ Instant messaging 170 91 80 68 45 52 6 15 13 23 47 51 65 27 28 150 7 6 6 8% 9% 7% 21% 11% 7% 1% 5% 7% 8% 10% 10% 10% 7% 6% 9% 4% 6% 11% def ef f g n n p pq Download applications or programs directly to your phone 136 82 55 38 54 38 6 15 9 19 49 38 51 28 20 121 6 4 6 7% 8% 5% 12% 13% 5% 1% 5% 5% 7% 10% 7% 8% 7% 4% 7% 3% 4% 10% b ef ef f gh n n n p opq Listen to FM radio 118 70 48 41 34 34 9 19 9 24 14 23 37 24 34 102 7 4 5 6% 7% 4% 13% 8% 4% 2% 6% 5% 9% 3% 4% 6% 6% 7% 6% 4% 4% 8% b ef ef f j j pq Accessing/ receiving news 105 69 36 16 47 37 4 7 9 13 50 54 32 11 8 96 3 3 3 5% 7% 3% 5% 12% 5% 1% 2% 5% 5% 11% 10% 5% 3% 1% 6% 2% 3% 6% b f cef f ghi lmn n pq pq Accessing/ receiving sports/ team news/ scores 92 74 18 15 37 36 4 6 9 10 45 46 30 11 5 85 2 2 2 4% 8% 2% 5% 9% 5% 1% 2% 5% 4% 10% 9% 5% 3% 1% 5% 1% 3% 4% b f cef f ghi lmn n n p p Record video clips using the phone 90 51 40 34 32 21 3 10 9 13 27 28 27 20 16 78 5 4 4 4% 5% 4% 11% 8% 3% 1% 3% 5% 5% 6% 5% 4% 5% 3% 5% 3% 4% 7% ef ef f p Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd8B (Qd28B) And, Which Of These Activities Have You Used Your Mobile For In The Last Week? (Multicode) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3091 1492 1599 450 535 1167 939 533 334 389 587 730 941 638 782 1786 425 416 464 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 986 1050 291 339 790 641 336 203 262 429 491 622 427 504 1551 286 281 427 Total 2054 981 1072 321 405 762 566 298 189 270 465 533 630 383 508 1731 168 97 57 Play games which come pre-installed, with others 87 56 31 31 30 25 - 8 8 14 29 20 31 21 14 80 2 1 3 4% 6% 3% 10% 7% 3% -% 3% 4% 5% 6% 4% 5% 5% 3% 5% 1% 1% 6% b ef ef f g n pq pq Send/ receive video clips 62 39 23 20 16 23 3 6 3 8 16 24 17 10 11 56 2 1 3 3% 4% 2% 6% 4% 3% 1% 2% 2% 3% 3% 5% 3% 3% 2% 3% 1% 1% 5% b ef f f n q pq Video streaming 43 33 10 16 20 6 1 5 4 5 13 11 16 8 8 40 1 1 1 2% 3% 1% 5% 5% 1% *% 2% 2% 2% 3% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 3% b ef ef p Download a new video clip 39 28 11 16 14 7 2 1 6 4 14 13 12 10 4 34 2 * 2 2% 3% 1% 5% 3% 1% *% *% 3% 1% 3% 2% 2% 3% 1% 2% 1% *% 4% b ef ef g g n q oq Using VoIP service e.g. Skype 34 28 6 13 15 4 1 6 3 6 10 6 19 6 3 31 1 1 1 2% 3% 1% 4% 4% 1% *% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% 3% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% b ef ef kn Video calling 31 20 11 10 16 5 - 3 3 1 8 8 9 7 7 29 * 1 1 2% 2% 1% 3% 4% 1% -% 1% 1% *% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% 2% *% 1% 2% b ef ef f TV streaming 28 23 6 12 10 4 2 8 4 4 4 4 11 7 6 27 1 * 1 1% 2% 1% 4% 2% 1% *% 3% 2% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% *% 1% b ef ef q Listen to Podcasts 26 22 4 4 15 6 2 3 3 * 9 7 10 5 4 21 1 2 2 1% 2% *% 1% 4% 1% *% 1% 2% *% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 4% b cef i op Other 12 7 5 1 1 6 4 1 2 1 3 5 5 2 - 8 1 2 - 1% 1% *% *% *% 1% 1% *% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% *% -% *% 1% 2% -% n n or Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd8B (Qd28B) And, Which Of These Activities Have You Used Your Mobile For In The Last Week? (Multicode) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3091 1492 1599 450 535 1167 939 533 334 389 587 730 941 638 782 1786 425 416 464 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 986 1050 291 339 790 641 336 203 262 429 491 622 427 504 1551 286 281 427 Total 2054 981 1072 321 405 762 566 298 189 270 465 533 630 383 508 1731 168 97 57 None of these 332 174 158 10 8 82 233 65 44 31 35 80 88 56 109 276 30 18 8 16% 18% 15% 3% 2% 11% 41% 22% 23% 11% 8% 15% 14% 15% 21% 16% 18% 19% 14% cd cde ij ij klm Don't know 18 10 8 - - 4 14 2 - 3 - 5 4 6 2 17 - 1 * 1% 1% 1% -% -% 1% 2% 1% -% 1% -% 1% 1% 2% *% 1% -% 1% *% cde j Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QD8B (QD28B) And, which of these activities have you used your mobile for in the last week? (MULTICODE) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3091 217 235 214 222 234 224 227 213 2190 901 1630 1449 1779 848 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 207 217 203 211 223 212 216 198 1685 397 1079 1021 1278 657 Total 2054 252 294 163 153 179 198 172 320 1785 269 1241 803 1276 721 Send/ receive text messages (SMS) 1625 217 221 129 120 142 154 130 258 1425 200 1092 525 1001 578 79% 86% 75% 79% 78% 80% 77% 76% 81% 80% 74% 88% 65% 78% 80% bdfg j l Use your phone as a camera 566 73 75 50 35 44 53 41 117 505 60 411 154 332 215 28% 29% 26% 31% 23% 25% 27% 24% 36% 28% 22% 33% 19% 26% 30% bdefg j l Accessing the internet 423 56 55 36 34 38 41 37 80 384 39 312 110 250 162 21% 22% 19% 22% 22% 21% 21% 22% 25% 22% 15% 25% 14% 20% 22% j l Send/ receive messages with pictures/ images 341 47 36 27 30 22 38 17 81 303 38 258 83 199 131 17% 19% 12% 17% 20% 12% 19% 10% 25% 17% 14% 21% 10% 16% 18% g g beg beg bceg l Visiting social networking sites (e.g. Facebook) 285 38 49 22 22 16 33 23 55 262 23 211 74 167 111 14% 15% 17% 14% 14% 9% 17% 13% 17% 15% 8% 17% 9% 13% 15% e e e j l Send/ receive emails (not SMS) 259 38 49 28 17 15 18 20 42 231 28 210 49 162 89 13% 15% 17% 17% 11% 8% 9% 12% 13% 13% 11% 17% 6% 13% 12% e ef ef l Listen to music using MP3 function 234 33 31 19 16 16 21 28 38 210 24 150 84 135 91 11% 13% 10% 11% 10% 9% 11% 16% 12% 12% 9% 12% 10% 11% 13% e Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QD8B (QD28B) And, which of these activities have you used your mobile for in the last week? (MULTICODE) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3091 217 235 214 222 234 224 227 213 2190 901 1630 1449 1779 848 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 207 217 203 211 223 212 216 198 1685 397 1079 1021 1278 657 Total 2054 252 294 163 153 179 198 172 320 1785 269 1241 803 1276 721 Upload pictures to PC/laptop 216 30 29 22 16 14 18 11 53 190 26 163 53 128 78 10% 12% 10% 13% 11% 8% 9% 6% 17% 11% 10% 13% 7% 10% 11% g g befg l Play games which come pre-installed, by yourself 178 24 34 19 15 17 18 14 24 159 19 133 45 104 67 9% 9% 12% 12% 10% 10% 9% 8% 7% 9% 7% 11% 6% 8% 9% l Use IM/ Instant messaging 170 21 21 15 18 13 11 9 43 158 12 131 39 91 73 8% 8% 7% 9% 12% 7% 5% 5% 13% 9% 4% 11% 5% 7% 10% fg befg j l m Download applications or programs directly to your phone 136 14 22 14 11 11 14 6 29 123 14 105 31 85 46 7% 6% 7% 9% 7% 6% 7% 4% 9% 7% 5% 8% 4% 7% 6% g g l Listen to FM radio 118 14 34 10 7 6 8 9 14 106 12 80 37 63 50 6% 6% 12% 6% 5% 4% 4% 5% 4% 6% 4% 6% 5% 5% 7% acdefgh Accessing/ receiving news 105 25 16 13 6 4 11 5 17 94 11 90 15 58 43 5% 10% 5% 8% 4% 2% 5% 3% 5% 5% 4% 7% 2% 5% 6% deg eg l Accessing/ receiving sports/ team news/ scores 92 23 13 10 5 7 15 3 10 84 8 81 12 58 31 4% 9% 5% 6% 3% 4% 8% 2% 3% 5% 3% 7% 1% 5% 4% degh g dgh l Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QD8B (QD28B) And, which of these activities have you used your mobile for in the last week? (MULTICODE) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3091 217 235 214 222 234 224 227 213 2190 901 1630 1449 1779 848 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 207 217 203 211 223 212 216 198 1685 397 1079 1021 1278 657 Total 2054 252 294 163 153 179 198 172 320 1785 269 1241 803 1276 721 Record video clips using the phone 90 8 13 10 8 7 9 3 20 83 7 67 24 56 30 4% 3% 5% 6% 5% 4% 4% 2% 6% 5% 3% 5% 3% 4% 4% g g l Play games which come pre-installed, with others 87 22 14 10 7 6 6 1 13 78 8 69 18 50 33 4% 9% 5% 6% 5% 3% 3% *% 4% 4% 3% 6% 2% 4% 5% efg g g g g g g l Send/ receive video clips 62 12 10 7 3 4 3 3 14 60 3 54 8 34 26 3% 5% 3% 4% 2% 3% 1% 2% 4% 3% 1% 4% 1% 3% 4% f j l Video streaming 43 10 9 8 - 3 2 1 8 38 6 35 8 24 18 2% 4% 3% 5% -% 2% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 3% 1% 2% 2% dg d dfg d l Download a new video clip 39 4 5 4 2 3 7 - 10 33 5 34 5 22 14 2% 2% 2% 3% 1% 1% 3% -% 3% 2% 2% 3% 1% 2% 2% g g g l Using VoIP service e.g. Skype 34 8 6 5 - 2 2 - 8 33 1 29 5 13 20 2% 3% 2% 3% -% 1% 1% -% 2% 2% *% 2% 1% 1% 3% dg dg dg dg j l m Video calling 31 8 3 2 2 3 4 - 8 28 2 25 6 16 14 2% 3% 1% 2% 1% 2% 2% -% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% g g g l TV streaming 28 7 5 1 1 3 2 1 7 26 3 21 8 15 13 1% 3% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QD8B (QD28B) And, which of these activities have you used your mobile for in the last week? (MULTICODE) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3091 217 235 214 222 234 224 227 213 2190 901 1630 1449 1779 848 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 207 217 203 211 223 212 216 198 1685 397 1079 1021 1278 657 Total 2054 252 294 163 153 179 198 172 320 1785 269 1241 803 1276 721 Listen to Podcasts 26 2 7 2 2 2 - 2 3 20 6 20 5 16 7 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% -% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% f l Other 12 - 5 1 1 - 1 1 1 10 1 7 5 9 3 1% -% 2% *% *% -% *% *% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% e None of these 332 31 53 27 19 29 34 36 46 280 52 97 234 218 106 16% 12% 18% 17% 12% 17% 17% 21% 14% 16% 19% 8% 29% 17% 15% ad k Don't know 18 3 5 - 3 2 1 1 3 13 5 6 12 11 7 1% 1% 2% -% 2% 1% *% *% 1% 1% 2% *% 1% 1% 1% k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd9 (Qd28C). You Said That You Use Your Mobile Phone To Access The Internet. Which One Of These Best Describes Where You Use Your Mobile Phone To Access The Internet? (Single Code) Base : Those who use their mobile phone to access the internet GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e ~f ~g ~h i j k l m n o ~p ~q ~r Unweighted total 750 386 364 201 211 295 43 93 50 101 220 226 260 135 129 483 81 87 99 Effective Weighted Sample 520 268 253 132 141 216 34 59 32 75 166 159 179 95 88 427 53 61 92 Total 583 296 287 153 174 220 35 58 35 84 187 190 196 101 95 517 29 23 14 I always use in the home 36 20 16 6 14 10 ** ** ** 4 3 9 8 9 10 31 ** ** ** 6% 7% 6% 4% 8% 5% ** ** ** 4% 2% 5% 4% 9% 10% 6% ** ** ** I mainly use in the home 54 25 29 12 17 22 ** ** ** 9 18 14 17 12 11 48 ** ** ** 9% 8% 10% 8% 10% 10% ** ** ** 11% 10% 7% 8% 12% 12% 9% ** ** ** I use equally in the home and outside the home 294 146 148 98 93 94 ** ** ** 45 91 74 111 57 52 262 ** ** ** 50% 49% 52% 64% 53% 43% ** ** ** 53% 49% 39% 57% 56% 55% 51% ** ** ** e e k k k I mainly use outside the home 133 70 63 27 32 63 ** ** ** 17 59 66 39 12 15 117 ** ** ** 23% 24% 22% 18% 18% 29% ** ** ** 21% 32% 35% 20% 12% 16% 23% ** ** ** cd lmn I always use outside the home 47 21 26 7 13 21 ** ** ** 7 14 20 15 5 7 41 ** ** ** 8% 7% 9% 5% 8% 10% ** ** ** 8% 7% 11% 8% 4% 7% 8% ** ** ** Don't know 19 15 4 3 5 10 ** ** ** 2 1 7 6 6 * 18 ** ** ** 3% 5% 2% 2% 3% 4% ** ** ** 2% 1% 4% 3% 6% *% 3% ** ** ** b n Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd9 (Qd28C). You Said That You Use Your Mobile Phone To Access The Internet. Which One Of These Best Describes Where You Use Your Mobile Phone To Access The Internet? (Single Code) Base : Those who use their mobile phone to access the internet ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h i j k l m n Unweighted total 750 66 59 52 53 56 60 68 69 579 171 513 237 428 223 Effective Weighted Sample 520 64 55 50 51 54 57 65 64 456 75 356 174 321 179 Total 583 81 79 44 42 46 58 56 110 529 54 429 154 351 218 I always use in the home 36 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 31 5 18 17 22 12 6% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 6% 10% 4% 11% 6% 5% k I mainly use in the home 54 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 46 8 36 18 32 20 9% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 9% 15% 8% 11% 9% 9% I use equally in the home and outside the home 294 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 270 24 209 85 173 115 50% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 51% 45% 49% 56% 49% 53% I mainly use outside the home 133 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 121 12 113 20 86 45 23% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 23% 23% 26% 13% 24% 21% l I always use outside the home 47 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 43 4 38 8 28 18 8% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 8% 7% 9% 5% 8% 8% Don't know 19 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 19 * 15 5 10 9 3% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 4% 1% 3% 3% 3% 4% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd10 (Qd28D). Do You Use Any Of The Following Types Of Apps Or Applications On Your Smartphone? (Multicode) Base : Those with a Smartphone GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e ~f ~g ~h i j k l m n o p q ~r Unweighted total 811 427 384 203 215 314 79 84 54 104 240 250 283 134 144 511 101 103 96 Effective Weighted Sample 559 298 262 135 142 227 60 52 37 78 181 173 193 95 98 451 65 74 90 Total 620 319 301 155 175 225 65 49 36 89 206 205 206 103 106 544 35 28 13 Social networking (e.g. Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn) 355 164 191 122 121 97 ** ** ** 49 118 111 127 57 60 317 16 13 ** 57% 51% 64% 79% 69% 43% ** ** ** 55% 57% 54% 62% 55% 56% 58% 45% 45% ** a e e pq Maps 269 148 121 57 83 105 ** ** ** 33 114 119 93 34 24 243 11 8 ** 43% 46% 40% 37% 47% 47% ** ** ** 37% 56% 58% 45% 33% 22% 45% 32% 29% ** i lmn n q Games 254 148 107 80 85 76 ** ** ** 32 89 70 98 42 45 230 11 8 ** 41% 46% 35% 52% 49% 34% ** ** ** 36% 43% 34% 48% 41% 42% 42% 31% 27% ** b e e k q News/ sports news 246 160 85 47 76 99 ** ** ** 29 121 108 81 32 24 222 8 10 ** 40% 50% 28% 30% 43% 44% ** ** ** 33% 59% 53% 39% 31% 23% 41% 23% 35% ** b c c i lmn n p Travel (timetables etc.) 170 92 78 41 49 67 ** ** ** 17 82 84 60 18 9 157 6 4 ** 27% 29% 26% 27% 28% 30% ** ** ** 19% 40% 41% 29% 17% 8% 29% 16% 14% ** i lmn mn pq Shopping (e.g. Tesco, Ocado, eBay) 126 59 66 38 46 36 ** ** ** 16 44 37 50 20 20 115 3 4 ** 20% 19% 22% 25% 26% 16% ** ** ** 18% 21% 18% 24% 19% 18% 21% 8% 16% ** e e p Banking 106 61 45 28 29 41 ** ** ** 7 45 40 39 17 11 94 5 5 ** 17% 19% 15% 18% 17% 18% ** ** ** 7% 22% 19% 19% 16% 10% 17% 13% 17% ** i n None of these 91 45 46 19 19 35 ** ** ** 14 20 27 30 15 19 75 9 6 ** 15% 14% 15% 12% 11% 16% ** ** ** 16% 10% 13% 15% 15% 18% 14% 25% 21% ** o Don't know 29 14 15 4 5 10 ** ** ** 5 5 5 7 7 10 23 3 2 ** 5% 4% 5% 3% 3% 4% ** ** ** 6% 2% 2% 3% 7% 10% 4% 8% 7% ** kl Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QD10 (QD28D). Do you use any of the following types of apps or applications on your Smartphone? (MULTICODE) Base : Those with a Smartphone ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h i j k l m n Unweighted total 811 72 60 63 59 53 75 60 69 600 211 552 257 472 243 Effective Weighted Sample 559 69 55 61 57 51 72 58 65 467 101 385 186 345 192 Total 620 90 77 53 45 44 72 50 113 540 80 460 158 380 227 Social networking (e.g. Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn) 355 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 317 38 259 96 216 130 57% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 59% 48% 56% 61% 57% 57% j Maps 269 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 240 29 220 49 172 91 43% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 44% 36% 48% 31% 45% 40% l Games 254 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 225 29 196 58 152 96 41% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 42% 36% 43% 37% 40% 42% News/ sports news 246 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 216 29 203 43 164 76 40% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 40% 37% 44% 27% 43% 33% l n Travel (timetables etc.) 170 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 148 22 143 27 112 54 27% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 27% 27% 31% 17% 29% 24% l Shopping (e.g. Tesco, Ocado, eBay) 126 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 112 14 99 26 74 49 20% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 21% 17% 22% 17% 19% 21% Banking 106 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 95 11 88 18 61 42 17% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 18% 14% 19% 12% 16% 19% l None of these 91 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 73 18 65 26 54 35 15% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 14% 23% 14% 16% 14% 16% i Don't know 29 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 24 5 19 8 21 7 5% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 4% 6% 4% 5% 6% 3% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd11A (Qd21A). Showcard Thinking About Your Mobile Phone Service Only, Please Use This Card To Say How Satisfied You Are With (Main Supplier) For Each Of The Following...The Overall Service Provided By Main Supplier. (Single Code) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |---------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | c | d | | Unweighted total | 3091 | 1492 | 1599 | 450 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 2035 | 986 | 1050 | 291 | | Total | 2054 | 981 | 1072 | 321 | | Very satisfied | 1222 | 582 | 640 | 193 | | 60% | 59% | 60% | 60% | 60% | | Fairly satisfied | 653 | 314 | 338 | 97 | | 32% | 32% | 32% | 30% | 33% | | g | g | g | | | | Neither | 83 | 39 | 44 | 14 | | 4% | 4% | 4% | 4% | 3% | | k | | | | | | Fairly dissatisfied | 38 | 20 | 18 | 10 | | 2% | 2% | 2% | 3% | 2% | | Very dissatisfied | 24 | 9 | 15 | 2 | | 1% | 1% | 1% | 1% | 1% | | l | | | | | | Don't know | 34 | 17 | 17 | 6 | | 2% | 2% | 2% | 2% | 2% | | e | r | r | | | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd11A (Qd21A). Showcard Thinking About Your Mobile Phone Service Only, Please Use This Card To Say How Satisfied You Are With (Main Supplier) For Each Of The Following...The Overall Service Provided By Main Supplier. (Single Code) Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3091 217 235 214 222 234 224 227 213 2190 901 1630 1449 1779 848 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 207 217 203 211 223 212 216 198 1685 397 1079 1021 1278 657 Total 2054 252 294 163 153 179 198 172 320 1785 269 1241 803 1276 721 Very satisfied 1222 87 197 101 105 99 131 117 190 1073 149 755 462 780 407 60% 34% 67% 62% 68% 56% 66% 68% 59% 60% 56% 61% 58% 61% 56% ae a ae a ae ae a n Fairly satisfied 653 120 74 51 41 67 55 44 97 562 91 388 260 385 249 32% 47% 25% 31% 27% 38% 28% 26% 30% 31% 34% 31% 32% 30% 35% bcdefgh bdfg m Neither 83 26 7 4 3 6 8 6 11 70 13 48 35 56 25 4% 10% 2% 2% 2% 3% 4% 4% 4% 4% 5% 4% 4% 4% 4% bcdefgh Fairly dissatisfied 38 5 5 4 2 4 3 2 8 31 7 22 17 19 19 2% 2% 2% 3% 1% 2% 1% 1% 3% 2% 3% 2% 2% 1% 3% Very dissatisfied 24 2 5 3 1 - 1 2 6 18 6 10 13 15 8 1% 1% 2% 2% *% -% 1% 1% 2% 1% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% e Don't know 34 13 7 - 2 2 - 1 7 31 3 19 15 21 13 2% 5% 2% -% 1% 1% -% *% 2% 2% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% cdefg cf cf Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd11J (Qd21J). Showcard Thinking About Your Mobile Phone Service Only, Please Use This Card To Say How Satisfied You Are With (Main Supplier) For Each Of The Following...Reception/ Accessing Network. (Single Code). Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |---------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | c | d | | Unweighted total | 3091 | 1492 | 1599 | 450 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 2035 | 986 | 1050 | 291 | | Total | 2054 | 981 | 1072 | 321 | | Very satisfied | 1167 | 550 | 618 | 186 | | 57% | 56% | 58% | 58% | 58% | | j | j | k | | | | Fairly satisfied | 605 | 296 | 309 | 90 | | 29% | 30% | 29% | 28% | 28% | | g | gi | | | | | Neither | 104 | 57 | 47 | 19 | | 5% | 6% | 4% | 6% | 5% | | h | h | r | qr | | | Fairly dissatisfied | 84 | 34 | 50 | 11 | | 4% | 3% | 5% | 3% | 3% | | p | | | | | | Very dissatisfied | 59 | 26 | 33 | 10 | | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% | 4% | | g | op | | | | | Don't know | 35 | 18 | 16 | 6 | | 2% | 2% | 2% | 2% | 2% | | e | r | | | | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qd11J (Qd21J). Showcard Thinking About Your Mobile Phone Service Only, Please Use This Card To Say How Satisfied You Are With (Main Supplier) For Each Of The Following...Reception/ Accessing Network. (Single Code). Base : Those who personally use a mobile phone ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3091 217 235 214 222 234 224 227 213 2190 901 1630 1449 1779 848 Effective Weighted Sample 2035 207 217 203 211 223 212 216 198 1685 397 1079 1021 1278 657 Total 2054 252 294 163 153 179 198 172 320 1785 269 1241 803 1276 721 Very satisfied 1167 94 175 85 90 94 129 122 186 1048 119 715 449 713 420 57% 37% 59% 52% 59% 53% 65% 71% 58% 59% 44% 58% 56% 56% 58% a a a a ace abcdeh a j Fairly satisfied 605 112 70 53 47 59 50 35 87 521 85 365 234 376 213 29% 44% 24% 32% 31% 33% 25% 20% 27% 29% 31% 29% 29% 30% 29% bcdefgh g g bg Neither 104 19 14 12 6 9 11 4 15 81 22 59 45 68 34 5% 8% 5% 7% 4% 5% 5% 2% 5% 5% 8% 5% 6% 5% 5% g g i Fairly dissatisfied 84 10 18 9 8 8 3 7 7 64 20 50 33 62 20 4% 4% 6% 6% 5% 4% 2% 4% 2% 4% 7% 4% 4% 5% 3% f f i n Very dissatisfied 59 4 11 4 1 7 5 3 15 38 21 34 25 34 22 3% 1% 4% 3% 1% 4% 2% 2% 5% 2% 8% 3% 3% 3% 3% d d d i Don't know 35 13 6 - 2 1 - 1 10 33 2 18 17 22 13 2% 5% 2% -% 1% 1% -% *% 3% 2% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% cdefg cf cfg Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QE1. Does your household have a PC, laptop, netbook or tablet computer? (MULTICODE OPTIONS 1-4 ONLY) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Yes - PC 1050 526 524 153 156 435 306 101 75 128 311 341 348 185 176 910 70 44 27 47% 49% 45% 47% 38% 56% 41% 27% 35% 46% 66% 60% 52% 45% 29% 48% 36% 39% 43% d cdf g gh ghi lmn mn n pqr p Yes - laptop 1230 578 653 192 276 502 260 126 101 170 323 391 403 209 228 1049 86 59 37 55% 53% 56% 59% 68% 64% 35% 33% 47% 61% 68% 69% 60% 50% 38% 56% 44% 53% 59% f cf f g gh ghi lmn mn n p p p Yes - netbook 92 50 42 17 17 49 9 3 9 10 30 30 37 14 11 79 4 5 4 4% 5% 4% 5% 4% 6% 1% 1% 4% 4% 6% 5% 5% 3% 2% 4% 2% 4% 6% f f f g g g n n p op Yes - tablet computer - e.g. iPad 40 22 18 7 9 18 5 3 1 3 17 17 16 4 3 35 2 2 1 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% *% 1% 4% 3% 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% 2% 2% f f f ghi mn n No 526 244 281 67 60 94 305 190 77 49 23 51 112 100 262 413 70 29 13 23% 23% 24% 20% 15% 12% 41% 50% 35% 18% 5% 9% 17% 24% 43% 22% 35% 26% 22% e cde hij ij j k kl klm oqr Don't know 4 3 1 1 - 2 2 3 1 1 - - 1 2 2 4 - * - *% *% *% *% -% *% *% 1% *% *% -% -% *% *% *% *% -% *% -% Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QE1. Does your household have a PC, laptop, netbook or tablet computer? (MULTICODE OPTIONS 1-4 ONLY) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Yes - PC 1050 137 165 96 77 97 115 69 153 888 161 665 377 675 349 47% 49% 54% 52% 47% 49% 55% 37% 43% 45% 55% 53% 38% 49% 43% g gh g g g gh i l n Yes - laptop 1230 120 207 101 97 107 111 107 198 1053 177 832 396 802 392 55% 43% 67% 54% 60% 54% 53% 57% 56% 54% 61% 66% 40% 58% 48% acefgh a a a a a a i l n Yes - netbook 92 5 13 12 4 8 9 8 20 80 12 67 24 64 24 4% 2% 4% 6% 3% 4% 4% 4% 6% 4% 4% 5% 2% 5% 3% a a l Yes - tablet computer - e.g. iPad 40 7 11 1 2 7 2 2 3 33 6 32 8 29 10 2% 3% 4% *% 1% 3% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 3% 1% 2% 1% c cg c l No 526 79 40 39 32 47 41 46 89 479 47 150 373 274 238 23% 28% 13% 21% 20% 24% 20% 25% 25% 24% 16% 12% 38% 20% 29% bdf b b b b j k m Don't know 4 2 - - 1 - 2 - - 4 * 1 3 3 2 *% 1% -% -% 1% -% 1% -% -% *% *% *% *% *% *% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe2. Do You Or Does Anyone In Your Household Have Access To The Internet/ Worldwide Web At Home (Via Any Device, E.G. Pc, Mobile Phone Etc)? (Single Code) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Yes - have access and use at home 1671 813 858 261 352 665 393 181 130 227 440 502 532 305 332 1431 118 76 46 74% 75% 73% 80% 86% 85% 53% 48% 60% 81% 93% 89% 80% 74% 55% 76% 60% 69% 74% f cf cf g gh ghi lmn mn n pq p p Yes - have access but don't use at home 44 15 29 3 6 13 23 6 8 7 8 9 16 10 9 31 8 3 1 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% 3% 2% 4% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% 2% 4% 3% 2% c o No do not have access at home 527 247 280 61 49 97 320 189 76 46 24 53 118 95 261 411 70 30 15 23% 23% 24% 19% 12% 12% 43% 50% 35% 16% 5% 9% 18% 23% 43% 22% 36% 27% 24% de cde hij ij j k kl klm oqr o Don't know 14 7 7 2 2 5 5 2 3 - 1 2 3 4 5 12 - 1 - 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% *% 1% -% *% *% *% 1% 1% 1% -% 1% -% r ALL WITH ACCESS 1715 828 888 264 358 678 416 187 138 234 448 511 549 314 341 1462 126 80 47 76% 77% 76% 81% 88% 87% 56% 49% 64% 84% 95% 90% 82% 76% 56% 78% 64% 72% 76% f cf cf g gh ghi lmn mn n pq p p Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QE2. Do you or does anyone in your household have access to the internet/ Worldwide Web at HOME (via any device, e.g. PC, mobile phone etc)? (SINGLE CODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Yes - have access and use at home 1671 194 261 144 127 148 162 135 259 1440 231 1089 573 1071 554 74% 69% 85% 77% 78% 75% 77% 72% 73% 73% 79% 86% 58% 78% 68% acdefgh a a i l n Yes - have access but don't use at home 44 4 3 3 3 2 3 7 7 37 8 17 27 27 16 2% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 4% 2% 2% 3% 1% 3% 2% 2% be k No do not have access at home 527 77 42 39 29 46 46 44 87 474 53 148 375 277 235 23% 28% 14% 21% 18% 24% 22% 24% 25% 24% 18% 12% 38% 20% 29% bd b b b b b j k m Don't know 14 5 1 1 3 1 - 1 1 13 1 6 7 7 6 1% 2% *% *% 2% *% -% *% *% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% f f ALL WITH ACCESS 1715 198 264 147 131 150 165 142 266 1477 238 1106 601 1098 570 76% 71% 86% 79% 80% 76% 78% 76% 75% 75% 82% 88% 61% 79% 70% acefgh a a i l n Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe3 (In6). Showcard Do You Ever Access The Internet Anywhere Other Than In Your Home At All? If Yes: Where Is That? (Multicode) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Your workplace 534 271 264 57 136 284 58 18 24 76 231 234 208 64 28 469 32 22 12 24% 25% 22% 17% 33% 36% 8% 5% 11% 27% 49% 41% 31% 16% 5% 25% 16% 19% 19% f cf cf g gh ghi lmn mn n pqr Anywhere - using a 3G mobile phone/ Smartphone 337 173 164 88 99 126 24 26 24 46 119 111 125 56 45 306 18 9 4 15% 16% 14% 27% 24% 16% 3% 7% 11% 16% 25% 20% 19% 14% 7% 16% 9% 8% 6% ef ef f g ghi mn mn n pqr In someone else's home 259 113 146 84 77 73 26 45 20 36 64 61 94 43 61 216 28 8 7 11% 10% 12% 26% 19% 9% 3% 12% 9% 13% 14% 11% 14% 10% 10% 11% 14% 7% 11% def ef f n q q School/ college 99 51 48 70 14 14 2 9 1 10 24 31 47 10 12 91 2 4 2 4% 5% 4% 21% 3% 2% *% 2% 1% 4% 5% 5% 7% 2% 2% 5% 1% 3% 4% def f f h gh mn mn p p Library 93 45 48 35 23 18 18 25 3 17 13 17 47 8 21 83 4 3 3 4% 4% 4% 11% 6% 2% 2% 7% 1% 6% 3% 3% 7% 2% 3% 4% 2% 3% 5% def ef hj hj kmn Anywhere - using Wi-Fi/ wireless broadband and a laptop/ portable media player/ portable games console/ E- reader/ tablet computer 91 53 38 19 18 38 17 6 5 11 32 38 36 12 6 81 4 4 3 4% 5% 3% 6% 4% 5% 2% 2% 2% 4% 7% 7% 5% 3% 1% 4% 2% 3% 4% b f f f gh mn mn n p Internet cafe 63 33 30 20 14 19 10 6 8 8 16 17 28 13 5 58 3 * 1 3% 3% 3% 6% 3% 2% 1% 2% 4% 3% 3% 3% 4% 3% 1% 3% 2% *% 2% ef f n n n q University 60 25 36 38 8 14 * 19 2 2 12 16 38 4 3 53 2 4 1 3% 2% 3% 12% 2% 2% *% 5% 1% 1% 3% 3% 6% 1% *% 3% 1% 4% 1% def f f hi i mn kmn pr Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe3 (In6). Showcard Do You Ever Access The Internet Anywhere Other Than In Your Home At All? If Yes: Where Is That? (Multicode) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Other 41 25 16 2 11 15 13 2 4 7 14 10 13 7 11 37 1 2 2 2% 2% 1% 1% 3% 2% 2% 1% 2% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% *% 1% 3% g g p No, do not 1211 565 646 96 144 369 602 279 155 145 138 208 289 256 458 981 119 73 38 54% 52% 55% 29% 35% 47% 81% 74% 71% 52% 29% 37% 43% 62% 75% 52% 61% 65% 61% cd cde ij ij j k kl klm o o o EVER USE INTERNET AT HOME OR ELSEWHERE 1795 870 925 296 387 703 409 207 146 247 453 520 583 325 366 1527 139 81 49 80% 80% 79% 90% 95% 90% 55% 55% 67% 88% 96% 92% 87% 79% 60% 81% 70% 72% 78% f cef f g gh ghi lmn mn n pq p Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QE3 (IN6). SHOWCARD Do you ever access the internet anywhere other than in your home at all? IF YES: Where is that? (MULTICODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Your workplace 534 78 92 39 35 43 48 40 92 484 51 518 16 368 155 24% 28% 30% 21% 21% 22% 23% 22% 26% 25% 17% 41% 2% 27% 19% cdeg j l n Anywhere - using a 3G mobile phone/ Smartphone 337 67 28 24 26 28 31 31 72 305 32 252 85 193 141 15% 24% 9% 13% 16% 14% 15% 16% 20% 16% 11% 20% 9% 14% 17% bcdefg b b bc j l m In someone else's home 259 49 30 20 12 14 22 17 51 226 33 157 100 142 110 11% 18% 10% 11% 8% 7% 11% 9% 14% 11% 11% 12% 10% 10% 14% bcdefg de m School/ college 99 29 11 8 3 9 4 12 14 96 3 35 64 56 40 4% 10% 4% 4% 2% 5% 2% 6% 4% 5% 1% 3% 7% 4% 5% bcdefh df j k Library 93 21 15 7 6 6 6 7 15 86 8 28 66 52 39 4% 8% 5% 4% 3% 3% 3% 4% 4% 4% 3% 2% 7% 4% 5% def k Anywhere - using Wi-Fi/ wireless broadband and a laptop/ portable media player/ portable games console/ E-reader/ tablet computer 91 8 18 8 5 8 6 5 24 75 16 64 27 63 26 4% 3% 6% 5% 3% 4% 3% 2% 7% 4% 6% 5% 3% 5% 3% adfg l Internet cafe 63 28 6 3 2 4 2 3 11 57 6 48 15 29 33 3% 10% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 3% 3% 2% 4% 1% 2% 4% bcdefgh l m University 60 13 14 3 3 7 5 1 6 56 4 23 38 29 31 3% 5% 5% 2% 2% 4% 2% 1% 2% 3% 1% 2% 4% 2% 4% g g g k m Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QE3 (IN6). SHOWCARD Do you ever access the internet anywhere other than in your home at all? IF YES: Where is that? (MULTICODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Other 41 15 3 2 1 6 11 - - 32 9 21 20 25 14 2% 5% 1% 1% *% 3% 5% -% -% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% bcdgh dgh bcdgh i No, do not 1211 115 163 110 97 103 107 102 184 1041 170 495 705 721 452 54% 41% 53% 59% 60% 52% 51% 55% 52% 53% 58% 39% 72% 52% 56% a a a a a a a i k EVER USE INTERNET AT HOME OR ELSEWHERE 1795 222 273 150 133 161 169 140 278 1552 242 1160 625 1144 602 80% 79% 89% 81% 82% 82% 81% 75% 78% 79% 83% 92% 64% 83% 74% acdefgh l n Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe4 (Qe23). Showcard And How Often Do You Personally Use The Internet Nowadays Either At Home Or Elsewhere? (Single Code) Base : Those who use the internet at home or elsewhere GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2624 1283 1341 419 504 1064 637 355 252 359 567 707 854 513 550 1545 351 337 391 Effective Weighted Sample 1743 861 882 268 320 725 449 227 150 242 416 474 568 350 356 1345 237 229 361 Total 1795 870 925 296 387 703 409 207 146 247 453 520 583 325 366 1527 139 81 49 Every day 1190 598 592 221 283 449 236 125 85 167 342 389 422 183 195 1030 76 53 31 66% 69% 64% 75% 73% 64% 58% 61% 58% 68% 75% 75% 72% 56% 53% 67% 55% 66% 63% b ef ef f ghi mn mn p p p Several times a week 333 155 178 44 56 153 80 37 27 46 70 83 96 67 88 275 33 18 8 19% 18% 19% 15% 14% 22% 20% 18% 19% 19% 16% 16% 16% 20% 24% 18% 24% 22% 17% cd kl or At least once a week 122 58 64 16 26 46 34 16 13 14 19 20 28 34 40 98 14 5 5 7% 7% 7% 5% 7% 7% 8% 8% 9% 6% 4% 4% 5% 10% 11% 6% 10% 6% 10% j kl kl o o At least once a month 66 27 39 8 10 30 18 14 10 6 10 10 15 24 17 53 11 1 1 4% 3% 4% 3% 3% 4% 4% 7% 7% 3% 2% 2% 3% 7% 5% 3% 8% 1% 3% ij ij kl k q oqr q A few times a year 16 4 12 2 2 4 8 3 1 1 5 1 5 6 5 13 1 1 1 1% *% 1% 1% *% 1% 2% 2% 1% *% 1% *% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% a e k k Less than once a year 2 2 * - 2 * * * 2 - * - * - 2 2 - - * *% *% *% -% *% *% *% *% 1% -% *% -% *% -% *% *% -% -% 1% Never 43 16 27 2 1 13 28 10 7 7 3 13 6 9 15 36 2 3 2 2% 2% 3% 1% *% 2% 7% 5% 5% 3% 1% 3% 1% 3% 4% 2% 1% 4% 5% d cde j j j l l op Don't know 23 12 11 4 7 7 5 1 1 5 3 4 12 3 4 20 2 1 * 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% *% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe4 (Qe23). Showcard And How Often Do You Personally Use The Internet Nowadays Either At Home Or Elsewhere? (Single Code) Base : Those who use the internet at home or elsewhere ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2624 189 218 195 189 209 187 178 180 1864 760 1512 1102 1549 684 Effective Weighted Sample 1743 181 201 185 180 200 177 170 168 1435 347 1006 786 1123 536 Total 1795 222 273 150 133 161 169 140 278 1552 242 1160 625 1144 602 Every day 1190 140 200 111 84 103 121 95 177 1013 176 806 380 786 373 66% 63% 73% 74% 63% 64% 71% 68% 64% 65% 73% 69% 61% 69% 62% adeh adeh i l n Several times a week 333 38 39 22 28 26 24 24 73 300 33 203 125 210 115 19% 17% 14% 15% 21% 16% 14% 17% 26% 19% 14% 18% 20% 18% 19% abcefg j At least once a week 122 14 13 6 12 21 8 11 12 103 19 78 43 64 53 7% 6% 5% 4% 9% 13% 5% 8% 4% 7% 8% 7% 7% 6% 9% c abcfh m At least once a month 66 14 9 5 2 3 5 6 9 60 6 36 30 39 26 4% 6% 3% 3% 2% 2% 3% 4% 3% 4% 2% 3% 5% 3% 4% de A few times a year 16 5 1 1 - 2 2 1 2 15 1 6 9 7 8 1% 2% *% 1% -% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% k Less than once a year 2 2 - - - - - - - 2 - 2 * - 2 *% 1% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% *% -% *% *% -% *% Never 43 6 2 2 5 6 8 2 4 39 4 17 26 21 20 2% 3% 1% 1% 4% 4% 5% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1% 4% 2% 3% b b k Don't know 23 3 9 2 1 - 1 2 1 21 2 12 11 17 5 1% 1% 3% 2% 1% -% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% e Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe5 (Qe9). Showcard Which Of These Methods Does Your Household Use To Connect To The Internet At Home? (Multicode) Base : Those with access to the internet at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2534 1234 1300 376 462 1039 657 315 248 348 563 704 825 501 504 1493 329 334 378 Effective Weighted Sample 1679 825 854 240 294 707 459 202 148 233 414 471 544 341 327 1299 219 228 349 Total 1715 828 888 264 358 678 416 187 138 234 448 511 549 314 341 1462 126 80 47 Ordinary phone line - dialup access 14 5 9 * 3 1 9 * 1 3 3 4 7 1 2 12 - 1 * 1% 1% 1% *% 1% *% 2% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% -% 1% 1% ce Fixed Broadband ADSL through a phone line or cable service - always on, high speed access, 1513 733 780 205 300 619 389 139 114 199 424 479 495 275 264 1287 113 72 42 88% 89% 88% 78% 84% 91% 94% 74% 82% 85% 95% 94% 90% 88% 77% 88% 89% 90% 88% cd cd g ghi mn n n Broadband through a mobile network - connecting via a USB stick or dongle 380 178 202 93 105 142 40 48 28 55 107 113 116 60 92 336 18 18 8 22% 22% 23% 35% 29% 21% 10% 26% 20% 23% 24% 22% 21% 19% 27% 23% 14% 23% 18% ef ef f lm pr p Other 21 15 6 3 4 10 4 4 3 5 3 3 6 8 4 20 1 * * 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% *% *% b k Don't know 14 8 6 5 6 * 3 4 4 1 1 5 5 1 4 8 6 - * 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% *% 1% 2% 3% 1% *% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 5% -% *% e e e j j oqr Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe5 (Qe9). Showcard Which Of These Methods Does Your Household Use To Connect To The Internet At Home? (Multicode) Base : Those with access to the internet at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2534 169 212 190 186 196 182 183 175 1787 747 1460 1065 1508 648 Effective Weighted Sample 1679 161 195 180 177 187 172 174 162 1374 343 967 759 1092 506 Total 1715 198 264 147 131 150 165 142 266 1477 238 1106 601 1098 570 Ordinary phone line - dialup access 14 1 5 1 - - 5 - - 9 5 8 6 11 2 1% 1% 2% 1% -% -% 3% -% -% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% *% degh i Fixed Broadband ADSL through a phone line or cable service - always on, high speed access, 1513 176 239 127 114 127 151 122 232 1300 213 994 511 979 493 88% 89% 90% 86% 87% 85% 92% 86% 87% 88% 89% 90% 85% 89% 86% e l Broadband through a mobile network - connecting via a USB stick or dongle 380 39 44 56 34 32 27 33 71 338 42 249 131 238 134 22% 20% 17% 38% 26% 21% 16% 23% 27% 23% 18% 23% 22% 22% 24% abdefgh bf bf j Other 21 3 3 1 - 8 - 1 3 21 - 14 7 12 9 1% 2% 1% 1% -% 6% -% 1% 1% 1% -% 1% 1% 1% 2% bcdfgh j Don't know 14 5 - - - 2 1 1 - 14 * 6 8 13 1 1% 2% -% -% -% 1% *% 1% -% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% *% bcdh n Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe6 (Qe10). Showcard And Which Of These Is Your Main Method Of Connection? (Single Code) Base : Those with access to the internet at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2534 1234 1300 376 462 1039 657 315 248 348 563 704 825 501 504 1493 329 334 378 Effective Weighted Sample 1679 825 854 240 294 707 459 202 148 233 414 471 544 341 327 1299 219 228 349 Total 1715 828 888 264 358 678 416 187 138 234 448 511 549 314 341 1462 126 80 47 Fixed Broadband ADSL through a phone line or cable service - always on, high speed access, 1489 721 768 201 297 607 384 138 113 195 415 468 489 273 260 1267 111 70 41 87% 87% 87% 76% 83% 89% 92% 74% 82% 83% 93% 91% 89% 87% 76% 87% 88% 88% 87% cd cd g ghi mn n n Broadband through a mobile network - connecting via a USB stick or dongle 190 86 104 56 51 64 20 40 19 31 30 34 51 34 72 168 9 9 5 11% 10% 12% 21% 14% 9% 5% 22% 13% 13% 7% 7% 9% 11% 21% 11% 7% 11% 12% def ef f hij j j k klm p Other 22 12 9 3 4 7 8 5 2 6 2 5 5 6 5 19 1 1 1 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% *% 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% j j Don't know 14 8 6 5 6 * 3 4 4 1 1 5 5 1 4 8 6 - * 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% *% 1% 2% 3% 1% *% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 5% -% *% e e e j j oqr Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe6 (Qe10). Showcard And Which Of These Is Your Main Method Of Connection? (Single Code) Base : Those with access to the internet at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2534 169 212 190 186 196 182 183 175 1787 747 1460 1065 1508 648 Effective Weighted Sample 1679 161 195 180 177 187 172 174 162 1374 343 967 759 1092 506 Total 1715 198 264 147 131 150 165 142 266 1477 238 1106 601 1098 570 Fixed Broadband ADSL through a phone line or cable service - always on, high speed access, 1489 175 236 118 113 125 148 120 231 1278 211 979 501 961 487 87% 88% 90% 80% 87% 84% 90% 84% 87% 87% 89% 89% 83% 88% 85% c c c l Broadband through a mobile network - connecting via a USB stick or dongle 190 16 23 28 17 19 11 20 33 169 22 108 82 109 76 11% 8% 9% 19% 13% 12% 7% 14% 12% 11% 9% 10% 14% 10% 13% abf f f k m Other 22 2 4 1 - 4 4 1 3 16 5 13 9 15 6 1% 1% 2% 1% -% 3% 3% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% d d Don't know 14 5 - - - 2 1 1 - 14 * 6 8 13 1 1% 2% -% -% -% 1% *% 1% -% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% *% bcdh n Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe7 (Qe22B). You Mentioned That Your Household Has A Mobile Broadband Connection (Connecting Via A Usb Stick Or Dongle, Or Built-In 3G Connectivity In A Laptop Or Another Device). Do You Personally Access The Internet In This Way, Using Mobile Broadband? Base : Those in a household with mobile broadband | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |-------------------------------------------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | c | d | | Unweighted total | 518 | 241 | 277 | 123 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 363 | 175 | 188 | 82 | | Total | 380 | 178 | 202 | 93 | | Yes | 350 | 164 | 186 | 86 | | 92% | 92% | 92% | 92% | 97% | | No | 27 | 13 | 14 | 6 | | 7% | 7% | 7% | 7% | 3% | | Don't know | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | | 1% | 1% | 1% | 1% | *% | | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r | | | | | All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe7 (Qe22B). You Mentioned That Your Household Has A Mobile Broadband Connection (Connecting Via A Usb Stick Or Dongle, Or Built-In 3G Connectivity In A Laptop Or Another Device). Do You Personally Access The Internet In This Way, Using Mobile Broadband? Base : Those In A Household With Mobile Broadband | | | | ENGLAND REGIONS | URBANITY | WORKING | DEPRIVATION LEVEL | |---------------------------|--------|------|-------------------|------------|-----------|---------------------| | SOUTH | SOUTH | EAST | WEST | EAST | YORKS& | MEDIUM/ | | Total | LONDON | EAST | WEST | MIDS | MIDS | OF ENG | | Significance Level: 95% | ~a | ~b | ~c | ~d | ~e | ~f | | Unweighted total | 518 | 33 | 36 | 70 | 45 | 39 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 363 | 32 | 33 | 67 | 43 | 38 | | Total | 380 | 39 | 44 | 56 | 34 | 32 | | Yes | 350 | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | 92% | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | No | 27 | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | 7% | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | Don't know | 3 | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | 1% | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe8 (Qe22C). Which One Of These Best Describes Where You Use Mobile Broadband To Access The Internet? (Single Code) Base : Those who use mobile broadband to access the internet GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e ~f ~g ~h ~i j k l ~m n o ~p ~q ~r Unweighted total 471 220 251 115 130 181 45 71 36 60 124 122 153 83 113 311 49 58 53 Effective Weighted Sample 333 161 172 77 87 138 35 46 23 43 98 91 104 57 82 272 32 40 50 Total 350 164 186 86 102 130 33 46 26 44 103 103 108 55 84 309 17 17 7 I always use in the home 101 37 64 20 30 41 ** ** ** ** 20 19 22 ** 42 89 ** ** ** 29% 23% 34% 23% 29% 31% ** ** ** ** 19% 18% 20% ** 50% 29% ** ** ** a kl I mainly use in the home 41 22 19 14 10 13 ** ** ** ** 12 10 13 ** 12 34 ** ** ** 12% 14% 10% 16% 10% 10% ** ** ** ** 11% 10% 12% ** 15% 11% ** ** ** I use equally in the home and outside the home 120 56 64 33 38 35 ** ** ** ** 34 37 43 ** 21 107 ** ** ** 34% 34% 35% 38% 38% 27% ** ** ** ** 33% 36% 40% ** 25% 35% ** ** ** n I mainly use outside the home 70 41 29 17 17 33 ** ** ** ** 30 31 25 ** 7 62 ** ** ** 20% 25% 16% 20% 17% 25% ** ** ** ** 30% 30% 23% ** 8% 20% ** ** ** b n n I always use outside the home 17 8 10 2 6 8 ** ** ** ** 8 6 5 ** 2 16 ** ** ** 5% 5% 5% 2% 6% 6% ** ** ** ** 8% 6% 4% ** 2% 5% ** ** ** Don't know 1 1 * - 1 - ** ** ** ** - - * ** * 1 ** ** ** *% *% *% -% 1% -% ** ** ** ** -% -% *% ** *% *% ** ** ** Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe8 (Qe22C). Which One Of These Best Describes Where You Use Mobile Broadband To Access The Internet? (Single Code) Base : Those who use mobile broadband to access the internet ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h i j k l m n Unweighted total 471 31 34 63 39 37 28 39 40 362 109 282 189 280 138 Effective Weighted Sample 333 30 31 60 37 36 26 37 37 286 52 200 140 208 112 Total 350 36 43 51 29 30 25 31 63 312 38 230 120 220 123 I always use in the home 101 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 88 13 59 43 60 38 29% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 28% 34% 26% 35% 27% 31% k I mainly use in the home 41 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 36 5 24 17 28 12 12% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 12% 13% 11% 14% 13% 10% I use equally in the home and outside the home 120 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 106 14 82 38 75 43 34% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 34% 37% 35% 32% 34% 35% I mainly use outside the home 70 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 66 3 54 15 42 26 20% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 21% 9% 24% 13% 19% 21% j l I always use outside the home 17 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 15 2 11 6 15 3 5% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 5% 6% 5% 5% 7% 2% Don't know 1 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1 * * 1 * 1 *% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** *% *% *% 1% *% *% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe9 (Qe7). Which Internet Service Provider (Isp) Does Your Household Currently Use As Its Main Supplier At Home? (Single Code) Base : Those with access to the internet at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2534 1234 1300 376 462 1039 657 315 248 348 563 704 825 501 504 1493 329 334 378 Effective Weighted Sample 1679 825 854 240 294 707 459 202 148 233 414 471 544 341 327 1299 219 228 349 Total 1715 828 888 264 358 678 416 187 138 234 448 511 549 314 341 1462 126 80 47 Virgin Media (NTL/ Telewest/ Blueyonder) 384 192 192 67 102 141 74 45 26 51 101 104 124 80 76 345 21 9 7 22% 23% 22% 26% 29% 21% 18% 24% 19% 22% 22% 20% 23% 25% 22% 24% 17% 12% 16% f ef pqr BT Total Broadband 330 159 170 52 58 133 87 23 29 39 114 134 101 52 43 277 25 13 15 19% 19% 19% 20% 16% 20% 21% 12% 21% 17% 25% 26% 18% 17% 12% 19% 19% 17% 31% g gi lmn n opq Sky 260 121 139 33 64 111 51 25 17 38 82 76 80 45 58 225 15 13 7 15% 15% 16% 13% 18% 16% 12% 13% 12% 16% 18% 15% 15% 14% 17% 15% 12% 17% 15% f Talk Talk (Carphone Warehouse) 187 104 82 21 20 81 65 20 20 26 37 43 64 43 38 157 13 13 5 11% 13% 9% 8% 6% 12% 16% 11% 14% 11% 8% 8% 12% 14% 11% 11% 10% 16% 10% b d cd j k o BT (other/ unspecified) 75 30 45 4 17 25 28 4 5 13 17 27 23 11 13 66 5 3 2 4% 4% 5% 2% 5% 4% 7% 2% 4% 5% 4% 5% 4% 4% 4% 5% 4% 3% 3% c ce Orange (Wanadoo/ Freeserve) 74 31 43 15 21 28 11 10 8 10 16 24 26 12 12 63 4 6 1 4% 4% 5% 6% 6% 4% 3% 5% 6% 4% 4% 5% 5% 4% 4% 4% 3% 8% 2% f f r opr AOL 53 23 30 3 4 31 15 3 4 5 13 13 20 13 7 40 8 4 1 3% 3% 3% 1% 1% 5% 4% 1% 3% 2% 3% 2% 4% 4% 2% 3% 6% 5% 2% cd d or O2 47 31 16 8 11 22 6 13 3 10 11 14 12 10 11 43 1 1 3 3% 4% 2% 3% 3% 3% 1% 7% 2% 4% 2% 3% 2% 3% 3% 3% 1% 1% 6% b hj q opq '3' 46 24 22 11 16 17 1 9 8 8 6 4 13 9 20 38 4 2 2 3% 3% 2% 4% 5% 3% *% 5% 6% 3% 1% 1% 2% 3% 6% 3% 3% 3% 3% f f f j j k k kl Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe9 (Qe7). Which Internet Service Provider (Isp) Does Your Household Currently Use As Its Main Supplier At Home? (Single Code) Base : Those with access to the internet at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2534 1234 1300 376 462 1039 657 315 248 348 563 704 825 501 504 1493 329 334 378 Effective Weighted Sample 1679 825 854 240 294 707 459 202 148 233 414 471 544 341 327 1299 219 228 349 Total 1715 828 888 264 358 678 416 187 138 234 448 511 549 314 341 1462 126 80 47 BT Yahoo 31 18 13 2 6 16 8 1 3 10 3 9 10 5 6 23 6 2 1 2% 2% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1% 2% 4% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 5% 2% 1% gj or T-Mobile 27 13 14 9 8 9 1 6 4 6 2 2 7 7 11 23 3 2 - 2% 2% 2% 3% 2% 1% *% 3% 3% 2% *% *% 1% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% -% f f j j j k kl r r r BT Openworld 19 12 6 5 3 6 5 1 1 1 8 9 6 3 1 14 3 1 * 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% *% 2% 2% 1% 1% *% 1% 2% 1% 1% n Plusnet 11 4 7 1 * 5 5 2 1 * 3 2 7 1 1 10 * 1 * 1% 1% 1% *% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% *% 1% *% *% 1% *% 1% 1% Other 106 43 63 14 17 39 36 12 6 12 25 29 32 17 28 87 8 8 2 6% 5% 7% 5% 5% 6% 9% 7% 4% 5% 6% 6% 6% 6% 8% 6% 6% 11% 5% d or Don't know 67 21 46 18 10 15 24 13 3 7 9 21 24 6 16 52 11 2 2 4% 3% 5% 7% 3% 2% 6% 7% 2% 3% 2% 4% 4% 2% 5% 4% 9% 3% 4% a de e hij m oqr Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe9 (Qe7). Which Internet Service Provider (Isp) Does Your Household Currently Use As Its Main Supplier At Home? (Single Code) Base : Those with access to the internet at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2534 169 212 190 186 196 182 183 175 1787 747 1460 1065 1508 648 Effective Weighted Sample 1679 161 195 180 177 187 172 174 162 1374 343 967 759 1092 506 Total 1715 198 264 147 131 150 165 142 266 1477 238 1106 601 1098 570 Virgin Media (NTL/ Telewest/ Blueyonder) 384 36 61 26 33 44 36 28 82 366 18 254 125 223 153 22% 18% 23% 18% 25% 29% 22% 20% 31% 25% 7% 23% 21% 20% 27% acg acg j m BT Total Broadband 330 43 54 36 30 21 35 15 42 260 70 218 112 228 87 19% 22% 21% 25% 23% 14% 21% 10% 16% 18% 29% 20% 19% 21% 15% g g eg eg g i n Sky 260 42 39 17 14 21 23 24 46 241 18 177 80 156 97 15% 21% 15% 11% 11% 14% 14% 17% 17% 16% 8% 16% 13% 14% 17% cd j Talk Talk (Carphone Warehouse) 187 18 27 15 18 14 22 14 28 160 27 117 70 132 50 11% 9% 10% 10% 14% 9% 13% 10% 11% 11% 11% 11% 12% 12% 9% n BT (other/ unspecified) 75 11 17 4 9 6 4 12 4 55 20 49 26 56 17 4% 5% 6% 3% 7% 4% 2% 8% 1% 4% 9% 4% 4% 5% 3% h fh cfh i Orange (Wanadoo/ Freeserve) 74 6 12 11 5 10 4 6 8 62 13 50 24 50 23 4% 3% 5% 8% 4% 7% 3% 4% 3% 4% 5% 5% 4% 5% 4% f AOL 53 8 5 3 4 7 8 4 2 40 13 34 17 36 16 3% 4% 2% 2% 3% 5% 5% 3% 1% 3% 5% 3% 3% 3% 3% h h i O2 47 5 10 1 4 2 3 7 11 44 4 29 18 28 16 3% 3% 4% 1% 3% 1% 2% 5% 4% 3% 2% 3% 3% 3% 3% c c c Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QE9 (QE7). Which Internet Service Provider (ISP) does your household currently use as its MAIN supplier at home? (SINGLE CODE) Base : Those with access to the internet at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2534 169 212 190 186 196 182 183 175 1787 747 1460 1065 1508 648 Effective Weighted Sample 1679 161 195 180 177 187 172 174 162 1374 343 967 759 1092 506 Total 1715 198 264 147 131 150 165 142 266 1477 238 1106 601 1098 570 '3' 46 2 7 8 3 3 2 8 5 41 5 29 17 26 18 3% 1% 3% 6% 2% 2% 1% 6% 2% 3% 2% 3% 3% 2% 3% af af BT Yahoo 31 2 1 5 1 2 3 2 7 27 4 22 9 18 12 2% 1% *% 4% 1% 2% 2% 1% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% bd T-Mobile 27 7 2 1 2 2 3 3 4 25 2 16 11 13 14 2% 3% 1% *% 2% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% 3% c m BT Openworld 19 1 2 2 1 - 4 - 5 15 4 14 4 10 8 1% 1% 1% 1% *% -% 2% -% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% e Plusnet 11 - 3 3 - 1 - 1 2 6 5 5 6 8 2 1% -% 1% 2% -% 1% -% *% 1% *% 2% *% 1% 1% *% i Other 106 10 19 10 4 11 7 15 12 83 22 60 46 63 40 6% 5% 7% 7% 3% 7% 4% 10% 4% 6% 9% 5% 8% 6% 7% dfh i Don't know 67 7 4 6 3 7 13 5 8 52 15 32 35 50 16 4% 4% 2% 4% 2% 4% 8% 3% 3% 4% 6% 3% 6% 5% 3% bdh i k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe3B (Qe10). How Many People Aged 16 Or Over In Your Household (Including Yourself) Could Access The Fixed Broadband Connection In Your Home If They Wanted To? Base : Those with fixed broadband at home where there is more than one person in household GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2038 980 1058 282 365 884 507 181 179 271 518 604 674 411 349 1205 269 264 300 Effective Weighted Sample 1351 653 698 181 230 601 357 116 105 181 380 406 448 278 223 1049 178 179 277 Total 1395 667 728 200 286 584 325 106 99 181 413 444 454 264 232 1192 103 63 37 1 129 45 84 4 24 48 52 20 21 15 12 34 38 19 38 111 7 5 5 9% 7% 12% 2% 9% 8% 16% 19% 22% 8% 3% 8% 8% 7% 16% 9% 7% 8% 13% a c c cde ij ij j klm p 2 812 385 427 59 197 335 220 53 51 108 278 290 260 153 109 684 63 44 20 58% 58% 59% 30% 69% 57% 68% 50% 52% 60% 67% 65% 57% 58% 47% 57% 62% 70% 55% ce c ce gh ln n n or 3 253 126 128 67 33 119 34 17 13 34 71 68 87 55 43 224 15 8 7 18% 19% 18% 34% 12% 20% 10% 16% 13% 19% 17% 15% 19% 21% 19% 19% 15% 12% 18% def df q 4 156 86 70 55 20 65 16 16 9 17 44 43 55 33 26 134 14 5 3 11% 13% 10% 28% 7% 11% 5% 15% 9% 10% 11% 10% 12% 12% 11% 11% 13% 8% 9% def f 5 or more 41 21 20 14 9 16 3 * 4 6 8 6 14 5 16 35 3 1 2 3% 3% 3% 7% 3% 3% 1% *% 5% 3% 2% 1% 3% 2% 7% 3% 3% 2% 5% ef klm Don't know 3 3 * - 2 1 * - - * - 3 * - - 3 - - * *% 1% *% -% 1% *% *% -% -% *% -% 1% *% -% -% *% -% -% *% Mean number of people 2.4 2.5 2.3 3.1 2.3 2.4 2.1 2.3 2.2 2.4 2.4 2.3 2.4 2.4 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.3 2.4 b def f df h k k k q q Standard deviation .94 .95 .92 .98 .90 .92 .73 .96 1.04 .91 .81 .83 .94 .86 1.17 .94 .96 .82 1.04 Standard error .02 .03 .03 .06 .05 .03 .03 .07 .08 .06 .04 .03 .04 .04 .06 .03 .06 .05 .06 Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe3B (Qe10). How Many People Aged 16 Or Over In Your Household (Including Yourself) Could Access The Fixed Broadband Connection In Your Home If They Wanted To? Base : Those with fixed broadband at home where there is more than one person in household ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2038 139 177 155 153 152 153 139 137 1429 609 1241 789 1236 502 Effective Weighted Sample 1351 133 163 147 146 145 145 133 127 1102 281 823 568 896 393 Total 1395 165 221 121 108 116 139 110 212 1198 197 944 442 906 451 1 129 8 23 9 16 7 7 19 22 110 19 66 63 86 38 9% 5% 10% 7% 15% 6% 5% 18% 10% 9% 10% 7% 14% 9% 8% acef acef k 2 812 90 135 82 57 67 86 57 110 685 127 570 236 559 232 58% 54% 61% 68% 52% 57% 62% 52% 52% 57% 64% 60% 53% 62% 51% adgh i l n 3 253 36 31 11 22 22 30 24 47 221 32 179 72 158 89 18% 22% 14% 9% 21% 19% 22% 22% 22% 18% 16% 19% 16% 17% 20% c c c c c c 4 156 25 23 18 13 11 11 6 28 141 15 102 54 84 69 11% 15% 10% 15% 12% 9% 8% 5% 13% 12% 8% 11% 12% 9% 15% g fg g m 5 or more 41 6 6 - - 10 5 3 5 37 4 24 17 18 22 3% 4% 3% -% -% 9% 4% 3% 2% 3% 2% 3% 4% 2% 5% cd c bcdgh cd cd m Don't know 3 - 3 - - - - - - 3 * 3 * 1 2 *% -% 2% -% -% -% -% -% -% *% *% *% *% *% *% Mean number of people 2.4 2.6 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.6 2.4 2.2 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.4 2.4 2.3 2.6 bcdg bcdg g j m Standard deviation .94 .97 .98 .82 .87 1.08 .85 .90 .93 .95 .84 .90 1.02 .86 1.06 Standard error .02 .08 .07 .07 .07 .09 .07 .08 .08 .03 .03 .03 .04 .02 .05 Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe3A (Qe11). How Many People Aged 16 Or Over In Your Household (Including Yourself) Could Access The Mobile Broadband Connection In Your Home If They Wanted To? Base : Those with mobile broadband at home where there is more than one person in household GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e ~f ~g ~h ~i j k l ~m n o ~p ~q ~r Unweighted total 486 216 270 120 126 192 48 65 37 70 126 133 151 86 116 325 45 59 57 Effective Weighted Sample 342 158 183 80 84 146 36 42 23 51 100 99 103 60 80 283 28 41 54 Total 360 162 198 91 99 135 35 42 26 51 105 111 108 58 83 321 15 17 8 1 115 50 65 28 39 39 ** ** ** ** 32 37 34 ** 31 103 ** ** ** 32% 31% 33% 30% 39% 29% ** ** ** ** 30% 33% 31% ** 37% 32% ** ** ** 2 171 74 96 35 54 60 ** ** ** ** 53 53 49 ** 37 150 ** ** ** 47% 46% 49% 39% 54% 45% ** ** ** ** 51% 48% 45% ** 44% 47% ** ** ** 3 36 16 20 11 2 19 ** ** ** ** 11 14 13 ** 5 32 ** ** ** 10% 10% 10% 12% 2% 14% ** ** ** ** 11% 13% 12% ** 6% 10% ** ** ** d d 4 29 16 12 13 2 13 ** ** ** ** 7 7 8 ** 8 27 ** ** ** 8% 10% 6% 14% 2% 10% ** ** ** ** 7% 6% 8% ** 9% 8% ** ** ** d d 5 or more 4 2 3 2 1 2 ** ** ** ** - - 2 ** 1 4 ** ** ** 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% ** ** ** ** -% -% 2% ** 1% 1% ** ** ** Don't know 5 3 2 2 1 1 ** ** ** ** 1 1 1 ** 2 5 ** ** ** 2% 2% 1% 3% 1% 1% ** ** ** ** 1% 1% 1% ** 2% 2% ** ** ** Mean number of people 2.0 2.0 1.9 2.1 1.7 2.1 ** ** ** ** 1.9 1.9 2.0 ** 1.9 2.0 ** ** ** d d Standard deviation .97 1.00 .95 1.17 .75 1.00 ** ** ** ** .85 .85 1.02 ** 1.00 .99 ** ** ** Standard error .04 .07 .06 .11 .07 .07 ** ** ** ** .08 .07 .08 ** .09 .06 ** ** ** Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QE3A (QE11). How many people aged 16 or over in your household (including yourself) could access the mobile Broadband connection in your home if they wanted to? Base : Those with mobile broadband at home where there is more than one person in household ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h i j k l m n Unweighted total 486 30 35 68 45 38 26 40 43 371 115 294 192 291 138 Effective Weighted Sample 342 29 32 65 43 37 24 38 40 291 56 208 142 218 111 Total 360 36 43 55 34 31 23 32 67 319 41 241 119 228 125 1 115 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 100 15 70 45 72 41 32% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 31% 36% 29% 38% 32% 32% 2 171 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 151 20 122 48 116 50 47% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 47% 47% 51% 41% 51% 40% 3 36 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 32 4 23 14 21 15 10% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 10% 9% 9% 11% 9% 12% 4 29 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 28 1 23 6 13 16 8% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 9% 3% 9% 5% 6% 12% m 5 or more 4 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 4 1 2 3 3 2 1% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% Don't know 5 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 5 1 3 3 3 2 2% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1% 2% 1% 2% 1% 2% Mean number of people 2.0 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 2.0 1.8 2.0 1.9 1.9 2.1 Standard deviation .97 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** .98 .91 .93 1.05 .89 1.11 Standard error .04 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** .05 .08 .05 .08 .05 .09 Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe12A (Qe5A). Showcard Which, If Any, Of These Do You Or Members Of Your Household Use The Internet For Whilst At Home? (Multicode) Base : Those with access to the internet at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2534 1234 1300 376 462 1039 657 315 248 348 563 704 825 501 504 1493 329 334 378 Effective Weighted Sample 1679 825 854 240 294 707 459 202 148 233 414 471 544 341 327 1299 219 228 349 Total 1715 828 888 264 358 678 416 187 138 234 448 511 549 314 341 1462 126 80 47 Sending and receiving e-mail 1503 722 781 223 321 613 345 143 114 206 430 466 485 280 271 1292 107 68 37 88% 87% 88% 85% 90% 90% 83% 77% 82% 88% 96% 91% 88% 89% 79% 88% 84% 86% 78% f cf g ghi n n n r r General surfing/ browsing the internet 1499 731 768 231 310 612 345 147 118 212 421 453 487 273 286 1284 108 68 39 87% 88% 87% 88% 87% 90% 83% 79% 85% 91% 94% 89% 89% 87% 84% 88% 86% 85% 83% f g gh n r Purchasing goods/services/ tickets etc. 1216 578 638 168 271 509 269 109 90 177 371 406 398 223 190 1037 94 53 33 71% 70% 72% 64% 76% 75% 65% 58% 65% 76% 83% 79% 73% 71% 56% 71% 74% 66% 69% cf cf gh ghi lmn n n Banking 1027 492 535 145 236 433 213 90 66 143 325 369 336 172 150 890 70 43 24 60% 59% 60% 55% 66% 64% 51% 48% 48% 61% 73% 72% 61% 55% 44% 61% 56% 54% 51% cf cf gh ghi lmn n n r Using social networking sites (such as MySpace, Facebook or Bebo) 1015 470 545 218 258 418 121 111 71 147 291 288 342 187 197 870 65 52 28 59% 57% 61% 83% 72% 62% 29% 59% 51% 63% 65% 56% 62% 60% 58% 60% 51% 65% 59% def ef f h h p p Finding/ downloading information for personal reasons e.g. information, news, weather 997 502 495 138 211 407 241 81 71 146 315 354 348 165 130 850 73 52 22 58% 61% 56% 52% 59% 60% 58% 44% 52% 62% 70% 69% 63% 53% 38% 58% 58% 66% 46% b c gh ghi mn mn n r r or Finding/ downloading information for work/ business 763 390 373 102 161 352 147 49 37 111 280 311 251 128 73 667 45 36 15 44% 47% 42% 39% 45% 52% 35% 26% 27% 47% 62% 61% 46% 41% 21% 46% 35% 45% 32% b f cf gh ghi lmn n n pr pr Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe12A (Qe5A). Showcard Which, If Any, Of These Do You Or Members Of Your Household Use The Internet For Whilst At Home? (Multicode) Base : Those with access to the internet at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2534 1234 1300 376 462 1039 657 315 248 348 563 704 825 501 504 1493 329 334 378 Effective Weighted Sample 1679 825 854 240 294 707 459 202 148 233 414 471 544 341 327 1299 219 228 349 Total 1715 828 888 264 358 678 416 187 138 234 448 511 549 314 341 1462 126 80 47 Watching video clips/ webcasts (e.g. YouTube or Big Brother) 691 351 340 151 164 290 86 72 45 86 223 225 236 120 110 585 54 31 20 40% 42% 38% 57% 46% 43% 21% 38% 33% 37% 50% 44% 43% 38% 32% 40% 43% 40% 43% def f f ghi n n Using local council/ Government sites, e.g. to find information, to complete processes such as tax returns, to contact local MP 667 327 340 77 139 286 165 55 43 84 259 281 230 92 65 594 39 23 11 39% 40% 38% 29% 39% 42% 40% 29% 31% 36% 58% 55% 42% 29% 19% 41% 31% 29% 23% c c c ghi lmn mn n pqr Playing games online/ interactively 657 329 328 125 147 302 83 66 50 105 174 171 207 145 134 564 43 31 18 38% 40% 37% 48% 41% 44% 20% 35% 36% 45% 39% 33% 38% 46% 39% 39% 34% 39% 39% f f f g kl Downloading music files, movies or video clips 634 319 314 139 145 274 76 61 39 85 218 212 212 115 95 536 56 24 18 37% 39% 35% 53% 40% 40% 18% 33% 28% 36% 49% 41% 39% 37% 28% 37% 44% 30% 38% def f f ghi n n n oq q To find information on health related issues e.g. NHS Direct/ NHS 24 613 277 336 69 143 260 140 41 39 88 208 243 204 85 80 530 42 26 15 36% 33% 38% 26% 40% 38% 34% 22% 28% 37% 46% 48% 37% 27% 23% 36% 33% 33% 32% c c c g ghi lmn mn Finding/ downloading information for school/ college/ university/ homework 604 269 335 125 118 289 72 71 31 81 186 222 208 94 79 523 35 30 16 35% 32% 38% 47% 33% 43% 17% 38% 23% 35% 41% 43% 38% 30% 23% 36% 28% 37% 33% a df f df h h h mn mn p p Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe12A (Qe5A). Showcard Which, If Any, Of These Do You Or Members Of Your Household Use The Internet For Whilst At Home? (Multicode) Base : Those with access to the internet at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2534 1234 1300 376 462 1039 657 315 248 348 563 704 825 501 504 1493 329 334 378 Effective Weighted Sample 1679 825 854 240 294 707 459 202 148 233 414 471 544 341 327 1299 219 228 349 Total 1715 828 888 264 358 678 416 187 138 234 448 511 549 314 341 1462 126 80 47 Watching catch-up TV (such as BBC iPlayer, Sky Player, ITV Player) 599 312 286 109 137 239 114 52 40 80 205 214 220 93 72 525 34 26 14 35% 38% 32% 41% 38% 35% 27% 28% 29% 34% 46% 42% 40% 30% 21% 36% 27% 33% 29% b f f f ghi mn mn n pr Communicating via instant messaging, SMS messaging, chat rooms, voice calls 576 281 295 138 129 240 69 58 40 84 166 178 195 101 102 493 45 24 13 34% 34% 33% 52% 36% 35% 17% 31% 29% 36% 37% 35% 36% 32% 30% 34% 36% 31% 27% def f f r r Watching live TV programmes 401 215 186 84 95 157 64 46 22 47 134 142 154 54 51 354 21 15 11 23% 26% 21% 32% 27% 23% 15% 24% 16% 20% 30% 28% 28% 17% 15% 24% 17% 18% 23% b ef f f hi mn mn p Real time gambling/ trading/ auctions 350 179 171 51 99 157 43 22 24 52 130 115 128 65 42 302 32 12 4 20% 22% 19% 19% 28% 23% 10% 12% 17% 22% 29% 22% 23% 21% 12% 21% 25% 14% 9% f cf f g gh n n n qr qr Listening to radio 316 173 143 54 65 124 73 23 23 40 97 117 117 47 35 275 17 15 8 18% 21% 16% 21% 18% 18% 17% 12% 16% 17% 22% 23% 21% 15% 10% 19% 14% 19% 17% b g mn mn Watch news programmes 282 159 123 49 67 104 61 26 16 33 92 118 99 32 33 245 15 14 7 16% 19% 14% 19% 19% 15% 15% 14% 12% 14% 21% 23% 18% 10% 10% 17% 12% 17% 15% b ghi mn mn Uploading/ adding content to the internet 282 159 123 62 76 108 35 23 21 32 96 103 98 49 32 251 13 11 7 16% 19% 14% 24% 21% 16% 8% 12% 15% 14% 22% 20% 18% 15% 9% 17% 11% 13% 14% b ef ef f gi n n n p Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe12A (Qe5A). Showcard Which, If Any, Of These Do You Or Members Of Your Household Use The Internet For Whilst At Home? (Multicode) Base : Those with access to the internet at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2534 1234 1300 376 462 1039 657 315 248 348 563 704 825 501 504 1493 329 334 378 Effective Weighted Sample 1679 825 854 240 294 707 459 202 148 233 414 471 544 341 327 1299 219 228 349 Total 1715 828 888 264 358 678 416 187 138 234 448 511 549 314 341 1462 126 80 47 Using Twitter (browsing/ reading site) 211 110 101 54 55 75 27 17 16 28 53 65 75 35 36 177 21 10 4 12% 13% 11% 21% 15% 11% 7% 9% 11% 12% 12% 13% 14% 11% 11% 12% 16% 12% 9% ef f f r Downloading films (Video on Demand) 157 92 65 44 46 55 12 22 15 16 46 50 53 30 25 129 19 5 4 9% 11% 7% 17% 13% 8% 3% 12% 11% 7% 10% 10% 10% 9% 7% 9% 15% 6% 8% b ef ef f oqr Streamed audio services (free) 116 75 41 31 31 41 14 9 8 12 42 42 49 14 11 103 7 3 2 7% 9% 5% 12% 9% 6% 3% 5% 5% 5% 9% 8% 9% 4% 3% 7% 5% 4% 5% b ef f f mn mn Using Twitter (account holder, posting on site) 109 63 46 27 37 31 14 9 11 14 26 40 40 13 16 97 5 3 3 6% 8% 5% 10% 10% 5% 3% 5% 8% 6% 6% 8% 7% 4% 5% 7% 4% 4% 7% b ef ef m Streamed audio services (subscription) 33 25 8 8 9 12 4 4 3 1 11 10 13 7 4 28 3 2 * 2% 3% 1% 3% 2% 2% 1% 2% 2% 1% 3% 2% 2% 2% 1% 2% 2% 3% 1% b Other 16 8 8 5 1 4 5 3 1 3 * 4 7 1 3 14 * 1 * 1% 1% 1% 2% *% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% *% 2% 1% j j None of these 20 7 13 1 3 4 12 4 1 3 3 5 7 2 7 14 4 1 1 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 3% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 3% 1% 2% ce o o Don't know 16 5 11 2 2 4 9 2 2 1 2 5 6 2 3 12 3 * 1 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% *% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% *% 1% e o Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe12A (Qe5A). Showcard Which, If Any, Of These Do You Or Members Of Your Household Use The Internet For Whilst At Home? (Multicode) Base : Those with access to the internet at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2534 169 212 190 186 196 182 183 175 1787 747 1460 1065 1508 648 Effective Weighted Sample 1679 161 195 180 177 187 172 174 162 1374 343 967 759 1092 506 Total 1715 198 264 147 131 150 165 142 266 1477 238 1106 601 1098 570 Sending and receiving e-mail 1503 176 240 130 116 124 147 121 237 1294 209 1002 494 978 489 88% 89% 91% 89% 89% 83% 89% 85% 89% 88% 88% 91% 82% 89% 86% e l General surfing/ browsing the internet 1499 176 220 128 110 135 140 131 244 1293 206 978 513 970 490 87% 89% 83% 87% 84% 90% 85% 92% 92% 88% 87% 88% 85% 88% 86% bdf bd Purchasing goods/services/ tickets etc. 1216 130 202 103 106 86 130 90 190 1045 171 842 368 798 386 71% 66% 77% 70% 81% 57% 79% 64% 71% 71% 72% 76% 61% 73% 68% aeg e acegh aceg e l n Banking 1027 103 177 101 88 81 102 67 171 880 147 738 282 700 303 60% 52% 67% 69% 67% 54% 62% 47% 64% 60% 62% 67% 47% 64% 53% aeg aeg aeg g ag l n Using social networking sites (such as MySpace, Facebook or Bebo) 1015 120 148 80 80 81 101 85 175 892 123 688 323 619 368 59% 61% 56% 54% 61% 54% 62% 60% 66% 60% 51% 62% 54% 56% 64% ce j l m Finding/ downloading information for personal reasons e.g. information, news, weather 997 128 166 81 79 66 104 71 155 868 130 664 328 664 312 58% 64% 63% 55% 60% 44% 63% 50% 58% 59% 54% 60% 55% 60% 55% eg eg e e eg e l n Finding/ downloading information for work/ business 763 108 125 62 61 51 82 55 122 665 97 600 160 512 235 44% 54% 47% 42% 47% 34% 50% 39% 46% 45% 41% 54% 27% 47% 41% ceg e e eg e l n Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe12A (Qe5A). Showcard Which, If Any, Of These Do You Or Members Of Your Household Use The Internet For Whilst At Home? (Multicode) Base : Those with access to the internet at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2534 169 212 190 186 196 182 183 175 1787 747 1460 1065 1508 648 Effective Weighted Sample 1679 161 195 180 177 187 172 174 162 1374 343 967 759 1092 506 Total 1715 198 264 147 131 150 165 142 266 1477 238 1106 601 1098 570 Watching video clips/ webcasts (e.g. YouTube or Big Brother) 691 88 111 52 57 56 71 52 97 611 80 481 210 445 226 40% 44% 42% 36% 43% 38% 43% 37% 36% 41% 34% 43% 35% 41% 40% j l Using local council/ Government sites, e.g. to find information, to complete processes such as tax returns, to contact local MP 667 118 110 62 43 36 88 43 95 580 87 469 195 446 210 39% 59% 42% 42% 33% 24% 53% 31% 36% 39% 36% 42% 33% 41% 37% bcdegh eg eg bcdegh e l Playing games online/ interactively 657 73 108 63 57 41 70 53 100 573 84 446 211 406 233 38% 37% 41% 43% 44% 27% 42% 37% 38% 39% 35% 40% 35% 37% 41% e e e e e e l Downloading music files, movies or video clips 634 85 102 54 49 43 67 44 93 558 76 441 193 391 225 37% 43% 39% 37% 37% 29% 41% 31% 35% 38% 32% 40% 32% 36% 39% eg e e j l To find information on health related issues e.g. NHS Direct/ NHS 24 613 75 102 60 40 38 67 53 95 533 80 438 174 393 204 36% 38% 39% 41% 30% 25% 40% 37% 36% 36% 34% 40% 29% 36% 36% e e de de e e l Finding/ downloading information for school/ college/ university/ homework 604 79 106 57 43 44 56 43 95 537 66 402 200 404 184 35% 40% 40% 39% 33% 29% 34% 30% 36% 36% 28% 36% 33% 37% 32% e eg e j Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe12A (Qe5A). Showcard Which, If Any, Of These Do You Or Members Of Your Household Use The Internet For Whilst At Home? (Multicode) Base : Those with access to the internet at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2534 169 212 190 186 196 182 183 175 1787 747 1460 1065 1508 648 Effective Weighted Sample 1679 161 195 180 177 187 172 174 162 1374 343 967 759 1092 506 Total 1715 198 264 147 131 150 165 142 266 1477 238 1106 601 1098 570 Watching catch-up TV (such as BBC iPlayer, Sky Player, ITV Player) 599 97 96 58 54 30 71 48 69 524 75 407 192 392 193 35% 49% 37% 40% 41% 20% 43% 34% 26% 35% 31% 37% 32% 36% 34% begh eh eh eh eh e l Communicating via instant messaging, SMS messaging, chat rooms, voice calls 576 79 81 49 57 37 56 45 90 506 70 401 173 344 219 34% 40% 31% 34% 44% 24% 34% 31% 34% 34% 29% 36% 29% 31% 38% e beg e l m Watching live TV programmes 401 54 72 41 37 33 34 22 61 353 48 288 112 254 136 23% 27% 27% 28% 28% 22% 20% 16% 23% 24% 20% 26% 19% 23% 24% g g g g l Real time gambling/ trading/ auctions 350 57 51 19 29 15 44 29 58 310 40 271 79 220 126 20% 29% 19% 13% 22% 10% 27% 21% 22% 21% 17% 25% 13% 20% 22% bce e ce ce e ce l Listening to radio 316 27 56 32 39 24 34 21 42 267 49 234 82 215 93 18% 14% 21% 22% 30% 16% 20% 15% 16% 18% 20% 21% 14% 20% 16% a abefgh l Watch news programmes 282 45 39 22 36 24 16 15 47 244 37 199 82 183 91 16% 23% 15% 15% 28% 16% 10% 11% 18% 17% 16% 18% 14% 17% 16% bfg bcefgh f l Uploading/ adding content to the internet 282 37 44 25 34 21 33 18 38 252 30 209 72 175 100 16% 19% 17% 17% 26% 14% 20% 13% 14% 17% 12% 19% 12% 16% 17% begh j l Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe12A (Qe5A). Showcard Which, If Any, Of These Do You Or Members Of Your Household Use The Internet For Whilst At Home? (Multicode) Base : Those with access to the internet at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2534 169 212 190 186 196 182 183 175 1787 747 1460 1065 1508 648 Effective Weighted Sample 1679 161 195 180 177 187 172 174 162 1374 343 967 759 1092 506 Total 1715 198 264 147 131 150 165 142 266 1477 238 1106 601 1098 570 Using Twitter (browsing/ reading site) 211 30 33 12 19 17 13 14 39 190 21 154 57 130 77 12% 15% 12% 8% 15% 11% 8% 10% 15% 13% 9% 14% 9% 12% 14% f f f j l Downloading films (Video on Demand) 157 24 24 7 15 16 13 11 17 141 16 113 44 90 63 9% 12% 9% 5% 12% 11% 8% 8% 6% 10% 7% 10% 7% 8% 11% c c c l Streamed audio services (free) 116 22 20 10 8 8 12 9 15 103 13 87 29 73 41 7% 11% 8% 7% 6% 5% 7% 6% 6% 7% 5% 8% 5% 7% 7% l Using Twitter (account holder, posting on site) 109 14 22 7 12 9 9 4 22 98 11 80 29 71 34 6% 7% 8% 5% 9% 6% 5% 2% 8% 7% 5% 7% 5% 6% 6% g g g l Streamed audio services (subscription) 33 8 6 1 2 - 2 1 7 29 4 26 7 18 15 2% 4% 2% 1% 2% -% 1% *% 3% 2% 2% 2% 1% 2% 3% ceg e e Other 16 1 5 1 1 - 3 1 2 14 2 7 8 10 6 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% -% 2% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% None of these 20 4 3 3 2 1 1 - - 17 3 8 12 12 7 1% 2% 1% 2% 2% 1% *% -% -% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% k Don't know 16 3 3 - 1 1 1 1 2 15 2 7 9 10 5 1% 2% 1% -% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe12B (Qe5B) Showcard And, Which, If Any, Of These Activities Have You Or Members Of Your Household Used The Internet For In The Last Week? (Multicode) Base : Those with access to the internet at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2534 1234 1300 376 462 1039 657 315 248 348 563 704 825 501 504 1493 329 334 378 Effective Weighted Sample 1679 825 854 240 294 707 459 202 148 233 414 471 544 341 327 1299 219 228 349 Total 1715 828 888 264 358 678 416 187 138 234 448 511 549 314 341 1462 126 80 47 Sending and receiving e-mail 1311 632 679 199 281 530 301 124 99 178 379 425 426 234 226 1132 87 61 31 76% 76% 77% 76% 78% 78% 72% 67% 72% 76% 85% 83% 78% 74% 66% 77% 69% 76% 66% f g ghi lmn n n pr r General surfing/ browsing the internet 1284 645 639 206 276 518 283 132 96 189 359 392 414 223 254 1095 94 62 33 75% 78% 72% 78% 77% 76% 68% 70% 70% 81% 80% 77% 75% 71% 75% 75% 74% 78% 69% b f f f gh gh r r Using social networking sites (such as MySpace, Facebook or Bebo) 824 374 450 193 219 324 87 99 55 120 227 226 273 153 171 707 51 41 24 48% 45% 51% 73% 61% 48% 21% 53% 40% 51% 51% 44% 50% 49% 50% 48% 40% 51% 52% a def ef f h h h p p p Banking 774 364 409 101 185 323 164 75 48 104 243 285 250 128 111 673 52 29 20 45% 44% 46% 38% 52% 48% 39% 40% 34% 44% 54% 56% 45% 41% 32% 46% 41% 37% 42% cf cf ghi lmn n n q Finding/ downloading information for personal reasons e.g. information, news, weather 634 333 301 78 131 268 158 58 50 92 206 238 228 88 80 552 35 33 15 37% 40% 34% 29% 37% 40% 38% 31% 36% 39% 46% 47% 42% 28% 24% 38% 27% 42% 31% b c c gh mn mn pr pr Purchasing goods/ services/ tickets etc. 622 303 319 84 145 256 136 61 48 90 187 215 195 116 96 542 34 26 19 36% 37% 36% 32% 41% 38% 33% 32% 35% 38% 42% 42% 36% 37% 28% 37% 27% 33% 40% cf g ln n n p p Finding/ downloading information for work/ business 493 259 234 57 113 231 92 37 26 72 185 215 166 67 45 433 24 26 10 29% 31% 26% 22% 32% 34% 22% 20% 19% 31% 41% 42% 30% 21% 13% 30% 19% 32% 22% b cf cf gh ghi lmn mn n pr pr Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe12B (Qe5B) Showcard And, Which, If Any, Of These Activities Have You Or Members Of Your Household Used The Internet For In The Last Week? (Multicode) Base : Those with access to the internet at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2534 1234 1300 376 462 1039 657 315 248 348 563 704 825 501 504 1493 329 334 378 Effective Weighted Sample 1679 825 854 240 294 707 459 202 148 233 414 471 544 341 327 1299 219 228 349 Total 1715 828 888 264 358 678 416 187 138 234 448 511 549 314 341 1462 126 80 47 Watching video clips/ webcasts (e.g. YouTube or Big Brother) 400 209 190 100 97 155 47 45 24 55 124 133 131 66 70 343 24 18 14 23% 25% 21% 38% 27% 23% 11% 24% 17% 23% 28% 26% 24% 21% 21% 23% 19% 23% 30% def f f h op Finding/ downloading information for school/ college/ university/ homework 396 181 216 91 71 189 46 48 21 54 117 140 139 61 58 338 25 21 12 23% 22% 24% 34% 20% 28% 11% 25% 15% 23% 26% 27% 25% 19% 17% 23% 20% 27% 25% df f df h h mn mn Playing games online/ interactively 390 194 196 78 89 171 52 45 33 65 89 89 119 94 88 334 24 19 14 23% 23% 22% 29% 25% 25% 12% 24% 24% 28% 20% 17% 22% 30% 26% 23% 19% 24% 29% f f f j kl k op Communicating via instant messaging, SMS messaging, chat rooms, voice calls 360 171 189 94 77 149 39 40 32 61 84 104 126 58 72 303 31 17 9 21% 21% 21% 36% 22% 22% 9% 22% 23% 26% 19% 20% 23% 19% 21% 21% 24% 22% 20% def f f j Watching catch-up TV (such as BBC iPlayer, Sky Player, ITV Player) 322 181 141 67 70 127 59 34 25 48 101 110 114 54 44 286 16 12 9 19% 22% 16% 25% 19% 19% 14% 18% 18% 20% 23% 22% 21% 17% 13% 20% 12% 15% 19% b ef f n n p p Downloading music files, movies or video clips 318 167 152 84 73 128 33 37 28 46 95 96 106 58 59 267 25 13 13 19% 20% 17% 32% 20% 19% 8% 20% 20% 20% 21% 19% 19% 18% 17% 18% 20% 16% 28% def f f opq Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe12B (Qe5B) Showcard And, Which, If Any, Of These Activities Have You Or Members Of Your Household Used The Internet For In The Last Week? (Multicode) Base : Those with access to the internet at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2534 1234 1300 376 462 1039 657 315 248 348 563 704 825 501 504 1493 329 334 378 Effective Weighted Sample 1679 825 854 240 294 707 459 202 148 233 414 471 544 341 327 1299 219 228 349 Total 1715 828 888 264 358 678 416 187 138 234 448 511 549 314 341 1462 126 80 47 Using local council/ Government sites, e.g. to find information, to complete processes such as tax returns, to contact local MP 261 122 139 27 55 117 63 27 20 36 98 114 90 30 27 238 7 11 5 15% 15% 16% 10% 15% 17% 15% 14% 14% 15% 22% 22% 16% 10% 8% 16% 5% 14% 11% c ghi lmn mn pr p p To find information on health related issues e.g. NHS Direct/ NHS 24 241 109 132 26 54 102 59 20 15 38 83 107 72 28 34 212 13 9 7 14% 13% 15% 10% 15% 15% 14% 11% 11% 16% 18% 21% 13% 9% 10% 15% 10% 11% 16% c gh lmn Watching live TV programmes 206 123 83 56 51 77 22 28 12 26 72 70 77 30 30 185 6 7 7 12% 15% 9% 21% 14% 11% 5% 15% 9% 11% 16% 14% 14% 9% 9% 13% 5% 9% 15% b def f f h n mn p pq Listening to radio 170 97 73 31 34 66 40 13 15 22 62 65 58 26 21 148 7 9 6 10% 12% 8% 12% 9% 10% 10% 7% 11% 10% 14% 13% 11% 8% 6% 10% 5% 11% 14% b g mn n p p p Watch news programmes 157 93 64 28 37 55 37 17 11 17 46 69 55 13 21 138 7 8 4 9% 11% 7% 11% 10% 8% 9% 9% 8% 7% 10% 14% 10% 4% 6% 9% 5% 10% 9% b mn mn p Uploading/ adding content to the internet 142 91 52 35 37 55 16 17 13 17 41 50 50 20 23 127 5 7 4 8% 11% 6% 13% 10% 8% 4% 9% 9% 7% 9% 10% 9% 6% 7% 9% 4% 9% 9% b ef f f p p p Real time gambling/ trading/ auctions 142 69 73 21 38 64 19 10 13 27 48 42 52 32 16 121 14 4 3 8% 8% 8% 8% 11% 9% 5% 5% 9% 11% 11% 8% 9% 10% 5% 8% 11% 5% 6% f f g g n n n qr Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe12B (Qe5B) Showcard And, Which, If Any, Of These Activities Have You Or Members Of Your Household Used The Internet For In The Last Week? (Multicode) Base : Those with access to the internet at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2534 1234 1300 376 462 1039 657 315 248 348 563 704 825 501 504 1493 329 334 378 Effective Weighted Sample 1679 825 854 240 294 707 459 202 148 233 414 471 544 341 327 1299 219 228 349 Total 1715 828 888 264 358 678 416 187 138 234 448 511 549 314 341 1462 126 80 47 Using Twitter (browsing/ reading site) 110 54 56 37 26 40 7 15 10 14 26 29 44 14 23 93 8 6 3 6% 7% 6% 14% 7% 6% 2% 8% 7% 6% 6% 6% 8% 5% 7% 6% 6% 7% 7% def f f m Downloading films (Video on Demand) 80 56 24 25 27 22 6 14 13 9 19 26 23 16 15 67 8 3 3 5% 7% 3% 10% 8% 3% 1% 7% 9% 4% 4% 5% 4% 5% 5% 5% 7% 3% 6% b ef ef ij Streamed audio services (free) 66 43 23 18 17 22 9 5 6 6 26 24 27 8 6 59 2 3 2 4% 5% 3% 7% 5% 3% 2% 3% 4% 3% 6% 5% 5% 3% 2% 4% 2% 4% 4% b ef f n n Using Twitter (account holder, posting on site) 65 43 22 18 25 14 8 7 6 12 16 25 23 7 11 60 2 2 2 4% 5% 3% 7% 7% 2% 2% 4% 5% 5% 4% 5% 4% 2% 3% 4% 1% 3% 5% b ef ef p p Streamed audio services (subscription) 15 14 2 4 6 4 2 3 2 1 5 4 5 3 3 13 1 1 * 1% 2% *% 1% 2% 1% *% 1% 2% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% b Other 11 5 6 3 1 3 4 1 1 2 * 2 6 1 2 9 * 1 * 1% 1% 1% 1% *% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% *% 1% *% *% 1% *% 1% 1% None of these 56 26 30 5 6 17 29 7 7 7 11 11 14 13 18 44 7 2 3 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 7% 4% 5% 3% 2% 2% 3% 4% 5% 3% 5% 3% 7% cde k oq Don't know 28 12 16 3 2 8 15 4 2 4 2 7 9 6 6 21 5 1 1 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 4% 2% 2% 2% *% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1% 4% 1% 2% cde j o Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe12B (Qe5B) Showcard And, Which, If Any, Of These Activities Have You Or Members Of Your Household Used The Internet For In The Last Week? (Multicode) Base : Those with access to the internet at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2534 169 212 190 186 196 182 183 175 1787 747 1460 1065 1508 648 Effective Weighted Sample 1679 161 195 180 177 187 172 174 162 1374 343 967 759 1092 506 Total 1715 198 264 147 131 150 165 142 266 1477 238 1106 601 1098 570 Sending and receiving e-mail 1311 171 220 120 94 103 135 100 189 1123 188 880 425 859 421 76% 87% 83% 81% 72% 69% 82% 70% 71% 76% 79% 80% 71% 78% 74% degh degh degh degh l General surfing/ browsing the internet 1284 161 193 111 79 118 123 114 195 1104 180 834 442 833 418 75% 81% 73% 75% 61% 79% 75% 80% 73% 75% 75% 75% 73% 76% 73% d d d d d d d Using social networking sites (such as MySpace, Facebook or Bebo) 824 91 129 68 57 65 84 69 144 723 100 549 272 498 301 48% 46% 49% 47% 44% 43% 51% 49% 54% 49% 42% 50% 45% 45% 53% e j m Banking 774 82 135 84 60 62 79 45 126 660 113 554 213 527 227 45% 41% 51% 57% 46% 42% 48% 31% 47% 45% 48% 50% 35% 48% 40% g adeg g g g g l n Finding/ downloading information for personal reasons e.g. information, news, weather 634 88 121 59 38 42 65 39 99 549 86 418 212 433 187 37% 44% 46% 40% 29% 28% 39% 27% 37% 37% 36% 38% 35% 39% 33% deg deg deg deg n Purchasing goods/ services/ tickets etc. 622 60 120 64 54 47 57 49 92 515 106 443 173 415 188 36% 30% 45% 43% 41% 31% 35% 35% 35% 35% 45% 40% 29% 38% 33% aefgh ae a i l Finding/ downloading information for work/ business 493 74 83 39 38 41 49 31 78 426 67 393 96 339 144 29% 38% 32% 27% 29% 28% 30% 22% 29% 29% 28% 36% 16% 31% 25% ceg g l n Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe12B (Qe5B) Showcard And, Which, If Any, Of These Activities Have You Or Members Of Your Household Used The Internet For In The Last Week? (Multicode) Base : Those with access to the internet at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2534 169 212 190 186 196 182 183 175 1787 747 1460 1065 1508 648 Effective Weighted Sample 1679 161 195 180 177 187 172 174 162 1374 343 967 759 1092 506 Total 1715 198 264 147 131 150 165 142 266 1477 238 1106 601 1098 570 Watching video clips/ webcasts (e.g. YouTube or Big Brother) 400 53 71 28 21 34 44 34 58 350 50 271 128 256 130 23% 27% 27% 19% 16% 23% 27% 24% 22% 24% 21% 25% 21% 23% 23% d d d Finding/ downloading information for school/ college/ university/ homework 396 52 71 32 27 35 39 25 57 348 48 259 137 262 122 23% 26% 27% 22% 21% 24% 24% 17% 21% 24% 20% 23% 23% 24% 21% g g Playing games online/ interactively 390 38 78 43 28 27 33 35 51 337 53 259 131 242 134 23% 19% 30% 29% 22% 18% 20% 25% 19% 23% 22% 23% 22% 22% 23% aefh aefh Communicating via instant messaging, SMS messaging, chat rooms, voice calls 360 38 51 37 31 26 31 31 58 315 46 251 108 219 132 21% 19% 19% 25% 23% 17% 19% 22% 22% 21% 19% 23% 18% 20% 23% l Watching catch-up TV (such as BBC iPlayer, Sky Player, ITV Player) 322 47 64 30 30 19 33 25 38 279 43 210 112 213 100 19% 24% 24% 20% 23% 13% 20% 18% 14% 19% 18% 19% 19% 19% 18% eh eh eh Downloading music files, movies or video clips 318 33 66 29 16 27 19 24 53 280 39 218 100 192 113 19% 17% 25% 20% 12% 18% 12% 17% 20% 19% 16% 20% 17% 17% 20% df f f Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe12B (Qe5B) Showcard And, Which, If Any, Of These Activities Have You Or Members Of Your Household Used The Internet For In The Last Week? (Multicode) Base : Those with access to the internet at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2534 169 212 190 186 196 182 183 175 1787 747 1460 1065 1508 648 Effective Weighted Sample 1679 161 195 180 177 187 172 174 162 1374 343 967 759 1092 506 Total 1715 198 264 147 131 150 165 142 266 1477 238 1106 601 1098 570 Using local council/ Government sites, e.g. to find information, to complete processes such as tax returns, to contact local MP 261 36 61 28 13 22 24 16 37 214 47 193 67 178 77 15% 18% 23% 19% 10% 15% 15% 11% 14% 15% 20% 17% 11% 16% 14% d defgh dg i l To find information on health related issues e.g. NHS Direct/ NHS 24 241 26 52 26 16 17 22 16 39 208 33 180 61 158 75 14% 13% 20% 17% 12% 11% 13% 11% 15% 14% 14% 16% 10% 14% 13% eg l Watching live TV programmes 206 30 42 19 15 22 16 13 28 181 26 141 64 124 75 12% 15% 16% 13% 11% 15% 10% 9% 11% 12% 11% 13% 11% 11% 13% Listening to radio 170 16 35 15 16 13 21 14 19 147 23 125 45 110 54 10% 8% 13% 10% 12% 9% 13% 10% 7% 10% 10% 11% 8% 10% 9% l Watch news programmes 157 22 21 11 17 15 13 8 30 137 21 109 49 108 45 9% 11% 8% 8% 13% 10% 8% 6% 11% 9% 9% 10% 8% 10% 8% g Uploading/ adding content to the internet 142 13 28 17 18 10 17 9 13 122 21 105 38 97 41 8% 7% 11% 12% 14% 7% 11% 6% 5% 8% 9% 9% 6% 9% 7% h aegh l Real time gambling/ trading/ auctions 142 3 28 12 12 8 15 12 29 123 19 111 31 91 48 8% 2% 11% 8% 9% 6% 9% 8% 11% 8% 8% 10% 5% 8% 8% a a a a a a l Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe12B (Qe5B) Showcard And, Which, If Any, Of These Activities Have You Or Members Of Your Household Used The Internet For In The Last Week? (Multicode) Base : Those with access to the internet at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2534 169 212 190 186 196 182 183 175 1787 747 1460 1065 1508 648 Effective Weighted Sample 1679 161 195 180 177 187 172 174 162 1374 343 967 759 1092 506 Total 1715 198 264 147 131 150 165 142 266 1477 238 1106 601 1098 570 Using Twitter (browsing/ reading site) 110 13 23 5 9 7 7 9 20 95 14 74 36 70 36 6% 7% 9% 3% 7% 5% 4% 6% 8% 6% 6% 7% 6% 6% 6% c Downloading films (Video on Demand) 80 13 12 5 5 11 4 4 14 73 7 57 23 44 33 5% 6% 4% 3% 4% 8% 2% 3% 5% 5% 3% 5% 4% 4% 6% fg Streamed audio services (free) 66 14 10 5 5 5 5 5 10 59 7 49 17 43 21 4% 7% 4% 4% 4% 3% 3% 4% 4% 4% 3% 4% 3% 4% 4% Using Twitter (account holder, posting on site) 65 9 20 2 4 6 4 4 11 59 7 47 19 44 20 4% 5% 8% 2% 3% 4% 2% 2% 4% 4% 3% 4% 3% 4% 3% cfg Streamed audio services (subscription) 15 1 4 1 1 - 1 1 4 12 3 12 4 12 4 1% 1% 2% *% 1% -% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Other 11 1 2 1 1 - 2 - 2 9 2 6 5 5 6 1% 1% 1% *% 1% -% 1% -% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% None of these 56 7 3 5 6 2 3 4 15 51 5 27 30 30 24 3% 3% 1% 3% 4% 1% 2% 2% 6% 3% 2% 2% 5% 3% 4% be k Don't know 28 3 4 - 2 4 1 3 3 23 5 9 18 18 9 2% 2% 2% -% 1% 2% 1% 2% 1% 2% 2% 1% 3% 2% 2% c c k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe13 (Qenew11) Showcard What Was The Advertised Speed Of Your Main Home Internet Connection When You Took Up Your Service? (Single Code) Base : Those who use broadband as their main method of connecting to the internet at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2481 1207 1274 366 448 1029 638 300 238 339 560 692 810 489 490 1464 317 328 372 Effective Weighted Sample 1641 806 836 233 284 700 446 192 139 227 411 462 534 333 317 1273 209 224 344 Total 1680 807 872 257 348 671 404 179 132 227 445 502 539 307 332 1434 120 79 46 Up to 512kb 20 14 7 1 5 12 2 1 1 2 2 4 9 5 2 18 2 * * 1% 2% 1% *% 2% 2% 1% *% *% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 2% *% 1% Up to 1MB 15 12 3 4 2 5 3 2 1 1 4 7 1 3 3 13 * * 1 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 2% b l o Up to 2MB 57 35 22 4 16 22 15 4 3 10 20 20 17 11 9 50 3 2 3 3% 4% 3% 2% 5% 3% 4% 2% 2% 5% 5% 4% 3% 4% 3% 3% 2% 2% 6% b c opq Up to 4MB 48 30 18 7 8 21 12 7 3 10 14 12 13 8 15 43 2 2 1 3% 4% 2% 3% 2% 3% 3% 4% 3% 4% 3% 2% 2% 3% 4% 3% 2% 3% 2% Up to 8MB 158 105 52 21 35 63 39 16 13 22 54 57 63 18 19 137 8 8 5 9% 13% 6% 8% 10% 9% 10% 9% 10% 10% 12% 11% 12% 6% 6% 10% 6% 10% 10% b mn mn Up to 10MB 93 53 40 14 25 35 19 10 8 9 32 31 32 15 15 77 7 6 2 6% 7% 5% 5% 7% 5% 5% 5% 6% 4% 7% 6% 6% 5% 5% 5% 6% 8% 4% Up to 16MB 37 19 17 2 14 17 4 8 1 10 11 11 11 8 7 33 1 2 1 2% 2% 2% 1% 4% 2% 1% 4% 1% 4% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% 2% 2% cf h h Up to 20MB 162 104 58 21 38 77 26 20 14 25 55 53 52 31 26 137 15 5 4 10% 13% 7% 8% 11% 11% 6% 11% 11% 11% 12% 11% 10% 10% 8% 10% 13% 6% 9% b f f q Up to 24MB 18 11 6 1 4 9 3 1 * 2 8 2 12 2 1 15 1 * 1 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 2% *% 2% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 2% kn Up to 50MB 33 15 17 9 14 7 3 4 1 3 10 10 14 4 5 27 4 2 1 2% 2% 2% 3% 4% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% 2% 3% 1% 1% 2% 4% 2% 1% ef ef Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe13 (Qenew11) Showcard What Was The Advertised Speed Of Your Main Home Internet Connection When You Took Up Your Service? (Single Code) Base : Those who use broadband as their main method of connecting to the internet at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2481 1207 1274 366 448 1029 638 300 238 339 560 692 810 489 490 1464 317 328 372 Effective Weighted Sample 1641 806 836 233 284 700 446 192 139 227 411 462 534 333 317 1273 209 224 344 Total 1680 807 872 257 348 671 404 179 132 227 445 502 539 307 332 1434 120 79 46 Above 50 MB 11 5 6 3 4 2 3 - * 1 3 3 3 3 2 10 * * 1 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% -% *% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% *% *% 2% opq Don't know 1030 404 625 170 182 402 275 105 86 130 234 292 312 200 227 876 75 52 27 61% 50% 72% 66% 52% 60% 68% 59% 65% 57% 53% 58% 58% 65% 68% 61% 62% 66% 58% a d d de j kl kl Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe13 (Qenew11) Showcard What Was The Advertised Speed Of Your Main Home Internet Connection When You Took Up Your Service? (Single Code) Base : Those who use broadband as their main method of connecting to the internet at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2481 163 209 189 186 188 176 180 173 1750 731 1437 1035 1470 639 Effective Weighted Sample 1641 156 192 179 177 179 167 171 161 1343 337 951 736 1063 499 Total 1680 191 260 146 131 144 160 140 264 1447 233 1087 584 1070 563 Up to 512kb 20 - - 2 1 3 1 1 10 18 2 17 3 16 4 1% -% -% 2% *% 2% 1% 1% 4% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% b abdfg l Up to 1MB 15 - 4 2 2 3 2 - - 10 4 8 7 10 3 1% -% 1% 2% 1% 2% 1% -% -% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% Up to 2MB 57 7 10 7 6 4 8 6 3 47 10 39 17 35 19 3% 3% 4% 5% 4% 2% 5% 4% 1% 3% 4% 4% 3% 3% 3% Up to 4MB 48 16 3 4 7 1 5 1 5 37 11 29 19 29 18 3% 8% 1% 3% 5% 1% 3% 1% 2% 3% 5% 3% 3% 3% 3% bcefgh beg Up to 8MB 158 21 34 17 18 9 17 7 14 127 31 105 52 118 35 9% 11% 13% 12% 14% 7% 11% 5% 5% 9% 13% 10% 9% 11% 6% g egh gh egh g i n Up to 10MB 93 18 10 6 10 8 7 4 13 84 8 65 28 62 29 6% 9% 4% 4% 7% 6% 5% 3% 5% 6% 4% 6% 5% 6% 5% bg Up to 16MB 37 4 6 3 2 4 3 3 8 34 3 27 10 18 18 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% 2% 2% 3% 2% 1% 2% 2% 2% 3% Up to 20MB 162 20 22 14 11 11 9 23 27 149 12 112 50 101 56 10% 10% 8% 10% 8% 8% 6% 16% 10% 10% 5% 10% 9% 9% 10% bdef j Up to 24MB 18 3 2 2 - - - - 8 16 1 15 2 11 6 1% 1% 1% 1% -% -% -% -% 3% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% defg l Up to 50MB 33 2 10 1 - 2 1 2 7 29 4 23 10 12 20 2% 1% 4% 1% -% 2% 1% 1% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% 4% d d m Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe13 (Qenew11) Showcard What Was The Advertised Speed Of Your Main Home Internet Connection When You Took Up Your Service? (Single Code) Base : Those who use broadband as their main method of connecting to the internet at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2481 163 209 189 186 188 176 180 173 1750 731 1437 1035 1470 639 Effective Weighted Sample 1641 156 192 179 177 179 167 171 161 1343 337 951 736 1063 499 Total 1680 191 260 146 131 144 160 140 264 1447 233 1087 584 1070 563 Above 50 MB 11 - 1 1 1 2 - - 4 9 2 8 3 7 3 1% -% 1% 1% *% 2% -% -% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Don't know 1030 101 157 86 74 95 107 93 162 885 144 640 382 650 352 61% 53% 60% 59% 57% 66% 67% 67% 61% 61% 62% 59% 65% 61% 62% a ad a k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe14 (Qe11A). Showcard What Is The Actual Speed Of Your Main Home Internet Connection? (Single Code) Base : Those who use broadband as their main method of connecting to the internet at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2481 1207 1274 366 448 1029 638 300 238 339 560 692 810 489 490 1464 317 328 372 Effective Weighted Sample 1641 806 836 233 284 700 446 192 139 227 411 462 534 333 317 1273 209 224 344 Total 1680 807 872 257 348 671 404 179 132 227 445 502 539 307 332 1434 120 79 46 26K 4 2 1 - - 2 2 - - 2 - 2 - 1 1 3 1 - - *% *% *% -% -% *% *% -% -% 1% -% *% -% *% *% *% 1% -% -% 56K 1 1 * - - * 1 - 1 - * * * 1 - 1 - * * *% *% *% -% -% *% *% -% *% -% *% *% *% *% -% *% -% 1% *% 64K 4 1 4 2 1 1 - - - 1 2 1 3 - - 4 - - - *% *% *% 1% *% *% -% -% -% *% *% *% 1% -% -% *% -% -% -% f 128K 1 1 - - * 1 - - - - - 1 - - * 1 * - - *% *% -% -% *% *% -% -% -% -% -% *% -% -% *% *% *% -% -% 150K 2 2 1 - - 1 1 - - - - 1 1 - - 2 - - - *% *% *% -% -% *% *% -% -% -% -% *% *% -% -% *% -% -% -% 256K 8 5 2 1 2 4 - 1 - - 2 4 2 - 1 7 * 1 * *% 1% *% *% 1% 1% -% 1% -% -% 1% 1% *% -% *% *% *% 1% *% 500K 3 * 2 1 - 2 * - * - 2 * - 2 - 2 - * * *% *% *% *% -% *% *% -% *% -% *% *% -% 1% -% *% -% *% *% l 512K 11 8 3 1 5 5 * - - 1 * * 7 4 * 9 1 * * 1% 1% *% *% 2% 1% *% -% -% *% *% *% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% *% *% f kn k 750K 2 1 1 - - 1 1 - - - 1 1 - 1 - 1 1 - - *% *% *% -% -% *% *% -% -% -% *% *% -% *% -% *% 1% -% -% o 1MB 18 15 3 2 4 9 3 4 * 2 7 8 4 3 4 14 3 1 1 1% 2% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% *% 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 2% b 1.5MB 16 11 5 2 8 4 2 4 * 3 3 4 6 3 3 12 3 * 1 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% *% 1% ef Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe14 (Qe11A). Showcard What Is The Actual Speed Of Your Main Home Internet Connection? (Single Code) Base : Those who use broadband as their main method of connecting to the internet at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2481 1207 1274 366 448 1029 638 300 238 339 560 692 810 489 490 1464 317 328 372 Effective Weighted Sample 1641 806 836 233 284 700 446 192 139 227 411 462 534 333 317 1273 209 224 344 Total 1680 807 872 257 348 671 404 179 132 227 445 502 539 307 332 1434 120 79 46 2MB 54 34 19 3 10 19 21 3 6 8 14 17 21 7 10 43 6 2 2 3% 4% 2% 1% 3% 3% 5% 1% 5% 4% 3% 3% 4% 2% 3% 3% 5% 3% 5% b ce o 3MB 24 16 8 1 7 10 7 6 - 7 2 9 8 3 5 18 4 1 1 1% 2% 1% *% 2% 2% 2% 4% -% 3% *% 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% 3% 1% 3% hj hj o 4MB 74 54 20 12 10 28 24 5 10 12 26 26 26 10 11 68 2 3 1 4% 7% 2% 5% 3% 4% 6% 3% 8% 5% 6% 5% 5% 3% 3% 5% 1% 4% 3% b d p 8MB 93 64 29 16 22 34 21 8 4 13 39 35 35 10 12 81 5 4 2 6% 8% 3% 6% 6% 5% 5% 4% 3% 6% 9% 7% 7% 3% 4% 6% 4% 6% 5% b gh mn m 10MB 64 47 18 9 15 31 9 9 2 8 23 16 23 15 11 54 5 3 2 4% 6% 2% 4% 4% 5% 2% 5% 1% 4% 5% 3% 4% 5% 3% 4% 4% 4% 4% b f h 16MB 35 24 11 4 11 17 3 5 1 10 13 12 9 10 4 33 1 1 1 2% 3% 1% 1% 3% 3% 1% 3% *% 4% 3% 2% 2% 3% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% b f f h 20MB 61 35 25 13 14 27 6 4 6 10 23 16 15 16 14 49 6 4 2 4% 4% 3% 5% 4% 4% 1% 2% 5% 4% 5% 3% 3% 5% 4% 3% 5% 5% 5% f f f 24MB 20 11 8 2 3 9 5 - * 2 7 8 11 1 - 18 1 * * 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% -% *% 1% 2% 2% 2% *% -% 1% 1% 1% *% n mn 50MB 24 12 12 4 10 6 4 4 * 2 7 9 10 2 3 17 4 2 1 1% 1% 1% 2% 3% 1% 1% 3% *% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 3% 3% 1% e o Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe14 (Qe11A). Showcard What Is The Actual Speed Of Your Main Home Internet Connection? (Single Code) Base : Those who use broadband as their main method of connecting to the internet at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2481 1207 1274 366 448 1029 638 300 238 339 560 692 810 489 490 1464 317 328 372 Effective Weighted Sample 1641 806 836 233 284 700 446 192 139 227 411 462 534 333 317 1273 209 224 344 Total 1680 807 872 257 348 671 404 179 132 227 445 502 539 307 332 1434 120 79 46 Over 50MB 8 2 6 2 2 3 1 - - * 2 2 2 2 2 8 * * * 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% -% -% *% *% *% *% 1% 1% 1% *% *% 1% Other 27 14 13 2 7 12 6 3 1 7 3 7 9 5 5 24 2 1 1 2% 2% 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% 3% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% 2% j Don't know 1126 445 681 180 214 444 287 123 101 141 268 323 346 212 245 965 76 54 31 67% 55% 78% 70% 62% 66% 71% 69% 77% 62% 60% 64% 64% 69% 74% 67% 63% 69% 66% a d d j ij kl Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe14 (Qe11A). Showcard What Is The Actual Speed Of Your Main Home Internet Connection? (Single Code) Base : Those who use broadband as their main method of connecting to the internet at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2481 163 209 189 186 188 176 180 173 1750 731 1437 1035 1470 639 Effective Weighted Sample 1641 156 192 179 177 179 167 171 161 1343 337 951 736 1063 499 Total 1680 191 260 146 131 144 160 140 264 1447 233 1087 584 1070 563 26K 4 - 3 - - - - - - 3 1 1 2 2 2 *% -% 1% -% -% -% -% -% -% *% *% *% *% *% *% 56K 1 - - - - - - 1 - 1 * * 1 1 * *% -% -% -% -% -% -% *% -% *% *% *% *% *% *% 64K 4 - 2 - - - - 3 - 4 - 4 1 3 2 *% -% 1% -% -% -% -% 2% -% *% -% *% *% *% *% 128K 1 - - - - - - 1 - 1 * 1 * 1 * *% -% -% -% -% -% -% 1% -% *% *% *% *% *% *% 150K 2 - - - - - 2 - - - 2 1 1 2 - *% -% -% -% -% -% 1% -% -% -% 1% *% *% *% -% i 256K 8 - - 1 - - - 1 6 8 * 6 2 4 4 *% -% -% 1% -% -% -% *% 2% 1% *% 1% *% *% 1% b 500K 3 - - - - - 1 - 1 2 1 2 1 2 * *% -% -% -% -% -% *% -% 1% *% *% *% *% *% *% 512K 11 1 - 1 - 1 - - 7 10 1 9 2 8 3 1% *% -% *% -% *% -% -% 3% 1% *% 1% *% 1% 1% bdfg 750K 2 - - - - - 1 - - 2 * 1 1 2 - *% -% -% -% -% -% 1% -% -% *% *% *% *% *% -% 1MB 18 - 4 2 2 1 4 - 1 13 5 12 6 14 3 1% -% 1% 1% 2% 1% 2% -% *% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% g 1.5MB 16 - 3 2 2 1 3 2 - 12 4 10 6 9 6 1% -% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% -% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe14 (Qe11A). Showcard What Is The Actual Speed Of Your Main Home Internet Connection? (Single Code) Base : Those who use broadband as their main method of connecting to the internet at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2481 163 209 189 186 188 176 180 173 1750 731 1437 1035 1470 639 Effective Weighted Sample 1641 156 192 179 177 179 167 171 161 1343 337 951 736 1063 499 Total 1680 191 260 146 131 144 160 140 264 1447 233 1087 584 1070 563 2MB 54 3 9 12 3 2 5 2 8 39 15 35 17 39 13 3% 2% 3% 8% 3% 1% 3% 1% 3% 3% 6% 3% 3% 4% 2% abdefgh i 3MB 24 - 6 1 1 1 1 3 7 21 4 11 13 20 3 1% -% 2% 1% 1% 1% *% 2% 3% 1% 2% 1% 2% 2% 1% a k n 4MB 74 17 18 6 9 4 4 3 7 63 11 47 27 58 14 4% 9% 7% 4% 7% 3% 2% 2% 3% 4% 5% 4% 5% 5% 2% efgh fg efg n 8MB 93 23 11 10 7 6 10 6 8 82 11 64 28 57 33 6% 12% 4% 7% 6% 4% 7% 5% 3% 6% 5% 6% 5% 5% 6% bdegh 10MB 64 17 8 4 8 2 2 5 9 60 5 46 18 37 26 4% 9% 3% 3% 6% 2% 1% 3% 3% 4% 2% 4% 3% 3% 5% bcefgh ef 16MB 35 8 5 - 2 4 3 4 7 32 3 30 5 19 15 2% 4% 2% -% 1% 3% 2% 3% 3% 2% 1% 3% 1% 2% 3% c c c c l 20MB 61 9 6 4 6 6 3 5 11 59 2 42 18 36 22 4% 5% 2% 3% 4% 5% 2% 3% 4% 4% 1% 4% 3% 3% 4% j 24MB 20 4 9 - * - - - 5 17 2 15 5 15 5 1% 2% 3% -% *% -% -% -% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% cdefg 50MB 24 1 6 - - 3 1 1 5 22 1 18 6 10 14 1% *% 2% -% -% 2% 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% cd cd m Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe14 (Qe11A). Showcard What Is The Actual Speed Of Your Main Home Internet Connection? (Single Code) Base : Those who use broadband as their main method of connecting to the internet at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2481 163 209 189 186 188 176 180 173 1750 731 1437 1035 1470 639 Effective Weighted Sample 1641 156 192 179 177 179 167 171 161 1343 337 951 736 1063 499 Total 1680 191 260 146 131 144 160 140 264 1447 233 1087 584 1070 563 Over 50MB 8 - 3 - 1 - - - 4 8 1 8 1 5 3 1% -% 1% -% *% -% -% -% 2% 1% *% 1% *% *% *% Other 27 2 4 4 1 1 2 8 2 20 7 17 10 16 11 2% 1% 1% 3% 1% 1% 1% 6% 1% 1% 3% 2% 2% 1% 2% abdefh Don't know 1126 107 164 101 88 111 119 97 176 968 158 705 413 711 384 67% 56% 63% 69% 68% 78% 75% 70% 67% 67% 68% 65% 71% 66% 68% a a abdh ab a k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe15 (Qe11B). Can You Tell Me Whether The Actual Speed Of Your Main Home Internet Connection Is More Than 512K? (Single Code) Base : Those unaware of their broadband connection speed GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 1686 686 1000 253 286 690 457 210 180 213 339 449 532 343 362 1005 206 224 251 Effective Weighted Sample 1116 450 666 158 182 474 315 136 107 143 254 306 345 236 233 871 133 152 231 Total 1126 445 681 180 214 444 287 123 101 141 268 323 346 212 245 965 76 54 31 Yes, more than 512K 235 124 112 41 58 89 47 20 18 29 60 77 77 41 41 198 26 5 6 21% 28% 16% 23% 27% 20% 16% 16% 18% 21% 23% 24% 22% 19% 17% 21% 34% 9% 20% b f n q oqr q No, 512K or less 21 14 7 2 5 7 7 5 4 1 2 6 7 4 3 16 2 2 1 2% 3% 1% 1% 2% 2% 3% 4% 4% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1% 2% 2% 4% 2% b j j o Don't know 869 307 562 137 152 348 233 98 79 111 206 240 262 166 201 750 48 47 24 77% 69% 83% 76% 71% 78% 81% 80% 79% 79% 77% 74% 76% 79% 82% 78% 63% 86% 78% a d d k p opr p Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe15 (Qe11B). Can You Tell Me Whether The Actual Speed Of Your Main Home Internet Connection Is More Than 512K? (Single Code) Base : Those unaware of their broadband connection speed ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 1686 94 131 132 127 147 132 126 116 1184 502 936 744 985 450 Effective Weighted Sample 1116 89 120 125 121 140 125 120 107 913 227 622 526 710 352 Total 1126 107 164 101 88 111 119 97 176 968 158 705 413 711 384 Yes, more than 512K 235 ** 25 34 19 17 15 18 43 201 34 157 78 159 70 21% ** 15% 34% 21% 16% 12% 18% 24% 21% 22% 22% 19% 22% 18% bdefg f No, 512K or less 21 ** 4 2 2 - 2 5 - 18 3 13 8 13 7 2% ** 2% 2% 2% -% 1% 5% -% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% eh Don't know 869 ** 135 65 68 94 103 75 133 748 121 535 327 538 307 77% ** 82% 64% 77% 84% 86% 77% 76% 77% 77% 76% 79% 76% 80% c c c ch c Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe16 (Qe11C). Do You Know How To Find Out What Speeds You Are Getting On Your Computer At Home? (Single Code) Base : Those with broadband at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2481 1207 1274 366 448 1029 638 300 238 339 560 692 810 489 490 1464 317 328 372 Effective Weighted Sample 1641 806 836 233 284 700 446 192 139 227 411 462 534 333 317 1273 209 224 344 Total 1680 807 872 257 348 671 404 179 132 227 445 502 539 307 332 1434 120 79 46 Yes 577 381 196 92 139 233 114 67 32 82 180 201 191 91 94 502 39 25 11 34% 47% 22% 36% 40% 35% 28% 38% 24% 36% 40% 40% 35% 30% 28% 35% 32% 32% 25% b f f f h h h mn n r No 879 341 538 130 161 350 238 73 76 117 228 258 277 163 180 741 68 44 26 52% 42% 62% 51% 46% 52% 59% 41% 58% 51% 51% 51% 51% 53% 54% 52% 57% 56% 56% a cde g g g Don't know 223 85 138 35 47 89 52 38 24 28 37 42 71 52 58 192 13 10 9 13% 11% 16% 14% 14% 13% 13% 21% 18% 12% 8% 8% 13% 17% 17% 13% 11% 12% 19% a ij j k k k opq Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QE16 (QE11C). Do you know how to find out what speeds you are getting on your computer at home? (SINGLE CODE) Base : Those with broadband at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2481 163 209 189 186 188 176 180 173 1750 731 1437 1035 1470 639 Effective Weighted Sample 1641 156 192 179 177 179 167 171 161 1343 337 951 736 1063 499 Total 1680 191 260 146 131 144 160 140 264 1447 233 1087 584 1070 563 Yes 577 76 92 61 47 41 57 44 84 491 86 401 174 394 172 34% 40% 36% 42% 36% 29% 36% 31% 32% 34% 37% 37% 30% 37% 30% e eg l n No 879 95 135 75 67 72 80 73 144 765 114 561 312 553 300 52% 50% 52% 52% 51% 50% 50% 52% 55% 53% 49% 52% 53% 52% 53% Don't know 223 20 33 10 17 31 23 23 35 191 32 126 97 123 92 13% 10% 13% 7% 13% 21% 15% 17% 13% 13% 14% 12% 17% 11% 16% abcd c c k m Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe17 (Qe12X). Showcard You Said You Use A Mobile Usb Stick Or Dongle To Access The Internet, Thinking About The Speed Of Your Mobile Broadband, Is This Faster, Slower Or About The Same As You Expected It To Be When You First Got It? (Single Code) Base : Those with mobile broadband | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |-------------------------------------------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | c | d | | Unweighted total | 513 | 239 | 274 | 121 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 360 | 174 | 186 | 81 | | Total | 377 | 177 | 200 | 92 | | A lot faster | 14 | 4 | 10 | 1 | | 4% | 2% | 5% | 1% | 6% | | A little faster | 39 | 20 | 19 | 7 | | 10% | 11% | 10% | 8% | 12% | | About the same | 202 | 93 | 109 | 58 | | 54% | 53% | 54% | 62% | 56% | | e | | | | | | A little slower | 53 | 31 | 22 | 14 | | 14% | 18% | 11% | 15% | 14% | | A lot slower | 27 | 12 | 15 | 6 | | 7% | 7% | 7% | 6% | 5% | | Don't know | 42 | 17 | 25 | 7 | | 11% | 10% | 13% | 7% | 8% | | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r | | | | | All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe17 (Qe12X). Showcard You Said You Use A Mobile Usb Stick Or Dongle To Access The Internet, Thinking About The Speed Of Your Mobile Broadband, Is This Faster, Slower Or About The Same As You Expected It To Be When You First Got It? (Single Code) Base : Those with mobile broadband | | | | ENGLAND REGIONS | URBANITY | WORKING | DEPRIVATION LEVEL | |---------------------------|--------|------|-------------------|------------|-----------|---------------------| | SOUTH | SOUTH | EAST | WEST | EAST | YORKS& | MEDIUM/ | | Total | LONDON | EAST | WEST | MIDS | MIDS | OF ENG | | Significance Level: 95% | ~a | ~b | ~c | ~d | ~e | ~f | | Unweighted total | 513 | 33 | 35 | 70 | 44 | 39 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 360 | 32 | 32 | 67 | 42 | 38 | | Total | 377 | 39 | 43 | 56 | 34 | 32 | | A lot faster | 14 | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | 4% | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | A little faster | 39 | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | 10% | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | l | | | | | | | | About the same | 202 | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | 54% | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | A little slower | 53 | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | 14% | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | A lot slower | 27 | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | 7% | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | Don't know | 42 | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | 11% | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | k | | | | | | | Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe18A (Qe8Aa). Showcard Thinking About Your Mobile Broadband Internet Service, Please Use This Card To Say How Satisfied You Are With Your Main Supplier For... The Overall Service Provided By Main Provider? (Single Code) Base : Those with mobile broadband | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |-------------------------------------------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | c | d | | Unweighted total | 513 | 239 | 274 | 121 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 360 | 174 | 186 | 81 | | Total | 377 | 177 | 200 | 92 | | Very satisfied | 149 | 70 | 79 | 32 | | 40% | 40% | 40% | 34% | 44% | | n | | | | | | Fairly satisfied | 167 | 76 | 90 | 43 | | 44% | 43% | 45% | 47% | 43% | | k | | | | | | Neither | 24 | 13 | 11 | 5 | | 6% | 7% | 6% | 6% | 8% | | k | | | | | | Fairly dissatisfied | 12 | 5 | 7 | 5 | | 3% | 3% | 3% | 5% | 1% | | Very dissatisfied | 7 | 4 | 3 | 4 | | 2% | 2% | 2% | 4% | 2% | | Don't know | 18 | 8 | 9 | 3 | | 5% | 5% | 5% | 4% | 1% | | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r | | | | | All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe18A (Qe8Aa). Showcard Thinking About Your Mobile Broadband Internet Service, Please Use This Card To Say How Satisfied You Are With Your Main Supplier For... The Overall Service Provided By Main Provider? (Single Code) Base : Those with mobile broadband ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h i j k l m n Unweighted total 513 33 35 70 44 39 30 41 45 394 119 306 207 303 149 Effective Weighted Sample 360 32 32 67 42 38 28 39 42 309 57 215 153 225 121 Total 377 39 43 56 34 32 27 33 70 336 41 247 130 235 133 Very satisfied 149 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 134 16 104 45 96 51 40% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 40% 39% 42% 35% 41% 38% Fairly satisfied 167 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 150 17 103 64 104 58 44% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 45% 41% 42% 49% 44% 44% Neither 24 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 23 1 18 7 16 7 6% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 7% 3% 7% 5% 7% 6% Fairly dissatisfied 12 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 10 2 7 4 4 7 3% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 3% 5% 3% 3% 2% 5% Very dissatisfied 7 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 6 2 5 2 3 4 2% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 2% 4% 2% 2% 1% 3% Don't know 18 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 14 3 11 7 12 5 5% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 4% 8% 4% 5% 5% 4% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe18B (Qe8Ab). Showcard Thinking About Your Mobile Broadband Internet Service, Please Use This Card To Say How Satisfied You Are With Your Main Supplier For... The Speed Of Your Service While Online (Not Just The Connection)? (Single Code) Base : Those with mobile broadband | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |-------------------------------------------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | c | d | | Unweighted total | 513 | 239 | 274 | 121 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 360 | 174 | 186 | 81 | | Total | 377 | 177 | 200 | 92 | | Very satisfied | 141 | 65 | 76 | 31 | | 37% | 37% | 38% | 33% | 43% | | Fairly satisfied | 147 | 67 | 80 | 41 | | 39% | 38% | 40% | 45% | 36% | | Neither | 30 | 15 | 15 | 7 | | 8% | 8% | 7% | 8% | 10% | | Fairly dissatisfied | 25 | 14 | 11 | 5 | | 7% | 8% | 6% | 6% | 7% | | k | | | | | | Very dissatisfied | 17 | 8 | 8 | 4 | | 4% | 5% | 4% | 5% | 2% | | l | | | | | | Don't know | 18 | 8 | 9 | 3 | | 5% | 5% | 5% | 4% | 1% | | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r | | | | | All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe18B (Qe8Ab). Showcard Thinking About Your Mobile Broadband Internet Service, Please Use This Card To Say How Satisfied You Are With Your Main Supplier For... The Speed Of Your Service While Online (Not Just The Connection)? (Single Code) Base : Those with mobile broadband | | | | ENGLAND REGIONS | URBANITY | WORKING | DEPRIVATION LEVEL | |---------------------------|--------|------|-------------------|------------|-----------|---------------------| | SOUTH | SOUTH | EAST | WEST | EAST | YORKS& | MEDIUM/ | | Total | LONDON | EAST | WEST | MIDS | MIDS | OF ENG | | Significance Level: 95% | ~a | ~b | ~c | ~d | ~e | ~f | | Unweighted total | 513 | 33 | 35 | 70 | 44 | 39 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 360 | 32 | 32 | 67 | 42 | 38 | | Total | 377 | 39 | 43 | 56 | 34 | 32 | | Very satisfied | 141 | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | 37% | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | l | | | | | | | | Fairly satisfied | 147 | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | 39% | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | Neither | 30 | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | 8% | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | Fairly dissatisfied | 25 | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | 7% | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | Very dissatisfied | 17 | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | 4% | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | i | | | | | | | | Don't know | 18 | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | 5% | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe18C (Qe8Ac). Showcard Thinking About Your Mobile Broadband Internet Service, Please Use This Card To Say How Satisfied You Are With Your Main Supplier For... The Reliability Of The Service From Main Provider? (Single Code) Base : Those with mobile broadband | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |-------------------------------------------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | c | d | | Unweighted total | 513 | 239 | 274 | 121 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 360 | 174 | 186 | 81 | | Total | 377 | 177 | 200 | 92 | | Very satisfied | 155 | 70 | 86 | 36 | | 41% | 39% | 43% | 39% | 40% | | Fairly satisfied | 147 | 75 | 72 | 36 | | 39% | 42% | 36% | 39% | 41% | | Neither | 27 | 14 | 14 | 5 | | 7% | 8% | 7% | 5% | 11% | | Fairly dissatisfied | 19 | 7 | 12 | 10 | | 5% | 4% | 6% | 11% | 2% | | d | k | | | | | Very dissatisfied | 10 | 3 | 7 | 2 | | 3% | 2% | 3% | 2% | 4% | | l | | | | | | Don't know | 18 | 8 | 10 | 3 | | 5% | 5% | 5% | 4% | 2% | | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r | | | | | All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe18C (Qe8Ac). Showcard Thinking About Your Mobile Broadband Internet Service, Please Use This Card To Say How Satisfied You Are With Your Main Supplier For... The Reliability Of The Service From Main Provider? (Single Code) Base : Those with mobile broadband | | | | ENGLAND REGIONS | URBANITY | WORKING | DEPRIVATION LEVEL | |---------------------------|--------|------|-------------------|------------|-----------|---------------------| | SOUTH | SOUTH | EAST | WEST | EAST | YORKS& | MEDIUM/ | | Total | LONDON | EAST | WEST | MIDS | MIDS | OF ENG | | Significance Level: 95% | ~a | ~b | ~c | ~d | ~e | ~f | | Unweighted total | 513 | 33 | 35 | 70 | 44 | 39 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 360 | 32 | 32 | 67 | 42 | 38 | | Total | 377 | 39 | 43 | 56 | 34 | 32 | | Very satisfied | 155 | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | 41% | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | Fairly satisfied | 147 | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | 39% | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | Neither | 27 | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | 7% | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | Fairly dissatisfied | 19 | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | 5% | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | Very dissatisfied | 10 | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | 3% | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | Don't know | 18 | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | | 5% | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe19 (Qe12). Showcard Thinking About The Speed Of Your Household'S Fixed Broadband Internet, Is This Faster, Slower Or About The Same As You Expected It To Be When You First Got It? (Single Code) Base : Those with fixed broadband at home | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |---------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | c | d | | Unweighted total | 2243 | 1098 | 1145 | 294 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 1480 | 728 | 752 | 187 | | Total | 1513 | 733 | 780 | 205 | | A lot faster | 82 | 46 | 36 | 10 | | 5% | 6% | 5% | 5% | 6% | | m | m | | | | | A little faster | 168 | 88 | 80 | 32 | | 11% | 12% | 10% | 16% | 11% | | e | | | | | | About the same | 785 | 382 | 403 | 108 | | 52% | 52% | 52% | 53% | 59% | | f | f | f | | | | A little slower | 209 | 107 | 102 | 26 | | 14% | 15% | 13% | 12% | 11% | | r | | | | | | A lot slower | 119 | 61 | 59 | 14 | | 8% | 8% | 8% | 7% | 7% | | r | | | | | | Don't know | 149 | 49 | 100 | 15 | | 10% | 7% | 13% | 7% | 6% | | a | cde | j | k | | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe19 (Qe12). Showcard Thinking About The Speed Of Your Household'S Fixed Broadband Internet, Is This Faster, Slower Or About The Same As You Expected It To Be When You First Got It? (Single Code) Base : Those with fixed broadband at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2243 149 193 164 163 167 166 157 152 1573 670 1319 915 1347 561 Effective Weighted Sample 1480 143 178 155 155 159 157 150 141 1208 308 871 652 974 436 Total 1513 176 239 127 114 127 151 122 232 1300 213 994 511 979 493 A lot faster 82 4 13 10 7 5 4 8 21 70 12 52 31 61 18 5% 2% 5% 8% 6% 4% 3% 7% 9% 5% 6% 5% 6% 6% 4% af af A little faster 168 15 30 18 15 11 16 17 22 151 17 114 54 110 53 11% 9% 12% 14% 13% 9% 11% 14% 10% 12% 8% 11% 11% 11% 11% About the same 785 110 127 54 55 73 75 64 109 698 87 528 250 502 261 52% 62% 53% 42% 49% 58% 49% 52% 47% 54% 41% 53% 49% 51% 53% cdfh c c j A little slower 209 24 34 23 17 16 21 20 23 168 41 142 64 138 67 14% 14% 14% 18% 15% 12% 14% 17% 10% 13% 19% 14% 13% 14% 14% h i A lot slower 119 10 12 9 13 7 20 6 24 92 28 73 46 89 28 8% 6% 5% 7% 12% 5% 13% 5% 10% 7% 13% 7% 9% 9% 6% beg abeg i n Don't know 149 14 24 13 7 15 15 7 33 121 28 85 65 79 66 10% 8% 10% 10% 6% 12% 10% 6% 14% 9% 13% 9% 13% 8% 13% dg i k m Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe20A (Qe8A). Showcard Thinking About Your Fixed Broadband Internet Service, Please Use This Card To Say How Satisfied You Are With Your Main Supplier For... The Overall Service Provided By Main Provider. (Single Code) Base : Those with fixed broadband at home | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |---------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | c | d | | Unweighted total | 2243 | 1098 | 1145 | 294 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 1480 | 728 | 752 | 187 | | Total | 1513 | 733 | 780 | 205 | | Very satisfied | 682 | 324 | 357 | 92 | | 45% | 44% | 46% | 45% | 49% | | i | opr | | | | | Fairly satisfied | 604 | 296 | 308 | 82 | | 40% | 40% | 40% | 40% | 37% | | g | | | | | | Neither | 111 | 54 | 56 | 14 | | 7% | 7% | 7% | 7% | 9% | | qr | q | | | | | Fairly dissatisfied | 61 | 30 | 31 | 11 | | 4% | 4% | 4% | 6% | 4% | | q | q | q | | | | Very dissatisfied | 30 | 20 | 9 | 3 | | 2% | 3% | 1% | 2% | 1% | | b | d | | | | | Don't know | 25 | 7 | 18 | 2 | | 2% | 1% | 2% | 1% | 1% | | a | cde | i | o | | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe20A (Qe8A). Showcard Thinking About Your Fixed Broadband Internet Service, Please Use This Card To Say How Satisfied You Are With Your Main Supplier For... The Overall Service Provided By Main Provider. (Single Code) Base : Those with fixed broadband at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2243 149 193 164 163 167 166 157 152 1573 670 1319 915 1347 561 Effective Weighted Sample 1480 143 178 155 155 159 157 150 141 1208 308 871 652 974 436 Total 1513 176 239 127 114 127 151 122 232 1300 213 994 511 979 493 Very satisfied 682 49 123 46 55 54 71 65 114 600 82 465 215 442 222 45% 28% 51% 36% 49% 43% 47% 53% 49% 46% 39% 47% 42% 45% 45% ac ac a a ac ac j Fairly satisfied 604 86 85 60 44 60 64 37 77 515 90 390 207 398 189 40% 49% 35% 47% 39% 47% 42% 30% 33% 40% 42% 39% 40% 41% 38% bgh bgh bgh g Neither 111 22 15 12 4 10 9 8 19 96 15 71 40 71 38 7% 13% 6% 9% 3% 8% 6% 6% 8% 7% 7% 7% 8% 7% 8% df d Fairly dissatisfied 61 12 7 5 6 - 4 9 11 50 11 41 20 34 25 4% 7% 3% 4% 6% -% 3% 7% 5% 4% 5% 4% 4% 4% 5% e e e e e e e Very dissatisfied 30 2 5 3 4 1 3 3 7 23 6 19 11 18 11 2% 1% 2% 2% 3% 1% 2% 2% 3% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% Don't know 25 5 5 2 - 1 1 1 5 17 9 9 17 15 9 2% 3% 2% 1% -% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 4% 1% 3% 2% 2% d i k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe20B (Qe8B). Showcard Thinking About Your Fixed Broadband Internet Service, Please Use This Card To Say How Satisfied You Are With Your Main Supplier For... The Speed Of Your Service While Online (Not Just The Connection)? (Single Code) Base : Those with fixed broadband at home | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |---------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | c | d | | Unweighted total | 2243 | 1098 | 1145 | 294 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 1480 | 728 | 752 | 187 | | Total | 1513 | 733 | 780 | 205 | | Very satisfied | 574 | 267 | 307 | 78 | | 38% | 36% | 39% | 38% | 42% | | ij | | | | | | Fairly satisfied | 609 | 303 | 306 | 87 | | 40% | 41% | 39% | 43% | 41% | | g | g | g | m | | | Neither | 124 | 67 | 57 | 13 | | 8% | 9% | 7% | 7% | 7% | | h | h | h | kn | q | | Fairly dissatisfied | 112 | 52 | 60 | 15 | | 7% | 7% | 8% | 7% | 5% | | q | | | | | | Very dissatisfied | 65 | 36 | 29 | 10 | | 4% | 5% | 4% | 5% | 3% | | Don't know | 29 | 9 | 21 | 2 | | 2% | 1% | 3% | 1% | 1% | | a | cde | i | o | | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe20B (Qe8B). Showcard Thinking About Your Fixed Broadband Internet Service, Please Use This Card To Say How Satisfied You Are With Your Main Supplier For... The Speed Of Your Service While Online (Not Just The Connection)? (Single Code) Base : Those with fixed broadband at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2243 149 193 164 163 167 166 157 152 1573 670 1319 915 1347 561 Effective Weighted Sample 1480 143 178 155 155 159 157 150 141 1208 308 871 652 974 436 Total 1513 176 239 127 114 127 151 122 232 1300 213 994 511 979 493 Very satisfied 574 48 105 42 45 48 61 54 86 515 59 398 176 361 198 38% 27% 44% 33% 40% 38% 41% 44% 37% 40% 28% 40% 34% 37% 40% ac a a ac j l Fairly satisfied 609 80 85 52 48 60 57 44 94 522 88 389 212 394 197 40% 46% 35% 41% 42% 47% 38% 36% 41% 40% 41% 39% 42% 40% 40% bg Neither 124 20 12 15 6 12 9 12 20 97 27 78 45 85 37 8% 11% 5% 12% 5% 9% 6% 10% 8% 7% 13% 8% 9% 9% 7% b bd i Fairly dissatisfied 112 11 26 12 8 4 13 7 13 93 19 83 29 79 30 7% 6% 11% 9% 7% 3% 9% 6% 6% 7% 9% 8% 6% 8% 6% e e e Very dissatisfied 65 10 7 3 6 1 9 4 15 54 11 36 29 44 19 4% 6% 3% 3% 5% *% 6% 3% 6% 4% 5% 4% 6% 5% 4% e e e e k Don't know 29 6 3 2 1 3 1 2 5 21 8 10 19 16 12 2% 3% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% 2% 4% 1% 4% 2% 2% i k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe20C (Qe8C). Showcard Thinking About Your Fixed Broadband Internet Service, Please Use This Card To Say How Satisfied You Are With Your Main Supplier For... The Reliability Of The Service From Main Provider? (Single Code) Base : Those with fixed broadband at home | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |---------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | c | d | | Unweighted total | 2243 | 1098 | 1145 | 294 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 1480 | 728 | 752 | 187 | | Total | 1513 | 733 | 780 | 205 | | Very satisfied | 703 | 339 | 364 | 90 | | 46% | 46% | 47% | 44% | 46% | | Fairly satisfied | 602 | 291 | 310 | 86 | | 40% | 40% | 40% | 42% | 40% | | g | g | | | | | Neither | 96 | 54 | 42 | 14 | | 6% | 7% | 5% | 7% | 8% | | h | q | | | | | Fairly dissatisfied | 60 | 24 | 36 | 9 | | 4% | 3% | 5% | 4% | 4% | | hj | j | k | k | k | | Very dissatisfied | 27 | 17 | 10 | 5 | | 2% | 2% | 1% | 2% | 1% | | Don't know | 26 | 7 | 18 | 2 | | 2% | 1% | 2% | 1% | 1% | | a | cde | i | o | | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe20C (Qe8C). Showcard Thinking About Your Fixed Broadband Internet Service, Please Use This Card To Say How Satisfied You Are With Your Main Supplier For... The Reliability Of The Service From Main Provider? (Single Code) Base : Those with fixed broadband at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2243 149 193 164 163 167 166 157 152 1573 670 1319 915 1347 561 Effective Weighted Sample 1480 143 178 155 155 159 157 150 141 1208 308 871 652 974 436 Total 1513 176 239 127 114 127 151 122 232 1300 213 994 511 979 493 Very satisfied 703 51 129 56 59 57 72 68 105 610 93 490 213 463 222 46% 29% 54% 45% 52% 45% 47% 55% 45% 47% 44% 49% 42% 47% 45% a a a a a a a l Fairly satisfied 602 87 83 49 41 62 68 36 88 519 83 378 216 392 193 40% 50% 35% 39% 36% 49% 45% 29% 38% 40% 39% 38% 42% 40% 39% bdgh bdg g Neither 96 21 11 10 3 5 6 7 18 80 16 64 32 61 33 6% 12% 5% 8% 2% 4% 4% 6% 8% 6% 8% 6% 6% 6% 7% bdef d d Fairly dissatisfied 60 6 9 7 6 1 2 8 13 50 10 33 27 34 23 4% 4% 4% 6% 5% 1% 1% 6% 5% 4% 5% 3% 5% 4% 5% ef e ef e Very dissatisfied 27 5 4 1 4 1 3 2 3 25 2 20 7 13 13 2% 3% 2% 1% 4% 1% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 3% Don't know 26 5 3 2 1 1 1 1 5 17 9 9 16 16 9 2% 3% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 4% 1% 3% 2% 2% i k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe21 (Qe35). Read Out Description Of Wireless Router. Have You Or Anyone In Your Household Ever Used A Fixed Wireless Internet Connection At Home? (Single Code) Base : Those with fixed broadband at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2243 1098 1145 294 385 948 616 242 211 298 533 661 747 434 401 1311 294 303 335 Effective Weighted Sample 1480 728 752 187 243 640 429 154 124 198 390 443 493 293 255 1142 195 207 309 Total 1513 733 780 205 300 619 389 139 114 199 424 479 495 275 264 1287 113 72 42 Yes & currently using 1131 553 577 171 246 467 247 94 81 151 342 382 374 190 185 979 74 50 28 75% 75% 74% 83% 82% 75% 63% 68% 71% 76% 81% 80% 75% 69% 70% 76% 66% 69% 67% ef ef f gh mn m pqr Yes but stopped using 33 21 12 4 6 14 9 4 1 3 8 13 7 5 7 25 5 1 1 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% 1% 2% 2% 3% 1% 2% 3% 2% 5% 2% 3% o No never used 314 150 165 26 46 127 115 37 27 40 69 78 100 72 64 260 29 16 9 21% 20% 21% 13% 15% 21% 30% 27% 24% 20% 16% 16% 20% 26% 24% 20% 26% 22% 23% c cde j kl k Don't know 36 9 27 5 2 11 18 3 5 4 5 5 15 8 7 23 4 5 3 2% 1% 3% 2% 1% 2% 5% 2% 4% 2% 1% 1% 3% 3% 3% 2% 4% 7% 8% a de j k o o Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe21 (Qe35). Read Out Description Of Wireless Router. Have You Or Anyone In Your Household Ever Used A Fixed Wireless Internet Connection At Home? (Single Code) Base : Those with fixed broadband at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2243 149 193 164 163 167 166 157 152 1573 670 1319 915 1347 561 Effective Weighted Sample 1480 143 178 155 155 159 157 150 141 1208 308 871 652 974 436 Total 1513 176 239 127 114 127 151 122 232 1300 213 994 511 979 493 Yes & currently using 1131 130 191 104 68 77 119 102 189 965 166 768 356 745 358 75% 74% 80% 82% 59% 60% 79% 84% 82% 74% 78% 77% 70% 76% 73% de de de de ade de l Yes but stopped using 33 - 3 4 3 3 1 1 9 26 7 19 13 23 9 2% -% 1% 3% 3% 3% 1% 1% 4% 2% 3% 2% 3% 2% 2% a a a a No never used 314 43 40 15 40 46 30 15 30 282 32 196 116 189 116 21% 24% 17% 12% 35% 36% 20% 13% 13% 22% 15% 20% 23% 19% 23% cgh abcfgh abcfgh j Don't know 36 4 5 4 3 1 1 3 4 28 8 11 25 22 10 2% 2% 2% 3% 2% *% 1% 3% 2% 2% 4% 1% 5% 2% 2% k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe22 (Qe24). Showcard How Likely Are You To Get Internet Access At Home In The Next 12 Months? (Single Code) Base : Those without internet access at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b ~c ~d e f g h ~i ~j ~k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 920 434 486 82 76 158 604 378 131 60 32 78 185 193 464 475 158 154 133 Effective Weighted Sample 596 281 315 54 48 101 403 244 85 41 22 52 125 123 300 412 112 101 122 Total 527 247 280 61 49 97 320 189 76 46 24 53 118 95 261 411 70 30 15 Certain to 20 10 10 ** ** 8 1 3 2 ** ** ** 5 4 7 15 3 1 * 4% 4% 3% ** ** 8% *% 2% 3% ** ** ** 4% 5% 3% 4% 5% 4% 1% f Very likely 18 4 14 ** ** 3 4 6 3 ** ** ** 4 4 9 15 * 2 1 3% 2% 5% ** ** 3% 1% 3% 3% ** ** ** 3% 4% 3% 4% *% 6% 4% a p p p Likely 44 24 20 ** ** 9 12 14 7 ** ** ** 14 7 22 34 6 2 2 8% 10% 7% ** ** 9% 4% 7% 10% ** ** ** 12% 7% 8% 8% 9% 7% 11% f Unlikely 61 24 37 ** ** 19 29 14 17 ** ** ** 13 10 32 49 6 5 1 12% 10% 13% ** ** 20% 9% 7% 23% ** ** ** 11% 11% 12% 12% 8% 17% 8% f g r Very unlikely 74 40 33 ** ** 12 46 31 8 ** ** ** 15 16 39 54 11 5 4 14% 16% 12% ** ** 12% 15% 16% 11% ** ** ** 13% 16% 15% 13% 16% 16% 25% o Certain not to 240 111 129 ** ** 18 206 106 31 ** ** ** 43 37 130 186 36 11 7 46% 45% 46% ** ** 18% 64% 56% 40% ** ** ** 36% 39% 50% 45% 52% 36% 47% e h lm q Don't know 70 33 37 ** ** 29 22 16 8 ** ** ** 24 18 23 58 7 4 1 13% 13% 13% ** ** 30% 7% 8% 10% ** ** ** 20% 19% 9% 14% 10% 13% 4% f n n r r Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QE22 (QE24). SHOWCARD How likely are you to get internet access at home in the next 12 months? (SINGLE CODE) Base : Those without internet access at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h i j k l m n Unweighted total 920 74 36 60 48 67 58 68 64 655 265 192 721 462 325 Effective Weighted Sample 596 71 33 58 45 63 55 65 60 512 105 122 497 309 255 Total 527 77 42 39 29 46 46 44 87 474 53 148 375 277 235 Certain to 20 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 16 4 14 5 10 9 4% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 3% 7% 9% 1% 4% 4% l Very likely 18 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 15 2 4 14 11 6 3% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 3% 5% 3% 4% 4% 2% Likely 44 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 40 4 20 24 18 24 8% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 8% 7% 14% 6% 7% 10% l Unlikely 61 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 56 6 23 39 34 26 12% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 12% 11% 15% 10% 12% 11% Very unlikely 74 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 67 6 14 59 42 28 14% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 14% 12% 10% 16% 15% 12% Certain not to 240 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 215 25 33 204 125 107 46% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 45% 46% 22% 54% 45% 46% k Don't know 70 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 64 6 40 30 35 35 13% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 13% 12% 27% 8% 13% 15% l Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe23A (Qe25A). Why Are You Unlikely To Get Internet Access At Home In The Next 12 Months? (Multicode) Unprompted Base : Those unlikely to get internet access at home in the next 12 months GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b ~c ~d ~e f g h ~i ~j ~k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 687 327 360 34 30 86 537 305 102 34 16 60 127 135 365 349 118 114 106 Effective Weighted Sample 445 214 231 22 19 53 358 197 69 22 11 41 86 86 236 303 84 74 97 Total 375 175 199 26 20 49 281 150 56 24 13 40 71 62 201 289 53 21 12 No need 197 94 102 ** ** ** 153 68 35 ** ** ** 44 38 93 151 25 12 8 52% 54% 51% ** ** ** 54% 45% 63% ** ** ** 62% 60% 47% 52% 47% 59% 68% g n n op Don't want a computer 126 58 67 ** ** ** 109 51 18 ** ** ** 19 21 73 100 15 8 3 34% 33% 34% ** ** ** 39% 34% 32% ** ** ** 26% 33% 36% 35% 29% 38% 24% r Too old to use the internet 96 42 55 ** ** ** 96 49 11 ** ** ** 14 11 59 74 14 5 3 26% 24% 27% ** ** ** 34% 33% 19% ** ** ** 20% 18% 29% 26% 26% 26% 22% h m Don't know how you use computers/ the internet 94 42 52 ** ** ** 82 42 15 ** ** ** 14 12 57 62 24 6 3 25% 24% 26% ** ** ** 29% 28% 26% ** ** ** 20% 20% 28% 21% 45% 28% 24% oqr Too expensive to set up 60 27 33 ** ** ** 24 29 8 ** ** ** 7 7 44 45 10 4 1 16% 15% 16% ** ** ** 9% 20% 14% ** ** ** 10% 11% 22% 16% 18% 20% 9% lm Computer is too expensive to buy 41 21 20 ** ** ** 23 20 7 ** ** ** 5 6 31 30 8 3 * 11% 12% 10% ** ** ** 8% 13% 13% ** ** ** 6% 9% 15% 10% 16% 12% 3% l r r r Charges are too expensive 26 12 14 ** ** ** 8 12 3 ** ** ** 2 2 22 17 7 2 1 7% 7% 7% ** ** ** 3% 8% 5% ** ** ** 3% 3% 11% 6% 13% 9% 6% lm o Friends/ family member checks things on the internet for me 26 11 16 ** ** ** 20 6 2 ** ** ** 5 5 11 19 4 3 * 7% 6% 8% ** ** ** 7% 4% 4% ** ** ** 7% 8% 6% 6% 8% 15% 2% or Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe23A (Qe25A). Why Are You Unlikely To Get Internet Access At Home In The Next 12 Months? (Multicode) Unprompted Base : Those unlikely to get internet access at home in the next 12 months GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b ~c ~d ~e f g h ~i ~j ~k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 687 327 360 34 30 86 537 305 102 34 16 60 127 135 365 349 118 114 106 Effective Weighted Sample 445 214 231 22 19 53 358 197 69 22 11 41 86 86 236 303 84 74 97 Total 375 175 199 26 20 49 281 150 56 24 13 40 71 62 201 289 53 21 12 Worries/ concerns about privacy issues 24 9 15 ** ** ** 19 6 2 ** ** ** 6 4 11 23 1 * - 7% 5% 8% ** ** ** 7% 4% 3% ** ** ** 9% 6% 5% 8% 2% 2% -% pr Concerned about security/ fraud 20 8 12 ** ** ** 17 3 2 ** ** ** 5 3 9 20 - * - 5% 5% 6% ** ** ** 6% 2% 4% ** ** ** 8% 5% 5% 7% -% 1% -% pr Don't have a phone line 19 9 11 ** ** ** 5 6 3 ** ** ** 2 1 11 15 3 1 * 5% 5% 5% ** ** ** 2% 4% 6% ** ** ** 3% 2% 6% 5% 5% 7% 4% Satisfied with using the internet elsewhere 12 10 2 ** ** ** 4 2 2 ** ** ** 2 3 4 9 2 1 * 3% 6% 1% ** ** ** 1% 1% 3% ** ** ** 3% 4% 2% 3% 4% 3% 4% b Satisfied with using the internet at work 3 3 - ** ** ** 1 * - ** ** ** 1 1 * 3 - * - 1% 2% -% ** ** ** *% *% -% ** ** ** 2% 2% *% 1% -% *% -% b n n Other 47 20 27 ** ** ** 31 16 4 ** ** ** 12 6 22 44 1 1 1 13% 12% 13% ** ** ** 11% 10% 8% ** ** ** 17% 9% 11% 15% 2% 6% 8% pq p Don't know 3 3 * ** ** ** 3 * - ** ** ** * 1 * 2 * * * 1% 1% *% ** ** ** 1% *% -% ** ** ** *% 2% *% 1% *% 1% 1% n Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe23A (Qe25A). Why Are You Unlikely To Get Internet Access At Home In The Next 12 Months? (Multicode) Unprompted Base : Those unlikely to get internet access at home in the next 12 months ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h i j ~k l m n Unweighted total 687 47 28 49 38 44 37 58 48 490 197 91 590 348 233 Effective Weighted Sample 445 45 26 48 36 42 36 56 45 383 78 56 402 234 184 Total 375 46 33 31 23 29 28 37 63 338 36 70 302 201 161 No need 197 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 175 22 ** 155 118 71 52% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 52% 59% ** 51% 58% 44% n Don't want a computer 126 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 117 9 ** 106 67 56 34% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 34% 25% ** 35% 33% 35% Too old to use the internet 96 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 86 10 ** 92 51 42 26% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 26% 27% ** 31% 26% 26% Don't know how you use computers/ the internet 94 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 86 8 ** 82 47 44 25% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 25% 22% ** 27% 23% 27% Too expensive to set up 60 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 55 5 ** 41 37 22 16% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 16% 14% ** 14% 18% 13% Computer is too expensive to buy 41 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 39 2 ** 33 17 23 11% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 11% 6% ** 11% 9% 14% Charges are too expensive 26 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 24 2 ** 17 11 14 7% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 7% 7% ** 6% 6% 9% Friends/ family member checks things on the internet for me 26 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 24 2 ** 21 18 8 7% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 7% 5% ** 7% 9% 5% Worries/ concerns about privacy issues 24 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 24 * ** 23 10 15 7% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 7% 1% ** 8% 5% 9% j Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe23A (Qe25A). Why Are You Unlikely To Get Internet Access At Home In The Next 12 Months? (Multicode) Unprompted Base : Those unlikely to get internet access at home in the next 12 months ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h i j ~k l m n Unweighted total 687 47 28 49 38 44 37 58 48 490 197 91 590 348 233 Effective Weighted Sample 445 45 26 48 36 42 36 56 45 383 78 56 402 234 184 Total 375 46 33 31 23 29 28 37 63 338 36 70 302 201 161 Concerned about security/ fraud 20 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 20 * ** 18 8 12 5% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 6% *% ** 6% 4% 7% j Don't have a phone line 19 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 17 2 ** 11 12 7 5% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 5% 5% ** 3% 6% 4% Satisfied with using the internet elsewhere 12 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 12 * ** 7 5 6 3% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 3% 1% ** 2% 3% 4% Satisfied with using the internet at work 3 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 3 * ** * 2 1 1% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1% *% ** *% 1% 1% Other 47 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 41 6 ** 30 21 25 13% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 12% 16% ** 10% 10% 16% Don't know 3 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 2 * ** 3 3 - 1% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1% 1% ** 1% 1% -% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe23B (Qe25B). And, Which One Of These Reasons Is Your Main Reason For Not Getting Internet Access At Home? (Single Code) Base : Those unlikely to get internet access at home in the next 12 months GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b ~c ~d ~e f g h ~i ~j ~k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 687 327 360 34 30 86 537 305 102 34 16 60 127 135 365 349 118 114 106 Effective Weighted Sample 445 214 231 22 19 53 358 197 69 22 11 41 86 86 236 303 84 74 97 Total 375 175 199 26 20 49 281 150 56 24 13 40 71 62 201 289 53 21 12 No need 108 53 55 ** ** ** 81 41 20 ** ** ** 26 22 50 83 12 7 6 29% 30% 27% ** ** ** 29% 27% 36% ** ** ** 36% 35% 25% 29% 22% 33% 48% op Too old to use the internet 56 22 33 ** ** ** 56 30 6 ** ** ** 8 7 32 43 9 2 2 15% 13% 17% ** ** ** 20% 20% 10% ** ** ** 11% 12% 16% 15% 16% 11% 13% Don't want a computer 55 25 30 ** ** ** 47 20 10 ** ** ** 10 9 31 47 4 3 1 15% 14% 15% ** ** ** 17% 13% 18% ** ** ** 14% 14% 16% 16% 8% 15% 8% pr Don't know how you use computers/ the internet 51 22 30 ** ** ** 44 20 11 ** ** ** 8 8 31 31 16 3 1 14% 12% 15% ** ** ** 16% 13% 19% ** ** ** 12% 13% 16% 11% 30% 16% 10% oqr Too expensive to set up 24 11 13 ** ** ** 7 13 2 ** ** ** 2 4 18 21 2 1 1 7% 6% 7% ** ** ** 3% 8% 4% ** ** ** 3% 7% 9% 7% 4% 5% 4% Friends/family member checks things on the internet for me 11 5 6 ** ** ** 7 2 1 ** ** ** 2 4 2 7 3 1 - 3% 3% 3% ** ** ** 3% 1% 2% ** ** ** 3% 6% 1% 3% 5% 3% -% n r Computer is too expensive to buy 10 6 4 ** ** ** 2 4 1 ** ** ** 1 * 9 5 4 1 * 3% 4% 2% ** ** ** 1% 2% 2% ** ** ** 2% *% 4% 2% 8% 4% 1% or Worries/ concerns about privacy issues 8 4 4 ** ** ** 6 - 2 ** ** ** 3 - 2 8 - - - 2% 2% 2% ** ** ** 2% -% 3% ** ** ** 4% -% 1% 3% -% -% -% g Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe23B (Qe25B). And, Which One Of These Reasons Is Your Main Reason For Not Getting Internet Access At Home? (Single Code) Base : Those unlikely to get internet access at home in the next 12 months GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b ~c ~d ~e f g h ~i ~j ~k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 687 327 360 34 30 86 537 305 102 34 16 60 127 135 365 349 118 114 106 Effective Weighted Sample 445 214 231 22 19 53 358 197 69 22 11 41 86 86 236 303 84 74 97 Total 375 175 199 26 20 49 281 150 56 24 13 40 71 62 201 289 53 21 12 Charges are too expensive 7 2 5 ** ** ** 1 6 * ** ** ** * * 7 4 1 1 * 2% 1% 3% ** ** ** *% 4% *% ** ** ** *% *% 4% 2% 2% 7% 2% o Satisfied with using the internet elsewhere 4 3 1 ** ** ** 1 1 1 ** ** ** 1 1 2 2 1 - * 1% 2% *% ** ** ** *% 1% 1% ** ** ** 1% 1% 1% 1% 3% -% 2% Other 38 20 18 ** ** ** 26 14 3 ** ** ** 10 6 17 35 1 1 1 10% 11% 9% ** ** ** 9% 9% 5% ** ** ** 14% 10% 8% 12% 1% 6% 12% p p Don't know 3 3 * ** ** ** 3 * - ** ** ** * 1 * 2 * * * 1% 1% *% ** ** ** 1% *% -% ** ** ** *% 2% *% 1% *% 1% 1% n Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe23B (Qe25B). And, Which One Of These Reasons Is Your Main Reason For Not Getting Internet Access At Home? (Single Code) Base : Those unlikely to get internet access at home in the next 12 months ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h i j ~k l m n Unweighted total 687 47 28 49 38 44 37 58 48 490 197 91 590 348 233 Effective Weighted Sample 445 45 26 48 36 42 36 56 45 383 78 56 402 234 184 Total 375 46 33 31 23 29 28 37 63 338 36 70 302 201 161 No need 108 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 97 11 ** 85 67 35 29% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 29% 30% ** 28% 33% 22% n Too old to use the internet 56 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 51 4 ** 53 28 26 15% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 15% 12% ** 18% 14% 16% Don't want a computer 55 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 49 6 ** 45 34 21 15% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 15% 16% ** 15% 17% 13% Don't know how you use computers/ the internet 51 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 46 6 ** 45 24 26 14% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 14% 15% ** 15% 12% 16% Too expensive to set up 24 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 22 2 ** 16 13 10 7% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 7% 6% ** 5% 7% 6% Friends/family member checks things on the internet for me 11 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 10 * ** 8 6 5 3% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 3% 1% ** 3% 3% 3% Computer is too expensive to buy 10 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 10 1 ** 9 5 5 3% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 3% 2% ** 3% 2% 3% Worries/ concerns about privacy issues 8 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 8 - ** 6 2 6 2% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 2% -% ** 2% 1% 4% m Charges are too expensive 7 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 6 1 ** 5 4 3 2% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 2% 3% ** 2% 2% 2% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe23B (Qe25B). And, Which One Of These Reasons Is Your Main Reason For Not Getting Internet Access At Home? (Single Code) Base : Those unlikely to get internet access at home in the next 12 months ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h i j ~k l m n Unweighted total 687 47 28 49 38 44 37 58 48 490 197 91 590 348 233 Effective Weighted Sample 445 45 26 48 36 42 36 56 45 383 78 56 402 234 184 Total 375 46 33 31 23 29 28 37 63 338 36 70 302 201 161 Satisfied with using the internet elsewhere 4 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 4 - ** 2 2 2 1% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1% -% ** 1% 1% 1% Other 38 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 33 5 ** 25 16 21 10% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 10% 14% ** 8% 8% 13% Don't know 3 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 2 * ** 3 3 - 1% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1% 1% ** 1% 1% -% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe24 (Qeni1). Explain Satellite Broadband Were You Aware That Satellite Broadband Is Available? (Single Code) Base : All respondents in Scotland and Wales GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h ~i j k l m n ~o p q ~r Unweighted total 980 475 505 124 156 344 356 203 111 91 115 207 289 203 281 - 487 493 - Effective Weighted Sample 612 293 319 83 105 218 207 128 72 60 75 131 179 115 189 - 330 329 - Total 308 147 161 42 55 106 106 65 38 30 36 65 85 59 99 - 197 111 - Yes 100 54 45 17 19 41 23 11 13 ** 17 32 30 21 17 - 66 34 - 32% 37% 28% 40% 34% 39% 22% 17% 33% ** 48% 49% 35% 36% 17% -% 33% 30% -% b f f f g g lmn n n No 191 85 106 23 34 61 73 50 24 ** 18 30 51 36 74 - 123 68 - 62% 58% 65% 56% 62% 57% 69% 77% 62% ** 50% 47% 60% 61% 74% -% 62% 61% -% ce hj k k klm Don't know 18 7 10 2 2 4 10 4 2 ** 1 3 5 2 8 - 8 10 - 6% 5% 6% 4% 4% 4% 9% 6% 5% ** 2% 4% 6% 4% 8% -% 4% 9% -% e p Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe24 (Qeni1). Explain Satellite Broadband Were You Aware That Satellite Broadband Is Available? (Single Code) Base : All respondents in Scotland and Wales ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h i j k l m n Unweighted total 980 - - - - - - - - 480 500 486 491 680 300 Effective Weighted Sample 612 - - - - - - - - 427 471 318 293 398 224 Total 308 - - - - - - - - 252 56 161 146 178 130 Yes 100 - - - - - - - - 82 17 68 31 63 36 32% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% 33% 31% 43% 21% 35% 28% l No 191 - - - - - - - - 159 32 86 104 105 86 62% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% 63% 57% 53% 71% 59% 66% j k Don't know 18 - - - - - - - - 11 7 7 11 10 8 6% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% 4% 12% 4% 8% 6% 6% i Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe25 (Qe29). Before Now, Were You Aware That You Could Make Voice Calls Using The Internet? (Single Code) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Yes 1653 835 818 272 351 623 406 195 141 224 419 480 544 293 336 1408 133 74 37 73% 77% 70% 83% 86% 80% 55% 52% 65% 80% 89% 85% 81% 71% 55% 75% 68% 67% 60% b f ef f g gh ghi mn mn n pqr r r No 565 228 336 50 54 146 314 173 74 53 43 73 117 116 259 448 61 32 23 25% 21% 29% 15% 13% 19% 43% 46% 34% 19% 9% 13% 17% 28% 43% 24% 31% 29% 37% a d cde hij ij j k kl klm o o oq Don't know 38 18 20 5 3 12 19 10 1 3 10 13 8 4 13 29 2 5 2 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 3% 3% *% 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% 4% 3% d h op o Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QE25 (QE29). Before now, were you aware that you could make voice calls using the internet? (SINGLE CODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Yes 1653 209 252 136 128 141 148 122 271 1445 208 1056 588 1055 561 73% 75% 82% 73% 79% 71% 71% 65% 76% 74% 71% 84% 60% 76% 69% g cefg fg g l n No 565 59 53 49 33 56 58 60 80 486 79 190 372 305 237 25% 21% 17% 26% 20% 28% 28% 32% 23% 25% 27% 15% 38% 22% 29% b bd b abdh k m Don't know 38 12 2 2 1 1 4 5 3 34 5 15 23 22 14 2% 4% 1% 1% 1% *% 2% 2% 1% 2% 2% 1% 2% 2% 2% bcdeh e k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe26 (Qe29A). And Do You Or Anyone In Your Household Have Access To Internet Voice Services At Home? (Single Code) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Yes 522 248 274 93 127 179 123 55 42 57 168 202 182 64 74 459 29 20 14 23% 23% 23% 28% 31% 23% 17% 14% 19% 20% 36% 36% 27% 16% 12% 24% 15% 18% 22% f ef f g ghi lmn mn pq p No 1665 800 865 225 272 575 593 310 169 217 286 345 470 332 518 1374 163 83 46 74% 74% 74% 69% 67% 74% 80% 82% 78% 78% 61% 61% 70% 80% 85% 73% 83% 74% 74% d cde j j j k kl klm oqr Don't know 69 34 35 10 9 27 23 13 6 6 18 19 16 17 16 53 4 9 2 3% 3% 3% 3% 2% 3% 3% 4% 3% 2% 4% 3% 2% 4% 3% 3% 2% 8% 4% opr Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QE26 (QE29A). And do you or anyone in your household have access to internet voice services at home? (SINGLE CODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Yes 522 74 108 44 41 39 46 26 82 456 66 352 170 345 163 23% 26% 35% 23% 25% 20% 22% 14% 23% 23% 23% 28% 17% 25% 20% g acdefgh g g g g l n No 1665 197 190 139 117 155 161 155 260 1450 215 874 779 997 623 74% 70% 62% 75% 71% 78% 77% 83% 73% 74% 74% 69% 79% 72% 77% b b ab b abcdh b k m Don't know 69 9 9 4 6 4 4 6 12 58 10 33 35 40 26 3% 3% 3% 2% 3% 2% 2% 3% 3% 3% 4% 3% 4% 3% 3% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe27 (Qe30). Have You Or Anyone In Your Household Ever Used One Of These Services To Make Voice Calls Using The Internet At Home? (Single Code) Base : Those with access to internet voice services at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f ~g ~h ~i j k l ~m ~n o ~p ~q r Unweighted total 712 350 362 120 145 275 172 83 62 87 207 255 263 98 96 439 85 86 102 Effective Weighted Sample 470 235 236 79 91 185 126 56 37 56 152 173 171 64 64 379 53 58 95 Total 522 248 274 93 127 179 123 55 42 57 168 202 182 64 74 459 29 20 14 Yes & currently using 409 189 220 77 101 144 88 ** ** ** 137 168 144 ** ** 362 ** ** 11 78% 76% 80% 83% 79% 81% 71% ** ** ** 82% 83% 79% ** ** 79% ** ** 79% Yes but stopped using 55 31 24 8 11 18 18 ** ** ** 13 17 20 ** ** 46 ** ** 1 11% 13% 9% 9% 9% 10% 15% ** ** ** 8% 8% 11% ** ** 10% ** ** 9% No never used 53 24 29 7 15 16 15 ** ** ** 16 14 18 ** ** 46 ** ** 2 10% 10% 11% 8% 12% 9% 12% ** ** ** 9% 7% 10% ** ** 10% ** ** 12% Don't know 5 4 1 1 * 2 2 ** ** ** 2 3 * ** ** 5 ** ** - 1% 2% *% 1% *% 1% 2% ** ** ** 1% 1% *% ** ** 1% ** ** -% Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe27 (Qe30). Have You Or Anyone In Your Household Ever Used One Of These Services To Make Voice Calls Using The Internet At Home? (Single Code) Base : Those with access to internet voice services at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h i j k l m n Unweighted total 712 60 82 55 60 49 49 34 50 517 195 431 280 447 163 Effective Weighted Sample 470 57 75 52 57 47 46 32 47 391 90 283 204 318 131 Total 522 74 108 44 41 39 46 26 82 456 66 352 170 345 163 Yes & currently using 409 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 358 52 276 133 263 135 78% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 78% 78% 78% 78% 76% 83% Yes but stopped using 55 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 47 8 34 21 41 12 11% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 10% 11% 10% 13% 12% 8% No never used 53 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 46 7 39 14 37 14 10% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 10% 10% 11% 8% 11% 9% Don't know 5 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 5 * 3 2 4 1 1% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe28 (Qe31). Which Supplier Does/ Did Your Household Use To Make Voice Calls Using The Internet? (Single Code) Base : Those who have ever used internet voice services at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f ~g ~h ~i j k l ~m ~n o ~p ~q ~r Unweighted total 639 314 325 111 129 251 148 73 55 76 188 234 237 84 84 393 78 77 91 Effective Weighted Sample 420 210 211 73 80 167 110 47 33 48 138 159 154 55 54 339 48 52 85 Total 464 220 244 85 112 162 106 45 39 49 150 185 164 54 61 408 26 17 12 Skype 393 185 208 67 100 135 91 ** ** ** 126 155 141 ** ** 348 ** ** ** 85% 84% 85% 79% 90% 83% 86% ** ** ** 84% 84% 86% ** ** 85% ** ** ** MSN Messenger 33 17 16 10 9 8 5 ** ** ** 5 5 14 ** ** 26 ** ** ** 7% 8% 6% 11% 8% 5% 5% ** ** ** 3% 3% 9% ** ** 6% ** ** ** k BT Broadband voice/Home Hub 16 8 9 3 3 6 6 ** ** ** 7 8 4 ** ** 12 ** ** ** 4% 4% 3% 3% 3% 3% 5% ** ** ** 5% 4% 2% ** ** 3% ** ** ** BT Communicator 13 5 8 4 2 7 1 ** ** ** 10 9 4 ** ** 12 ** ** ** 3% 2% 3% 4% 1% 4% 1% ** ** ** 7% 5% 3% ** ** 3% ** ** ** Orange broadband/ Wanadoo/ Livebox 7 3 4 * 3 3 1 ** ** ** 2 2 5 ** ** 6 ** ** ** 1% 1% 2% *% 3% 2% 1% ** ** ** 1% 1% 3% ** ** 1% ** ** ** Vonage 3 3 * - 1 * 2 ** ** ** 1 2 - ** ** 2 ** ** ** 1% 2% *% -% 1% *% 2% ** ** ** 1% 1% -% ** ** 1% ** ** ** Other 20 13 7 4 3 8 5 ** ** ** 4 9 8 ** ** 17 ** ** ** 4% 6% 3% 5% 2% 5% 5% ** ** ** 3% 5% 5% ** ** 4% ** ** ** Don't know 12 4 8 4 - 6 2 ** ** ** 2 2 3 ** ** 10 ** ** ** 3% 2% 3% 5% -% 4% 2% ** ** ** 2% 1% 2% ** ** 2% ** ** ** d Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qe28 (Qe31). Which Supplier Does/ Did Your Household Use To Make Voice Calls Using The Internet? (Single Code) Base : Those who have ever used internet voice services at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h i j k l m n Unweighted total 639 58 65 50 54 46 39 32 49 461 178 384 254 401 147 Effective Weighted Sample 420 56 59 48 51 44 37 30 46 349 80 250 185 285 117 Total 464 71 82 41 37 36 36 24 81 405 59 310 154 304 148 Skype 393 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 342 51 260 132 254 127 85% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 84% 86% 84% 86% 84% 86% MSN Messenger 33 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 31 2 21 12 18 13 7% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 8% 3% 7% 8% 6% 9% BT Broadband voice/Home Hub 16 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 12 5 12 5 14 2 4% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 3% 8% 4% 3% 5% 1% i BT Communicator 13 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 12 1 9 5 6 7 3% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 3% 2% 3% 3% 2% 5% Orange broadband/ Wanadoo/ Livebox 7 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 6 1 4 2 4 2 1% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 2% Vonage 3 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1 2 3 1 3 * 1% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** *% 4% 1% *% 1% *% i Other 20 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 18 1 14 5 14 5 4% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 5% 2% 5% 3% 5% 3% Don't know 12 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 12 * 8 3 8 3 3% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 3% *% 3% 2% 3% 2% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh1A. Showcard Which, If Any, Of These Types Of Television Does Your Household Receive At The Moment? (Multicode) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Only terrestrial TV (Channels 1-4/1-5) 92 43 49 14 9 17 52 39 8 3 6 13 24 14 41 79 6 1 6 4% 4% 4% 4% 2% 2% 7% 10% 3% 1% 1% 2% 4% 3% 7% 4% 3% 1% 10% de hij klm q opq Terrestrial TV 332 167 165 34 53 122 123 47 33 41 73 88 94 72 77 300 14 2 16 15% 15% 14% 10% 13% 16% 17% 13% 15% 14% 15% 16% 14% 18% 13% 16% 7% 2% 26% c c n pq q opq Cable TV (through Virgin Media - previously NTL and Telewest) 357 175 182 65 71 131 90 50 25 43 88 91 111 73 82 314 28 8 7 16% 16% 16% 20% 18% 17% 12% 13% 12% 15% 19% 16% 17% 18% 13% 17% 14% 8% 11% f f f gh qr q Satellite TV (Sky) 879 431 447 117 177 336 249 95 73 126 227 246 266 164 202 715 78 55 31 39% 40% 38% 36% 43% 43% 34% 25% 34% 45% 48% 43% 40% 40% 33% 38% 40% 49% 49% f cf g gh gh n n n op op Satellite TV (Other) 48 28 20 3 11 13 20 4 7 5 8 13 19 4 12 40 2 4 1 2% 3% 2% 1% 3% 2% 3% 1% 3% 2% 2% 2% 3% 1% 2% 2% 1% 4% 2% m p Freeview (through a set-top box or digital television set) with ONLY free channels 1133 541 592 174 181 397 380 186 127 139 228 265 337 222 308 934 109 52 37 50% 50% 50% 53% 44% 51% 51% 49% 58% 50% 48% 47% 50% 54% 51% 50% 56% 47% 59% d d d gij k oq oq Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh1A. Showcard Which, If Any, Of These Types Of Television Does Your Household Receive At The Moment? (Multicode) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Freeview (through a set-top box or digital television set) with free channels PLUS top-up channels such as ESPN, TV favourites, Picturebox films) 96 50 46 10 16 31 39 18 10 11 18 27 24 17 28 79 3 8 6 4% 5% 4% 3% 4% 4% 5% 5% 5% 4% 4% 5% 4% 4% 5% 4% 2% 7% 9% p op op Digital TV via a broadband DSL line (e.g. BT Vision, Tiscali) 42 18 24 3 15 18 6 3 1 4 13 18 12 6 6 32 7 2 1 2% 2% 2% 1% 4% 2% 1% 1% *% 1% 3% 3% 2% 2% 1% 2% 4% 2% 2% cf f gh n o No TV in household 47 23 23 17 10 10 10 15 3 2 7 12 25 4 6 40 5 2 * 2% 2% 2% 5% 2% 1% 1% 4% 1% 1% 2% 2% 4% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% *% ef ij mn r r r Don't know 2 * 2 - * - 2 1 - - - 1 1 - 1 2 - - * *% *% *% -% *% -% *% *% -% -% -% *% *% -% *% *% -% -% *% Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QH1A. SHOWCARD Which, if any, of these types of television does your household receive at the moment? (MULTICODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Only terrestrial TV (Channels 1-4/1-5) 92 12 24 2 8 12 5 8 8 78 13 25 67 53 32 4% 4% 8% 1% 5% 6% 2% 4% 2% 4% 5% 2% 7% 4% 4% c cfh c cfh c k Terrestrial TV 332 19 75 14 13 80 31 35 33 282 50 186 146 196 119 15% 7% 24% 8% 8% 40% 15% 19% 9% 14% 17% 15% 15% 14% 15% acdfh abcdfgh acd acdh Cable TV (through Virgin Media - previously NTL and Telewest) 357 37 56 19 28 42 33 25 74 345 12 218 136 209 140 16% 13% 18% 10% 17% 22% 16% 13% 21% 18% 4% 17% 14% 15% 17% c c acg acg j l Satellite TV (Sky) 879 112 101 61 59 69 104 84 124 752 127 551 323 539 309 39% 40% 33% 33% 36% 35% 49% 45% 35% 38% 43% 44% 33% 39% 38% abcdeh bceh i l Satellite TV (Other) 48 3 14 5 4 2 5 2 5 39 9 29 19 33 13 2% 1% 4% 3% 3% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% aeg Freeview (through a set-top box or digital television set) with ONLY free channels 1133 103 132 136 74 96 91 93 210 980 153 623 505 726 370 50% 37% 43% 73% 45% 49% 43% 50% 59% 50% 52% 49% 51% 53% 46% abdefgh a a abdefg n Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QH1A. SHOWCARD Which, if any, of these types of television does your household receive at the moment? (MULTICODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Freeview (through a set-top box or digital television set) with free channels PLUS top-up channels such as ESPN, TV favourites, Picturebox films) 96 6 18 4 8 9 2 9 22 79 17 50 47 66 24 4% 2% 6% 2% 5% 5% 1% 5% 6% 4% 6% 4% 5% 5% 3% af f f f acf n Digital TV via a broadband DSL line (e.g. BT Vision, Tiscali) 42 2 9 3 4 1 2 2 9 34 8 35 7 25 16 2% 1% 3% 1% 3% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 3% 3% 1% 2% 2% e l No TV in household 47 18 6 2 3 2 2 4 3 42 4 23 24 13 33 2% 6% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% 2% 1% 2% 2% 1% 4% bcdefgh m Don't know 2 - - 1 - - - 1 - 1 1 - 2 2 - *% -% -% 1% -% -% -% *% -% *% *% -% *% *% -% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh1B. Showcard And Which Of These Do You Consider Is Your Main Type Of Television? (Single Code) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Only terrestrial TV (Channels 1-4/1-5) 56 23 33 10 6 7 34 28 6 3 5 6 14 10 26 46 5 * 5 2% 2% 3% 3% 1% 1% 5% 7% 3% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 4% 2% 3% *% 8% e de hij kl q q opq Terrestrial TV 61 32 29 5 5 16 35 17 6 4 6 16 17 8 20 58 1 1 2 3% 3% 2% 1% 1% 2% 5% 5% 3% 2% 1% 3% 3% 2% 3% 3% *% 1% 4% cde ij pq pq Cable TV (through Virgin Media - previously NTL and Telewest) 341 165 176 63 70 121 87 47 25 42 82 87 105 71 78 300 26 8 7 15% 15% 15% 19% 17% 16% 12% 13% 12% 15% 17% 15% 16% 17% 13% 16% 13% 8% 11% f f f g n qr q Satellite TV (Sky) 863 422 440 115 176 327 245 94 69 125 221 240 264 160 199 702 76 54 30 38% 39% 38% 35% 43% 42% 33% 25% 32% 45% 47% 42% 39% 39% 33% 37% 39% 49% 49% cf cf gh gh n n n op op Satellite TV (Other) 39 22 18 2 10 11 17 3 6 5 6 11 12 4 12 35 1 2 1 2% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% 2% 1% 3% 2% 1% 2% 2% 1% 2% 2% *% 2% 2% c p p p Freeview (through a set-top box or digital television set) with ONLY free channels 753 349 403 108 112 254 278 155 96 89 124 161 210 142 240 630 75 35 13 33% 32% 34% 33% 27% 33% 38% 41% 44% 32% 26% 28% 31% 34% 39% 33% 38% 31% 21% de ij ij k kl r r r Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh1B. Showcard And Which Of These Do You Consider Is Your Main Type Of Television? (Single Code) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Freeview (through a set-top box or digital television set) with free channels PLUS top-up channels such as ESPN, TV favourites, Picturebox films) 60 33 27 6 8 18 28 15 5 6 11 17 10 9 23 49 1 6 3 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 4% 4% 2% 2% 2% 3% 2% 2% 4% 3% 1% 6% 4% l p op op Digital TV via a broadband DSL line (e.g. BT Vision, Tiscali) 34 12 22 3 12 16 4 2 1 4 10 15 11 4 4 25 7 2 1 2% 1% 2% 1% 3% 2% 1% *% *% 1% 2% 3% 2% 1% 1% 1% 3% 2% 1% f f g n or No TV in household 47 23 23 17 10 10 10 15 3 2 7 12 25 4 6 40 5 2 * 2% 2% 2% 5% 2% 1% 1% 4% 1% 1% 2% 2% 4% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% *% ef ij mn r r r Don't know 2 * 2 - * - 2 1 - - - 1 1 - 1 2 - - * *% *% *% -% *% -% *% *% -% -% -% *% *% -% *% *% -% -% *% Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QH1B. SHOWCARD And which of these do you consider is your MAIN type of television? (SINGLE CODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Only terrestrial TV (Channels 1-4/1-5) 56 10 13 2 1 6 5 3 6 50 6 15 41 28 23 2% 4% 4% 1% 1% 3% 2% 2% 2% 3% 2% 1% 4% 2% 3% d cd k Terrestrial TV 61 2 19 3 8 13 2 9 2 51 10 18 43 41 18 3% 1% 6% 1% 5% 7% 1% 5% 1% 3% 4% 1% 4% 3% 2% acfh acfh acfh acfh k Cable TV (through Virgin Media - previously NTL and Telewest) 341 36 52 18 27 40 33 22 72 329 12 210 128 199 136 15% 13% 17% 10% 17% 20% 16% 12% 20% 17% 4% 17% 13% 14% 17% c c acg c acg j l Satellite TV (Sky) 863 112 97 59 59 66 103 84 122 740 123 541 316 528 304 38% 40% 32% 32% 36% 33% 49% 45% 34% 38% 42% 43% 32% 38% 37% bcdeh bceh l Satellite TV (Other) 39 3 11 5 4 1 5 2 5 32 8 22 17 28 11 2% 1% 4% 2% 2% *% 2% 1% 1% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% 1% e e e Freeview (through a set-top box or digital television set) with ONLY free channels 753 93 91 91 53 65 57 56 125 645 107 376 374 480 260 33% 33% 29% 49% 32% 33% 27% 30% 35% 33% 37% 30% 38% 35% 32% abdefgh k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QH1B. SHOWCARD And which of these do you consider is your MAIN type of television? (SINGLE CODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Freeview (through a set-top box or digital television set) with free channels PLUS top-up channels such as ESPN, TV favourites, Picturebox films) 60 6 11 3 5 5 2 5 13 46 13 26 34 41 16 3% 2% 3% 1% 3% 2% 1% 3% 4% 2% 5% 2% 3% 3% 2% i k Digital TV via a broadband DSL line (e.g. BT Vision, Tiscali) 34 1 8 3 4 1 - 2 7 27 7 29 5 21 12 2% *% 2% 1% 2% 1% -% 1% 2% 1% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% af f f l No TV in household 47 18 6 2 3 2 2 4 3 42 4 23 24 13 33 2% 6% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% 2% 1% 2% 2% 1% 4% bcdefgh m Don't know 2 - - 1 - - - 1 - 1 1 - 2 2 - *% -% -% 1% -% -% -% *% -% *% *% -% *% *% -% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh2 (Qh50). How Many Tv Sets Are There In All Rooms Of Your House? (Single Code) Base : Those with a TV in the household GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3412 1650 1762 439 527 1192 1254 672 380 406 590 771 980 694 967 1941 479 483 509 Effective Weighted Sample 2233 1089 1144 280 333 802 852 427 234 271 431 514 644 461 624 1682 323 321 468 Total 2207 1058 1149 311 398 771 728 362 214 278 465 554 643 409 601 1844 192 109 62 One (1.0) 599 291 308 73 112 175 239 181 70 80 78 121 164 93 221 487 67 29 15 27% 28% 27% 24% 28% 23% 33% 50% 33% 29% 17% 22% 25% 23% 37% 26% 35% 27% 25% ce hij j j klm oqr Two (2.0) 777 369 408 94 155 241 288 98 76 105 185 219 229 145 184 640 73 42 21 35% 35% 36% 30% 39% 31% 40% 27% 36% 38% 40% 39% 36% 35% 31% 35% 38% 39% 35% ce ce g g g n Three (3.0) 463 208 255 80 73 184 125 53 30 57 113 123 133 95 112 399 29 22 13 21% 20% 22% 26% 18% 24% 17% 15% 14% 21% 24% 22% 21% 23% 19% 22% 15% 20% 21% df df g gh p p Four (4.0) 242 117 125 42 45 108 48 25 20 25 49 60 76 52 55 207 17 12 6 11% 11% 11% 13% 11% 14% 7% 7% 9% 9% 11% 11% 12% 13% 9% 11% 9% 11% 10% f f f Five or more (5.0) 110 65 44 18 11 56 24 3 14 12 34 29 39 18 24 96 5 3 5 5% 6% 4% 6% 3% 7% 3% 1% 7% 4% 7% 5% 6% 4% 4% 5% 3% 3% 8% b df g g g p opq Don't know 20 11 9 4 2 9 5 3 3 2 5 2 5 6 7 19 * 1 * 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 2% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% Mean number of TV sets 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.5 2.2 2.5 2.1 1.8 2.2 2.2 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.1 2.3 2.1 2.2 2.4 df f df g g ghi n n n p p pq Standard deviation 1.13 1.17 1.10 1.16 1.06 1.20 1.03 .98 1.19 1.09 1.12 1.10 1.16 1.11 1.13 1.14 1.05 1.06 1.22 Standard error .02 .03 .03 .06 .05 .03 .03 .04 .06 .05 .05 .04 .04 .04 .04 .03 .05 .05 .05 Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QH2 (QH50). How many TV sets are there in ALL rooms of your house? (SINGLE CODE) Base : Those with a TV in the household ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3412 231 244 246 236 262 238 246 238 2406 1006 1638 1758 1961 942 Effective Weighted Sample 2233 220 225 233 224 249 225 233 221 1850 436 1076 1233 1390 730 Total 2207 262 301 183 160 195 208 183 352 1920 287 1237 957 1367 779 One (1.0) 599 98 76 50 37 50 51 42 84 528 71 279 319 329 254 27% 37% 25% 27% 23% 26% 24% 23% 24% 28% 25% 23% 33% 24% 33% bcdefgh k m Two (2.0) 777 108 120 60 54 57 70 50 121 685 92 440 330 483 272 35% 41% 40% 33% 34% 29% 34% 27% 34% 36% 32% 36% 34% 35% 35% eg eg Three (3.0) 463 40 53 45 32 46 48 47 89 394 69 278 181 298 152 21% 15% 18% 25% 20% 24% 23% 25% 25% 21% 24% 23% 19% 22% 19% a a a ab a l Four (4.0) 242 8 33 20 26 31 25 28 37 211 31 159 82 165 71 11% 3% 11% 11% 16% 16% 12% 15% 11% 11% 11% 13% 9% 12% 9% a a a a a a a l n Five or more (5.0) 110 7 17 6 12 9 8 15 21 85 24 70 40 76 29 5% 3% 6% 3% 8% 5% 4% 8% 6% 4% 8% 6% 4% 6% 4% ac acf i Don't know 20 1 2 2 - 2 8 2 2 18 2 11 9 17 2 1% 1% 1% 1% -% 1% 4% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% abcdegh n Mean number of TV sets 2.3 1.9 2.3 2.3 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.6 2.4 2.3 2.5 2.4 2.2 2.4 2.2 a a ac a a abcf a i l n Standard deviation 1.13 .95 1.14 1.10 1.22 1.18 1.10 1.23 1.14 1.12 1.21 1.14 1.11 1.14 1.09 Standard error .02 .06 .07 .07 .08 .07 .07 .08 .07 .02 .04 .03 .03 .03 .04 Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh3 (Qh51). Showcard When Did You Last Buy A Tv Set For The Main Viewing Room In Your House? (Single Code) Base : Those with a TV in the household GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3412 1650 1762 439 527 1192 1254 672 380 406 590 771 980 694 967 1941 479 483 509 Effective Weighted Sample 2233 1089 1144 280 333 802 852 427 234 271 431 514 644 461 624 1682 323 321 468 Total 2207 1058 1149 311 398 771 728 362 214 278 465 554 643 409 601 1844 192 109 62 In the last 6 months 207 97 111 36 45 65 61 30 26 23 47 60 61 33 53 176 14 12 6 9% 9% 10% 12% 11% 8% 8% 8% 12% 8% 10% 11% 10% 8% 9% 10% 7% 11% 9% 6-12 months ago 334 161 173 58 55 133 88 36 36 50 80 75 102 72 85 280 31 14 8 15% 15% 15% 19% 14% 17% 12% 10% 17% 18% 17% 13% 16% 18% 14% 15% 16% 13% 13% f f g g g More than a year ago, up to 2 years ago 512 247 265 63 107 191 152 68 37 67 134 155 136 110 111 425 51 24 13 23% 23% 23% 20% 27% 25% 21% 19% 17% 24% 29% 28% 21% 27% 19% 23% 26% 22% 21% f h gh ln ln More than 2 years ago, up to 3 years ago 360 167 193 38 76 124 121 56 38 49 85 99 104 63 93 304 24 20 11 16% 16% 17% 12% 19% 16% 17% 15% 18% 18% 18% 18% 16% 15% 16% 16% 13% 19% 18% c p p More than 3 years ago 726 355 371 81 107 242 296 162 75 82 116 155 218 123 230 606 63 35 22 33% 34% 32% 26% 27% 31% 41% 45% 35% 30% 25% 28% 34% 30% 38% 33% 33% 32% 35% cde hij j k km Don't know 68 32 36 35 8 16 9 12 2 6 3 10 22 9 27 54 8 4 2 3% 3% 3% 11% 2% 2% 1% 3% 1% 2% 1% 2% 3% 2% 5% 3% 4% 3% 4% def j km Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QH3 (QH51). SHOWCARD When did you last buy a TV set for the MAIN viewing room in your house? (SINGLE CODE) Base : Those with a TV in the household ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3412 231 244 246 236 262 238 246 238 2406 1006 1638 1758 1961 942 Effective Weighted Sample 2233 220 225 233 224 249 225 233 221 1850 436 1076 1233 1390 730 Total 2207 262 301 183 160 195 208 183 352 1920 287 1237 957 1367 779 In the last 6 months 207 15 22 19 19 19 24 14 43 177 30 120 86 128 74 9% 6% 7% 11% 12% 10% 11% 8% 12% 9% 11% 10% 9% 9% 9% a a a 6-12 months ago 334 28 41 37 34 25 28 30 58 287 46 202 128 216 110 15% 11% 14% 20% 21% 13% 14% 16% 16% 15% 16% 16% 13% 16% 14% ae abef l More than a year ago, up to 2 years ago 512 69 74 38 29 49 41 40 84 453 59 304 207 325 174 23% 26% 25% 21% 18% 25% 20% 22% 24% 24% 21% 25% 22% 24% 22% d More than 2 years ago, up to 3 years ago 360 59 39 26 28 35 28 25 64 315 45 209 149 228 120 16% 22% 13% 14% 17% 18% 13% 14% 18% 16% 16% 17% 16% 17% 15% bcfg More than 3 years ago 726 87 120 58 44 53 85 65 93 629 97 373 350 436 268 33% 33% 40% 32% 27% 27% 41% 36% 26% 33% 34% 30% 37% 32% 34% deh deh eh k Don't know 68 3 5 4 6 15 3 8 9 59 10 30 38 34 32 3% 1% 2% 2% 4% 8% 1% 5% 3% 3% 3% 2% 4% 2% 4% abcfh af k m Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh4 (Qh52). Showcard Which, If Any, Of These Features Do You Have On The Main Tv In Your House? (Multicode) Base : Those with a TV in the household GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3412 1650 1762 439 527 1192 1254 672 380 406 590 771 980 694 967 1941 479 483 509 Effective Weighted Sample 2233 1089 1144 280 333 802 852 427 234 271 431 514 644 461 624 1682 323 321 468 Total 2207 1058 1149 311 398 771 728 362 214 278 465 554 643 409 601 1844 192 109 62 Access to digital TV channels (without the need for a separate set-top box, i.e. built-in Freeview or Freesat) 1244 597 647 165 244 449 386 160 125 170 265 336 373 252 282 1015 125 65 38 56% 56% 56% 53% 61% 58% 53% 44% 58% 61% 57% 61% 58% 62% 47% 55% 65% 60% 62% cf f g g g n n n o o Built-in DVD player (i.e. not a standalone DVD player that you need to connect to your TV) 151 84 67 17 30 48 56 16 13 19 41 47 43 26 35 124 17 6 4 7% 8% 6% 5% 7% 6% 8% 4% 6% 7% 9% 9% 7% 6% 6% 7% 9% 6% 6% g Access to the internet (to access web pages or video streamed through the TV using any means, e.g. games console) 104 56 48 10 26 48 21 11 8 15 32 41 33 18 12 89 5 6 4 5% 5% 4% 3% 6% 6% 3% 3% 4% 5% 7% 7% 5% 4% 2% 5% 3% 6% 6% f cf g n n n p p 3D-capability (i.e. 3D ready - ability to watch programmes in 3D) 36 21 15 5 8 19 4 3 1 4 11 14 14 6 3 30 4 2 1 2% 2% 1% 2% 2% 3% 1% 1% *% 2% 2% 3% 2% 1% *% 2% 2% 2% 1% f f h n n None of these 799 385 414 123 126 261 290 180 78 91 163 172 221 133 273 691 52 37 19 36% 36% 36% 39% 32% 34% 40% 50% 36% 33% 35% 31% 34% 32% 45% 37% 27% 34% 31% d de hij klm pr Don't know 66 23 44 12 11 21 22 12 5 6 9 11 17 13 25 51 8 4 3 3% 2% 4% 4% 3% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% 3% 4% 3% 4% 4% 4% a k Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QH4 (QH52). SHOWCARD Which, if any, of these features do you have on the MAIN TV in your house? (MULTICODE) Base : Those with a TV in the household ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3412 231 244 246 236 262 238 246 238 2406 1006 1638 1758 1961 942 Effective Weighted Sample 2233 220 225 233 224 249 225 233 221 1850 436 1076 1233 1390 730 Total 2207 262 301 183 160 195 208 183 352 1920 287 1237 957 1367 779 Access to digital TV channels (without the need for a separate set-top box, i.e. built-in Freeview or Freesat) 1244 78 183 117 107 101 93 94 244 1062 182 756 484 837 369 56% 30% 61% 64% 67% 52% 45% 52% 69% 55% 63% 61% 51% 61% 47% aefg aefg aefg a a a aefg i l n Built-in DVD player (i.e. not a standalone DVD player that you need to connect to your TV) 151 32 24 9 8 18 6 7 21 132 19 97 51 85 62 7% 12% 8% 5% 5% 9% 3% 4% 6% 7% 7% 8% 5% 6% 8% cdfgh f fg l Access to the internet (to access web pages or video streamed through the TV using any means, e.g. games console) 104 5 26 10 6 7 15 10 10 94 10 80 24 84 16 5% 2% 9% 5% 4% 3% 7% 6% 3% 5% 4% 6% 3% 6% 2% adeh ah a l n 3D-capability (i.e. 3D ready - ability to watch programmes in 3D) 36 2 12 6 2 1 3 1 3 31 5 27 9 29 6 2% 1% 4% 3% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% aegh e l n None of these 799 152 85 58 46 84 97 80 90 714 85 387 406 433 346 36% 58% 28% 32% 29% 43% 46% 44% 26% 37% 30% 31% 42% 32% 44% bcdefgh bcdh bcdh bcdh j k m Don't know 66 6 12 6 1 3 13 6 5 54 12 32 34 38 25 3% 2% 4% 3% 1% 1% 6% 3% 1% 3% 4% 3% 4% 3% 3% d d adeh Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh5 (Qh53). Is The Main Tv In Your Household An Hdtv Set Or Hd Ready? (Single Code) Base : Those with a TV in the household GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3412 1650 1762 439 527 1192 1254 672 380 406 590 771 980 694 967 1941 479 483 509 Effective Weighted Sample 2233 1089 1144 280 333 802 852 427 234 271 431 514 644 461 624 1682 323 321 468 Total 2207 1058 1149 311 398 771 728 362 214 278 465 554 643 409 601 1844 192 109 62 Yes, the main TV in the household is an HDTV set or HD ready 1356 680 676 187 262 510 397 164 128 172 339 382 388 280 306 1134 121 65 36 61% 64% 59% 60% 66% 66% 55% 45% 60% 62% 73% 69% 60% 69% 51% 61% 63% 60% 59% b f f g g ghi ln n ln No 707 324 382 105 116 225 261 161 75 93 117 148 214 107 238 600 51 35 20 32% 31% 33% 34% 29% 29% 36% 44% 35% 33% 25% 27% 33% 26% 40% 33% 27% 32% 33% de hij j j km klm p Don't know 144 53 91 19 20 35 70 38 11 13 10 24 42 22 57 111 20 8 5 7% 5% 8% 6% 5% 5% 10% 10% 5% 5% 2% 4% 6% 5% 9% 6% 10% 8% 8% a de hij j klm o Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QH5 (QH53). Is the MAIN TV in your household an HDTV set or HD ready? (SINGLE CODE) Base : Those with a TV in the household ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3412 231 244 246 236 262 238 246 238 2406 1006 1638 1758 1961 942 Effective Weighted Sample 2233 220 225 233 224 249 225 233 221 1850 436 1076 1233 1390 730 Total 2207 262 301 183 160 195 208 183 352 1920 287 1237 957 1367 779 Yes, the main TV in the household is an HDTV set or HD ready 1356 130 185 116 93 138 127 109 235 1164 192 836 511 883 437 61% 50% 61% 63% 58% 71% 61% 60% 67% 61% 67% 68% 53% 65% 56% a a abdfg a a a i l n No 707 112 102 53 59 44 65 70 94 632 75 340 363 407 279 32% 43% 34% 29% 37% 22% 31% 38% 27% 33% 26% 28% 38% 30% 36% cefh e eh e ceh j k m Don't know 144 20 14 14 8 13 16 4 23 124 20 60 84 77 63 7% 8% 5% 7% 5% 7% 8% 2% 6% 6% 7% 5% 9% 6% 8% g g g g g k m Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh6 (Qh54) Although You Have An Hdtv Ready Set, To Actually Watch Tv Channels And Programmes That Are Broadcast In High Definition, You Need An Hd Set Top Box Or A Tv With Built-In Hdtv Receiver. For The Main Tv Set, Does Your Household Have An Hdtv Service - From Either Sky, Virgin Media, Freesat Or Freeview? (Single Code) Base : Those whose main TV set is an HDTV or HD-ready GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2035 1026 1009 257 353 776 649 293 222 262 436 525 600 448 462 1177 287 286 285 Effective Weighted Sample 1351 688 663 164 224 526 454 183 139 180 316 350 392 310 304 1019 200 192 264 Total 1356 680 676 187 262 510 397 164 128 172 339 382 388 280 306 1134 121 65 36 Yes 726 374 351 102 153 268 202 74 54 88 205 225 215 155 131 600 69 33 24 54% 55% 52% 55% 58% 52% 51% 45% 42% 51% 61% 59% 55% 55% 43% 53% 57% 50% 65% ghi n n n oq No 590 291 299 80 99 231 181 84 71 81 130 145 165 118 163 500 48 31 11 44% 43% 44% 43% 38% 45% 46% 51% 55% 47% 38% 38% 42% 42% 53% 44% 40% 47% 31% j j klm r r Don't know 40 15 25 5 10 12 14 6 4 4 4 12 8 8 12 33 4 2 1 3% 2% 4% 2% 4% 2% 4% 4% 3% 2% 1% 3% 2% 3% 4% 3% 3% 3% 3% Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh6 (Qh54) Although You Have An Hdtv Ready Set, To Actually Watch Tv Channels And Programmes That Are Broadcast In High Definition, You Need An Hd Set Top Box Or A Tv With Built-In Hdtv Receiver. For The Main Tv Set, Does Your Household Have An Hdtv Service - From Either Sky, Virgin Media, Freesat Or Freeview? (Single Code) Base : Those whose main TV set is an HDTV or HD-ready ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2035 114 149 154 136 182 141 144 157 1450 585 1115 912 1232 518 Effective Weighted Sample 1351 109 137 146 130 173 134 137 146 1107 270 738 652 882 404 Total 1356 130 185 116 93 138 127 109 235 1164 192 836 511 883 437 Yes 726 89 115 57 51 58 57 43 130 629 97 477 244 458 244 54% 68% 62% 49% 55% 42% 45% 39% 55% 54% 51% 57% 48% 52% 56% cdefgh cefg eg eg l No 590 38 61 57 40 78 67 64 96 500 90 344 242 400 179 44% 29% 33% 49% 43% 57% 52% 58% 41% 43% 47% 41% 47% 45% 41% ab a abdh ab abdh k Don't know 40 3 9 2 2 2 3 3 9 35 5 15 25 25 14 3% 2% 5% 2% 2% 2% 3% 3% 4% 3% 3% 2% 5% 3% 3% k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh7 (Qh55). Which Supplier Provides Your Hd Tv Service, For Your Main Tv Set? Base : Those with an HD TV service for their main TV set GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g ~h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 1094 561 533 148 199 425 322 134 97 139 273 307 334 248 205 593 169 147 185 Effective Weighted Sample 699 367 332 91 124 273 218 79 55 90 194 200 207 164 130 515 116 100 171 Total 726 374 351 102 153 268 202 74 54 88 205 225 215 155 131 600 69 33 24 Sky (via satellite dish) 411 218 193 60 94 146 111 37 ** 50 128 133 129 78 71 325 49 22 15 57% 58% 55% 59% 61% 55% 55% 50% ** 57% 62% 59% 60% 50% 54% 54% 71% 66% 62% o o Virgin Media (via cable) 157 79 79 27 38 63 29 14 ** 19 49 50 48 36 23 143 9 2 4 22% 21% 22% 26% 25% 24% 15% 19% ** 22% 24% 22% 22% 24% 17% 24% 12% 7% 15% f f f pqr q Freeviw (via TV aerial) 125 62 63 12 18 49 46 20 ** 11 24 35 27 33 31 103 10 8 4 17% 17% 18% 12% 12% 18% 23% 27% ** 12% 12% 15% 12% 21% 24% 17% 15% 23% 18% cd ij l l Freesat (via satellite dish) 20 13 8 2 1 6 13 - ** 6 2 5 7 5 3 19 * 1 * 3% 3% 2% 1% *% 2% 6% -% ** 7% 1% 2% 3% 3% 2% 3% *% 4% 1% de gj p Don't know 11 3 9 2 3 3 3 2 ** 1 2 2 4 2 3 10 1 * 1 2% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1% 2% 3% ** 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% 3% 2% 1% *% 3% Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh7 (Qh55). Which Supplier Provides Your Hd Tv Service, For Your Main Tv Set? Base : Those with an HD TV service for their main TV set ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h i j k l m n Unweighted total 1094 78 89 73 72 76 65 55 85 767 327 646 444 634 275 Effective Weighted Sample 699 74 83 69 69 73 61 53 79 576 140 412 307 444 214 Total 726 89 115 57 51 58 57 43 130 629 97 477 244 458 244 Sky (via satellite dish) 411 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 352 59 274 135 268 128 57% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 56% 61% 57% 55% 59% 53% Virgin Media (via cable) 157 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 152 6 114 41 95 58 22% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 24% 6% 24% 17% 21% 24% j l Freeviw (via TV aerial) 125 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 104 22 71 55 68 53 17% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 17% 22% 15% 22% 15% 22% k m Freesat (via satellite dish) 20 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 13 7 10 10 19 1 3% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 2% 8% 2% 4% 4% *% i n Don't know 11 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 8 4 8 3 7 4 2% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1% 4% 2% 1% 2% 2% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh8 (Qh3). Showcard Which Of The Following Best Describes Your Satellite Tv Service/S? (Multicode) Base : Those with Satellite TV GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 1525 767 758 188 273 590 474 205 147 218 330 380 474 319 352 782 226 255 262 Effective Weighted Sample 942 482 461 110 159 382 305 114 82 139 220 239 292 202 217 679 143 173 241 Total 924 458 466 121 188 348 268 99 80 132 234 259 284 167 214 754 80 58 32 Sky satellite dish to receive subscription channels - you pay a monthly subscription fee 805 400 405 109 168 306 221 86 67 117 220 225 242 156 182 653 74 48 29 87% 87% 87% 91% 90% 88% 83% 87% 84% 89% 94% 87% 85% 93% 85% 87% 93% 83% 93% f f f gh kln oq oq Sky satellite dish for free to air services only - you pay no monthly subscription fee 55 29 26 5 10 19 21 6 3 6 7 19 15 8 13 45 3 5 1 6% 6% 6% 4% 5% 5% 8% 6% 4% 4% 3% 7% 5% 5% 6% 6% 4% 9% 5% Freesat standard package with a dish and standard set top box - you do not pay a subscription fee 15 8 7 * * 5 9 1 1 3 - 2 4 3 5 12 * 2 1 2% 2% 1% *% *% 2% 3% 1% 1% 2% -% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% *% 3% 2% d j p Freesat HD package with a dish and high definition (HD) set top box - you do not pay a subscription fee 10 6 4 3 1 1 5 * 1 1 3 5 4 1 * 10 - 1 * 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% *% 2% *% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% *% 1% -% 1% *% e n Other satellite dish, showing mainly non- English programmes where you pay a monthly subscription fee 3 * 3 * 2 1 - * 2 - * - * - 3 3 - - 1 *% *% 1% *% 1% *% -% *% 2% -% *% -% *% -% 1% *% -% -% 2% o Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh8 (Qh3). Showcard Which Of The Following Best Describes Your Satellite Tv Service/S? (Multicode) Base : Those with Satellite TV GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 1525 767 758 188 273 590 474 205 147 218 330 380 474 319 352 782 226 255 262 Effective Weighted Sample 942 482 461 110 159 382 305 114 82 139 220 239 292 202 217 679 143 173 241 Total 924 458 466 121 188 348 268 99 80 132 234 259 284 167 214 754 80 58 32 Other satellite dish, showing mainly non- English programmes where you do not pay a monthly subscription fee 4 4 - - 1 3 1 2 - 1 1 2 - 2 - 4 - - * *% 1% -% -% *% 1% *% 2% -% 1% 1% 1% -% 1% -% 1% -% -% *% b Broadband satellite - satellite provided for the use of broadband internet access but used to access free to air satellite programmes 4 * 4 - 3 1 - 1 1 - 2 3 1 - 1 3 1 * - *% *% 1% -% 1% *% -% 1% 1% -% 1% 1% *% -% *% *% 1% *% -% f Don't know 35 13 22 4 5 13 14 5 6 5 4 6 17 * 12 30 2 3 - 4% 3% 5% 3% 3% 4% 5% 5% 7% 4% 2% 2% 6% *% 5% 4% 2% 5% -% j m km m r r r Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh8 (Qh3). Showcard Which Of The Following Best Describes Your Satellite Tv Service/S? (Multicode) Base : Those with Satellite TV ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e f g ~h i j k l m n Unweighted total 1525 97 90 87 93 95 122 112 86 1007 518 836 681 877 386 Effective Weighted Sample 942 93 83 83 89 91 115 106 79 758 214 518 453 596 291 Total 924 115 113 66 64 71 109 87 129 789 135 578 340 569 322 Sky satellite dish to receive subscription channels - you pay a monthly subscription fee 805 ** ** ** ** ** 92 79 ** 693 112 511 290 495 280 87% ** ** ** ** ** 84% 91% ** 88% 83% 88% 85% 87% 87% Sky satellite dish for free to air services only - you pay no monthly subscription fee 55 ** ** ** ** ** 8 3 ** 42 13 32 22 32 21 6% ** ** ** ** ** 8% 3% ** 5% 9% 6% 7% 6% 6% i Freesat standard package with a dish and standard set top box - you do not pay a subscription fee 15 ** ** ** ** ** 2 2 ** 11 4 4 11 10 5 2% ** ** ** ** ** 2% 3% ** 1% 3% 1% 3% 2% 1% k Freesat HD package with a dish and high definition (HD) set top box - you do not pay a subscription fee 10 ** ** ** ** ** 3 - ** 7 3 7 3 9 1 1% ** ** ** ** ** 3% -% ** 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% *% Other satellite dish, showing mainly non-English programmes where you pay a monthly subscription fee 3 ** ** ** ** ** - 1 ** 3 * 1 2 2 1 *% ** ** ** ** ** -% 1% ** *% *% *% 1% *% *% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh8 (Qh3). Showcard Which Of The Following Best Describes Your Satellite Tv Service/S? (Multicode) Base : Those with Satellite TV ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e f g ~h i j k l m n Unweighted total 1525 97 90 87 93 95 122 112 86 1007 518 836 681 877 386 Effective Weighted Sample 942 93 83 83 89 91 115 106 79 758 214 518 453 596 291 Total 924 115 113 66 64 71 109 87 129 789 135 578 340 569 322 Other satellite dish, showing mainly non-English programmes where you do not pay a monthly subscription fee 4 ** ** ** ** ** - - ** 4 - 3 1 3 1 *% ** ** ** ** ** -% -% ** 1% -% 1% *% *% *% Broadband satellite - satellite provided for the use of broadband internet access but used to access free to air satellite programmes 4 ** ** ** ** ** - 1 ** 4 * 3 1 3 1 *% ** ** ** ** ** -% 2% ** *% *% *% *% 1% *% Don't know 35 ** ** ** ** ** 4 1 ** 31 4 22 12 21 14 4% ** ** ** ** ** 3% 1% ** 4% 3% 4% 4% 4% 4% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh9A (Qr1A). Does Your Household Have Sky+? (Single Code) Base : Those with Sky TV GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 1460 726 734 182 262 570 446 196 136 210 321 364 449 312 335 742 222 243 253 Effective Weighted Sample 900 453 447 106 152 369 285 109 75 131 214 227 275 197 207 646 139 164 232 Total 879 431 447 117 177 336 249 95 73 126 227 246 266 164 202 715 78 55 31 Yes 649 317 333 89 138 253 169 56 49 92 188 196 199 116 138 535 53 39 21 74% 73% 74% 76% 78% 75% 68% 58% 68% 73% 82% 80% 75% 71% 68% 75% 68% 72% 70% f f g ghi mn No 215 109 107 27 38 79 71 37 24 34 36 47 63 45 61 170 22 15 9 25% 25% 24% 23% 22% 24% 29% 39% 32% 27% 16% 19% 24% 27% 30% 24% 29% 27% 28% ij j j k k Don't know 14 6 8 2 * 3 9 2 - * 4 2 5 3 3 10 2 1 1 2% 1% 2% 2% *% 1% 3% 3% -% *% 2% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1% 3% 2% 2% de Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh9A (Qr1A). Does Your Household Have Sky+? (Single Code) Base : Those with Sky TV ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e f g ~h i j k l m n Unweighted total 1460 95 81 79 86 93 116 109 83 960 500 804 648 838 369 Effective Weighted Sample 900 91 75 75 82 89 110 103 76 726 202 497 429 568 279 Total 879 112 101 61 59 69 104 84 124 752 127 551 323 539 309 Yes 649 ** ** ** ** ** 76 66 ** 558 91 419 227 421 207 74% ** ** ** ** ** 73% 79% ** 74% 72% 76% 70% 78% 67% l n No 215 ** ** ** ** ** 27 17 ** 183 33 128 86 110 96 25% ** ** ** ** ** 26% 20% ** 24% 26% 23% 27% 20% 31% m Don't know 14 ** ** ** ** ** 1 1 ** 11 3 4 10 8 6 2% ** ** ** ** ** 1% 1% ** 1% 2% 1% 3% 1% 2% k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh9B (Qr1B). Does Your Household Have V+? (Single Code) Base : Those with Cable TV | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |---------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | ~c | ~d | | Unweighted total | 434 | 205 | 229 | 71 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 330 | 155 | 175 | 57 | | Total | 357 | 175 | 182 | 65 | | Yes | 172 | 83 | 89 | ** | | 48% | 47% | 49% | ** | ** | | ln | n | | | | | No | 159 | 83 | 77 | ** | | 45% | 47% | 42% | ** | ** | | k | kl | | | | | Don't know | 26 | 9 | 16 | ** | | 7% | 5% | 9% | ** | ** | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh9B (Qr1B). Does Your Household Have V+? (Single Code) Base : Those with Cable TV ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h i ~j k l m n Unweighted total 434 34 43 24 40 59 36 35 46 411 23 226 205 224 163 Effective Weighted Sample 330 33 40 23 38 56 34 33 44 317 13 174 168 184 134 Total 357 37 56 19 28 42 33 25 74 345 12 218 136 209 140 Yes 172 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 166 ** 121 48 106 62 48% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 48% ** 56% 35% 51% 44% l No 159 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 153 ** 83 76 84 71 45% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 45% ** 38% 56% 40% 51% k Don't know 26 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 25 ** 14 12 19 7 7% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 7% ** 6% 9% 9% 5% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh9C (Qr1C). Does Your Freesat Set Top Box Allow You To Record And Store Tv Programmes, And Also Pause And Rewind Live Tv Programmes? (Single Code) Base : Those with Freesat GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h ~i ~j ~k ~l ~m ~n ~o ~p ~q ~r Unweighted total 44 22 22 6 4 9 25 6 2 8 3 9 13 10 12 27 1 10 6 Effective Weighted Sample 31 18 13 4 2 9 17 3 2 6 3 7 10 7 8 24 1 7 5 Total 25 15 10 3 2 7 13 1 2 4 3 6 8 5 5 22 * 2 1 Yes ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** No ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Don't know ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh9C (Qr1C). Does Your Freesat Set Top Box Allow You To Record And Store Tv Programmes, And Also Pause And Rewind Live Tv Programmes? (Single Code) Base : Those with Freesat ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h ~i ~j ~k ~l ~m ~n Unweighted total 44 - 6 7 2 2 6 3 1 27 17 15 29 30 8 Effective Weighted Sample 31 - 5 7 2 2 5 3 1 21 10 11 20 22 7 Total 25 - 6 5 1 2 5 2 1 18 7 11 14 19 5 Yes ** - ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** -% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** No ** - ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** -% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Don't know ** - ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** -% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh9D (Qr1D). Does Your Freeview Box Or Freeview Tv Set Allow To Record And Store Tv Programmes, And Also Pause And Rewind Live Tv Programmes (This Includes Freeview Playback And Freeview Plus Boxes)? (Single Code) Base : Those with Freeview GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 1972 963 1009 264 284 673 751 390 247 227 332 440 555 408 569 1070 291 272 339 Effective Weighted Sample 1252 609 643 158 171 442 502 246 146 143 236 285 352 266 354 923 192 179 313 Total 1219 584 634 181 197 424 417 203 135 149 243 290 360 235 334 1005 112 60 41 Yes 213 92 120 22 35 70 85 22 20 21 44 65 61 42 45 176 22 9 5 17% 16% 19% 12% 18% 17% 20% 11% 15% 14% 18% 22% 17% 18% 14% 18% 20% 15% 13% c g n r r No 892 439 453 145 140 313 294 169 108 117 164 197 263 173 259 736 77 45 34 73% 75% 71% 80% 71% 74% 71% 83% 80% 78% 68% 68% 73% 74% 78% 73% 68% 75% 82% f j j j k opq Don't know 114 53 60 14 22 41 37 12 6 12 35 29 36 20 29 92 13 6 2 9% 9% 10% 8% 11% 10% 9% 6% 5% 8% 14% 10% 10% 9% 9% 9% 12% 10% 5% gh r r r Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh9D (Qr1D). Does Your Freeview Box Or Freeview Tv Set Allow To Record And Store Tv Programmes, And Also Pause And Rewind Live Tv Programmes (This Includes Freeview Playback And Freeview Plus Boxes)? (Single Code) Base : Those with Freeview ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 1972 96 123 191 119 137 112 134 158 1349 623 925 1042 1153 480 Effective Weighted Sample 1252 92 114 181 113 130 106 127 146 1018 274 587 709 809 367 Total 1219 109 146 140 81 103 94 101 231 1050 169 667 548 784 393 Yes 213 ** 33 27 23 25 13 15 32 174 38 113 97 150 57 17% ** 22% 20% 28% 24% 14% 15% 14% 17% 23% 17% 18% 19% 15% fgh fh i No 892 ** 100 95 52 67 77 76 172 778 114 484 406 557 301 73% ** 68% 68% 64% 65% 82% 76% 75% 74% 67% 73% 74% 71% 77% bcde j m Don't know 114 ** 14 18 6 11 4 9 27 97 17 70 44 77 35 9% ** 9% 13% 7% 11% 4% 9% 12% 9% 10% 10% 8% 10% 9% f f Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh9E (Qr1E). Does Your Broadband Tv Service Allow You To Record And Store Tv Programmes, And Also Pause And Rewind Live Tv Programmes? (Single Code) Base : Those with Broadband TV GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h ~i ~j ~k ~l ~m ~n ~o ~p ~q ~r Unweighted total 62 27 35 7 15 31 9 9 4 6 17 19 19 11 13 27 13 11 11 Effective Weighted Sample 37 17 20 4 10 17 7 4 2 5 11 14 10 6 8 23 11 6 10 Total 42 18 24 3 15 18 6 3 1 4 13 18 12 6 6 32 7 2 1 Yes ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** No ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Don't know ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh9E (Qr1E). Does Your Broadband Tv Service Allow You To Record And Store Tv Programmes, And Also Pause And Rewind Live Tv Programmes? (Single Code) Base : Those with Broadband TV ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h ~i ~j ~k ~l ~m ~n Unweighted total 62 2 6 3 5 1 2 3 5 36 26 48 14 33 18 Effective Weighted Sample 37 2 6 3 5 1 2 3 5 27 11 28 9 21 14 Total 42 2 9 3 4 1 2 2 9 34 8 35 7 25 16 Yes ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** No ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Don't know ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh10 (Qr5). Showcard How Often, If Ever, Do You Use Your Dvr To Watch Recorded Programmes? (Single Code) Base : Those who own a DVR GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 1558 755 803 187 288 611 472 178 142 219 374 444 474 316 324 885 231 211 231 Effective Weighted Sample 1018 496 523 123 177 407 325 103 81 150 262 296 312 213 203 768 153 147 213 Total 1030 497 534 136 215 387 293 90 78 141 280 325 307 193 205 863 88 50 29 More than once a week 488 227 261 61 104 191 133 45 37 72 130 148 154 89 97 399 53 25 12 47% 46% 49% 45% 48% 49% 45% 50% 47% 51% 47% 46% 50% 46% 47% 46% 60% 49% 41% oqr Once a week 153 69 83 23 36 54 40 16 9 18 43 53 41 31 28 129 11 7 5 15% 14% 16% 17% 17% 14% 14% 17% 11% 12% 15% 16% 13% 16% 14% 15% 13% 15% 18% Once every 2-3 weeks 63 33 29 10 11 28 14 8 4 8 19 20 15 14 14 50 8 3 2 6% 7% 6% 7% 5% 7% 5% 9% 5% 5% 7% 6% 5% 7% 7% 6% 9% 5% 8% Once a month 32 14 18 4 6 12 10 1 3 7 9 5 9 7 10 27 2 2 1 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 1% 4% 5% 3% 2% 3% 4% 5% 3% 2% 3% 5% k Once every 2-4 months 22 13 9 2 6 5 9 2 - 1 8 6 8 5 3 21 * 1 * 2% 3% 2% 2% 3% 1% 3% 2% -% 1% 3% 2% 3% 3% 1% 2% *% 2% *% Less often than every 4 months 51 25 26 8 14 15 14 * 3 7 14 20 16 8 7 47 2 1 1 5% 5% 5% 6% 6% 4% 5% *% 4% 5% 5% 6% 5% 4% 3% 5% 2% 1% 5% g g q Never 116 63 53 12 22 44 38 10 15 17 36 40 29 22 24 104 4 4 3 11% 13% 10% 9% 10% 11% 13% 11% 19% 12% 13% 12% 10% 12% 12% 12% 5% 8% 11% p p Don't know 106 52 54 17 17 38 34 7 8 12 20 32 36 17 22 86 8 9 3 10% 10% 10% 12% 8% 10% 12% 8% 10% 8% 7% 10% 12% 9% 11% 10% 9% 18% 11% op Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QH10 (QR5). SHOWCARD How often, if ever, do you use your DVR to watch recorded programmes? (SINGLE CODE) Base : Those who own a DVR ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 1558 80 114 109 117 121 113 112 119 1088 470 882 667 949 378 Effective Weighted Sample 1018 76 105 103 111 115 107 107 111 834 209 576 468 673 295 Total 1030 93 142 83 82 94 103 87 180 889 142 651 370 675 327 More than once a week 488 ** 68 48 41 41 44 56 75 405 83 313 172 328 148 47% ** 48% 58% 50% 43% 43% 64% 42% 46% 59% 48% 47% 49% 45% efh bdefh i Once a week 153 ** 23 8 17 19 15 10 24 131 21 94 55 109 38 15% ** 16% 9% 21% 21% 14% 12% 13% 15% 15% 14% 15% 16% 12% c c Once every 2-3 weeks 63 ** 7 3 4 3 9 5 8 58 5 47 16 32 28 6% ** 5% 3% 5% 3% 9% 6% 4% 7% 3% 7% 4% 5% 9% m Once a month 32 ** 6 5 3 5 2 2 3 30 3 18 14 16 15 3% ** 4% 6% 4% 5% 2% 2% 2% 3% 2% 3% 4% 2% 4% Once every 2-4 months 22 ** 7 2 3 - 2 - 3 19 3 14 8 13 9 2% ** 5% 3% 4% -% 2% -% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% eg e Less often than every 4 months 51 ** 7 1 2 6 4 1 14 46 5 36 14 33 16 5% ** 5% 1% 2% 6% 4% 1% 8% 5% 4% 6% 4% 5% 5% cg cg Never 116 ** 17 11 6 7 15 7 25 104 12 68 48 66 47 11% ** 12% 13% 7% 7% 14% 8% 14% 12% 9% 10% 13% 10% 14% m Don't know 106 ** 7 5 6 13 13 7 28 96 10 61 43 77 26 10% ** 5% 6% 7% 14% 12% 8% 16% 11% 7% 9% 12% 11% 8% b bcd Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh11 (Qh42A). Do You Ever Watch Tv Programmes 'On Demand' Through Your Tv Service? (Read Explanation If Necessary) Base : Those with multichannel TV GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3243 1574 1669 420 512 1154 1157 591 368 398 582 748 946 664 885 1850 468 477 448 Effective Weighted Sample 2132 1040 1092 267 326 782 790 378 227 267 426 499 621 443 579 1603 314 317 414 Total 2116 1015 1100 297 390 753 676 324 206 275 459 541 620 395 561 1766 186 108 56 Yes 464 229 236 80 111 189 85 39 24 62 136 146 143 91 85 391 45 15 14 22% 23% 21% 27% 28% 25% 13% 12% 12% 23% 30% 27% 23% 23% 15% 22% 24% 14% 25% f f f gh ghi n n n q q q No 1563 742 821 201 269 538 554 266 176 207 312 373 455 284 452 1296 139 86 41 74% 73% 75% 68% 69% 71% 82% 82% 85% 75% 68% 69% 73% 72% 81% 73% 75% 80% 74% cde ij ij j klm or Don't know 88 44 44 15 10 27 36 18 6 6 11 22 21 20 24 78 2 7 1 4% 4% 4% 5% 3% 4% 5% 6% 3% 2% 2% 4% 3% 5% 4% 4% 1% 6% 2% d ij pr pr Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh11 (Qh42A). Do You Ever Watch Tv Programmes 'On Demand' Through Your Tv Service? (Read Explanation If Necessary) Base : Those with multichannel TV ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3243 219 224 242 223 245 231 234 232 2297 946 1600 1629 1893 902 Effective Weighted Sample 2132 209 206 229 212 233 218 222 215 1769 414 1057 1147 1335 697 Total 2116 250 277 181 152 184 204 175 344 1842 274 1213 891 1313 747 Yes 464 61 62 28 38 45 44 32 81 412 52 331 131 288 162 22% 24% 23% 15% 25% 25% 21% 18% 24% 22% 19% 27% 15% 22% 22% c c c c l No 1563 185 198 136 110 127 153 140 246 1353 210 835 719 974 548 74% 74% 71% 76% 73% 69% 75% 80% 72% 73% 77% 69% 81% 74% 73% beh k Don't know 88 4 17 16 3 11 7 3 17 76 12 47 41 51 37 4% 2% 6% 9% 2% 6% 3% 2% 5% 4% 4% 4% 5% 4% 5% adg adfg adg g Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh12 (Qh42B). How Often, If Ever, Do You Use Your 'On Demand' Tv Service To Watch Tv Programmes After They'Ve Been Shown? Base : Those who ever watch TV programmes 'on demand' through their TV service GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f ~g ~h ~i j k l m n o p ~q r Unweighted total 662 325 337 107 153 277 125 68 51 89 174 188 208 134 132 384 107 64 107 Effective Weighted Sample 439 219 220 70 91 192 89 39 28 62 128 125 138 96 83 334 75 43 100 Total 464 229 236 80 111 189 85 39 24 62 136 146 143 91 85 391 45 15 14 Every day 40 19 22 9 11 13 7 ** ** ** 13 7 13 11 9 32 6 ** 2 9% 8% 9% 11% 10% 7% 8% ** ** ** 9% 5% 9% 12% 10% 8% 13% ** 13% k A few times a week 137 70 67 28 42 49 17 ** ** ** 52 46 42 29 20 109 21 ** 4 30% 30% 29% 35% 38% 26% 20% ** ** ** 38% 31% 30% 31% 24% 28% 46% ** 28% f ef or Once a week 88 45 43 11 26 37 13 ** ** ** 23 29 25 12 21 74 7 ** 3 19% 20% 18% 14% 24% 20% 15% ** ** ** 17% 20% 18% 13% 25% 19% 17% ** 19% m A few times a month 65 32 33 13 10 26 16 ** ** ** 23 23 23 11 8 55 6 ** 2 14% 14% 14% 16% 9% 14% 19% ** ** ** 17% 16% 16% 13% 10% 14% 14% ** 12% d Once a month 53 21 31 14 9 24 6 ** ** ** 12 16 15 12 9 49 1 ** 1 11% 9% 13% 18% 8% 13% 7% ** ** ** 9% 11% 11% 13% 11% 12% 3% ** 10% f p Less often 76 39 37 4 12 36 24 ** ** ** 14 24 21 14 17 68 3 ** 2 16% 17% 16% 6% 11% 19% 28% ** ** ** 10% 17% 15% 15% 20% 17% 6% ** 17% c cd p p Don't know 5 3 2 - * 3 2 ** ** ** - * 3 2 * 4 * ** * 1% 1% 1% -% *% 2% 2% ** ** ** -% *% 2% 2% *% 1% 1% ** 1% Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh12 (Qh42B). How Often, If Ever, Do You Use Your 'On Demand' Tv Service To Watch Tv Programmes After They'Ve Been Shown? Base : Those who ever watch TV programmes 'on demand' through their TV service ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h i j k l m n Unweighted total 662 52 48 33 53 60 47 40 51 487 175 428 231 372 183 Effective Weighted Sample 439 50 45 31 51 58 45 38 47 373 76 286 163 270 145 Total 464 61 62 28 38 45 44 32 81 412 52 331 131 288 162 Every day 40 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 28 13 28 12 27 11 9% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 7% 24% 9% 9% 9% 7% i A few times a week 137 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 126 11 105 30 83 50 30% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 31% 21% 32% 23% 29% 31% l Once a week 88 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 79 9 62 24 54 32 19% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 19% 18% 19% 19% 19% 19% A few times a month 65 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 58 7 41 24 39 24 14% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 14% 13% 12% 19% 14% 15% Once a month 53 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 48 4 35 18 35 16 11% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 12% 9% 11% 13% 12% 10% Less often 76 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 70 7 55 22 47 27 16% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 17% 13% 17% 16% 16% 16% Don't know 5 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 4 1 4 1 3 2 1% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1% 3% 1% 1% 1% 1% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh13 (Qh43A). Do You Ever Watch Tv Programmes Online Or Download Programmes From Uk Tv Broadcasters' Website (Such As Bbc Iplayer, Itv Player, Channel 4 On-Demand/ 4Od, Demand Five, Or Sky Player) After They'Ve Been Shown? I Don'T Mean Watching Live Programmes Online. Base : Those with access to the internet at home or elsewhere GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2694 1314 1380 420 506 1086 682 362 266 367 577 722 877 530 565 1578 362 353 401 Effective Weighted Sample 1783 877 907 269 320 739 476 231 157 248 423 484 581 360 364 1374 243 241 370 Total 1828 882 946 296 387 714 431 210 152 251 459 527 595 332 373 1553 141 84 50 Yes 625 318 306 132 152 240 102 61 35 75 210 229 225 93 77 542 44 24 15 34% 36% 32% 44% 39% 34% 24% 29% 23% 30% 46% 43% 38% 28% 21% 35% 31% 28% 30% ef f f ghi mn mn n q No 1085 503 581 147 205 423 310 131 106 163 228 275 327 221 262 916 87 49 33 59% 57% 61% 50% 53% 59% 72% 62% 70% 65% 50% 52% 55% 66% 70% 59% 62% 58% 66% c cde j j j kl kl o Don't know 119 60 58 18 30 51 19 18 11 13 21 24 43 18 33 95 10 11 2 6% 7% 6% 6% 8% 7% 4% 9% 7% 5% 4% 5% 7% 6% 9% 6% 7% 14% 5% f j k opr Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh13 (Qh43A). Do You Ever Watch Tv Programmes Online Or Download Programmes From Uk Tv Broadcasters' Website (Such As Bbc Iplayer, Itv Player, Channel 4 On-Demand/ 4Od, Demand Five, Or Sky Player) After They'Ve Been Shown? I Don'T Mean Watching Live Programmes Online. Base : Those with access to the internet at home or elsewhere ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2694 191 221 198 193 211 189 189 186 1903 791 1537 1147 1586 707 Effective Weighted Sample 1783 183 203 188 184 201 179 180 173 1465 360 1018 817 1145 552 Total 1828 224 275 153 136 162 171 147 285 1579 249 1171 647 1161 617 Yes 625 96 95 53 52 44 65 53 86 535 89 420 203 409 201 34% 43% 34% 35% 38% 27% 38% 36% 30% 34% 36% 36% 31% 35% 33% eh e e l No 1085 109 161 94 77 111 95 91 178 937 147 674 405 686 366 59% 49% 58% 61% 57% 68% 56% 62% 63% 59% 59% 58% 63% 59% 59% a abdf a a k Don't know 119 20 20 6 7 8 11 3 20 106 13 77 39 66 50 6% 9% 7% 4% 5% 5% 7% 2% 7% 7% 5% 7% 6% 6% 8% cg g g g Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh14 (Qh43B). How Often, If Ever, Do You Watch Tv Programmes Online Or Download From Uk Tv Broadcasters' Websites After They'Ve Been Shown? Base : Those who ever watch TV programmes online or download from UK TV broadcasters' websites GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f ~g ~h i j k l m n o p ~q r Unweighted total 866 440 426 170 192 352 152 91 55 111 252 296 311 150 109 539 122 99 106 Effective Weighted Sample 599 310 289 118 125 250 114 59 36 76 194 209 217 103 74 477 79 69 99 Total 625 318 306 132 152 240 102 61 35 75 210 229 225 93 77 542 44 24 15 Every day 21 8 14 6 4 10 2 ** ** * 5 7 12 * 3 21 * ** * 3% 2% 4% 4% 2% 4% 2% ** ** *% 2% 3% 5% *% 4% 4% *% ** 1% m A few times a week 125 66 58 43 33 29 19 ** ** 18 47 35 51 25 14 110 7 ** 3 20% 21% 19% 33% 22% 12% 18% ** ** 23% 23% 15% 22% 27% 18% 20% 15% ** 22% ef e k Once a week 106 54 52 23 33 41 10 ** ** 14 26 43 41 9 12 85 9 ** 4 17% 17% 17% 17% 21% 17% 10% ** ** 19% 12% 19% 18% 10% 16% 16% 21% ** 29% f m o A few times a month 111 58 53 21 29 42 18 ** ** 10 33 43 40 13 14 92 11 ** 3 18% 18% 17% 16% 19% 18% 18% ** ** 14% 15% 19% 18% 14% 19% 17% 24% ** 18% Once a month 87 44 43 12 13 38 23 ** ** 12 29 30 28 20 10 76 6 ** 2 14% 14% 14% 9% 8% 16% 23% ** ** 16% 14% 13% 12% 21% 12% 14% 13% ** 13% d cd l Less often 161 82 79 23 34 75 29 ** ** 20 70 68 48 24 22 146 10 ** 2 26% 26% 26% 18% 22% 31% 29% ** ** 27% 33% 30% 21% 25% 28% 27% 23% ** 17% c c l r Don't know 14 6 8 3 6 5 - ** ** - 1 3 6 2 3 13 1 ** - 2% 2% 3% 3% 4% 2% -% ** ** -% *% 1% 3% 2% 4% 2% 3% ** -% f Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh14 (Qh43B). How Often, If Ever, Do You Watch Tv Programmes Online Or Download From Uk Tv Broadcasters' Websites After They'Ve Been Shown? Base : Those who ever watch TV programmes online or download from UK TV broadcasters' websites ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h i j k l m n Unweighted total 866 80 79 69 69 54 68 64 56 627 239 534 330 545 215 Effective Weighted Sample 599 77 72 66 66 52 64 61 52 490 121 367 243 404 171 Total 625 96 95 53 52 44 65 53 86 535 89 420 203 409 201 Every day 21 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 19 2 14 7 13 8 3% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 4% 2% 3% 4% 3% 4% A few times a week 125 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 111 14 82 42 80 41 20% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 21% 15% 20% 21% 20% 20% Once a week 106 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 94 12 74 32 69 33 17% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 18% 14% 18% 16% 17% 16% A few times a month 111 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 99 12 75 35 67 41 18% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 18% 14% 18% 17% 16% 21% Once a month 87 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 66 21 46 40 60 24 14% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 12% 23% 11% 20% 15% 12% i k Less often 161 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 134 27 119 42 111 47 26% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 25% 30% 28% 21% 27% 23% l Don't know 14 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 13 1 10 4 9 5 2% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 2% 1% 2% 2% 2% 3% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh15 (Qh43C). Would You Say That Watching Tv Programmes In This Way Makes You Watch More, Less Or About The Same Amount Of Television Than You Used To? Base : Those who ever watch TV programmes online or download from UK TV broadcasters' websites GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f ~g ~h i j k l m n o p ~q r Unweighted total 866 440 426 170 192 352 152 91 55 111 252 296 311 150 109 539 122 99 106 Effective Weighted Sample 599 310 289 118 125 250 114 59 36 76 194 209 217 103 74 477 79 69 99 Total 625 318 306 132 152 240 102 61 35 75 210 229 225 93 77 542 44 24 15 More 102 48 54 33 30 27 12 ** ** 12 45 39 45 10 9 97 1 ** 2 16% 15% 18% 25% 20% 11% 12% ** ** 15% 21% 17% 20% 10% 11% 18% 1% ** 17% ef e m p p Less 56 25 31 10 16 20 9 ** ** 8 18 20 22 8 6 50 2 ** 1 9% 8% 10% 8% 11% 8% 9% ** ** 11% 8% 9% 10% 9% 8% 9% 5% ** 9% About the same 447 237 211 87 98 186 77 ** ** 53 143 165 150 72 60 377 41 ** 11 72% 74% 69% 66% 65% 78% 76% ** ** 71% 68% 72% 66% 78% 78% 70% 92% ** 74% cd l or Don't know 19 9 10 2 7 7 3 ** ** 2 4 5 8 3 3 17 1 ** - 3% 3% 3% 2% 5% 3% 3% ** ** 3% 2% 2% 4% 3% 4% 3% 1% ** -% Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh15 (Qh43C). Would You Say That Watching Tv Programmes In This Way Makes You Watch More, Less Or About The Same Amount Of Television Than You Used To? Base : Those who ever watch TV programmes online or download from UK TV broadcasters' websites ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h i j k l m n Unweighted total 866 80 79 69 69 54 68 64 56 627 239 534 330 545 215 Effective Weighted Sample 599 77 72 66 66 52 64 61 52 490 121 367 243 404 171 Total 625 96 95 53 52 44 65 53 86 535 89 420 203 409 201 More 102 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 94 8 78 25 56 44 16% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 18% 9% 18% 12% 14% 22% j l m Less 56 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 49 7 34 21 36 18 9% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 9% 8% 8% 11% 9% 9% About the same 447 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 377 71 296 149 302 135 72% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 70% 80% 71% 74% 74% 67% i Don't know 19 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 16 3 12 7 15 4 3% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 3% 3% 3% 4% 4% 2% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh16 (Qh43D). Would You Say That Watching Tv Programmes In This Way Makes You Watch More Of The Same Sorts Of Programmes That You Used To Watch, Or Different Programmes Than Those You Used To Watch, Or No Real Change? Base : Those who ever watch TV programmes online or download from UK TV broadcasters' websites GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f ~g ~h i j k l m n o p ~q r Unweighted total 866 440 426 170 192 352 152 91 55 111 252 296 311 150 109 539 122 99 106 Effective Weighted Sample 599 310 289 118 125 250 114 59 36 76 194 209 217 103 74 477 79 69 99 Total 625 318 306 132 152 240 102 61 35 75 210 229 225 93 77 542 44 24 15 Same sorts of programmes 155 85 70 36 39 53 27 ** ** 23 56 58 57 22 17 139 7 ** 4 25% 27% 23% 27% 26% 22% 26% ** ** 31% 27% 25% 25% 24% 22% 26% 15% ** 27% p Different programmes 96 45 50 28 24 32 12 ** ** 11 31 27 41 18 9 87 4 ** 3 15% 14% 16% 21% 16% 13% 11% ** ** 14% 15% 12% 18% 19% 12% 16% 10% ** 18% ef No real change 344 170 174 63 77 144 60 ** ** 35 114 135 114 50 45 289 32 ** 8 55% 53% 57% 48% 51% 60% 59% ** ** 47% 54% 59% 51% 53% 59% 53% 73% ** 51% c or Don't know 30 18 12 4 11 11 4 ** ** 6 9 9 12 4 5 27 1 ** 1 5% 6% 4% 3% 8% 5% 3% ** ** 8% 4% 4% 5% 4% 7% 5% 3% ** 5% Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qh16 (Qh43D). Would You Say That Watching Tv Programmes In This Way Makes You Watch More Of The Same Sorts Of Programmes That You Used To Watch, Or Different Programmes Than Those You Used To Watch, Or No Real Change? Base : Those who ever watch TV programmes online or download from UK TV broadcasters' websites ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h i j k l m n Unweighted total 866 80 79 69 69 54 68 64 56 627 239 534 330 545 215 Effective Weighted Sample 599 77 72 66 66 52 64 61 52 490 121 367 243 404 171 Total 625 96 95 53 52 44 65 53 86 535 89 420 203 409 201 Same sorts of programmes 155 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 131 24 107 47 108 43 25% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 24% 27% 26% 23% 26% 21% Different programmes 96 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 91 5 70 24 48 45 15% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 17% 6% 17% 12% 12% 22% j m No real change 344 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 288 56 221 123 233 103 55% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 54% 63% 53% 60% 57% 51% Don't know 30 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 26 4 21 9 19 10 5% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qcheck. Can I Just Check That You Have The Following Services? (Multicode) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Landline phone 1908 913 995 221 314 679 693 256 172 234 445 539 567 358 444 1610 156 89 53 85% 84% 85% 67% 77% 87% 94% 68% 79% 84% 94% 95% 85% 87% 73% 85% 80% 80% 84% c cd cde g g ghi lmn n n pq Mobile phone 2054 981 1072 321 405 762 566 298 189 270 465 533 630 383 508 1731 168 97 57 91% 91% 91% 98% 99% 98% 76% 79% 87% 97% 98% 94% 94% 93% 84% 92% 86% 87% 92% f ef f g gh gh n n n pq p Fixed Broadband internet access 1513 733 780 205 300 619 389 139 114 199 424 479 495 275 264 1287 113 72 42 67% 68% 66% 63% 74% 79% 53% 37% 53% 71% 90% 85% 74% 67% 43% 68% 57% 64% 67% f cf cdf g gh ghi lmn mn n p p Mobile broadband internet access 380 178 202 93 105 142 40 48 28 55 107 113 116 60 92 336 18 18 8 17% 16% 17% 28% 26% 18% 5% 13% 13% 20% 23% 20% 17% 14% 15% 18% 9% 16% 13% ef ef f gh gh mn pr p Narrowband internet access 14 5 9 * 3 1 9 * 1 3 3 4 7 1 2 12 - 1 * 1% *% 1% *% 1% *% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% *% 1% -% 1% 1% e TV service with additional channels you pay to receive 1193 582 611 173 253 452 315 138 93 163 316 332 360 231 270 989 107 59 38 53% 54% 52% 53% 62% 58% 43% 36% 43% 58% 67% 59% 54% 56% 44% 52% 55% 53% 61% f cf f gh ghi n n n oq No, none of these 14 8 6 1 1 3 8 10 - - - 1 1 * 12 7 6 2 - 1% 1% *% *% *% *% 1% 3% -% -% -% *% *% *% 2% *% 3% 1% -% hij klm or or Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QCHECK. Can I just check that you have the following services? (MULTICODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Landline phone 1908 231 280 159 142 164 188 157 289 1644 263 1089 808 1210 645 85% 82% 91% 85% 87% 83% 89% 84% 81% 84% 90% 86% 82% 88% 79% aegh ah i l n Mobile phone 2054 252 294 163 153 179 198 172 320 1785 269 1241 803 1276 721 91% 90% 96% 88% 94% 91% 94% 92% 90% 91% 92% 99% 82% 92% 89% aceh c c l n Fixed Broadband internet access 1513 176 239 127 114 127 151 122 232 1300 213 994 511 979 493 67% 63% 78% 68% 70% 64% 72% 65% 65% 66% 73% 79% 52% 71% 61% acegh a i l n Mobile broadband internet access 380 39 44 56 34 32 27 33 71 338 42 249 131 238 134 17% 14% 14% 30% 21% 16% 13% 17% 20% 17% 14% 20% 13% 17% 17% abdefgh af f l Narrowband internet access 14 1 5 1 - - 5 - - 9 5 8 6 11 2 1% *% 2% *% -% -% 2% -% -% *% 2% 1% 1% 1% *% degh degh i TV service with additional channels you pay to receive 1193 135 160 79 88 108 125 106 188 1062 131 755 430 728 427 53% 48% 52% 42% 54% 55% 59% 57% 53% 54% 45% 60% 44% 53% 53% c c c ac c c j l No, none of these 14 2 - 1 1 2 - - 1 13 1 1 12 7 7 1% 1% -% *% *% 1% -% -% *% 1% *% *% 1% *% 1% k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qdm. And Which, If Any, Of These Services Are You Primarily Or Jointly Responsible For - In Terms Of Deciding Which Supplier Or Network To Use? (Multicode) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Landline phone 1638 797 841 90 274 641 633 235 161 213 400 464 473 311 390 1386 132 77 43 73% 74% 72% 27% 67% 82% 86% 62% 74% 76% 85% 82% 71% 75% 64% 74% 67% 69% 68% c cd cde g g ghi lmn n n pr Mobile phone 1736 843 893 242 357 655 481 260 168 238 414 448 544 326 418 1462 141 82 50 77% 78% 76% 74% 88% 84% 65% 69% 77% 85% 88% 79% 81% 79% 69% 78% 72% 73% 81% f cf cf g gh gh n n n p pq Fixed Broadband internet access 1279 630 649 85 262 583 349 128 107 178 377 413 402 238 226 1090 96 61 33 57% 58% 55% 26% 64% 75% 47% 34% 49% 64% 80% 73% 60% 58% 37% 58% 49% 55% 53% cf cdf c g gh ghi lmn n n pr Mobile broadband internet access 282 135 147 54 86 108 34 39 26 42 82 74 82 45 81 246 15 15 6 12% 13% 12% 16% 21% 14% 5% 10% 12% 15% 17% 13% 12% 11% 13% 13% 8% 13% 10% f ef f g p p Narrowband internet access 7 4 3 - * 1 6 * 1 * 3 2 4 - 1 7 - * * *% *% *% -% *% *% 1% *% 1% *% 1% *% 1% -% *% *% -% *% 1% e TV service with additional channels you pay to receive 918 453 465 66 200 397 254 106 83 128 268 269 268 176 204 765 79 44 29 41% 42% 40% 20% 49% 51% 34% 28% 38% 46% 57% 47% 40% 43% 34% 41% 40% 40% 47% cf cf c g g ghi ln n n o None of these 178 73 105 59 18 37 64 32 14 16 17 34 47 33 64 140 20 13 5 8% 7% 9% 18% 4% 5% 9% 8% 6% 6% 4% 6% 7% 8% 11% 7% 10% 12% 8% def de j kl o Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QDM. And which, if any, of these services are you primarily or jointly responsible for - in terms of deciding which supplier or network to use? (MULTICODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Landline phone 1638 196 236 134 128 137 156 136 263 1421 217 959 668 1041 554 73% 70% 77% 72% 79% 69% 74% 73% 74% 72% 74% 76% 68% 75% 68% ae l n Mobile phone 1736 208 248 137 127 148 174 149 270 1528 208 1064 668 1086 599 77% 74% 81% 74% 78% 75% 83% 80% 76% 78% 71% 84% 68% 79% 74% ace j l n Fixed Broadband internet access 1279 147 201 103 99 107 122 100 211 1107 172 866 405 837 410 57% 53% 65% 55% 61% 54% 58% 54% 60% 56% 59% 69% 41% 61% 51% aceg l n Mobile broadband internet access 282 26 34 42 23 24 19 28 49 248 34 186 96 180 95 12% 9% 11% 23% 14% 12% 9% 15% 14% 13% 12% 15% 10% 13% 12% abdefgh f l Narrowband internet access 7 - 4 - - - 2 - - 6 1 4 3 7 - *% -% 1% -% -% -% 1% -% -% *% *% *% *% *% -% TV service with additional channels you pay to receive 918 104 115 62 60 89 88 79 168 831 87 595 315 566 322 41% 37% 37% 33% 37% 45% 42% 42% 47% 42% 30% 47% 32% 41% 40% c c abcd j l None of these 178 24 17 15 13 20 16 14 22 145 33 66 112 104 68 8% 9% 6% 8% 8% 10% 7% 7% 6% 7% 11% 5% 11% 8% 8% i k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QG1. Do you receive any of these services as part of an overall deal or package from the same supplier? (SINGLE CODE) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Yes 1202 580 622 149 244 493 316 135 92 163 331 361 374 227 240 1023 97 52 29 53% 54% 53% 45% 60% 63% 43% 36% 43% 58% 70% 64% 56% 55% 39% 54% 49% 47% 46% cf cf gh ghi lmn n n qr No 972 467 505 137 158 274 403 233 122 113 135 182 269 169 352 796 90 55 31 43% 43% 43% 42% 39% 35% 54% 62% 56% 40% 29% 32% 40% 41% 58% 42% 46% 49% 50% e cde ij ij j k k klm o o Don't know 82 35 48 42 6 14 20 10 2 3 6 23 27 17 16 67 10 4 2 4% 3% 4% 13% 2% 2% 3% 3% 1% 1% 1% 4% 4% 4% 3% 4% 5% 4% 3% def Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QG1. Do you receive any of these services as part of an overall deal or package from the same supplier? (SINGLE CODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Yes 1202 132 185 92 90 109 107 98 211 1064 138 768 427 766 406 53% 47% 60% 49% 55% 55% 51% 52% 60% 54% 47% 61% 43% 55% 50% acf ac j l n No 972 141 107 85 68 81 98 82 133 837 135 457 510 559 381 43% 50% 35% 46% 42% 41% 47% 44% 38% 43% 46% 36% 52% 40% 47% beh b b b k m Don't know 82 7 15 9 6 7 6 7 10 63 20 36 47 56 24 4% 3% 5% 5% 3% 4% 3% 4% 3% 3% 7% 3% 5% 4% 3% i k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qg2. Is This One Deal Or Package, Or More Than One? (Single Code) Base : Those with a bundle of services, who receive any of these services as part of an overall deal or package GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 1692 815 877 173 305 727 487 225 164 221 398 482 522 336 352 1042 227 199 224 Effective Weighted Sample 1161 564 597 124 198 504 351 149 101 154 299 329 357 237 240 902 161 141 208 Total 1202 580 622 149 244 493 316 135 92 163 331 361 374 227 240 1023 97 52 29 One deal or package 1129 546 583 139 229 459 301 129 86 157 311 336 351 211 231 963 94 47 25 94% 94% 94% 94% 94% 93% 95% 96% 94% 96% 94% 93% 94% 93% 96% 94% 97% 90% 86% r qr Two packages from one supplier 44 21 23 6 9 18 11 3 3 4 11 14 14 11 5 36 1 4 3 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 3% 2% 3% 2% 3% 4% 4% 5% 2% 4% 1% 8% 9% op op Two packages from different suppliers 9 4 6 - 3 5 1 * * * 5 3 2 2 2 8 1 * 1 1% 1% 1% -% 1% 1% *% *% *% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 3% oq Three or more packages 11 6 5 1 2 6 2 - 2 1 4 5 2 3 1 10 1 * * 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% -% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% *% 2% Don't know 9 4 5 3 - 5 1 2 1 2 * 2 4 1 1 7 1 1 * 1% 1% 1% 2% -% 1% *% 2% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 2% 1% j Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qg2. Is This One Deal Or Package, Or More Than One? (Single Code) Base : Those with a bundle of services, who receive any of these services as part of an overall deal or package ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 1692 113 147 119 131 145 119 127 141 1278 414 968 717 1019 449 Effective Weighted Sample 1161 108 136 113 124 138 112 121 131 987 197 659 535 754 359 Total 1202 132 185 92 90 109 107 98 211 1064 138 768 427 766 406 One deal or package 1129 130 154 83 86 108 104 91 206 997 132 718 404 709 395 94% 99% 83% 91% 96% 99% 98% 93% 97% 94% 96% 94% 95% 93% 97% bc b bcg bc b bc m Two packages from one supplier 44 1 20 6 3 - - 2 5 41 2 28 16 38 3 4% 1% 11% 6% 3% -% -% 2% 2% 4% 2% 4% 4% 5% 1% adefgh aef e n Two packages from different suppliers 9 - 1 1 1 - 1 3 1 8 1 6 3 4 4 1% -% *% 1% 1% -% 1% 3% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% e Three or more packages 11 - 7 2 - - - - - 10 1 9 2 9 1 1% -% 4% 3% -% -% -% -% -% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% *% adefgh Don't know 9 1 3 - - 1 1 2 - 8 1 7 2 6 3 1% 1% 1% -% -% 1% 1% 2% -% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qg3 (Qg3A). Showcard Thinking About The Service Package You Consider To Be The Main One, Or The One Your Household Spends The Most On... Please Could You Tell Me Which Services Are Part Of This Deal Or Package You Have With The Same Supplier? (Multicode) Base : Those with at least one deal or package with the same supplier | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |------------------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | c | d | | Unweighted total | 1680 | 809 | 871 | 169 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 1152 | 560 | 592 | 122 | | Total | 1193 | 576 | 617 | 146 | | Landline phone | 1013 | 491 | 522 | 110 | | 85% | 85% | 85% | 76% | 80% | | cd | cd | n | n | | | One mobile phone | 99 | 46 | 52 | 19 | | 8% | 8% | 8% | 13% | 11% | | f | f | j | opr | | | More than one mobile phone | 26 | 13 | 12 | 4 | | 2% | 2% | 2% | 3% | 1% | | o | | | | | | Internet - Fixed Broadband access | 1012 | 490 | 522 | 112 | | 85% | 85% | 85% | 76% | 89% | | cf | cf | g | gh | mn | | Internet - Mobile Broadband access | 89 | 41 | 48 | 22 | | 7% | 7% | 8% | 15% | 8% | | def | f | f | p | | | TV service | 536 | 245 | 291 | 70 | | 45% | 43% | 47% | 48% | 50% | | h | | | | | | Don't know | 37 | 20 | 18 | 4 | | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% | | l | l | l | | | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qg3 (Qg3A). Showcard Thinking About The Service Package You Consider To Be The Main One, Or The One Your Household Spends The Most On... Please Could You Tell Me Which Services Are Part Of This Deal Or Package You Have With The Same Supplier? (Multicode) Base : Those with at least one deal or package with the same supplier ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 1680 112 145 119 131 144 118 125 141 1269 411 959 714 1012 446 Effective Weighted Sample 1152 107 134 113 124 137 111 119 131 979 195 652 533 748 356 Total 1193 131 183 92 90 108 105 96 211 1057 136 761 425 761 404 Landline phone 1013 91 159 78 83 94 97 81 177 889 124 649 362 664 325 85% 69% 87% 85% 92% 87% 92% 85% 84% 84% 91% 85% 85% 87% 81% a a ah a a a a i n One mobile phone 99 16 13 4 6 8 6 16 16 90 8 67 32 54 43 8% 12% 7% 4% 7% 7% 5% 17% 7% 9% 6% 9% 7% 7% 11% c bcdefh m More than one mobile phone 26 3 2 2 2 1 5 2 2 22 4 17 8 12 13 2% 2% 1% 2% 3% 1% 5% 2% 1% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% 3% Internet - Fixed Broadband access 1012 117 156 82 72 95 91 78 171 900 112 663 346 650 339 85% 89% 86% 90% 81% 88% 87% 81% 81% 85% 82% 87% 81% 85% 84% l Internet - Mobile Broadband access 89 16 10 10 9 8 2 8 20 81 8 60 29 59 29 7% 12% 5% 11% 10% 7% 2% 9% 9% 8% 6% 8% 7% 8% 7% f f f f f TV service 536 63 70 34 30 58 53 38 110 506 30 350 183 328 195 45% 48% 39% 37% 34% 54% 50% 40% 52% 48% 22% 46% 43% 43% 48% d bcdg d bcd j Don't know 37 1 6 1 1 4 1 2 15 32 5 24 10 26 11 3% 1% 3% 1% 1% 4% 1% 2% 7% 3% 4% 3% 2% 3% 3% acdf Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qg4 (Qg3B). Do You Receive A Discount Or Special Deal For Subscribing To This Package Of Services? (Single Code) Base : Those with at least one deal or package with the same supplier GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 1680 809 871 169 305 721 485 223 162 218 397 480 515 334 351 1035 226 197 222 Effective Weighted Sample 1152 560 592 122 198 500 350 147 99 152 298 328 352 236 239 895 160 139 206 Total 1193 576 617 146 244 488 315 132 91 162 331 359 369 226 239 1016 96 51 29 Yes 804 375 430 79 165 347 213 82 59 109 226 253 253 148 151 681 69 37 17 67% 65% 70% 54% 68% 71% 68% 62% 65% 68% 68% 70% 68% 65% 63% 67% 71% 71% 61% c c c r No 215 112 103 22 43 87 62 36 17 34 61 58 70 41 46 186 13 9 8 18% 19% 17% 15% 18% 18% 20% 27% 19% 21% 19% 16% 19% 18% 19% 18% 13% 17% 28% j opq Don't know 174 89 85 45 35 53 41 15 15 18 44 48 47 37 41 149 15 6 3 15% 15% 14% 31% 14% 11% 13% 11% 16% 11% 13% 13% 13% 17% 17% 15% 15% 12% 11% def Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QG4 (QG3B). Do you receive a discount or special deal for subscribing to this package of services? (SINGLE CODE) Base : Those with at least one deal or package with the same supplier ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 1680 112 145 119 131 144 118 125 141 1269 411 959 714 1012 446 Effective Weighted Sample 1152 107 134 113 124 137 111 119 131 979 195 652 533 748 356 Total 1193 131 183 92 90 108 105 96 211 1057 136 761 425 761 404 Yes 804 80 133 54 73 75 54 61 152 714 90 530 268 517 270 67% 61% 73% 58% 82% 69% 51% 64% 72% 68% 66% 70% 63% 68% 67% acf acefg f cf l No 215 25 29 18 4 18 34 18 40 192 23 130 85 141 66 18% 19% 16% 20% 4% 17% 32% 19% 19% 18% 17% 17% 20% 19% 16% d d d d abcdegh d d Don't know 174 27 20 20 13 15 18 17 19 151 23 101 72 103 68 15% 20% 11% 22% 14% 14% 17% 18% 9% 14% 17% 13% 17% 13% 17% bh bh h Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qg5 (Qg3C). Do You Receive One Bill For This Bundle Of Services, Or More Than One Bill? (Single Code) Base : Those with at least one deal or package with the same supplier GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 1680 809 871 169 305 721 485 223 162 218 397 480 515 334 351 1035 226 197 222 Effective Weighted Sample 1152 560 592 122 198 500 350 147 99 152 298 328 352 236 239 895 160 139 206 Total 1193 576 617 146 244 488 315 132 91 162 331 359 369 226 239 1016 96 51 29 One bill 1123 542 581 132 228 464 299 128 88 156 313 339 347 207 230 961 89 48 26 94% 94% 94% 90% 93% 95% 95% 96% 96% 96% 95% 95% 94% 92% 96% 95% 92% 93% 91% m r More than one bill 33 16 17 1 9 15 9 4 2 5 15 12 10 9 3 27 2 3 1 3% 3% 3% *% 4% 3% 3% 3% 2% 3% 4% 3% 3% 4% 1% 3% 2% 5% 5% Don't know 36 18 18 13 6 9 7 1 1 1 3 8 13 10 6 29 5 1 1 3% 3% 3% 9% 3% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% 3% 4% 2% 3% 5% 2% 5% def Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QG5 (QG3C). Do you receive one bill for this bundle of services, or more than one bill? (SINGLE CODE) Base : Those with at least one deal or package with the same supplier ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 1680 112 145 119 131 144 118 125 141 1269 411 959 714 1012 446 Effective Weighted Sample 1152 107 134 113 124 137 111 119 131 979 195 652 533 748 356 Total 1193 131 183 92 90 108 105 96 211 1057 136 761 425 761 404 One bill 1123 124 169 84 83 102 100 89 209 994 129 715 402 715 382 94% 95% 93% 91% 92% 95% 95% 92% 99% 94% 95% 94% 94% 94% 95% bcdg More than one bill 33 4 10 4 2 1 2 2 2 29 5 23 10 23 9 3% 3% 6% 4% 2% 1% 2% 2% 1% 3% 4% 3% 2% 3% 2% eh Don't know 36 3 3 4 5 4 3 6 - 34 2 23 13 23 12 3% 2% 2% 5% 6% 4% 3% 6% -% 3% 1% 3% 3% 3% 3% h h h h h Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qg6 (Qg3D). Which Supplier Do You Use For This Package Of Services? (Single Code) Base : Those with at least one deal or package with the same supplier GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 1680 809 871 169 305 721 485 223 162 218 397 480 515 334 351 1035 226 197 222 Effective Weighted Sample 1152 560 592 122 198 500 350 147 99 152 298 328 352 236 239 895 160 139 206 Total 1193 576 617 146 244 488 315 132 91 162 331 359 369 226 239 1016 96 51 29 Virgin Media (previously NTL/ Telewest) 353 173 180 50 81 134 88 48 25 44 90 99 104 70 80 314 25 7 7 30% 30% 29% 34% 33% 28% 28% 37% 27% 27% 27% 28% 28% 31% 33% 31% 26% 14% 26% j q q q BT 303 151 152 32 56 130 85 21 27 40 99 120 90 51 42 249 32 15 8 25% 26% 25% 22% 23% 27% 27% 16% 29% 25% 30% 33% 24% 23% 17% 24% 33% 28% 26% g g g lmn n o Sky 275 120 154 36 67 109 62 26 16 43 86 83 89 46 58 236 16 14 9 23% 21% 25% 25% 28% 22% 20% 20% 18% 27% 26% 23% 24% 20% 24% 23% 17% 26% 30% f p op Talk Talk/ Carphone Warehouse 149 84 66 10 14 73 53 17 17 22 29 29 50 37 34 124 11 11 4 13% 15% 11% 7% 6% 15% 17% 13% 18% 13% 9% 8% 13% 17% 14% 12% 12% 21% 12% b cd cd j k k k opr Orange 25 11 14 5 11 8 2 4 2 3 7 7 8 6 4 22 1 1 * 2% 2% 2% 3% 4% 2% 1% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% f ef O2 18 9 8 6 5 3 4 7 * 3 3 4 7 3 4 16 1 - * 1% 2% 1% 4% 2% 1% 1% 6% *% 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% 2% 2% 1% -% 2% e hj Vodafone 9 2 8 2 3 5 - 2 - 1 5 2 2 3 3 9 * * * 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% -% 1% -% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% f T-Mobile 7 4 3 2 1 3 1 2 1 - - * 2 2 2 6 - 1 - 1% 1% *% 2% *% 1% *% 1% 1% -% -% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% -% 2% -% AOL 6 4 2 - * 4 2 * * * 3 2 3 1 * 5 1 * * 1% 1% *% -% *% 1% *% *% *% *% 1% 1% 1% *% *% *% 1% 1% *% Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qg6 (Qg3D). Which Supplier Do You Use For This Package Of Services? (Single Code) Base : Those with at least one deal or package with the same supplier GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 1680 809 871 169 305 721 485 223 162 218 397 480 515 334 351 1035 226 197 222 Effective Weighted Sample 1152 560 592 122 198 500 350 147 99 152 298 328 352 236 239 895 160 139 206 Total 1193 576 617 146 244 488 315 132 91 162 331 359 369 226 239 1016 96 51 29 Other 41 16 25 3 3 17 18 5 3 5 7 11 13 6 11 29 9 2 * 3% 3% 4% 2% 1% 3% 6% 4% 4% 3% 2% 3% 4% 3% 5% 3% 9% 4% 1% d or Don't know 7 2 5 * 4 1 2 - - 1 2 3 1 1 2 7 * * - 1% *% 1% *% 2% *% 1% -% -% 1% 1% 1% *% *% 1% 1% *% *% -% e Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qg6 (Qg3D). Which Supplier Do You Use For This Package Of Services? (Single Code) Base : Those with at least one deal or package with the same supplier ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 1680 112 145 119 131 144 118 125 141 1269 411 959 714 1012 446 Effective Weighted Sample 1152 107 134 113 124 137 111 119 131 979 195 652 533 748 356 Total 1193 131 183 92 90 108 105 96 211 1057 136 761 425 761 404 Virgin Media (previously NTL/ Telewest) 353 32 53 20 25 44 37 24 78 338 15 216 134 205 140 30% 24% 29% 22% 28% 41% 35% 25% 37% 32% 11% 28% 31% 27% 35% abcdg c acg j m BT 303 29 49 30 28 23 26 23 40 240 63 194 109 212 83 25% 22% 27% 33% 32% 21% 25% 23% 19% 23% 47% 25% 26% 28% 21% eh h i n Sky 275 39 40 20 14 21 21 22 59 256 18 182 90 171 95 23% 30% 22% 21% 16% 19% 20% 23% 28% 24% 13% 24% 21% 23% 24% d d j Talk Talk/ Carphone Warehouse 149 16 21 11 16 11 13 13 23 129 21 91 58 103 43 13% 12% 11% 12% 18% 10% 13% 13% 11% 12% 15% 12% 14% 14% 11% Orange 25 5 2 4 1 3 3 3 2 21 3 17 7 13 11 2% 3% 1% 4% 1% 3% 2% 4% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% O2 18 3 2 - 1 - 2 3 4 17 * 13 5 8 9 1% 2% 1% -% 2% -% 2% 4% 2% 2% *% 2% 1% 1% 2% ce Vodafone 9 2 1 1 - - - 1 3 9 * 7 3 7 2 1% 2% 1% 1% -% -% -% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% T-Mobile 7 3 - - 1 - - 1 - 7 - 5 2 3 4 1% 3% -% -% 1% -% -% 2% -% 1% -% 1% *% *% 1% AOL 6 1 - 1 1 - - 2 - 3 3 6 * 5 1 1% 1% -% 1% 1% -% -% 2% -% *% 2% 1% *% 1% *% i l Other 41 - 9 5 2 6 2 2 2 29 12 24 17 30 11 3% -% 5% 5% 2% 6% 2% 3% 1% 3% 9% 3% 4% 4% 3% a a ah i Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QG6 (QG3D). Which supplier do you use for this package of services? (SINGLE CODE) Base : Those with at least one deal or package with the same supplier ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 1680 112 145 119 131 144 118 125 141 1269 411 959 714 1012 446 Effective Weighted Sample 1152 107 134 113 124 137 111 119 131 979 195 652 533 748 356 Total 1193 131 183 92 90 108 105 96 211 1057 136 761 425 761 404 Don't know 7 - 5 - 1 - - 1 - 7 * 6 1 4 3 1% -% 3% -% 1% -% -% 1% -% 1% *% 1% *% 1% 1% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp1. Showcard During An Average Week, On How Many Days Do You Listen To The Radio (Including Listening At Home, In The Car, At Work, Via Mobile Phone, Personal Stereo)? (Single Code) Base : All respondents | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |-------------------------------------------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | c | d | | Unweighted total | 3474 | 1679 | 1795 | 460 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 2281 | 1110 | 1171 | 296 | | Total | 2256 | 1082 | 1174 | 327 | | 7 days a week | (7.0) | 1033 | 530 | 503 | | 46% | 49% | 43% | 35% | 38% | | b | cd | cd | g | g | | 6 days a week | (6.0) | 75 | 40 | 35 | | 3% | 4% | 3% | 3% | 3% | | g | | | | | | 5 days a week | (5.0) | 173 | 87 | 86 | | 8% | 8% | 7% | 8% | 8% | | f | f | f | g | g | | 3 or 4 days a week | (3.5) | 187 | 79 | 108 | | 8% | 7% | 9% | 11% | 10% | | r | | | | | | 1 or 2 days a week | (1.5) | 223 | 90 | 133 | | 10% | 8% | 11% | 11% | 12% | | a | h | l | r | r | | Less often | (0.5) | 134 | 60 | 73 | | 6% | 6% | 6% | 5% | 4% | | d | i | pr | p | | | Never/ do not listen to the radio | (0.0) | 423 | 193 | 230 | | 19% | 18% | 20% | 26% | 25% | | ef | ef | hij | j | k | | Don't know | 7 | 2 | 5 | - | | *% | *% | *% | -% | *% | | Mean number of days during an | | | | | | average week | 4.3 | 4.5 | 4.1 | 3.6 | | b | cd | cd | g | g | | Standard deviation | 2.94 | 2.92 | 2.95 | 2.97 | | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r | | | | | All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp1. Showcard During An Average Week, On How Many Days Do You Listen To The Radio (Including Listening At Home, In The Car, At Work, Via Mobile Phone, Personal Stereo)? (Single Code) Base : All respondents | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |-------------------------------------------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | c | d | | Unweighted total | 3474 | 1679 | 1795 | 460 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 2281 | 1110 | 1171 | 296 | | Total | 2256 | 1082 | 1174 | 327 | | Standard error | .05 | .07 | .07 | .14 | | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r | | | | | All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QP1. SHOWCARD During an average week, on how many days do you listen to the radio (including listening at home, in the car, at work, via mobile phone, personal stereo)? (SINGLE CODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 7 days a week (7.0) 1033 102 164 95 75 89 114 81 147 878 155 596 434 696 300 46% 37% 54% 51% 46% 45% 54% 43% 41% 45% 53% 47% 44% 50% 37% agh ah a agh i n 6 days a week (6.0) 75 18 7 1 4 3 10 5 15 68 7 52 23 40 34 3% 7% 2% *% 3% 2% 5% 3% 4% 3% 2% 4% 2% 3% 4% bcde c c c c l 5 days a week (5.0) 173 28 22 7 15 17 15 17 25 160 13 124 49 92 77 8% 10% 7% 4% 9% 9% 7% 9% 7% 8% 4% 10% 5% 7% 9% c c c c j l m 3 or 4 days a week (3.5) 187 30 28 16 13 16 14 17 22 166 21 100 83 111 72 8% 11% 9% 9% 8% 8% 7% 9% 6% 8% 7% 8% 8% 8% 9% 1 or 2 days a week (1.5) 223 25 37 22 19 21 18 15 30 193 30 110 113 138 81 10% 9% 12% 12% 12% 10% 8% 8% 8% 10% 10% 9% 11% 10% 10% k Less often (0.5) 134 13 18 19 9 12 3 11 36 116 18 62 69 94 38 6% 5% 6% 10% 6% 6% 1% 6% 10% 6% 6% 5% 7% 7% 5% f f af f f f af k Never/ do not listen to the radio (0.0) 423 64 31 26 25 37 36 40 79 379 45 211 209 206 207 19% 23% 10% 14% 15% 19% 17% 22% 22% 19% 15% 17% 21% 15% 25% bcd b b bc bcd j k m Don't know 7 - - - 4 2 - 1 1 5 3 4 3 5 2 *% -% -% -% 2% 1% -% *% *% *% 1% *% *% *% *% abcf i Mean number of days during an average week 4.3 4.0 4.8 4.3 4.4 4.2 4.8 4.1 3.9 4.2 4.6 4.5 4.0 4.5 3.8 aegh aegh i l n Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp1. Showcard During An Average Week, On How Many Days Do You Listen To The Radio (Including Listening At Home, In The Car, At Work, Via Mobile Phone, Personal Stereo)? (Single Code) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Standard deviation 2.94 2.91 2.73 2.97 2.87 2.95 2.82 2.97 3.06 2.94 2.93 2.86 3.03 2.89 2.98 Standard error .05 .19 .17 .19 .19 .18 .18 .19 .20 .06 .09 .07 .07 .07 .10 Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp2A (Qp11A). Showcard How Often, If At All, Do You Access The Radio Via - Traditional Set With Am Stereo - Either At Home, In The Car Or On Portable Radio. (Single Code) Base : Those who listen to radio | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |-------------------------------------------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | c | d | | Unweighted total | 2811 | 1389 | 1422 | 327 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 1853 | 920 | 935 | 215 | | Total | 1825 | 887 | 939 | 242 | | Every day | 264 | 145 | 120 | 38 | | 14% | 16% | 13% | 16% | 10% | | b | de | p | opq | | | At least weekly | 147 | 74 | 73 | 8 | | 8% | 8% | 8% | 3% | 8% | | c | c | c | or | | | At least monthly | 67 | 39 | 28 | 10 | | 4% | 4% | 3% | 4% | 2% | | k | k | q | q | q | | Have tried it once | 61 | 29 | 32 | 3 | | 3% | 3% | 3% | 1% | 5% | | c | op | op | | | | Never | 823 | 386 | 436 | 113 | | 45% | 44% | 47% | 47% | 46% | | f | h | h | q | oq | | Do not have access to device | 463 | 214 | 250 | 69 | | 25% | 24% | 27% | 28% | 29% | | f | f | f | r | r | | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r | | | | | All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp2A (Qp11A). Showcard How Often, If At All, Do You Access The Radio Via - Traditional Set With Am Stereo - Either At Home, In The Car Or On Portable Radio. (Single Code) Base : Those who listen to radio ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2811 191 226 217 198 213 199 195 190 1981 830 1400 1399 1664 719 Effective Weighted Sample 1853 182 208 206 188 202 188 185 175 1529 365 920 993 1194 565 Total 1825 217 277 160 135 158 174 146 274 1580 245 1044 771 1171 603 Every day 264 21 48 19 26 18 64 11 24 215 49 136 127 173 80 14% 10% 17% 12% 19% 11% 36% 7% 9% 14% 20% 13% 16% 15% 13% agh acegh abcdegh i k At least weekly 147 33 14 14 5 14 16 11 11 130 17 72 75 77 67 8% 15% 5% 9% 4% 9% 9% 8% 4% 8% 7% 7% 10% 7% 11% bcdegh d d dh k m At least monthly 67 8 11 9 2 11 2 4 9 58 9 32 33 46 19 4% 4% 4% 5% 1% 7% 1% 3% 3% 4% 4% 3% 4% 4% 3% df df Have tried it once 61 1 15 8 4 5 4 2 11 57 4 32 29 46 11 3% *% 5% 5% 3% 3% 2% 1% 4% 4% 2% 3% 4% 4% 2% ag ag a a j n Never 823 72 132 62 71 103 60 77 111 700 122 494 327 522 273 45% 33% 48% 39% 52% 65% 34% 53% 41% 44% 50% 47% 42% 45% 45% af acfh abcdfgh acfh i l Do not have access to device 463 80 56 50 28 8 29 42 107 419 44 279 180 307 153 25% 37% 20% 31% 21% 5% 16% 29% 39% 27% 18% 27% 23% 26% 25% bdef e bdef e e ef bdefg j Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp2B (Qp11B). Showcard How Often, If At All, Do You Access The Radio Via - Traditional Set With Fm Stereo - Either At Home, In The Car Or On Portable Radio. (Single Code) Base : Those who listen to radio | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |------------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | c | d | | Unweighted total | 2811 | 1389 | 1422 | 327 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 1853 | 920 | 935 | 215 | | Total | 1825 | 887 | 939 | 242 | | Every day | 566 | 310 | 255 | 69 | | 31% | 35% | 27% | 29% | 27% | | b | cde | j | j | p | | At least weekly | 334 | 151 | 184 | 37 | | 18% | 17% | 20% | 15% | 19% | | km | r | or | or | | | At least monthly | 104 | 55 | 50 | 16 | | 6% | 6% | 5% | 7% | 4% | | g | k | | | | | Have tried it once | 58 | 28 | 30 | 4 | | 3% | 3% | 3% | 2% | 3% | | i | i | i | l | p | | Never | 463 | 212 | 251 | 66 | | 25% | 24% | 27% | 27% | 27% | | f | h | gh | kn | q | | Do not have access to device | 300 | 131 | 169 | 50 | | 16% | 15% | 18% | 21% | 21% | | f | f | f | r | r | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp2B (Qp11B). Showcard How Often, If At All, Do You Access The Radio Via - Traditional Set With Fm Stereo - Either At Home, In The Car Or On Portable Radio. (Single Code) Base : Those who listen to radio ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2811 191 226 217 198 213 199 195 190 1981 830 1400 1399 1664 719 Effective Weighted Sample 1853 182 208 206 188 202 188 185 175 1529 365 920 993 1194 565 Total 1825 217 277 160 135 158 174 146 274 1580 245 1044 771 1171 603 Every day 566 50 102 53 21 66 63 43 81 479 87 294 270 401 142 31% 23% 37% 33% 16% 42% 36% 30% 30% 30% 35% 28% 35% 34% 24% ad ad adgh ad d d k n At least weekly 334 58 35 24 23 34 21 35 42 300 34 185 149 193 134 18% 27% 13% 15% 17% 21% 12% 24% 15% 19% 14% 18% 19% 16% 22% bcdfh bf bcfh j m At least monthly 104 17 19 11 5 12 4 13 7 90 14 53 49 66 36 6% 8% 7% 7% 4% 7% 2% 9% 3% 6% 6% 5% 6% 6% 6% fh f f fh dfh Have tried it once 58 5 8 8 2 - 1 2 24 53 5 35 23 40 17 3% 2% 3% 5% 2% -% 1% 1% 9% 3% 2% 3% 3% 3% 3% e e defg abdefg Never 463 38 68 36 64 42 60 36 51 381 82 301 162 281 166 25% 17% 25% 23% 48% 27% 35% 24% 18% 24% 33% 29% 21% 24% 28% abcefgh a abcgh i l Do not have access to device 300 49 44 29 19 4 25 16 69 277 23 176 118 190 107 16% 23% 16% 18% 14% 3% 14% 11% 25% 18% 9% 17% 15% 16% 18% defg e e e e e bdefg j Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp2C (Qp11C). Showcard How Often, If At All, Do You Access The Radio Via - Mobile Phone. (Single Code) Base : Those who listen to radio GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2811 1389 1422 327 410 1027 1047 498 311 347 538 688 831 577 715 1629 357 397 428 Effective Weighted Sample 1853 920 935 215 254 697 716 323 189 230 393 455 557 386 465 1417 241 264 394 Total 1825 887 939 242 303 665 615 267 173 232 417 491 553 339 442 1541 143 89 52 Every day 33 21 12 12 9 10 3 9 4 8 3 8 5 5 15 28 1 2 2 2% 2% 1% 5% 3% 1% *% 3% 3% 3% 1% 2% 1% 2% 3% 2% 1% 2% 4% ef f j j l op At least weekly 62 33 29 26 18 12 5 8 3 12 9 12 26 9 15 52 6 2 2 3% 4% 3% 11% 6% 2% 1% 3% 2% 5% 2% 2% 5% 3% 3% 3% 4% 2% 4% ef ef hj At least monthly 56 39 17 11 19 16 10 4 6 9 11 18 17 9 11 44 9 2 1 3% 4% 2% 5% 6% 2% 2% 1% 4% 4% 3% 4% 3% 3% 3% 3% 6% 2% 2% b f ef oqr Have tried it once 78 34 44 22 15 31 10 3 8 5 25 25 27 14 13 72 5 * 1 4% 4% 5% 9% 5% 5% 2% 1% 5% 2% 6% 5% 5% 4% 3% 5% 4% *% 3% ef f f g gi q q q Never 1208 572 636 136 207 484 381 164 117 161 297 329 360 239 280 1007 107 51 43 66% 65% 68% 56% 68% 73% 62% 61% 68% 70% 71% 67% 65% 71% 63% 65% 75% 57% 83% c cf g g n q oq opq Do not have access to device 388 188 200 35 35 112 205 80 34 36 72 100 117 63 107 338 15 32 2 21% 21% 21% 14% 12% 17% 33% 30% 20% 15% 17% 20% 21% 19% 24% 22% 11% 36% 4% d cde hij m pr r opr Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp2C (Qp11C). Showcard How Often, If At All, Do You Access The Radio Via - Mobile Phone. (Single Code) Base : Those who listen to radio ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2811 191 226 217 198 213 199 195 190 1981 830 1400 1399 1664 719 Effective Weighted Sample 1853 182 208 206 188 202 188 185 175 1529 365 920 993 1194 565 Total 1825 217 277 160 135 158 174 146 274 1580 245 1044 771 1171 603 Every day 33 7 3 2 2 2 5 3 4 32 1 17 17 11 20 2% 3% 1% 1% 2% 1% 3% 2% 2% 2% *% 2% 2% 1% 3% j m At least weekly 62 8 7 6 5 5 5 7 9 55 6 41 21 25 35 3% 4% 3% 4% 4% 3% 3% 5% 3% 3% 3% 4% 3% 2% 6% m At least monthly 56 4 7 4 6 6 1 6 8 50 6 40 16 40 14 3% 2% 3% 3% 5% 4% 1% 4% 3% 3% 2% 4% 2% 3% 2% f f f l Have tried it once 78 15 15 7 4 7 3 5 16 69 10 62 17 50 27 4% 7% 5% 4% 3% 5% 2% 3% 6% 4% 4% 6% 2% 4% 4% f f f l Never 1208 126 177 100 102 129 125 105 143 1038 171 713 494 768 397 66% 58% 64% 63% 76% 81% 72% 72% 52% 66% 70% 68% 64% 66% 66% h h abch abcfgh ah ah Do not have access to device 388 57 67 41 15 10 34 19 94 336 52 173 208 276 110 21% 26% 24% 26% 11% 6% 20% 13% 34% 21% 21% 17% 27% 24% 18% deg deg deg de e bdefg k n Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp2D (Qp11D). Showcard How Often, If At All, Do You Access The Radio Via - Digital Radio Through Tv. (Single Code) Base : Those who listen to radio GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2811 1389 1422 327 410 1027 1047 498 311 347 538 688 831 577 715 1629 357 397 428 Effective Weighted Sample 1853 920 935 215 254 697 716 323 189 230 393 455 557 386 465 1417 241 264 394 Total 1825 887 939 242 303 665 615 267 173 232 417 491 553 339 442 1541 143 89 52 Every day 111 57 54 24 21 36 30 19 13 11 19 28 39 14 30 92 10 6 3 6% 6% 6% 10% 7% 5% 5% 7% 7% 5% 5% 6% 7% 4% 7% 6% 7% 6% 6% ef m At least weekly 194 91 103 38 48 62 47 27 16 32 47 48 53 40 52 155 25 10 4 11% 10% 11% 16% 16% 9% 8% 10% 9% 14% 11% 10% 10% 12% 12% 10% 18% 11% 7% ef ef oqr At least monthly 154 86 67 17 28 69 40 8 16 21 42 42 57 39 16 124 21 6 3 8% 10% 7% 7% 9% 10% 7% 3% 9% 9% 10% 9% 10% 11% 4% 8% 15% 7% 5% b f g g g n n n r oqr Have tried it once 156 72 84 15 34 70 37 19 7 25 60 66 39 24 27 145 4 5 2 9% 8% 9% 6% 11% 10% 6% 7% 4% 11% 14% 13% 7% 7% 6% 9% 3% 5% 4% f f h gh lmn pqr Never 997 477 520 123 145 366 363 137 104 130 221 258 288 192 258 841 76 42 37 55% 54% 55% 51% 48% 55% 59% 51% 60% 56% 53% 53% 52% 57% 58% 55% 53% 47% 72% d cd l q opq Do not have access to device 213 102 111 25 28 62 98 57 18 13 28 49 77 29 59 183 7 21 3 12% 12% 12% 11% 9% 9% 16% 21% 10% 6% 7% 10% 14% 9% 13% 12% 5% 23% 6% cde hij m m pr opr Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp2D (Qp11D). Showcard How Often, If At All, Do You Access The Radio Via - Digital Radio Through Tv. (Single Code) Base : Those who listen to radio ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2811 191 226 217 198 213 199 195 190 1981 830 1400 1399 1664 719 Effective Weighted Sample 1853 182 208 206 188 202 188 185 175 1529 365 920 993 1194 565 Total 1825 217 277 160 135 158 174 146 274 1580 245 1044 771 1171 603 Every day 111 14 9 12 7 4 17 9 19 96 15 63 48 65 43 6% 6% 3% 8% 5% 3% 10% 6% 7% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 7% e be At least weekly 194 24 28 21 14 14 13 17 24 169 25 113 80 111 80 11% 11% 10% 13% 11% 9% 8% 11% 9% 11% 10% 11% 10% 9% 13% m At least monthly 154 18 17 14 13 10 12 17 23 134 20 102 51 106 45 8% 8% 6% 9% 9% 6% 7% 12% 9% 8% 8% 10% 7% 9% 8% b l Have tried it once 156 38 23 11 12 8 21 8 24 140 17 105 50 98 56 9% 18% 8% 7% 9% 5% 12% 5% 9% 9% 7% 10% 7% 8% 9% bcdegh eg l Never 997 100 150 87 80 112 99 85 129 851 146 561 433 632 328 55% 46% 54% 54% 59% 71% 57% 58% 47% 54% 60% 54% 56% 54% 54% ah abcdfgh a ah i Do not have access to device 213 22 50 15 9 10 13 10 54 191 22 99 108 160 50 12% 10% 18% 9% 7% 6% 7% 7% 20% 12% 9% 9% 14% 14% 8% acdefg acdefg k n Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp2E (Qp11E). Showcard How Often, If At All, Do You Access The Radio Via - Digital Radio Through The Internet. (Single Code) Base : Those who listen to radio GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2811 1389 1422 327 410 1027 1047 498 311 347 538 688 831 577 715 1629 357 397 428 Effective Weighted Sample 1853 920 935 215 254 697 716 323 189 230 393 455 557 386 465 1417 241 264 394 Total 1825 887 939 242 303 665 615 267 173 232 417 491 553 339 442 1541 143 89 52 Every day 52 29 22 7 11 22 12 8 4 2 11 20 17 7 8 47 1 2 1 3% 3% 2% 3% 4% 3% 2% 3% 2% 1% 3% 4% 3% 2% 2% 3% 1% 2% 2% n p At least weekly 91 51 40 24 25 28 14 9 10 15 29 30 37 12 12 79 6 5 2 5% 6% 4% 10% 8% 4% 2% 3% 6% 6% 7% 6% 7% 4% 3% 5% 4% 5% 4% ef ef f g n mn At least monthly 87 51 36 15 15 39 19 5 5 15 24 30 28 13 16 70 15 2 1 5% 6% 4% 6% 5% 6% 3% 2% 3% 7% 6% 6% 5% 4% 4% 5% 10% 2% 2% b f f g g qr oqr Have tried it once 84 44 40 13 17 36 18 3 3 9 28 32 32 13 8 72 5 5 1 5% 5% 4% 5% 6% 5% 3% 1% 2% 4% 7% 6% 6% 4% 2% 5% 4% 6% 2% f f g gh n n r r Never 1107 520 587 136 192 441 338 133 98 153 283 305 335 223 244 944 76 44 43 61% 59% 63% 56% 63% 66% 55% 50% 57% 66% 68% 62% 61% 66% 55% 61% 53% 49% 82% f cf gh gh n n pq opq Do not have access to device 404 192 213 47 44 99 215 110 53 38 41 75 104 71 155 329 40 31 4 22% 22% 23% 19% 15% 15% 35% 41% 30% 16% 10% 15% 19% 21% 35% 21% 28% 35% 8% cde hij ij j k klm r or or Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp2E (Qp11E). Showcard How Often, If At All, Do You Access The Radio Via - Digital Radio Through The Internet. (Single Code) Base : Those who listen to radio ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2811 191 226 217 198 213 199 195 190 1981 830 1400 1399 1664 719 Effective Weighted Sample 1853 182 208 206 188 202 188 185 175 1529 365 920 993 1194 565 Total 1825 217 277 160 135 158 174 146 274 1580 245 1044 771 1171 603 Every day 52 4 9 4 2 3 9 6 11 43 9 38 13 34 16 3% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% 5% 4% 4% 3% 4% 4% 2% 3% 3% l At least weekly 91 17 16 7 7 9 10 7 6 81 10 64 27 55 34 5% 8% 6% 4% 5% 6% 6% 5% 2% 5% 4% 6% 3% 5% 6% h l At least monthly 87 4 11 11 11 7 7 10 8 72 15 63 24 63 24 5% 2% 4% 7% 8% 4% 4% 7% 3% 5% 6% 6% 3% 5% 4% a ah a l Have tried it once 84 11 12 9 9 6 4 7 14 74 10 65 19 55 28 5% 5% 4% 6% 6% 4% 2% 5% 5% 5% 4% 6% 2% 5% 5% l Never 1107 133 176 102 84 110 121 85 133 944 163 662 443 695 370 61% 62% 64% 64% 62% 70% 69% 58% 49% 60% 66% 63% 57% 59% 61% h h h h gh gh i l Do not have access to device 404 48 52 27 22 23 24 31 102 367 38 152 245 269 131 22% 22% 19% 17% 16% 15% 14% 21% 37% 23% 15% 15% 32% 23% 22% f abcdefg j k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp2F (Qp11F). Showcard How Often, If At All, Do You Access The Radio Via - Dab Radio Set. (Single Code) Base : Those who listen to radio GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2811 1389 1422 327 410 1027 1047 498 311 347 538 688 831 577 715 1629 357 397 428 Effective Weighted Sample 1853 920 935 215 254 697 716 323 189 230 393 455 557 386 465 1417 241 264 394 Total 1825 887 939 242 303 665 615 267 173 232 417 491 553 339 442 1541 143 89 52 Every day 324 159 165 29 45 136 114 27 24 43 102 128 99 47 50 283 23 11 6 18% 18% 18% 12% 15% 20% 19% 10% 14% 18% 24% 26% 18% 14% 11% 18% 16% 13% 11% c c g gh lmn n qr At least weekly 134 72 62 21 20 50 42 9 11 14 47 46 55 16 17 119 10 3 1 7% 8% 7% 9% 7% 8% 7% 3% 6% 6% 11% 9% 10% 5% 4% 8% 7% 4% 2% ghi mn mn qr r At least monthly 40 22 18 8 6 13 13 3 2 6 13 15 13 6 6 34 4 * 1 2% 3% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 1% 2% 3% 1% 2% q Have tried it once 22 8 14 - 7 11 3 * 4 2 5 4 9 7 2 20 1 1 * 1% 1% 2% -% 2% 2% 1% *% 2% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% cf f g g n Never 429 210 219 57 70 157 145 75 40 46 78 110 124 90 105 336 30 32 31 23% 24% 23% 24% 23% 24% 24% 28% 23% 20% 19% 22% 22% 26% 24% 22% 21% 36% 59% ij op opq Do not have access to device 877 416 460 127 154 297 297 152 92 121 171 188 254 172 262 748 74 42 13 48% 47% 49% 53% 51% 45% 48% 57% 54% 52% 41% 38% 46% 51% 59% 49% 52% 47% 25% e j j j k k klm r r r Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp2F (Qp11F). Showcard How Often, If At All, Do You Access The Radio Via - Dab Radio Set. (Single Code) Base : Those who listen to radio ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2811 191 226 217 198 213 199 195 190 1981 830 1400 1399 1664 719 Effective Weighted Sample 1853 182 208 206 188 202 188 185 175 1529 365 920 993 1194 565 Total 1825 217 277 160 135 158 174 146 274 1580 245 1044 771 1171 603 Every day 324 55 54 39 28 18 38 30 22 273 51 196 128 237 81 18% 25% 20% 24% 21% 12% 22% 21% 8% 17% 21% 19% 17% 20% 13% eh eh eh eh eh eh n At least weekly 134 25 21 14 9 16 8 9 17 121 13 84 49 90 43 7% 12% 7% 9% 7% 10% 4% 6% 6% 8% 5% 8% 6% 8% 7% f f At least monthly 40 3 5 6 4 6 2 6 4 33 7 21 20 32 7 2% 1% 2% 3% 3% 4% 1% 4% 1% 2% 3% 2% 3% 3% 1% n Have tried it once 22 1 3 - 2 - 2 - 12 20 2 16 6 18 4 1% *% 1% -% 1% -% 1% -% 4% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% aceg Never 429 19 69 30 35 56 68 26 33 351 78 246 182 265 133 23% 9% 25% 19% 26% 35% 39% 18% 12% 22% 32% 24% 24% 23% 22% ah a agh abcgh abcdgh a i Do not have access to device 877 114 124 72 57 63 56 76 187 783 94 482 387 528 335 48% 53% 45% 45% 42% 40% 32% 52% 68% 50% 38% 46% 50% 45% 56% def f f ef abcdefg j m Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp2G (Qp11G) Showcard How Often, If At All, Do You Access The Radio Via - Car Radio (Fm). (Single Code) Base : Those who listen to radio GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2811 1389 1422 327 410 1027 1047 498 311 347 538 688 831 577 715 1629 357 397 428 Effective Weighted Sample 1853 920 935 215 254 697 716 323 189 230 393 455 557 386 465 1417 241 264 394 Total 1825 887 939 242 303 665 615 267 173 232 417 491 553 339 442 1541 143 89 52 Every day 683 379 304 70 136 300 178 47 50 107 191 216 225 137 105 577 51 25 29 37% 43% 32% 29% 45% 45% 29% 18% 29% 46% 46% 44% 41% 40% 24% 37% 36% 28% 55% b cf cf g gh gh n n n q opq At least weekly 491 225 267 63 72 192 163 45 39 72 136 153 153 92 93 425 34 22 10 27% 25% 28% 26% 24% 29% 27% 17% 23% 31% 33% 31% 28% 27% 21% 28% 24% 24% 19% g gh n n n r At least monthly 79 38 42 10 10 26 33 9 11 7 21 18 29 12 20 69 4 6 1 4% 4% 4% 4% 3% 4% 5% 3% 6% 3% 5% 4% 5% 4% 4% 4% 3% 6% 1% r r Have tried it once 23 10 13 - 2 7 14 5 1 2 5 10 4 3 6 21 - 2 * 1% 1% 1% -% 1% 1% 2% 2% *% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% -% 2% *% c pr Never 240 109 132 39 33 72 97 59 35 15 29 50 60 51 79 192 20 17 10 13% 12% 14% 16% 11% 11% 16% 22% 20% 6% 7% 10% 11% 15% 18% 12% 14% 19% 20% e e ij ij kl kl o o Do not have access to device 309 127 182 60 51 69 130 102 37 29 35 45 81 44 140 257 33 17 3 17% 14% 19% 25% 17% 10% 21% 38% 21% 13% 8% 9% 15% 13% 32% 17% 23% 19% 5% a de e e hij ij k klm r or r Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp2G (Qp11G) Showcard How Often, If At All, Do You Access The Radio Via - Car Radio (Fm). (Single Code) Base : Those who listen to radio ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2811 191 226 217 198 213 199 195 190 1981 830 1400 1399 1664 719 Effective Weighted Sample 1853 182 208 206 188 202 188 185 175 1529 365 920 993 1194 565 Total 1825 217 277 160 135 158 174 146 274 1580 245 1044 771 1171 603 Every day 683 44 115 65 50 61 71 53 119 569 114 505 176 484 170 37% 20% 42% 41% 37% 38% 41% 36% 43% 36% 47% 48% 23% 41% 28% a a a a a a a i l n At least weekly 491 59 71 49 38 51 48 44 65 420 71 295 194 313 169 27% 27% 26% 30% 28% 32% 27% 30% 24% 27% 29% 28% 25% 27% 28% At least monthly 79 27 7 12 5 5 1 4 9 74 6 33 45 52 27 4% 12% 3% 7% 4% 3% 1% 3% 3% 5% 2% 3% 6% 4% 4% bdefgh bfg j k Have tried it once 23 2 2 4 1 1 1 1 10 20 3 9 14 18 5 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% *% *% 4% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% bdefg Never 240 20 38 12 25 30 29 25 13 209 31 105 135 143 87 13% 9% 14% 8% 18% 19% 17% 17% 5% 13% 13% 10% 17% 12% 14% h ach ach ach ach k Do not have access to device 309 64 43 19 17 10 25 20 59 290 20 98 207 161 146 17% 30% 16% 12% 12% 7% 14% 14% 22% 18% 8% 9% 27% 14% 24% bcdefg e e e cdeg j k m Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp2H (Qp11H) Showcard How Often, If At All, Do You Access The Radio Via - Car Radio (Am). (Single Code) Base : Those who listen to radio GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2811 1389 1422 327 410 1027 1047 498 311 347 538 688 831 577 715 1629 357 397 428 Effective Weighted Sample 1853 920 935 215 254 697 716 323 189 230 393 455 557 386 465 1417 241 264 394 Total 1825 887 939 242 303 665 615 267 173 232 417 491 553 339 442 1541 143 89 52 Every day 186 118 68 15 33 87 52 9 14 28 64 63 66 31 25 155 17 6 8 10% 13% 7% 6% 11% 13% 8% 3% 8% 12% 15% 13% 12% 9% 6% 10% 12% 6% 16% b cf g g gh n n n q oq At least weekly 153 83 70 15 25 65 48 5 12 18 56 42 52 34 25 127 16 7 3 8% 9% 7% 6% 8% 10% 8% 2% 7% 8% 14% 9% 9% 10% 6% 8% 11% 7% 6% g g ghi n n r At least monthly 35 25 10 5 4 10 15 3 4 8 10 14 11 3 7 30 4 1 1 2% 3% 1% 2% 1% 2% 2% 1% 3% 3% 2% 3% 2% 1% 2% 2% 3% 1% 1% b m Have tried it once 41 20 21 6 10 11 15 9 1 5 7 14 12 6 9 32 2 6 1 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% 2% 2% 3% 1% 2% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% 7% 3% opr Never 826 396 430 106 131 308 280 114 74 110 179 229 246 166 183 691 65 35 35 45% 45% 46% 44% 43% 46% 46% 43% 43% 47% 43% 47% 45% 49% 41% 45% 45% 39% 67% n opq Do not have access to device 585 245 340 95 100 184 206 127 67 63 99 128 164 99 193 506 40 35 4 32% 28% 36% 39% 33% 28% 33% 48% 39% 27% 24% 26% 30% 29% 44% 33% 28% 40% 7% a e e ij ij klm r r opr Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp2H (Qp11H) Showcard How Often, If At All, Do You Access The Radio Via - Car Radio (Am). (Single Code) Base : Those who listen to radio ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2811 191 226 217 198 213 199 195 190 1981 830 1400 1399 1664 719 Effective Weighted Sample 1853 182 208 206 188 202 188 185 175 1529 365 920 993 1194 565 Total 1825 217 277 160 135 158 174 146 274 1580 245 1044 771 1171 603 Every day 186 22 22 13 5 12 51 6 25 163 23 138 48 129 49 10% 10% 8% 8% 4% 8% 29% 4% 9% 10% 9% 13% 6% 11% 8% dg abcdegh dg l At least weekly 153 28 21 12 3 10 30 9 14 136 17 96 57 84 66 8% 13% 8% 7% 2% 6% 17% 6% 5% 9% 7% 9% 7% 7% 11% degh d d bcdegh m At least monthly 35 8 4 5 2 5 3 3 - 30 5 15 21 27 8 2% 4% 2% 3% 1% 3% 2% 2% -% 2% 2% 1% 3% 2% 1% h h h k Have tried it once 41 4 10 3 1 2 2 1 8 37 4 26 15 30 9 2% 2% 4% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 3% 2% 1% 2% 2% 3% 2% g Never 826 49 135 70 90 116 56 79 94 683 142 491 332 535 256 45% 23% 49% 44% 67% 73% 32% 54% 34% 43% 58% 47% 43% 46% 43% afh af abcfgh abcfgh a acfh a i Do not have access to device 585 105 84 57 34 14 31 48 132 530 54 279 298 366 215 32% 49% 30% 36% 25% 9% 18% 33% 48% 34% 22% 27% 39% 31% 36% bcdefg ef def e e ef bcdefg j k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp2I (Qp11I) Showcard How Often, If At All, Do You Access The Radio Via - Car Radio (Dab). (Single Code) Base : Those who listen to radio GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2811 1389 1422 327 410 1027 1047 498 311 347 538 688 831 577 715 1629 357 397 428 Effective Weighted Sample 1853 920 935 215 254 697 716 323 189 230 393 455 557 386 465 1417 241 264 394 Total 1825 887 939 242 303 665 615 267 173 232 417 491 553 339 442 1541 143 89 52 Every day 63 34 28 6 8 34 15 5 5 6 23 25 23 12 3 50 3 8 2 3% 4% 3% 2% 3% 5% 2% 2% 3% 3% 6% 5% 4% 4% 1% 3% 2% 9% 4% f g n n n opr At least weekly 32 14 18 6 5 13 8 * 2 4 17 11 16 3 1 30 * 1 1 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% *% 1% 2% 4% 2% 3% 1% *% 2% *% 1% 1% g g g n mn p At least monthly 9 3 7 2 - 4 3 - - - 5 5 2 2 - 8 1 * - 1% *% 1% 1% -% 1% *% -% -% -% 1% 1% *% *% -% 1% 1% *% -% g n Have tried it once 15 6 9 2 5 3 6 2 - 3 1 9 3 - 4 14 1 - - 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% *% 1% 1% -% 1% *% 2% 1% -% 1% 1% 1% -% -% m Never 544 268 276 73 85 191 195 88 53 57 109 147 153 118 127 438 39 33 34 30% 30% 29% 30% 28% 29% 32% 33% 31% 25% 26% 30% 28% 35% 29% 28% 27% 37% 66% ij l op opq Do not have access to device 1161 561 600 153 200 420 388 171 112 162 262 294 355 204 308 1000 99 47 15 64% 63% 64% 63% 66% 63% 63% 64% 65% 70% 63% 60% 64% 60% 70% 65% 69% 53% 29% km qr qr r Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp2I (Qp11I) Showcard How Often, If At All, Do You Access The Radio Via - Car Radio (Dab). (Single Code) Base : Those who listen to radio ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2811 191 226 217 198 213 199 195 190 1981 830 1400 1399 1664 719 Effective Weighted Sample 1853 182 208 206 188 202 188 185 175 1529 365 920 993 1194 565 Total 1825 217 277 160 135 158 174 146 274 1580 245 1044 771 1171 603 Every day 63 15 8 4 5 1 9 3 6 55 8 45 17 42 19 3% 7% 3% 2% 4% *% 5% 2% 2% 3% 3% 4% 2% 4% 3% bcegh e e l At least weekly 32 12 8 1 - 3 3 2 3 27 5 22 10 22 10 2% 5% 3% *% -% 2% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1% 2% 2% cdfgh cd d At least monthly 9 4 1 1 1 - 2 - - 7 2 3 6 9 - 1% 2% 1% *% 1% -% 1% -% -% *% 1% *% 1% 1% -% n Have tried it once 15 - 4 1 - - - - 10 15 - 10 5 12 3 1% -% 1% *% -% -% -% -% 3% 1% -% 1% 1% 1% 1% acdefg j Never 544 27 87 39 58 78 89 28 32 451 93 321 222 339 172 30% 12% 32% 24% 43% 49% 51% 19% 12% 29% 38% 31% 29% 29% 28% agh ah abcgh abcgh abcgh h i Do not have access to device 1161 159 168 116 71 77 73 113 223 1026 135 643 511 747 399 64% 73% 61% 72% 53% 48% 42% 77% 81% 65% 55% 62% 66% 64% 66% bdef ef bdef f bdef bcdef j k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp3 (Qb1). Do You, Or Does Anyone In Your Household, Have Digital Radio Channels In Your Home At The Moment - Whether Through A Specialist Dab Radio Receiver, Through A Digital Television Or Over The Internet? (Single Code) Base : All respondents | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |---------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | c | d | | Unweighted total | 3474 | 1679 | 1795 | 460 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 2281 | 1110 | 1171 | 296 | | Total | 2256 | 1082 | 1174 | 327 | | Yes | 1339 | 657 | 682 | 193 | | 59% | 61% | 58% | 59% | 64% | | f | f | g | g | ghi | | No | 862 | 407 | 455 | 119 | | 38% | 38% | 39% | 36% | 34% | | cde | hij | ij | j | k | | Don't know | 55 | 18 | 37 | 15 | | 2% | 2% | 3% | 5% | 2% | | a | ef | o | | | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp3 (Qb1). Do You, Or Does Anyone In Your Household, Have Digital Radio Channels In Your Home At The Moment - Whether Through A Specialist Dab Radio Receiver, Through A Digital Television Or Over The Internet? (Single Code) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Yes 1339 205 176 114 87 101 125 143 222 1156 183 800 536 852 462 59% 73% 57% 61% 53% 51% 60% 76% 63% 59% 63% 63% 54% 62% 57% bcdefh e bcdefh de l n No 862 72 126 64 75 89 81 42 121 760 103 433 421 496 332 38% 26% 41% 34% 46% 45% 39% 22% 34% 39% 35% 34% 43% 36% 41% ag ag acgh acgh ag g k m Don't know 55 3 5 8 1 7 4 3 11 48 7 28 27 34 18 2% 1% 1% 4% 1% 3% 2% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% 3% 2% 2% ad Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp4 (Q1). Showcard Please Think About Any Radio Sets That You May Have At Home That Someone Listens To In Most Weeks. In Which Of These Rooms At Home Do You Have One Of These Radios That Someone Listens To In Most Weeks? (Multicode) Base : All respondents | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |---------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | c | d | | Unweighted total | 3474 | 1679 | 1795 | 460 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 2281 | 1110 | 1171 | 296 | | Total | 2256 | 1082 | 1174 | 327 | | Kitchen/ Kitchen diner | 833 | 399 | 433 | 87 | | 37% | 37% | 37% | 26% | 31% | | cd | cd | g | gh | mn | | Living room/ Lounge | 760 | 388 | 372 | 97 | | 34% | 36% | 32% | 30% | 28% | | b | cde | j | pr | pr | | Adult's bedroom | 521 | 257 | 265 | 74 | | 23% | 24% | 23% | 23% | 19% | | de | g | mn | mn | p | | Dining room | 101 | 53 | 48 | 12 | | 4% | 5% | 4% | 4% | 2% | | d | d | pqr | | | | Child's bedroom | 93 | 42 | 52 | 20 | | 4% | 4% | 4% | 6% | 3% | | df | f | df | gh | g | | Bathroom/ Shower room/ WC | 59 | 30 | 29 | 5 | | 3% | 3% | 2% | 1% | 3% | | n | n | n | | | | Study/ Home office | 53 | 34 | 19 | 4 | | 2% | 3% | 2% | 1% | 1% | | b | d | d | g | g | | Garage | 26 | 16 | 9 | 2 | | 1% | 2% | 1% | 1% | 1% | | n | ln | p | p | | | Spare bedroom | 21 | 12 | 9 | 1 | | 1% | 1% | 1% | *% | 1% | | g | | | | | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp4 (Q1). Showcard Please Think About Any Radio Sets That You May Have At Home That Someone Listens To In Most Weeks. In Which Of These Rooms At Home Do You Have One Of These Radios That Someone Listens To In Most Weeks? (Multicode) Base : All respondents | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |-------------------------------------------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | c | d | | Unweighted total | 3474 | 1679 | 1795 | 460 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 2281 | 1110 | 1171 | 296 | | Total | 2256 | 1082 | 1174 | 327 | | Conservatory | 21 | 9 | 12 | - | | 1% | 1% | 1% | -% | 1% | | c | mn | | | | | Hallway/ Landing | 17 | 9 | 8 | 2 | | 1% | 1% | 1% | 1% | 1% | | Move around as needed/ portable | 76 | 40 | 35 | 10 | | 3% | 4% | 3% | 3% | 4% | | h | oqr | | | | | Other | 24 | 14 | 10 | 1 | | 1% | 1% | 1% | *% | 1% | | g | g | n | | | | None - do not have any radio sets at | | | | | | home that someone listens to in most | | | | | | weeks | 640 | 291 | 349 | 123 | | 28% | 27% | 30% | 38% | 37% | | ef | ef | f | hij | k | | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r | | | | | All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp4 (Q1). Showcard Please Think About Any Radio Sets That You May Have At Home That Someone Listens To In Most Weeks. In Which Of These Rooms At Home Do You Have One Of These Radios That Someone Listens To In Most Weeks? (Multicode) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Kitchen/ Kitchen diner 833 83 138 81 60 74 103 74 91 699 134 479 350 570 234 37% 30% 45% 44% 37% 38% 49% 40% 26% 36% 46% 38% 36% 41% 29% ah ah h h adegh ah i n Living room/ Lounge 760 111 113 70 68 71 55 69 105 646 114 395 361 493 252 34% 40% 37% 38% 42% 36% 26% 37% 30% 33% 39% 31% 37% 36% 31% fh f f fh f f i k n Adult's bedroom 521 51 79 67 40 52 51 45 62 428 93 289 232 376 128 23% 18% 26% 36% 25% 26% 24% 24% 18% 22% 32% 23% 24% 27% 16% ah abdefgh ah i n Dining room 101 14 10 5 13 14 7 11 21 90 10 45 56 76 23 4% 5% 3% 3% 8% 7% 3% 6% 6% 5% 4% 4% 6% 6% 3% bcf c k n Child's bedroom 93 10 15 16 5 7 9 10 14 76 17 56 37 62 27 4% 4% 5% 9% 3% 4% 4% 5% 4% 4% 6% 4% 4% 4% 3% adeh Bathroom/ Shower room/ WC 59 4 11 10 3 8 6 3 4 50 9 39 20 46 11 3% 1% 4% 6% 2% 4% 3% 2% 1% 3% 3% 3% 2% 3% 1% adgh h n Study/ Home office 53 3 12 5 6 7 6 1 9 42 11 36 17 45 7 2% 1% 4% 3% 3% 4% 3% 1% 2% 2% 4% 3% 2% 3% 1% ag g ag i n Garage 26 - 9 4 4 1 3 1 2 19 7 14 12 23 2 1% -% 3% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% *% a a a i n Spare bedroom 21 - 5 7 2 2 2 - 2 15 6 13 8 16 4 1% -% 2% 4% 1% 1% 1% -% *% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% g afgh i Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp4 (Q1). Showcard Please Think About Any Radio Sets That You May Have At Home That Someone Listens To In Most Weeks. In Which Of These Rooms At Home Do You Have One Of These Radios That Someone Listens To In Most Weeks? (Multicode) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Conservatory 21 - 3 2 1 3 3 2 3 16 5 12 9 19 2 1% -% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% *% n Hallway/ Landing 17 3 2 1 1 1 4 1 1 14 2 11 6 12 4 1% 1% 1% *% 1% *% 2% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Move around as needed/ portable 76 1 6 11 6 5 9 2 18 61 15 47 29 46 28 3% *% 2% 6% 4% 3% 4% 1% 5% 3% 5% 4% 3% 3% 3% abg a a ag ag Other 24 1 6 2 2 - 3 2 4 18 6 15 9 18 5 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% -% 2% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% e e None - do not have any radio sets at home that someone listens to in most weeks 640 84 71 43 35 51 54 49 126 587 52 363 271 310 314 28% 30% 23% 23% 22% 26% 26% 26% 35% 30% 18% 29% 28% 22% 39% d bcdefg j m Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp5 (Q2). In Total, How Many Radio Sets Do You Have In Your Home That You, Or Someone In Your Household, Listen To In Most Weeks? (Single Code) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 None 673 310 363 123 159 227 164 150 68 91 135 131 192 123 227 548 78 31 16 30% 29% 31% 37% 39% 29% 22% 40% 31% 33% 29% 23% 29% 30% 37% 29% 40% 28% 26% ef ef f hj k k klm oqr 1 844 395 449 112 144 307 281 146 82 91 184 198 244 162 241 702 75 43 24 37% 36% 38% 34% 35% 39% 38% 39% 38% 32% 39% 35% 36% 39% 40% 37% 38% 39% 39% 2-3 595 295 299 75 95 196 228 69 53 82 115 179 187 108 121 510 34 32 18 26% 27% 26% 23% 23% 25% 31% 18% 24% 29% 24% 32% 28% 26% 20% 27% 18% 28% 30% cde g g n n n p p p 4-5 105 60 45 7 7 35 54 9 12 14 28 39 36 13 16 92 6 3 3 5% 6% 4% 2% 2% 5% 7% 2% 6% 5% 6% 7% 5% 3% 3% 5% 3% 3% 5% d cde g g mn n 6-10 20 15 6 2 1 9 8 2 1 1 9 12 5 2 - 20 - * * 1% 1% *% 1% *% 1% 1% *% *% *% 2% 2% 1% 1% -% 1% -% *% *% b g lmn n Don't know 19 8 11 9 * 5 5 2 1 1 2 6 5 5 3 14 3 2 * 1% 1% 1% 3% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% *% def or Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QP5 (Q2). In total, how many radio sets do you have in your home that you, or someone in your household, listen to in most weeks? (SINGLE CODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 None 673 81 84 49 45 50 60 48 131 617 56 381 286 333 324 30% 29% 27% 26% 27% 25% 28% 26% 37% 31% 19% 30% 29% 24% 40% bcdeg j m 1 844 122 105 56 62 81 80 65 131 749 95 462 377 527 292 37% 44% 34% 30% 38% 41% 38% 35% 37% 38% 32% 37% 38% 38% 36% bcg c j 2-3 595 69 90 62 46 57 55 65 68 491 104 334 260 405 171 26% 24% 29% 33% 28% 29% 26% 35% 19% 25% 36% 26% 26% 29% 21% h ah h h afh i n 4-5 105 7 23 15 8 5 12 7 15 75 29 60 45 80 21 5% 3% 8% 8% 5% 3% 6% 4% 4% 4% 10% 5% 5% 6% 3% ae ae i n 6-10 20 - 2 5 2 3 2 - 6 15 5 12 8 18 2 1% -% 1% 2% 1% 2% 1% -% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% *% ag n Don't know 19 1 4 - 1 1 1 2 4 16 3 12 7 18 1 1% *% 1% -% 1% *% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% n Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp6 (Q3). Before Today, Had You Heard Of Digital Radios, Sometimes Called D-A-B Radios? Read Out Explanation If Necessary (Single Code) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Yes 1862 938 924 277 347 691 546 252 174 253 435 503 581 348 430 1569 161 87 44 83% 87% 79% 85% 85% 89% 74% 67% 80% 90% 92% 89% 87% 84% 71% 83% 82% 79% 71% b f f f g gh gh mn n n qr r r No 318 115 203 41 49 70 158 110 36 24 33 55 66 53 144 254 29 21 15 14% 11% 17% 12% 12% 9% 21% 29% 17% 9% 7% 10% 10% 13% 24% 13% 15% 19% 24% a cde hij ij klm o op Unsure 76 29 47 9 12 19 35 17 6 3 4 9 22 12 34 64 6 3 3 3% 3% 4% 3% 3% 2% 5% 4% 3% 1% 1% 2% 3% 3% 6% 3% 3% 3% 5% e ij klm Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QP6 (Q3). Before today, had you heard of digital radios, sometimes called D-A-B radios? READ OUT EXPLANATION IF NECESSARY (SINGLE CODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Yes 1862 242 253 161 134 172 153 158 296 1613 249 1116 737 1161 656 83% 86% 83% 86% 82% 87% 73% 85% 83% 82% 85% 89% 75% 84% 81% f f f f f f f l No 318 24 45 21 23 22 57 25 36 282 37 115 201 178 126 14% 9% 15% 11% 14% 11% 27% 13% 10% 14% 13% 9% 20% 13% 16% a abcdegh k Unsure 76 14 8 5 6 3 1 4 23 70 6 29 45 43 30 3% 5% 3% 2% 4% 1% *% 2% 6% 4% 2% 2% 5% 3% 4% ef f f cefg k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp7 (Q4). You Said Earlier That You Have (Number At Qp5) Radio Sets In Your Home That Someone In The Household Listens To In Most Weeks. How Many Of These Radio Sets Are Digital Radios? Read Out Explanation If Necessary (Single Code) Base : All respondents | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |-------------------------------------------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | c | d | | Unweighted total | 3474 | 1679 | 1795 | 460 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 2281 | 1110 | 1171 | 296 | | Total | 2256 | 1082 | 1174 | 327 | | None | 1520 | 723 | 798 | 228 | | 67% | 67% | 68% | 70% | 72% | | e | hij | ij | j | k | | 1 | 549 | 260 | 288 | 64 | | 24% | 24% | 25% | 20% | 21% | | cd | c | g | g | ghi | | 2 | 122 | 68 | 53 | 20 | | 5% | 6% | 5% | 6% | 6% | | g | gh | n | n | n | | 3 | 37 | 19 | 19 | 6 | | 2% | 2% | 2% | 2% | *% | | d | g | n | n | n | | 4-5 | 5 | 4 | 1 | * | | *% | *% | *% | *% | *% | | 6-10 | 2 | - | 2 | 1 | | *% | -% | *% | *% | -% | | Don't know | 22 | 7 | 14 | 7 | | 1% | 1% | 1% | 2% | 1% | | f | i | o | | | | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r | | | | | All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp7 (Q4). You Said Earlier That You Have (Number At Qp5) Radio Sets In Your Home That Someone In The Household Listens To In Most Weeks. How Many Of These Radio Sets Are Digital Radios? Read Out Explanation If Necessary (Single Code) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 None 1520 168 197 119 102 149 138 121 249 1337 183 813 698 879 595 67% 60% 64% 64% 62% 76% 65% 65% 70% 68% 63% 65% 71% 64% 73% abcdfg a j k m 1 549 78 84 48 44 39 57 50 77 465 84 336 210 374 163 24% 28% 27% 26% 27% 20% 27% 26% 22% 24% 29% 27% 21% 27% 20% e i l n 2 122 26 13 12 14 7 13 11 15 105 17 79 43 81 39 5% 9% 4% 6% 9% 4% 6% 6% 4% 5% 6% 6% 4% 6% 5% beh be l 3 37 4 12 6 3 - 2 2 5 32 6 21 16 29 9 2% 1% 4% 3% 2% -% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% ef e e 4-5 5 - - 1 1 - - 1 2 4 * 1 4 4 1 *% -% -% *% *% -% -% *% 1% *% *% *% *% *% *% 6-10 2 - - - - 1 - - 1 2 - - 2 2 - *% -% -% -% -% *% -% -% *% *% -% -% *% *% -% Don't know 22 4 1 1 - 1 1 2 4 19 3 10 11 14 7 1% 2% *% 1% -% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QP8 (Q5). In most weeks, how many motor vehicles do you personally use - as a driver or a passenger? (SINGLE CODE) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 None 524 221 302 117 107 107 193 198 61 42 38 46 134 73 271 411 74 28 9 23% 20% 26% 36% 26% 14% 26% 52% 28% 15% 8% 8% 20% 18% 45% 22% 38% 25% 15% a def e e hij ij j k k klm r oqr r 1 1239 628 611 155 211 450 423 158 132 182 258 313 384 248 294 1060 84 57 39 55% 58% 52% 47% 52% 58% 57% 42% 61% 65% 55% 55% 57% 60% 48% 56% 43% 51% 62% b c c g gj g n n n p p opq 2 438 203 235 43 85 202 108 17 21 49 161 185 140 79 34 372 31 22 12 19% 19% 20% 13% 21% 26% 15% 4% 10% 18% 34% 33% 21% 19% 6% 20% 16% 20% 19% cf cf g gh ghi lmn n n 3 35 22 13 9 2 16 8 2 1 3 10 14 8 9 5 28 5 2 1 2% 2% 1% 3% *% 2% 1% 1% *% 1% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% df n 4 or more 11 6 5 2 2 3 5 2 - 2 4 4 1 4 2 9 * 1 1 1% 1% *% 1% *% *% 1% 1% -% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% *% *% *% 1% 1% o Don't know 9 2 7 1 2 4 3 1 2 1 2 4 2 1 2 6 2 1 - *% *% 1% *% *% *% *% *% 1% *% *% 1% *% *% *% *% 1% 1% -% Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QP8 (Q5). In most weeks, how many motor vehicles do you personally use - as a driver or a passenger? (SINGLE CODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 None 524 119 41 29 31 35 32 39 84 499 24 170 350 213 301 23% 43% 13% 15% 19% 18% 15% 21% 24% 25% 8% 13% 36% 15% 37% bcdefgh b bcf j k m 1 1239 142 186 96 93 111 123 113 196 1075 164 726 508 769 431 55% 51% 60% 51% 57% 56% 59% 60% 55% 55% 56% 58% 52% 56% 53% ac a l 2 438 16 74 55 34 47 44 32 70 347 90 326 108 353 72 19% 6% 24% 29% 21% 24% 21% 17% 20% 18% 31% 26% 11% 26% 9% a adfgh a a a a a i l n 3 35 1 4 5 1 2 7 4 2 27 9 28 7 30 4 2% *% 1% 3% 1% 1% 3% 2% *% 1% 3% 2% 1% 2% 1% ah ah i l n 4 or more 11 - 1 1 1 2 3 - 1 8 3 7 4 10 - 1% -% *% *% *% 1% 2% -% *% *% 1% 1% *% 1% -% ag n Don't know 9 1 1 1 2 - - - 1 8 1 3 6 6 3 *% *% *% 1% 1% -% -% -% *% *% 1% *% 1% *% *% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp9 (Q6). How Many Of These Motor Vehicles Have A Radio? (Single Code) Base : Those who use at least one motor vehicle in most weeks GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 2674 1345 1329 294 412 1031 937 352 286 356 559 719 821 586 548 1540 332 366 436 Effective Weighted Sample 1724 886 840 182 247 687 637 212 163 233 405 477 534 385 338 1331 212 243 400 Total 1723 859 865 210 300 670 544 179 154 236 432 517 533 339 335 1468 121 82 53 None 41 25 16 1 12 18 10 5 4 5 13 13 12 8 8 40 * 1 - 2% 3% 2% *% 4% 3% 2% 3% 3% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% 3% 3% *% 1% -% c pr 1 1208 607 602 153 199 443 413 153 126 179 253 303 374 244 287 1027 86 57 39 70% 71% 70% 73% 66% 66% 76% 86% 82% 76% 58% 59% 70% 72% 86% 70% 71% 69% 73% de ij j j k k klm 2 424 198 226 43 86 191 104 15 23 48 153 181 135 75 32 360 31 21 12 25% 23% 26% 21% 29% 28% 19% 8% 15% 20% 35% 35% 25% 22% 10% 25% 26% 26% 23% f cf g ghi lmn n n 3 35 22 13 9 2 15 9 2 1 3 10 14 9 8 4 28 3 2 1 2% 3% 1% 4% 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 2% 3% 2% 2% 1% 2% 3% 2% 3% df 4 or more 11 6 5 2 2 3 5 2 - 2 4 4 1 4 2 9 * 1 1 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% -% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% *% 2% 1% Don't know 4 1 3 2 - * 2 2 1 - - 1 1 1 1 3 - 1 - *% *% *% 1% -% *% *% 1% *% -% -% *% *% *% *% *% -% 1% -% e Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QP9 (Q6). How many of these motor vehicles have a radio? (SINGLE CODE) Base : Those who use at least one motor vehicle in most weeks ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2674 137 214 209 189 214 201 197 179 1805 869 1468 1194 1642 596 Effective Weighted Sample 1724 131 197 198 180 203 190 187 165 1376 393 953 834 1178 454 Total 1723 159 265 156 130 162 178 148 269 1457 267 1087 628 1163 508 None 41 10 12 2 3 1 5 2 4 38 3 26 13 17 24 2% 7% 5% 1% 2% *% 3% 2% 2% 3% 1% 2% 2% 1% 5% cegh e j m 1 1208 132 177 95 91 109 119 112 193 1048 161 712 492 758 412 70% 83% 67% 61% 70% 67% 67% 75% 72% 72% 60% 66% 78% 65% 81% bcdefh c c c j k m 2 424 15 70 52 33 47 44 30 68 334 90 314 106 345 67 25% 9% 26% 33% 25% 29% 25% 20% 25% 23% 34% 29% 17% 30% 13% a ag a ag a a a i l n 3 35 1 5 5 1 2 7 4 2 26 8 27 8 30 3 2% 1% 2% 3% 1% 1% 4% 3% 1% 2% 3% 2% 1% 3% 1% h n 4 or more 11 - 1 1 1 2 3 - 1 8 3 7 4 11 - 1% -% *% *% 1% 1% 2% -% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% -% n Don't know 4 1 - 1 1 1 - - - 3 1 1 3 3 1 *% 1% -% 1% *% *% -% -% -% *% *% *% 1% *% *% k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp10/11 (Q7A/B). Is The Radio In This Vehicle A Digital Radio?/ How Many Of The Radios In Those Vehicles Are Digital Radios? Read Out Explanation If Necessary (Single Code) Base : Those who use at least one motor vehicle with a radio in most weeks | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |---------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | c | d | | Unweighted total | 2624 | 1319 | 1305 | 289 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 1685 | 866 | 821 | 179 | | Total | 1678 | 833 | 846 | 207 | | None | 1534 | 767 | 767 | 191 | | 91% | 92% | 91% | 92% | 91% | | e | j | j | j | k | | 1 | 38 | 21 | 17 | 1 | | 2% | 3% | 2% | 1% | 3% | | c | f | n | p | | | 2 | 54 | 22 | 32 | 6 | | 3% | 3% | 4% | 3% | 4% | | g | lmn | m | | | | 3 | 1 | * | 1 | * | | *% | *% | *% | *% | -% | | 4 or more | 1 | * | * | - | | *% | *% | *% | -% | -% | | Don't know | 50 | 22 | 29 | 9 | | 3% | 3% | 3% | 4% | 2% | | m | | | | | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp10/11 (Q7A/B). Is The Radio In This Vehicle A Digital Radio?/ How Many Of The Radios In Those Vehicles Are Digital Radios? Read Out Explanation If Necessary (Single Code) Base : Those who use at least one motor vehicle with a radio in most weeks ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 2624 127 205 203 184 212 196 194 176 1764 860 1444 1169 1618 570 Effective Weighted Sample 1685 122 189 192 175 201 185 184 162 1342 388 933 814 1160 433 Total 1678 148 253 153 126 161 173 146 264 1416 263 1060 611 1144 482 None 1534 135 230 139 121 141 158 136 240 1296 238 955 573 1031 455 91% 91% 91% 91% 96% 88% 91% 93% 91% 92% 90% 90% 94% 90% 94% e k m 1 38 - 8 5 2 5 3 4 7 34 4 31 7 31 6 2% -% 3% 3% 2% 3% 2% 3% 3% 2% 2% 3% 1% 3% 1% a l 2 54 7 9 4 1 4 6 2 11 45 9 38 15 43 10 3% 5% 3% 3% 1% 3% 3% 1% 4% 3% 3% 4% 2% 4% 2% d 3 1 - - - - - 1 - - 1 * 1 * 1 * *% -% -% -% -% -% 1% -% -% *% *% *% *% *% *% 4 or more 1 - - - - - - - * - 1 * * 1 - *% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% *% -% *% *% *% *% -% Don't know 50 6 6 5 2 10 6 3 6 39 11 35 15 37 11 3% 4% 3% 3% 2% 6% 3% 2% 2% 3% 4% 3% 3% 3% 2% dg Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp12 (Q9) Showcard Here Is A List Of Some Other Ways Of Listening To Radio Programmes As They Are Broadcast. In Most Weeks, Do You Or Someone Else In Your Household Listen At Home To Radio Programmes As They Are Broadcast In Any Of These Ways? (Multicode) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Using a digital TV service - such as Freeview, Sky, Virgin, BT Vision 477 246 231 82 104 169 123 60 49 70 96 116 155 96 110 391 54 20 12 21% 23% 20% 25% 25% 22% 17% 16% 23% 25% 20% 20% 23% 23% 18% 21% 27% 18% 20% f f f g g n n oqr Using a computer connected to the internet 250 136 113 57 57 93 42 25 24 32 71 81 96 36 36 220 13 9 8 11% 13% 10% 17% 14% 12% 6% 7% 11% 11% 15% 14% 14% 9% 6% 12% 7% 8% 12% b ef f f g g g mn mn p p Using a Smartphone - such as an iPhone or BlackBerry 114 62 52 36 26 36 16 11 5 20 34 34 37 19 24 103 5 3 4 5% 6% 4% 11% 6% 5% 2% 3% 2% 7% 7% 6% 6% 5% 4% 5% 3% 2% 6% def f f gh gh pq pq Using an MP3 player - such as an iPod 102 56 46 24 30 39 10 14 7 19 26 34 32 21 16 87 6 4 5 5% 5% 4% 7% 7% 5% 1% 4% 3% 7% 5% 6% 5% 5% 3% 5% 3% 4% 8% f f f n n n opq Using a games console - such as a PlayStation or Wii 28 18 10 9 8 7 4 1 4 5 5 9 7 6 6 25 1 1 2 1% 2% 1% 3% 2% 1% 1% *% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 3% ef f g p No, none of these 1589 738 851 201 267 534 588 296 153 184 316 386 450 288 466 1323 137 85 45 70% 68% 73% 61% 65% 68% 79% 78% 71% 66% 67% 68% 67% 70% 77% 70% 70% 76% 72% a c cde hij klm o Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp12 (Q9) Showcard Here Is A List Of Some Other Ways Of Listening To Radio Programmes As They Are Broadcast. In Most Weeks, Do You Or Someone Else In Your Household Listen At Home To Radio Programmes As They Are Broadcast In Any Of These Ways? (Multicode) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Using a digital TV service - such as Freeview, Sky, Virgin, BT Vision 477 49 60 41 38 40 40 42 81 414 63 293 181 300 165 21% 17% 20% 22% 23% 20% 19% 22% 23% 21% 21% 23% 18% 22% 20% l Using a computer connected to the internet 250 22 46 27 19 25 26 25 29 206 43 168 81 169 73 11% 8% 15% 15% 12% 13% 12% 14% 8% 11% 15% 13% 8% 12% 9% ah ah a i l n Using a Smartphone - such as an iPhone or BlackBerry 114 16 20 7 9 9 10 12 20 103 11 86 28 62 49 5% 6% 7% 4% 5% 4% 5% 7% 6% 5% 4% 7% 3% 4% 6% l Using an MP3 player - such as an iPod 102 11 20 6 7 7 11 7 17 88 14 74 28 66 31 5% 4% 7% 3% 4% 4% 5% 4% 5% 5% 5% 6% 3% 5% 4% l Using a games console - such as a PlayStation or Wii 28 1 4 - 6 3 3 1 6 24 5 22 6 21 6 1% *% 1% -% 4% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% acg c l No, none of these 1589 210 207 128 114 141 151 122 250 1386 203 828 753 960 585 70% 75% 67% 69% 70% 72% 72% 65% 70% 71% 69% 66% 77% 69% 72% g k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp13 (Q10) Showcard And Before Today, Were You Aware That You Can Listen To Radio Programmes As They Are Broadcast In These Ways? (Multicode) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Using a digital TV service - such as Freeview, Sky, Virgin, BT Vision 1609 793 816 245 324 617 424 218 147 218 402 446 499 303 362 1360 149 63 38 71% 73% 70% 75% 79% 79% 57% 58% 68% 78% 85% 79% 75% 73% 60% 72% 76% 56% 61% b f f f g gh ghi mn n n qr qr Using a computer connected to the internet 1548 767 781 256 324 595 373 181 128 216 406 453 499 278 318 1327 128 58 35 69% 71% 66% 78% 79% 76% 50% 48% 59% 77% 86% 80% 75% 67% 52% 70% 65% 52% 56% b f f f g gh ghi lmn mn n qr qr Using a Smartphone - such as an iPhone or BlackBerry 1295 642 653 234 284 504 272 154 101 179 355 370 434 231 260 1120 113 32 29 57% 59% 56% 71% 70% 65% 37% 41% 46% 64% 75% 65% 65% 56% 43% 59% 58% 29% 47% ef f f gh ghi mn mn n qr qr q Using an MP3 player - such as an iPod 1220 611 609 223 263 479 254 148 91 161 335 349 400 219 251 1045 115 32 28 54% 56% 52% 68% 64% 61% 34% 39% 42% 58% 71% 62% 60% 53% 41% 55% 59% 29% 44% b ef f f gh ghi mn mn n qr qr q Using a games console - such as a PlayStation or Wii 915 470 445 173 209 358 175 107 72 136 228 262 288 176 189 783 88 24 20 41% 43% 38% 53% 51% 46% 24% 28% 33% 49% 48% 46% 43% 43% 31% 42% 45% 22% 31% b ef f f gh gh n n n qr qr q No, none of these 394 175 220 31 41 82 241 126 43 32 27 66 80 68 180 310 36 32 17 17% 16% 19% 9% 10% 10% 33% 33% 20% 11% 6% 12% 12% 17% 30% 16% 18% 29% 27% cde hij ij j kl klm op op Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp13 (Q10) Showcard And Before Today, Were You Aware That You Can Listen To Radio Programmes As They Are Broadcast In These Ways? (Multicode) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Using a digital TV service - such as Freeview, Sky, Virgin, BT Vision 1609 216 231 133 114 125 137 133 270 1388 221 989 615 1004 567 71% 77% 75% 71% 70% 63% 65% 71% 76% 71% 76% 78% 63% 73% 70% ef ef ef i l Using a computer connected to the internet 1548 210 221 130 115 137 133 129 252 1335 213 983 564 986 527 69% 75% 72% 70% 71% 69% 63% 69% 71% 68% 73% 78% 57% 71% 65% f f i l n Using a Smartphone - such as an iPhone or BlackBerry 1295 195 205 100 91 91 108 108 222 1118 177 859 435 822 444 57% 70% 67% 54% 56% 46% 51% 58% 63% 57% 61% 68% 44% 59% 55% cdefg cdefg e e cef l n Using an MP3 player - such as an iPod 1220 183 186 100 92 96 93 101 192 1046 174 810 408 772 420 54% 65% 61% 54% 57% 49% 44% 54% 54% 53% 59% 64% 42% 56% 52% cefgh ef f f f f i l Using a games console - such as a PlayStation or Wii 915 113 148 87 71 68 64 71 162 775 139 610 304 589 306 41% 40% 48% 46% 44% 34% 30% 38% 46% 39% 48% 48% 31% 43% 38% f efg ef ef ef i l n No, none of these 394 33 46 32 22 41 52 34 50 349 46 128 262 219 159 17% 12% 15% 17% 14% 21% 25% 18% 14% 18% 16% 10% 27% 16% 20% ad abcdh k m Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp14 (Q12) Showcard Which, If Any, Of These Features Did You Associate With Digital Radio Before Today? (Multicode) Base : All aware of digital radio, with experience of listening to digital radio or aware of ways of listening to digital radio GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3096 1534 1562 433 508 1147 1008 530 343 390 584 752 948 626 770 1809 428 427 432 Effective Weighted Sample 2060 1023 1038 281 323 781 702 339 213 263 428 505 635 425 503 1573 291 286 399 Total 2062 1001 1061 310 385 750 618 296 196 271 463 547 637 381 497 1739 173 97 54 Clear and high quality sound/ interference free 1207 630 577 176 234 476 321 147 116 174 293 336 394 211 265 1003 117 53 33 59% 63% 54% 57% 61% 63% 52% 50% 59% 64% 63% 62% 62% 55% 53% 58% 68% 55% 61% b f f g g g n mn oq A wider choice of radio stations/ digitalonly radio stations 1129 592 537 195 221 436 276 136 110 163 300 329 367 195 238 931 119 52 28 55% 59% 51% 63% 57% 58% 45% 46% 56% 60% 65% 60% 58% 51% 48% 54% 69% 53% 51% b f f f g g gh mn mn oqr Ease of use (e.g. find your station by name, not frequency) 627 342 286 99 116 258 154 60 50 89 185 198 209 111 109 527 67 18 15 30% 34% 27% 32% 30% 34% 25% 20% 25% 33% 40% 36% 33% 29% 22% 30% 39% 19% 28% b f f g gh mn n n q oqr q Scrolling text information about the programme (e.g. track and artist name, phone numbers, topics, guests) 394 233 161 60 79 169 86 37 29 57 131 135 128 75 56 329 48 9 8 19% 23% 15% 19% 20% 23% 14% 13% 15% 21% 28% 25% 20% 20% 11% 19% 28% 9% 15% b f f f g ghi n n n q oqr q Extra features (including ability to pause and rewind live radio, programme guides) 393 225 168 67 83 165 78 35 34 54 123 125 136 62 70 311 61 12 9 19% 22% 16% 22% 21% 22% 13% 12% 17% 20% 27% 23% 21% 16% 14% 18% 35% 12% 17% b f f f g ghi mn mn q oqr Future-proof/ ready for switchover 362 208 154 48 70 154 90 44 33 57 119 116 123 59 63 286 52 12 11 18% 21% 14% 16% 18% 20% 15% 15% 17% 21% 26% 21% 19% 16% 13% 16% 30% 13% 20% b f g gh mn n oqr q Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp14 (Q12) Showcard Which, If Any, Of These Features Did You Associate With Digital Radio Before Today? (Multicode) Base : All aware of digital radio, with experience of listening to digital radio or aware of ways of listening to digital radio GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3096 1534 1562 433 508 1147 1008 530 343 390 584 752 948 626 770 1809 428 427 432 Effective Weighted Sample 2060 1023 1038 281 323 781 702 339 213 263 428 505 635 425 503 1573 291 286 399 Total 2062 1001 1061 310 385 750 618 296 196 271 463 547 637 381 497 1739 173 97 54 None of these 438 169 269 63 78 121 177 96 43 45 58 90 127 80 141 379 27 23 10 21% 17% 25% 20% 20% 16% 29% 33% 22% 17% 13% 16% 20% 21% 28% 22% 15% 23% 19% a cde hij j klm p p Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp14 (Q12) Showcard Which, If Any, Of These Features Did You Associate With Digital Radio Before Today? (Multicode) Base : All aware of digital radio, with experience of listening to digital radio or aware of ways of listening to digital radio ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3096 233 234 227 222 240 207 225 221 2206 890 1584 1499 1811 853 Effective Weighted Sample 2060 222 215 215 211 228 196 214 205 1702 403 1052 1071 1298 666 Total 2062 266 287 170 152 181 185 170 328 1788 275 1208 845 1286 722 Clear and high quality sound/ interference free 1207 159 157 107 83 113 91 101 192 1024 182 751 454 782 392 59% 60% 55% 63% 54% 63% 49% 60% 59% 57% 66% 62% 54% 61% 54% f f f f i l n A wider choice of radio stations/ digital-only radio stations 1129 184 138 102 81 95 97 88 145 980 148 719 404 719 382 55% 69% 48% 60% 53% 52% 53% 52% 44% 55% 54% 60% 48% 56% 53% bcdefgh bh l Ease of use (e.g. find your station by name, not frequency) 627 117 113 48 20 52 50 48 79 551 76 397 229 404 209 30% 44% 39% 28% 13% 29% 27% 28% 24% 31% 28% 33% 27% 31% 29% cdefgh cdefgh d d d d d l Scrolling text information about the programme (e.g. track and artist name, phone numbers, topics, guests) 394 69 76 35 22 32 38 30 28 335 59 256 138 264 121 19% 26% 26% 21% 14% 18% 21% 17% 8% 19% 22% 21% 16% 21% 17% degh degh h h h h l n Extra features (including ability to pause and rewind live radio, programme guides) 393 73 66 35 16 33 30 30 27 337 56 263 129 253 131 19% 27% 23% 21% 11% 19% 16% 17% 8% 19% 20% 22% 15% 20% 18% defgh dh dh dh h dh l Future-proof/ ready for switchover 362 72 58 38 19 21 30 24 25 316 46 235 126 226 125 18% 27% 20% 23% 13% 12% 16% 14% 8% 18% 17% 19% 15% 18% 17% defgh deh degh h h l Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp14 (Q12) Showcard Which, If Any, Of These Features Did You Associate With Digital Radio Before Today? (Multicode) Base : All aware of digital radio, with experience of listening to digital radio or aware of ways of listening to digital radio ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3096 233 234 227 222 240 207 225 221 2206 890 1584 1499 1811 853 Effective Weighted Sample 2060 222 215 215 211 228 196 214 205 1702 403 1052 1071 1298 666 Total 2062 266 287 170 152 181 185 170 328 1788 275 1208 845 1286 722 None of these 438 39 74 30 33 35 50 31 87 391 47 206 230 257 171 21% 15% 26% 18% 21% 20% 27% 18% 26% 22% 17% 17% 27% 20% 24% acg acg acg j k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp15 (Q13) Showcard As A Digital Radio Listener, Which, If Any, Of These Features Of Digital Radio Have You Had Experience Of When Listening To Digital Radio? (Multicode) Base : All with any type of digital radio GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 1534 769 765 212 246 574 502 191 168 200 355 437 507 295 295 949 190 194 201 Effective Weighted Sample 1045 527 519 148 157 400 356 136 104 132 264 295 353 202 200 828 133 127 187 Total 1065 524 541 171 193 382 319 117 100 134 277 322 359 185 199 919 81 41 25 A wider choice of radio stations/ digitalonly radio stations 555 284 271 87 106 216 147 46 50 82 171 185 203 86 81 471 53 18 13 52% 54% 50% 51% 55% 57% 46% 39% 50% 61% 62% 57% 57% 47% 41% 51% 66% 44% 51% f g gh mn mn oqr Clear and high quality sound/ interference free 548 298 250 77 91 217 162 52 44 79 164 175 191 91 90 460 55 19 14 51% 57% 46% 45% 47% 57% 51% 44% 44% 58% 59% 55% 53% 50% 45% 50% 68% 46% 56% b cd gh gh n oqr Ease of use (e.g. find your station by name, not frequency) 346 176 170 55 60 134 97 28 23 43 118 134 117 48 46 290 37 12 8 32% 34% 31% 32% 31% 35% 30% 24% 23% 32% 43% 42% 33% 26% 23% 32% 45% 28% 31% ghi lmn n oqr None of these 284 123 161 58 50 82 94 47 34 30 49 62 95 53 74 249 14 16 6 27% 24% 30% 34% 26% 22% 30% 40% 34% 22% 18% 19% 26% 29% 37% 27% 17% 38% 23% a e e ij ij k k kl p opr Scrolling text information about the programme (e.g. track and artist name, phone numbers, topics, guests) 209 124 85 29 35 93 51 11 17 31 75 77 77 37 18 183 19 4 3 20% 24% 16% 17% 18% 24% 16% 9% 17% 23% 27% 24% 21% 20% 9% 20% 23% 10% 14% b f g gh n n n q qr Extra features (including ability to pause and rewind live radio, programme guides) 178 106 72 27 37 75 39 10 16 22 67 75 57 29 17 149 21 5 3 17% 20% 13% 16% 19% 20% 12% 9% 16% 17% 24% 23% 16% 16% 8% 16% 26% 11% 14% b f f g g lmn n n oqr Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp15 (Q13) Showcard As A Digital Radio Listener, Which, If Any, Of These Features Of Digital Radio Have You Had Experience Of When Listening To Digital Radio? (Multicode) Base : All with any type of digital radio ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 1534 123 128 129 120 103 119 116 111 1090 444 819 708 959 374 Effective Weighted Sample 1045 117 118 122 114 97 112 111 103 852 210 557 517 697 304 Total 1065 142 158 96 83 79 109 87 164 909 156 644 414 713 327 A wider choice of radio stations/ digital-only radio stations 555 104 74 51 46 46 51 41 58 490 65 370 181 374 169 52% 73% 47% 53% 55% 58% 47% 47% 35% 54% 42% 57% 44% 52% 52% bcdefgh h h h j l Clear and high quality sound/ interference free 548 95 74 44 50 48 41 40 68 472 76 342 203 366 168 51% 67% 47% 46% 60% 61% 37% 46% 41% 52% 49% 53% 49% 51% 51% bcfgh bcfgh bcfgh Ease of use (e.g. find your station by name, not frequency) 346 74 63 23 17 34 27 26 27 299 46 214 131 231 108 32% 52% 40% 24% 20% 43% 24% 30% 16% 33% 30% 33% 32% 32% 33% cdfgh cdfh cdfgh h None of these 284 17 48 32 19 14 38 21 61 231 53 146 137 190 88 27% 12% 30% 33% 23% 18% 35% 24% 37% 25% 34% 23% 33% 27% 27% ae ae a ade a adeg i k Scrolling text information about the programme (e.g. track and artist name, phone numbers, topics, guests) 209 42 34 20 16 24 16 18 12 174 35 140 69 147 59 20% 30% 21% 21% 19% 31% 15% 21% 7% 19% 22% 22% 17% 21% 18% fh h h h fh h l Extra features (including ability to pause and rewind live radio, programme guides) 178 42 31 15 10 16 13 12 10 150 28 120 58 125 50 17% 30% 19% 16% 12% 21% 12% 14% 6% 17% 18% 19% 14% 17% 15% cdfgh h h h l Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp16 (Qp12). Showcard How Likely Is It That Your Household Will Get A Dab Radio In The Next 12 Months? (Single Code) Base : Those who listen to radio and have any active radio sets but no DAB sets at home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 1304 645 659 133 174 443 554 293 155 139 181 263 349 275 417 703 156 207 238 Effective Weighted Sample 829 403 426 82 108 286 367 182 95 91 124 167 227 177 260 609 102 139 218 Total 784 385 399 93 125 260 306 143 86 90 128 166 221 153 244 646 60 50 28 Certain to 30 22 7 4 8 8 9 2 3 5 5 8 8 6 8 26 2 - 1 4% 6% 2% 5% 6% 3% 3% 2% 4% 6% 4% 5% 4% 4% 3% 4% 3% -% 4% b q q q Very likely 45 21 25 8 4 23 10 3 8 6 10 10 17 10 9 42 1 2 1 6% 5% 6% 9% 3% 9% 3% 2% 9% 7% 8% 6% 8% 7% 4% 6% 2% 4% 3% f df g g g n r Likely 86 44 42 10 15 37 24 12 9 12 21 19 28 19 21 67 8 9 3 11% 12% 11% 11% 12% 14% 8% 8% 10% 13% 16% 11% 13% 12% 8% 10% 14% 17% 10% f g or Unlikely 138 68 69 10 22 52 54 16 26 22 25 33 44 19 43 119 5 10 4 18% 18% 17% 11% 18% 20% 18% 11% 30% 25% 19% 20% 20% 12% 17% 18% 9% 19% 15% c g g g m p p Very unlikely 114 56 58 8 17 32 57 28 10 14 17 31 27 21 35 89 10 8 7 15% 15% 15% 9% 13% 12% 19% 19% 11% 15% 13% 18% 12% 14% 14% 14% 16% 16% 26% ce opq Certain not to 148 59 88 16 20 35 78 50 13 7 15 25 33 29 61 122 10 10 7 19% 15% 22% 17% 16% 13% 25% 35% 15% 7% 11% 15% 15% 19% 25% 19% 16% 20% 24% a de hij kl Don't know 223 114 109 36 41 71 75 32 17 24 36 42 64 50 67 182 24 12 5 28% 29% 27% 39% 32% 28% 24% 23% 20% 26% 28% 25% 29% 33% 27% 28% 40% 24% 19% ef r oqr Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp16 (Qp12). Showcard How Likely Is It That Your Household Will Get A Dab Radio In The Next 12 Months? (Single Code) Base : Those who listen to radio and have any active radio sets but no DAB sets at home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d e ~f ~g ~h i j k l m n Unweighted total 1304 76 88 95 77 117 81 90 79 888 416 588 712 732 334 Effective Weighted Sample 829 72 82 91 73 111 76 84 73 675 176 365 492 519 256 Total 784 84 109 67 51 87 70 66 112 673 111 405 376 498 258 Certain to 30 ** ** ** ** 8 ** ** ** 24 6 18 11 20 8 4% ** ** ** ** 9% ** ** ** 4% 5% 5% 3% 4% 3% Very likely 45 ** ** ** ** 12 ** ** ** 39 6 33 12 34 11 6% ** ** ** ** 14% ** ** ** 6% 6% 8% 3% 7% 4% l Likely 86 ** ** ** ** 9 ** ** ** 77 10 48 38 51 33 11% ** ** ** ** 11% ** ** ** 11% 9% 12% 10% 10% 13% Unlikely 138 ** ** ** ** 19 ** ** ** 119 18 73 64 92 42 18% ** ** ** ** 22% ** ** ** 18% 17% 18% 17% 18% 16% Very unlikely 114 ** ** ** ** 7 ** ** ** 96 18 54 60 73 34 15% ** ** ** ** 8% ** ** ** 14% 16% 13% 16% 15% 13% Certain not to 148 ** ** ** ** 16 ** ** ** 123 25 62 86 88 53 19% ** ** ** ** 18% ** ** ** 18% 23% 15% 23% 18% 21% k Don't know 223 ** ** ** ** 15 ** ** ** 195 28 116 104 140 78 28% ** ** ** ** 18% ** ** ** 29% 25% 29% 28% 28% 30% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp17 (Qj14B). Why Are You Unlikely To Get Digital Radio In The Next 12 Months? (Multicode) Unprompted Base : Those unlikely to get DAB radio in the next 12 months GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b ~c ~d e f g ~h ~i ~j k l m n o ~p q r Unweighted total 705 333 372 49 85 219 352 198 99 71 83 140 174 138 253 369 69 116 151 Effective Weighted Sample 437 203 234 29 50 133 235 119 56 47 56 91 108 89 151 319 43 81 138 Total 400 184 216 34 58 119 189 93 49 43 56 88 103 68 139 329 25 28 18 No need 204 89 115 ** ** 56 95 44 ** ** ** 49 50 36 68 172 ** 10 11 51% 48% 53% ** ** 47% 50% 47% ** ** ** 55% 49% 53% 49% 52% ** 37% 62% q q Happy to use existing service 174 82 91 ** ** 49 95 41 ** ** ** 31 49 30 64 140 ** 15 5 43% 45% 42% ** ** 41% 50% 44% ** ** ** 35% 47% 44% 46% 42% ** 53% 28% r r Can receive through digital TV service 32 18 14 ** ** 8 11 3 ** ** ** 15 5 6 6 27 ** 2 1 8% 10% 7% ** ** 7% 6% 3% ** ** ** 18% 5% 9% 4% 8% ** 8% 4% ln Happy to use analogue radio service 21 12 9 ** ** 7 12 3 ** ** ** 6 6 2 7 17 ** 1 1 5% 7% 4% ** ** 6% 6% 3% ** ** ** 7% 5% 4% 5% 5% ** 2% 6% Poor reception in our area 14 5 9 ** ** 4 8 1 ** ** ** 5 6 2 1 14 ** 1 - 4% 3% 4% ** ** 4% 4% 1% ** ** ** 5% 6% 3% 1% 4% ** 2% -% n n r Too expensive generally 14 7 7 ** ** 2 6 4 ** ** ** 3 3 2 5 12 ** 2 1 4% 4% 3% ** ** 2% 3% 4% ** ** ** 4% 3% 3% 3% 4% ** 6% 4% Would never listen 14 6 8 ** ** 7 4 2 ** ** ** 3 4 3 4 13 ** * * 3% 3% 4% ** ** 6% 2% 2% ** ** ** 3% 4% 5% 3% 4% ** 1% 1% Can't afford it 14 5 9 ** ** 3 3 4 ** ** ** * 4 2 7 11 ** 1 1 3% 3% 4% ** ** 2% 2% 4% ** ** ** *% 4% 4% 5% 3% ** 4% 3% k Don't know why I should 13 4 9 ** ** 3 7 5 ** ** ** 1 4 1 7 11 ** 1 1 3% 2% 4% ** ** 2% 4% 5% ** ** ** 1% 4% 1% 5% 3% ** 5% 4% Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp17 (Qj14B). Why Are You Unlikely To Get Digital Radio In The Next 12 Months? (Multicode) Unprompted Base : Those unlikely to get DAB radio in the next 12 months GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b ~c ~d e f g ~h ~i ~j k l m n o ~p q r Unweighted total 705 333 372 49 85 219 352 198 99 71 83 140 174 138 253 369 69 116 151 Effective Weighted Sample 437 203 234 29 50 133 235 119 56 47 56 91 108 89 151 319 43 81 138 Total 400 184 216 34 58 119 189 93 49 43 56 88 103 68 139 329 25 28 18 Will get it when I have to/ when switchover 7 4 3 ** ** 3 4 1 ** ** ** 4 1 * 2 4 ** 2 * 2% 2% 1% ** ** 3% 2% 2% ** ** ** 4% 1% 1% 1% 1% ** 6% 2% o Not available in our area 2 1 1 ** ** * 2 - ** ** ** 1 1 * * 2 ** * * 1% 1% *% ** ** *% 1% -% ** ** ** 1% 1% *% *% 1% ** *% 1% Other 21 10 11 ** ** 8 9 4 ** ** ** 3 12 3 4 18 ** 2 1 5% 5% 5% ** ** 7% 5% 4% ** ** ** 3% 11% 4% 3% 6% ** 6% 4% kn Don't know 9 2 7 ** ** 3 3 3 ** ** ** 1 3 2 4 8 ** 1 * 2% 1% 3% ** ** 3% 2% 3% ** ** ** 1% 3% 2% 3% 2% ** 3% 1% Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp17 (Qj14B). Why Are You Unlikely To Get Digital Radio In The Next 12 Months? (Multicode) Unprompted Base : Those unlikely to get DAB radio in the next 12 months ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h i j k l m n Unweighted total 705 29 51 64 38 58 36 56 37 474 231 289 414 383 171 Effective Weighted Sample 437 28 48 61 36 55 34 53 33 349 100 172 281 276 125 Total 400 32 65 46 25 42 30 40 50 338 61 189 210 253 128 No need 204 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 164 40 99 104 129 64 51% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 48% 65% 52% 50% 51% 50% i Happy to use existing service 174 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 156 18 70 104 108 61 43% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 46% 29% 37% 49% 43% 47% j k Can receive through digital TV service 32 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 28 4 19 13 21 10 8% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 8% 6% 10% 6% 8% 8% Happy to use analogue radio service 21 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 17 4 7 14 16 4 5% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 5% 7% 4% 7% 6% 3% Poor reception in our area 14 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 10 4 8 7 13 1 4% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 3% 7% 4% 3% 5% 1% n Too expensive generally 14 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 13 1 5 9 9 4 4% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 4% 2% 3% 4% 3% 3% Would never listen 14 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 11 3 8 6 8 6 3% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 3% 5% 4% 3% 3% 4% Can't afford it 14 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 13 1 6 8 9 4 3% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 4% 2% 3% 4% 3% 3% Don't know why I should 13 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 11 2 5 8 7 5 3% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 3% 3% 2% 4% 3% 4% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qp17 (Qj14B). Why Are You Unlikely To Get Digital Radio In The Next 12 Months? (Multicode) Unprompted Base : Those unlikely to get DAB radio in the next 12 months ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h i j k l m n Unweighted total 705 29 51 64 38 58 36 56 37 474 231 289 414 383 171 Effective Weighted Sample 437 28 48 61 36 55 34 53 33 349 100 172 281 276 125 Total 400 32 65 46 25 42 30 40 50 338 61 189 210 253 128 Will get it when I have to/ when switchover 7 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 5 2 5 2 4 3 2% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 2% 3% 3% 1% 1% 2% Not available in our area 2 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1 1 1 1 1 1 1% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** *% 2% 1% *% *% 1% Other 21 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 17 4 12 9 14 7 5% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 5% 7% 6% 4% 5% 5% Don't know 9 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 8 1 4 5 6 2 2% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 2% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qz1. Showcard Could You Please Take A Look At The Options Shown On This Card And Let Me Know Which Applies To You? (Single Code) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Married/ living as married 1392 691 701 81 269 580 463 134 112 201 392 421 395 294 282 1185 104 68 35 62% 64% 60% 25% 66% 74% 63% 36% 52% 72% 83% 74% 59% 71% 46% 63% 53% 61% 57% b c cdf c g gh ghi ln n ln pr p Single 515 273 242 246 122 98 50 119 53 43 61 86 177 80 171 417 56 23 19 23% 25% 21% 75% 30% 12% 7% 32% 24% 15% 13% 15% 26% 19% 28% 22% 28% 21% 30% b def ef f ij ij km km oq oq Widowed, divorced or separated 344 117 227 1 18 101 225 122 50 36 19 59 97 37 152 280 36 20 8 15% 11% 19% *% 4% 13% 30% 32% 23% 13% 4% 10% 14% 9% 25% 15% 18% 18% 12% a c cd cde hij ij j km klm r r Refused 5 1 4 * * 3 2 2 1 - 1 - * 2 3 4 * * * *% *% *% *% *% *% *% 1% 1% -% *% -% *% *% 1% *% *% *% 1% Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QZ1. SHOWCARD Could you please take a look at the options shown on this card and let me know which applies to you? (SINGLE CODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Married/ living as married 1392 165 206 121 109 131 136 104 212 1186 206 898 484 915 442 62% 59% 67% 65% 67% 66% 65% 56% 60% 60% 71% 71% 49% 66% 54% g g g g i l n Single 515 75 59 35 29 41 44 55 78 468 46 258 255 264 232 23% 27% 19% 19% 18% 21% 21% 29% 22% 24% 16% 20% 26% 19% 29% cd bcdef j k m Widowed, divorced or separated 344 40 42 29 23 25 30 27 64 305 39 103 241 201 135 15% 14% 14% 16% 14% 13% 14% 14% 18% 16% 13% 8% 24% 15% 17% k Refused 5 - - 1 2 - - 1 - 4 1 2 3 2 3 *% -% -% 1% 1% -% -% 1% -% *% *% *% *% *% *% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qz2. Showcard Which Of The Groups On This Card Do You Consider You Belong To? (Single Code) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 WHITE British 1388 622 765 200 222 497 469 243 116 164 293 356 414 256 363 1271 31 47 39 62% 58% 65% 61% 55% 64% 63% 64% 53% 59% 62% 63% 62% 62% 60% 67% 16% 42% 63% a d d h h pq p pq English 277 160 116 27 37 87 126 32 37 43 58 75 78 59 65 266 6 4 1 12% 15% 10% 8% 9% 11% 17% 9% 17% 15% 12% 13% 12% 14% 11% 14% 3% 4% 1% b cde g g pqr Scottish 175 87 88 23 34 59 60 34 21 21 17 36 43 38 57 21 153 * * 8% 8% 7% 7% 8% 7% 8% 9% 10% 7% 4% 6% 6% 9% 9% 1% 78% *% *% j j j l oqr Welsh 67 35 32 8 13 21 26 15 11 6 12 16 18 12 21 10 * 56 * 3% 3% 3% 2% 3% 3% 3% 4% 5% 2% 2% 3% 3% 3% 3% 1% *% 51% 1% opr Irish 35 15 20 5 3 13 13 10 5 4 7 6 9 6 13 16 * * 19 2% 1% 2% 2% 1% 2% 2% 3% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% *% *% 30% opq Any other white background 68 34 34 15 31 15 7 11 4 7 18 21 22 9 16 61 4 1 2 3% 3% 3% 5% 7% 2% 1% 3% 2% 3% 4% 4% 3% 2% 3% 3% 2% 1% 3% ef ef q q MIXED White and Black Caribbean 9 2 7 4 2 3 1 3 1 1 1 - 3 3 3 9 - * * *% *% 1% 1% *% *% *% 1% *% *% *% -% *% 1% 1% *% -% *% *% f White and Black African 4 1 3 2 - - 2 1 - - 1 1 3 - - 4 - - - *% *% *% 1% -% -% *% *% -% -% *% *% *% -% -% *% -% -% -% e Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qz2. Showcard Which Of The Groups On This Card Do You Consider You Belong To? (Single Code) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 White and Asian 3 3 - - 1 1 - - - - 3 1 1 - - 3 - - - *% *% -% -% *% *% -% -% -% -% 1% *% *% -% -% *% -% -% -% Any other mixed background 1 1 - 1 - - - - - - - - 1 - - 1 - - - *% *% -% *% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% *% -% -% *% -% -% -% ASIAN AND BRITISH ASIAN Indian 70 37 33 18 13 27 13 9 3 5 17 19 26 9 16 69 - 1 1 3% 3% 3% 5% 3% 3% 2% 2% 1% 2% 4% 3% 4% 2% 3% 4% -% 1% 1% f f pqr Pakistani 32 14 18 5 16 6 4 3 5 6 6 7 8 2 14 32 - - - 1% 1% 2% 2% 4% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% -% -% -% ef m pqr Bangladeshi 29 17 12 6 13 8 1 4 6 5 5 3 7 5 14 29 - - - 1% 2% 1% 2% 3% 1% *% 1% 3% 2% 1% *% 1% 1% 2% 2% -% -% -% f ef f k pqr Any other Asian background 10 6 4 2 2 6 - 3 - 1 4 3 6 1 - 10 - * - *% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% -% 1% -% *% 1% 1% 1% *% -% 1% -% *% -% f f f n BLACK AND BLACK BRITISH Caribbean 26 15 11 6 2 8 10 4 3 6 9 5 9 2 10 26 - - - 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% -% -% -% pqr African 37 20 17 3 11 21 3 3 6 5 17 12 12 5 8 35 1 1 * 2% 2% 1% 1% 3% 3% *% 1% 3% 2% 4% 2% 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% *% f f g g r Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qz2. Showcard Which Of The Groups On This Card Do You Consider You Belong To? (Single Code) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Any other black background 5 3 1 - - 5 - 1 - 1 1 - 1 1 3 5 - - - *% *% *% -% -% 1% -% *% -% *% *% -% *% *% *% *% -% -% -% f MIDDLE EAST AND ARABIC ORIGIN Middle Eastern, including Arabic origin 4 3 2 * 2 3 - 1 - - 3 3 * - 1 4 - * - *% *% *% *% *% *% -% *% -% -% 1% 1% *% -% *% *% -% *% -% Iranian 3 1 1 1 - - 1 - - 1 - - 1 1 - 3 - - - *% *% *% *% -% -% *% -% -% 1% -% -% *% *% -% *% -% -% -% CHINESE OR OTHER ETHNIC GROUP Chinese 2 1 1 2 * * - * * - - * 2 * - 1 1 * * *% *% *% 1% *% *% -% *% *% -% -% *% *% *% -% *% *% *% *% ef Any other background 7 2 5 1 4 2 1 1 - 2 1 1 3 - 4 7 - - - *% *% *% *% 1% *% *% *% -% 1% *% *% *% -% 1% *% -% -% -% f Refused 5 2 2 - 1 1 2 - - - - 1 1 2 - 4 * - - *% *% *% -% *% *% *% -% -% -% -% *% *% 1% -% *% *% -% -% Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QZ2. SHOWCARD Which of the groups on this card do you consider you belong to? (SINGLE CODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 WHITE British 1388 106 219 142 122 135 151 160 236 1192 195 775 602 935 413 62% 38% 71% 76% 75% 68% 72% 86% 67% 61% 67% 62% 61% 68% 51% a ah a a a abcdefh a i n English 277 15 48 24 30 26 38 19 66 237 40 142 134 206 70 12% 5% 16% 13% 19% 13% 18% 10% 18% 12% 14% 11% 14% 15% 9% a a ag a ag ag n Scottish 175 4 3 1 3 - 3 1 8 153 22 96 79 89 85 8% 1% 1% *% 2% -% 1% *% 2% 8% 8% 8% 8% 6% 11% e e m Welsh 67 - 1 4 1 2 1 1 1 50 17 35 32 54 13 3% -% *% 2% *% 1% *% *% *% 3% 6% 3% 3% 4% 2% a i n Irish 35 7 2 1 - 1 2 - 3 27 9 17 19 9 8 2% 3% 1% 1% -% *% 1% -% 1% 1% 3% 1% 2% 1% 1% deg i Any other white background 68 28 14 8 2 2 2 1 5 64 4 46 21 18 48 3% 10% 4% 4% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 3% 1% 4% 2% 1% 6% bcdefgh defg defg j l m MIXED White and Black Caribbean 9 2 - 2 - 3 1 1 2 9 1 3 7 5 4 *% 1% -% 1% -% 1% *% *% *% *% *% *% 1% *% 1% White and Black African 4 2 1 - 1 - - - - 4 - 1 3 3 1 *% 1% *% -% *% -% -% -% -% *% -% *% *% *% *% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QZ2. SHOWCARD Which of the groups on this card do you consider you belong to? (SINGLE CODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 White and Asian 3 - 3 - - - - - - 1 1 3 - 3 - *% -% 1% -% -% -% -% -% -% *% *% *% -% *% -% Any other mixed background 1 - - 1 - - - - - 1 - - 1 1 - *% -% -% *% -% -% -% -% -% *% -% -% *% *% -% ASIAN AND BRITISH ASIAN Indian 70 40 5 1 - 16 - 3 3 70 * 46 24 24 46 3% 14% 2% *% -% 8% -% 2% 1% 4% *% 4% 2% 2% 6% bcdefgh df bcdfgh j m Pakistani 32 10 4 - - 5 1 1 9 31 1 17 15 7 25 1% 4% 1% -% -% 3% 1% 1% 3% 2% *% 1% 2% *% 3% cdfg cd cd j m Bangladeshi 29 3 - 2 - 4 5 1 14 29 - 18 10 1 28 1% 1% -% 1% -% 2% 2% *% 4% 1% -% 1% 1% *% 3% bd bd bcdg j m Any other Asian background 10 2 3 - 1 1 2 - 2 10 - 6 4 4 6 *% 1% 1% -% *% *% 1% -% 1% 1% -% *% *% *% 1% ## Black And Black British Caribbean 26 21 - - 1 1 1 1 2 26 - 13 13 5 21 1% 8% -% -% *% *% 1% *% *% 1% -% 1% 1% *% 3% bcdefgh j m African 37 30 - 1 1 2 3 - - 37 - 25 11 8 29 2% 11% -% *% *% 1% 1% -% -% 2% -% 2% 1% 1% 4% bcdefgh j m Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QZ2. SHOWCARD Which of the groups on this card do you consider you belong to? (SINGLE CODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Any other black background 5 1 1 - 1 - - - 1 4 1 3 1 2 3 *% *% *% -% *% -% -% -% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% MIDDLE EAST AND ARABIC ORIGIN Middle Eastern, including Arabic origin 4 2 2 - - - - - - 4 * 3 1 2 3 *% 1% 1% -% -% -% -% -% -% *% *% *% *% *% *% Iranian 3 3 - - - - - - - 3 - 3 - 1 1 *% 1% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% *% -% *% -% *% *% CHINESE OR OTHER ETHNIC GROUP Chinese 2 1 - - - - - - - 2 1 * 2 1 1 *% *% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% *% *% *% *% *% *% Any other background 7 1 2 - 2 1 2 - - 7 - 6 2 3 5 *% *% 1% -% 1% *% 1% -% -% *% -% *% *% *% 1% Refused 5 - - 1 - - - - 3 3 1 1 3 2 2 *% -% -% *% -% -% -% -% 1% *% *% *% *% *% *% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qz3 (C9). Showcard Which Of These, If Any, Limit Your Daily Activities Or The Work You Can Do? (Multicode) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Cannot walk far or manage stairs or can only do so with difficulty 120 58 62 * 7 18 94 38 18 8 7 21 20 18 60 95 16 4 4 5% 5% 5% *% 2% 2% 13% 10% 8% 3% 1% 4% 3% 4% 10% 5% 8% 4% 7% c c cde ij ij klm oq Breathlessness or chest pains 87 46 42 4 4 14 66 28 11 9 8 17 18 16 37 75 4 4 4 4% 4% 4% 1% 1% 2% 9% 7% 5% 3% 2% 3% 3% 4% 6% 4% 2% 3% 6% cde ij j kl op Poor hearing, partial hearing or deafness 67 33 35 2 2 6 57 24 7 9 4 15 12 13 27 53 9 5 1 3% 3% 3% 1% 1% 1% 8% 6% 3% 3% 1% 3% 2% 3% 4% 3% 4% 4% 2% cde j j j l r r Poor vision, partial sight or blindness 53 21 32 1 3 8 41 17 6 4 7 9 8 14 22 44 5 3 1 2% 2% 3% *% 1% 1% 6% 5% 3% 1% 1% 2% 1% 3% 4% 2% 2% 3% 2% cde ij l kl Mental health problems or difficulties 27 11 16 2 5 12 8 13 3 2 1 1 4 3 18 18 7 2 1 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 4% 2% 1% *% *% 1% 1% 3% 1% 4% 2% 1% ij j klm or Limited ability to reach 26 12 14 * 1 3 21 8 4 - 2 5 4 3 13 23 1 1 * 1% 1% 1% *% *% *% 3% 2% 2% -% *% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% *% cde ij i l Other illnesses or health problems which limit your daily activities or the work that you can do 104 57 48 4 8 35 58 27 15 10 10 21 24 16 44 85 8 8 4 5% 5% 4% 1% 2% 4% 8% 7% 7% 4% 2% 4% 4% 4% 7% 5% 4% 7% 6% cd cde j j klm Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qz3 (C9). Showcard Which Of These, If Any, Limit Your Daily Activities Or The Work You Can Do? (Multicode) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 None 1918 914 1004 315 380 709 514 272 169 247 440 498 602 352 465 1610 160 95 52 85% 84% 85% 96% 93% 91% 69% 72% 78% 88% 93% 88% 90% 85% 76% 85% 82% 85% 84% ef f f gh ghi n mn n Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QZ3 (C9). SHOWCARD Which of these, if any, limit your daily activities or the work you can do? (MULTICODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Cannot walk far or manage stairs or can only do so with difficulty 120 10 7 13 4 9 15 11 26 105 14 11 109 75 41 5% 3% 2% 7% 2% 4% 7% 6% 7% 5% 5% 1% 11% 5% 5% bd bd bd k Breathlessness or chest pains 87 11 7 8 7 10 2 7 22 72 16 15 72 47 36 4% 4% 2% 5% 4% 5% 1% 4% 6% 4% 5% 1% 7% 3% 4% f f f f bf k Poor hearing, partial hearing or deafness 67 3 10 8 6 7 6 2 11 58 9 13 55 43 23 3% 1% 3% 4% 3% 4% 3% 1% 3% 3% 3% 1% 6% 3% 3% ag a k Poor vision, partial sight or blindness 53 6 7 7 2 2 4 1 14 44 9 12 41 29 23 2% 2% 2% 4% 1% 1% 2% *% 4% 2% 3% 1% 4% 2% 3% eg eg k Mental health problems or difficulties 27 3 1 4 1 3 2 1 3 23 3 1 26 15 12 1% 1% *% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 3% 1% 1% b k Limited ability to reach 26 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 7 21 5 2 23 18 8 1% *% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% 2% *% 2% 1% 1% k Other illnesses or health problems which limit your daily activities or the work that you can do 104 5 18 19 5 8 5 12 13 77 28 25 79 63 38 5% 2% 6% 10% 3% 4% 2% 6% 4% 4% 9% 2% 8% 5% 5% af adefh af i k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QZ3 (C9). SHOWCARD Which of these, if any, limit your daily activities or the work you can do? (MULTICODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 None 1918 255 269 146 142 164 182 161 292 1685 232 1191 715 1176 690 85% 91% 88% 78% 87% 83% 87% 86% 82% 86% 80% 95% 73% 85% 85% ceh c c c c j l Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qz4 (C10). Showcard Which Of These Best Describes Your Sight? (Single Code) Base : Those with poor vision, partial sight or blindness GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h ~i ~j ~k ~l ~m ~n ~o ~p ~q ~r Unweighted total 90 35 55 3 4 11 72 34 10 5 6 12 14 21 43 49 9 17 15 Effective Weighted Sample 59 22 37 2 3 9 46 23 5 5 6 8 10 16 26 44 7 10 14 Total 53 21 32 1 3 8 41 17 6 4 7 9 8 14 22 44 5 3 1 Have difficulty seeing ordinary newspaper print ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Cannot see well enough to read a newspaper headline ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Cannot see well enough to recognise a friend across a road ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Cannot see well enough to recognise a friend if close to his or her face ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Cannot see well enough to recognise a friend if he or she is at arm's length ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Cannot see well enough to recognise a friend across a room ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Cannot see well enough to read a large print book ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Cannot tell by the light where the windows are ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qz4 (C10). Showcard Which Of These Best Describes Your Sight? (Single Code) Base : Those with poor vision, partial sight or blindness GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h ~i ~j ~k ~l ~m ~n ~o ~p ~q ~r Unweighted total 90 35 55 3 4 11 72 34 10 5 6 12 14 21 43 49 9 17 15 Effective Weighted Sample 59 22 37 2 3 9 46 23 5 5 6 8 10 16 26 44 7 10 14 Total 53 21 32 1 3 8 41 17 6 4 7 9 8 14 22 44 5 3 1 Cannot see the shapes of furniture in the room ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qz4 (C10). Showcard Which Of These Best Describes Your Sight? (Single Code) Base : Those with poor vision, partial sight or blindness ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h ~i ~j ~k ~l ~m ~n Unweighted total 90 6 7 11 4 4 5 1 11 57 33 14 76 48 27 Effective Weighted Sample 59 6 7 11 4 4 5 1 11 47 13 11 49 33 23 Total 53 6 7 7 2 2 4 1 14 44 9 12 41 29 23 Have difficulty seeing ordinary newspaper print ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Cannot see well enough to read a newspaper headline ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Cannot see well enough to recognise a friend across a road ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Cannot see well enough to recognise a friend if close to his or her face ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Cannot see well enough to recognise a friend if he or she is at arm's length ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Cannot see well enough to recognise a friend across a room ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Cannot see well enough to read a large print book ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Cannot tell by the light where the windows are ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qz4 (C10). Showcard Which Of These Best Describes Your Sight? (Single Code) Base : Those with poor vision, partial sight or blindness ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h ~i ~j ~k ~l ~m ~n Unweighted total 90 6 7 11 4 4 5 1 11 57 33 14 76 48 27 Effective Weighted Sample 59 6 7 11 4 4 5 1 11 47 13 11 49 33 23 Total 53 6 7 7 2 2 4 1 14 44 9 12 41 29 23 Cannot see the shapes of furniture in the room ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qz5 (C11). Showcard Which Of These Best Describes Your Hearing? (Single Code) Base : Those with poor hearing, partial hearing or deafness GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e f ~g ~h ~i ~j ~k ~l ~m ~n ~o ~p ~q ~r Unweighted total 118 60 58 2 2 10 104 42 17 13 4 23 25 28 42 65 20 23 10 Effective Weighted Sample 81 39 43 2 2 7 71 33 9 11 4 16 18 18 31 58 14 17 9 Total 67 33 35 2 2 6 57 24 7 9 4 15 12 13 27 53 9 5 1 Cannot hear sounds at all 1 ** ** ** ** ** 1 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 2% ** ** ** ** ** 2% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Cannot follow a TV programme with the volume turned up 4 ** ** ** ** ** 4 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 6% ** ** ** ** ** 7% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Have difficulty hearing someone talking in a loud voice in a quiet room 5 ** ** ** ** ** 5 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 8% ** ** ** ** ** 8% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Cannot hear a doorbell, alarm clock or telephone bell 3 ** ** ** ** ** 2 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 5% ** ** ** ** ** 4% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Cannot follow a TV programme at a volume others find acceptable 11 ** ** ** ** ** 10 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 17% ** ** ** ** ** 17% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Difficulty hearing someone talking in a normal voice in a quiet room 5 ** ** ** ** ** 5 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 8% ** ** ** ** ** 9% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Difficulty following a conversation against background noise 18 ** ** ** ** ** 15 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 26% ** ** ** ** ** 27% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Don't know 10 ** ** ** ** ** 8 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 15% ** ** ** ** ** 14% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qz5 (C11). Showcard Which Of These Best Describes Your Hearing? (Single Code) Base : Those with poor hearing, partial hearing or deafness ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h ~i ~j ~k l ~m ~n Unweighted total 118 3 9 13 9 11 7 4 9 82 36 17 101 73 35 Effective Weighted Sample 81 3 9 13 9 11 6 4 9 67 16 12 71 53 27 Total 67 3 10 8 6 7 6 2 11 58 9 13 55 43 23 Cannot hear sounds at all 1 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1 ** ** 2% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 2% ** ** Cannot follow a TV programme with the volume turned up 4 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 4 ** ** 6% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 8% ** ** Have difficulty hearing someone talking in a loud voice in a quiet room 5 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 5 ** ** 8% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 9% ** ** Cannot hear a doorbell, alarm clock or telephone bell 3 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 2 ** ** 5% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 4% ** ** Cannot follow a TV programme at a volume others find acceptable 11 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 8 ** ** 17% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 15% ** ** Difficulty hearing someone talking in a normal voice in a quiet room 5 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 4 ** ** 8% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 7% ** ** Difficulty following a conversation against background noise 18 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 17 ** ** 26% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 30% ** ** Don't know 10 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 6 ** ** 15% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 11% ** ** Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qz7 (Sga). Do You Ever Work From Home? (Single Code) Base : Those working full or part time GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 1659 852 807 189 374 875 221 100 151 260 469 458 555 391 255 927 268 218 246 Effective Weighted Sample 1094 566 530 125 230 598 154 58 88 172 344 310 364 260 167 835 177 149 226 Total 1260 629 631 167 296 614 183 70 99 193 391 381 417 258 204 1067 100 61 32 Yes 354 184 170 20 70 196 69 17 18 37 152 180 108 48 17 311 20 15 8 28% 29% 27% 12% 24% 32% 37% 25% 18% 19% 39% 47% 26% 19% 9% 29% 20% 24% 24% c cd cd ghi lmn mn n p No 906 445 461 148 226 418 114 52 81 156 239 202 308 210 186 756 80 46 24 72% 71% 73% 88% 76% 68% 63% 75% 82% 81% 61% 53% 74% 81% 91% 71% 80% 76% 76% def ef j j j k kl klm o Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QZ7 (SGA). Do you ever work from home? (SINGLE CODE) Base : Those working full or part time ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k ~l m n Unweighted total 1659 121 122 103 127 114 121 110 109 1158 501 1659 - 983 430 Effective Weighted Sample 1094 119 118 101 125 112 119 108 106 916 205 1094 - 708 339 Total 1260 163 184 95 102 102 127 99 195 1106 155 1260 - 796 433 Yes 354 43 73 31 30 27 38 19 51 296 58 354 - 239 107 28% 26% 40% 32% 30% 27% 30% 20% 26% 27% 37% 28% -% 30% 25% aegh g i No 906 121 111 64 72 75 89 80 145 809 97 906 - 556 326 72% 74% 60% 68% 70% 73% 70% 80% 74% 73% 63% 72% -% 70% 75% b b bc b j Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qz8 (Sgb). Would You Say That You Work From Home Most Of The Time Or Just Occasionally? (Single Code) Base : Those who ever work from home GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b ~c ~d e ~f ~g ~h ~i j k l ~m ~n o ~p ~q ~r Unweighted total 462 249 213 20 83 273 86 21 25 55 182 205 155 73 29 272 63 62 65 Effective Weighted Sample 306 166 141 14 51 183 61 13 14 34 133 144 101 47 17 247 39 40 59 Total 354 184 170 20 70 196 69 17 18 37 152 180 108 48 17 311 20 15 8 Most of the time 136 67 69 ** ** 64 ** ** ** ** 41 63 42 ** ** 124 ** ** ** 38% 36% 41% ** ** 33% ** ** ** ** 27% 35% 39% ** ** 40% ** ** ** Just occasionally 215 116 100 ** ** 130 ** ** ** ** 111 115 66 ** ** 185 ** ** ** 61% 63% 59% ** ** 66% ** ** ** ** 73% 64% 61% ** ** 60% ** ** ** Don't know 2 1 1 ** ** 2 ** ** ** ** - 2 - ** ** 2 ** ** ** 1% 1% 1% ** ** 1% ** ** ** ** -% 1% -% ** ** 1% ** ** ** Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QZ8 (SGB). Would you say that you work from home most of the time or just occasionally? (SINGLE CODE) Base : Those who ever work from home ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h i j k ~l m n Unweighted total 462 32 51 34 38 31 36 21 29 298 164 462 - 295 102 Effective Weighted Sample 306 32 49 34 37 31 35 21 28 242 72 306 - 216 80 Total 354 43 73 31 30 27 38 19 51 296 58 354 - 239 107 Most of the time 136 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 106 30 136 - 101 32 38% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 36% 53% 38% -% 42% 30% i n Just occasionally 215 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 189 26 215 - 136 75 61% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 64% 46% 61% -% 57% 70% j m Don't know 2 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1 1 2 - 2 - 1% ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1% 2% 1% -% 1% -% Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qz10 (Qz9A). Could You Please Tell Me If Your Total Household Income From All Sources Before Tax And Other Deductions Is Above Or Below £11,500 Per Year? Base : All respondents | GENDER | AGE GROUP | HOUSEHOLD INCOME | SOCIAL GROUP | NATION | |---------------------------|-------------|--------------------|----------------|----------| | UNDER | | | | | | FEMALE | £11.5K- | £17.5K- | ENG | | | Total | MALE | 16-24 | 25-34 | 35-54 | | SCOT | | | | | | LAND | WALES | NI | | | | Significance Level: 95% | a | b | c | d | | Unweighted total | 3474 | 1679 | 1795 | 460 | | Effective Weighted Sample | 2281 | 1110 | 1171 | 296 | | Total | 2256 | 1082 | 1174 | 327 | | Under £11,500 | 367 | 157 | 210 | 51 | | 16% | 15% | 18% | 16% | 16% | | a | e | e | cde | hij | | Above £11,500 | 1282 | 633 | 649 | 140 | | 57% | 59% | 55% | 43% | 64% | | cf | cf | g | g | g | | Don't know | 203 | 89 | 115 | 100 | | 9% | 8% | 10% | 30% | 7% | | def | k | k | | | | Refused | 404 | 203 | 201 | 36 | | 18% | 19% | 17% | 11% | 14% | | c | cde | r | r | r | Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QZ10 (QZ9A). Could you please tell me if your total household income from all sources before tax and other deductions is above or below £11,500 per year? Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Under £11,500 367 33 51 35 24 35 34 25 50 330 37 68 297 169 183 16% 12% 17% 19% 15% 18% 16% 14% 14% 17% 13% 5% 30% 12% 22% a j k m Above £11,500 1282 192 186 112 95 106 121 82 192 1126 156 898 380 835 411 57% 68% 61% 60% 58% 54% 57% 44% 54% 57% 53% 71% 39% 60% 51% defgh g g g g g g l n Don't know 203 24 27 15 12 21 31 21 19 164 39 96 107 112 85 9% 9% 9% 8% 8% 11% 15% 11% 5% 8% 13% 8% 11% 8% 10% h acdh h i k Refused 404 32 42 24 31 34 25 58 94 344 60 198 199 266 134 18% 11% 14% 13% 19% 17% 12% 31% 27% 18% 20% 16% 20% 19% 16% af abcdef abcef k Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qz11 (Qz9). Showcard Group In Which You Would Place Your Total Household Income From All Sources, Before Tax And Other Deductions? (Single Code) Base : All respondents GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Unweighted total 3474 1679 1795 460 540 1204 1270 697 383 408 596 784 1014 701 975 1983 487 493 511 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 1110 1171 296 342 813 864 445 236 273 437 524 671 466 629 1719 330 329 470 Total 2256 1082 1174 327 408 781 740 378 217 280 472 566 669 413 608 1886 197 111 62 Up to £221/ Under £11,500 378 163 215 53 64 88 172 378 - - - 25 65 48 240 297 40 25 16 17% 15% 18% 16% 16% 11% 23% 100% -% -% -% 4% 10% 12% 40% 16% 20% 23% 26% a e e cde hij k k klm o o op £222 - £336/ £11,500 - £17,499 217 107 110 20 41 68 88 - 217 - - 21 64 48 84 169 23 16 10 10% 10% 9% 6% 10% 9% 12% -% 100% -% -% 4% 10% 12% 14% 9% 11% 14% 16% ce gij k k kl o o £337 - £576/ £17,500 - £29,999 280 149 131 24 72 106 77 - - 280 - 48 98 66 67 240 18 12 10 12% 14% 11% 7% 18% 14% 10% -% -% 100% -% 9% 15% 16% 11% 13% 9% 11% 15% cf c ghj k kn p £578 - £961/ £30,000 - £49,999 316 135 180 38 66 161 51 - - - 316 122 119 61 14 281 14 13 8 14% 13% 15% 12% 16% 21% 7% -% -% -% 67% 22% 18% 15% 2% 15% 7% 12% 13% f f cf ghi mn n n p p £962 or over/ £50,000+ 156 85 71 11 34 80 32 - - - 156 119 28 10 - 147 5 3 1 7% 8% 6% 3% 8% 10% 4% -% -% -% 33% 21% 4% 2% -% 8% 3% 3% 2% cf cf ghi lmn n n pqr DK/ Refused 909 443 467 181 131 277 320 - - - - 231 295 180 203 753 96 42 17 40% 41% 40% 55% 32% 35% 43% -% -% -% -% 41% 44% 44% 33% 40% 49% 38% 28% def de n n n r oqr r Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QZ11 (QZ9). SHOWCARD Group in which you would place your total household income from all sources, before tax and other deductions? (SINGLE CODE) Base : All respondents ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Unweighted total 3474 247 249 251 240 264 240 252 240 2458 1016 1659 1799 1983 980 Effective Weighted Sample 2281 235 229 238 228 251 227 239 223 1892 443 1094 1265 1407 761 Total 2256 280 307 186 163 197 210 187 354 1964 292 1260 983 1382 812 Up to £221/ Under £11,500 378 33 52 35 26 36 38 26 50 338 40 70 305 175 187 17% 12% 17% 19% 16% 18% 18% 14% 14% 17% 14% 6% 31% 13% 23% a k m £222 - £336/ £11,500 - £17,499 217 25 19 16 13 23 15 20 37 193 24 99 117 125 82 10% 9% 6% 9% 8% 11% 7% 11% 11% 10% 8% 8% 12% 9% 10% b k £337 - £576/ £17,500 - £29,999 280 39 29 23 25 22 24 26 50 248 32 193 86 169 101 12% 14% 9% 13% 15% 11% 12% 14% 14% 13% 11% 15% 9% 12% 12% l £578 - £961/ £30,000 - £49,999 316 80 41 26 27 22 31 18 37 276 40 265 50 212 96 14% 28% 13% 14% 16% 11% 15% 9% 10% 14% 14% 21% 5% 15% 12% bcdefgh g l n £962 or over/ £50,000+ 156 26 27 19 8 16 33 2 14 137 19 126 30 123 32 7% 9% 9% 10% 5% 8% 16% 1% 4% 7% 6% 10% 3% 9% 4% gh gh dgh g g abdegh l n DK/ Refused 909 77 138 66 63 79 68 95 166 772 137 507 394 578 314 40% 28% 45% 36% 39% 40% 32% 51% 47% 39% 47% 40% 40% 42% 39% acf a a acdef acf i Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. ## Qz12 (Qzni1). Do You Regard Yourself As Belonging To Any Particular Religion? If Yes: Which Religion, Religious Denomination Or Body Do You Belong? Base : All respondents in Northern Ireland GENDER AGE GROUP HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOCIAL GROUP NATION UNDER FEMALE £11.5K- £17.5K- ENG Total MALE 16-24 25-34 35-54 55+ £11.5K £17.5K £29.9K £30K+ AB C1 C2 DE LAND SCOT LAND WALES NI Significance Level: 95% a b ~c ~d e f g ~h ~i ~j ~k l m n ~o ~p ~q r Unweighted total 511 243 268 80 98 172 161 143 82 71 71 99 135 100 177 - - - 511 Effective Weighted Sample 470 225 245 74 90 160 149 131 75 66 66 92 126 94 166 - - - 470 Total 62 30 32 10 13 21 18 16 10 10 9 11 18 14 19 - - - 62 Roman Catholic 27 12 14 ** ** 10 7 8 ** ** ** ** 7 5 11 - - - 27 43% 42% 44% ** ** 45% 40% 51% ** ** ** ** 37% 38% 57% -% -% -% 43% lm Presbyterian Church of Ireland 13 6 7 ** ** 4 4 3 ** ** ** ** 3 4 3 - - - 13 21% 22% 21% ** ** 20% 24% 19% ** ** ** ** 17% 31% 18% -% -% -% 21% ln Church of Ireland 9 4 5 ** ** 3 3 2 ** ** ** ** 3 2 2 - - - 9 14% 14% 14% ** ** 16% 18% 13% ** ** ** ** 16% 13% 13% -% -% -% 14% Methodist Church of Ireland 2 1 1 ** ** 1 * * ** ** ** ** 1 - 1 - - - 2 3% 2% 4% ** ** 3% 2% 3% ** ** ** ** 5% -% 3% -% -% -% 3% m Other Christian (including Christian related) 2 1 1 ** ** 1 * * ** ** ** ** * * * - - - 2 4% 4% 3% ** ** 3% 2% 3% ** ** ** ** 2% 3% 2% -% -% -% 4% Other religions/ philosophies 2 1 1 ** ** * 1 1 ** ** ** ** 1 * * - - - 2 4% 3% 4% ** ** 2% 3% 4% ** ** ** ** 7% 3% 2% -% -% -% 4% n No religion 5 3 2 ** ** 2 1 1 ** ** ** ** 2 1 1 - - - 5 8% 9% 7% ** ** 8% 4% 5% ** ** ** ** 13% 8% 3% -% -% -% 8% n Refused 2 1 1 ** ** * 1 * ** ** ** ** 1 * * - - - 2 3% 4% 2% ** ** 2% 5% 2% ** ** ** ** 3% 2% 2% -% -% -% 3% Columns Tested: a,b - c,d,e,f - g,h,i,j - k,l,m,n - o,p,q,r All data have been weighted to ensure they are representative of the UK adult population. Ofcom does not quota or weight by household income, so it may not be representative of the UK population, but it is included for reasons of interest. Any break column with a base size lower than 100 has been removed as margins of error become too great. Data is tested at the 95% confidence level. QZ12 (QZNI1). Do you regard yourself as belonging to any particular religion? IF YES: Which religion, religious denomination or body do you belong? Base : All respondents in Northern Ireland ENGLAND REGIONS URBANITY WORKING DEPRIVATION LEVEL SOUTH SOUTH EAST WEST EAST YORKS& MEDIUM/ Total LONDON EAST WEST MIDS MIDS OF ENG HUMBER NORTH URBAN RURAL YES NO LOW HIGH Significance Level: 95% ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e ~f ~g ~h i j k l ~m ~n Unweighted total 511 - - - - - - - - 259 252 246 263 - - Effective Weighted Sample 470 - - - - - - - - 253 246 226 244 - - Total 62 - - - - - - - - 39 23 32 30 - - Roman Catholic 27 - - - - - - - - 16 11 12 14 - - 43% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% 41% 46% 39% 46% -% -% Presbyterian Church of Ireland 13 - - - - - - - - 9 4 7 7 - - 21% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% 24% 17% 21% 22% -% -% Church of Ireland 9 - - - - - - - - 4 4 4 5 - - 14% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% 11% 19% 13% 15% -% -% i Methodist Church of Ireland 2 - - - - - - - - 2 * 1 1 - - 3% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% 4% 2% 3% 3% -% -% Other Christian (including Christian related) 2 - - - - - - - - 1 1 2 1 - - 4% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% 3% 5% 5% 2% -% -% Other religions/ philosophies 2 - - - - - - - - 2 * 1 1 - - 4% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% 5% 1% 4% 3% -% -% j No religion 5 - - - - - - - - 4 1 3 2 - - 8% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% 9% 6% 11% 5% -% -% l Refused 2 - - - - - - - - * 1 1 1 - - 3% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% -% 1% 5% 2% 3% -% -% i Columns Tested: a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h - i,j - k,l - m,n

en

3662-pdf

Director: Steven Boyes ## List Of Appeals And Determinations - 22Nd November 2016 Written Reps Procedure | Application No. | DEL/PC | |----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | DEL | Erection of 4 bed dwelling and associated garage at 2 Rectory Close | | DISMISSED | N/2014/1110 | | APP/V2825/W/16/3155828 | | | DEL | Outline planning permission for the erection of a dwelling at Land Rear of 1 Thornton | | Road | | | N/2015/1285 | | | APP/V2825/W/16/3152716 | | | DEL | Erection of 3 bed dwelling with parking spaces at 754 Obelisk Rise | | AWAITED | N/2015/1403 | | APP/V2825/W/16/3158525 | | | N/2016/0251 | | | APP/V2825/W/16/3157902 | | | DEL | Variation of condition 5 of application N/2010/532 (Change of use to restaurant and | | takeaway on ground floor and residential on first floor) to extend opening hours to | | | Sunday to Thursday 10.00 - 01.00 and Friday & Saturday 10.00 - 0200 at Freddies | | | Chicken, 99 Weedon Road | | | DEL | Change of use from dwelling house (Use Class C3) into house in multiple occupation | | for upto 4 occupants (Use Class C4) at 26 Burns Street | | | N/2016/0309 | | | APP/V2825/C/16/3152604 | | | N/2016/0540 | | | APP/V2825/W/16/3154685 | | | DEL | Change of use from offices (Use Class B1) into house in multiple occupation for 5no. | | occupants (Use Class C4) including rear dormer extension and 2no. velux roof lights at | | | 343 Wellingborough Road | | | DEL | Two storey side extension at 15 Sussex Close | | DISMISSED | N/2016/0614 | | APP/V2825/D/16/3157292 | | ## Public Inquiry N/2015/0335 APP/V2825/W/15/3138580 PC Redevelopment comprising a new distribution centre (Use Class B8) including related service roads, access and servicing arrangements, car parking, landscaping bund and associated works. Land at Milton Ham, Towcester Road Public Inquiry will commence on 29 November 2016 at the Guildhall, St Giles Square ## Hearings | | |-----| | | ## Enforcement Appeals | | |--------------------------------------| | 69 Raeburn Road | | E/2016/0129 | | APP/V2825/C/16/3152604 | | The Address for Planning Appeals is: | Mr Brian Rowe, Room 301, The Planning Inspectorate, Temple Quay House, 2 The Square, Temple Quay, Bristol BS1 6PN. Appeal decisions can be viewed at - www.planningportal.co.uk Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 Background Papers The Appeal Papers for the appeals listed Author and Contact Officer: Mrs Rita Bovey, Development Manager Telephone 01604 837237 Planning and Regeneration AWAITED AWAITED DISMISSED ALLOWED AWAITED DISMISSED

en

4280-pdf

## Scotland'S Colleges 2017 Auditor General For Scotland The Auditor General's role is to: - appoint auditors to Scotland's central government and NHS bodies - examine how public bodies spend public money - help them to manage their finances to the highest standards - check whether they achieve value for money. The Auditor General is independent and reports to the Scottish Parliament on the performance of: - directorates of the Scottish Government - government agencies, eg the Scottish Prison Service, Historic Environment Scotland - NHS bodies - further education colleges - Scottish Water - NDPBs and others, eg Scottish Police Authority, Scottish Fire and Rescue Service. You can find out more about the work of the Auditor General on our website: www.audit-scotland.gov.uk/about-us/auditor-general Audit Scotland is a statutory body set up in April 2000 under the Public Finance and Accountability (Scotland) Act 2000. We help the Auditor General for Scotland and the Accounts Commission check that organisations spending public money use it properly, efficiently and effectively. ## Contents Key facts 4 Summary 5 Part 1. College performance 8 Part 2. College finances 16 Endnotes 29 Appendix 1. Audit methodology 32 Appendix 2. Scotland's college landscape 2017 34 ## Key Facts Summary Key Messages 1 The college sector has continued to exceed the national target for learning but delivered slightly less activity than in 2014-15. Two regions failed to meet their target resulting in a reduction in funding for one college. The Highlands and Islands region met its overall target but two colleges within the region failed to meet their targets. The Scottish Government currently prioritises full-time courses for younger learners, and changes in demography and in school leaver destinations will make it harder for the sector to continue to achieve the national target. 2 Student numbers decreased slightly in 2015-16 and FTE is at its lowest since 2006-07. Both full-time and part-time student numbers fell in 2015-16, with the latter decreasing at a greater rate. Most of the reductions in 2015-16 were in the 16-24 years old age group. Overall demand for college places is still not recorded at a national level, so it is not possible to say whether the decreases reflect a fall in demand. 3 Student attainment improved in 2015-16. The overall percentage of full-time further education students successfully completing their course increased in 2015-16 (from 64 to 65 per cent). Most full-time students continue to be satisfied with their college experience. At least 83 per cent of students who achieve a qualification go on to a positive destination, such as further study, training or employment. 4 The financial health of the college sector remains relatively stable but has deteriorated since 2014-15. The underlying deficit has increased to £8 million (representing one per cent of income) and colleges hold £11 million less cash than in 2014-15. Four colleges face particular challenges to their financial sustainability. Staff costs remain the highest area of expenditure and have increased as a percentage of total spending. The number of people employed by colleges has increased by six per cent over the last two years. 5 Total Scottish Government funding to the college sector will increase by five per cent between 2015/16 and 2017/18, though the bulk of this increase relates to a capital project at a single college. Funding for running costs will increase by one per cent, but colleges face a number of financial challenges. In particular, in June 2016, Colleges Scotland estimated that implementing national bargaining could cost around £80 million (not adjusting for inflation) over three years. The sector has still to develop longer-term financial planning in order to support financial decision-making that takes account of both immediate and future cost pressures. the college sector continued to exceed targets for learning but faces financial challenges ## Recommendations The Scottish Government and the SFC should: - model how changes in demography and school leaver destinations affect the ability of colleges to continue to meet the national learning activity target - complete the national estate condition survey and use this as a basis to prioritise future capital investment - work with colleges to assess demand for college courses across Scotland, in accordance with our recommendation last year, in order to plan future education provision. The SFC should conclude its work to: - specify the adjustments that should be made to the financial position reported in college accounts, taking account of the approach we have used in this report, in order to reach an 'underlying financial position' that reflects the immediate financial health of each college - require each college to include, within its accounts, the underlying financial position - specify the common assumptions to be used by colleges when developing longer-term financial plans. Colleges should: - prepare longer-term financial plans, as we recommended last year, in order to support financial decision-making that takes account of both immediate and future cost pressures - calculate the cost of harmonising staff pay, terms and conditions and include these in their financial plans. ## About The Audit 2 1. This report is the latest in a series that provides an overview of the college sector in Scotland. It gives an update on college finances and an analysis of learning activity. We have set out our methodology in Appendix 1. Our previous reports have commented on the various changes which have taken place in the sector in recent years including regionalisation, college mergers and reclassification of colleges as public bodies. 1, 2. Scotland's colleges play an important role in helping to achieve sustainable economic growth by contributing to the development of a highly educated and skilled workforce. In 2015-16, there were 220,680 students at incorporated colleges. They are the main providers of further education (FE) in Scotland, and also provide a significant amount of higher education (HE), with around 47,000 students studying at HE level at college in 2015-16. The college sector in Scotland comprises 20 incorporated colleges and six non-incorporated colleges organised into 13 college regions (Appendix 2). 3 Ten of these regions consist of one college. College boards in these regions have been designated as regional college boards. The three remaining regions (Glasgow, Highlands and Islands, and Lanarkshire) consist of more than one college. The individual colleges in these regions are assigned to a regional body. The regional bodies for the three multicollege regions are: - Glasgow Colleges' Regional Board (GCRB) 4 - The Lanarkshire Board - University of the Highlands and Islands (UHI). 3. UHI delivers its education through the various colleges within the Highlands and Islands region. Thus any higher education provided by a college is on behalf of UHI. Any further education delivered by a college is on behalf of the region. This differs from colleges elsewhere which deliver a mixture of further and higher education on behalf of the region. The participation data included in this report does not include information about students studying higher education through UHI. 4. Colleges prepare their accounts based on the academic year (1 August to 31 July). This differs from the Scottish Government's financial year which runs from 1 April to 31 March. We use the convention '2015-16' when referring to figures from colleges' accounts, or relating to the academic year; and '2015/16' when referring to funding allocations made in the Scottish Government's financial year. 5. A revised Statement of Recommended Practice (SORP) introduced in 2015-16 resulted in changes in how colleges prepare their accounts. SORPs are sectordriven recommendations on accounting and related practices as approved by the Financial Reporting Council (FRC), the UK body responsible for promoting corporate governance and reporting. The figures for the previous year are normally included in accounts to help make comparisons. As the revised SORP required colleges to restate the prior-year financial figures, the 2014-15 financial figures included in the 2015-16 accounts may differ from those included in the 2014-15 accounts. We have used the 2014-15 financial figures as presented in the 2015-16 accounts in this report. 5 6. Unless we state otherwise, all financial figures in the body of this report are in real terms, that is, adjusting for inflation. The base year for this report is 2015-16 and GDP deflators from December 2016 have been used to calculate the realterms figures for other years. ## Part 1 College Performance Key Messages 1 The college sector has continued to exceed the national target for learning but delivered slightly less activity than in 2014-15. Two regions failed to meet their target resulting in a reduction in funding for one college. The Highlands and Islands region met its overall target but two colleges within the region failed to meet their targets. The Scottish Government currently prioritises full-time courses for younger learners and changes in demography and in school leaver destinations will make it harder for the sector to continue to achieve the national target. 2 Student numbers decreased slightly in 2015-16 and FTE is at its lowest since 2006-07. Both full-time and part-time student numbers fell in 2015-16, with the latter decreasing at a greater rate. Most of the reductions have been in the 16-24 years age group. Overall demand for college places is still not recorded at a national level, so it is not possible to say whether the decreases reflect a fall in demand. 3 The overall percentage of full-time further education students successfully completing their course increased in 2015-16 (from 64 to 65 per cent). Most full-time students continue to be satisfied with their college experience. At least 83 per cent of students who achieve a qualification go on to a positive destination, such as further study, training or employment. ## The College Sector Has Continued To Exceed The National Target For Learning Activity In 2015-16 But Delivered Slightly Less Activity Than In 2014-15 7. The volume of learning which colleges deliver can be measured in full-time equivalent (FTE) student places, or in units of learning known as credits. Each credit broadly equates to 40 hours of learning. Since 2012-13, the Scottish Government has set a national target for the college sector (including nonincorporated colleges) to deliver 116,269 FTE student places. The SFC set an equivalent target for 2014-15 and 2015-16 of 1,689,431 credits. 6 The college sector exceeded this target and delivered 1,752,536 credits in 2015-16. This compares to 1,755,601 credits the previous year, a reduction of 0.17 per cent (Exhibit 1, page 9). The sector has exceeded the national target in every year since it was introduced. colleges have exceeded the national target for learning but this will become harder because of demographic and other changes The population is in decline while activity targets remain relatively static. 8. In order to meet the national target, the SFC agrees credit targets with each of the 13 college regions. In multi-college regions, the regional body agrees the credit targets for the assigned colleges. Two regions (Edinburgh, and Dumfries and Galloway) did not meet their targets in 2015-16. The SFC subsequently reduced funding to Dumfries and Galloway for 2016-17, but allowed Edinburgh to retain funding because it was facing significant financial challenges. The Auditor General for Scotland published statutory reports on Edinburgh College in 2016 and 2017. More details are presented in Exhibit 7 (page 19). 9. Within the Highlands and Islands region, two colleges (Lews Castle and North Highland) delivered less FE activity than they had agreed with their regional body (UHI). Lews Castle College under-delivered by 20 per cent and North Highland College by three per cent. Due to other colleges in the region exceeding their targets, the region overall met its target and so the SFC did not seek to recover funding. UHI did not seek to recover funding from either Lews Castle College or North Highland College. The Auditor General for Scotland published a statutory report on Lews Castle College in 2017. More details are presented in (Exhibit 7). ## Changes In Demography And In School Leaver Destinations Will Make It Harder For The Sector To Continue To Achieve The National Target 10. The Scottish Government's national target for the college sector has remained constant over the last four years, with a continued focus on full-time and younger learners. This has resulted in reductions in student numbers, with reductions being more pronounced for part-time and older learners. Our analysis of activity and student population in the following sections focuses on the period from the year immediately before the national target was introduced (2011-12) to the most recent year (2015-16). 11. The Office for National Statistics' (ONS) Labour Market Statistics indicate that the number of young people (aged 16 to 19) in Scotland is reducing Exhibit 1 (page 9). 7 Data is not readily comparable across all school leaver destinations, but Scottish Government data shows that more young people are going into work. 8 Data from the SFC also shows that the number of Scottishbased people aged under 21 entering university has increased by seven per cent between 2011-12 and 2015-16, while the number of people aged under 20 entering college has decreased by four per cent. These factors are likely to make continued achievement of the national target for the college sector more difficult. ## Student Numbers Decreased Slightly In 2015-16 And Fte Is At Its Lowest Since 2006-07 12. In 2015-16, there were 220,680 students (by headcount) studying at incorporated colleges in Scotland. 9, 10 Over the long term, student numbers have been decreasing (Exhibit 2). Decreases in the last four years have been smaller than the preceding years (2007-08 to 2010-11). The number of students at incorporated colleges decreased slightly in 2015-16, by around a half of one per cent. When measured by FTE, the student population is more stable, but decreased by around two per cent in 2015-16 - this is its lowest level since 2006-07. When those studying courses at other institutions (Scotland's Rural College (SRUC) and nonincorporated colleges) are included and when students with multiple enrolments at different colleges are removed, from the figures, there was a small increase in headcount in 2015-16. This is largely due to increases at SRUC, which is a higher education institution but counts towards the achievement of the national target for colleges. Even with the inclusion of figures for these institutions there is still a drop in FTEs since 2014-15. The college student population continued to fall in 2015-16. 13. As overall demand for college places is not recorded at national level, it is not possible to say whether the decreases reflect a fall in demand. In our report last year we recommended that the SFC should explore with colleges a way to better assess demand for college courses across Scotland. 11 This would allow the SFC to identify levels of unmet demand and to assess the effect of future changes in policy or in the wider environment, such as university admissions and employment levels. The Scottish Government has commenced a project to evaluate the cost and benefits of a common application process for colleges in response to our recommendation. 14. Both full-time and part-time student numbers have decreased from 2014-15 to 2015-16. The number of full-time students has decreased by three per cent (2,266) since 2011-12, and has decreased by one per cent between 2014-15 and 2015-16. Part-time student numbers have decreased by 18 per cent (32,562) since 2011-12, and by eight per cent since 2014-15. These changes reflect Scottish Government policies to prioritise full-time courses for younger learners leading to recognised qualifications. 15. The number of students aged between 16 and 24 years old fell by three per cent in 2015-16. The number of under-16, part-time learners increased by 18 per cent (Exhibit 3). The SFC reports that the Developing Young Workforce programme has resulted in more school age children attending courses at college, for example construction and hairdressing. 12 However, the number of part-time students aged 18-19 years old decreased by 28 per cent since 2014-15. The population for this group in 2014-15 was a high point and the reduction is less when comparing over a number of years. The SFC was unable to provide specific reasons for the reduction but referred to younger people leaving school with more qualifications and improved employment prospects as being significant factors. ## Exhibit 3 Analysis Of Student Numbers By Age, 2015-16 The Number Of Students Aged Under 16 Increased In 2015-16 But The Number Of Students Aged 16-24 Decreased. | Student age | Full-time | |---------------|--------------| | students | | | Part-time | | | students | | | Number of | | | students | | | 2015-16 | | | Change | | | from | | | 2014-15 | | | Under 16 | 423 | | 16-17 | 12,850 | | 18-19 | 26,552 | | 20-24 | 18,325 | | Over 25 | 19,182 | | Total | 77,332 | Note: The total number of students reflected here differs from the total in Exhibit 2 as part-time students can undertake multiple courses at one or more colleges. Source: SFC Infact database Number of students 2015-16 Change from 2014-15 16. Forty-two per cent of students are aged 25 and over, consistent with 2014-15. The number of full-time students aged 25 and over increased by three per cent in 2015-16 while the number of part-time students aged 25 and over decreased by six per cent. There was a smaller overall decrease in the number of older parttime learners than in those aged between 16 and 24 years. ## There Are Still Some Courses With Significant Gender Imbalances 17. The overall gender balance of the student population remains broadly even, with females representing 51 per cent and males 49 per cent in 2015-16. Fulltime female students decreased by almost three per cent, while full-time male students remained static in 2015-16. Since 2011-12, full-time male students have decreased by four per cent and full-time female students have decreased by two per cent. 18. The reduction in part-time female students in 2015-16 was slightly more than for males, though both fell by over eight per cent. Female part-time students have reduced by 21 per cent since 2011-12. Male part-time students have decreased by 14 per cent over the same period. 19. Key performance indicators in the SFC's gender action plan (published in 2016) are to: - increase the minority gender share in the most unbalanced subjects (by five percentage points) by 2021 - have no subjects with more than 75 per cent of students being from one gender by 2030. 20. The overall gender split remained static between 2014-15 and 2015-16. There have been some improvements in male-dominated subjects (engineering and transport). Gender imbalance has, however, increased in some female-dominated subjects (social work and health) (Exhibit 4, page 13). Addressing this issue will take a number of years and will require joint working between schools, colleges, Skills Development Scotland (SDS), the SFC and employers. 21. The SFC has created a Gender Governance Group made up of representatives from partner organisations including the Scottish Government, Education Scotland, SDS, National Union of Students Scotland, College Development Network and representatives from both college and university sectors. A report to this group in December 2016 noted that all college regional outcome agreements for 2016-17 included some activities focused on addressing gender imbalances, compared to 2015-16 where some made no reference to the issue. The SFC has asked each college to produce institutional plans by July 2017. These plans should set out the steps the college is taking to implement the relevant aspects of the SFC's Gender Action Plan. The most male-dominated subjects have improved slightly, but in two femaledominated subjects, the imbalance has increased. | Subject | Male | |--------------|---------| | students in | | | 2015-16 | | | % | | | Female | | | students in | | | 2015-16 | | | % | | | Percentage | | | point change | | | in minority | | | gender from | | | 2014-15 | | | Engineering | | | 84.7 | 15.3 | | 1.6 | | | Transport | | | 92.3 | 7.7 | | 0.9 | | | Health | | | 22.1 | 77.9 | | -3.0 | | | Social Work | | | 12.9 | 87.1 | | -1.2 | | Source: SFC Infact database ## The Percentage Of Students From Ethnic Minority Backgrounds Has Remained Static In Recent Years 22. The number of students from an ethnic minority background increased from 13,563 in 2011-12 to 13,618 in 2015-16. The percentage of ethnic minority students has remained at six per cent of the total student population over this period. ## An Increasing Percentage Of Students Are From Deprived Backgrounds 23. While there has been an overall drop in student numbers since 2011-12, the number of students from the 15% most deprived SIMD areas has increased from 47,783 in 2011-12 to 48,475 in 2015-16 (1 per cent). 13 The percentage of students from these areas increased to almost 22 per cent of the total student population and it is at its highest percentage since 2006-07. ## Student Attainment Improved Between 2014-15 And 2015-16 24. Attainment rates measure how many students successfully completed their course and gained the appropriate qualification. The rates improved for all HE students and full-time FE students in colleges in 2015-16. The percentage of full-time FE students successfully completing their course decreased from 66 to 64 per cent in 2014-15, but increased to 65 per cent in 2015-16. HE attainment remained static between 2013-14 and 2014-15 but improved for both full-time students (from 71 to 72 per cent) and part-time students (78 to 79 per cent) in 2015-16. The picture is different for part-time FE students, where attainment decreased (for the second year in a row) by two percentage points to 73 per cent. ## Retention Rates Remain Lower For Full-Time Students Than Those Attending Part-Time 25. Retention rates measure the percentage of students who complete their course. The rates for all categories of student (apart from HE full-time) decreased slightly in 2015-16. The overall rates are: - FE full-time: 74 per cent (a decrease of 0.2 per cent since 2014-15) - FE part-time: 90 per cent (a decrease of 1.4 per cent since 2014-15) - HE full-time: 82 per cent (an increase of 0.1 per cent since 2014-15) - HE part-time: 91 per cent (a decrease of 1.2 per cent since 2014-15) While the SFC has not been able to explain the reasons for these reductions, it suggested that efforts to target harder to reach students and the numbers leaving for employment explained the lower retention rates for full-time students (both FE and HE). 14 26. In March 2017, the Minister for Further Education, Higher Education and Science outlined the development of a new improvement project designed to raise attainment and improve retention rates in Scotland's colleges. ## The Sfc'S Survey Indicates That Most Full-Time Students Continue To Be Satisfied With Their College Experience 27. The SFC undertook a second student satisfaction survey in 2016. This was the first time the SFC surveyed all colleges and modes of study (ie, full time, part-time and distance/flexible), and achieved an overall response rate of 26 per cent, with response rates at individual colleges ranging from under five per cent to 75 per cent. 16 15 There was a good level of response from full-time students from which to draw conclusions. While there are some colleges with high response rates from part-time and distance/flexible students, there was some significant variation. Five colleges did not survey students on distance/flexible courses, but one of these (Perth College) has surveyed these students in 2016-17. 28. Satisfaction ratings are based on the number of students who 'agree' or 'strongly agree' to questions. The overall satisfaction ratings were: - 90 per cent for full-time students (response rate of 37 per cent; 25,981 students) - 93 per cent for part-time students (response rate of 11 per cent; 5,138 students) - 88 per cent for distance/flexible students (response rate of four per cent; 354 students). 29. In terms of full-time students, most questions within the survey elicited a satisfaction response of 80 per cent and above. Responses relating to survey questions about whether student suggestions were taken seriously and the ability of student associations to influence change for the better received the lowest satisfaction ratings (74 and 59 per cent respectively). ## At Least 83 Per Cent Of College Students Who Achieve A Qualification Go On To A Positive Destination 30. The SFC published its second report on destinations for college students in September 2016. This looked at students who gained a qualification in 2014-15. 17 This does not solely represent college leavers, as students can gain a qualification and then go on to another college course. It excludes students who do not pursue a formal qualification and those who do not complete their course. It noted that: - 69 per cent of qualifiers went on to education or training (2013-14, 65 per cent) - 14 per cent went into employment (2013-14, 17 per cent) - four per cent were either unemployed or unable to work (2013-14, four per cent) - the destinations of the remaining 13 per cent were unknown (2013-14, 14 per cent) The number of people that colleges prepare to join the workforce has an impact on how successfully the Scottish Government achieves its economic strategy. 31. As this is only the second such survey to have been carried out by the SFC, the quality of the data is still improving. Last year we recommended that the SFC should publish leaver destination at national, regional and college levels. 18 The report published in September 2016 did so. 19 The next report is due out in September 2017 and will focus on college students who gained a qualification in 2015-16. ## Part 2 College Finances Key Messages 1 The financial health of the college sector remains relatively stable but has deteriorated since 2014-15. The underlying deficit has increased to £8 million (representing one per cent of income) and colleges hold £11 million less cash than in 2014-15. Four colleges face particular challenges to their financial sustainability. 2 Staff costs remain the highest area of expenditure and have increased as a percentage of total spending. The number of people employed by colleges has increased by six per cent over the last two years. 3 Total Scottish Government funding to the college sector will increase by five per cent between 2015/16 and 2017/18, though the bulk of this increase relates to a capital project at a single college. Funding for running costs will increase by one per cent, but colleges still face a number of financial challenges. In particular, in June 2016, Colleges Scotland estimated that implementing national bargaining could cost around £80 million (not adjusting for inflation) over three years. 4 The SFC is coordinating a national estates condition survey to inform the preparation of a sector capital plan. The sector has still to develop longer-term financial planning to support financial decision-making that takes account of both immediate and future cost pressures. ## The Financial Health Of The Sector Remains Relatively Stable But Has Deteriorated Since 2014-15 college finances have deteriorated - funding will increase in 2017-18 but implementing national bargaining is likely to involve significant costs 32. The sector reported an overall deficit of £19 million in colleges' 2015-16 audited accounts. After adjustments are taken into account (outlined in Appendix 1, and in line with adjustments made in last year's report), the underlying deficit is £8 million. This represents one per cent of total income (£655 million), and is a deterioration from the underlying deficit of £1 million in 2014-15 (Exhibit 5, page 17). Eleven colleges had an underlying deficit in 2015-16, compared to 9 in 2014-15. ## Exhibit 5 College Sector Financial Results The Underlying Financial Position Has Deteriorated Since 2014-15. | Reported surplus/(deficit) | (10) | (19) | |----------------------------------------------|--------|--------| | Asset revaluation reductions | 5 | 4 | | Pension adjustments | 14 | 12 | | Donations to arm's-length foundations (ALFs) | 7 | 0 | | Net Depreciation cash spending | | | | 2 | | | | | 6 | 9 | | Non-Government capital grant | (23) | (14) | | Underlying surplus/(deficit) | (1) | (8) | Notes: 1. The 2014-15 position differs from the £3 million deficit we presented in 2016 as all colleges have now adopted an accounting adjustment in respect of employees' untaken leave at the year-end, where previously only some colleges had adopted this. 2. T he 2015-16 net depreciation cash adjustment figure is based on figures presented in the 2015-16 college accounts and returns provided by colleges to the SFC. The 2014-15 figure is based on an analysis performed by the SFC in 2016 with some further adjustments as advised by colleges. Source: 2015-16 audited college accounts; Governance and financial health of the college sector: Analysis of 2014-15 financial statements, SFC, March 2016 33. An organisation's balance sheet indicates its overall financial health. It reports the value of assets held by an organisation, including properties and equipment. It also reports the value of financial obligations which an organisation is required to meet. These include any amounts owed at the balance sheet date for buying goods and supplies and any outstanding loans. Comparing these two figures provides the 'net assets' position. In situations where an organisation's financial obligations outweigh its assets, this results in a 'net liabilities' position. This measure can be used as an indicator of the college sector's financial health (Exhibit 6). However, net assets include some items which do not reflect actions taken by colleges and are outside their immediate control, such as pension liabilities. The impact of the new SORP on the net asset position is covered in Appendix 1. ## Exhibit 6 College Sector Net Assets Position The Net Assets Position Deteriorated In 2015-16. | 2013-14 | | |--------------------------|-----| | (£m) | | | 2014-15 | | | (£m) | | | 2015-16 | | | (£m) | | | Sector net assets | 261 | | Number of colleges in a | | | net liabilities position | | | 3 | 3 | | 5 | | Note: 2012-13 figures have not been recalculated under the new SORP so are not available on a consistent basis with figures from later years and have not been included in the table. Source: 2015-16 audited college accounts 2014-15 1 (£m) 2015-16 (£m) 34. The reasons for the movements were: • an increase in the value of fixed assets (due to new properties at City of Glasgow and Inverness colleges) • an increase in longer-term financial obligations (due to the financing for new properties at City of Glasgow and Inverness colleges and increases in pension obligations) • a decrease in current assets (due to a reduction in the amount of cash held). 35. The amount of cash held by colleges has decreased since colleges were reclassified as public bodies in 2014, and reduced by £11 million in 2015-16 (from £55 million to £44 million). This is included within current assets in college balance sheets. The SFC's financial memorandum sets out the terms and conditions with which colleges must comply. 20 It recommends that colleges maintain cash balances at a minimum, consistent with the level of funds required to meet any relevant liabilities. A target amount is not specified. Four colleges have maintained cash reserves specifically to pay off outstanding loans and other financial commitments. Balances for these colleges are therefore expected to reduce year on year. These repayments in 2015-16 were £2 million. The reduction in cash balances (over and above these repayments) has contributed to the reduction in the net assets position in the balance sheet. Two colleges (Moray College and New College Lanarkshire) have also experienced problems in their management of cash, as described in Exhibit 7 (page 19) and Exhibit 8 (page 20). ## Four Colleges Face Particular Challenges To Their Financial Sustainability 36. The Auditor General for Scotland has the power to prepare a statutory report (under section 22 of the Public Finance and Accountability (Scotland) Act 2000) to draw to the Scottish Parliament's and the public's attention matters of concern arising from an audit of accounts. The Auditor General prepared three such reports based on the 2015-16 accounts of Edinburgh College, Lews Castle College and Moray College (Exhibit 7, page 19). ## Exhibit 7 Three Colleges With Financial Challenges In 2015-16 The Auditor General For Scotland Prepared Statutory Reports On Edinburgh College In 2016 And 2017, And On Moray College And Lews Castle College In 2017. | College | |------------------------------------------------------------| | Edinburgh College | | The college reported deficits in 2014-15 and 2015- | | 16. A decision by the SFC to recover funding from | | the college for under-delivering activity in 2014-15 | | led to the college identifying underlying problems | | with student recruitment and with its curriculum. The | | college is implementing a business transformation | | plan, with significant financial support from the | | SFC. The college anticipates continued financial | | challenges until 2018-19, when it expects to return to | | a surplus position. | | Lews Castle | | College | | The college has persistently under-delivered against | | its FE activity target over a long period (at least eight | | years). The level of under-delivery has increased | | significantly over the last four years, and it delivered | | only 80 per cent of its FE target in 2015-16. While | | the college is not in immediate financial difficulty, | | continued under-delivery could result in financial | | penalties, a reduction in funding, or both of these. It is | | working with UHI and the SFC to implement changes | | to its operating model. The college and UHI have also | | agreed a reduced activity target for 2017-18. | | Moray College | | The college required an advance of funding from UHI | | to meet short-term obligations in 2015-16. This was the | | second year the college had required such an advance. | | The college had problems with financial management | | and planning, and the auditor concluded that | | fundamental changes were required for the college to | | achieve financial balance. The college has developed a | | recovery plan and is working with UHI and the SFC to | | implement the plan. | Source: Annual audit reports and 2015-16 audited college accounts 37. In addition, New College Lanarkshire has experienced difficulties during 2016-17 (Exhibit 8, page 20). 1 Exhibit 8 New College Lanarkshire has requested support from the SFC during 2016-17. ## Description Of Issue In its financial statements for the year ending 31 July 2016, the college reported a deficit of £1.953 million (equivalent to around four per cent of total income). In the performance report that accompanied the accounts, the college made adjustments for non-cash items that reduced the deficit to £52,000. However, the college was aware that its underlying position was a deficit of around £2.1 million (consistent with our analysis). In the annual audit report for 2015- 16, the auditor highlighted that the college's cash balances would be under significant pressure going forward. During 2015-2016, the college had faced cash flow pressures and had taken steps to mitigate these by adjusting timescales for payments for debtors and creditors. However, the steps taken by the college did not address underlying cash flow problems. The college was in discussion with the SFC about its financial position from July 2016 and cash flow forecasts provided to the SFC from September 2016 indicated that the college would have a significant cash shortfall by March 2017. In December 2016, the cash shortfall at March 2017 was estimated to be £2.118 million. The college attributes the cash shortfall to a combination of lower than expected levels of fee income and higher than expected costs associated with national bargaining, pensions and national insurance contributions. In March 2017, the SFC agreed to provide an advance of £2 million of the college's remaining 2016-17 allocation, on the condition that the college develop a plan to address known cost pressures. At the time of this report, the college is working with the SFC to agree the plan, which is expected to cover a five-year period. Source: Audit Scotland, New College Lanarkshire and the SFC ## The Sfc Remains The Largest Source Of Funding For Colleges 38. We compared college income and expenditure figures for 2015-16 to 2012-13 (Appendix 1). Overall income to colleges has reduced by £25 million (four per cent) since 2012-13 (Exhibit 9, page 21). The SFC remains the largest source of funding to the sector, at 73 per cent of total income. This percentage has not changed since 2012-13 although the amount of SFC funding has reduced by £15 million. SFC funding varies from 58 per cent at Perth College to 83 per cent at Ayrshire College. Colleges which earn more income from other sources have a lower percentage of their income from the SFC. The income can be derived from courses which attract funding from employers. The Student Awards Agency Scotland (SAAS) also provides funding for HE courses. When this is included, 79 per cent of college income in 2015-16 was from Scottish Government sources compared to 78 per cent in 2012-13. 39. The reduction in SFC funding has occurred at the same time as the college sector's other sources of income - including tuition fees, education contracts and donations and investment - have decreased. The combined reductions mean the college sector is working with less funding and less flexibility. ## Exhibit 9 Analysis Of Income To Colleges The Level Of Income To Colleges Has Reduced By Four Per Cent In Real Terms. | Type of income | 2012-13 | 2015-16 | | |----------------------------|------------|------------|------| | (£m) | (£m) | (£m) | | | SFC income | 496 | 481 | (15) | | Tuition fees and contracts | 119 | 117 | (2) | | Donations, endowments and | | | | | 3 | 1 | (2) | | | investment income | | | | | Other income | 62 | 56 | (6) | | Total income | 680 | 655 | (25) | Note: Colleges received £38 million of funding from SAAS in 2015-16 (£36 million in 2012-13). This income is included in Tuition fees and contracts. Source: 2012-13 and 2015-16 audited college accounts ## Staff Costs Continue To Be Colleges' Largest Area Of Spending 40. Colleges' total spending has decreased by £9 million (one per cent of total spending) since 2012-13 (Exhibit 10, page 22). This is due in part to a £19 million reduction in exceptional costs (£18 million of which related to staff severance). Colleges also reduced depreciation costs by £2 million and other operating expenditure (relating to items such as maintaining college properties and paying for utilities) by £17 million. These reductions have been offset by increases in staff costs (paragraph 41) and interest payments. The latter having increased by £5 million due to non-profit distributing (NPD) building projects at two colleges (City of Glasgow and Inverness). 21 41. Staff costs continue to be the largest area of spending for colleges and have increased by £24 million since 2012-13. Staff costs have increased from 62 per cent of total spending in 2014-15 to 64 per cent in 2015-16. This figure is not separately identified in accounts but colleges estimated additional costs of £6 million in 2015-16 as a result of increases in pensions and national insurance contributions. Other parts of the public sector have also seen increases in staff costs due to these changes. A further £7 million is due to accounting adjustments relating to pension obligations, and £1 million due to the introduction of an accounting adjustment for untaken annual leave at the end of the year. The remaining £10 million increase in staff costs is likely to be due (at least in part) to the increase in the number of people employed by colleges. Pay awards could also be a factor. Exhibit 10 Analysis of college spending since 2012-13 Spending has decreased by £9 million since 2012-13. Type of spending 2012-13 2015-16 Difference (£m) (£m) (£m) Staff costs 409 433 24 Exceptional staff costs 25 7 (18) Other exceptional costs 2 1 (1) Other operating spending 183 166 (17) Depreciation 49 47 (2) Interest payable 4 9 5 Total spending 672 663 (9) Source: 2012-13 and 2015-16 audited college accounts ## The Number Of People Employed By Colleges Has Increased By Six Per Cent Over The Last Two Years 42. In 2011-12, before the Scottish Government's reform programme, colleges employed 11,290 staff (FTE) (Exhibit 11, page 23). This fell to 10,238 in 2013-14 (a reduction of nine per cent), and increased to 10,898 by 2015-16 (an increase of six per cent since 2013-14), despite the large number of departures associated with the Scottish Government's reform programme and the associated mergers. The number of non-teaching staff has increased by 343 (nine per cent) since 2013-14. Colleges with the most significant increases told us that the main reasons are services being brought in-house, curriculum changes and employing more apprentices. 43. Teaching staff numbers have risen by 317 (five per cent) since 2013-14. From discussion with colleges, the main reasons for the increases are increasing credits targets for expanding colleges (including European funded places) and changes in curriculum or service delivery. An element of the increase is also due to changes in prior-year figures. This was caused by a combination of an eight-month accounting period and the merging of different information systems. 44. In 2016, we recommended that colleges should implement a more systematic approach to workforce planning. 23 Colleges Scotland is leading work on behalf of the sector called 'Workforce for the future'. This aims to create a 'fit for purpose, cost effective and professional workforce to meet the needs of the college sector in the future'. 24, 25 The sector intends to use the agreed 'Workforce for the future' vision as the basis for future workforce plans. 22 ## Exhibit 11 Staff Levels In Incorporated Colleges From 2011-12 To 2015-16 Staff Numbers Decreased Following The Programme Of Mergers In 2012-13 But Have Been Increasing For Both Teaching And Non-Teaching Staff Since 2013-14. Scottish Government Funding To The Sector Will Increase In 2017/18 45. The Scottish Government announced the budget for 2017/18 in December 2016. The Scottish Government's allocation to the sector had decreased between 2009/10 and 2014/15. The allocation increased slightly in 2015/16 to £557 million, and again in 2016/17 to £577 million. In its December 2016 budget the Scottish Government indicated that it will provide a total of £582 million for colleges in 2017/18, a rise of five per cent from 2015/16 (Exhibit 12, page 24). 46. The Scottish Government funding allocation to the sector is in two distinct parts. The larger part (95 per cent in 2015/16) is called revenue funding and is used to fund running costs such as paying staff and buying goods and services. The sector is due to receive an increase in revenue funding of £5 million (one per cent) in 2017/18. The Scottish Government's draft budget announcement for 2017/18 stated that this increase is 'to ensure that colleges continue to add value to the economy and offer opportunities to adults of all ages.' 26 It also stated a commitment for the sector to continue to provide 116,000 FTE college places. 47. The second part is capital funding, which is used to buy or build new assets and enhance existing ones. This is due to rise by £21 million, £19 million of which (90 per cent) is for a single project at Forth Valley College. ## Exhibit 12 Scottish Government Funding To The College Sector The Scottish Government Has Confirmed A One Per Cent Rise In Revenue Grant Funding (In Real Terms) For 2017/18. Notes: 1. T he above allocations do not include additional amounts provided to the college sector to support NPD unitary charges. These were: 2015/16 - £6m; 2016/17 - £24m; 2017/18 - £28m (all in real terms). 2. S ince 2014/15 the Scottish Government has made in-year adjustments to transfer an element of the capital allocation to revenue. These were: 2014/15 - £12m; 2015/16 - £10m; 2016/17 - £17m (all in real terms). We have not incorporated these changes in the exhibit. Source: Scottish Government draft budgets and budget revisions (2014/15 to 2017/18) 48. The SFC splits the Scottish Government revenue allocation into separate elements before distributing it to colleges in academic years (August to July). In multi-college regions, the regional body is expected to carry out this role. The regional bodies were established in 2014, but in 2015-16 only UHI was able to distribute funding. UHI has continued to distribute funds to colleges in the region on the same basis as previously used by the SFC. The Lanarkshire Board has been able to fulfil this role since August 2016 and GCRB since April 2017. 49. The main element of a college's funding is the teaching grant. This is used to provide FE and HE learning. The SFC allocation for 2017-18 is £404 million. This is an increase of £10 million (2.5 per cent) compared with 2015-16. All colleges and college regions will receive an increase of two per cent, with seven receiving a further increase in the transition to the new funding model (paragraphs 55–57). 27 All regions, apart from the Highlands and Islands, will receive a share of £1.6 million of funding specifically for running childcare courses. The Glasgow region will also receive funding of £0.2 million to implement the Glasgow Curriculum and Estates Review. ## The College Sector Continues To Face A Number Of Significant Financial Challenges 50. The college sector faces several financial challenges, as described in the following paragraphs. National bargaining 51. Negotiations on pay and conditions for college staff are now conducted at a sector level, with a negotiating committee structure comprised of sector and trades union representatives. Prior to this, negotiations took place at each college, which resulted in differences in rates of pay and in terms and conditions. Negotiations cover annual pay increases and harmonisation of pay and conditions. Annual pay increases for 2015-16 and 2016-17 were agreed separately for both lecturing and support staff in 2015 and 2016. 52. Harmonising pay and conditions has been difficult. While negotiations are underway, details have still to be agreed and differences between the parties have already led to some employees taking industrial action. In Colleges Scotland's June 2016 spending review submission to the Scottish Government, it estimated the cost of implementing national bargaining to be £79.5 million (not adjusting for inflation) over a three year period. Following the latest rounds of negotiation, both the Scottish Government and the SFC have been working with Colleges Scotland to produce a final estimate of the cost of implementing national bargaining and this will be considered as part of the spending review process. Student support funding 53. Colleges receive a separate allocation for student support funding to pay for things such as bursaries, childcare and discretionary funds (discretionary funds replaced hardship funds from 2007-08). College accounts report that £101 million was paid out in student support payments in 2015-16. In 2014-15 the figure was higher (£130 million) but this mainly reflected the 16-month accounting period. In 2014-15, the Scottish Government authorised colleges to use depreciation funding to meet any shortfall in student support funding (paragraphs 65–67). In 2015-16, colleges were again authorised to spend depreciation funding on student support. The 2015-16 accounts report that £1 million of depreciation funding was spent on student support. It is not possible to draw an equivalent figure for 2014-15 as some colleges did not include this detail in their accounts. The Scottish Government has commissioned a review of student support funding, which is due to report its findings in autumn 2017. European funding 54. The Ministerial letter of guidance from October 2013 requested that the SFC should, in collaboration with SDS and colleges, 'maximise funding available through the 2014-20 European Funding programme'. 28 In response, the SFC has administered several programmes such as the Youth Employment Initiative, which will end in 2017-18, and Developing Scotland's Workforce which will run until 2020-21. These programmes are part European funded. In total, these projects will provide £70 million worth of funding between 2014-15 and 2017-18. 30 29 Colleges receiving these funds will have to plan for the end of these programmes. The UK Government's commitment to provide certainty regarding future European funding means that the decision to leave the European Union should not affect these programmes. New funding model 55. The SFC is changing the way it allocates funding to college regions. Allocations are based on the amount of learning activity that colleges provide. Previously, courses were weighted to recognise that some courses cost more to run than others. The SFC has developed a new funding model which removes the weightings and instead categorises courses into five price groups. The SFC has also changed the way it provides funding for colleges to help students with additional support needs and to reflect rurality. 56. The SFC is introducing the funding model on a transitional basis, starting from 2015-16. This is intended to avoid colleges experiencing significant changes to their funding in a short timeframe. During this transitional period, the SFC has guaranteed that no college will receive a reduction in funding of more than one per cent in any one year (unless the college agrees to a larger reduction). The SFC expects that the new funding model will be fully implemented by 2020-21. The SFC's modelling indicates that, had the model been fully implemented in 2015-16, six regions would have received a total of £1.3 million more funding than they did, while the remaining seven would have received £1.3 million less. 31 Highlands and Islands' allocation was one and a half per cent below what the region would have received under the new model. The differences for the other five regions which would have received more funding under the new model amounted to less than one per cent of the region's allocation. 57. The final funding allocations for 2017-18 show that the funding for three regions will be in line with the new model. 32 Of the remainder, four will receive less and six will receive more than under the new model. Most differences are less than two per cent. Two regions (Ayrshire, and Dumfries and Galloway) are due to receive three and four per cent more than they would have, had the new model been fully implemented. 33 All regions (and colleges) should be working to match their future budgets to the allocations under the new model. ## The Sfc Is Coordinating A National Estate Condition Survey 58. The current Scottish Government capital allocation to colleges is not enough to pay for significant capital projects, other than that for Forth Valley College. Last year we highlighted that there was no national condition survey of the college sector estate on which to base capital allocations. The SFC is coordinating an exercise to determine the condition of the college estate - that is, all property that colleges own. It is due to be complete in July 2017, after which a national capital plan will be developed. This follows a recommendation in our report last year to determine the current condition of the college estate and prepare a plan to ensure that it is fit for purpose. 34 59. The Scottish Government is supporting investment of over £300 million to the college sector through the NPD programme. 35 This is a form of public private partnership administered by the Scottish Futures Trust. Colleges receive funding for NPD assets as part of their revenue allocation. This is currently not available to colleges for new building projects because the Scottish Government is considering the impact of guidance issued by Eurostat (the statistical office of the European Union). 60. Colleges can also apply for funds from arm's-length foundations (ALFs). These are independent, charitable bodies which were set up when colleges were reclassified as public bodies. As colleges could no longer retain significant cash reserves as a result of public sector rules, colleges donated £99 million to ALFs in 2014, with a further £7 million donated in 2014-15. Colleges' accounts report that £42 million was received from ALFs in the last two years. The majority of this (£39 million) was used for capital spending. ALFs prepare annual sets of accounts but these do not conform to the college academic year, and so cannot be compared directly with college accounts. 36 The ALFs' accounts report that they held £57 million in 2016. Colleges forecast that they will require a further £34 million of funding from ALFs for capital projects from 2016-17 to 2018-19. ## The Sector Has Still To Develop Longer-Term Financial Planning To Support Financial Decision-Making 61. Having longer-term plans in place will allow colleges to better prepare for the challenges ahead and ensure their future budgets are in line with likely funding under the new model. Last year we recommended that colleges develop longterm financial strategies, underpinned by medium-term (between three and five years) financial plans. 37 Most colleges continue to budget for a single year, but some are now preparing longer-term financial plans. 62. The SFC requires colleges to provide an annual financial forecast return (FFR). The most recent FFRs (in June 2016) provided forecasts for July 2016, 2017 and 2018. These forecasts do not include either pension adjustments or nongovernment capital grant income and therefore are comparable to the underlying position presented at paragraph 32. The June 2016 FFRs forecast a sector deficit of £20 million in 2016-17, with 16 colleges forecasting a deficit. The forecast deficit for 2017-18 was £13 million, with 13 colleges forecasting a deficit. 38 These forecasts were prepared before the funding increase announced by the Scottish Government (December 2016). 63. The forecast figures should be treated with a degree of caution. We compared the forecasts for 2015-16 (from the June 2015 FFRs) to the underlying position in paragraph 32. These forecast that the sector would break even with eight colleges in deficit, while the final position was an underlying deficit of £8 million with 11 in deficit. Of the eight which forecast a deficit in 2015, three returned a surplus. 64. The SFC has been working with the sector to improve longer-term financial planning. One element of this is developing common assumptions for all colleges, for example around Scottish Government funding and cost inflation. ## Reporting On The Use Of Depreciation Funding Should Improve In 2016-17 65. Last year, we noted that the need for Scottish Government approval for the use of net depreciation funding created uncertainty for colleges. We recommended that the Scottish Government and the SFC should identify and implement a better approach to allocating depreciation budgets to colleges. The SFC has introduced changes to address this recommendation. The SFC will allocate each college a fixed cash amount which they can spend on loan repayments, staff pay awards or student support funding. 39 This cash amount will remain unchanged in future years. This should provide colleges with greater certainty over future spending plans. 66. Last year we also recommended that the SFC should require colleges to report how they have spent depreciation funding in their accounts, including a breakdown of the spending. As a result, the SFC amended the accounts direction for 2015-16 to recommend what college accounts should report where the college has incurred a deficit as a result of spending net depreciation cash. The SFC provided an illustrative table to demonstrate how the breakdown of the spending should be shown. There was an improvement in how the spending was reported with all but one college including details in the 2015-16 accounts. Ayrshire College chose not to provide the breakdown using this table and therefore it was not clear how much net depreciation cash had been spent on the items specified by the SFC. 67. The SFC has also changed the presentation of college accounts (in 2016-17) to improve how colleges report deficits resulting from how they spend this cash. The accounts will continue to report surpluses or deficits in the same way as now, but colleges will be required to include a note which includes the non-cash budget from the Scottish Government. This non-cash budget is designed to cover the cost of depreciation for Scottish Government reporting requirements. This will report an adjusted surplus or deficit. ## Endnotes  1 *Scotland's colleges 2016* , Audit Scotland, August 2016.  2 *Scotland's colleges 2015* , Audit Scotland, April 2015.  3 Until 1992, all publicly funded colleges were run by local authorities. Under the Further and Higher Education (Scotland) Act 1992, most of these colleges established their own corporate body and boards of management. The boards of management took over responsibility for the financial and strategic management of the colleges. These colleges are referred to as incorporated colleges and produce accounts subject to audit by the Auditor General for Scotland. The remaining six colleges are generally referred to as non-incorporated colleges. Scotland's Rural College (SRUC) is classed as a higher education institution but counts towards the achievement of the national target for colleges.  4 There are two colleges in the region. New College Lanarkshire is a regional college. South Lanarkshire College is assigned to New College Lanarkshire. The Board of New College Lanarkshire (referred to as the Lanarkshire Board), established in October 2014, has a dual role as the college's board and as the regional body. The Lanarkshire Board was enlarged to include members from South Lanarkshire College in recognition of its responsibilities for that college. This includes the chair and principal of South Lanarkshire College.  5 The GDP deflator can be viewed as a measure of general inflation in the domestic economy. These are produced by HM Treasury and published on the gov.uk website.  6 Before credits were introduced, college activity was previously measured in Weighted Standard Units of Measurement (WSUMs) broadly equated to 40 hours of learning. They also included full-time tariffs. In 2014-15, colleges had to achieve a WSUMs target, as the credit target was not introduced until 2015-16. The target for 2015-16 was the WSUMs target in 2014-15 rolled forward and converted to credits.  7 *NOMIS Labour Market Statistics, Population estimates - local authority based by single year of age*, Office for National Statistics, February 2017.  8 *Summary statistics for attainment, leaver destinations and healthy living - No. 6: 2016 Edition 22*, Scottish Government, June 2016.  9 Headcount counts the number of students.  10 The student population data from the SFC's Infact database includes data for two non-incorporated colleges (Argyll and West Highland) within the figures for North Highland College (which is an incorporated college).  11 Scotland's colleges 2016 , Audit Scotland, August 2016.  12 The Scottish Government established the Commission for Developing Scotland's Young Workforce in January 2013, asking it to make recommendations that would help Scotland to produce better qualified, motivated young people who are ready for work. The Scottish Government's response in December 2014 outlined the early progress that had been made and the additional work proposed to implement the Commission's recommendations. Colleges will play a central role in implementing many of the Commission's recommendations. The Scottish Government published its most recent progress report in December 2016.  13 SIMD refers to the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation. We use 15 per cent which is a commonly used percentile and is consistent with the approach taken in 2016. The Scottish Government has recently started measuring by ten per cent and 20 per cent. In 2015-16, students from the ten per cent most deprived SIMD areas accounted for 16 per cent of the student population, while students from the twenty percent most deprived SIMD areas accounted for 28 per cent of the student population.  14 Colleges of success - Raising attainment, improving retention and making Scotland's colleges world class, Scottish Government website, https://beta.gov.scot/news/colleges-of-success-2017-03-31/, March 2017  15 The SFC targeted a response rate of 50 per cent and achieved a response rate of 26 per cent across all modes of study.  16 The following colleges did not survey students on distance/flexible courses: Edinburgh College, Glasgow Kelvin College, Perth College, Lews Castle College and Moray College. South Lanarkshire College does not have any students on distance/flexible courses.  17 *College Leaver Destinations 2014-15,* SFC, September 2016.  18 *Scotland's colleges 2016* , Audit Scotland, August 2016.  19 *College Leaver Destinations 2014-15,* SFC, September 2016.  20 *Financial Memorandum with Fundable Bodies in the College Sector*, SFC, December 2014.  21 The Scottish Futures Trust runs the NPD programme. The programme is a form of public private partnership and was developed as an alternative to Private Finance Initiatives.  22 Modern apprenticeships help employers to develop their workforce by training new staff, and upskilling existing employees. For individuals, a modern apprenticeship is a job which lets them earn a wage and gain an industryrecognised qualification.  23 *Scotland's colleges 2016* , Audit Scotland, August 2016.  24 *Submission to the Scottish Government's Spending Review 2017*, Colleges Scotland, June 2016.  25 Colleges Scotland is a charitable company which is funded through subscriptions from member colleges. It acts as the collective voice for Scottish colleges. The Colleges Scotland Board is made up of the 13 regional chairs plus four principals and the Chief Executive of Colleges Scotland.  26 *Scotland's Budget: Draft Budget 2017-18*, Chapter 6 Education and Skills, Scottish Government, December 2016.  27 The seven colleges/regions to receive an additional funding increase in 2017-18 in transition to the new funding model are: Dundee and Angus College; Edinburgh College; Forth Valley College; Glasgow College Region; Highlands and Islands College Region; North East Scotland College and West Lothian College.  28 *Letter of Guidance to the Chair of the SFC*, Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning, October 2013.  29 The Regional Outcome Agreement documentation for 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 and 2017-18 provides details of European funding. This includes both the part funded by the SFC and the match funded element from the European Structural Funds. These funds also include an element for student support.  30 Chancellor Philip Hammond guarantees EU funding beyond date UK leaves the EU, www.gov.uk, https://www.gov.uk/ government/news/chancellor-philip-hammond-guarantees-eu-funding-beyond-date-uk-leaves-the-eu, August 2016.  31 The 2015-16 regional outcome agreement documentation (Annex B - College sector funding and targets 2015-16) indicated that Borders, Glasgow, Highlands and Islands, Lanarkshire, North East Scotland and West Lothian regions received less than they would have done had the new funding model been fully implemented in 2015-16. It also indicates that Ayrshire, Dumfries and Galloway, Dundee and Angus, Edinburgh, Fife, Forth Valley, and West regions all received more than they would have done under the new funding model.  32 The 2017-18 final regional outcome agreement documentation (Table 2: Activity (Credit) targets and final funding allocations 2017-18) indicated that Dundee and Angus, Highlands and Islands and West Lothian regions are due to receive an allocation in line with the new funding model in 2017-18. Edinburgh, Forth Valley, Glasgow and North East Scotland regions are due to receive less than that calculated by the new funding model whilst Ayrshire, Borders, Dumfries and Galloway, Fife, Lanarkshire and West regions are due to receive more.  33 Ayrshire College's final allocation for 2017-18 is three per cent higher than under the new model. This is because the college provides a higher number of courses in a lower price group than previously. Dumfries and Galloway College's allocation is four per cent higher than under the new funding model. This is because the college now provides more HE courses which attract funding from the Student Awards Agency for Scotland (SAAS). The SFC reduces its income to reflect this.  34 *Scotland's colleges 2016* , Audit Scotland, August 2016.  35 The Scottish Government is supporting investment of over £300 million to three colleges (Inverness, City of Glasgow and Ayrshire). The Scottish Government has supported these projects with payments (via the SFC) totalling £35 million by the end of 2015-16.  36 ALFs prepare sets of accounts which have different year-end dates to that of colleges. Generally ALF accounts are based on the year to the end of March (as opposed to July for colleges) so it is not possible to accurately reconcile ALF accounts to college accounts.  37 *Scotland's colleges 2016* , Audit Scotland, August 2016.  38 Ayrshire College did not provide a forecast for 2017-18 in its June 2016 FFR as it felt that there were significant uncertainties on underpinning assumptions.  39 The SFC now refers to a fixed cash budget earmarked for priorities (CBP) which is no longer linked to depreciation. ## Appendix 1 Audit Methodology Our Audit Involved: - an analysis of information held by the SFC including performance and activity data and communications with the sector - interviews with a wide range of stakeholders. These included college principals, senior college finance staff, regional chairs, Colleges Scotland, staff and student unions, the SFC and the Scottish Government - a data request completed by auditors - analysis of relevant Scottish Government budget documentation and colleges' audited accounts and auditors' reports covering the financial periods ending July 2016. This report focuses on incorporated colleges. Where it is necessary to include data relating to non-incorporated colleges, this is clearly stated. ## Detailed Methodology For Specific Sections In The Report: Accounting adjustments to audited accounts (paragraph 32) In line with our 2016 report, we have adjusted the sector's deficit as it includes technical accounting adjustments that do not reflect actions taken by colleges and are outside their immediate control. These include property asset valuation reductions and pension adjustments. We also made adjustments for donations to arm's-length foundations (ALFs) as these do not indicate any concerns about financial sustainability. The Office for National Statistics (ONS) reclassified colleges as public bodies from April 2014. Following reclassification, colleges are no longer permitted to build up cash or take out new borrowing as this would count towards the Scottish Government's total spending. Colleges can therefore donate any surplus to an ALF. In 2013-14 and 2014-15, we adjusted the deficit position to take account of donations to an ALF. Colleges can apply for and have received funding from ALFs, generally for capital purposes, for example spending on buildings. No college made a donation to an ALF in 2015-16 and the sector expects the funds held by ALFs to reduce over time. The overall level of funds held by ALFs has reduced from £99 million in 2014 to £57 million in 2016. We have made adjustments totalling £9 million in 2015-16 and £6 million in 2014- 15 for colleges spending 'net depreciation cash'. Part of a college's allocation is for depreciation, reflecting the loss of value over time of assets such as equipment. But as this does not involve spending money, this is available for other purposes. Historically, colleges tended to transfer this money to their reserves to use for future capital spending or finance loan repayments. Following reclassification, colleges can no longer build up cash but if the money is spent it will have an adverse effect on the reported financial position. In some cases, it could result in a college reporting a deficit. In previous years, the Scottish Government gave colleges permission to spend this money on specified items (for example, paying off loans and funding student support). This permission also extended to colleges recording deficits as a direct result of spending this money in this way. We have introduced one further adjustment to the deficit position. The previous SORP required capital grants from non-government bodies (such as ALFs) to be shown as income. This was spread over the expected lifetime of the assets the grants were used to buy. Under the new SORP, capital grants from ALFs are still shown as income. But they are now shown, in full, in the year in which they are received. This resulted in an increase of £14 million in the income recognised in 2015-16 accounts and a £23 million increase in the income for 2014-15. We have made adjustments for these figures. Changes to the net assets position from the introduction of the new SORP (paragraph 33) The introduction of the new SORP has led to a significant decrease in college net assets and to five colleges reporting a net liabilities position, where previously there was none. This is because of a change in how government capital grants are presented in college accounts. These grants are shown as income in the accounts, spread over a number of years dependent on the expected useable life of the asset it was used to buy. As only a part of the grant can be shown in any one year, the amount of the grant which has not yet been shown as income (the deferred part) is shown as a financial obligation in the balance sheet. The previous SORP required a similar treatment but did not report the deferred part as an obligation. As these deferred amounts do not require a future external payment they do not represent a risk to financial sustainability. Financial trend analysis (paragraph 38) Financial trend analysis is complicated due to changes in the financial periods covered by college accounts. When incorporated colleges were reclassified as public bodies in 2014, all colleges (other than those in the Highlands and Islands region) changed their accounting year-end to March. This resulted in colleges preparing accounts covering an eight-month period in 2013-14 (August to March). The sector reverted to a July year-end in 2014-15, and prepared accounts covering a 16-month period for 2014-15 (April to July). The accounts for 2015-16 were the first set of accounts for all 20 incorporated colleges to be prepared for a 12-month period since 2012-13. To reflect this, at some points in the report, we have used 2012-13 as a baseline period for comparison. ## Appendix 2 Scotland'S College Landscape 2017 Note: The map shows the 20 incorporated colleges, the six non-incorporated colleges in Scotland (in bold) and Scotland's Rural College (SRUC) which is classed as a higher education institution but counts towards the achievement of the national target for colleges. Source: Audit Scotland | Region | College | |---------------|-----------------------------| | Aberdeen and | | | Aberdeenshire | | | 1 | North East Scotland College | | Ayrshire | 2 | | Borders | 3 | | Dumfries and | | | Galloway | | | 4 | Dumfries & Galloway College | | Edinburgh and | | | Lothians | | | 5 | Edinburgh College | | Fife | 6 | | Central | 7 | | 8 | City of Glasgow College | | 9 | Glasgow Clyde College | |-----|-------------------------| | 10 | Glasgow Kelvin College | | 11 | Argyll College | | 12 | Inverness College | | 13 | Lews Castle College | | 14 | Moray College | | 15 | North Highland College | | 16 | Orkney College | |-----------------------|-------------------------| | 17 | Perth College | | 18 | | | Sabhal Mòr Ostaig | | | 19 | | | Shetland College | | | 20 | | | West Highland College | | | 21 | New College Lanarkshire | | | 22 | South Lanarkshire College | |--------------|-------------------------|-----------------------------| | Tayside | 23 | Dundee and Angus College | | West | 24 | West College Scotland | | West Lothian | 25 | West Lothian College | | n/a | | | | 26 | Newbattle Abbey College | | | n/a | 27 | SRUC | ## Scotland'S Colleges 2017 This report is available in PDF and RTF formats, along with a podcast summary at: www.audit-scotland.gov.uk If you require this publication in an alternative format and/or language, please contact us to discuss your needs: 0131 625 1500 or **info@audit-scotland.gov.uk** For the latest news, reports and updates, follow us on: Audit Scotland, 4th Floor, 102 West Port, Edinburgh EH3 9DN T: 0131 625 1500 E: **info@audit-scotland.gov.uk** www.audit-scotland.gov.uk ISBN 978 1 911494 33 1 AGS/2017/4

en

0781-pdf

## Town & Country Planning General Development Order Notification NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY Tel: 01629 816200 Fax: 01629 816310 E-mail: cusiomcr.scrvice@pcakdistricl-npa.gov.uk Web: www.peakdislrict.gov.uk Minicom: 01629 816319 Aldern House. Baslow Road. Bakewell. Derbyshire. DE45 I AE - - P.1889 To: Warwick Charlesworth Anroach Farm Quarnford Buxton SK170TA THIS NOTICE RELATES TO PLANNING CONTROL ONLY, ANY OTHER STATUTORY CONSENT MUST BE OBTAINED FROM THE APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY ## Town & Country Planning Acts & General Development Order Schedule 2, -er--poRTS 68 7 In pursuance of the powers vested in the Peak District National Park Authority under the above Acts and Order, and with reference to your notification, details of which are as follows: Office Code No. Date received: Proposal: Location: NP/GDO/1206/1095 04 December 2006 Replacement of stock barn damaged in storm. Demolish current, and replace with slightly smaller unit. Anroach Farm Quarnford Buxton SK170TA Quarnford Parish: ## The Decision NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT PERMISSION FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT in the manner described oJn the application and shown on the accompanying plans and drawings is • GRANTED subject to the following conditions: The development hereby permitted shall be begun within 5 years from the date of this permission. 2 The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out otherwise than in complete accordance with the submitted plans, subject to the following conditions or modifications: 3 At the time of erection of the proposed agricultural building, the below cladding shall be clad with reclaimed natural gritstone, coursed and pointed to match the stonework of the adjacent farm house. 4 All external timberwork shall be stained or painted dark brown or black and shall be permanently so maintained. Cont/d... Signed 5 The sheeting for the roof shall be factory colour-coated to BS 5252 Ref. No. 18B29 (Dark Slate) and thereafter the sheets shall not be repainted or replaced other than that colour without the prior written approval of the National Park Authority. 6 When the building hereby permitted is no longer required for the purposes of agriculture it shall be dismantled, removed from the site and the site shall be restored to its original condition. ## Reasons For Conditions: 1 To comply with Condition A2 (2) vi (aa ) of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order (which requires the development shall be carried out where approval has been given by the local planning authority within a period of five years from the date on which approval was gi\ienr 2 For clarity and for the avoidance of doubt. 3-5 To minimise the impact of the development on the surroundings and to safeguard the landscape ## ---------€6:F1F1Caaftf8:Lleltteerf-Eefi-'L!Ffllt:E,..,Aa'R'Ee.Aac-.------------------------------....,E- 6 The building has been approved for agriCUltural use only; when that use ceases the removal of the building will allow the original character and appearance of the site to be restored. ## Footnotes 1. The applicant is advised that approval for the proposed development in this case because it is considered the farm building by virtue of its siting and design would not result in an unduly adverse affect on the landscape character and would not prejudice the nature conservation interest of the adjacent Site of Special Scientific Interest. Note: This application was determined taking into account the policies listed below. As required by S54a of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, applications which accord with Development Plan policies should be approved unless material planning considerations indicate otherwise. In this case, it was considered there were no overriding material considerations. Relevant Structure Plan policies include: GS1, C2, C5, C6, C11 & C15. Relevant Local Plan policies include: LC1, LC4, LC13, LC17. ## Statement Of Applicant'S Rights Arising From The Refusal Of Planning Permission Or From The Grant Of Permission Subject To Conditions Appeals To The Secretary Of State If you are aggrieved by the decision of your local planning authority to refuse permission for the proposed development or to grant it subject to conditions, then you can appeal to the Secretary of State for the Environment under Section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. If you want to appeal, then you must do so within 6 months of the date of this notice, using a form which you can get from the Pianning Inspectorate at Customer Support Unit, Tempie Quay House, 2 The Square, Temple Quay, Bristol BS1 6PN, teiephone No. 0117 372 8000 or www.planninginspectorate.gov.uk . The Secretary of State can allow a longer period for giving notice of an appeal, but he will not normally be prepared to use this power unless there are special circumstances which excuse the delay in giving notice of appeal. The Secretary of State need not consider an appeal if it seems to him that the local planning authority could not have granted planning permission for the proposed development or could not have granted it without the conditions they imposed, having regard to the statutory requirements, to -e,..----tlLllElenpOl'-T,orvVil'iSmio:nITliS;-Oof":f dallrT1lyrndEe-VV1e=1luouprrrITti€!rllrttuOrr1ld:lle=rrl,air,Tl:idt"Lti:or.aa1j"lyrndrrlrl'!ect:'trnio:iinl!s;-grrII11V'!'!enfi"1UJlrrc:ldree!1'f~ara1Tee'Vi7ie:;)ITIooprrmiEeITniftcoii'radieeirr".------ In practice, the Secretary of State does not refuse to consider appeals solely because the local planning authority based its decision on a direction given by him. ## Purchase Notices If either the local planning authority or the Secretary of State for the Environment refuses permission to develop land or grants it subject to conditions, the owner may claim that he can neither put the land to a reasonably beneficial use in its existing state nor render the land capable of a reasonably beneficial use by the carrying out of any development which has been or would be permitted. In these circumstances, the owner may serve a purchase notice on the Council (District Council,London Borough Councilor Common Council of the City of London) or, where the land is situated in a National Park, the National Park Authority for that Park in whose area the land is situated. This notice will require the Councilor Authority to purchase his interest in the land in accordance with the provisions of Part VI of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Replacement of stock barn damaged in storm. Demolish current, and replace with slightly smaller unit at Anroach Farm, Quarnford, Buxton. The work on the above development is to commence ## Delegated Item Report Planning Cas P File No: 1889 NP Number: NP/GDO/1206/1095 Ao'ho'"'''' Date of Report: 3/4/2007 Structure Plan Codes: GS1, C2, C5, C6, C11 & C15. Local Plan Codes: LC1, LC4, LC13, LC17. ## List Of Background Papers (Not Previously Published) Nil ## Human Rights Any human rights issues have been considered and addressed in the preparation of this report. Report: Anroach Farm is located in an isolated position in open countryside within the Leek Moors SSSI below a small gritstone outcrop to the north of Gib Tor and the plantation at Brund Hill close to Morridge Top. The farm comprises of 45 acres (approximately 18 hectares), a stonebuilt farmhouse of traditional appearance and a livestock shelter constructed from blocks covered with corrugated metal sheets. Beef cattle are grazed on the farm which is operated in accordance with a management agreement with English Nature. There is no relevant planning history on file prior to the submission of prior notification of demolition of the existing livestock and its replacement with a modern agricultural bUilding. The Authority notified the applicant prior approval was required for the development and amended plans have now been received that follow advice offered by the Authority to enhance the design of the proposed development. Proposed is a modern agricultural business to replace the existing livestock shelter which has been storm damaged. The building will measure 13.98m x 12.2.m with a shallow roof pitched roof over with eaves at 3.67m and ridge at 5.8m above the adjacent ground. The roof will be clad with fibre cement sheets factory coloured dark blue, walls will be clad with Yorkshire boarding and the undercladding will be clad with coursed gritstone. The National Park Authority has a duty to conserve and enhance the National Park, and adopted development plan policies refiect the duties set out in Structure Plan Policy (SPP GS1). SPP GS1 also states that development incompatible with policies in the development plan will not normally be permitted and development plan policies relevant to the current application include SPP C2, C5, C6, C11 and C15 and Local Plan Policies (LPP) LC1, LC4, LC13 and LC17. SPP C2 states that development outside the confines of towns and villages can be permitted for agriculture provided that the development would respect, would not adversely affect and would not lead to undesirable changes in the landscape. The importance of conserving and enhancing agricultural landscapes is stressed in SPP C5 and SPP C6 provides for development necessary for the practice of agriculture. Local Plan Policy (LPP) LC 13 set outs appropriate siting, design and scale of agricultural development and LPP LC4 also demands that detailed treatment of development is of a high standard. SPP C11 and LPP LC17 preclude development that would adversely affect sites of wildlife importance - inclUding Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and LPP LC1 preclUdes development within the natural zone. Notably, the application site is on the very boundary of the natural zone and within a SSSI Additionally, SPP C15 is supportive of development that would allow undesirable features or buildings to be removed providing the proposed development in itself would not harm the valued characteristics of the National Park. In this case, the proposal would normally be considered pemitted development under the terms of Class 6 of the Town and Country (General Permitted Development) Order albeit on the basis of a low level of agricultural business being operated from Anroach Farm and in broad terms the proposal is acceptable in principle. The development is necessary for agriculture, no new access tracks or hardstanding is required and the proposed building is close to the existing buildings. Furthermore, the new building is of a sufficiently high standard of design and materials to be considered acceptable in this open landscape which is of particular importance in this location where screening or bunding would not be appropriate or in keeping with the character or appearance of the local area. The new building will also facilitate appropriate land management which combined with an element of planning gain that would be achieved by the demolition of the existing building would suggest the proposal will serve to conserve and enhance the landscape character of the area. Natural England also confirm that the development is unlikely to prejUdice the special ecological interest of the area and have no overriding objections to the scheme. It is therefore concluded the proposed development satisfies relevant development plan polices with no material considerations that indicate that the new building would cause sufficient harm to the valued characteristics of the National Park to withhold approval. Accordingly, the current application is recommended for approval subject to conditions to enable the Authority to retain control over the final appearance of the development. Sustainabilitv Issues: The current application does not appear to include any energy saving measures or renewable energy technologies but the proposed development will help to sustain appropriate land management of the surrounding moorlands. Consultation: Natural England - No objections PDNPA Ecology - No response to date Site Notice No representations received Recommendation: APPROVE Within 5 years In accordance with the submitted details subject to following conditions/modifications: • Minor design details • Remove when no longer required for the purposes of agriculture 1 March 2007 PD/4/2/1 P1889 Date: Our ref: Your ref: ## England Christopher Fridlington Deepdale Business Park Ashford Rd, Bakewell Derbyshire DE451GT F 01629 816679 . Development Control Peak District National Park Authority Aldern House Baslow Road Bakewell DE451AE Dear Christhopher ## - Application Code Number Np/Gdo/1206/1095 Replacement Of Stock Barn Ann Roach Farm, Quarnford Thank you for consulting Natural England on the above proposal, your letter was received by this office on 1 March 2007. This letter is Natural England's formal consultation response under Regulation 48(3) of the Habitats Regulations 1994'. Based on the information provided, Natural England has no objection to the proposed development, It is our view that, either alone or in combination with other plans or projects, it would not be likely to have a significant effect on the important interest features of the Peak District Moors (South Pennine Moors Phase 1) Special Protection Area (SPA) or any of the features of special scientific interest of the Leek Moors Site of Special Scientific Interest (8S81) for the reason that the erection of a replacement building is a very low-impact development on the same footprint of the existing building. If the application is amended, English Nature should be re-consulted for a further 21 days in accordance with Circular 08/2005, Please forward a copy of the decision notice to our office at the above address, If you have any queries relating to the content of this letter, please contact the author at the above address. Yours sincerely Conservation Officer Peak to Trent team Natural England Head Office , East Parade Sheffield 5' 2ET ## Notice Of Planning Proposal Warwick Charlesworth AN APPLICATION HAS BEEN MADE BY : FOR: | Replacement | |-------------------------------------------| | storm. Demolish current, and replace with | | slightly smaller unit. | AT: Anroach Farm Quarnford Quarnford PARISH: Standard Site Notice REASONS FOR ADVERT: NP/GDO/1206/1095 OFFICE CODE NO : 1889 P FILE NO: 09/03/2007 ADVERT START DATE: 30103/2007 ## Comments To Be Received By : A copy of the application and the 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 1 Borough council and parish council 1 meeting for comment. If you wish to make any comments please write to the National Park Authority Office before the expiry date, please note the authority now permits members of the public and consultees to address its committees, including those which determine planning applications. Please contact Democratic Services if you require details. Tel: Fax: Email: www: 01629816200 01629816310 planningservice@peakdistrict.gov.uk www.peakdistrict.org Head of The Planning Service Peak District National Park Authority Aldern House, Baslow Road, Bakewell Derbyshire DE451AE Tel: 01629816200 Fax: 01629 816310 E-mail: customer.scrvicc@peakdistrict.gov.uk Web: www.peakdistrict.gov.uk Minicom: 01629 816319 Aldem House. Baslow Road. Bakewell. Derbyshire. DE45 1AE Yourre~ Our ref: GD~ Dale: 19 December 2006 Warwick Charlesworth Anroach Farm Quarnford Buxton SK170TA Dear Applicant NP/GDO/1206/1095 Prior Notification for Replacement of stock barn damaged in storm. Demolish current, and replace with slightly smaller unit. • I refer to the forms and details submitted for the above development on 04 December 2006. I confirm that the National Park Authority has determined that prior approval is required for the siting, design and external appearance of the building. Please submit further details as soon as possible including a block plan at 1:200 showing the precise location of the building in relation to the existing yard area and elevational drawings at a scale of 1:50 or 1:100 showing ali four elevations. The proposal is only likely to obtain consent if it is amended to show the roof factory colour coated to dark slate blue (18B29); above cladding to be timber (Yorkshire boarding); below cladding, if proposed, to be clad with coursed gritstone to match the existing farmhouse and significantly the forthcoming details must show that the development wili not prejudice the ecological interest of the surrounding land. Once we have received the necessary details we will arrange for a site notice to be displayed at the site for at ieast three weeks. The National Park Authority has eight weeks from the receipt of the submitted details to issue a decision. The development must not commence until you are notified of the National Park Authority's decision. If approval is withheld or is granted subject to conditions with which you disagree, or if the decision is not issued within eight weeks, you wili have the right of appeai to the Secretary of State for the Environment. There is however, no right of appeal against the decision of the National Park Authority to require approval of detaiis. • Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any queries. Yours faithfuliy Head of The Planning Service M:\shared\Decislon_Notices\2006\GDO12061*095/19/12/06* 16:24/CAF Corporate Resources & Monitoring Officer: Ruth Marchington Directors: Recreation & Education: John Thompson National Projects: Ken Parker Chief Finance Officer: Peter Swaby Working together to care for a living landscape for everyone ## Delegated Item Report P File No: 1889 Planning Case Officer: Cf Np Number: Np/Gdo/1206/1095 Authorised By: Date Of Report: 19/12/2006 Structure Plan Codes: GS1, C2, C5, C6 & C11. ## Local Plan Codes: Lc1, Lc4, Lc13, Lc17. List Of Background Papers (Not Previously Published) Nil - Human Rights Any human rights issues have been considered and addressed in the preparation of.this report. Report: Anroach Farm is located in an isolated position in open countryside within the Leek Moors SSSI below a small gritstone outcrop to the north of Gib Tor and the plantation at Brund Hill close to Morridge Top. The farm comprises of 45 acres (approximately 18 hectares), a stonebuilt farmhouse of traditional appearance and a livestock shelter constructed from blocks covered with corrugated metal sheets. Beef cattle are grazed on the farm which is operated in accordance with a management agreement with English Nature. Proposed is a modern agricultural business to replace the existing livestock shelter which has been storm damaged. The building will measure 13.7m x 12.2m with eaves at 3.65m above the ground level with a shallow roof pitched at 15°. The roof will be clad with fibre cement sheets, walls will be clad with metal box profile sheeting but undercladding has not been specified. The National Park Authority has a duty to conserve and enhance the National Park, and adopted development plan policies reflect the duties set out in Structure Plan Policy (SPP GS1). SPP GS1 also states that development incompatible with policies in the development plan will not normally be permitted and development plan policies relevant to the current application include SPP C2, C5, C6 and C11 and Local Plan Policies (LPP) LC1, LC4, LC13 and LC17. SPP C2 states that development outside the confines of towns and villages can be permitted for agriculture provided that the development would respect, would not adversely affect and would not lead to undesirable changes in the landscape. The importance of conserving and enhancing agricultural landscapes is stressed in SPP C5 and SPP C6 provides for development necessary for the practice of agriculture. Local Plan Policy (LPP) LC 13 set outs appropriate siting, design and scale of agricultural development and LPP LC4 also demands that detailed treatment of development is of a high standard. SPP C11 and LPP LC17 preclude development that would adversely affect sites of wildlife importance - including Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and LPP LC1 precludes development within the natural zone. Notably, the application site is on the very boundary of the natural zone and within a SSSI In this case, the proposal is pemitted development under the terms of Class 6 of the Town and Country (General Permitted Development) Order albeit on the basis of a low level of agricUltural business being operated from Anroach Farm and in broad terms the proposal is acceptable in principle. The development is necessary for agricUlture, no new access tracks or hardstanding is required and the proposed building is close to the eXisting buildings. Furthermore, an element of planning gain would be achieved by the demolition of the existing building and the new building will also facilitate appropriate land management which together suggest the proposal will serve to conserve and enhance the landscape character of the area. However, the current application is not supported by sufficient detail to primarily ensure the building and associated works will not prejudice the special ecological interest of the area (SPP C11 and LPP LC1 and LPP LC17) or detract from the special qualities of the landscape area (SPP C2 and LPP LC4). Given the sensitivity of the landscape and the nature conservation status of the area, it is considered that it is appropriate to require prior approval to not only properly assess the impact of the proposed building but also, if a livestock building is acceptable in this location, to allow the Authority to retain a level of control necessary to ensure the development will not harm the valued characteristics of the local area. ## Recommendation: Prior Approval ~ ~(uJ.~~ ~vl eKf\~J Qr ~ U-VU"~ ~ Wl~ts:hw--U~."-1~1e ~~~ .hYt-fld'f3S~d ~~ ~ ~ ~ 0t'WlWS Q~JI~ ~~J ~ .~c4v{'j ~ ~O ~etGV'S .f(CA tVl~~4- t\.J~ /'. vvJv.. '5 S J.t.-v WI r~ C1 J V (~J ~ {Ii 'AIr/ill f( 0-1.(}'-1 u{~(ceA s ~ ~ Vluk f'iYJ(~ $'SS I , UcJ5<- 10 ex,s~ (foJ f / *lj,dvcj* L-",elL l- OUJ cJ'e..c. . ~ . 10{6if~~ v{~-ers S~ s~5 fvl~\0/lCQA~ ~ u/l~J liaroJ"-- v.vt. SS ~ (~S, J,.;J, 0V1 W< J" cJet Jj:QJ**wise** ~ ~cJ: c..Vl st ~I"O/"l CcYls-~hJt CA---- ( ~h VlanCiL . Caring for a Uving Landscape Aldern House Baslow Road BAKEWELL Derbyshire DE451AE ## Development Control Town And Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 Schedule 2, Parts 6 & 7 * Please read the Notes for Guidance before completing this form. PLEASE ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS AS APPROPRIATE 3. State the full postal address or location of land subject to this notification and the agricultural holding num~ . /": .1.t. (,JA.~-«..~g0J..Q.1AA?:rI'f..tf8Q1.:311\/'P.if.(.'r.?-?8.1J.f'?1' 7..I4..!.1.?rC..A. . ..2.f.. / r:J..7./. / t1<;JJ.? 4. ~~~~~~t,;r~se~~:(.ts: ?(J~~4G£; i";{.~j7i:1..~ . . ;{ ~ cI.<~ { 72 . "J.?:(yll.~.I..!. ~ !~ ~g1::q~.I.(."I) .?!:::.I..t?:!ffl::: ?:.H.~-r? ~.~(-:c . ~. •._--------------------- 5. What is the area of the agricultural unit? (Agricultural unit means agricultural land which is occupied as a unit for the purposes of agriculture.) Hectares ..................I.(il..,.~ .... 6. What is the area of the parcel of land where the development is to be located? .L..- I Hectares 7. What is the Ordnance Survey grid reference of the proposed development? o.::?:-:.~:f..*....*~.?..::.'l..¥.'..... 8. Does the development affect an ancient monument, archaeological site or listed building, or is it. ~~ a Site of Special Scientific Interest or a Local Nature Reserve? ~/NO If yes, please provide details. . ## Proposed Building | 9. | What | is the proposed use | of | the building? | |-----------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------| | | | | | | | 7~~ | | | | | | .. | 3.k1.r! | | | | | . | | | | | | 9 (a) | What | are the dimensions | of | the proposed bUilding/structure? | | Length | | | | | | 14:.5.:' | | | | | | metres | Height to eaves | | | | | Width | | | | | | .!.'J | | | | | | metres | Height to ridge | | | | | | | | | | | ~f~ | | | | | | 4 | ... | | | | | metres | | | | | | | == | .. | | | | ~! | | | | | | .. | | | | | | :~:: | | | | | | >.: | .. | | | | | ? | | | | | | metres | | | | | | 9 (b) | | | | | | Walls | (please specify different materials, eg biockwork, | timber | cladding, sheets | and | | heights). | | | | | | Material | | | | | | Material | | | | | | Ct>t.v.'/ | | | | | | ~h~. | | | | | | i'/0.f | | | | | | L? | | | | | | t?-1!Jt.b | | | | | | External Colour | | | | | | External Colour | | | | | | | | | | | | :7.~~I·:+.o.:I.·F·········· | | | | | | ) | | | | | | .. | | | | | | 3r~d.0., | L~.~.c.b.(LJaJ- | | | | | | &ri.e.{ | . | | | | Metres | | | | | | Metres | | | | | | | :5..W | | | | | . | | | | | | | ./ | .. | 'Y), | | | g. | | | | | | [j0.0 | . | | | | | 9 | | | | | | (c) | Roof | Material | | | | External Colour | | | | | | | | | | | | ~a.y.f."" | | | | | | . | | | | | | ye$iNOe. | | | | | | 9 (d) | Has an agricultural building been constructed on this holding within the last two years? | | | | | If | yes, | what | is its external floor area and what is its distance from the proposed | new | | Floor Area | m | | | | | 2 | | | | | | Distance from | new | building | metres | | ## Proposed Road 10 (a) What are the dimensions of the pro Length metres Width ................................................ metres 10 (b) What are the surface mat lals? Material External Colour . ## Excavation/Engineering Operations 11 (a) Which Ordnance Survey P el (field) number(s) does the proposed excavation/engineering operation fall within: 11 (b) What is the area of the proposed w07 m2 • 11 (c) ~1.~.a.S~.~~~.~:~~.~~~~:~~..O~.t.h.~.~.r~p~.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 11 (d) Have previous excavation or waste depo' been carried out? YES/NO 12. Please confirm you have included your fee by ticking this box. 13. I Certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief the statements made in this form and in the supporting. information are true and the information is correct. vi. 4~~~d. ~/(/v\ -bOJAt'toW( MA,ktoi *.?tJJO'o-* h --b& fUr*lo..v..d* kg ~( i1"'fed ;-" led. vJaf +~ ~A5/r.J{( '7Yv-A({u ~~ -1ht.- Ovte.-- wL-- d~(.)fA­ .[( td~-t().J'? JtrC{(/kd· 0) /kjt:; *(;,AA[* {~/{A hc:(tf~ (-6h~/~R-J 3> A-V\(tJ?\.V~ /''7 fc7r[di',"~*-h-J(* 45' t1lulj W *jtNrvLec!* /~ t'JcU;fda~ w<K *G"f* "Y'~-r *",,-It:* ;f~{,.., k llei..,e ~Lfrw-- I'~ 1f~d -!?( ~ ~tf(e-- ( -+t:e~A.rA vJ/.'t( ## Prior Notification Form: Notes For Guidance The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, requires anyone proposing: (a) to build, extend or alter a farm or forestry building; (b) to build or alter a farm or forestry road; (c) to carry out excavations or the deposit of waste materials which individually or collectively exceed 0.5 hectares on one site; (d) fish farming; to notify the Authority of their intention to carry out such development. This notification applies to the exercise of permitted development rights only; this form is not suitable if planning permission is needed for the development. Please note that permitted development rights only apply if the works are reasonably necessary for an agricultural or forestry purpose. This form cannot be used for: buildings over 465 m area; development which has started or been completed; livestock, slurry or sewage buildings within 400 m of a non-farm dwelling; development within 25 m of a -cIassifiedcroad;_ . _ development on a separate parcel of land less than 1 hectare; some developments on farm holdings of less than 5 hectares; excavations involving the removal of mineral, where the mineral is moved off the agricultural unit; the deposit of waste materials brought onto the land from elsewhere (except for use in building works or in the provisio~of. hard surface). . ## Planning Pennission Will Be Required For Such Development (Separate Fonns Are Available), What constitutes an alteration to a farm or forestry bUilding or road will be a matter of fact and degree depending upon the circumstances of the case. You should contact the Authority in advance to discuss any proposals if you are unsure whether or not planning permission or notification is required. ## What You Need To Do Please provide details of the development on the attached form. The form is designed for three types of development: (a) alterations to existing or new bUildings/structures; (b) construction of roadsltracks; or (c) the carrying out of excavation or the deposit of waste materials. When completing the form answer all questions from 1 to 8, 12 and 13. For questions 9, 10 and 11, only answer the question which applies to this notification. For example, if you are wishing to erect a building, out of questions 9, 10, 11, only question 9 applies. The notification must be accompanied by a map showing the location of the proposed building, road, or engineering/excavation works to scale of 1:2,500 and on an Ordnance Survey base, with the application site marked in red and the boundary of land comprised in the agricultural unit edged in blue. Please provide as much information as possible, particularly scale plans and elevations of proposed works as this will assist the Authority in considering your proposaf and may avoid the need to submit further details. Copies of Ordnance Survey map extracts are available from this office. Piease contact Developm•. Control for a form. The cost is likely to be aiOilnd £ 15. It will help if you discuss your proposal beforehand by contacting the Development Control Service at Aldem House, Saslow Road, Bakewell, Derbyshire, DE45 1AE. Telephone 01629 816200. The completed form, plans and fee of £50 should be returned to this office. ## What Happens Next The Authority has 28 days from receipt of the notification to respond. You should receive an acknowledgement informing you of the date of receipt. If we later indicate that we have no objections (or do not respond within the 28-day period) then the development can proceed exactly as notified. If the Authority indicate, within the 28-day period, that we require the formal submission of details for approval, work cannot begin until details have been approved by the Authority. If the formal submission of details is required we will notify you within 28 days of receipt of a valid notification, giving advice on what details we wish to approve. Once those details have been received the Authority has 8 weeks in which to make a decision. If approval is refused, or is granted SUbject to conditions with which you disagree, you have the right to appeal - within six months - to the Secretary of State for the Environment. ## Do Not Start Work Until: the Authority has notified you in writing that prior approval is not required; or you have received approval from the Authority; or at least 28 days have elapsed from the date your notification was registered by the Authority, and you or your agent have not been notified that prior approval is not required. Please allow for delays in postage. We strongly recommend that you check with the Authority b6fore commencing a development if you have not received a response within 28 days. IAN HARVEY FABRICATIONS LIMITED Pitchings Farm, Whitefields Lane, Waterfall, Waterhouses Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire. ST103JF Tel. (01538) 308377 Fax. (01538) 308771 VAT. Reg. No. 420 965848 www.cattlegrids.co.uk email: .Ilales@cattlegrids.com Karen Clancy Ann Roche Clinic Quarnford Nr Buxton 18 November 2006 Dear Karen ## Quotation To Supply And Erect 45Ft X 40Ft Agricultural Building Size - 3 x 15ft bays giving an overall length of 45ft and a clear span of 40ft. An eaves height of approximately 12ft (to match eXisting building) and a 15 degrees roof pitch. - Construction - We will use 7" x 4" UB for the rafters (roof) and 8" x 5X" UB for the stanchions (legs) with one 7" x 4" UB" for,each gable post. The roof timbers will be 7" x 3" with the side sheeting using 5" x 3" - 6"" x 3". All timber will be tanalised. , Sheeting - The roof area will be clad with British Eternit Fibre Cement sheets. Colourbrown with approximately 10% roof light area. The side sheeting will be steel box profile, the same colour as the roof and will be clad down to approximately 3ft from the ground level. Guttering - Black 170mm PVC guttering with 1 x 11 Omm down pipe per side to terminate at ground level. Concrete Wall Panels - 100mm thick concrete wall panels 1 metre high round the wall of the building, except one 15ft bay at the front to allow for the door. Doors - 1 pair of steel sliding doors 10ft high and -15ft wide, colour - brown. This price includes: • excavation of the foundation holes and concrete. • ~ Demolition of existing building and disposal of the scrap steel work. I trust that this quotation is to your satisfaction. Should you wish to discuss any of the above, please do not hesitate to contact me. Regards ~ DlSTRlCT NAT!'QNAL pAAK AllOOR'!T'( ALLOCA1E.D :GROtlP OF"1;"I, :q Ian Harvey DATE REC·O 2 9 NOV 2006 # Management Agreement (Annex 2) ~ ~ Leek Moors Sssi (Ann Roach Farm) English Nature - • Drawn By: Sara D J Barrett Date: 24I2l2OO4 Ref: All 032534 ~ English Nature 2004 ~Ingo. Uconc:. Number 100017_. 2004 .... photogr.p,y by ukperspec:tIv....com 2004 English Nature Peak District & Derbyshire Office Endcliffe Deepdale Business Park I Ashford Road Bakewell DE451GT Townend Waterfall Waterhouses Stalls ST103HZ TeI(01538) 308043 Allen Newby B.Sc. (Eng) DMS Gillian Peacegood B.Sc. PhD Fax (01538) 308n9 sales@pmeweb.co.uk 22-Feb-2007 Chris Fridlington PDNA Aldern House Bakewell DES 1AE ## Replacement Stock Barn, Anroach Farm Re Np/Gdo/1206J1096 • Dear Chris, Further to our recent conversation, I am pleased to submit the details of the replacement stock barn. Please find enclosed four copies of the following: 1). 1:2500 Site Location Plan at A4 2). 1:500 Existing Block Plan at A4 3). 1:500 Proposed Block Plan at A4 4). 1:200 Proposed Block Plan at A4 5). 1:200 Yard Elevations at A4 6). 1:50 Plans and Elevations of Replacement Stock Barn at A1 7). Design and Access Statement 8). Environmental Impact Assessment • Please let me know if you require any further information. Bestreg~ Allen Newby pp Warwick Charlesworth Anroach Farm OFFICER Cor ## Ordnance Survey® Siteplan Data1M data arJd incOlpOlilrillg s~ revision avaioI>Io at 1I1is data. © Crown Copyright 2007. ReproO.Iction in whole or " part is prohibitad without tho prior permission of oronance 50""",. Gem,e Coordnates: 402109 365460 Ordnance Survey and tho OS symbol are registered IJllde mark.s and Siteplan atrade mark of Ofdnanco SuNev, tho national mapping agency of Great Britain, National Grid sheet reference at centre of this S;teplan: SK1J265 SupprlOd by: The Glasgow Map Centre Serial Num""" 01354100 | | | | | | Itemret | Quantity | |-----------------|---------------|--------------|-----------|------|-----------|---------------| | TillelName, | designation, | material, | dimension | etc | Article | No.lReterence | | Designed by | | | | | | | | A W Newby | | | | | | | | Checked by | Approved by - | date | File name | Date | Scale | | | A W Newby | W | Charlesworth | - | | | | | 08/0 | | | | | | | | IDjoroach_exist | | | | | | | | n~1fOl2ltt6 | | | | | | | | 1500 | | | | | | | Edition A Sheet 1/1 | Itemref | Quantity | |----------------------------------------------|---------------| | Title/Name, designation, material, dimension | | | etc | | | Article | No./Reference | | Designed by | | | A W Newby | | | Checked by | Approved by - | | A W Newby | | | W Charlesworth - | 09/0 | | Date | | | s~ty0611Jl:1< | | | Scale | | | 10500 | | | -=--'--L--=~----'------i | | | Edition | | | A | | | Sheet | | | 1/1 | | Itemref Quantity TitlelName, designation, material, dimension etc Article No./Reference Scale Date 10200 DeSIgned by A W Newby Checked by Approved by - date File name A W Newby W Charlesworth - *09/0* lD.nroach.Jlrop s~1YOIlVdl::'k 200 - Edition A Sheet 1/1 | Itemret | Quantity | |----------------------------------------------|------------------| | TillelName, designation, material, dimension | etc | | Article | No.lReterence | | Designed by | | | A W Newby | | | Checked | by | | A W Newby | W Charlesworth - | | 09/0 | | | I'gricultural | Un | | UOO | | Edition A Sheet 1/1 ## Design & Access Statement Replacement Stock Barn, Anroach Farm Re Np/Gdo/1206/1096 Description Of Existing Buildings & Their Setting Anroach Farm is an 18th Century farm house nestling below the broken escarpment of Anroach in the Staffordshire Moorlands. The 45 acre estate is a mixture of pasture, moorland and marsh. The walls of the main farmhouse are of coursed construction using local coarse reddish gritstone. It is roofed with staffordshire blue-grey tiles. Two outbuildings are attached to the left hand side of the main farmhouse. The first and smaller of the two, is a timber construction; vertically clad with tongue and groove boarding stained a mid-brown colour. The second is stonebuilt with semi-coursed masonry, again of local stone. Both outbuildings are set back from the main farm bUilding by 500 mm or so. Both are mono pitched and roofed in blue-grey profile steel. The outbuildings date from circa 1960. Further to the left lies the stock barn to be replaced. It is a 15 metre long, 9.5 metre wide, semicircular hooped frame construction, clad in corrugated iron. The building is decrepit. The frame is badly rotted and many of the sheets have blown off in recent gales. The stock barn dates from circa 1950. The stock barn is orientated with the semicircular open end of the building lying at 90 0 to the aforementioned bUildings. It is set forward, forming a sheltered yard overlooking the lower pastures. The yard is surfaced with stone chippings: Please refer to the accompanying 1: 500 Existing Block Plan for further details. ## Description Of Proposed Development The replacement stock barn will be a modern portal frame bUilding with three bays, each approximately 4.6 metres wide and spanning approximately 12.2 metres. It will be faced to approximately 1/3rd eaves height in reclaimed local gritstone with the upper 2/3rds vertically clad in tanalised yorkshire boarding. The eaves height will be nominally 3.6 metres, as per the eaves height of the adjacent buildings. The roof pitch will be 15°, giving an overall height to the ridge of approximately 5.3 metres. The roof will be clad with blue-grey profile 6 fibre-cement sheeting with ~ 10% grp roof-light area. The building will be orientated with its ridge at 90° to the farm and it's outbuildings. Access from the yard will be via a split sliding door spanning the full width of the central bay. The sliding door will be 2/3rds clad in Yorkshire boarding to match the elevations of the adjacent bays. The replacement stock barn will be set further back than the existing building; by approximately half the width of a bay. Overall the replacement stock barn will be significantly smaller than the existing building. However, because it's length will be greater than the width of the existing building, the South East gable end will extend a little further into the yard. The orientation and positioning will afford improved shelter from the prevailing south westerly winds. Rainwater goods comprise black plastic 170 mm half round guttering and 110 mm down-pipes running to soak-aways to the front and rear of the bUilding. Please refer to the following plans for further details: 1: 500 Proposed Block Plan 1:200 Proposed Block Plan 1:200 Yard Elevations ## Impact Of The Proposed Development On Neighbours The proposed development is unlikely to have any impact on the privacy and liVing conditions of neighbours. Anroach Farm is in a remote location and the nearest building at Adders Green is approximately 250m to the South East. Several public footpaths cross the estate. The closest, the footpath from Gibb Tor to Flash Bottom, runs along the top of the Anroach escarpment. The back of Anroach Farm, the outbuildings and the proposed development will be visible from this footpath. However, the replacement building is both smaller and more aesthetically pleasing than the bUilding it replaces and therefore represents an overall planning gain. ## Environmental Impact Assessment Replacement Stock Barn, Anroach Farm Re Np/Gdo/1206/1096 Description Of Existing Building. Anroach Farm is an 18th Century farm house nestling below the broken escarpment of Anroach in the Staffordshire Moorlands. The 45 acre estate is a diverse habitat with a mixture of pasture, crag, moorland and marsh and is subject to a Management Agreement with English Nature. The stock barn to be replaced is a 15 metre long, 9.5 metre wide, semicircular hooped frame construction, clad in corrugated iron. It is set forward from the main farm buildings, forming a raised, sheltered yard overlooking the lower pastures. The yard is surfaced with stone chippings. The building is decrepit. The frame is badly rotted and many of the sheets have blown off in recent gales. There are no rainwater goods so rainwater percolates directly into the into the water table around the periphery of the building. The terrace upon which the building sits is sandy and free draining. Rainwater percolating into the water table in this area resurfaces in marshy meadow near the road to the South. There is no evidence of nesting activity from birds, bats or rodents in or around the barn . Please refer to the accompanying 1: 500 Existing Block Plan for further details. ## Description Of Proposed Development The replacement stock barn will be a modern portal frame building, approximately 13.8 metres long, spanning approximately 12.2 metres and with an eaves height of approximately 3.6 meters. It will be faced to approximately 1/3rd eaves height in reclaimed local gritstone with the upper 2/3rds vertically clad in tanalised yorkshire boarding. Non-arsenic based Utanalith-E" timber treatment has been specified. The roof will be clad with blue-grey profile 6 fibre-cement sheeting with ~ 10% grp roof-light area. The building will be orientated with its ridge at 90° to the farm and it's outbuildings. Access from the yard will be via a split sliding door spanning the full width .of the central bay. The sliding door will be 2/3rds clad in Yorkshire boarding to match the elevations of the adjacent bays. • The replacement stock barn will be set further back than the existing bUilding; by approximately half the width of a bay. Overall the replacement stock barn will be significantly smaller than the existing building. However, because it's length will be greater than the width of the existing building, the South East gable end will extend a little further into the yard. The orientation and positioning will afford improved shelter from the prevailing south westerly winds. Rainwater goods comprise black plastic 170 mm half round guttering and 110 mm down-pipes running to soak-aways to the front and rear of the building. Please refer to the following plans for further details: 1:500 Proposed Block Plan 1:200 Proposed Block Plan 1:200 Yard Elevations ## Environment Impact Of The Proposed Development. The overall environmental impact of the proposed development is likely to be minimal. The main change concerns the handling of surface water. The new • building will have rainwater goods, whereas the old stock barn did not. The best solution is to feed the outflow from the down-pipes fed to soakaways placed in the free draining terraced area extending to the front and rear of the building. As such, rainwater should still enter the water table and resurface in the marshy meadows as previously. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

en

3308-pdf

## Internal Audit Report Key Financial Controls # Payroll (Non-Schools) ## March 2018 To: Chief Executive Interim Assistant Chief Executive HR Strategic Lead Interim Director of Resources Head of Finance Copied to: Finance Director, CSG Operations Director, CSG HR Director, CSG Operations Director, CSG HR Assistant Director of Finance, CSG HR Team Leader, CSG Payroll Team Manager, CSG We would like to thank management and staff of the CSG Payroll and Finance teams for their time and co-operation during the course of the internal audit. ## Cross Council Assurance Service ## ## Table Of Contents | 1. Executive Summary | 2 | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------| | 2. Summary of results and assurance ratings | 3 | | 3. Detailed operating effectiveness results | 4 | | 4. Control design recommendations | 13 | | 5. Follow-up on 2016/17 control design recommendation | 15 | | Appendix A: Definition of risk categories and assurance levels in the Executive Summary | 18 | | Appendix B: Background and context | 19 | | Appendix C: Internal Audit roles and responsibilities | 20 | | | | | | | ## 1. Executive Summary Introduction The review of key financial controls has been agreed in the Internal Audit and CAFT Plan 2017-18. ## Background & Context As part of this review we confirmed and updated our prior year understanding of the key controls operating within Barnet's key financial systems to ensure that our work is up to date and relevant. We then devised an overarching programme of testing across the different systems and processes to give assurance on the effectiveness of these key controls. This report summarises the audit work undertaken covering the period from 1 February 2017 to 31 December 2017 over non-schools' payroll. Our work has now been completed in line with the Terms of Reference. We have found that the control environment has deteriorated in the period, with control operating exceptions noted in eight areas (three in 2016/17) and control design exceptions noted in four areas (two in 2016/17). This report consists of the following sections: - Part 1: Executive Summary - provides background and context to the report. - Part 2: Summary of Results - sets out an overview of the number of findings and assurance ratings for each individual system; - Part 3: Detailed Operating Effectiveness Results - explains in detail the exceptions we found for each test area where we found non-compliance with the intended controls; - Part 4: Control Design Recommendations - highlights the areas where the design of controls could be improved to enhance the control environment or to improve efficiency; and - **Part 5:** Follow up on 2016/17 control design recommendations - sets out in detail a control design issue raised in 2016/17 and confirms if the recommendation has been implemented. ## 2. Summary Of Results And Assurance Rating Number Department Overall Opinion 2017/18 Overall Opinion 2016/17 Direction of Travel controls tested 2017/18 2016/17 2017/18 2016/17 Non-schools' payroll Limited Reasonable  Controls where of operating Control design exceptions were exceptions found Comments found 11 8 3 4* 2 *The two control design issues noted in the previous period have not yet been fully resolved. ## 3. Detailed Operating Effectiveness Results 1) Non-Schools Payroll | Control Ref | |----------------| | | ## Control Operating Effectiveness - Medium Risk  100% P1 Payroll reconciliation between payroll and GL (control performed by the Finance team) We requested a sample of two reconciliations performed between 1 February 2017 and 31 December 2017 (the reconciliations for August and December 2017). We were informed that due to staffing pressures, this did not take place on a monthly basis during 2017/18. A reconciliation between payroll and the general ledger is carried out as part of year end finance processes. ## Management Response And Agreed Action: Management will reinstitute a monthly process for 2018/19 to ensure that the payroll system and general ledger are reconciled and any discrepancies are investigated in a timely manner. Reconciliations are performed on a monthly basis. They are performed by an appropriate member of the finance team and reviewed by a senior member of the finance team. Payroll Team Manager Target date: 31/07/2018 | Control Ref | Control Tested | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | | Control Operating Effectiveness - Low Risk | | |  | | | | | | P2 | | | Reconciliation of | | | payment runs to BACS | | | listings | | | 50% | | | | | | We requested a sample of two reconciliations performed between 1 February 2017 and 31 December | | | 2017 (the reconciliations for August and December 2017). We identified the following exceptions: | | | - | | | | 1/2 (50%) of BACS secondary authorisations viewed was not dated, and as such we were | | unable to tell whether this authorisation took place in a timely manner. | | | An additional issue was identified, as the reconciliation process usually includes agreeing BACS listings | | | through Control Total Reports to the final BACS transmission amount. In December 2017, the Control | | | Total Report was not produced. This has been raised as an exception under control P8. | | | Each payment run is | | | reconciled to the BACS / | | | cheque listings and is | | | authorised. The Payroll | | | Supervisor then authorises | | | release of the BACS | | | transmission. | | The process notes within the monthly payroll processing runsheet will be updated to mandate that preparers and reviewers both sign and date the reconciliation documentation to demonstrate timely reconciliation of the payment run to the BACS listings. Payroll Team Manager Target date: 31/07/2018 Control Design and Operating Effectiveness - Medium Risk P3 Starter form  A sample of 25 starter forms processed between 1 February 2017 and 31 December 2017 were tested. We identified the following exceptions: 12% - 2/25 (8%) starters had starter forms which were prepared and authorised by the same person. As a result, there was no segregation of duties in place around these starter requests. In both cases, the authoriser was the relevant budget holder. Starter forms with relevant information are fully completed and authorised by an appropriate member of staff (as per the scheme of delegation) who is different to the preparer. - 1/25 (4%) starters had no starter form relating to the period of employment under review. The individual had previously been employed by Barnet and had re-joined in the same post, however there was a five-month period in between where they had not been a Council employee. A starter form should exist for each discrete period of employment. The HR business partner for the service area provided email evidence that a form had been requested, however as the form was to be returned to the HR Admin inbox rather to the HR business partner, there was no mechanism in place for non-completion to be identified or followed up on. See control design finding in section 4 below. | Control Ref | |--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | 1. The new starter form will be amended to explicitly require two different signatories to | | demonstrate segregation of duties around preparation and approval of new starter requests and | | ensure that no forms can be processed without evidence of this. | | 2. A starter form will be retrospectively created relating to the individual in our sample who did not | | have a new starter form. | Payroll Team Manager Target Date: 31/08/2018 | Control Ref | |----------------| | | ## Control Operating Effectiveness - Medium Risk P4 Leaver Form  16% A sample of 25 leavers between 1 February 2017 and 31 December 2017 were tested. We identified the following exceptions: - 3/25 (12%) leaver forms were completed and authorised after the leaving date. No overpayments to these leavers were noted. - 1/25 (4%) leaver form was undated. As such, it cannot be confirmed whether the request and authorisation occurred before or after the individual's leaving date. Leaver forms have adequate backing information and are checked and authorised by the HR manager before being received by payroll and processed in the payroll. These exceptions are because managers in the Council have not followed procedure. The exceptions are thus outside of the payroll team's control, as the payroll team cannot action leavers until they are notified. 1. Management will remind staff of the importance of submitting leaver forms prior to the leaving date. 2. As agreed in the Non-Schools Payroll audit in June 2017, CSG Management will report on the instances of late Leaver Form submissions and the financial impact of these late submissions to Council management. 3. Management will consider the introduction of sanctions for managers who are unable to demonstrate that there was a valid reason not to send a form in prior to the leaving date (e.g. the employee left without giving notice). This could be linked to managers' corporate objectives around managing budgets. Payroll Team Manager Target Date: 31/08/2018 | Control Ref | |----------------| | | ## Control Operating Effectiveness - High Risk P5 Standing data form  4% A sample of 25 changes to standing data processed between 1 February 2017 and 31 December 2017 were tested. This sample included ten movers' forms, nine changes to bank details and six salary/hours changes. We identified the following exception: Modifications to standing data are reviewed for completeness, accuracy and authorisation by an appropriate level of management. - 1/25 (4%) of bank details changes were not supported by documentation. An amendment to bank details was made so that a severance payment with a value of £6,630 would be made to a relative of the employee, however this amendment was requested by the relative rather than the employee. There was no evidence that the employee had confirmed this request, or that there was Power of Attorney in place which would allow the relative to make this request on their behalf. Written guidance around changes to standing data will be developed (see finding P13), which will highlight that no changes can be made to bank or address details without the explicit, written agreement of the individual concerned, or their legal proxy. The process of drafting the guidance will include consideration of whether the existing controls are sufficiently robust. If control weaknesses are noted, additional controls will be put in place to strengthen the process. Payroll Team Manager Target Date: 31/08/2018 Not tested Control Design - Medium Risk P6 System access - control design The control design issue identified during 2016/17 has not been remedied and we were not able to test the operation of this control. See section 5 of this report for details. issue identified Payroll system access is reviewed on a regular basis and access is only granted to appropriate members of staff. | Control Ref | |--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | No exceptions noted. | | P7 | | Exception reports | |  | | | | | | The system generated | | exception report indicating | | unusual payments (i.e. | | excessively large | | payments, multiple | | payments made to the | | same employee, etc.) is | | investigated and resolved | | prior to payment | | distribution on a monthly | | basis. Monthly checks are | | done by administrators, | | team leader and payroll | | manager. | | Control Operating Effectiveness - Low Risk | | P8 | | Control total reports | |  | | | | 50% | | | | 1/2 (50%) of control total report reconciliations requested had not been performed. The December 2017 | | control total report was not available to review and management confirmed that one had not been | | produced. We confirmed that the January 2018 report could be agreed back to the November 2017 | | report and that no discrepancies were noted. As such there was no financial impact on the Council as a | | result of this omission. | The system generated control total report showing cumulative amount payable to third parties (e.g. HMRC, give as you earn, pension) is prepared each month and compared to payments made and the general ledger. The process notes within the monthly payroll processing runsheet will be updated to mandate that the Control Total report for each month is saved within the payroll team's shared drive. Payroll Team Manager Target Date: 31/08/2018 | Control Ref | Control Tested | |------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------| | | | | Not tested | | | Control Design - Medium Risk | | | | | | P9 | | | Overtime payments | | | - control | | | design | | | The control design issue identified during 2016/17 has not been remedied and we were not able to test | | | the operation of this control. See section 5 of this report for details. | | | issue | | | identified | | | | | | Overtime payments are at | | | the correct rate, within | | | agreed limits and | | | authorised in line with the | | | scheme of delegation prior | | | to payment. Evidence is | | | retained to demonstrate | | | authorisation. | | | Not tested | | | Control Design - Medium Risk | | | P10 | | | Sick Pay | | | - control | | | A control design issue has been identified relating to this control. See section 4 below for details. | | | design | | | issue | | | | | | identified | | | | | | Sick pay adjustment is | | | made in line with sick pay | | | policy when CSG receive | | | an appropriately approved | | | 'Notification of sick leave' | | | form. Sick pay is ended | | | when CSG receive an | | | appropriately approved | | | 'Notification of return to | | | work' form | | | . | | | Not tested | | | | | | Not tested | | | P11 | | | Holiday Pay | | | Holiday pay is correctly | | | adjusted for part time | | | employees and for | | | employees carrying over | | | holiday. This calculation is | | | prepared and reviewed by | | | two separate employees | | | | | | The control covering holiday pay adjustments within the terms of reference for this review does not | | | operate as described. The only circumstances in which pay is adjusted relating to holidays are when | | | people leave the organisation and are paid in lieu of untaken holiday, or have their final pay adjusted to | | | reflect where they have taken more holiday than they are entitled to. The total value of pay in lieu of | | | holiday in 2017/18 was £119,615. Given the fact that unusually large payments would be identified and | | | investigated through the exception reporting process (control P7), management do not consider holiday | | | pay adjustments to be a key payroll control. | | | Control Ref | |----------------| | | ## Control Operating Effectiveness - Medium Risk P12 Overpayments  60% We requested a sample of five overpayments between 1 February 2017 and 31 December 2017, with a value of £13,635. The total value of known overpayments in the period was £98,103. We identified the following exceptions: - 1/5 (20%) of overpayments were not chased within three months of the notification date of the overpayment and had not yet been repaid at the date of audit. This overpayment had a value of £3,371. Overpayments are invoiced in the case of leavers and recovery action is performed or adjusted for in the following month's pay in the case of employees. - 1/5 (20%) of overpayment chaser letters requested a repayment amount that did not agree to the amount owed (there was a difference of £388 between the two figures). The full amount was received and as a result there was no monetary impact. We were also provided with evidence that one overpayment which did not form part of our sample with a value of £1,854 was absorbed by the budget holder as it was due to an error on the part of HR/payroll and they did not feel that it was fair to require repayment from the former member of staff. No evidence was provided to demonstrate that payroll staff verified that this was a legitimate and approved write-off or that the budget holder had the authority to make this decision before closing the chasing process for this debt. In addition, no evidence was provided that the Council's HR Lead had been alerted that an error had been made by HR/payroll that had a financial impact on the Council. 1. LBB will agree a clear documented approach for chasing debt and follow this in all cases. 2. Debt chasing letters will be completed using blank templates, rather than by rolling forward earlier letters, to avoid errors in the amount of repayment being sought. 3. Where overpayments are not recoverable and this is due to HR/payroll errors, a clear agreement will be reached on where the cost of any losses should be borne. 4. Council management will establish, in conjunction with the Council's S151, its position for recovery of overpayments and write-offs. CSG will include reporting of any overpayments and the recovery progress in monthly performance reporting. Payroll Team Manager and Strategic HR Lead Target Date: 30/09/18 ## Control Operating Effectiveness - Medium Risk P13 Policies And Procedures  Management provided us with the following policy and procedure documentation: 58% - Monthly payroll processing runsheet - Unified Reward Policy - Absence Management Policy Policies and procedures are reviewed regularly to ensure they are accurate, complete and kept up to date. All of these had been updated within the last two years. These documents covered or referred to 5/12 (42%) controls tested: Policies and procedures are clearly documented and communicated to staff. - P2 - BACS reconciliation - P7 - exception reporting - P8 - control totals - P9 - overtime payments - P10 - sick pay 7/12 (58%) of the controls reviewed at audit were not covered by the policies and process documents provided: - P1 - reconciliation between payroll and general ledger - P3 - starters - P4 - leavers - P5 - changes to standing data - P6 - systems access to Core - P11 - holiday pay - P12 - overpayments Existing policies and process documents relating to Payroll will be reviewed by the Council and updated to reflect the current legislative context and practice at the Council. Where areas are identified which are not covered by current policies and procedures, management will create process notes to ensure that the Council's approach to payroll can be clearly communicated to staff and continuity of practice can be maintained in the event of staff turnover. All policies will be reviewed on an annual basis and updated if necessary. Payroll Team Manager Target Date: 31/08/2018 ## 4. Control Design Recommendations Identified March 2018 | Control | Detailed finding | Agreed Action | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------|------------------| | Ref | | | | Medium risk | | | | | | | | P3 | | | | Payroll - new starter forms | | | | On occasion, the addition of new individuals to payroll is expedited to meet payroll | | | | deadlines for the month without a new starter form having been received. A form | | | | should still be created for all new starters and all new starter forms should be returned | | | | to the HR Admin inbox. As this process is usually used to trigger the addition of a new | | | | staff member to payroll, if a staff member has already been added to payroll there is | | | | no mechanism to identify non-completion of the new starter form. | | | | Risk | Responsible Officer | Target date | | In the absence of the formal new starter process being carried out, people may be added to | | | | payroll without formal authorisation by budget holders, and key information about staff members | | | | may not be held within the system. | | | Management will enforce the requirement that no new starters are added to payroll unless a new starter form has been received. This will apply to last minute additions to payroll where exceptions have historically been made and no exceptions will be tolerated in future. Payroll Team Manager 31/07/2018 | Control | Detailed finding | Agreed Action | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------|------------------| | Ref | | | | Medium risk | | | | | | | | P10 | | | | Payroll - sick pay | | | | Sick leave should be authorised by managers within Core. Evidence should be | | | | retained to demonstrate authorisation. There is no consistent mechanism for retention | | | | of sickness certification documentation across departments. Payroll are not | | | | consistently able to access underlying sickness certification documentation signed off | | | | by managers, and as a result they are not able to verify the accuracy of sick leave | | | | dates within Core. | | | | CSG Payroll management confirmed that at the moment there is no facility for | | | | Managers to upload evidence directly to Core. Managers are responsible for the | | | | record keeping in relation to absence and as such may therefore keep records at a | | | | local level. Some choose to send documents to HR, but this is not required. | | | | Risk | Responsible Officer | Target date | | In the absence of underlying sick leave documentation, sickness payments may be made on the | | | | basis of inaccurate or incorrectly certified information and management may not be able to gain | | | | assurance over the accuracy of information provided through Core. | | | Management will require all sick leave documentation to be sent to HR to ensure that supporting evidence for sick leave is retained centrally and an audit trail can be maintained. Strategic HR Lead 30/09/18 ## 5. Follow-Up On 2016/17 Control Design Recommendation | | |-----| | | P6 Payroll - system access to Core - Medium Risk We reviewed a report of employees who have access to Core, the Council's payroll system. The report was dated 1 February 2017 and showed the last login date for each user along with their access rights. The payroll system access report is not regularly reviewed to ensure that access has only been granted to appropriate members of staff. Management stated that the Service Delivery Manager (Non-schools' payroll) had undertaken an exercise in October 2016 following the recommendation in the prior year report. However, the Service Delivery Manager has left and evidence of the review could not be provided. Currently this procedure is not assigned to anyone. The system access report obtained during the audit showed 36 open users. The Operations Director stated that at the time of the audit these users' access rights were appropriate based on their roles and responsibilities. This finding was raised in the previous year but there is no evidence to confirm that the risk has been addressed. ## Follow-Up Work Performed - 2017/18 We requested evidence to demonstrate that a quarterly user access report is sent to each team involved with payroll processing for review and amendment. Management were unable to provide us with evidence that this had happened for the periods requested (covering August and December 2017) and as such we were not able to confirm the operation of this control. Management confirmed that the reviews had happened, however they stated that the relevant emails had been archived before the date of audit. They were able to show us emails relating to a user access review which took place in February 2018. This demonstrated that the action agreed in 2016/17 around retaining an audit trail of user reviews has not been consistently implemented. Management did not provide evidence of the monthly user reports covering starters and leavers which were agreed as an action in 2016/17. Payroll system access reports, showing all employees who have access to Core, will be run on a periodic basis and reviewed by the service to ensure that access is only granted to appropriate members of staff and where necessary access to the system has been removed. An audit trail of this review will be retained. A new Monthly User Report will be produced that confirms every new starter and leaver in the month on the Barnet Contract and that access rights to Core have been appropriately updated. There is a risk that users have inappropriate access rights and are able to make unauthorised changes to the payroll system which could result in fraud, financial loss or employee dissatisfaction. Payroll system access reports, showing all employees who have access to Core, will be run on a periodic basis and reviewed by the service to ensure that access is only granted to appropriate members of staff and where necessary access to the system has been removed. An audit trail of this review will be retained. A new Monthly User Report will be produced that confirms every new starter and leaver in the month on the Barnet Contract and that access rights to Core have been appropriately updated. Revised Implementation date: 31/08/2018 Responsible Officer: Payroll Team Manager Detailed finding 2016/17 Risk Agreed action P9 Payroll - Overtime payments - Medium Risk Overtime payments should be authorised in line with the scheme of delegation prior to payment. Evidence should be retained to demonstrate authorisation. Overtime payments between 1 October 2016 and 31 January 2017 amounted to £386,461. The overtime payments process is currently very manual. There is no consistent mechanism of recording, authorising and progressing overtime for payment across departments. Generally, we found: - An officer will complete an overtime sheet detailing the overtime worked and the line manager will sign this as approved; and - These forms are then sent to an employee within the department in question for them to collate the overtime into one spreadsheet. This spreadsheet is then sent to the payroll team to be processed. There is no independent review of the spreadsheet against what the managers have approved and so there is a risk that inappropriate and unauthorised overtime payments are stated on the spreadsheet due to error or fraud. As a result of the above process the payroll team do not see who originally authorised the overtime and are unable to check it was appropriately authorised by an officer with prerequisite delegated authority. CSG management have stated that the functionality exists within the Core HR Portal for submitting and approving overtime. Payroll management stated that finance review a monthly report showing how much overtime has been paid and to whom. This is a potential way for unusual overtime payments to be identified and challenged. However, there is no evidence that demonstrates these reports have been run monthly, scrutinised and the exceptions fed back to payroll. Management also stated that revenue budgetary monitoring will partially mitigate the risk by helping management to identify unusual payments or material changes in payroll. ## Follow-Up Work Performed - 2017/18 We requested evidence to demonstrate that the issues identified at audit in 2016/17 had been remedied. Management confirmed that it is now possible to approve overtime within Core, however system users confirmed that there is an issue within the process which means that overtime which is not approved within a short window of time disappears from the system and has to be re-entered into Core. This overtime can then end up being recognised in the incorrect period. Due to this issue, Core is not currently being used to process overtime payments by all service areas. As such, the first recommendation is deemed not to have been fully implemented. a) Both CSG management and Council management will investigate the possibility of creating a more automated process using the Core HR Portal that ensures all payments for overtime hours worked have been approved by the line manager and payroll have oversight of this to ensure that only appropriate overtime payments are processed. b) Finance will run overtime reports to highlight who has received overtime payments to identify any unexpected or unusual overtime payments. Exceptions will be reported back to payroll. Payroll process inappropriate or fraudulent overtime payments that have not been approved by the appropriate manager resulting in financial loss to the Council. to use of the system are understood and that mitigating actions can be identified. The total value of overtime payments in 2017/18 amounted to £1,061,687. Monthly exception reports (P7) are carried out which will identify variances of over £100, including overtime payments, for investigation. This is deemed to be an adequate control in this area and the second recommendation is deemed to have been implemented. b) A subsequent plan will be discussed and agreed with the Council to mandate a standardised control process across the Council for overtime. Revised Implementation date: 30/09/2018 Responsible Officer: Payroll Team Manager ## Appendix A: Definition Of Risk Categories And Assurance Levels In The Executive Summary Risk rating Immediate and significant action required. A finding that could cause: Critical  - Life threatening or multiple serious injuries or prolonged work place stress. Severe impact on morale & service performance (e.g. mass strike actions); or - Critical impact on the reputation or brand of the organisation which could threaten its future viability. Intense political and media scrutiny (i.e. front-page headlines, TV). Possible criminal or high profile civil action against the Council, members or officers; or - Cessation of core activities, strategies not consistent with government's agenda, trends show service is degraded. Failure of major projects, elected Members & Senior Directors are required to intervene; or - Major financial loss, significant, material increase on project budget/cost. Statutory intervention triggered. Impact the whole Council. Critical breach in laws and regulations that could result in material fines or consequences. Action required promptly and to commence as soon as practicable where significant changes are necessary. A finding that could cause: High  - Serious injuries or stressful experience requiring medical many workdays lost. Major impact on morale & performance of staff; or - Significant impact on the reputation or brand of the organisation. Scrutiny required by external agencies, inspectorates, regulators etc. Unfavourable external media coverage. Noticeable impact on public opinion; or - Significant disruption of core activities. Key targets missed, some services compromised. Management action required to overcome medium-term difficulties; or - High financial loss, significant increase on project budget/cost. Service budgets exceeded. Significant breach in laws and regulations resulting in significant fines and consequences. A finding that could cause: Medium  - Injuries or stress level requiring some medical treatment, potentially some workdays lost. Some impact on morale & performance of staff; or - Moderate impact on the reputation or brand of the organisation. Scrutiny required by internal committees or internal audit to prevent escalation. Probable limited unfavourable media coverage; or - Significant short-term disruption of non-core activities. Standing orders occasionally not complied with, or services do not fully meet needs. Service action will be required; or - Medium financial loss, small increase on project budget/cost. Handled within the team. Moderate breach in laws and regulations resulting in fines and consequences. A finding that could cause: Low  - Minor injuries or stress with no workdays lost or minimal medical treatment, no impact on staff morale; or - Minor impact on the reputation of the organisation; or - Minor errors in systems/operations or processes requiring action or minor delay without impact on overall schedule; or - Handled within normal day to day routines; or - Minimal financial loss, minimal effect on project budget/cost. ## Level Of Assurance Substantial There is a sound control environment with risks to key service objectives being reasonably managed. Any deficiencies identified are not cause for major concern. Recommendations will normally only be Advice and Best Practice.  Reasonable  An adequate control framework is in place but there are weaknesses which may put some service objectives at risk. There are Medium priority recommendations indicating weaknesses but these do not undermine the system's overall integrity. Any Critical recommendation will prevent this assessment, and any High recommendations would need to be mitigated by significant strengths elsewhere. Limited There are a number of significant control weaknesses which could put the achievement of key service objectives at risk and result in error, fraud, loss or reputational damage. There are High recommendations indicating significant failings. Any Critical recommendations would need to be mitigated by significant strengths elsewhere.  No  There are fundamental weaknesses in the control environment which jeopardise the achievement of key service objectives and could lead to significant risk of error, fraud, loss or reputational damage being suffered. ## Appendix B: Background And Context As part of this review we confirmed and updated our prior year understanding of the key controls operating within Barnet's key financial systems to ensure our work is up to date and relevant. We then devised an overarching programme of testing across the different systems and processes to give assurance on the effectiveness of these key controls. CAM is the process of on-going testing of key controls to assess whether they are operating effectively, and to flag areas and report transactions that appear to circumvent control parameters. We use a combination of manual testing and data mining tools to extract data from the IT system, using pre-determined parameters to check that controls are operating as designed CAM helps to provide regular and timely assurance over the financial systems and informs our opinion of the adequacy and effectiveness of these systems at the year end. Our testing under continuous auditing and monitoring provides the following benefits: - Gives management assurance over the operation of key controls during the year; - Control weaknesses can be addressed during the year rather than after the year end; and - The administrative burden on management is reduced when compared with a full system review, in areas where there is sufficient evidence that key controls are operating effectively. This approach has been agreed as part of the 2017/18 Internal Audit programme and developed in consultation with the owners and operators of the relevant systems. The controls we have tested have been identified through a combination of industry knowledge, historic audit findings and workshops with the key contacts and system owners. All controls have been identified using a risk-based approach. ## Appendix C - Internal Audit Roles And Responsibilities Limitations inherent to the internal auditor's work We have undertaken the review of *Key Financial Controls - Payroll*, subject to the limitations outlined below. ## Internal Control Internal control systems, no matter how well designed and operated, are affected by inherent limitations. These include the possibility of poor judgment in decisionmaking, human error, control processes being deliberately circumvented by employees and others, management overriding controls and the occurrence of unforeseeable circumstances. ## Future Periods Our assessment of controls is for the period specified only. Historic evaluation of effectiveness is not relevant to future periods due to the risk that: - the design of controls may become inadequate because of changes in operating environment, law, regulation or other; or - the degree of compliance with policies and procedures may deteriorate. ## Responsibilities Of Management And Internal Auditors It Is Management'S Responsibility To Develop And Maintain Sound Systems Of Risk Management, Internal Control And Governance And For The Prevention And Detection Of Irregularities And Fraud. Internal Audit Work Should Not Be Seen As A Substitute For Management'S Responsibilities For The Design And Operation Of These Systems. We endeavour to plan our work so that we have a reasonable expectation of detecting significant control weaknesses and, if detected, we shall carry out additional work directed towards identification of consequent fraud or other irregularities. However, internal audit procedures alone, even when carried out with due professional care, do not guarantee that fraud will be detected. Accordingly, our examinations as internal auditors should not be relied upon solely to disclose fraud, defalcations or other irregularities which may exist.

en

2053-pdf

## # Adoption Services City Of York Council Internal Audit Report 2019/20 Business Unit: Children, Education and Communities Directorate, Responsible Officer: Assistant Director, Children's Specialist Services Service Manager: Head of Agency, One Adoption North and Humber Reference: 11420/003 ## Summary And Overall Conclusions Introduction One Adoption North and Humber went live in February 2018 and is responsible for finding families for children needing an adoptive family, the recruitment of adopters and the provision of post adoption support. The Agency delivers services for five Local Authorities, City of York Council (the host), North Yorkshire County Council, East Riding of Yorkshire Council, Hull City Council and North East Lincolnshire Council. Services are provided under a regional model in accordance with the government policy paper 'Adoption: a vision for change' (2016) that states all local authorities should be in a regional adoption agency by 2020. The purpose of regionalisation is to have a system where children are matched with the most suitable adopter as quickly as possible, with recruitment taking place at an efficient scale to provide a pool of 'adoption ready' adopters large enough and well enough matched to the needs of children waiting and enough high quality adoption support services available nationwide. The model delivers a single service under a Head of Agency and two Service Managers but is not fully integrated, with staffing systems and procedures remaining under the control of the member councils. The Service Managers report to the Head of Agency, who is directly accountable to the Leadership and Management Board. Objectives and Scope of the Audit The purpose of this audit was to provide assurance to the Local Authorities that the procedures and controls in place ensured:  Compliance with the approved delivery model  Shared budgets are well managed  Effective performance management systems are in place  Management of best practice and quality assurance  Responsibilities in respect of Inter Agency Fees are met  GDPR responsibilities have been met  The effectiveness of the User Voice system in service development  The overall effect of the Agency on the rates of recruitment of adopters and the timeliness and number of children placed in the Agency can be measured. Due to the Covid-19 Pandemic, we have been limited in obtaining information and data to carry out some of the proposed testing. This primarily related to compliance testing of the quality assurance framework and the overall effectiveness of the Agency compared to pre-Agency figures. ## Key Findings The organisation of the Regional Adoption Agency appears to comply with the approved delivery model with the exception of inconsistencies in who the service manager reports to on adoption issues. Additionally it was noted that the Agency does not currently have a risk register in place. The shared budget is managed well, and held separate from Inter-Agency fees. The budget position is reported every quarter to the Management Board. Contributions from each member local authority to the shared budget are collected as one single payment instead of in four instalments as agreed in the Partnership Agreement, however the Partnership Agreement was due for review in February 2020 and this will be considered as an amendment. There are effective performance management systems in place, with monthly, quarterly and annual reports produced from local and statutory measures. Reports are regularly presented at the Heads of Service meetings and the Management Board meetings and scrutiny of the reports is evidenced. The Agency has a suitable system in place to manage best practice and has an approved Quality Assurance Framework. Service managers and the Head of Agency complete audits to ensure that staff are adhering to policy and procedure. These form part of staff apprai sals and allow service managers to set targets for their teams. The process in place for collecting the first instalment of Inter-Agency Fees is appropriate however, responsibility for collecting the final instalment is currently external to the Agency, which could prevent the final instalment being requested within a suitable timeframe. In relation to GDPR, the 5 Local Authorities in the Agency do not have shared systems. The Agency used suitably qualified staff from CYC to assist in creating a Data Sharing Agreement, which was signed by all member authorities. Each authority is responsible for compliance with the data sharing agreement. The GDPR arrangements at individual authorities were not included in this review. The User Voice System is the process of providing the Agency with direct feedback on improving the service that they offer to their adopters. The system uses social media, surveys and group sessions to form a basis for new projects or existing projects to ensure they are working or how they could be improved. The system is being used effectively in improving service development and providing a direct link between the Management Board and the clients. The User Voice System has been integral in getting client feedback through surveys and focus groups and setting up the Peer Mentoring system. The Agency measures the recruitment of adopters, the timeliness of placements and number of children that are placed through the Agency through their regular reports, with the Head of Agency providing commentary for the Management Board to explain any changes or trends in the data provided. The Agency has shown performance levels above the national average over the last two years since its inception on most areas within the report. ## Overall Conclusions The arrangements for managing risk were good with few weaknesses identified. An effective control environment is in operation, but there is scope for further improvement in the areas identified. Our overall opinion of the controls within the system at the time of the audit was that they provided Substantial Assurance. ## 1 Risk Register Issue/Control Weakness Risk There is no risk register in place for the Agency. The Agency is unable to effectively manage its risks or deliver on its objectives. ## Findings A risk register is a management tool which helps managers and companies document risks, track risks and address them through preventative controls and corrective actions. At the beginning of the audit, the Risk Register for the Agency was requested from the Head of Agency. However, the Agency does not have a risk register in place. Although the Agency is jointly owned by 5 Local Authorities, it should have its own risk register in place, which would then be reviewed regularly by the Management Board. This has been raised with the Head of Agency who plans to have a risk register with regular review in place as soon as possible. ## Agreed Action 1.1 A Risk Register will be created, presented and reviewed at Management Board on a quarterly basis. ## 2 Delivery Model Issue/Control Weakness Risk The Agency's current working practice for reporting does not match the approved delivery model. The Agency fails to achieve its objectives set out in the Partnership Agreement ## Findings The Partnership Agreement, which is due to be reviewed by the Agency's Management Board, specifies how the Agency is to be organised, through an approved delivery model. The delivery model sets out the Agency structure and the responsibilities in each area. As the Regional Adoption system is new, there is not a mandatory delivery model which all Regional Adoption Agencies need to be following, wi th only recommended models suggested. The current model in the Partnership Agreement outlines that Service Managers for both teams are expected to report to the Head of Agency on adoption related matters. They report to their Head of Service at their respective Local Authority for HR related matters. This model has a single line of accountability for adoption matters through the Head of Service who then reports to the Management Board. Current practice is that the Service Manager for the North Team is still reporting to and supervised by the Head of Service for North Yorkshire County Council. This does not match the approved Delivery Model or provide an equal service for all Local Authorities in the Agency, with an efficient reporting structure and a single line of accountability to the Management Board. As the Partnership Agreement is currently under review, it would be a suitable time to review current practice against the delivery model, and make the necessary changes. ## Agreed Action 2.1 This will be discussed as the Partnership Agreement is updated. An agreed cause of action will be put in place. ## 3 Inter Agency Fees Issue/Control Weakness Risk The process for requesting the final fee for Inter Agency adoptions is not efficient. The Agency fails to collect all income due for children adopted outside of the Agency. ## Findings When a child from a different Adoption Agency or Local Authority is placed with one of the Agency's adopters, there is a fee of £27,000 owed to the Agency (added 10% if it is London based). The payment is formed of two instalments, 66% when the match has been made and the final 33% once the adoption has been completed. The collection of the first instalment of Inter-Agency Fees is initiated by the Service Managers who complete the Inter Agency fee form. Every quarter, the Finance Officer at CYC will contact the relevant Service Managers to see if any adoptions have been completed in the last quarter. This will then prompt the Finance Officer to collect the final instalment of the Inter Agency Fee. Although testing evidenced that money is being collected, the current system requires the Finance Officer who is a CYC employee, to obtain information on adoption completions from the Service Managers in order to trigger invoicing of the final instalment rather than this process being initiated by the service itself. As the information is only requested quarterly there could be a delay in collection of up to 2 months. This practice could be improved by placing the responsibility for initiating invoicing of the final instalment with the Service Managers. ## Agreed Action 3.1 Service Managers Service Mangers will notify York Finance on adoption orders being made when a child has been placed with an RAA adopter. This information will be checked monthly from the data return. ## Audit Opinions And Priorities For Actions Audit Opinions Audit work is based on sampling transactions to test the operation of systems. It cannot guarantee the elimination of fraud or error. Our opinion is based on the risks we identify at the time of the audit. Our overall audit opinion is based on 5 grades of opinion, as set out below. Opinion Assessment of internal control | High Assurance | |----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | Substantial | | Assurance | | Overall, good management of risk with few weaknesses identified. An effective control environment is in | | operation but there is scope for further improvement in the areas identified. | | | | Reasonable | | Assurance | | Overall, satisfactory management of risk with a number of weaknesses identified. An acceptable control | | environment is in operation but there are a number of improvements that could be made. | Limited Assurance Overall, poor management of risk with significant control weaknesses in key areas and major improvements required before an effective control environment will be in operation. No Assurance Overall, there is a fundamental failure in control and risks are not being effectively managed. A number of key areas require substantial improvement to protect the system from error and abuse. ## Priorities For Actions Priority 1 A fundamental system weakness, which presents unacceptable risk to the system objectives and requires urgent attention by management. Priority 2 A significant system weakness, whose impact or frequency presents risks to the system objectives, which needs to be addressed by management. Priority 3 The system objectives are not exposed to significant risk, but the issue merits attention by management. Where information resulting from audit work is made public or is provided to a third party by the client or by Veritau then this must be done on the understandi ng that any third party will rely on the information at its own risk. Veritau will not owe a duty of care or assume any responsibility towards anyone other than the client in relation to the information supplied. Equally, no third party may assert any rights or bring any claims against Veritau in connection with the information. Where information is provided to a named third party, the third party will keep the information confidential. This page is intentionally left blank

en

4615-pdf

## O Ou ur r S Sh ha ar re ed d P Pa as st t: : P Ph ha as se e T Tw wo o: : D De ev ve el lo op pi in ng g 2 21 1s st t C Ce en nt tu ur ry y A Ar rc ch hi iv ve e S Se er rv vi ic ce es s Local Authority Archive Services in England: Funding Opportunities and Development Needs English Archival Mapping Project Phase Two Mapping Project Board 2001 1 ## Acknowledgements The English Archival Mapping Project Phase Two has been directed and monitored by a Project Board, convened by the Public Record Office (PRO), and comprising representatives of the Association of Chief Archivists in Local Government (ACALG), the Historical Manuscripts Commission (HMC), and the Society of Archivists (SofA). The members of the Project Board were: Elizabeth Hallam Smith Director of Public Services, (PRO, Chair) Jim Grisenthwaite County Archivist, Cumbria Record Office, (ACALG) Deborah Jenkins Head of the London Metropolitan Archives, (ACALG) Elizabeth Rees Chief Archivist, Tyne & Wear Archives Service, (ACALG) Ian Hart Senior Curatorial Officer, (HMC) Bruce Jackson County Archivist, Lancashire Record Office, (SofA) David Leitch1 Head of Archive Inspection Services Department, (PRO) The Team which carried the Project forward on a day-to-day basis was based in the PRO's Archive Inspection Services Department. Justin Frost designed the questionnaire; Steven Jones and Nicholas Coney were responsible for monitoring and processing the returned questionnaires; Fiona van Hoof and Sarah Jane Newbery were responsible for data entry. Justin Frost prepared this report on behalf of the Mapping Project Board. We are grateful to all 132 head archivists and their colleagues in local authority record offices who took the time to complete the detailed project questionnaire. We are also grateful to the chairs of the Regional Archives Councils for their support for this project, and in validating the emerging findings. Elizabeth Stazicker Chair of the East of England Regional Archive Council Rachel Watson Chair of the East Midlands Regional Archive Council David Mander Chair of the London Archives Regional Council Elizabeth Rees Chair of the North East Regional Archive Council Jim Grisenthwaite Chair of the North West Regional Archive Council Richard Childs Chair of the South East Regional Archive Council Paul Brough Chair of the South West Regional Archive Council Roger Vaughan Chair of the West Midlands Regional Archive Council Keith Sweetmore Chair of the Yorkshire Regional Archive Council Enquiries about this report should be directed to: Steven Jones Head of Archive Inspection Services Records Management Department Public Record Office Kew Surrey TW9 4DU Telephone: 020 8392 5318 Fax: 020 8392 5283 e-mail: steven.jones@pro.gov.uk Abbreviations used in this report A2A Access to Archives (national retrospective catalogue | | | conversion programme) | |-------|-------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------| | BS | | British Standard | | CIPFA | Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy | | | CITU | | Cabinet Office Information Technology Unit | | CPD | Continuing professional development | | | DCMS | Department for Culture Media and Sport | | | FOI | Freedom of Information | | | HEFCE | Higher Education Funding Council for England | | | HLF | Heritage Lottery Fund | | | HMC | Historical Manuscripts Commission | | | ICT | Information and communications technology | | | IDAC | Inter-Departmental Archives Committee | | | JISC | Joint Information Services Committee (of the Higher | | | | Education Funding Councils) | | | LIC | Library and Information Commission | | | LINC | | Library and Information Networking Co-operation Council | | NCA | National Council on Archives | | | NMGM | National Museums and Galleries on Merseyside | | | NOF | New Opportunities Fund | | | NPO | National Preservation Office | | | NTO | National Training Organisation | | | PRO | Public Record Office | | | RAC | Regional Archive Council | | | UKOLN | United Kingdom Office of Library Networking | | | | (University of Bath) | | | | | | ## Contents 1 Purpose of this Report 2 Project History and Methodology 3 Main Findings PART I: 4 Accommodation and Storage The National 5 Public Access and Services Analysis 6 Preservation and Conservation 7 Finding Aids and Reference Services 8 Information and Communications Technology 9 Electronic Records 10 Training and Development 11 External relations and Cross-sectoral Working PART II: 12 East of England Region Regional Findings 13 East Midlands Region 14 London Region 15 North East Region 16 North West Region 17 South East Region 18 South West Region 19 West Midlands Region 20 Yorkshire Region 21 Mapping Project Phase Two: Overall Conclusions Appendices 1. Statistical Data: National Charts; Regional Charts 2. Participating & Non-participating Archive Services 3. Useful Contacts and Addresses ## 1. Purpose Of This Report The purpose of this report is to update the findings and conclusions of the Phase One English Archival Mapping Project - "Our Shared Past: an Archival Domesday for England" (1997)2 in 8 key areas of provision: Accommodation and Storage Public Access and Services Preservation and Conservation Finding Aids and Reference Services Information and Communications Technology Electronic Records Training and Development External relations and Cross-sectoral Working ½ To analyse the findings of the 2000/2001 data ½ To indicate strengths and weaknesses of current provision in the English local authority archive sector ½ To signpost any development needs and priorities ½ To take account of new developments in the English archival scene ½ To indicate current funding opportunities Archives have gained significant ground since Phase One (1997-98) of this series of mapping surveys, both in profile and strategic capacity. The findings of this report will provide the advocacy necessary to support the improvement programmes of local authority archive services, and to frame the direction of resources to enable archives to develop with confidence and purpose to meet the challenges of the 21st century. This report is intended for a wide audience: policy makers in central and local government, funding and grant awarding bodies, employing authorities, archivists and records managers, and all users of local authority archive services. The establishment of Regional Archive Councils3 by the National Council on Archives, and the creation of a new government advisory body, Resource (The Council for Museums, Archives and Libraries),4 have been major landmarks. They are conclusive evidence that the archive sector is now firmly established in the context of the regional cultural agenda, and recognised by central government on equal terms with the partner domains of museums and libraries. The value of archives The archives held by local authority archive services have been created by local and central government bodies, private businesses, local organisations and societies and individuals. Holdings range from medieval parchment, paper files, letters, volumes, maps, plans, photographs to modern media such as audio and video cassettes, film, computer tapes and disks, and CD-ROMs. Archives are an essential part of our cultural heritage, and the exploration and understanding of our archival treasures plays an important part in improving the quality of life for many thousands of people. Archives engage users in a direct and personal way and can play a full part in developing and supporting wider government policy aims, such as combating social exclusion, promoting cultural diversity, economic regeneration and urban renewal. Archives offer personal enjoyment, a sense of community identity, and create valuable learning opportunities. With particular reference to recent legislation for Data Protection, Freedom Of Information and Human Rights, archives stand as evidence which can enable people to have a greater understanding and awareness of the way we are governed. The changing cultural landscape In the last 30 years there has been a significant expansion in the quantity and scope of archive collections. In parallel, there has been a continuing increase in the number of people using those collections, fuelled in large measure by the growth of interest in family and local history. In England, there are as many as one million visits each year to archive collections, and over 75% of those who visit do so for private or personal research.5 Across the country the use of archival material has never been more popular. Coupled with this growth is a changing Government agenda, which archives can seize to play a key role in delivering information policy objectives. The heart of this vision is a landscape where information is accessible to all. Archives have a core role to play in embracing this vision. 5 Public Services Quality Group, National Survey of Visitors to British Archives, June 1998. 3 RACs were set up by the NCA in response to proposals from the DCMS for the development of regional cultural structures. 4 Resource was created in April 2000, embracing the former Museums and Galleries Commission, and Library and Information Commission, together with new responsibilities for archives. 2. Project History and Methodology Project History In the last 5 years, the archive community has become increasingly aware that it needs to adopt a much more coherent and objective approach to the determination of funding and strategic priorities. Based on models developed for other cultural sectors, the concept of an "archival map" has been successfully applied to surveys beginning with Welsh local authority archive services (1996), English local authority archive services (Phase One, 1997), and Scottish archives (1999). In addition to this update of mapping for English local authority archive services (Phase Two), a further Welsh update and a project to map English specialist repositories6 are due to report shortly. Methodology In late Spring 1999, the Public Record Office convened a Project Board to take forward Phase Two of the English Archival Mapping Project, a survey to update the finding of Phase One and to take account of developments in local authority archives since 1997, such as new buildings and refurbishments, and the effects of administrative and local government changes. The methodology of self-assessment by questionnaire was identical to that employed for Phase One, with one difference: from the outset, the survey was executed on the basis of transparency and openness of findings in terms of priority bandings. This arrangement, with the full approval of all participants, gave the project validity and integrity and ensured common ownership of the findings. As in Phase One, individual scores were released only to the repositories concerned, and to RAC chairs. The questionnaire was issued to all 134 local authority archive services in England in the autumn of 1999, and complete returns were received from 132 repositories by late Spring 2000. Returns were scored by the PRO project team using a standard formula which gave weight to certain questions to produce an overall score. Provisional results were then sent to each RAC for validation and comments. As a result of this exercise, a number of "anomalies" were investigated by the project team, and in consultation with the relevant head archivists of the repositories concerned, some changes were made in order to 6 The Missing Link, a project coordinated by the Society of Archivists to map specialist repositories in England has been achieve consistency in the results. The revised results were then circulated to all RACs, individual repositories and the Project Board for final approval in Summer 2000. Details of final individual scores and priority bands were then distributed to all participating repositories, together with overall summaries of the results in August 2000. The almost 100% response rate lends the findings of this report weight and credence. The key role played by the RACs in assessing and moderating the scores provides overwhelming evidence that a strategic approach to defining core priorities, and assessing funding requirements and objectives is recognised by the archive community as essential. Note on scoring and priority bands Levels of provision have been assessed by placing record offices in 4 priority bands (see tables below). Most findings in this report have been expressed as percentages of the number of record offices (out of a total of 132) falling within each of these priority bands. These have been rounded to the nearest whole percent, for ease of comparison and analysis. | Very poor provision = | Priority band 1 | |----------------------------|--------------------| | | | | Poor provision | = | | | | | Fair provision | = | | | | | Good provision | = | | | | Priority bands have been expressed in pie chart form (see example, above) throughout this report. Percentage figures indicate the proportion of record offices' scores which fall into each priority band. For a survey population of 132 record offices: | | 2% = 3 record offices | 50% = 66 record offices | |-----|-----------------------------|------------------------------| | | 5% = 6 record offices | 60% = 79 record offices | | | 10% = 13 record offices | 70% = 92 record offices | | | 20% = 26 record offices | 80% = 106 record offices | | | 30% = 40 record offices | 90% = 119 record offices | | | 40% = 54 record offices | 100% = 132 record offices | | | | | ## 3. Main Findings The evidence of this report leads inescapably to the conclusion that local authority archives continue to have significant investment needs. The detailed findings which follow indicate only limited change and improvement since Phase One of the survey in 1997. In four key areas national provision is rated as poor: for the sections Accommodation and Storage, Preservation and Conservation, Finding Aids and Reference Services, and **Information and Communications Technology** national provision is rated as poor. For **Electronic Records** the national average provision is very poor. **Public Access and Services** provision is rated as fair, as are **Training and Development** and External Relations and Cross-sectoral Working. Section by section headlines Accommodation and Storage ½ A major concern is continued lack of space to store new accessions. A quarter of all services report that they are now full; nearly 80% will be full in 5 years or less ½ 70% of local authority archive services reported no change in records storage since 1997, although in 1997, 65% of services were found to be storing archives in premises which fell far short of adequacy Public Access and Services ½ 50% of services report that user numbers are increasing ½ Reflecting increased user numbers, 30% of services report increases in staff numbers; however, 12% report a decrease ½ Despite growing pressure on public space, 42% of services report no change to searchroom facilities since 1997; 12% report significant change ½ 18% of services are now open more; 8% open for fewer hours ½ 73% of services have trained staff in customer care The slight positive trend in the results for Accommodation and Storage and Public Access and Services since 1997 is partially explained by the completion of new buildings which have transformed the situation of major county record offices, (Surrey History Centre, Essex Record Office, Berkshire Record Office, and Oxfordshire Record Office), construction of new branch offices (East Kent Archives Centre), or significant developments to existing premises (Gloucestershire Record Office). Welcome as these developments are, there are still many locations where both public accommodation and archive storage are in need of significant investment to bring them up to recognised standards. Preservation and Conservation ½ 30% of services have written conservation strategies; 56% have disaster control plans ½ 55% have current microform programmes or plan to have them; 31% are actively carrying out conservation surveys ½ 69% report no change in conservation facilities since 1997, despite the 1998 Mapping Project Phase One report recommending significant investment in this area The overall finding of poor provision for Preservation and Conservation demonstrates that substantial investment is required in stewardship of collections. Finding Aids and Reference Services ½ 39% of services report that they have unlisted and therefore inaccessible material - this ranges from 2% to 95%7 of an office's total holdings, the average being 15% ½ 24% of services reported that over 95% of their finding aids are currently being produced by an automated software package ½ 63 offices are involved in A2A bids for retrospective conversion of catalogue data8 The poor provision for Finding Aids and Reference Services is a striking indication that many collections languish unlisted and unavailable. Information and Communications Technology ½ 41% of services have an ICT strategy, but 46% rate the overall application of ICT in their service as poor or fairly poor ½ 37% are currently working on or planning programmes to digitise original records (25% in 1997) ½ 59% are linked to the Internet for staff use; 28% provide public Internet access Of concern is the finding of low provision for Information and Communications Technology, which despite the investment of many record offices in archival software and hardware since 1997 must cast doubts on the readiness of some services to participate in national networking initiatives such as the Access to Archives (A2A)9 rolling programme. Electronic Records ½ Over half of all services surveyed reported that their authorities are creating and storing records electronically, but only 3% (4 services) have the capacity to store electronic records in accordance with the British Standard10 and 73% did not expect to be in a position to deal with electronic records within the next 2-3 years, making very real the prospect of severe information loss ½ In 1997, 98% of services were ill-equipped to deal with the selection and longterm preservation of electronic records generated by their authorities; Phase Two found that 94% of services were in this position of poor provision The finding that Electronic Records are very poorly catered for is perhaps of most immediate concern, and serves to underline the view of many archivists and records managers that archives are still unable to meet some of even the most basic needs in this rapidly developing field. As a consequence we as a nation are in very real danger of losing irreplaceable records - "the black hole" of recent history is a threat. In addition, unless these issues are addressed now, local authorities may well find themselves in breach of information management legislation. Training and Development ½ 63% of services hold internal courses, whilst 84% send staff on external courses ½ 77% of services regarded current training provision as fair or good ½ On specific training: 73% of services did not run courses in electronic records management, but 71% have trained staff in basic IT skills The recognition of fair provision for Training and Development and comments from respondents indicate that although this area is not particularly wellresourced, the capacity of local authority archive services for self-help is considerable. A concentrated effort of resources on training to meet the electronic records and electronic networking agenda is essential to improve the situation in these key areas. 9 A2A aims to create a virtual national archive catalogue for England, bringing together 8 million catalogue entries (400,000 catalogue pages), and making that information available globally from a central web portal. Led by the PRO, A2A is managed by a consortium of archive bodies, and is funded centrally through a grant from the Treasury "Invest to Save" budget. Individual regional and local consortia projects for retro-conversion are seeking funding from HLF who fully support the principles of the programme. 10 British Standard BS 4783/1-8: 1988-1994 Recommendations for the storage, transportation and maintenance of media for use in data processing and information storage. External Relations and Cross-sector Working ½ 73% of services assessed cross-sectoral working and external relations as fair or good ½ 57% of services are part of a local network, working together for joint objectives or projects such as ICT, communications, training and development, exhibitions and other public services and events The fair provision assessment accorded to External Relations and Cross-sector working is clear evidence of the willingness and ability of archives to develop constructive partnerships to contribute to wider agendas and to collaborate with museums, libraries and other organisations such as social services to achieve common goals and objectives. Regional Archive Councils are working with regional agencies such as Area Museum Councils and Regional Library Systems to develop a strong foundation for future collaboration. Of course these assessments only tell half the story. Many record offices provide excellent public services and provide the best possible storage for the archives in their custody, in the face of continuing pressure on resources. Many are developing innovative and far-reaching ways to reach out to develop new audiences and new ways of working. Tribute must be paid to the many conscientious staff working in archives, making records available, interpreting them, and caring for their physical well-being. Local authority archive services are laying the foundations for future growth by active participation in the development and implementation of regional archive strategies through the RACs. In addition, by the end of Autumn 2001, Regional Archive Development Officers will have been appointed (one for each English region). These posts11 will provide muchneeded support and capacity for the RACs. PART I: The National Analysis 4 Accommodation and Storage 5 Public Access and Services 6 Preservation and Conservation 7 Finding Aids and Reference Services 8 Information and Communications Technology 9 Electronic Records 10 Training and Development 11 External Relations and Crosssectoral Working 4. Accommodation and Storage "additional strongroom accommodation is urgently needed to allow our service to develop" "we have made little or no progress since 1997 in tackling our bigger problem - the poor quality and overall lack of archive storage space" "very significant sums are required to bring the main building up to full BS 5454 standard" 55% of local authority record offices provide storage accommodation which is assessed as either poor or fairly poor 12% provide good storage accommodation Key: see page 8 archive collections continue to be housed in poor or fairly poor accommodation, and there is a national chronic lack of accrual space for storage of new records. Some 70% of record offices report no change in their main building storage since 1997. The need to improve or totally re-furbish or rebuild is clearly a priority for most services. The situation has improved slightly since 1997, with the number of collections held in good accommodation nearly doubling, up 5% to 12%. This is encouraging, and reflects the impact of funding streams such as the Heritage Lottery Fund which has provided for a small number of new buildings and building improvements. However, it is notable that most recent significant new Archives must be held in suitable accommodation if they are to be preserved for future generations. Standards to which most institutions aspire are British Standard BS 5454 (2000),12 supported by the inspection regimes and advice of the PRO and HMC.13 The overwhelming conclusion of the Phase Two survey is that over half of all local authority 12 BS 5454 (2000): Recommendations for the storage and exhibition of archival documents. 13 The accepted standards are those recognised by the PRO and HMC, namely the HMC Standard for Record Repositories (3rd edition 2001), and Beyond the Public Record Office: Public Records in Places of Deposit (1994), both of which are framed around the principles of BS 5454. building schemes have been funded entirely through capital investment by the parent authorities or public/private initiatives. Fire, water, security and environmental protection All record offices take basic precautions against these potential threats. Half of all offices report that fire protection is good or fair. New EU regulations14 banning the use of halon as a fire suppressant have imposed replacement obligations on some services.15 Given the tendency to store records in basements, and recent climate trends, the threat of water ingress has assumed an increased importance. A number of offices report incidences of flooding, and water ingress through leaking roofs and pipes in storage areas. Although virtually all offices ensure controlled access to strongroom areas, security concerns are more likely where services occupy shared premises.16 Despite the number of poor or fairly poor assessments of fire, water and security protection decreasing slightly since 1997, the underlying pattern of only limited improvements means that core problems still remain to be addressed. BS 5454 (2000), the standard for good archive storage recommends careful control and observation of temperature, humidity and ventilation. Many record offices find that due to the constraints of occupying buildings not purposely designed for archives storage and public access, the absence of effective environmental controls means that a stable environment cannot be maintained during the fluctuations of the seasons - "Air conditioning equipment needs major overhaul or replacement to solve seasonal problem of high humidity in storage area resulting in mould outbreak" is an all too common example of the problems reported. More favourably, whilst overall conditions are variable, most offices have programmes ensuring that archive material is protected by being adequately boxed or wrapped. The exception is map and outsize document storage where many offices report a lack of good quality storage for these items. Accrual space A quarter of local authority archives report they are now full. Just under 50% report that they will be full in less than five years. Only 7% have space for over 11 years growth. The inescapable conclusion of these findings is that without substantial investment, 94 out of 132 local authority archive services in England will either have to limit acceptance of new accessions or begin to de-accession material by 2005. As space problems become more acute many offices are placing increasing reliance on substandard outstores, with the added attendant problems of restricted public access, 14 EC Regulation 2037/2000: Controls on Ozone Depleting Substances. 15 This expenditure is likely to come from capital budgets for modernisation of parent authorities. 16 This is common where services share joint premises with library or local studies collections ways forward is the funding of incremental improvement. Such projects, funded by the HLF and other grant awarding bodies, include upgrading of fire defences, fitting of water alarms, installation of mobile shelving to increase capacity, reboxing and packaging programmes, and the provision of environmental monitoring and control equipment.19 In a number of cases, where a building has a large number of faults, building of new premises would prove a more economic use of funding than continued investment in premises fundamentally unsuited for the storage of records. New partnerships can offer opportunities that can meet some of these needs. Neighbouring city and county record offices are joining forces to create strong services which can attract and sustain new funding, such as the recent merger between Chester and Cheshire Archive Services. Storage partnerships with other service providers such as the universities or the private sector and museum services can offer joint solutions to shared problems. and increased document handling risks. Special media storage Over a third of all offices collect material on special media.17 Virtually no offices have the capacity to deal with electronic records, but many hold photographic, moving image and sound archives. However only 12% rate their special media storage as good or fairly good, and those are almost universally archives which incorporate a designated film or sound archive18 within their remit, or those offices built within the last 10 years. Conclusion Good buildings, fit for their purpose are the key to strong archive services. Preservation of archival holdings is equally as important as providing means of access to them. Large-scale investment can only hope to secure significant improvements to a small number of locations. Plans for improvements and expansion are often dependent on often scarce matching funding. Whilst the number of new or re-furbished buildings has given the impression of an overall improvement in standards, many services still have to make do with sub-standard storage. One of the most achievable and sustainable 17 Typically defined as all records that are not paper or parchment. 18 The Film Archive Forum and Film Council are currently developing strategies priorities for moving image collections. 19 For example, digital monitoring devices, and portable air handling (humidification / de-humidification, circulation and filtering) equipment. ## 5. Public Access And Services "areas of excellence [of our service] are public service delivery, and imaginative outreach" "public and staff accommodation is poor and we urgently need increased space. Public expectations are rising and we need to improve finding aids …" "our strengths: the front-line public service, which the public acknowledge as high quality…" 65% of local authority record offices provide public services which are designated as either good or fair 50% of record offices are experiencing increased visitor numbers Key: see page 8 Archives are almost unique in the cultural sector in experiencing increasing user numbers. There is clearly public demand for archives and their services.20 English local authority archive services have a strong tradition of responsive, wellrespected public service, which is borne out by user survey findings.21 The findings of the Phase Two survey strongly support this perception. Nearly two thirds of all repositories provide fair or good public services. This is comparable with the findings of 1997. What is surprising is that 5% rated their public services as very poor, compared to none in 1997. One explanation for this anomaly is that familiarity with mapping enabled respondents to answer the Phase 2 survey more objectively than in 1997. Search room facilities An archive searchroom must provide an environment in which readers and staff can work comfortably and efficiently, whilst ensuring that the well-being of archival material is not compromised. A disappointing finding was that 88% of services reported little or only moderate change in searchroom facilities since 1997, despite user numbers increasing. Many record offices are operating at full capacity. Given user demands for more microform equipment, self-service copying facilities and computer terminals, the pressures on space become apparent. Many offices counter problems of overcrowding by operating booking systems and ensuring that any service restrictions are fully publicised. There is an understandable conflict between drives to attract new audiences and increase user numbers and to manage this increase within existing physical constraints. The Phase Two survey updated data on the core facilities which users are increasingly growing to expect. Just under half of all offices provide exhibition space,22 and nearly a quarter has access to a lecture theatre. A third has meeting facilities, and over 40% have a separate room for visiting parties.23 Given the necessary security measures required in an archive searchroom it is surprising that only 38% of services provide public cloakrooms and lockers. 30% of services provide a public telephone. 80% provide public toilet facilities, and 34% provide a room or facilities for public refreshments.24 22 This is often limited; for example display panels and showcases in public areas. 23 This is seen as essential for an effective community or external programme as it means that meetings can be held when the main search room is in use. 24 Some offices have taken an enterprising approach to provision of tea/coffee/snack facilities for readers, all aimed at making the visitor's experience more pleasant. Access for users with special needs Access for users with special needs is a consideration when upgrading existing, or planning new facilities. But all services endeavour to make suitable access arrangements where possible and find it helpful if they are given prior notification of visits. Often, it is the legacy of poor building design which acts as a barrier to access.25 Access for users with disabilities is often difficult, though 57% of services have public toilet facilities which are fully accessible.26 Parent authorities and local authority archives are encouraged to break down access barriers. Opening hours and enquiries Users are growing to expect more convenient opening hours from all local authority archive services.27 Record office opening hours vary greatly from limited hours on limited days to full "office hours" five days a week with evening and weekend opening. It was heartening to find that only 8% of offices were open for fewer hours than in 1997, whilst 18% were open longer, although some regions report fewer hours overall. Nearly half regarded their opening hours as good or fair. In order to 25 Many services occupy old buildings with poor access; for example for those with mobility impairments. Many offices lack induction loops, or have poor signage. 26 Resource is currently carrying out research across museums, archives and libraries to assess attitudes to disability issues, and levels of current provision. 27 Libraries are required to meet legal obligations concerning opening hours. Users are growing to expect a similar level of service from archives. extend access many offices have "24-hour" access to finding aids and service information through highquality web sites. Two thirds of services rate their enquiry service as good or fairly good. 64% of services are able to deal with e-mail enquiries, and this figure is rising. Authorities responsible for record offices might support public access further by maintaining opening hours and providing resources to extend them where there is sufficient demand. Staffing The majority of respondents commented on the quality and experience of their staff as being one of the greatest assets of their service. 30% reported increases in staff complement; only 12% reported a decrease. Where staff numbers increase the benefits are obvious - one office reported that a modest staffing increase enabled the reintroduction of Saturday morning opening. Many respondents reported that through innovative staff deployment,28 improvements in public service such as increased opening times and access to professional advice can be made. Welcome though this improved efficiency is, it is no real substitute for the maintenance of a full staff complement. Conclusion The quality and popularity of archive services is coming under increasingly closer scrutiny and pressure as both user numbers and expectation increase. Some offices have successfully achieved recognition for good customer service, such as the Government's Charter Mark award for excellence in public service. In many offices, numerous cost-neutral improvements have been implemented, arising from a culture of close consultation with users, and a very real desire to improve services. While some record offices can justifiably boast well equipped and well appointed search rooms, others are struggling with cramped facilities and limited opportunities for change. If archives are to sustain new user groups, they must be pleasant to visit and provide a range of services and facilities. Funding bodies should be encouraged to support projects for the provision of microform, special access needs and ICT equipment. For some offices, where both the public space and storage space is acutely lacking, a move to new or expanded accommodation may be the only way forward. For others, it may be possible to identify options for change within existing premises. Delivery of efficient, effective public services is the key to future success. Parent authorities might build on the proven track record of local authority archive services to satisfy the requirements of an increasingly avid, sophisticated and diverse audience. 6. Preservation and Conservation "[our] main weakness is lack of conservation resources" "space is restricted, particularly for large maps…we have difficulty filling vacancies" "facilities and equipment have gained from project funding support" 70% of local authority record offices' provision for records conservation is rated as poor or very poor 11 offices out of 132 regard provision as good Key: see page 8 to upgrade existing equipment. Space is at premium, and many conservation units continue to operate in cramped, poorly designed premises. Only 28% of offices report that they have sufficient staff and equipment to meet current needs. Although there are shortcomings in many individual repositories it is important to note that the archives sector is well provided with conservation facilities, many of which are centres of excellence. Approximately half of all offices surveyed have their own conservation facilities, and of this number 50% rate them as good or fairly good. This suggests that provision is being polarised between the conservation "haves" and the "have-nots." Problems reported Conservation is the practical application of techniques and processes to archival documents to achieve chemical and physical stabilisation to extend their life and usability, and accessibility to the public. Preservation is the on-going process of caring for archives to ensure that conservation can be kept to a minimum. Facilities and staff The conclusion of the Phase Two survey is that 70% of offices regard provision for records conservation as very poor or poor, compared to 60% of offices in these priority bands in 1997. Alarmingly, 69% of offices report no change in conservation facilities since 1997, and many report a need include staff vacancies and a lack of suitable candidates to fill them, and freezing or deleting of conservator posts. This latter action is to be regretted in offices with in-house facilities which are thus underutilised. Investment in projectbased staff can go some way to filling vacancies, and sharing expertise. A notable trend is the number of offices reporting contracting out of conservation work as services are scaled back or re-structured as part of efficiency programmes. Most offices, (including those that have inhouse facilities) have budgets for placing external work, although overall many have remained static or had limited increases. Another related trend is the pooling of resources between offices and other cultural institutions such as museums and libraries. In some cases, this has been a formalisation of existing local arrangements, but successful as these ventures have been, the problem of underresourced services remains where offices do not have basic budgets to enter into such arrangements. It may be argued that the time has come to take a radical look at conservation requirements and priorities both nationally and regionally. A solution based on cooperation and partnership could allow offices lacking facilities to join forces with institutions in similar circumstances to improve facilities or access to them. Developing regional conservation centres of excellence would be more beneficial than spreading resources thinly and duplicating efforts, bringing about economies of scale, and ensuring that vital resources are not disaggregated by supporting multiple smaller units. Policies and strategies A well-run preservation programme needs good management. In addition, funding bodies will wish to satisfy themselves that policies and programmes are in place as a guarantee of continuing stewardship of newly conserved material. A priority identified in 1997 was a need for services to develop preservation policies to enshrine good practice and frame future work. Record offices are acutely aware of the importance of such documents, but lack of staff-time and resources are often reasons for delays in their development. It is encouraging to note that 29% of offices now have written preservation policies in place (compared to less than 20% in 1997), and 56% have a written disaster preparedness and control plan. Another 25% report that these key documents are in preparation, along with plans to provide staff training. Assessments of need Record offices are encouraged to adopt tools, such as the National Preservation Office's Preservation Needs Assessment Survey Methodology29 to carry out collection 29 Developed by the NPO and PRO as a tool to survey and assess the preservation needs of library and archive collections, this survey is a method of obtaining a statistically valid snapshot of the state of preservation of a collection. electronic materials. Record offices are encouraged to support the development of a national preservation strategy,30 which will bring benefits in co-ordination and sharing of best practice. Much can be done through good preservation now to reduce the conservation debt we pass to succeeding generations. Limited, targeted expenditure31 will reap benefits in later years. Credit must also be given to the work of volunteers who undertake minor cleaning and repair work. We cannot afford to ignore the overwhelming public interest in the science and art of conservation.32 Experience has shown that "behind the scenes" tours of work in progress both fascinate and stimulate public interest and this can be turned to the archive's advantage. Partnerships need to be developed to increase capacity and to ensure that investment in conservation and preservation maintains parity with other key activities of public service. condition surveys to establish the extent of preservation needs. Surveying has markedly suffered as resources have been reduced. Against a background of accumulating conservation backlogs, survey work is the best method of setting priorities, but very few offices reported that they were currently carrying out such work. Investment is required to tackle backlogs and thus make records accessible. Microform programmes It is a matter of concern that 20% of offices report that they have no current microform programmes, compared to 6% in 1997. The creation of surrogate records increases access and ensures preservation of popular or damaged items. This decrease may be attributable to the rapid growth in digital technologies which have diverted resources. Microform programmes most commonly concern newspapers and family history records. One office had developed an ambitious programme to film its "archival treasures". Conclusion Clearly, local authority record offices bear a backlog of conservation work. It is vital that efforts continue to be directed to address this workload. Investment in collection surveys, and support for more staff would alleviate some of the immediate burden. It is essential to develop a co-ordinated framework of policies and strategies at local, regional and national level to address both traditional and 30 See A National Preservation Strategy for Library and Archive Collections in the United Kingdom and Ireland: principles and prospects, NPO, Jan 2001. 31 Many of these actions are inexpensive, such as the provision of book rests and cradles, weights and protective film in search rooms. 32 The success of the NMGM's Conservation Centre in Liverpool as an attraction in its own right attests to this philosophy. ## 7. Finding Aids And Reference Services "user demand is taken into consideration when deciding cataloguing priorities" "we need to develop ICT to maximise the benefit of our computer cataloguing system" "our [online cataloguing] system is an example of excellence in the field, although additional funding is required to increase the quality of digitised images" 76% of local authority record offices have finding aids provision which is assessed as poor or very poor But there are notable successes too, with nearly three quarters of all services involved in A2A bids Key: see page 8 Good finding aids and reference services are vital for the provision of access to our national archive collections. Since 1997, significant advances have been made to create a national archive network to provide comprehensive information about archival holdings. The NCA report Archives Online33 paved the way for these developments, which have been embraced with enthusiasm and drive through the Access to Archives (A2A) programme spearheaded by the PRO in partnership with the HMC and the British Library. The 33 NCA, Archives Online: the establishment of a United Kingdom Archival Network, 1998. emergence of the New Opportunities Fund as a source of funding for themed cross-sectoral digitisation and cataloguing projects under the content creation strand of the People's Network34 presents innovative options for partnerships and programmes. Welcome as these developments are, there is an urgent requirement to address the need for investment in core finding aids, if we are to see real success. 34 The People's Network is a NOF funded programme to link every public library in the UK to the Internet, create online content, and provide training for library staff. See New Library: The People's Network LIC, 1997. general backlogs and that the sudden arrival of large and complex collections can set back this laudable aim. Archivists may need to invest considerable time researching collections and space to sort collections as part of the listing process is often at a premium, which can delay catalogue creation. It remains to be seen how crosssectoral initiatives such as Full Disclosure35 impact on reducing the backlog of outstanding cataloguing work. The Impact of ICT Most archive offices now produce lists, catalogues and finding aids either using stand alone computers to produce typed outputs, or directly inputting data to systems using automated proprietary (or in-house) software packages. 5% of offices report that such a catalogue covers 100% of their holdings. One of the greatest impacts of ICT has been in the searchroom itself, and beyond the archive, where users can access finding aids remotely. Another benefit of the ICT revolution has been in the development of core common standards for archive description, data sharing and interoperability.36 Description Catalogues and other finding aids A quarter of all offices report that at least 80% of their collections are fully catalogued, or at least box listed. 40% of respondents report that their collections contain completely unlisted material. On average, 15% of the total collections held by the 132 local authority archive services is unlisted and unusable, representing a significant investment in storage of inaccessible material. The problem is more acute in some areas, with metropolitan archives tending to have greater backlogs than shire county record offices. Many respondents quoted pressure on front-line services as having an adverse impact on cataloguing and collection management with staff diverted to public duties. Record offices are adopting approaches to ameliorate the problems of inadequate or missing catalogue data. Many offices are revising or compiling guides to collections that can then be mounted on the web, as well as published in conventional form. Whilst lacking the detail of individual item listings, these guides are invaluable in providing basic information. 44% of offices replied that they had existing guides, or were in the process of revising them. Projects to produce or revise guides are one way of providing users with at least basic information about collections. An encouraging response from many offices was that most offices aim to list new accessions as they are deposited. However this does mean that resources can be diverted from 35 UKOLN Full Disclosure, Releasing the Value of Library and Archive Collections, presented to the Pathfinding Group of the British Library, LIC and LINC, 1999. 36 The main standards are ISAD(G): General International Standard Archival Description, and ISAAR (CPF): International Standard Archival Authority Record for Corporate Bodies, Persons & Families, both by the ICA. The NCA and HMC have also developed National Name Authority Files. congratulation, and it is hoped that closer regional analysis of needs will result in improved co-operation. Regional archives could "pool" resources short-term to create response teams which can work on a regional basis to meet specific areas of need. There are clear public benefits in the development and support of special funding programmes to create comprehensive works of reference, through retrospective conversion of existing finding aids and the creation of new finding aids. Only then will archives be able to fully realise the potential of their collections to meet the public service agenda. standards offer a hierarchy of levels of description, which enable catalogue entries to be compiled which can neatly slot into a consolidated system, allowing for full searching and retrieval capabilities. Conclusion One of the fundamental objectives of creating good finding aids is to enable users to access information, efficiently and effectively, and to make that process as helpful as possible. As evidenced by this survey, the greatest area of need is to allocate resources to tackle those collections and parts of collections, which through being large or complex or having inadequate finding aids extant, languish inaccessible in archive strongrooms. Programmes for support must be ambitious but realistic. Sustained cataloguing programmes stretching over several years can embrace several offices and regions to open up previously closed collections. The benefits of non-formula funding to realise such ambitions has been ably demonstrated in the university sector where access has been given considerable support through Follett37 funding. In addition, resources must be deployed to ensure that archives do not add to the legacy of work, by prompt and efficient cataloguing of new accessions. The development of regional partnerships and strategies such as the creative and diverse A2A consortia is a matter for ## 8. Information And Communications Technology "[we have] very poor ICT provision and no specific budget for development" "For its size, our office has very good IT facilities" "one of our main failings has been a lack of resources for retrospective conversion projects" 62% of local authority record offices have ICT provision which is either poor or very poor The percentage of offices rating their ICT provision as good has more than trebled since 1997 Key: see page 8 Information and Communications Technology (ICT) is continuing to revolutionise the ways in which users access information about record offices and collections, and increasingly in the future access to records themselves, either digital images or records "born digital". Through ICT, archivists can make information widely available to users across the world and beyond traditional physical barriers. Record offices are aware of the very real benefits of ICT, and staff are keen to embrace new technologies and adopt a positive approach. Office applications of ICT A welcome 42% of respondents have ICT strategies in place in their institutions, either individual office strategies or as part of an overarching parent authority framework. Indeed these general strategies can be of great help in securing funds as part of general upgrading and modernisation programmes. However, there are instances where the parent body's ICT priorities have not assisted development of ICT in the record office, and there are still too many cases where central, often remote, opportunity to bring archives to the people, from the strongroom into their homes and offices. New opportunities are being opened up through e-commerce and commercial partnerships. Aspirations for future development of Internet use in archives are high, with only 20% of services rating their Internet provision as poor or fairly poor. In the later 1990s many record offices benefited as systems were upgraded to ensure Year 2000 compliance, but a common response is that shortage of modern ICT equipment is still holding back significant progress. Another oftrepeated comment is that archives are perceived to be "missing out" on initiatives designed to increase ICT capacity in other cultural sectors, such as the People's Network for public libraries.38 Various bodies are working to address such anomalies, and archives now have the opportunity to demonstrate their worth through innovative programmes, such as DCMS's Culture On-line.39 Appropriate investment is needed to ensure that progress continues to be made, and funding schemes might usefully be widened to include archive services where possible. corporate IT departments and units have failed to understand the precise requirements of the archive service, or have tried to impose ill-fitting template solutions. There are likely to be considerable benefits if archivists continue to work with such units to achieve shared solutions, and to raise awareness amongst general ICT practitioners of the specific requirements of archive systems. Half of those surveyed reported that ICT was used in the general management of the office, for maintenance of accessions registers, databases, management and recording of conservation and cataloguing backlogs, seat reservations and general production of word processed documents, as well as collection management and the production of finding aids. Nearly two thirds of all offices now have Internet access for staff use, and this figure is rapidly rising as more services become "connected". Public service applications of ICT Over a quarter of services provide public Internet access in the searchroom, although there are concerns over the costs and charges to the user for provision of this service, and over finding suitable accommodation in already overcrowded search rooms. Certainly users are growing to expect that such access will be available as a matter of course. Many record offices maintain very good web-sites. In areas with poor infrastructure, these gateways and portals offer an 38 Some archives have benefited under the People's Network, but only where they share library premises, or are within the same management or administrative structure. 39 Significant sums are likely to be released as part of the Culture On-line programme. offices can contribute primary material, with costs being shared. It was encouraging to note that 97% of respondents were aware of the PRO programme currently underway to digitise and make publicly available through the Internet the 1901 census returns. Conclusion ICT should be a major strength in each office, and an integral part of the operations of both staff and public services. Many offices have well-established ICT networks and programmes, and many more have aspirations to harness the opportunities that modern technology has to offer. There is a case for the establishment of a national framework and strategy for ICT development which sets minimum standards and requirements, and a baseline level of ICT provision to be achieved by all record offices, so that common standards of service provision can be adhered to. Improved understanding of ICT among archivists would enable the development of the ICT environment, and appropriate training and support for this is essential. Grant awarding bodies would help by focusing on projects which would help to build a strong foundation for ICT development. These might include retrospective conversion, digital imaging projects, the development of websites and on-line resources, and training to secure a sound skills base. Digitisation and imaging This has been an area of remarkable growth and interest since 1997. The advantages to users in being able to conduct research remotely by consultation of digitised images via the Internet are obvious. Coupled with the added preservation benefits, well-managed and sustainable projects of this nature are worthy of investment and funding support. 37% of offices reported that they are currently using ICT for document imaging either by scanning of original documents or digitisation of already filmed images, which represents an increase in this area of activity since 1997. There are innovative projects underway at individual, local and regional level, involving parish records, business records, and the production of CD- ROMs targeted for educational use and the genealogical market. Increasingly this is an area where offices are entering into commercial partnerships, with the twin benefits of generating small income streams, and raising profile. However 52% of offices rate their overall assessment of digitisation as poor or fairly poor, indicating that there is large untapped resource awaiting discovery and "packaging" for new audiences and markets. Reasons for slow penetration into this area include a lack of funding, lack of necessary technical skills, lack of staff time for research, and the fact that smaller offices do not have the capacity to enter into such work. One solution may be to develop regional programmes in which groups of ## 9. Electronic Records "the council will have to consider the long-term preservation of its electronic records and we are not in a position to accession them"" "our involvement with electronic records management remains worryingly limited…" "no idea - even our IT people don't have a full picture of what [systems are running] in departments…" Provision for electronic records in 94% of local authority record offices is poor or very poor Nationally, no office provides good provision for storage and retrieval of digital data Key: see page 8 ICT developments are rapidly changing the world around us and the way in which public services are delivered. For archive services the rapid growth of Internet use for public access to catalogues and other archival resources is one example of such fundamental changes. In addition, the Government's modernisation plans are setting priorities and challenging targets for the public sector. The Government's White Paper, Modernising Government40 clearly sets out the context of the information revolution. For the public, this means that by 2005, all services should be available electronically. Record offices will need to respond to this with regard to the services they provide. Statutory obligations Legislative and regulatory changes are demanding more effective records management in the public sector. In particular, managing access under the Freedom Of Information Act, 2000, and the Data Protection Act, 1998, require an integrated approach at all stages of the records life-cycle. Responsibilities under the Freedom Of Information Act require local authorities to assess the effects of electronic records.41 By comparison, little has been done across the local government sector to address similar issues. Digital data storage and public access Increasingly, records that were traditionally transferred to record offices in paper form will be created electronically. Only 3% of record offices currently offer special public facilities for the consultation of electronic records held by that office.42 A further 11% indicated that such access would be available in 2- 3 years. Investment in appropriate storage facilities for electronic records is essential. The establishment of regional digital archives, which could operate in a similar manner to the regional moving image and sound archives, may achieve this. Conclusion The creation and use of electronic records will become less "special media management" and more normal practice. This requires new ways of thinking by record creators 41 The PRO Records Management Department is developing programmes to promote electronic records management, producing practical guidance such as Management, appraisal and preservation of electronic records, Vol 1: Principles, and Vol 2 Procedures, (PRO 1999) the Act on their information holdings. Local authorities must start planning now to be ready to respond to these challenges. Electronic records By far the most disturbing finding of the Phase Two survey is that 94% of local authority archive services have yet to make any significant provision for the long-term public accessibility of electronic records. (a marginal improvement since 1997, when the figure was 98%). Only 3% of offices have facilities suitable for the storage of electronic records, and these are all offices built within the last five years. Some local authority archive services are charged with carrying out records management for their parent authority. Whilst some offices are clearly taking steps to raise their records management profile, there are still many authorities which have yet to get to grips with the management of their electronic systems. 51% of respondents are aware that their local authority is generating electronic records, both datasets and electronic office systems. The quote concerning the authority that did not even have a basic inventory of electronic systems in operation is all too familiar. More positively, many offices report that records management staffing has marginally increased as responsibilities for information policy have been added to record office duties. 25% of services report that information policy issues have changed the way in which their local authority is thinking about its and curators. The JISC/NPO collection of studies, Digital Culture, maximising the nation's investment43 is a clear statement of the key issues, and makes sound recommendations for further work. Important areas for development include training for staff currently in post to equip them with the necessary new skills, and focusing on the management of digital information in higher education courses for archivists and information managers. The development of structured policies would help to ensure that electronic records are effectively managed, preserved and made publicly available to meet business needs and enable citizens to exercise their rights to information. ## 10. Training And Development "[we have] our own in-house para-professional development programme, and training linked to staff appraisal and development programmes…" "we are proud of the level of training opportunities provided internally and externally to staff"" "this office is a recognised conservation training centre, but is no longer able to participate owing to other priorities" 77% of local authority record offices regard their training provision as fair or good Although 73% provide training in customer care, only 8% provide training in electronic records management Key: see page 8 The largest item of record office expenditure is staff, and to function effectively, a record office must have a well-trained, well-motivated staff base. Phase Two found an overall positive response to training, with 77% of offices regarding their training provision as fair or good. The overall impression is of a professional, responsive workforce, albeit one which is perceived to be strong in "traditional" skills. Alongside familiar training topics, there is now a raft of new skills and behaviours that archivists must acquire to be able to provide a comprehensive service. Current training and development opportunities The Phase Two questionnaire sought detailed information about 6 core competencies, and levels of training provided. 63% of services provided in-house training courses, whether formally or informally. 84% subscribed to external training courses, although it was remarked that the costs for external courses are rising steeply. Many offices share training and expertise, and many value the regional and thematic training courses provided by the Society of Archivists. Often, access to training is limited by level of staff complement and smaller services in in-house course44 and a modular course in partnership with higher education institutions.45 Archives also have an opportunity to influence the Department for Education and Skills review of the structure and remit of the National Training Organisations.46 Provision in basic skills is good on the whole, but investment is required in training programmes which will develop competencies in "new" skills relating to management of electronic information and information policy, to build a strong foundation for the future, and to develop the key core skill set of a professional archivist. 44 Between 1995 and 1997, in partnership with the School of Library, Archive and Information Studies, University College London, the PRO ran a diploma/MA course in Archives and Records Management for 18 members of staff. 45 Since 1999 the PRO's Records Management Department has established a modular training and education programme in records and information management for government staff. Known as the rm3 partnership, it is a consortium of the PRO, University of Liverpool and the University of Northumbria. particular find it difficult to maintain front-line services and release staff for training. Unsurprisingly, traditional training scored highly on the survey with 73% of services providing access to training in customer care, 56% providing access to training in conservation and preservation, and 44% providing access to training in records administration and management. Of more concern were the levels of training provision in "new" areas. Although an encouraging 71% of services provided access to training in basic IT skills, only 8% of services provided access to training in electronic records management, and a disappointing 20% of services provided access to training in information policy issues such as freedom of information and data protection. Encouragingly, continuing professional development (CPD) is held in high regard with 69% of offices supporting the principle. In addition, initiatives such as Investors in People have offered opportunities for development and personal growth. Conclusion Training remains a high priority for most local authority archive services although many are finding it increasingly difficult to co-ordinate training with public service commitments. Encouraging work is in hand to develop the university training courses, and the Public Record Office has pioneered the development of both a professional ## 11. External Relations And Cross-Sector Working "we are currently involved in the development of a heritage and culture strategy for the county" "we work increasingly with local museums and libraries on ICT projects, outreach activities and training" "our Friends Society is a useful source of financial and other support" Nearly three quarters of local authority record offices regard provision for external and cross-domain working as good or fair Only 6 offices out of 132 felt that they were severely lacking in this area of provision Key: see page 8 institutions, individuals, and community groups. Publications and publicity are important methods of raising profile, and in some cases generating income. Nearly 50% of offices have an active publications programme of leaflets, guides, calendars and indexes or pamphlets or books on aspects of their collections. An obvious area of partnership is with neighbouring archives and repositories, such as film and sound archives. Many local authority archives have a strong community presence and approximately half have "Friends" Local authority archive services have a long history of fruitful partnerships with a wide variety of public and private services, individuals and institutions. The nature of these associations can be formal and informal, and they range from the personal relationship with the depositor or donor to work with schools, museums, and libraries, on local, national and international scale. External relations These take many forms and embrace a range of official Cross-sector working Many offices are developing crosssector links not only for public service benefits, but also for institutional benefits. 57% are part of an established local network, working together for the purposes of ICT, communication and training and development. 87% work with local museums and libraries.48 Many develop regular exhibitions and displays designed to tour local venues, and one office reported receiving a small grant from the Area Museum Council for such projects. Through new strategic bodies, innovative partnerships are developing. For example links with the National Trust are being forged through the RACs, who have a broad membership drawn from the heritage sector, as well as local archives.49 The NCA and Resource are developing guidance for archives on the practical implementation of 48 The administrative structure of many local government authorities means that responsibility for archives, libraries, museums, leisure and culture often falls under the same department or directorate. 49 In addition to a membership drawn from the institutions and associations which are members of the NCA, membership of each RAC may be increased by up to five additional seats, which may be offered to institutions or associations operating within the boundaries of the region. Examples include English Heritage, the National Trust, Regional Cultural Consortia, English Partnerships, and the higher education sector. societies or strong ties with local or family history societies. Working to meet the education and learning agenda By far the most popular target area for co-operation is with learning establishments, and the development of services and products tailored to educational needs. Three quarters of all record offices work with schools, further education institutions, community colleges and universities. A third run their own education service with a designated education officer. Increasingly such services are being developed across cultural and heritage sectors. Investment is required so that offices can develop their education services further. Many respondents were clear that links with teachers need strengthening, and suggested that joint meetings to discuss curriculum and research requirements at an early stage, and advance collaboration with schools on set projects would be helpful. The production of educational packages such as CD-ROMs can also have financial benefits. Offices report that they are keen to work with universities, and such partnerships range from large-scale co-location projects, to induction programmes with undergraduates to fully utilise archive resources.47 policies and projects to combat social exclusion.50 Conclusion Local authority archive services are thinking beyond traditional partners, and looking to the wider community for new opportunities. At the heart of such partnerships must be a strong commitment to improve the experience of those who use our archives and those who will do so in the future. This does not mean abandoning commitment to good stewardship, scholarship or research, but rather means working creatively to build upon some of the exciting developments that are already taking place. PART II: Regional Findings Reports on archival provision in England51 12 East of England Region 13 East Midlands Region 14 London Region 15 North East Region 16 North West Region 17 South East Region 18 South West Region 19 West Midlands Region 20 Yorkshire Region ## 12. Regional Findings East Of England Region includes magnificent cathedrals, the first garden city in Letchworth, and the modernism of the Imperial War Museum at Duxford Airfield. At present there are 82 organisations in the region where archives are held and made publicly available. Commentary on East of England Region Mapping Project Phase Two scores The regional averages are above the national averages in all areas of provision with the exception of electronic records. However this masks some significant areas of poor provision. For Accommodation and Storage, the region is slightly above the national average, with half of all offices rating fair or good provision, and no offices rating very poor provision. For both Public Access and Services, and Conservation and Preservation, provision is significantly higher than the national average with 42% of offices providing good public access against the national average of 18%, and a quarter of all offices reporting good conservation provision. Finding Aids and Reference Services are obvious areas for investment, as no office reports good provision. Although recent investment in Information & Communications Technology means that provision is rated at 35% above the national average, the scores for Electronic Regional profile The East of England region stretches from the outskirts of London to the Wash, from Watford to Cromer. The region is really at least two distinct areas: East Anglia (Norfolk, Suffolk, Essex and part of Cambridgeshire) and the northern home counties (Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire). The rest of Cambridgeshire and particularly Peterborough naturally look towards Northamptonshire, while the home counties often find they have more in common with the capital. The whole region is also dominated by Cambridge, as both a city and a university. Transport links north/south are reasonably good, especially into and out of London, but east/west they are not so convenient and public transport is often not the best way to travel. It is a region of contrasts with tracts of agricultural land with rural isolation in the north and west, and with urban settlements in the south The coastline of Norfolk, Suffolk and Essex give a maritime flavour to the history of the region. Archival treasures The long and varied cultural history of the region gives it many riches, such as the great Roman cities of St Albans and Colchester, the Sutton Hoo burial and the lasting legacy of the Vikings. The built heritage ## Norfolk Record Office Has Recently Successfully Secured Hlf Funding For A New Record Office In Norwich. Strategic Priorities And Funding Needs For East Of England Region Archives Records are virtually the same as those nationally, with one exception (a newly built record office). Scores for both Staff Training and Development and External Relations and Cross-sector Working are significantly higher than the national average with no offices rating poor or very poor provision, reflecting the close working of archives, libraries and museums in the region. Cross-sector working, funding grants and current initiatives The three Regional agencies for the archive, museum, and library sectors in the East of England have joined together as ECLAIM (Eastern Counties' Libraries, Archives, Information and Museums) to commission The Fourth Dimension, the East of England Museums, Archives and Libraries Strategy.52 During the early half of 2001, the East of England Region prepared bids to Resource part way through the research phase of the project, for funding further cross-sector work. The region was awarded a grant towards developing a professional web portal but two other bids were unsuccessful. There is a cross– regional initiative with an A2A bid which will enable the digitisation of around 19,600 catalogue pages for archives illuminating the development of the urban and rural landscapes of the East of England. Archives in the East of England can build on the mentoring role played by staff in the searchroom to encourage and extend the self–directed learning which takes place there. User satisfaction is demonstrably high but there is a need for archive services to consider whether they are using all their resources to serve the same people. A broader constituency could be served a little less comprehensively with the same resources, in order to deliver equality of the entitlement to services. Archives can play an essential role in delivering government objectives of democracy, citizenship, access to information under the Freedom of Information Act and responding to the requirements of data protection. However, it has to be acknowledged that there is a smaller professional capacity within East of England archives than in museums or libraries. This restricts the possibilities of implementing the provisions required in the changing electronic environment, for engaging in training events and sharing expertise across the region The vigour of archives in the Region is demonstrable but strategies must be developed to support them effectively. ## Archival Treasures 13. Regional Findings East Midlands Region Regional profile Unlike some English regions, the East Midlands does not have a strong historic sense of regional identity. The six counties that comprise the East Midlands Region are Derbyshire, Leicestershire, Lincolnshire, Nottinghamshire, Northamptonshire and Rutland. Much of the region is rural and some parts are remote, but running through the region, on a north - south axis along the M1 motorway, is a more densely populated area which contains most of the region's major towns and cities. Elsewhere the landscape is essentially agricultural, characterised by villages and historic market towns, historic castles and stately homes, which together with the Peak District and the Lincolnshire Coast, attract millions of tourists into the region each year. Industrialisation came early to some parts of the Region and the East Midlands economy is dominated by its manufacturing base, with specific parts of the region having strong associations with particular products, such as textiles and footwear, coal mining, and transport industries. Although tourism is increasing substantially, agriculture remains a key element of the economy. Ethnic diversity is the most recent characteristic regional development. There are five county record offices, with the office of Leicestershire, Leicester and Rutland providing joint services, and Northamptonshire providing services for Peterborough. Other major repositories in the region are the Department of Manuscripts at the University of Notttingham with a rich literary collection, strong in the papers of DH Lawrence, and the Welbeck Abbey papers, and other public bodies such as schools, charitable foundations and trusts. Other notable holdings are the Boots Company Archive, the Leonard Cheshire Foundation papers at Staunton Harold, and the Cavendish family papers at the Chatsworth House Archive. Commentary on East Midlands Mapping Project Phase Two scores The survey suggests that local authority record offices in the Region provide facilities and services of a variable standard. Regional averages are above the national averages in all areas except electronic records. There are, however, significant areas of poor provision. External Relations and Cross-sectoral Working and Public Access and Services are rated highly but there are serious capacity shortcomings in both Information catalogues of 21 major family and estate papers, drawn from archives across the region. Strategic priorities and funding needs for East Midlands Region archives The East Midlands Archive Strategy54 identifies key priorities for future action and investment. Identification of non-users and the development of outreach plans to promote use among underrepresented groups, completion of an archival map of the region, and establishment of the East Midlands RAC website are key tasks. Longer term objectives include developing ICT skills and support for staff development, and a comprehensive programme of investment for the creation of electronic finding aids at regional level. and Communications Technology and **Electronic Records**. The score for Finding Aids and Reference Services shows a marked variation to the national average with 80% of offices rated poor provision, showing this to be a serious investment need. When compared to the national average, the Region scores well for Accommodation and Storage and Conservation and Preservation with no offices rating very poor provision. This reflects the fact that 3 out of the 5 county record offices are comparatively recent buildings. Training and Development are comparable with national findings. Cross-sectoral working, funding grants and current initiatives Local authority archives are an integral part of the cultural heritage sector in the East Midlands, with a long history of libraries and archives working together. Joint working has been fostered by a series of crossdomain conferences, called Future Sure. Work with museums needs to be further developed, for example for records of archaeological excavations. The East Midlands and the West Midlands remain the only English regions that do not have a regional moving image/sound archive, although strenuous efforts are being made to develop a regional media archive.53 The RAC is currently awaiting a decision from HLF on its A2A project to convert the 53 MACE, The Media Archive for Central England has yet to be fully established, although a director has been appointed to develop the project. 54 East Midlands RAC, A Regional Strategy for Archives in the East Midlands, John Feather, March 2001 ## 14. Regional Findings London Region Regional profile London is one of the great cities of the world. A major centre of trade and enterprise, it occupies a leading position in international commerce. London's cultural amenities and arts facilities are renowned throughout the world and attract a steady flow of international tourists in large numbers. London is also a place of contrast, with pockets of extreme social deprivation and poverty located alongside affluent and prosperous areas. Public services in London face the constant challenge of balancing priorities to target scarce resources where they are most needed. They must both support the aspirations of the community at large and reach out to marginalised members of society most in need of help and support. The London administrative region has a natural meaning and cohesion, and there are many historic loyalties within the area, including the distinct identities of north and south London, the differing characters of the City and the rest of Greater London, the twin links of the outer areas formerly in the shire counties (Essex, Kent and Surrey), and local loyalties based on streets, places and support for football clubs. The city is cosmopolitan in character, noted for its rich ethnic and cultural diversity. Archival treasures The richness and diversity of the archival collections located in London is second to none, and it would be invidious to single out any one collection. The London region is further enriched by the collections of the Public Record Office at Kew and the British Library at St Pancras. In addition there are many corporate and business archives, and archives run by professional associations, livery companies, learned societies, museums and galleries, religious, charity, higher education institutions and other public bodies. The collections are distributed among 371 different record offices and institutions. The 36 local authority services provide a network of care for local archives, though the range of services varies greatly between locations. Commentary on London Region Mapping Project Phase Two scores On the evidence of the mapping data, London's local authority repositories face particularly acute problems in terms of premises, staffing levels, funding and service provision. While there are undeniably some good services and centres of excellence in London, it is worrying that the London averages are below the national averages in every single aspect covered by the mapping project. Cross-sector working, funding grants and current initiatives London Museums, Archives and Libraries (LMAL) is an embryonic developmental cross-sector agency. Resolution of a number of issues in Strategic priorities and funding needs for London Region archives55 Yet for all the richness of the collections and commitment of the staff, there are serious problems for archives in London. It is the aim of the London Regional Archive Strategy to highlight the issues and to make practical recommendations so that archives can be properly protected and can attain their full potential in contributing to the social, cultural and economic life of the capital. The vision for London archives includes: ½ affirming the value of archives as "the memory of society", with public, private and organisational archives all having their place in the "nation's archival heritage" ½ promoting the incredible richness and diversity of the archives located in the Capital ½ enabling users to "discover" material in archives, libraries and museums from a single electronic source ½ making the history of the region accessible to everyone ½ harnessing the potential of ICT to ensure the intellectual amalgamation of dispersed content ½ training and equipping staff to enhance the experience of on-site access ½ supporting a network of viable and vibrant archives services ½ maximising the benefits for London archives by locking into national and local initiatives and sources of funding 55 Strategies for London archives are described more fully in Out of the Past - Into the Future: the Regional Archives Strategy for London, LARC/Chris Pickford, March 2001. See also Towards 2000 - the future of London's Archives, a paper given by David Mander at the London Pride conference to discuss London archives, June 2000. London will be required if the three domains are to come together fully. However, a way forward without commitment to full integration has been found and the partners in LMAL have signed up to a programme of cross-domain activities for the coming year while the long-term future remains open. LMAL has been successful in its bids to Resource for funding to develop collaborative structures, and for training and development to raise current levels of awareness for librarians, archivists and museum staff on common sectoral and London-wide issues. Further partnerships will be developed to co-ordinate activity to reduce overlap and duplication, to make the available resources go further and maximise the impact of effort. Partnerships will also work across organisational boundaries and recognise the potential for exploiting synergies between the museum, archive and library domains in delivering better and more costeffective services to the community. Links will be made across the sectors within the archive community, especially embracing the public, business, higher education and voluntary sectors in partnership ventures. Other partnerships have been developed to address specific issues, such as the London Learning Network Group, and the wellestablished and respected Greater London Archives Network. The impact of the Lottery awards in London has been the subject of much debate, but local authority archives have faired only marginally, mainly with small revenue grants. There are currently 3 bids from London consortia under the A2A programme. The establishment of the Greater London Authority presents new opportunities for the cultural sector as a whole, which must be seized for archives. . The concentration and combined presence of archives in London (29% of all British archives) is greater than any other region, and the need for funding and support is at least proportional. London attracts archive users from all over the country and all around the world, yet many services and facilities are sub-standard and in need of an upgrade. The standard of provision in London is generally below the national average, indicating an urgent need for investment and improvement. Users like archives services, and archives have the potential to reach a far greater audience. This should be exploited and supported. ## 15. Regional Findings North East Region Regional profile The North East is one of the smallest of the English regions in both area (8,592 sq km) and population (2.6 million). It comprises Northumberland, County Durham, Tyne & Wear and Teesside. It is a region of contrasts. Dozens of historic villages dot the region, and the landscape is still largely unspoilt. Half of the region is rural. The Western part is formed by the hills, moorlands and forests of the North Pennines, to the North the Cheviot Hills and Kielder Forest lead to the border with Scotland. In the South the region borders North Yorkshire Moors, and the 160 kilometre North Sea coastline forms the spectacular Eastern border, on which industrial conurbations are grouped around the main river estuaries. The North East has a proud industrial heritage. The region can boast a significant contribution to shaping the Industrial Revolution. In more recent times there has been considerable diversification of the traditional heavy manufacturing base into new technology and service industries. of the North East: their life and work; their politics; their religions; their recreation; their health. It is impossible to refer here to all the archives available for public consultation in the region, but the following examples highlight some of the most important and provide a flavour. The Durham Diocesan Archives and Bishopric Estate Records show the power and influence of the Bishops of Durham. The muniments of Durham Cathedral include one of Europe's most complete medieval monastic archives. Notable estate collections, comprising records of national and international importance, include those of the Duke of Northumberland at Alnwick Castle; the Marquis of Londonderry and the Earls of Strathmore at Durham County Record Office; the Trevelyan family of Wallington, Northumberland, in Newcastle University Library; and the Earl Grey papers in Durham University Library. These records include major political papers reflecting the importance of their creators in national and international affairs. The records of the Borough of Berwick-upon-Tweed illustrate the turbulent history a small town, sited on the border between England and Scotland. From becoming English in 1482 until being created a country in itself in 1836 to the town has had the unique status of being "of" but not "within" England. Archival treasures The archives themselves reflect the long history of the region, its culture and achievements, from the early medieval manuscripts produced in the Kingdom of Northumbria, through the boom and decline of heavy industry and up to the present day. Through these records we glimpse the people above the national average, partly due the ground-breaking formation of the North East Museums, Archives and Libraries Council (NEMLAC), as the single cross-sectoral agency for the North East. Cross-sector working, funding grants and current initiatives NEMLAC, a new body set up by North East Museums, Information North, and the North East Regional Archives Council became a fully constituted body from April 2001 and took on the roles of the museum and library bodies while at the same time extending the remit to archives. It is funded by Resource, and is the first crosssectoral agency to be formally established. The RAC has two seats on the NEMLAC Board. Archive priorities have been defined in NEMLAC's Archive Strategy for the North East of England. 56 The Northern Region Film and Television Archive57 is a good example of a regional partnership approach to a specialised medium. The North East's A2A bid is known as "Picks and Pistons" and aims to convert 12,500 catalogue pages of industrial archives from a wide variety of sources. 56 NEMLAC, An Archives Strategy for the North East of England, Liz Bregazzi, March 2001 57 The Northern Region Film and Television Archive is a consortium of Tyne and Wear Archives Service, the University of Teesside and Trade Films. Its remit is to collect, preserve and provide access to film from the whole of the Northern Region. The industrial heritage of the region is very well represented in its archives. Durham and Northumberland Record Offices both hold large collections of coal mining records, from before and after nationalisation. Tyne and Wear Archives Service has huge quantities of shipbuilding and heavy engineering records, many from famous firms such as Swan Hunter, Parsons, Hawthorn Leslie, Clarke Chapman Marine, Sunderland Shipbuilders and Vickers. Personal papers worthy of mention include those of Gertrude Bell at Newcastle University Library and Josephine Butler at Northumberland Record Office; and Fenwick's collection of circus material and Wood's music hall posters at Tyne and Wear Archives Service. Commentary on North East Region Mapping Project Phase Two scores Phase Two scored fairly poor provision for **Public Access and Services** for the region as a whole. Search rooms are at present unable to cope with demand, and offices report waiting lists. A further concern is a loss to the region of professional staff, both archivists and conservators. Scores for Accommodation and Storage, Conservation and Preservation and Staff Training and Development are broadly in line with the national averages. Finding Aids and Reference Services are markedly below the national average, with an overall assessment of poor or very poor for the Region. The low score for both Information and Communications Technology and Electronic Records indicates that investment is required to bring systems and catalogues up to standard. External Relations and Crosssectoral Working score significantly records will be addressed, beginning with training for record creating bodies to inform and explore the implications. Further investigations will be carried out into options for the management of electronic records, including the desirability of setting up a Regional Data Archive. There will be collaboration with Northern Arts and the Film Council to continue and develop funding for the Northern Region Film and Television Archive. Strategic priorities and funding needs for North East Region archives The Archive Strategy for the North East of England is designed to support and encourage the diverse archives of the Region. Archives will be supported through the advisory, strategic and development services of NEMLAC. The need for greater provision of catalogues and other finding aids will be tackled. The problem of electronic 16. Regional Findings North West Region Regional profile The North West Region of England stretches from the Scottish border in the north to the Welsh border in the south. It is home to 6.9 million people, with over 65% living in the heavily urbanised and industrialised area to the south of the region known as the Mersey Belt. Over half the land in the region is rural and relatively sparsely populated. Agriculture and tourism are the main economic drivers in the rural areas. Although the industrial tradition of the region remains strong, much of the traditional industrial base is in decline. Great efforts are being made to encourage new economic development and investment whilst at the same time emphasising the value of the heritage and cultural assets of the region. archives, Lancashire Record Office's holdings of the Kay Shuttleworth and Towneley archives, and the archives of the Lowther Estate and of TH Mawson, Landscape Architects, both held by the Cumbria Archive Service, are of more than local significance. Commentary on North West Region Mapping Project Phase Two scores In the main the North West record offices perform below the national average except in respect of Public Access and Services and External Relations and Cross-sectoral Working, where the regional average score is above the national average. The former difference can be explained, in part, by the increase in opening hours reported by several offices in the region (without the concomitant increase in staffing levels, however). With regard to the latter category, many North West record offices form parts of wider `heritage' or `cultural' departmental groupings and are, perforce, working more closely with library and museum professionals amongst others. When comparing regional performance with the national average scores between phases one and two, it appears that the decline in provision of Training and Development is more marked regionally than nationally, another factor attributable to the overall reduction in resources and increased workloads. When examining the performance of individual offices in the North West it becomes apparent that Archival treasures The cultural diversity of the region is reflected in its archive collections. Of particular note are the collections of the Wordsworth Trust at Grasmere, the Methodist Archive held by the John Rylands University Library in Manchester and the holdings of the North West Film Archive and National Museum of Labour History, also in Manchester. Whilst it might be regarded as invidious to single out particular local authority record offices for mention, it is acknowledged that the Chester City municipal archives, the Cheshire Diocesan archives, the Liverpool City Engineers Department ## Strategic Priorities And Funding Needs For North West Region Archives there are few high points of provision but many areas of significant need. The offices which consistently score nearest to or above the regional and national averages are, unsurprisingly, larger and better resourced than their counterparts in the region, reflecting the higher political, organisational and public profile they enjoy. Cross-sector working, funding grants and current initiatives At a regional level the nascent RAC has had fruitful discussions with The North West's Regional Archives Strategy Forward Together58 identifies the priorities across the wider archive provision. From a local authority viewpoint the most pressing need is for a political understanding of the balance that must be struck between access and stewardship. In the context of archives access and stewardship are not at opposite ends of a spectrum, they are merely two sides of the same coin. Accommodation is central to delivering better access and care of records and the North West needs more investment in better archive buildings. ICT is also a key to delivering better access and representatives of the North West Museums Service and the North West Library System. A joint statement of intent was issued in April 2000 and identified areas of mutual interest for future development, these being ICT, Conservation, Training, Grant Making and Standards. At a local level collaborative projects with museums and libraries are becoming more a norm than an exception (for example the touring Voices of Cumbria Millennium Oral History Project). The involvement of the Regional Archive Council with the newly formed conservation and greater investment is needed in a co-ordinated and planned fashion to ensure that resources are spent wisely and efficiently. The overall picture is not one of unrelieved gloom: capital investment is still taking place, for example the Cumbria Archive Service opened a fourth office at Whitehaven as recently as 1996 and the Cheshire Record Office improved its search room accommodation in 2000. Regional Cultural Consortium also offers opportunities for wider crosssectoral initiatives. Successful HLF awards have been relatively few in number and modest in their scale. Recent successes include the North West regional A2A bid Our Mutual Friends in the North linking finding aids to records of mutual, friendly and philanthropic societies in the North West. From a public standpoint the increased access to collections provided by many local archive services is a major success. ## 17. Regional Findings South East Region Regional profile The South East Region surrounds London. Unlike some other Regions, the South East struggles to find an identity. From Banbury in its north to Ventnor on the Isle of Wight and Margate in the far east, the Region has seemingly little cohesion. There are nevertheless certain factors which typify the Region. It is predominantly lowland, interspersed with rolling downland. Its southern coastline is the nearest point to continental Europe and has historically provided some of the Region's major influences, as has the Region's juxtaposition to London. The Region is the most prosperous outside London, deriving much of its wealth from agriculture and trade. The Region did not undergo the massive expansion of industrialisation of the nineteenth century. There are no large conurbations, but there are areas of urban sprawl along the south coast. With 8 million people it is the most populated Region. There are 7 county councils and 12 unitary authorities. A number of joint archive service arrangements have come into being after local government re-organisation. Archival treasures There are 164 organisations within the Region where archives are held and made publicly available. Whilst each county and a number of unitary authorities have repositories, local authority archive services are not the largest number of providers, although they do account for a greater quantity of material and readers. There are a sizeable and growing number of higher education institutions with archival collections (such as the Design Council Archive at Brighton University). This sector is dominated by the collections of Oxford University, and the Bodleian Library. There are a significant number of school and college archives, as well as a substantial number of religious houses and military archives. There are relatively few business archives (major archives are those of Pfizer and Friends Provident), but there are a wide variety of other specialist repositories including a health authority, stately homes and national organisations. The Region has two special media archives in the form of the Wessex Film and Sound Archive based at Hampshire Record Office, and the South East Film and Video Archive at the University of Brighton. The BBC Written Archives Centre is based at Caversham near Reading. Commentary on South East Region Mapping Project Phase Two scores The Region is above the national average for Accommodation and Storage and Public Access and Services, which is partly explained by new or comparatively new buildings in a number of locations such as West Sussex, Hampshire, Berkshire, Oxfordshire, Surrey and East Kent. Scores for Conservation and Preservation, Information and Communications Technology, and Training and Development are also above the national average. The Strategic priorities and funding needs for South East Region archives The Regional Archive Strategy for the South East59 looks carefully at the best mechanisms for regional collaborative working amongst archives, museums, and libraries in the South East. There is significant potential to enhance the archive contribution to a range of broader cultural, educational and economic initiatives. The challenge is to maintain core values while grasping new opportunities. The opportunities are there - the Region's archives must work together with common purpose to secure the benefits for their users. Despite the overall strength of archives in the South East there are pockets of seriously poor provision and underfunding. An archive service can be strong in some areas and very weak in others. In some repositories there is a real need to improve the standard of archival care and public access facilities. Backlogs of cataloguing and conservation work - crucial to access - inhibit the work of many otherwise successful archives. The archival resource remains largely untapped - despite exemplary work in opening up the heritage for wider use in many areas. Archives need the tools for the job - given the necessary resources, they can deliver on outreach and stewardship and access. Key priorities for the South East are improving standards of preservation and stewardship, tackling cataloguing backlogs, and securing sufficient levels of core funding. 59 SERAC, South East Regional Archive Strategy: Making SenSE of Archives, Chris Pickford, September 2001 Region also scores rather better than the national average for electronic records, evidence that local authorities are beginning to identify and address these issues. The score for External Relations and Crosssector Working is slightly down on the national average, reflecting the difficulties of working across such a disparate Region. Although the Region has a slightly higher rating than the national average for Finding Aids and Reference Services, the poor rating is 30% higher than the national figure, making this area ripe for investment. Cross-sector working, funding grants and current initiatives A weakness already identified in the South East is the artificiality of the Region, which tends to fall into 4 subregions. However despite this much useful work is taking place. Most record offices have a strong presence through talks and exhibitions, which actively seek to address social inclusion in rural areas. Co-operative ventures, such as that between the South East Film and Video Archive, University of Brighton, and county record offices in Kent, Surrey, East Sussex and West Sussex, are good examples of this way of working to achieve mutual benefits. During 2001, South East Museums, Archives and Libraries will be employing a Strategic Development Officer (funded by Resource) to develop a framework for future collaboration and establish strong links between key regional agencies and local government, and establishing a small cross-sector regional challenge fund. The South East was the first region to be awarded a grant from HLF under A2A in February 2001. The project, entitled From Landlord to Labourer covers over 200 archive collections held in 15 local repositories. ## 18 Regional Findings South West Region mixed success in attracting new economy business. Parts of the South West are now suffering economic hardship as a consequence of Foot & Mouth. Regional profile The South West region is the largest English region by area. At almost 250 miles long, the region stretches from Wiltshire, Gloucestershire and Dorset though Somerset to Devon, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly. The region encompasses an extensive rural Archival treasures Archival treasures of the region include records of Exeter Cathedral; Cornish mining records (Cornwall is to be designated a World Heritage Site for its mining legacy); Exeter City local customs accounts; British Rail, Western Region (formerly Great Western Railway) archives; records of Katherine, Lady Berkeley's Grammar School, Wotton-under-Edge; prison records from Gloucestershire County Gaol & Houses of Correction; ecclesiastical records from Salisbury, St. Augustine's Abbey, Bristol, and Winchcombe Abbey; estate and family papers of the Codrington family of Dodington (including architectural drawings by James Wyatt and others); Gloucestershire militia records; canal records of the Stroudwater Canal, Thames & Severn Canal, and network of towns and villages as well as major conurbations. It has obvious geographical, transport infrastructure and communication problems. Nine principal authorities operate archive services. All principal authorities buy into services if they do not themselves provide them. The local authorities comprise a mixture of conventional two-tier systems with a number of urban unitary councils. The region has identified itself as exceptionally diverse. Uniquely the South West of England Regional Development Agency identified the Environment as a strategic driver in its Regional Strategy. This document alluded to the high concentration of monuments, museums and historic houses in the region and to high levels of participation in the cultural sector. The region is perceived to be Gloucester & Berkeley Canal; records of the Dursley Pedersen Cycle Co, and records of the National Monuments Record Centre at Swindon. ## Commentary On South West Region Mapping Project Phase Two Scores prosperous and dynamic but this hides serious economic problems in Bristol, Plymouth, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly, as well as in many of the smaller coastal and market towns. There are significant problems with traditional industries (farming, fishing, mineral extraction, beach holidays) and only The Phase Two scores for the South West broadly reflect the pattern in the national aggregates. If priority bands one and two are aggregated the South West tends to do slightly better than the national figure. The exceptions to this are Information and Communications Technology and Public Access and Services. The results invite further analysis of ICT and Electronic Records. For Accommodation and Storage the South West has 60% of offices rated as fair or good compared to 44% nationally. Conservation and Strategic priorities and funding needs for South West Region archives There is no doubt that in archival terms, the Region is dividing along the lines of "haves and have-nots", and that Challenge Funding is a major driver of this process. The smallest services, whose needs are arguably greatest, appear least able to find staff time and match funding. Quality and standard of accommodation is also an issue and, although some Preservation scores better than the national average with 60% of offices rated as fair or good against 30% nationally. accommodation is achieving most or all of the relevant standards, there are also some notably bad archive buildings in the region. Amongst the priorities must be the need to find a suitable home for the regional film archive, the largest of its kind in England. Attention to electronic Cross-sector working, funding grants and current initiatives The South West Regional Archive Council made a good start in crosssectoral working. A model for joint working was ratified early on. The good working relationships have records, though better than elsewhere, is still desperately poor. The Regional Archive Strategy for the South West Region60 aims to develop a framework for advocacy for archives, wider recognition of the stewardship responsibilities of archives, continuing improvements to accommodation standards of the Region's archives and support for cross-sector working and understanding. continued and the three domains will be co-located from Autumn 2001. As for Challenge Funding, varied bids have succeeded such as Plymouth's multi-partner NOF bid for digitisation of theatre records and the Dorset Coast Digital Archive. Successful HLF bids for the Region include the consortium bid to Access to Archives @ The Heart of the Community (to retro-convert parish and school catalogues); the wide-ranging Access to Somerset's Archives, Wiltshire Wills Diocesan records project, and grants for storage accommodation, improvements to finding aids, and the mounting of catalogues on-line at Gloucestershire. The National Monuments Record Centre at Swindon received an HLF grant of £3 million to develop community based volunteer photography projects. ## 19. Regional Findings West Midlands Region public access. Major local authority metropolitan collections can be found at Birmingham City Archives, Coventry City Archives, and Dudley, Sandwell, Walsall and Wolverhampton Archives Services. Major shire county Regional profile The West Midlands is the most densely populated area in the UK outside London. The Region is comprised of the largely rural shire counties of Herefordshire, Shropshire, Staffordshire, Warwickshire and collections are held by Shropshire, Staffordshire, Warwickshire, Worcestershire, and the densely Worcestershire, and Herefordshire. populated conurbation of the West Midlands metropolitan districts and the unitary authorities of Stoke-on-Trent and Telford and the Wrekin. The urban core comprises the cities of Birmingham (the regional capital and the nation's second largest city), Coventry and the Black Country. The counties surrounding the conurbations have long been among the country's foremost agricultural communities University collections include those of Birmingham, Keele and Warwick. The Shakespeare Birthplace Trust Record Office holds archival material. A major business collection is the BP Amoco Archives. Important collections are also held by the Heritage Motor Museum Trust and the Ironbridge Gorge Museum. Strengths of the Region's collections include records of the Wilkinson and Wedgwood which, with historic and attractive market towns are now becoming tourist attractions in their own right for their natural beauty, rich history and cultural opportunities. The West Midlands sits at the heart of the UK's communications infrastucture, with strong road, rail and air networks, and good pubic transport. The Region boasts one of the most culturally diverse populations in the UK, and the resultant cultural strength has a potteries, records of trade unions and the co-operative movement, and family and estate papers of the Cadbury family, Crossman, Eden, Chamberlain, Elgar, Samuel Johnson and Thomas Arnold of Rugby school. Commentary on West Midlands Region Mapping Project Phase Two scores The Phase Two scores for the West Midlands are broadly comparable for those nationally. Scores for Accommodation and Storage are similarly comparable, with 57% of West Midlands offices scoring poor or very poor. For Public Access and Services 86% of offices score highly. Information and Communications Technology and **Electronic Records**. powerful impact on the life of the Region. Archival treasures 150 archive holding bodies have been identified in the West Midlands. There are 18 archive services in the West Midlands (22 offices) that provide score poorly. Finding Aids and Reference Services score poorly with 86% of offices rating poor or very poor provision. The scores for Muck and Brass project, which draws together the records of 16 archive holding bodies that relate to industrial development and the associated ## Conservation And Preservation, families and firms, was successful, and work on this project has now begun. ## Staff Training And Development And External Relations And Cross- Strategic priorities and funding needs for West Midlands region archives The Regional Archives Strategy61 sets out its ambitions for the archive sector. The strategy places a high priority on the importance of developing the capacity of the RAC and for investigating this in the context of working more closely with the RMC and TLP-WM. It advocates regional solutions to archival issues. In particular this includes regional promotion, raising public awareness of the potential of archives, and addressing archival provision through innovative approaches to access and stewardship. It also encourages consistency in meeting customer service expectations. The strategy recognises the sectoral Working are in line with the national findings. Cross-sector working, funding grants and current initiatives In the West Midlands, museums, archives and libraries have come together to form WM:CLAM, the West Midlands Council for Libraries Archives and Museums, an un-constituted group comprising the RAC, West Midlands Regional Museums Council and The Library Partnership West Midlands (TLP-WM). One striking feature of the pattern of provision in the West Midlands is that half (75 of 150) of the archive holding bodies in the region are museums. WM:CLAM published a statement of purpose in December 1999 called Common Ambition that laid out a set of principles for how the three bodies would work together. Since then WM:CLAM have received funding from Resource for the importance of tackling cultural diversity both in terms of collections and users. It echoes messages in the Government Policy on Archives Action Plan, for example, the RAC is committed to exploring options for electronic records management in the region. Crossroads project which will be completed by March 2002. Crossroads will improve access to the collections and resources of museums, galleries, archives and libraries in the West Midlands through a web enabled database containing high level descriptions of the region's resources. In addition, WM:CLAM has secured additional funding for the Profiles project which will seek to map resources for Black and South Asian history in the West Midlands, assess contemporary collecting needs and identify gaps in provision and look at marketing those resources better. The West Midlands A2A bid to HLF for the West Midlands RAC, Future Directions, the West Midlands ## 20. Regional Findings Yorkshire Region Regional profile The Yorkshire Region covers Doncaster, Hull, Rotherham, Sheffield, and York. West Yorkshire Archives Service runs offices covering Bradford, Calderdale, Kirklees, Leeds and approximately 12% of England's land mass, with a population of 5 million people. It includes the county of North Yorkshire, the metropolitan districts of South Yorkshire and West Yorkshire, and the unitary authorities of the former county of Humberside. Yorkshire has a strong regional Wakefield. The Universities of York, Leeds, and Sheffield hold strong archival collections. There is a regional film Archive for Yorkshire, and the Borthwick Institute in York and York Minster hold major archive collections. Commentary on Yorkshire region Mapping Project Phase Two scores The Phase Two scores for the Yorkshire Region compare favourably with the national averages. The same can be said of Yorkshire's scores for Accommodation and Storage. For Public Access and Services 64% of offices are rated as poor, compared to 30% nationally. Information and identity. It is an area of exceptional natural beauty (one fifth of the Region is designated a national park) and great historic interest. It is a region of contrasts from the North York Moors and Yorkshire Dales to the industrial and post-industrial conurbations of South and West Yorkshire and the heritage coast of North Yorkshire and East Riding. The region has a wealth of archaeological sites and historic buildings, including abbeys, castles, country houses, and industrial Communications Technology scores are slightly better than the national average, although scores for Electronic Records. are poor. Finding Aids and Reference architecture. Regional distinctiveness is also reflected in rich oral and folk traditions among both historic communities, and more recently Services score well compared to the national findings. The scores for Conservation and Preservation, are poor compared to the national score. Staff Training and Development and External Relations and Crosssettled ethnic groups. Archival treasures The Yorkshire region has a wealth of diverse archival institutions, covering rich collections of local, regional, and national importance. There are county record offices for East Riding of Yorkshire, North Yorkshire, North East Lincolnshire. Metropolitan archive services are run by Barnsley, sectoral Working are slightly lower than the national averages. Cross-sector working, funding grants and current initiatives The Yorkshire Signpost project has recently secured an award from HLF. the Regional Archives Strategy62 The strategy aims place an emphasis on archives' contribution to the growth, cohesion and promotion of Yorkshire and the Humber. Objectives identified include sustainability, supporting regional development through business, skills, learning and tourism, social regeneration and partnerships. The strategy identifies over 50 archive holding institutions in Yorkshire and the Humber and uses examples of practice from those institutions to illustrate the themes. Examples range from the West Yorkshire Archive Service's COSMOS project to the proposed partnership between the University of Hull, Hull City Council and Hull College to create a joint history centre. The strategy is informed by a baseline study questionnaire that was distributed amongst archives in the region. The results helped to identify key needs and opportunities on which the strategy's aims are based. The strategy is supported by a one-year action plan that will be updated year on year. Part of the A2A programme, it will enable the retro-conversion of 49,000 pages held by over 50 heritage organisations. Led by West Yorkshire Archive Service, it will form an electronic guide to archives available to the public in the region, which will be particularly useful because archives in and about Yorkshire are not necessarily held at the expected location within modern administrative boundaries. Yorkshire Signpost will enable a farmer at the head of Arkengarthdale to find out about sources to help trace his family tree; or a GCSE student in Whitby to access information about records for the history of medicine held by the Thackray Medical Museum in Leeds. During 2001/2002 the RAC, Yorkshire Museums Council and Yorkshire Libraries and Information will be completing two projects funded by Resource, to undertake market research to determine the comparative use and non-use of services in the three sectors. The research will look in particular at the differences in rural and urban use and what that might mean for joint marketing and promotion. A second related project will develop guidance on how to involve communities in the plans and activities of museums, archives and libraries. Both these projects will further the aims of the RAC's strategic framework. Strategic priorities and funding needs for Yorkshire Region archives A cross-sectoral policy unit has been established within the Yorkshire Museums Council, using funding from Resource. Each of the three agencies has contributed to the development of ## 21. Conclusion "Although the record office is small... it offers help and advice to local communities undertaking archive related projects and has a high profile in the area. It is well-used and supported by local people all year round, and is perceived as a community resource available to all - young and old, academics, and interested individuals" The above quote from one of the Phase Two mapping project offices play a part, also serves the business needs of local authorities. User needs and expectations Use of local authority record offices is increasing. This can partially be explained as a consequence of national demographic changes and increased leisure time for some citizens. Recent media interest, in particular television programmes, have helped to popularise archival resources for family and local history. The thirst for knowledge, learning and education continues unabated, from primary school-children to lifelong learners and "the university of the third age." These users need to be equipped with the tools and services to meet their needs. Examples include the popular National Grid for Learning, and the Learning Curve website.63 The questionnaires illustrates the value of local authority archive services to the local community. Taken as a whole the network of local authority record offices up and down the land are an undervalued national asset. Clearly, there is much exciting work taking place to build the record offices and public services of the 21st century, but there remains much to be done. The role of local authority archive services Local authority archive services are valued for two main reasons, and accordingly there are two main arguments for funding them. There is the cultural heritage argument: local authority archives are custodians of a vast wealth of fascinating and unique information and artefacts amassed by local communities. recent LIC report Empowering the Learning Community points to the future direction of resources and services.64 An increased public These cover an astonishing array of topics - in fact all areas of local life. There is also the good governance argument which although exerting a less emotional pull, places obligations on record creators, and custodians to manage record holdings effectively and efficiently to meet democratic and administrative responsibilities of transparency and accountability. Good records management, in which many record expectation of high quality public services and of access rights to official information have led to a greater public awareness of local authority archive services and the role they can play in the local community. ## These Developments Are Leading the way The NCA in its document British Archives: The Way Forward66 gives clear direction to frame priorities. HMC's Archives at the Millennium is a summary of a wide ranging consultation with the archives community on the strengths and weaknesses of the UK's archives.67 Resource has been developing cross-sector strategies68 and the Action Plan of the Government Policy on Archives,69 developed by the Inter-Departmental Archives extremely welcome, but without matching investment, archives will not be ready to make the most of these opportunities. New challenges New users bring new challenges. In some cases, increased pressure on already oversubscribed facilities is compromising services. One county archivist remarked that user pressure to provide national genealogical resources is beginning to compromise the role of the office to make historic county records available to county families for consultation. Changing technology offers Committee sets a clear agenda and goals for UK archives. Investment priorities Throughout this report investment needs have been identified. unparalleled opportunities for service development. Access to finding aids and documents via the Internet is the "world's window" on the collections and services of local authority Investment should address specific deficiencies in a focused manner, and projects on relatively modest budgets can bring great benefits to local authority record offices. One service reported that after a relatively small grant, "the atmosphere has been totally transformed for the first archives. The time has come not to merely gaze through that window, but to reach into the room beyond. The electronic age means that new ways will need to be developed to manage and preserve digital data. Archives will continue to reach out to new groups such as children and the socially excluded. The DCMS report Centres For Social Change65 clearly sets a framework for cultural institutions to achieve a greater breadth and cultural diversity in the user and staffing base. 66 NCA, British Archives: the Way Forward, 2000 67 HMC, Archives at the Millennium, the 28th report of the RCHM 1991-1999, 1999 68 To date, Resource is developing cross-sectoral strategies for ICT, Learning & Access, Stewardship, Archives and the emerging regional agenda. 69 The aim of the Inter-Departmental Archives Committee is to bring about as much consistency in the handling of archive policy matters within government The current work of IDAC is focused on the development and implementation of the Action Plan stemming from the publication of the Government Policy on Archives of December 1999. 65 DCMS Centres for Social Change: Museums, Galleries and Archives for All , May 2000 Chancellor70 with taking forward proposals for a new National time in over 30 years...and we have been given a sense of direction." Key priorities are: ½ Phased programmes of improvements to storage accommodation, and public facilities Archives Act. This may help to ensure protection and support for local authority and other archive services, to enable them to fulfil their potential for public benefit and to enable them to more effectively deliver the modernisation and information policy agenda of ½ Development of regional and national preservation strategies and improvements to conservation facilities and staffing levels government. New legislation alone cannot achieve all the objectives which local ½ Development of ICT infrastructure to support specific archive ICT initiatives and improvements to finding aids using web based technology authority record offices now face. The co-ordinated development of these archives services can be taken forwards individually, or collectively under the new regional structures, as a matter for immediate action. With bold commitment from funding bodies, local authorities, and archivists themselves this ½ Development of strategies to address the effective management and long-term preservation of electronic data ½ Continuing development of staff to equip them with new skills to meet new agendas opportunity for development can be seized to deliver long-term public benefits. ½ Continuing to work across cultural sectors to promote archives and make the best use of resources where interests are held in common The future: regional archive strategies; a new national archives act? The Regional Archive Strategies which are currently being launched and implemented will frame future priorities and set the objectives that will help deliver the local authority archive services of the 21st century. Within central Government there is a real desire for change and an opportunity to establish local archives firmly in the popular consciousness. The Public Record Office has been charged by the Lord ## Appendix 1: Statistical Data The Charts That Follow Show In Pie Graph From The Distribution Of Priority Bands Nationally, And For Each English Region. The Chart Key And The Scoring Priority Bands Are Explained On Page 8 Of This Report. National Charts Regional Charts: East Of England Region Key: see page 8 ## Regional Charts: East Midlands Region Key: see page 8 ## Regional Charts: London Region Key: see page 8 ## Regional Charts: North East Region Key: see page 8 ## Regional Charts: North West Region Regional Charts: South East Region Regional Charts: South West Region Regional Charts: West Midlands Region Regional Charts: Yorkshire Region Key: See Page 8 Appendix Two List Of Participating Local Authority Archive Services East of England Region Bedfordshire & Luton Archives Service Cambridgeshire County Record Office, Cambridge Cambridgeshire County Record Office, Huntingdon Essex Record Office, Chelmsford Essex Record Office, Colchester Essex Record Office, Southend Hertfordshire Archives & Local Studies Norfolk Record Office, King's Lynn Norfolk Record Office, Norwich Suffolk Record Office, Bury Suffolk Record Office, Ipswich Suffolk Record Office, Lowestoft LB of Croydon Local Studies Library LB of Ealing Local History Library & Archive Service LB of Enfield Local History Unit LB of Greenwich Local History Library LB of Hackney Archives Dept LB of H'smith & Fulham Archives Dept LB of Haringey Bruce Castle Museum LB of Hillingdon Local Heritage Service LB of Hounslow, Chiswick Local Studies Library LB of Kensington & Chelsea, Chelsea Library LB of Kensington & Chelsea, Kensington Library LB of Kingston-upon-Thames, North Kingston Heritage Centre LB of Lambeth Archives Dept LB of Lewisham Local History Centre LB of Newham Borough Archives LB of Redbridge Local Studies and Archives LB of Richmond-upon-Thames, Richmond Library LB of Richmond-upon-Thames, Twickenham Library LB of Southwark Local Studies Library LB of Sutton Archives LB of Tower Hamlets Archive Service LB of Waltham Forest Archives LB of Wandsworth Local History Library LB of Westminster City Archives North East Region Berwick upon Tweed Record Office Durham Record Office Northumberland: Gosforth Northumberland: Morpeth Teesside Archives Tyne & Wear Archives Service East Midlands Region Derbyshire Record Office Lincolnshire Archives Northamptonshire Record Office Nottinghamshire Archives The Record Office for Leicestershire, Leicester & Rutland London Region Corporation of London Record Office London Guildhall Library London Metropolitan Archives LB71 of Barking & Dagenham Archives LB of Barnet Archives Service LB of Bexley Libraries & Museums Dept LB of Brent Archives LB of Bromley Archives Service LB of Camden Archives & Local Studies Centre 71 London Borough North West Region Bolton Archives & Local Studies Service Bury Archive Service Cheshire & Chester Archive Cumbria Record Office, Barrow Cumbria Record Office, Carlisle Cumbria Record Office, Kendal Cumbria Record Office, Whitehaven Greater Manchester County Record Office Knowsley Archives Lancashire Record Office Liverpool/Merseyside Record Offices Manchester Local Studies Unit Oldham Archives Service Rochdale Library Service Salford City Archives Service St Helen's Local History & Archives Liby Stockport Archives Service Tameside Archive Service Trafford Local Studies Centre Wigan Archive Service Wirral Archives Service South East Region Berkshire Record Office Buckinghamshire Record Office Canterbury Cathedral Archives Centre for Kentish Studies, Maidstone East Kent Archives Centre, Dover East Sussex Record Office Hampshire Record Office Isle of Wight Record Office Medway Archives & Local Studies Centre Oxfordshire Archives Portsmouth City Museums & Records Service Southampton Record Office Surrey History Centre West Sussex Record Office South West Region Bath & North East Somerset Record Office Bristol Record Office Cornwall Record Office Devon Record Office, Exeter ## List Of Nonparticipating Local Authority Archive Services London Borough Of Harrow, Harrow Reference Library (Declined to participate in the English Archival Mapping Project Phase Two) London Borough of Havering (Not surveyed in the English Archival Mapping Project Phases One and Two. The London Borough of Havering does not currently operate an archives service. Some Borough records are kept at the Essex Record Office). London Borough of Islington, Islington Archives (Declined to participate in the English Archival Mapping Project Phases One and Two) London Borough of Merton (Not surveyed in the English Archival Mapping Project Phases One and Two. The London Dorset Record Office Gloucestershire Record Office North Devon Record Office Plymouth & West Devon Record Office Somerset Record Office Wiltshire & Swindon Record Office West Midlands Region Birmingham City Archives Coventry City Record Office Dudley Archives & Local History Service Herefordshire Record Office Sandwell Community History & Archive Service, Smethwick Shropshire Records & Research Service Staffordshire & Stoke-on-Trent Archives Service: Lichfield Staffordshire & Stoke-on-Trent Archives Service: Stafford72 Walsall Archives Service Warwickshire Record Office Wolverhampton Archives Worcester Record Office, City Centre Branch Worcestershire Record Office, Worcester Main Branch Borough of Merton does not currently operate an archives service. Some Borough records are kept at the Surrey History Centre) Yorkshire Region Barnsley Archive Service Doncaster Archives Department East Riding of Yorkshire Archive Office Hull City Archives North East Lincolnshire Archives North Yorkshire County Record Office, Northallerton Rotherham Borough Archives Sheffield Archives West Yorkshire Archive Service, Bradford West Yorkshire Archive Service, Calderdale (Halifax) West Yorkshire Archive Service, Kirklees (Huddersfield) West Yorkshire Archive Service, Leeds West Yorkshire Archive Service, Wakefield York City Archives 72 The office at Stokeon-Trent was not formally surveyed as it was a service point and did not then provide a full public service. ## Appendix Three: Useful Addresses And Contacts Society of Archivists Mr Patrick Cleary, Executive Secretary, 40, Northampton Road, London, EC1R 0HB Tel: 020 7278 8630 www.archives.org.uk Historical Manuscripts Commission Dr Chris Kitching, Secretary, Quality House, Quality Court, Chancery Lane, London, WC2A 1HP Tel: 020 7242 1198 www.hmc.gov.uk Public Record Office Kew, Richmond Surrey, TW9 4DU General Enquiries Tel: 020 8876 3444 www.pro.gov.uk Archive Inspection Services Mr Steven Jones, Tel: 020 8392 5318 A2A Programme Ms Meg Sweet, Tel: 020 8392 5315 http://www.a2a.pro.gov.uk Resource Mr Justin Frost, Archive Policy Adviser Resource, The Council for Museums, Archives & Libraries, 16, Queen Anne's Gate, London, SW1H 9AA Tel: 020 7273 1477 www.resource.gov.uk Inter-Departmental Archives Committee Dr David Leitch, Secretary IDAC, Public Record Office, Kew, Richmond Surrey, TW9 4DU Tel: 0208 8392 5262 Association of Chief Archivists in Local Government Mrs Thea Randall, Secretary c/o Staffordshire Record Office, Eastgate Street, Stafford, ST16 2LZ Tel: 01785 278379 National Council on Archives Secretary Mrs Margaret Turner, 26, Cruise Road, Sheffield, S11 7EF http://nca.archives.org.uk Archives Lottery Adviser Miss Alison Berwick c/o The Public Record Office, Kew, Richmond Surrey, TW9 4DU Tel: 020 8876 5347 Archive Development Officer for the Regions Miss Dawn Routledge c/o Resource, The Council for Museums, Archives & Libraries, 16, Queen Anne's Gate, London, SW1H 9AA Tel: 020 7273 1421 Department for Culture, Media & Sport Museums, Archives & Libraries Division, 2-4 Cockspur Street, London SW1Y 5DH www.culture.gov.uk National Preservation Office Dr Vanessa Marshall, Director, NPO, The British Library, 96, Euston Road, London, NW1 2DB Tel: 020 7412 7612 National Digital Archive of Datasets 20 Guilford Street London WC1N 1DZ United Kingdom Tel:020 7692 1212. www.ndad.ac.uk/ South East (SERAC) Mr Richard Childs Chair SERAC c/o West Sussex Record Office County Hall Chichester West Sussex PO19 1RN South West (SWRAC) Mr Paul Brough, Chair SWRAC c/o Cornwall County Record Office County Hall Truro Cornwall TR1 3AY www.southwestarchives.org West Midlands (WMRAC) Mr Roger Vaughan Chair WMRAC c/o Herbert Art Gallery and Museum Jordan Well Coventry CV1 5QP www.westmidlandsarchives.org.uk Yorkshire (YARC) Mr Keith Sweetmore Chair YARC c/o West Yorkshire Archive Service Registry of Deeds Newstead Road Wakefield WF1 2DE www.yarc.org.uk Regional Archive Councils East of England (EERAC) Mrs Elizabeth Stazicker, Chair ERAC c/o Cambridgeshire County Record Office, Shire Hall, Castle Hill Cambridge CB3 0AP East Midlands (EMRAC) Miss Rachel Watson, Chair EMRAC, c/o Northamptonshire Record Office Wootton Hall Park Northampton NN4 8BQ www.eastmidlandsarchives.org.uk/ London (LARC) Mr David Mander Chair LARC c/o, Hackney Archives Dept 43 De Beauvoir Road London N1 5SQ www.llng.og.uk/larc North East (NERAC) Ms Elizabeth Rees Chair NERAC c/o, Tyne and Wear Archives Service Blandford House Blandford Square Newcastle upon Tyne NE14JA www.nemlac.co.uk North West (NWRAC) Mr Jim Grisenthwaite Chair NWRAC c/o Cumbria Record Office The Castle Carlisle Cumbria CA3 8UR www.northwestarchives.org.uk

en

1381-pdf

## Department For Business, Innovation And Skills Ministerial Information: 01 April 2014 - 30 June 2014 GIFTS GIVEN OVER £140 Secretary of State for Business, Innovation & Skills and President of the Board of Trade, Rt Hon Vincent Cable MP Date gift given To Gift Value (over £140) Nil return Minister of State, (Universities and Science), Rt Hon David Willetts MP Date gift given To Gift Value (over £140) Nil return Minister of State (Trade and Investment), Lord Livingston Date gift given To Gift Value (over £140) Nil return Parliamentary Secretary for Business, Innovation and Skills Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, Viscount Younger Date gift given To Gift Value (over £140) Nil return Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, (Employment Relations, Consumer Affairs), Jenny Willott MP Date gift given To Gift Value (over £140) Nil return Minister of State for Skills and Enterprise (Skills jointly with the Department for Education), Matthew Hancock MP Date gift given To Gift Value (over £140) Nil return Minister of State, (Business and Enterprise), Rt Hon Michael Fallon MP Date gift given To Gift Value (over £140) Nil return ## Gifts Received Over £140 | From | Gift | Value | Outcome | |---------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------|-------------|--------------| | Secretary of State for Business, Innovation & Skills and President of the | | | | | Board of Trade, Rt Hon Vincent Cable MP | | | | | Date gift | | | | | received | | | | | Nil return | | | | | | | | | | From | Gift | Value | Outcome | | Minister of State, (Universities and Science), Rt Hon David Willetts MP | | | | | | | | | | Date gift | | | | | received | | | | | Nil return | | | | | From | Gift | Value | Outcome | | | | | | | Minister of State (Trade and Investment), Lord Livingston | | | | | Date gift | | | | | received | | | | | Necklace | Over limit | Retained by | | | the department | | | | | 01 May | China | | | | Entrepreneur | | | | | Club | | | | | From | Gift | Value | Outcome | | | | | | | Parliamentary Secretary for Business, Innovation and Skills | | | | | Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, Viscount Younger | | | | | Date gift | | | | | received | | | | | Nil return | | | | | From | Gift | Value | Outcome | | | | | | | Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, (Employment Relations, | | | | | Consumer Affairs), Jenny Willott MP | | | | | Date gift | | | | | received | | | | | Nil return | | | | | From | Gift | Value | Outcome | | | | | | | Minister of State for Skills and Enterprise (Skills jointly with the | | | | | Department for Education), Matthew Hancock MP | | | | | Date gift | | | | | received | | | | | | | | | | From | Gift | Value | Outcome | | | | | | | Minister of State, (Business and Enterprise), Rt Hon Michael Fallon MP | | | | | Date gift | | | | | received | | | | | Nil return | | | | | | | | | OVERSEAS TRAVEL Date(s) of trip Destination Purpose of trip 'Scheduled' or No 32 (The Royal) Squadron' or 'other RAF' or 'Charter' or 'Eurostar' Secretary of State for Business, Innovation & Skills and President of the Board of Trade, Rt Hon Vincent Cable MP 23 May - 01 June China, Hong Kong, Chongqing, Shenzhen, Guangzhou, Beijing, Qingdao To attend the Joint Economic and Trade Committee and annual trade dialogue with the Chinese Ministry of Commerce Minister of State, (Universities and Science), Rt Hon David Willetts MP 21 April - 24 April China, Beijing To attend the People to People Dialogue 04 May France, Paris To attend the OECD Forum 05 June - 06 June Poland, Krakow To attend Polish- British Roundtable 17 June - 23 June USA, Boston, San Diego, Mojave To speak at a Goldman Sachs conference and promote bilateral relationships between UK and USA Minister of State (Trade and Investment), Lord Livingston 08 May Belgium, Brussels Represent the UK at a FAC Trade Ministers meeting in Brussels 04 June- 06 June Spain, Madrid To promote UK Trade and Investment and meet with Senior Government Ministers Parliamentary Secretary for Business, Innovation and Skills, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, Viscount Younger 16 June - 17 June Germany, Berlin To attend the 9th edition of the EPO's European Inventor Award Ceremony Total cost including travel and accommodation of Minister only Number of officials accompanying Minister, where nonscheduled travel is used Scheduled £5,250 Scheduled £4,593 Eurostar £270 Scheduled £1,165 Scheduled £8,406 £252 Scheduled & Eurostar Scheduled £691 Scheduled £881 Date(s) of trip Destination Purpose of trip 'Scheduled' or No 32 (The Royal) Squadron' or 'other RAF' or 'Charter' or 'Eurostar' Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, (Employment Relations, Consumer Affairs), Jenny Willott MP Nil return Minister of State for Skills and Enterprise (Skills jointly with the Department for Education), Matthew Hancock MP 05 May - 06 May France, Paris To speak at the OECD Conference in Paris Minister of State, (Business and Enterprise), Rt Hon Michael Fallon MP 06 April - 07 April Germany, Hanover To attend the Hanover Trade Fair 10 April - 11 April Germany, Berlin To meet with German Ministers and representatives from industry to discuss business and energy topics 19 May - 20 May Germany, Berlin To attend the Berlin International Airshow 26 May - 27 May Italy, Milan To support the launch of the Italy Prompt Payment Code Name of organisation Type of hospitality received¹ HOSPITALITY Date of hospitality Secretary of State for Business, Innovation & Skills and President of the Board of Trade, Rt Hon Vincent Cable MP 02 April Channel 4 Lunch 09 April Lloyd Embley, The Mirror Dinner 29 April Amol Rajan, The Independent 07 May Sunday Times Lunch 07 May The Telegraph Dinner 14 May BBC Lunch 14 May BBC Dinner 25 June Lionel Barber, Financial Times, FT.com 30 June British Bankers' Lunch Total cost including travel and accommodation of Minister only Number of officials accompanying Minister, where nonscheduled travel is used Eurostar £279 Scheduled £866 Scheduled £720 Scheduled £280 Scheduled £974 Dinner Lunch | Name of organisation | Type of hospitality received¹ | Date of | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------|---------------------------| | hospitality | | | | Association | | | | Minister of State, (Universities and Science), Rt Hon David Willetts MP | | | | 02 April | Imperial College | Dinner | | 04 April | Lloyds | Lunch | | 09 April | The Times | Lunch | | 10 April | Association of the British | | | Pharmaceutical Industry | | | | 24 April | Yuri Milner | Dinner | | 29 April | Royal Society of Medicine Dinner | | | 30 April | | | | BBC, MailOnline | | | | 15 May | Edge Hill University | Lunch | | 19 May | Ian Katz, BBC Newsnight | Lunch | | 21 May | Confederation of British | | | Industry | | | | 02 June | Financial Times | Lunch | | 03 June | Daily Mail and The Times | Lunch | | 10 June | Rothschild | Breakfast | | 11 June | Foundation for Science | | | and Technology | | | | 13 June | Wilton Park | Dinner | | Minister of State (Trade and Investment), Lord Livingston | | | | 08 April | Treasurers Group | Breakfast | | 10 April | London Chamber of | | | Commerce and Industry | | | | 10 April | British Expertise | | | International | | | | 28 April | John Lewis Partnership | Breakfast | | 12 May | BT, Confederation of | | | British Industry | | | | 19 May | KPMG | Dinner and tickets to the | | Chelsea Flower Show | | | | 20 May | Panmure Gordon & Co | Breakfast | | 21 May | Confederation of British | | | Industry | | | | 27 May | Cable & Wireless | Breakfast | | 03 June | RLM Finsbury | Breakfast | | 12 June | World Jewish Relief | Breakfast | | 30 June | DLA Piper UK | Breakfast | | Parliamentary Secretary for Business, Innovation and Skills, | | | | Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, Viscount Younger | | | | 29 | | | | | | | | April | Classic FM | Tickets Classic FM | | performance and drinks* | | | | 24 June | Siemens, EEF- The | | | Manufacturers' | | | | Organisation | | | | Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, (Employment Relations, | | | | Consumer Affairs), Jenny Willott MP | | | | Nil return | | | | Minister of State for Skills and Enterprise (Skills jointly with the | | | | Department for Education), Matthew Hancock MP | | | | Dinner | | | | Lunch | | | | Dinner | | | | Dinner | | | | Lunch | | | | Dinner | | | | Breakfast | | | | Dinner | | | | Dinner | | | | Name of organisation | Type of hospitality received¹ | Date of | |------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------|--------------------------| | hospitality | | | | Breakfast | 01 May | Apprenticeship | | Ambassador Network | | | | Lunch | 01 May | DailyTelegraph, The | | Guardian | | | | 08 May | Sunday Times | Lunch | | 14 May | The Times | Lunch | | Dinner | 21 May | Confederation of British | | Industry | | | | 02 June | UBS | Dinner | | 03 June | London Stock Exchange | Breakfast | | 03 June | Evening Standard | Lunch | | 13 June | The Spectator | Lunch | | Dinner | | | | Minister of State, (Business and Enterprise), Rt Hon Michael Fallon MP | | | | 13 May | Institute of Chartered | | | Accountants of Scotland | | | | Lunch | 21 May | Institute for Family | | Business | | | | Dinner | 21 May | Confederation of British | | Industry | | | | 28 May | ARUP | Breakfast | ¹Does not normally include attendance at functions hosted by HM Government; 'diplomatic' functions in the UK or abroad, hosted by overseas governments; minor refreshments at meetings, receptions, conferences, and seminars; and offers of hospitality which were declined. * Indicates if accompanied by spouse/partner or other family member or friend. MEETINGS WITH EXTERNAL ORGANISATIONS Name of External Organisation1 Purpose of Meeting Date of Meeting To discuss higher education Secretary of State for Business, Innovation & Skills and President of the Board of Trade, Rt Hon Vincent Cable MP April 2014 University of Aberdeen, University of London, City University, Coventry University College, University of Manchester, University of Cambridge, Newcastle College, University of Law, University of Surrey, Higher Education Policy Institute April 2014 Trades Union Congress Regular meeting April 2014 Shell International To discuss energy issues April 2014 Financial Reporting Council To discuss the FRC's work promoting good corporate governance April 2014 Enterprise Forum To discuss business issues 1 Date of Meeting April 2014 British Retail Consortium Regular meeting April 2014 Confederation of British Industry Regular meeting April 2014 Lloyds To discuss banking April 2014 Nationwide To discuss banking May 2014 Association of School and College Leaders To discuss education and employment May 2014 HSBC To discuss banking May 2014 GMB, Unite the Union To discuss employment issues To discuss international student and school workers May 2014 Universities UK, Institute of Directors, Confederation of British Industry, The Royal Society, Cardiff University, University of Manchester, Student Funder June 2014 The Russell Group To discuss higher education June 2014 Celsa UK To discuss energy issues To discuss higher and further education June 2014 Association of Colleges, Universities UK, Guild Higher Education, University of Sheffield, Aston University, City & Islington College, University of Warwick, Education & Training Foundation, Institute of Education, Jaguar Land Rover, JP Morgan June 2014 Automotive Council To discuss the automotive industry Prime Ministers' Business lunch in honour of Premier Li Keqiang June 2014 Airbus, ARM Ltd, Arup, BP, Diageo, HSBC, ICAP, Jardine Matheson Group, Jaguar Land Rover, McLaren Automotive Group, Pinewood, Rio Tinto, Rolls Royce, Shell, Standard Chartered, Standard Life China, Swire, Zaha Hadid Architects To discuss mergers and takeovers June 2014 Centrica, Siemens, SELEX Galileo, WS Atkins, BAE Systems, Aggreko, Institute of Chartered Secretaries and Administrators, Confederation of Business Industry, British Chambers of Commerce, Trades Union Congress, Cass Business School, London Business School, University of Oxford, University of Sussex, Takeover Panel, Slaughter and May, Quoted Companies Alliance, Association of British Insurers 1 Date of Meeting June 2014 Engineering Employers Federation Regular meeting To discuss the construction industry June 2014 HS2 Ltd, Gardiner & Theobald, Barratt Developments, CIRIA, Travis Perkins, Midas, Imtech UK, Stanford Industrial Concrete Flooring, TrustMark, Construction Industry Training Board, British Land, Skanska UK, Laing O'Rourke, Kier, KMPG, Stepnell, Crossrail, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council To discuss the rail supply chain June 2014 Alstrom, Amey, Atkins, Carillion, Hitachi, HS2 Ltd, Network Rail, Perpetuum Ltd, Porterbrook, Siemens, South West Trains/RDG, Railway Industry Association June 2014 British Chambers of Commerce Regular meeting June 2014 General Motors Corporation To discuss the automotive industry To discuss banking June 2014 RBS, The Co-operative Bank, Barclays, HSBC, Lloyds, Clydesdale, Close Brothers, Aldermore, Handelsbanken, British Bankers' Association Minister of State, (Universities and Science), Rt Hon David Willetts MP April 2014 University of Glasgow To discuss higher education To attend Cyber Crime Reduction Partnership April 2014 Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry, British Bankers Association, Nominet, Payments Council, Federation of Small Businesses, Confederation of British Industry, Cardiff University, techUK, British Retail Consortium, The Internet Services Providers' Association April 2014 Ultra Global To discuss innovation April 2014 Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry To discuss life sciences April 2014 Aston University To discuss higher education April 2014 Universities Superannuation Scheme To discuss higher education April 2014 Association of British Healthcare Industries To discuss life sciences April 2014 Trevor Baylis Brands To discuss innovation April 2014 HP To discuss technology and innovation April 2014 O3b Networks To discuss technology 1 Date of Meeting and innovation To discuss higher education April 2014 University of Aberdeen, University of London, City University, Coventry University College, University of Manchester, University of Cambridge, Newcastle College, University of Law, University of Surrey, Higher Education Policy Institute April 2014 Intel To discuss technology and innovation April 2014 UK Spectrum Policy Forum To discuss technology and innovation April 2014 University of Bristol, University of Southampton, Mott Macdonald To discuss science and research April 2104 Higher Education Academy To discuss higher education April 2014 Harvard University To discuss higher education April 2014 The Business Services Association To discuss technology and innovation April 2014 E-Infrastructure Leadership Council To discuss technology and innovation April 2014 University of Portsmouth To discuss higher education April 2014 AstraZeneca To discuss life sciences April 2014 University of Manchester To discuss science and research April 2014 Pfizer To discuss science and research April 2014 AstraZeneca To discuss science and research April 2014 Barclays, Rothschild To discuss higher education April 2014 Evercore Partners International To discuss innovation and technology April 2014 Jaguar Land Rover To discuss innovation and technology April 2014 Pfizer To discuss science and research April 2014 Alacrity Foundation To discuss higher education April 2014 Universities UK To discuss higher education April 2014 AstraZeneca To discuss science and research May 2014 Huawei To discuss innovation and technology May 2014 Velcourt To discuss Agri-Tech May 2014 Research Sector Transparency Board To discuss science and research 1 Date of Meeting May 2014 AstraZeneca To discuss life sciences To discuss higher education May 2014 Centre for Social Justice, Tomorrow's People, National Care Advisory Service-Catch 22, Who Cares Trust, Care Leavers Association, Arsenal FC, University of York, Justice for Families, Whistler Walk Residential Unit, DRIVE Forward, Teesside University, SPEAR, Buttle UK May 2014 Chelmsford County High School To discuss higher education To discuss STEM May 2014 Gatsby Charitable Foundation, Wellcome Trust, Royal Society, Higher Education Academy, Society of Biology, Joint Mathematical Council, Royal Society of Chemistry, Institute of Physics, Advisory Committee on Mathematics Education, UK Forum for Computing Education, Confederation of British Industry, University UK, Royal Academy of Engineering, Science Council May 2014 Go On UK To discuss business May 2014 Johnson and Johnson To discuss life sciences May 2014 AstraZenca To discuss life sciences May 2014 The American International University To discuss higher education May 2014 Europa School UK To discuss innovation May 2014 Space Leadership Council To discuss space sector May 2014 Union Chimique Belge To discuss life sciences May 2104 Novartis To discuss life sciences May 2104 University of London To discuss higher education May 2014 Royal Academy of Engineering To discuss science and research To discuss innovation May 2014 Tech City UK, Connected Digital Economy Catapult, Open Data Institute June 2014 EC Harris To discuss higher education June 2014 David Abraham, Daniel Brooke, Channel 4 To discuss science and innovation June 2014 Green Templeton College To discuss higher 1 Date of Meeting education June 2014 Barclays, Rothschild To discuss higher education June 2014 Robert Gordon University To discuss science and research June 2014 Thales UK, Tech UK To discuss information economy June 2014 Ministerial Medical Technology Strategy Group To discuss medical innovation June 2014 Spotify To discuss innovation To discuss higher education June 2014 Adab Trust, East London Business Alliance, EMES State Street Bank and Trust Co, University of Greenwich June 2014 Sussex University To discuss research To discuss higher education June 2014 Universities and Colleges Admissions Service, Supporting Professionalism in Admissions, Higher Education Funding Council for England, Universities UK, Guild Higher Education To discuss space and innovation June 2014 Rolls Royce, Infineum, Lockheed Martin, Oxford Instruments, Johnson Matthey, Tata Motors, Siemens, BP, Toyota, Airbus, EDF, Unilever, Finmeccanica, Glaxo Smith Kline, Cisco, Harwell Oxford, University of Oxford, University College London, E2V, Duke of York June 2014 Universities UK To discuss higher education June 2014 Pearson To discuss higher education To discuss higher and further education June 2014 Association of Colleges, Universities UK, Guild Higher Education, University of Sheffield, Aston University, City & Islington College, Warwick University, Education & Training Foundation, Institute of Education, Jaguar Land Rover, JP Morgan June 2014 Universities Alliance To discuss higher education To discuss research and innovation June 2014 Airbus, ARM, Arup, BP, Diageo, HSBC, ICAP, Jardine Matheson Group, Jaguar Land Rover, McLaren, Pinewood, Rio Tinto, Rolls-Royce, Shell, Standard Chartered, Standard Life China, Swire, Zaha Hadid Architects June 2014 Nest Labs To discuss innovation 1 Date of Meeting To discuss research June 2014 University of Sussex, University of Sheffield, University of London, University of Kent, University of Warwick, Imperial College London, University of Wolverhampton, London School of Economics & Political Science, Medical Research Council, Higher Education Funding Council for England June 2014 Procter & Gamble, University of Leeds To discuss research June 2014 London Health Commission To discuss research June 2014 East Malling Trust To discuss agri-tech June 2014 Space Science & Exploration Trust To discuss space To discuss higher education June 2014 Science Community Representing Education, Higher Education Funding Council for England, Institute of Physics, Royal Society of Chemistry To discuss higher education June 2014 Barclays, Santander, Royal Bank of Scotland, Metro Bank, HSBC, Finance Conduct Authority, Higher Education Funding Council for England, Universities UK, Higher Education Commission, Office for Fair Access, Cranfield University, University of Law, National Centre for Universities and Business, Confederation of British Industry June 2014 Lipton Rogers To discuss higher education June 2014 University of Manchester To discuss research Minister of State (Trade and Investment), Lord Livingston April 2014 Ernst & Young Discuss trade and investment April 2014 Hobbs Valves Discuss trade and investment April 2014 Biocatalyst Discuss trade and investment April 2014 Seda Discuss trade and investment April 2014 Penderyn Whiskey Discuss trade and investment Discuss trade and investment April 2014 British Chamber of Commerce, Confederation of British Industry, EEF, Forum of Private Business, Federation of Small Businesses, Institute of Directors April 2014 MLM Consulting Engineers Ltd & Discuss trade and 1 Date of Meeting Murphy Philipps Associates investment April 2014 Metail Discuss trade and investment April 2014 Barclays Discuss trade, investment & Economic Affairs April 2014 Which? Discuss trade and investment Discuss trade and investment April 2014 Deloitte, Allocate Software, Baringa Partners, BTG PLC, Delta Display Holdings, Gemfields plc, Impello, Intelligent Energy Holdings, Kelway Holdings, Kobalt Music Group, Perform Group, Scolmore International, The Reflex Group, Caxton FX Discuss trade and investment April 2014 Echo Sourcing, BHM/Dawnus Joint Venture, Development and Management Strategies limited, Howden Broking Group, Burbidge Capital Limited, Hyperion Insurance Group, DLA Piper UK , Business Council for Africa UK, Goldsmiths Solicitors, Smith & Ouzman Ltd, Africa Justice Foundation, Lonrho, BCA W&S, Dawnus Construction Ltd, FBN Capital, Portland Group, King's College London, Howden Broking Group, Quant International Property Group, Business Council for Africa, Platinum Integrations, Africa Practice, SABMiller, Discuss trade and investment May 2014 China Entrepreneur Club, Shanxi Lu'an Mining Industry Co Ltd, Shanxi Qingyun Group Co, China Galaxy Investment Management Company Co Ltd, Xuzhou Coal Mining Group Corporation, ChinaEquity Group, Kuntin Investment Management Group Co Ltd, Sichuan Yibin Wuliangye Group Co, Luzhou Laojiao Group Co, Henan Guoji Industry Group Co, Weidong Group Co, Shenzhen Acto Culture Technology Group, Mylin Holding Group Co, Wafa Tea Co, Fujian Senyuan Co, CRW Shower Equipment Co Ltd of Gaoming Foshan, Qingdao Engineers Association, New Silk Road 1 Date of Meeting Fashion Organisation, Shenzhen Beike Biotechnology Co Ltd, Riverside Group, EveFashion Garments Co, Zhangguang 101 Hold Group Co, Haoxiangni Jujube Co, Beijing Xinwei Telecommunication Co, XiKing Culture & Media Co, Six Rooms Holdings, Beijing Shangyang OrientalEnvironmental Technology Co, Shanghai Xuhui Fenglin Life Science Park Office, Sichuan Province Tao Tangshi Architectural Design Limited, iSoftstone (Group) Chengdu Co, Zhong Zi Hui Jin Investment Management Co, Hebei Tianshan Industrial Group Co, Inner Mongolia Ankuai Logistics Development Co, Zhejiang Xianju Pharmaceutical Co, Zhong`ao Holdings Group Co, Yantai S&S Science and Technology Co, Guangzhou T100 Kids Dress Co, Guangzhoushi Yao Ban Lan Textile Co, Shaanxi Clean Energy Development, Shenzhen Dongjing Investment Co, Shenzhen Sanma Technology Group, Shanghai CP Guojian Pharmaceutical Co, Zhongneng Huayi International Investment Company, Heilongjiang Yichun Taihe Investment Company, Tai'an Zhigao Group Co, Shaanxi MaoYuan Industrial Group Co May 2014 HSBC Discuss trade and investment & Economic Affairs May 2014 British Chambers of Commerce Discuss trade and investment Discuss trade and investment May 2014 Chinese British Business Council, PwC , Matheson & Co Ltd, Sondrel Ltd, A B Sugar, Rochester PR Group, Electronic Media Services Ltd, HSBC Holdings, British Horseracing Authority, Rosenblatt, London Export Corporation, British Chambers of Commerce, Cheung Kong Graduate School of Business, London & Partners 1 Date of Meeting May 2014 Financial Conduct Authority Discuss trade and investment May 2014 Seacurus Discuss trade and investment May 2014 Techflow Flexibles Discuss trade and investment May 2014 North East Chambers of Commerce Discuss trade and investment Discuss trade and investment May 2014 AMEC, BAe Systems ,Balfour Beatty ,BP, Brunswick Group, Carillion, University of South Wales, Foster & Partners, University College London, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, HSBC, KPMG (UK), Rolls Royce, Serco Group , Royal Dutch Shell , Standard Chartered Bank, PWC, Energy Authority, Dubai Chamber, Sharjah Chamber, Abu Dhabi National Oil Company, Easa Saleh Al Gurg Group, Thani Investment, MASDAR, DP World, Bin Hamoodah, Knowledge and Human Development Authority, Abu Dhabi Education Council, Khalifa Fund, Ruwad Establishment, Abu Dhabi Council for Economic Development, Grandeur Interiors, Zayed University Dubai & Abu Dhabi, Courtyard Gallery, Petals Interiors Discuss trade and investment May 2014 Barclays, Oil Search, Australia Post, ResMed, QIC, Fairfax Media, Qantas, Santos, Colonial First State Global Asset Management, CSR Discuss trade and investment May 2014 Association of South East Asian Nations Business Council, UK India Business Council, China British Business Council May 2014 Fujitsu Telecommunications Europe Ltd Discuss trade and investment Discuss trade and investment May 2014 SP Setia, Knight Dragon, Emaar, Fajr Capital, Wanda, Silvertown Partnership, Argent, Sigma Partnership, St Modwens, 1 Nine Elms, Deloitte, HSBC, Macquarie May 2014 Lloyd's Discuss trade and investment May 2014 Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry Discuss trade and investment 1 Date of Meeting May 2014 TATA Limited Discuss trade and investment May 2014 Scottish Enterprise Discuss trade and investment May 2014 Glasgow Chambers of Commerce Discuss trade and investment May 2014 ClydeUnion Pumps Discuss trade and investment June 2014 Tetronics Discuss trade and investment June 2014 Canburg Limited Discuss trade and investment June 2014 Dyson Discuss trade and investment June 2014 Scisys UK Ltd Discuss trade and investment June 2014 Santander Discuss trade and investment June 2014 Mitel, Wesley Clover Discuss trade and investment June 2014 Bombardier Discuss trade and investment June 2014 Andor Technology company Discuss trade and investment June 2014 Mash Direct Discuss trade and investment June 2014 British Business Bank Discuss trade and investment Discuss trade and investment June 2014 Mott Mac, EDF,Rolls Royce, Lloyds Register, BP, Shell, BG Group, AMEC, Nexen, Sinopec, DNV-GL, Atkins, Met Office, JDR Cables, E.ON UK, Centrica, Scottish Power, RWE Npower, Honghua Group, Honghua International Technology and Trade Co, Shandong Kerui Group, Yantai Jierui Group, China Longyuan Power Group Co Ltd, China General Nuclear Power, Europe EnergyCorporation, CECEP (Tianjin) Investment Group, GAO Hui, Guohua Energy Investment Corporation, SBU Beijing Goldwind, Guangdong Mingyang Wind Power, Yingli Group, Trina Solar, China Renewable Energy Engineering Institute, China National Nuclear Corporation, State Nuclear Power Technology Co Ltd, Shanghai Electric Group Co Ltd, Dongfang 1 Date of Meeting Electric Corporation, China First Heavy Industries, China Development Bank, Tsinghua University Discuss trade and investment June 2014 Rio Tinto, Astra Zeneca, BAE Systems, British American Tobacco, BP, HSBC, GlaxoSmithKlein, Shell, Vodafone June 2014 Alvarez & Marsal Corporate Solutions (Europe) Discuss trade and investment June 2014 United Postal Services Discuss trade and investment June 2014 BGF - Growth Capital Investors Discuss trade and investment Discuss trade and investment June 2014 Emeritus, Tata and Sons Lodha Group, Piramal Group, Cipla, Hero MotorCorp, Cyient, CA Technologies, BioCon Ltd June 2014 Jaguar Land Rover Discuss trade and investment Discuss trade and investment June 2014 Barclays, British Bankers Association, Societe Generale , Sullivan & Worcester, SMBCE, Lloyds, Deutsche Bank June 2014 Heathrow Airport Holdings Discuss trade and investment Parliamentary Secretary for Business, Innovation and Skills Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, Viscount Younger April 2014 Carers UK To discuss Carers and flexible working May 2014 Premier League To discuss Copyright Designs and Patent Act May 2014 British Copyright Council To discuss the review of the collecting societies' codes of practice To discuss body image Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, (Employment Relations, Consumer Affairs), Jenny Willott MP April 2014 YMCA, Beat, All Walks Beyond the Catwalk, Girl Guiding UK, Women's Sport and Fitness Foundation, ASOS, , The All Party Parliamentary Group on Body Image, Middlesex University April 2014 Recruitment and Employment Confederation To discuss employment policy April 2014 British Retail Consortium Introductory meeting To discuss corporate governance April 2014 Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, Camborne School of Mines, Shell, BP, BG Group, Oil & Gas UK, 1 Date of Meeting Mineral Products Association, Publish What You Pay UK, Revenue Watch Institute April 2014 National Federation of Sub Postmasters To discuss Post Office April 2014 Sunday Times Introductory meeting To discuss equality April 2014 Robinson Hambro, Harvey Nash, Korn Ferry, Ridgeway Partners, Warren Partners, Zygos, MWM Consulting, Heidrick & Struggles, Spencer Stuart, JCA Group, Odgers Berndtson, Egon Zehnder, Women on Boards April 2014 UK Shared Business Service To discuss UK Shared Business Service operations April 2014 Royal Mail To discuss postal issues To discuss equality April 2014 EY, Lloyds Banking Group, Browne Jacobson, Ashurst, PwC Legal, B3Living, Hogan Lovells International , Sapphire Partners, The Law Society Group, Vodafone UK, Airbus UK, PwC , Vodafone Group Services Ltd, Lincoln Co-operative Society Ltd, DiversityJobs.co.uk, Ofcom, Balfour Beatty, Norman Broadbent, EDF Energy, Women in the City, Direct Line Group, Transport for London, Marks & Spencer, Chartered Management Institute, Royal Mail, Tata Consultancy Services, May 2014 Good Morning Britain Introductory meeting May 2014 The Property Ombudsman, Ombudsman Services: Property To discuss consumer policy May 2014 Sky Introductory meeting May 2014 Evening Standard Introductory meeting To discuss equality May 2014 Action on Hearing Loss, Age UK, British Humanist Association, British Institute of Human Rights, Children's Rights Alliance for England, Citizens Advice, Disability Rights UK, Discrimination Law Association, End Violence Against Women, Equality Challenge Unit, The English Regions Equality and Human Rights Network, Fawcett Society, Friends, Families and Travellers, Gender Identity 1 Date of Meeting Research and Education Society ,JUSTICE, Law Centres Network, Mind, National AIDS Trust, National Alliance of Women's Organisations , Press for Change, Race On The Agenda,Refugee Council, RNIB, Runnymede Trust, Scope, The Age and Employment Network, Trades Union Congress, UKREN, UNISON, Women's Budget Group, Women's Resource Centre May 2014 Equality and Diversity Forum To discuss equality and diversity June 2014 Post Office To discuss Post Office June 2014 R3 To discuss insolvency June 2014 The Confederation of British Industry To discuss employment policy To discuss consumer policy June 2014 British Gas, Cornwall Energy, E.On, EDF, Energy UK, First Utility, Npower, Scottish Power, SSE, Allfiled, Citizens Advice, Digital Catapult, Money Saving Expert, Mydex, Simplify Digital Ltd, Uswitch, Which?, Ofgem June 2014 British Chambers of Commerce Introductory meeting To discuss corporate governance June 2014 Sainsbury's, Tesco, Asda, Morrisons, Aldi, Co-operative, Kingfisher, John Lewis, Primark (AB Foods), M&S, Debenhams, Interchange & Consort Hotels, Nestle, Tate & Lyle, Waterford Wedgwood UK , Gangmasters Licensing Authority, Ethical Trading Institute, Stronger Together, Fairtrade Foundation, British Retail Consortium June 2014 Bank of Ireland To discuss Post Office June 2014 Post Office To discuss Post Office June 2014 Independent on Sunday To discuss equality To discuss insolvency June 2014 R3, The Institute for Chartered Accountants in England and Wales, Reeves and Co, Deloitte, Institute of Credit Management, Federation of Small Businesses, British Property Federation, Road Haulage Association, HMRC, Pension Protection Fund June 2014 CORE, Friends of the Earth, Christian Aid, Amnesty International To discuss corporate responsibility To discuss equality June 2014 British Toy and Hobby Association, British Retail Consortium, Home Retail Group, The Entertainer, Tesco, 1 Date of Meeting Asda Minister of State for Skills and Enterprise (Skills jointly with the Department for Education), Matthew Hancock MP April 2014 157 Group To discuss colleges April 2014 City of London Corporation To discuss skills April 2014 National Association of College and University Entrepreneurs To discuss entrepreneurs April 2014 Church of England To discuss banking April 2014 Prince's Trust To discuss vocational training April 2014 3Sun Ltd, Dawson Energy To discuss funding April 2014 Federation of Small Businesses Regular meeting April 2014 Tinder Foundation To discuss education technology May 2014 University and College Union To discuss colleges May 2014 Start-Up Loans Company To discuss finance May 2014 Apple Education To discuss skills and learning May 2014 Mike Thornton MP, Barton Peveril Sixth Form College To discuss funding May 2014 Association of Colleges Regular meeting May 2014 EEF - The Manufacturers'Organisation Regular meeting May 2014 Go ON UK To discuss business To discuss funding May 2014 Association of Colleges, Association of Schools and College Leaders, Freedom and Autonomy for Schools - National Association, Independent Academies Association, Principals' Professional Council, Sixth Form Colleges Association May 2014 Bully Banks To discuss banking May 2014 Association of Employment and Learning Providers To discuss apprenticeships June 2014 WAYRA To discuss enterprise June 2014 Tata Consultancy Services To discuss skills and entrepreneurship June 2014 Institute of Directors Regular meeting June 2014 Peter Hain MP and constituent To discuss apprenticeships To discuss higher and further education June 2014 Association of Colleges, Universities UK, Guild Higher Education, University of Sheffield, Aston University, City & Islington College, University of Warwick, Education & Training Foundation, Institute of Education, Jaguar Land Rover, JP Morgan June 2014 Julian Sturdy MP, Askham Bryan College To discuss funding June 2014 British Retail Consortium To discuss skills 1 Date of Meeting June 2014 Association of British Insurers To discuss business June 2014 Sir Richard Lambert To discuss banking June 2014 Sir Anthony Grayling To discuss higher education June 2014 European Automobile Manufacturer's Association To discuss manufacturing June 2014 Mark Brennan To discuss small business June 2014 Association of Colleges Regular meeting June 2014 Hilton Hotels To discuss tourism Minister of State, (Business and Enterprise), Rt Hon Michael Fallon MP April 2014 Pinewood Studios To discuss Portsmouth April 2014 Tower Bridge Ventures To discuss Portsmouth April 2014 Ben Ainslee Racing To discuss Portsmouth April 2014 NHS Innovation South East To discuss Portsmouth April 2014 The UK Cards Association To discuss economy issues April 2014 Fujitsu To discuss Fujitsu's recent investment in the UK May 2014 Confederation of British Industry To discuss growth in Construction and Energy June 2014 Crossrail To discuss Crossrail's business needs June 2014 Confederation of British Industry To discuss industrial strategy June 2014 Nissan To discuss manufacturing 1Does not normally include meetings with Government bodies such as other Government Departments, members of the Royal Household, NDPBs, Non-Ministerial Departments, Agencies, Government reviews and representatives of Parliament, devolved or foreign governments. Visits, attendance at seminars, conferences, receptions, media, interviews etc would not normally be classed as meetings.

en

1455-pdf

## Sir Nicholas Macpherson - Permanent Secretary, Hm Treasury Business Expenses - January-March 2012 DATES Total Cost £ DESTINATION PURPOSE TRAVEL OTHER (Including Hospitality Given) Air Rail Taxi/Car Accommodation/ Meals Edinburgh Official meetings £159.50 £18.00 £93.15 £270.65 24.01.12- 25.01.12 01.02.12 London Official meeting £8.50 £8.50 02.03.12 Oxford Official meeting £32.50 £32.50 Hospitality Received Date Organisation Name Type of Hospitality Received 11.01.12 St John's College Dinner and accommodation (and spouse) 24.01.12 Espirito Santo Investment Bank Lunch 24.01.12 Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) Dinner 26.01.12 British Academy Lunch 01.02.12 Barclays Dinner 21.02.12 Bank of America Merrill Lynch Viewing (and spouse) 28.02.12 JCA Group Lunch 02.03.12 Nuffield College Dinner 27.03.12 Whitehall and Industry Group Reception and speaking engagement ## Tom Scholar - Second Permanent Secretary, Hm Treasury Business Expenses - January-March 2012 DATES Total Cost £ DESTINATION PURPOSE TRAVEL OTHER (Including Hospitality Given) Air Rail Taxi/Car Accommodation/ Meals Basel Official meeting £64.00 £15.00 £222.43 £301.43 08.01.10- 10.01.10 Manchester Official meeting £120.99 £120.99 04.02.10- 05.02.10 Paris Official meeting £3.90 £15.40 £144.53 £163.83 18.02.10- 19.02.10 27.09.10 Paris Official meeting £13.10 £13.10 New York Official meeting £19.30 £51.32 £100.04 £170.66 27.09.10- 29.09.10 Seoul Official meeting £32.00 £40.85 £204.37 £277.22 16.10.10- 20.10.10 Toronto Official meeting £16.50 £87.38 £392.12 £496.00 29.10.10- 30.10.10 Cape Town Official meeting £32.00 £90.96 £185.94 £308.90 11.12.10- 15.12.10 Basel Official meeting £306.50 £306.50 09.01.12- 10.01.12 | 24.01.12 | Edinburgh | Official meeting | |------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------|------------------------------| | | | | | £114.75 | | | | Mexico | Official meeting | | | | | | | £3,552.60 | | | | 26.02.12 | | | | Basel | Official meeting | | | | | | | £163.50 | £34.00 | | | 06.03.12 | | | | | | | | Some costs above relate to trips made in 2010. | | | | | | | | Hospitality Received | | | | | | | | Date | Organisation Name | Type of Hospitality Received | | 10.01.12 | Virgin Money | Reception | | 24.01.12 | Royal Bank of Scotland | Dinner | | 31.01.12 | Hong Kong Trade Development Council | Reception | | 01.02.12 | Barclays | Dinner | | 16.02.12 | HSBC | Lunch | | 01.03.12 | Rothschild | Reception | | 26.03.12 | Promontory Financial Group (UK) Ltd | Dinner | | 28.03.12 | Reuters | Dinner | | | | | ## James Bowler –Director General, Strategy, Planning And Budget, Hm Treasury Business Expenses–January - March 2012 DATES Total Cost £ DESTINATION PURPOSE TRAVEL OTHER (Including Hospitality Given) Air Rail Taxi/Car Accommodation/ Meals 23.01.12 Sunningdale Training £21.00 £21.00 ## Hospitality Received James did not receive any hospitality during this period. ## Michael Ellam - Director General, International And Finance, Hm Treasury Business Expenses - January-March 2012 Total Cost £ DATES DESTINATION PURPOSE TRAVEL OTHER (Including Hospitality Given) Air Rail Taxi/Car Accommodation/ Meals Frankfurt Official meeting £54.33 £189.75 £244.08 21.12.11- 22.12.11 Paris Official meeting £340.00 £14.00 £198.89 £552.89 09.01.12- 10.01.12 Brussels Official meeting £340.00 £10.73 £214.94 £565.67 12.01.12- 13.01.12 Official meeting £12,353.73 £144.49 £710.21 £13,208.43 14.01.12- 21.01.12 Hong Kong /Beijing/Tokyo/ Mexico City/ London Brussels Official meeting £430.00 £144.68 £574.68 23.01.12- 24.01.12 Brussels Official meeting £319.86 £205.09 £524.95 26.01.12- 27.01.12 Frankfurt Official meeting £409.85 £18.90 £97.94 £183.76 £710.45 05.02.12- 06.02.12 Brussels Official meeting £309.00 £12.50 £224.20 £545.70 09.02.12- 10.02.12 Mexico City Official meeting £5,356.63 £107.15 £432.01 £5,895.79 23.02.12- 27.02.12 Brussels Official meeting £6.20 £318.00 £12.71 £208.10 £545.01 29.02.12- 01.03.12 Brussels Official meeting £279.00 £13.41 £186.80 £479.21 07.03.12- 08.03.12 Brussels Official meeting £490.00 £18.35 £169.29 £677.64 12.03.12- 13.03.12 14.03.12 Portsmouth Official meeting £36.00 £36.00 Washington Official meeting £3,905.13 £3,905.13 18.03.12- 21.03.12 Official meeting £795.95 £123.00 £55.04 £537.90 £1,511.89 21.03.12- 23.03.12 Frankfurt /Brussels /London Copenhagen Official meeting £791.65 £791.65 30.03.12- 31.03.12 Hospitality Received Date Organisation Name Type of Hospitality Received 16.02.12 HSBC Lunch 16.03.12 Investec Lunch 29.03.12 Financial Times Lunch ## Dave Ramsden - Director General And Chief Economic Adviser, Hm Treasury Business Expenses - January-March 2012 DATES Total Cost £ DESTINATION PURPOSE TRAVEL OTHER (Including Hospitality Given) Air Rail Taxi/Car Accommodation/ Meals Zurich Official conference £168.80 £60.02 £429.14 £657.96 12.01.12 - 14.01.12 31.01.12 Newport Official meeting £104.00 £104.00 10.02.12 Swindon Official meeting £53.50 £53.50 Hospitality Received Date Organisation Name Type of Hospitality Received 12.01.12-14.01.12 Bellagio Conference Dinner and lunch 17.01.12 British Bankers' Association Lunch and speaking engagement 01.02.12 PricewaterhouseCoopers Lunch 23.03.12 HSBC Lunch and speaking engagement 28.03.12 Citibank Dinner and speaking engagement 30.03.12 Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) Lunch ## Jonathan Taylor - Director General, Financial Services And Stability, Hm Treasury Business Expenses - January-March 2012 No Expenses Were Incurred During This Period. Hospitality Received ## | Date | Organisation Name | Type of Hospitality Received | |----------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------| | 10.01.12 | Virgin Money | Reception | | 13.01.12 | Deutsche Bank | Lunch | | 19.01.12 | BNP Paribas | Reception | | 24.01.12 | Deloitte | Lunch | | 25.01.12 | Mansion House | Dinner | | 01.02.12 | Barclays | Dinner | | 03.02.12 | European Policy Forum | Lunch | | 06.02.12 | Morgan Stanley | Lunch | | 09.02.12 | Association of Private Client Investment Managers and Stockbrokers (APCIMS) | Reception | | 14.02.12 | SJ Berwin LLP | Lunch | | 21.02.12 | Rothschild | Lunch | | 21.02.12 | Finance and Leasing Association (FLA) | Dinner | | 22.02.12 | City of London | Lunch | | 28.02.12 | CityUK | Lunch | | 12.03.12 | British private equity and Venture Capital Association (BVCA) | Dinner | | 13.03.12 | Investment UK | Lunch | | 26.03.12 | Aviva | Reception | | | | | ## Edward Troup - Managing Director, Budget, Tax And Welfare, Hm Treasury Business Expenses –January - March 2012 DATES Total Cost £ DESTINATION PURPOSE TRAVEL OTHER (Including Hospitality Given) Air Rail Taxi/Car Accommodation/ Meals 19.01.12 Sunningdale Training £6.90 £5.00 £11.90 20.01.12 Twickenham Official meeting £6.90 £6.90 30.01.12 Dorneywood Official meeting £7.80 £25.00 £32.80 22.03.12 Norwich Official meeting £62.00 £62.00 Hospitality Received Date Organisation Name Type of Hospitality Received 10.01.12 The Chartered Institute of Taxation Lunch 30.01.12 The Law Society Dinner ## Sharon White - Director General, Public Services, Hm Treasury Business Expenses - January-March 2012 DATES Total Cost £ DESTINATION PURPOSE TRAVEL OTHER (Including Hospitality Given) Air Rail Taxi/Car Accommodation/ Meals 29.02.12 London Official meetings £21.94 £21.94 Hospitality Received Date Organisation Name Type of Hospitality Received 14.02.12 Institute for Government Lunch ## Alison Cottrell - Corporate Services Director, Hm Treasury Business Expenses - January-March 2012 DATES Total Cost £ DESTINATION PURPOSE TRAVEL OTHER (Including Hospitality Given) Air Rail Taxi/Car Accommodation/ Meals 12.01.12 Norwich Official meeting £46.00 £7.50 £53.50 20.01.12 Norwich Official meeting £46.00 £7.25 £53.25 03.02.12 Brussels Official meeting £224.00 £224.00 15.02.12 Norwich Official meeting £34.00 £12.00 £46.00 22.03.12 Norwich Official meeting £62.00 £62.00 Hospitality Received Date Organisation Name Type of Hospitality Received 07.02.12 Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) Dinner ## Julian Kelly - Group Director, Finance And Commercial, Hm Treasury Business Expenses - January - March 2012 DATES Total Cost £ DESTINATION PURPOSE TRAVEL OTHER (Including Hospitality Given) Air Rail Taxi/Car Accommodation/ Meals 12.01.12 Norwich Official meeting £46.00 £7.50 £53.50 20.01.12 Norwich Official meeting £46.00 £7.25 £53.25 22.03.12 Norwich Official meeting £46.00 £46.00 ## Hospitality Received Julian did not receive any hospitality during this period.

en

0425-pdf

Disclosure ref: 7 Sent: 14th February 2019 ## Freedom Of Information Act 2000 Request How Many Charging Decisions, Including Successful Prosecutions, Have Been Made Against The Police And Cps For Failure To Disclose, Perverting The Course Of Justice And Corruption Within The Last Three Years Request I would like to enquire as to how many charging decisions, including successful prosecutions, have been made against the police and CPS for failure to disclose, perverting the course of justice and corruption (evidence tampering etc) within the last three years Response In order to establish the information you have requested, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), would require a manual review of individual case files. As a guide, during the three year period 2015- 2018, the CPS made charging decision in respect of 832,013 suspects. The number of successful prosecution in period was 1,471,855 of prosecution case files. Additionally, during the same financial years, there were 5,106 offences of perverting, attempting or conspiring to pervert the course of justice commenced prosecution. 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 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 manually reviewing 5,106 offences of perverting the course of justice which equates to 3,627 individual case files would exceed the appropriate limit. Consequently, we are not obliged to comply with your request. Under section 16 of the FOI Act there is a duty to provide advice and assistance; you may find it helpful to refer your request to the Ministry of Justice (MoJ), as they hold a breakdown of prosecution records by offence. Please see link below: Crown Prosecution Service, Information Management Unit, Floor 8, 102 Petty France, London SW1H 9AJ United Kingdom data.access@justice.gsi.gov.uk Information Management Unit 020 3357 0899 IMU@cps.gov.uk

en

4550-pdf

John Larkinson Chief Executive 14 March 2019 Managing Directors Train operating companies BY EMAIL Dear Colleague ## Passenger Information - Compliance With Condition 4 Of Gb Statement Of National Regulatory Provisions: Passenger Today we have published the findings and decisions relating to our investigations into Govia Thameslink Railway (GTR) and Northern Trains' compliance with their obligations under Condition 4 of GB Statement of National Regulatory Provisions: Passenger (Information to Passengers). The purpose of this letter is to ask that you: 1) Provide written assurance that any service recovery framework and crisis management plan currently in place take adequate account of the key principles set out in this letter; and 2) Provide a copy of your arrangements and relevant contingency plans to support passengers that require additional assistance to travel during periods of disruption (both planned and unplanned). ## Importance Of Passenger Information Rail passengers, like consumers in any other market, need access to good information about the products or services they intend to use or buy. In that context, our investigations demonstrate the importance of passenger information in operational decision-making, even during exceptional periods of disruption, and recognise that running a train service (or rail replacement bus) is only helpful to passengers if they know when and where the service will arrive, where it is going and how long the journey will take. As you will be aware, Condition 4 requires train operators to provide appropriate, accurate and timely information to allow passengers to plan and make their journeys with a reasonable degree of assurance, including when there is disruption. Train operators must do so to the greatest extent reasonably practicable having regard to all relevant circumstances, including the funding available. Our guidance1 to support this licence condition recognises that the licence obligations are not intended to undermine the primary objective of providing the best available service for passengers. Making justified changes to the train plan to meet passengers' needs should not be conditional on providing perfect advance information about these services. However, we would expect licence holders to use reasonable endeavours to get such information out as quickly and widely as possible. We recognise the exceptional circumstances surrounding the May 2018 timetable change. However, the findings of our subsequent investigations show that train operators must be able to demonstrate that, even during periods of unprecedented disruption, they have to the greatest extent considered and put in place reasonable measures to ensure that:  the provision of increasingly appropriate, accurate and timely information for passengers should be a core component of delivering effective service recovery following severe and prolonged disruption;  there is clear senior level responsibility for ensuring that the provision of passenger information is sufficiently considered, developed and (where necessary) adapted as far as possible to align with and support the operational recovery process so that passengers can benefit from the service improvements being made;  feedback from passengers and staff regarding information failures is actively reviewed and used to inform ongoing improvement in information provision;  clear, and to the greatest extent reasonably practicable, accurate communication regarding the cause(s) of disruption, the known or likely impact on passengers, and the steps being taken to recover the situation is provided; and  they undertake a proactive review of the lessons learnt after such events to continuously improve how passenger information is managed and used. Please provide written assurance that any service recovery framework and crisis management plans currently in place take adequate account of the key principles set out above. Provision of information to support passengers that require additional assistance The impact of disruption on passengers that require additional assistance to travel, including those who rely on booked or unbooked assistance, can be particularly severe. In our response to the Transport Select Committee report2 into the May timetable change we referred to our recently published consultation on changes to the Disabled People's Protection Policy (DPPP) Guidance, which offers an opportunity to reassess contingency planning for assistance provision during disruption. We proposed a requirement for operators to set out how they will contact passengers to inform them and discuss alternative arrangements where assistance booked in advance can no longer be provided because of service disruption. Please provide a copy of your arrangements and relevant contingency plans to support passengers that require additional assistance to travel during periods of disruption (both planned and unplanned). We will ensure that good practice in this area is included in both our final DPPP Guidance and in revisions to the guidance on meeting licence condition 4 (Information to Passengers) to reflect the findings of these investigations. Next steps I would welcome any additional comments on lessons learnt from your experience of the May timetable change in the areas of passenger information and assistance provision, whether assistance has been booked or not. As you may be aware, we are currently working with Network Rail and a number of operators to look at the wider area of passenger information to understand what might stimulate measurable and sustained improvement in the quality and consistency of information provided to passengers. We are grateful for the positive engagement in this work to date. We will report on the outcome of this research later this year and discuss with you the emerging areas for improvement to the passenger experience. I would be grateful for your response to this letter by **5 April 2019**. Please send your response to the following email address: passengerinformation@orr.gov.uk. Please note that this letter and your reply will be published on our website. Yours sincerely, ## John Larkinson Signature

en

3923-pdf

| SUPPLIER NAME | PORTFOLIO | COST CENTRE | EXPENDITURE CLASS | POST. DATE | AMOUNT | REF. | |------------------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------|----------|--------| | 4WARD STROKES | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Active Together (Oper Funding) | Other Partnership Support | 10/07/2014 | 240.00 | 117094 | | AA SHOPFITTING & BUILDING SERVICES LTD | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | The Pavilion | Hired Services | 03/07/2014 | 500.00 | 116704 | | AA SHOPFITTING & BUILDING SERVICES LTD | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | The Pavilion | Publicity & Promotion | 30/07/2014 | 1,177.00 | 118098 | | ALLPAY LIMITED DIRECT DEBIT ACCOUNT | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Banking Charges | Transaction Costs - All Pay | 10/07/2014 | 1,418.21 | 116917 | | ALZHEIMER'S SOCIETY | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Corporate Health Improvement | Project/Initiatives Fees | 31/07/2014 | 2,374.00 | 117623 | | ANCHORPRINT GROUP LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Communications | District Magazine Publication | 03/07/2014 | 540.00 | 116687 | | ANCHORPRINT GROUP LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Local Sports Alliance | Publicity & Promotion | 31/07/2014 | 334.00 | 117619 | | ANCHORPRINT GROUP LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Publicity & Promotion | 16/07/2014 | 275.00 | 117009 | | ANCHORPRINT GROUP LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Publicity & Promotion | 17/07/2014 | 300.00 | 117011 | | ANCHORPRINT GROUP LIMITED | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Corporate Health Improvement | Publicity & Promotion | 24/07/2014 | 280.00 | 117622 | | ASPE | Leader | Director Of Place | Research & Development | 24/07/2014 | 279.00 | 117667 | | BE FUELCARDS | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Fuel | 03/07/2014 | 271.85 | 116702 | | BLABY PRINT COMPANY | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Members Expenses/Allowances | Seminars & Short Training | 24/07/2014 | 513.00 | 117613 | | BOOGIE BODS | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Change For Life Project | Hired Services | 30/07/2014 | 230.00 | 118097 | | BPI RECYCLED PRODUCTS | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Cleansing Services | Other Equipment | 16/07/2014 | 2,781.98 | 116609 | | BRAUNSTONE TOWN COUNCIL | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Debtors Suspense | 17/07/2014 | 295.00 | 117352 | | BROCKINGTON COLLEGE | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Active Together (Oper Funding) | Hire Of Rooms | 10/07/2014 | 224.00 | 117090 | | BROCKINGTON COLLEGE | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Active Together (Oper Funding) | Hire Of Rooms | 10/07/2014 | 236.25 | 117091 | | BROOK STREET UK LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Local Land Charges | Gross Pay | 24/07/2014 | 325.97 | 117610 | | BROOK STREET UK LIMITED | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Temporary/Casual Staff | 03/07/2014 | 308.35 | 116340 | | BUILDING & MAINTENANCE SERVICES LIMITED | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Blaby Joint Service Shop | Cyc: Window Cleaning | 23/07/2014 | 674.10 | 115985 | | BUILDING & MAINTENANCE SERVICES LIMITED | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Council Offices & Land | Cyc: Air Con./Handling Service | 23/07/2014 | 1,100.00 | 115985 | | CANON (UK) LTD | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Reprographics | Printroom Copy Charge | 16/07/2014 | 1,863.89 | 116905 | | CAPITA BUSINESS SERVICESLTD | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Banking Charges | Transaction Costs - Cards | 16/07/2014 | 1,633.86 | 117233 | | CHEMPAC SOLUTION LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Protective Clothing/Uniforms | 03/07/2014 | 230.00 | 116313 | | CIEH | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Recruitment Costs | Staff Advertising | 10/07/2014 | 1,050.00 | 117089 | | CIVICA UK LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Performance Management | Surveys | 30/07/2014 | 500.00 | 118101 | | CLOCKWISE | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Deductions - Clockwise | 24/07/2014 | 530.00 | 117684 | | CONNEXION 2 | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Control A/C - Solo Protect | 31/07/2014 | 701.80 | 118112 | | CORNFLOWERS CATERING | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Staff Training And Development | Hired Services | 03/07/2014 | 519.40 | 116453 | | CRAEMER UK LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Bins - Domestic | 30/07/2014 | 5,727.00 | 118105 | | D 2 CONSTRUCTION | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 17/07/2014 | 784.00 | 117431 | | DAISY COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Telecoms - Calls | 10/07/2014 | 1,062.66 | 116896 | | DATATANK | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | C.Tax Billing, Coll & Recovery | Single Person Discount Review | 16/07/2014 | 4,224.00 | 116955 | | DATATANK | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | C.Tax Billing, Coll & Recovery | Single Person Discount Review | 16/07/2014 | 8,376.00 | 116956 | | SUPPLIER NAME | PORTFOLIO | COST CENTRE | EXPENDITURE CLASS | POST. DATE | AMOUNT | REF. | |-----------------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------|-----------|--------| | DAVID KIRTON DESIGNS | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 17/07/2014 | 244.75 | 117433 | | DAVID KIRTON DESIGNS | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 17/07/2014 | 1,169.50 | 117435 | | DAVID KIRTON DESIGNS | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 30/07/2014 | 253.55 | 118062 | | DENNIS EAGLE LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Vehicle Maintenance | Normal Repairs | 24/07/2014 | 411.35 | 116988 | | DEYTON BELL LTD | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Economic Development | Consultant'S Fees | 16/07/2014 | 2,333.00 | 116987 | | DEYTON BELL LTD | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Economic Development | Consultant'S Fees | 31/07/2014 | 2,340.00 | 118157 | | D H PEPPER & SON | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Composting Fees | 10/07/2014 | 9,264.24 | 116932 | | DINERS CLUB INTERNATIONAL | Community Services | Housing Options | Casual Mileage & Travel Exp. | 31/07/2014 | 258.50 | 118161 | | DISCLOSURE & BARRING SERVICE | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Misc - Criminal Records Bureau | 10/07/2014 | 396.00 | 116898 | | DOG SQUAD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Control Of Dogs | Small Misc Contracts | 16/07/2014 | 637.00 | 116895 | | DURA SPORT (LEISURE CARE) LIMITED | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | The Pavillion - Land And Build | Pla: All Weather Pitch Works | 24/07/2014 | 350.00 | 116960 | | EAST MIDLANDS HOUSING | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Debtors - Benefits | 03/07/2014 | 463.27 | 116685 | | E H COMPANY | Community Services | Homelessness | Homelessness | 03/07/2014 | 475.00 | 116634 | | ENDERBY DODGEBALL CLUB | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Local Sports Alliance | Grants - Sportivate | 24/07/2014 | 420.00 | 117723 | | ENVIRONMENT MEDIA GROUP LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Non-Kerbside Recycling Prom. | Seminars & Short Training | 10/07/2014 | 238.00 | 117013 | | ESPO | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Council Offices & Land | Gas | 18/07/2014 | 273.00 | 117251 | | ESPO | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Littlethorpe Depot | Gas | 16/07/2014 | -285.40 | 116900 | | ESPO | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | The Pavillion - Land And Build | Gas | 16/07/2014 | 359.09 | 115593 | | EXPRESS SERVICES | Community Services | Police & Crime Comm. Funding | Project/Initiatives Fees | 10/07/2014 | 261.00 | 116968 | | FAITHFUL & GOULD | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Littlethorpe Depot | Professional Fees | 17/07/2014 | 17,393.43 | 117346 | | FAROL LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Highway Cyclic Main Ptnership | Running Costs | 24/07/2014 | 704.85 | 117300 | | FERRET INFORMATION SYSTEMS | Community Services | Housing Pvt Sec Renewal Grants | Software Maintenance | 31/07/2014 | 342.00 | 118087 | | F G MOSS & SON | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 10/07/2014 | 15,802.69 | 117005 | | FORD & SLATER | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Vehicle Maintenance | Accidental Damage Repair Costs | 29/07/2014 | 250.00 | 117707 | | FORD & SLATER | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Vehicle Maintenance | Normal Repairs | 03/07/2014 | 304.76 | 116666 | | GAP PROPERTY SERVICES LEICESTER LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 10/07/2014 | 4,140.00 | 117000 | | GAP PROPERTY SERVICES LEICESTER LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 17/07/2014 | 4,725.00 | 117434 | | GEESINK NORBA | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Vehicle Maintenance | Normal Repairs | 16/07/2014 | 233.28 | 117325 | | GEESINK NORBA | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Vehicle Maintenance | Normal Repairs | 16/07/2014 | 829.59 | 117326 | | GEMCO SERVICE LTD | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Littlethorpe Depot | Equipment R & M | 16/07/2014 | 490.50 | 116308 | | GENESIS TOWN PLANNING | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Misc Expenses | 31/07/2014 | 20,087.79 | 116026 | | GHM PLANNING LTD | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Gross Pay | 30/07/2014 | 4,140.00 | 118126 | | GMB | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Deductions - Gmbatu | 03/07/2014 | 221.96 | 116765 | | GMB | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Deductions - Gmbatu | 31/07/2014 | 221.96 | 118121 | | GREENERGY FUELS LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Fuel | 03/07/2014 | 19,257.13 | 116594 | | GREENERGY FUELS LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Fuel | 21/07/2014 | 19,010.11 | 117311 | | SUPPLIER NAME | PORTFOLIO | COST CENTRE | EXPENDITURE CLASS | POST. DATE | AMOUNT | REF. | |-------------------------------------------|--------------------------------|-------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------|-----------|--------| | GREENERGY FUELS LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Fuel | 30/07/2014 | 18,905.10 | 118145 | | GREENWORKS SOLUTIONS LIMITED | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Council Offices & Land | Cyc: Vending Contracts | 16/07/2014 | 672.75 | 117271 | | H20 DESIGN | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Sub-Contractors | 10/07/2014 | 500.00 | 116995 | | HARBOROUGH DISTRICT COUNCIL | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Car Parks | Other Partnership Support | 03/07/2014 | 9,285.78 | 116625 | | HAYMARKET PUBLISHING SERVICES LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Recruitment Costs | Staff Advertising | 24/07/2014 | 895.00 | 117715 | | HAYS SPECIALIST RECRUITMENT | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 03/07/2014 | 661.50 | 116649 | | HAYS SPECIALIST RECRUITMENT | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 16/07/2014 | 515.66 | 115961 | | HAYS SPECIALIST RECRUITMENT | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 16/07/2014 | 408.33 | 115962 | | HAYS SPECIALIST RECRUITMENT | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 16/07/2014 | 659.05 | 117232 | | HAYS SPECIALIST RECRUITMENT | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 16/07/2014 | 264.60 | 116893 | | HAYS SPECIALIST RECRUITMENT | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 24/07/2014 | 649.46 | 117590 | | HAYS SPECIALIST RECRUITMENT | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 24/07/2014 | 524.40 | 117591 | | HAYS SPECIALIST RECRUITMENT | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 24/07/2014 | 671.67 | 117596 | | HAYS SPECIALIST RECRUITMENT | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 24/07/2014 | 594.32 | 117603 | | HAYS SPECIALIST RECRUITMENT | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 24/07/2014 | 678.47 | 117604 | | HEALTH MANAGEMENT LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Recruitment Costs | Medical Consultations | 30/07/2014 | 550.45 | 117699 | | HEWLETT PACKARD | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Applications - Business | 24/07/2014 | 7,843.20 | 116614 | | HIGH IMPACT EDUCATION SERVICE LIMITED | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Pay P Expenditure | 30/07/2014 | 1,607.50 | 118054 | | HINCKLEY & BOSWORTH COUNCIL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | External Legal Fees | Legal Fees | 30/07/2014 | 3,637.20 | 117309 | | HINCKLEY & BOSWORTH COUNCIL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Local Land Charges | Hinckely & Bosworth Prop Seach | 24/07/2014 | 1,855.50 | 117609 | | HOME MATCH LETTINGS | Community Services | Homelessness | Homelessness | 03/07/2014 | 1,000.00 | 116688 | | HOME START BLABY DISTRICT OADBY & WIGSTON | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 10/07/2014 | 13,000.00 | 116930 | | HUNCOTE PARISH COUNCIL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Community Improvements | Project/Initiatives Fees | 30/07/2014 | 3,000.00 | 118096 | | IDOX SOFTWARE LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Licencing Act 2003 | Software Maintenance | 31/07/2014 | 8,268.51 | 118064 | | IDOX SOFTWARE LIMITED | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Economic Development | Other | 16/07/2014 | 3,000.00 | 117328 | | IDOX SOFTWARE LIMITED | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Software Maintenance | 30/07/2014 | -1,025.00 | 118113 | | INDUSTRIA PERSONNEL SERVICE LTD | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | The Pavilion | Gross Pay | 03/07/2014 | 443.43 | 116605 | | INDUSTRIA PERSONNEL SERVICE LTD | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | The Pavilion | Gross Pay | 16/07/2014 | 261.51 | 116957 | | INDUSTRIA PERSONNEL SERVICE LTD | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | The Pavilion | Gross Pay | 16/07/2014 | 341.10 | 117281 | | INDUSTRIA PERSONNEL SERVICE LTD | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | The Pavilion | Gross Pay | 16/07/2014 | 363.84 | 117282 | | INDUSTRIA PERSONNEL SERVICE LTD | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | The Pavilion | Gross Pay | 24/07/2014 | 329.73 | 117696 | | INDUSTRIA PERSONNEL SERVICE LTD | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | The Pavilion | Gross Pay | 24/07/2014 | 454.80 | 117697 | | INDUSTRIA PERSONNEL SERVICE LTD | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | The Pavilion | Gross Pay | 30/07/2014 | 466.17 | 118067 | | INDUSTRIA PERSONNEL SERVICE LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Temporary/Casual Staff | 03/07/2014 | 378.00 | 116615 | | INDUSTRIA PERSONNEL SERVICE LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Temporary/Casual Staff | 03/07/2014 | 373.28 | 116324 | | INDUSTRIA PERSONNEL SERVICE LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Highway Cyclic Main Ptnership | Temporary/Casual Staff | 03/07/2014 | 378.00 | 116615 | | SUPPLIER NAME | PORTFOLIO | COST CENTRE | EXPENDITURE CLASS | POST. DATE | AMOUNT | REF. | |---------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------|----------|--------| | INDUSTRIA PERSONNEL SERVICE LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Highway Cyclic Main Ptnership | Temporary/Casual Staff | 03/07/2014 | 378.00 | 116324 | | INDUSTRIA PERSONNEL SERVICE LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Highway Cyclic Main Ptnership | Temporary/Casual Staff | 10/07/2014 | 387.45 | 116958 | | INDUSTRIA PERSONNEL SERVICE LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Highway Cyclic Main Ptnership | Temporary/Casual Staff | 16/07/2014 | 604.80 | 117314 | | INDUSTRIA PERSONNEL SERVICE LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Highway Cyclic Main Ptnership | Temporary/Casual Staff | 24/07/2014 | 321.30 | 117615 | | INPHASE LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Performance Management | Surveys | 30/07/2014 | 1,231.66 | 118063 | | INPLACE PERSONNEL LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Temporary/Casual Staff | 03/07/2014 | 372.80 | 116622 | | INPLACE PERSONNEL LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Temporary/Casual Staff | 10/07/2014 | 372.80 | 116959 | | INPLACE PERSONNEL LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Temporary/Casual Staff | 16/07/2014 | 372.80 | 117305 | | INPLACE PERSONNEL LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Temporary/Casual Staff | 24/07/2014 | 223.68 | 117644 | | INSTANT CLEANING UK | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Council Offices & Land | Temporary/Casual Staff | 03/07/2014 | 1,620.00 | 116621 | | IRRV | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | C.Tax Billing, Coll & Recovery | Seminars & Short Training | 16/07/2014 | 330.00 | 117284 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Cleansing Services | Temporary/Casual Staff | 03/07/2014 | 632.69 | 116602 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Cleansing Services | Temporary/Casual Staff | 03/07/2014 | 889.20 | 116128 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Cleansing Services | Temporary/Casual Staff | 10/07/2014 | 444.60 | 116936 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Cleansing Services | Temporary/Casual Staff | 21/07/2014 | 632.70 | 117270 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Cleansing Services | Temporary/Casual Staff | 24/07/2014 | 1,201.28 | 117674 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Cleansing Services | Temporary/Casual Staff | 24/07/2014 | 1,273.95 | 117706 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Temporary/Casual Staff | 03/07/2014 | 337.73 | 116602 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Temporary/Casual Staff | 03/07/2014 | 624.15 | 116128 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Temporary/Casual Staff | 10/07/2014 | 342.00 | 116936 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Temporary/Casual Staff | 21/07/2014 | 273.60 | 117270 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Temporary/Casual Staff | 24/07/2014 | 324.90 | 117706 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Highway Cyclic Main Ptnership | Temporary/Casual Staff | 03/07/2014 | 1,637.33 | 116602 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Highway Cyclic Main Ptnership | Temporary/Casual Staff | 03/07/2014 | 910.58 | 116128 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Highway Cyclic Main Ptnership | Temporary/Casual Staff | 10/07/2014 | 1,581.75 | 116936 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Highway Cyclic Main Ptnership | Temporary/Casual Staff | 21/07/2014 | 1,226.93 | 117270 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Highway Cyclic Main Ptnership | Temporary/Casual Staff | 24/07/2014 | 547.20 | 117674 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Highway Cyclic Main Ptnership | Temporary/Casual Staff | 24/07/2014 | 371.93 | 117706 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Overtime | 24/07/2014 | 465.92 | 117705 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Temporary/Casual Staff | 03/07/2014 | 3,560.90 | 116601 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Temporary/Casual Staff | 10/07/2014 | 3,190.66 | 116937 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Temporary/Casual Staff | 16/07/2014 | 2,945.22 | 117265 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Temporary/Casual Staff | 24/07/2014 | 3,430.63 | 117673 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Temporary/Casual Staff | 24/07/2014 | 3,247.59 | 117705 | | JELSONS LTD | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | The Pavillion - Land And Build | Contributions Towards Expenses | 31/07/2014 | 1,445.84 | 118162 | | J.K. ASPHALT | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 16/07/2014 | 852.00 | 116999 | | SUPPLIER NAME | PORTFOLIO | COST CENTRE | EXPENDITURE CLASS | POST. DATE | AMOUNT | REF. | |------------------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------|------------|--------| | JOHNSON POOLE & BLOOMER | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Littlethorpe Depot | Professional Fees | 16/07/2014 | 530.68 | 116963 | | JOHNSTON SWEEPERS LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Vehicle Maintenance | Normal Repairs | 03/07/2014 | 344.40 | 116657 | | KARCHER (UK) LTD | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Littlethorpe Depot | Cyc: Depot Garage Equipment | 03/07/2014 | 330.00 | 116124 | | KINGKRAFT LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 10/07/2014 | 9,500.00 | 117001 | | KINGS ARMOURED SECURITY SERVICES LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Customer Services | Security Services | 30/07/2014 | 503.08 | 118127 | | KINGS ARMOURED SECURITY SERVICES LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Car Parks | Pay & Display M/Cs | 10/07/2014 | 237.54 | 116705 | | KINGS ARMOURED SECURITY SERVICES LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Car Parks | Pay & Display M/Cs | 16/07/2014 | 274.12 | 115236 | | KLG PLUMBING | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 30/07/2014 | 4,113.00 | 118151 | | LAVENDER PSYCHOTHERAPY LIMITED | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | I&E Account - General Fund | Provision Amounts | 10/07/2014 | 330.00 | 117085 | | LCC BLABY STOKES CE PRIMARY SCHOOL | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Debtors Suspense | 03/07/2014 | 856.16 | 116677 | | LEAWOOD BUILDERS | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 17/07/2014 | 4,703.00 | 117432 | | LEICESTERSHIRE CAB | Community Services | Grant Aid & Access Act. - Cab | Grants - Cab | 16/07/2014 | 29,350.00 | 116992 | | LEICESTERSHIRE CONSTABULARY | Community Services | Comm Safety - Domestic Abuse | Other Third Party | 10/07/2014 | 592.58 | 117084 | | LEICESTERSHIRE CONSTABULARY | Community Services | Police & Crime Comm. Funding | Project/Initiatives Fees | 10/07/2014 | 1,800.00 | 116990 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Community Services | Police & Crime Comm. Funding | Project/Initiatives Fees | 24/07/2014 | 2,500.00 | 117702 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Local Land Charges | Lcc Fees | 24/07/2014 | 2,072.00 | 116345 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Local Land Charges | Lcc Fees | 24/07/2014 | 2,286.00 | 116346 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Council Offices & Land | Pla: Miscellaneous | 10/07/2014 | 220.00 | 117079 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Leader | Emergency Planning & Bus. Cont | Lrf Contribution | 16/07/2014 | 20,836.00 | 117248 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Leader | Emergency Planning & Bus. Cont | Subscriptions | 16/07/2014 | 3,569.00 | 117248 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Car Parks | Enhancement Schemes | 24/07/2014 | 287.26 | 117338 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Highway Cyclic Main Ptnership | Sub-Contractors | 30/07/2014 | 6,400.00 | 118088 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Leics Waste Man Partnership | 03/07/2014 | 10,000.00 | 116444 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Creditors -County-Superann Ees | 03/07/2014 | 132,728.02 | 116679 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Creditors -County-Superann Ees | 31/07/2014 | 131,071.79 | 118115 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Creditors-County-Superann Memb | 03/07/2014 | 1,369.62 | 116679 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Creditors-County-Superann Memb | 31/07/2014 | 1,210.82 | 118115 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 10/07/2014 | 1,431.27 | 116996 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 24/07/2014 | 3,187.00 | 117844 | | LEICESTERSHIRE FIRE & RESCUE SERVICE | Community Services | Community Dev. - Youth Issues | Project/Initiatives Fees | 10/07/2014 | 500.00 | 116945 | | LEICESTERSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS TRUST | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 03/07/2014 | 13,750.00 | 116644 | | LEICESTERSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS TRUST | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 16/07/2014 | 5,195.25 | 117335 | | LEXISNEXIS UK | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Register Of Electors | Subscriptions | 17/07/2014 | 906.15 | 117307 | | LEXISNEXIS UK | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Register Of Electors | Subscriptions | 17/07/2014 | -906.15 | 117308 | | L G CONSULTANCY | Community Services | Police & Crime Comm. Funding | Project/Initiatives Fees | 10/07/2014 | 1,000.00 | 116993 | | LOCAL GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Local Land Charges | Other Local Authorities | 24/07/2014 | 1,726.99 | 116697 | | SUPPLIER NAME | PORTFOLIO | COST CENTRE | EXPENDITURE CLASS | POST. DATE | AMOUNT | REF. | |---------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------|----------|--------| | LOCAL WORLD LIMITED | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Advertising - Notices | 10/07/2014 | 448.80 | 116950 | | LOCAL WORLD LIMITED | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Advertising - Notices | 10/07/2014 | 448.80 | 116951 | | LOCAL WORLD LIMITED | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Advertising - Notices | 10/07/2014 | 530.40 | 116952 | | LOCAL WORLD LIMITED | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Advertising - Notices | 10/07/2014 | 285.60 | 116953 | | LOCAL WORLD LIMITED | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Advertising - Notices | 10/07/2014 | 408.00 | 116977 | | LOCAL WORLD LIMITED | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Advertising - Notices | 16/07/2014 | 448.80 | 117329 | | LOCAL WORLD LIMITED | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Advertising - Notices | 24/07/2014 | 448.80 | 117632 | | LOCAL WORLD LIMITED | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Advertising - Notices | 24/07/2014 | 285.60 | 117633 | | LOCAL WORLD LIMITED | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Advertising - Notices | 30/07/2014 | 448.80 | 117664 | | LODGE KENNELS | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Control Of Dogs | Kenneling Fees | 03/07/2014 | 2,524.00 | 116700 | | LODGE TYRES CO LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Accidental Damage Repair Costs | 23/07/2014 | 1,212.90 | 117690 | | LODGE TYRES CO LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Vehicle Maintenance | Tyres | 10/07/2014 | 2,821.85 | 116695 | | LOGAL GOVERNMENT CHRONICLE | Leader | Corporate Management | Books, Newspapers And Pubs | 03/07/2014 | 249.00 | 116673 | | MACILDOWIE ASSOCIATES LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Recruitment Costs | Staff Advertising | 21/07/2014 | 3,300.00 | 116978 | | MALCOLM LANE & SONS LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Community Improvements | Project/Initiatives Fees | 24/07/2014 | 295.00 | 117318 | | MARRONS SOLICITORS | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Recharged Legal Fees | 17/07/2014 | 1,505.40 | 117343 | | MARRONS SOLICITORS | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Recharged Legal Fees | 17/07/2014 | 750.00 | 117344 | | MELBA PRODUCTS LIMITED T/AS MELBA SWINGTEX N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Cleansing Services | Bins - Trade | 30/07/2014 | 567.60 | 118104 | | | MICHAEL RONAN | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | I&E Account - General Fund | Provision Amounts | 31/07/2014 | 250.00 | 118152 | | MOLE GROUNDWORKS | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Council Offices & Land | Rea: Building | 10/07/2014 | 1,200.00 | 116292 | | MOLE GROUNDWORKS | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Open Spaces Management | Open Space Development | 03/07/2014 | 797.26 | 116604 | | MOLE GROUNDWORKS | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Open Spaces Management | Open Space Development | 24/07/2014 | 1,690.00 | 117657 | | MOLE GROUNDWORKS | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 03/07/2014 | 2,160.00 | 116293 | | MULTICELL INTERNATIONAL LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Vehicle Maintenance | Normal Repairs | 24/07/2014 | 227.72 | 117711 | | NARBOROUGH PARISH COUNCIL | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Open Spaces Management | Open Space Development | 03/07/2014 | 1,364.00 | 116681 | | NEW AUTO LIMITED T/AS MOGO UK | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Licencing - Hack Carr/Pvt Hire | Stationery | 03/07/2014 | 244.00 | 116318 | | NO GRAFFITI | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Open Spaces Management | Open Space Development | 16/07/2014 | 720.00 | 117288 | | NORTHGATE INFORMATION SOLUTIONS | Community Services | Benefits Section | Sundry It Purchases | 10/07/2014 | 5,200.00 | 116595 | | NORTHGATE VEHICLE HIRE | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Cleansing Services | Vehicle Hire - External | 24/07/2014 | 467.71 | 116935 | | NORTH WEST LEICESTERSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Internal Audit | Other Local Authorities | 10/07/2014 | 11,909.02 | 116986 | | | NOTTINGHAM CITY COUNCIL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Chair & V-Chair Of The Council | Hospitality | 16/07/2014 | 350.00 | 117295 | | NOTTINGHAM CITY COUNCIL | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | L A Assocs - Subscriptions | Subscriptions | 24/07/2014 | 4,995.00 | 117668 | | NOTTINGHAM CITY COUNCIL | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Seminars & Short Training | 17/07/2014 | 575.00 | 117294 | | NUTTERS MUSIC | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Chair & V-Chair Of The Council | Civic Equipment | 21/07/2014 | 500.00 | 117334 | | OADBY & WIGSTON BOROUGH COUNCIL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Change For Life Project | Hire Of Rooms | 24/07/2014 | 220.80 | 117716 | | OADBY & WIGSTON BOROUGH COUNCIL | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 10/07/2014 | 2,000.00 | 116994 | | SUPPLIER NAME | PORTFOLIO | COST CENTRE | EXPENDITURE CLASS | POST. DATE | AMOUNT | REF. | |--------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------|----------|--------| | OFFICE OF THE POLICE AND CRIME COMMISSIONEROther | General Fund Balance Sheet | S106 Monies Payable To 3rd Par | 24/07/2014 | 47,814.74 | 117677 | | | OFFICE OF THE POLICE AND CRIME COMMISSIONEROther | General Fund Balance Sheet | S106 Monies Payable To 3rd Par | 31/07/2014 | 12,085.82 | 117678 | | | PAVHURST ASSOCIATES LTD | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Fees And Charges | 10/07/2014 | 385.00 | 117083 | | P&MM LIMITED - DIRECT DEBIT ONLY | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Deductions - Childcare Voucher | 17/07/2014 | 2,982.00 | 117353 | | PMP SERVICES | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 30/07/2014 | 8,850.00 | 118150 | | POLYCOPY | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Reprographics | Print Mats (Int. Print Room) | 16/07/2014 | 466.00 | 117304 | | POST OFFICE LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Fleet Management | Road Fund Licence | 10/07/2014 | 225.00 | 117014 | | PREMIER SECURITY SERVICES | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Blaby Joint Service Shop | Security Services | 10/07/2014 | 552.08 | 116939 | | PREMIER SECURITY SERVICES | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Blaby Joint Service Shop | Security Services | 10/07/2014 | 552.08 | 116001 | | PREMIER SECURITY SERVICES | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Council Offices & Land | Security Services | 10/07/2014 | 552.08 | 116940 | | PREMIER SECURITY SERVICES | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Council Offices & Land | Security Services | 10/07/2014 | 552.08 | 116000 | | PREMIER SECURITY SERVICES | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Council Offices & Land | Security Services | 16/07/2014 | 260.28 | 116938 | | PREMIER SECURITY SERVICES | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Littlethorpe Depot | Security Services | 16/07/2014 | 552.08 | 116941 | | PREMIER SECURITY SERVICES | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | The Pavillion - Land And Build | Security Services | 16/07/2014 | 552.08 | 115562 | | PREMIER SECURITY SERVICES | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Security Services | 16/07/2014 | 912.51 | 116944 | | PREMIER TAXIS | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 03/07/2014 | 949.50 | 115963 | | PREMIER TAXIS | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 03/07/2014 | 3,393.00 | 115964 | | PRINT & PACKAGING SOLUTIONS LTD | Community Services | Police & Crime Comm. Funding | Project/Initiatives Fees | 10/07/2014 | 508.00 | 116980 | | PRINT UK | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Register Of Electors | Hired Services | 31/07/2014 | 2,110.00 | 118055 | | PRS PAYMENTS | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | The Pavilion | Licences | 24/07/2014 | 307.10 | 117631 | | QUALITY CULTURE LTD | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Seminars & Short Training | 10/07/2014 | 1,200.00 | 117093 | | R E BRADSHAW | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 10/07/2014 | 3,792.00 | 116998 | | REIDS PLAYGROUND MAINTENACE LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Equipment R & M | 30/07/2014 | 2,376.00 | 117612 | | RICARDO-AEA LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Environmental Health | Subscriptions | 10/07/2014 | 720.00 | 116286 | | RIGHT TRACK CONSULTANCY LTD | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Staff Training And Development | Hired Services | 21/07/2014 | 1,770.00 | 116961 | | RIGHT TRACK CONSULTANCY LTD | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Staff Training And Development | Hired Services | 24/07/2014 | 3,900.00 | 117701 | | ROYAL MAIL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | National Election Expenses | Postages | 16/07/2014 | 871.33 | 117007 | | ROYAL MAIL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | National Election Expenses | Postages | 21/07/2014 | 1,019.14 | 115539 | | SAFE START HOME SAFETY | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Home Safety(Nhs Funding) | Hired Services | 03/07/2014 | 750.00 | 116610 | | SEVERN TRENT WATER | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Public Conveniences | Water Charges | 10/07/2014 | 623.85 | 116651 | | SHELTER | Community Services | Benefits Section | Books, Newspapers And Pubs | 03/07/2014 | 227.50 | 116443 | | SHINX CREATIVE LTD | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Local Sports Alliance | Publicity & Promotion | 03/07/2014 | 430.00 | 116672 | | SI SPORTS LIMITED | Community Services | Community Dev. - Youth Issues | Project/Initiatives Fees | 10/07/2014 | 240.00 | 116984 | | SOFTWARE BOX LIMITED | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Development Strategy | Computer Services | 03/07/2014 | 304.02 | 116603 | | SOFTWARE BOX LIMITED | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Hired Services | 24/07/2014 | 304.02 | 116689 | | SOUTHERN ELECTRIC | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Council Offices & Land | Electricity | 16/07/2014 | 2,272.27 | 116912 | | SUPPLIER NAME | PORTFOLIO | COST CENTRE | EXPENDITURE CLASS | POST. DATE | AMOUNT | REF. | |------------------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------------------------|------------------------------|--------------|-----------|--------| | SOUTHERN ELECTRIC | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Littlethorpe Depot | Electricity | 30/07/2014 | 1,492.85 | 117600 | | SOUTHERN ELECTRIC | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Littlethorpe Depot | Electricity | 30/07/2014 | -1,900.73 | 117601 | | SOUTHERN ELECTRIC | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | The Pavillion - Land And Build | Electricity | 16/07/2014 | 1,160.41 | 116352 | | SOUTH LEICESTERSHIRE COLLEGE | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 16/07/2014 | 1,733.33 | 117260 | | SOUTH LEICESTERSHIRE COLLEGE | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 24/07/2014 | 1,375.79 | 117595 | | SOUTH LEICESTERSHIRE COLLEGE | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 24/07/2014 | 5,921.12 | 117618 | | SOUTH WIGSTON HIGH SCHOOL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Active Together (Oper Funding) | Other Partnership Support | 17/07/2014 | 13,202.00 | 117429 | | STEER TYRES LTD (LUTTERWORTH) | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Vehicle Maintenance | Tyres | 24/07/2014 | 1,760.00 | 117695 | | STEWART MORRIS PARTNERSHIP | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 30/07/2014 | 287.50 | 118146 | | ST PETERS CHURCH, ASTON FLAMVILLE | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Open Spaces Management | Parish Councils | 03/07/2014 | 480.00 | 116642 | | SYSTON FENCING COMPANY LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Commuted Sums - Open Spaces | 30/07/2014 | 510.00 | 118147 | | THE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Subscriptions | 17/07/2014 | 500.00 | 117337 | | THE PRUDENTIAL ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Deductions - Avc | 24/07/2014 | 1,586.78 | 117724 | | TNT POST NORTH LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Misc - Postage Meter - Tnt | 03/07/2014 | 892.45 | 116593 | | TNT POST NORTH LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Misc - Postage Meter - Tnt | 10/07/2014 | 1,285.61 | 116946 | | TNT POST NORTH LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Misc - Postage Meter - Tnt | 10/07/2014 | 2,303.30 | 116948 | | TNT POST NORTH LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Misc - Postage Meter - Tnt | 16/07/2014 | 1,025.35 | 117297 | | TNT POST NORTH LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Misc - Postage Meter - Tnt | 30/07/2014 | 835.76 | 118072 | | TNT POST NORTH LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Misc - Postage Meter - Tnt | 30/07/2014 | 260.41 | 118073 | | TNT POST NORTH LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Misc - Postage Meter - Tnt | 30/07/2014 | 810.33 | 118052 | | TNT POST NORTH LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Misc - Postage Meter - Tnt | 30/07/2014 | 1,101.02 | 118053 | | TWOFOLD LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Reprographics | Print Mats (Int. Print Room) | 30/07/2014 | 350.80 | 118076 | | UNISON | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Deductions - Unison | 03/07/2014 | 501.45 | 116766 | | UNISON | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Deductions - Unison | 31/07/2014 | 456.45 | 118120 | | VALUATION OFFICE AGENCY | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Assets Management | Valuation Fees | 03/07/2014 | 500.00 | 116654 | | VEHICLE WEIGHING SOLUTIONS | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Vehicle Maintenance | Normal Repairs | 30/07/2014 | 610.62 | 118099 | | VENN GROUP LTD | Community Services | Benefits Section | Temporary/Casual Staff | 03/07/2014 | 763.29 | 116646 | | VENN GROUP LTD | Community Services | Benefits Section | Temporary/Casual Staff | 16/07/2014 | 1,045.99 | 116902 | | VENN GROUP LTD | Community Services | Benefits Section | Temporary/Casual Staff | 16/07/2014 | 1,045.99 | 117252 | | VENN GROUP LTD | Community Services | Benefits Section | Temporary/Casual Staff | 24/07/2014 | 904.64 | 117589 | | VENN GROUP LTD | Community Services | Benefits Section | Temporary/Casual Staff | 30/07/2014 | 1,045.99 | 118125 | | VENN GROUP LTD | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | C.Tax Billing, Coll & Recovery | Temporary/Casual Staff | 03/07/2014 | 906.00 | 116643 | | VENN GROUP LTD | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | C.Tax Billing, Coll & Recovery | Temporary/Casual Staff | 03/07/2014 | 768.00 | 116348 | | VENN GROUP LTD | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | C.Tax Billing, Coll & Recovery | Temporary/Casual Staff | 16/07/2014 | 900.00 | 116901 | | VENTURE BUSINESS FORMS LTD | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Reprographics | Print Mats (Int. Print Room) | 30/07/2014 | 759.00 | 118108 | | VOLVO GROUP UK LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Vehicle Maintenance | Normal Repairs | 21/07/2014 | 265.78 | 117327 | | SUPPLIER NAME | PORTFOLIO | COST CENTRE | EXPENDITURE CLASS | POST. DATE | AMOUNT | REF. | |------------------|--------------------------------|------------------------------|------------------------|--------------|-----------|--------| | W T CLARKE & SON | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Composting Fees | 10/07/2014 | 6,815.03 | 116676 | | XMA LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Desktop - Applications | 24/07/2014 | 9,082.32 | 115977 | | XMA LIMITED | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Development Strategy | Computer Services | 30/07/2014 | 342.36 | 116966 | | XMA LIMITED | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Development Strategy | Computer Services | 30/07/2014 | 227.18 | 116612 | | XMA LIMITED | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Hired Services | 10/07/2014 | 680.94 | 116965 | | XPRESS SOFTWARE | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Register Of Electors | Research & Development | 16/07/2014 | 1,500.00 | 116954 | | XPRESS SOFTWARE | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Register Of Electors | Software Maintenance | 10/07/2014 | 10,166.29 | 116921 | | TOTAL: | 919,195.50 | | | | | |

en

2718-pdf

## Flooding: Information Sheet Contents: 1. Flooding - an overview 2. Three common types of flooding 3. History of flooding in Wales 4. Management techniques - past and present ## 1 . Flooding - An Overview The European Union Flood Directive defines flood as 'a temporary covering by water of land not normally covered by water' What causes flooding? Flooding can occur from the natural processes of heavy rain, tidal surges and raised groundwater levels, among others. It can also result from interference with the natural drainage processes, such as changes to river channels, increased run-off from land or blocked sewerage systems and culverts. In extreme weather conditions, rivers, streams and drainage systems reach their capacity and the ground becomes saturated. Water gathers and the natural boundaries, for example embankments, can no longer retain the water, resulting in the banks overflowing. This overflowing water follows the path of least resistance, settling in low-lying areas and flooding them. Why is flooding a problem? It is a problem for many people posing a risk to health, safety and wellbeing. It can cause loss of life, damage to property and possessions, loss of business and jobs, affect critical infrastructure such as electricity and water supply systems. In rural locations it can lead to destruction of crops and loss of livestock. ## Who Can Help? - Natural Resources Wales Provide A Floodline Warning service which people who live in a flood risk area can sign up to. - The local authority organise rest centres for people to be evacuated to, and help with identifying vulnerable people. Are there any positives? The answer to this is very subjective. It could be argued that in the UK it is unlikely to be seen as a positive occurrence. The UK is a densely populated island with a lot of industry, farms, towns and cities located alongside rivers. As well as flooding often causing widespread destruction, flood waters are usually full of lots of unpleasant things that do not leave areas that have been submerged in good condition. It can contain chemicals from agriculture and industry, sewerage, oil, and dangerous sharp objects, to mention but a few. However, floods can distribute and deposit river sediments over large areas of land. These river sediments replenish nutrients in topsoil and make agricultural lands more fertile. The populations of many ancient civilisations concentrated along the floodplains of rivers such as the Nile, the Tigris and the Yellow because periodic flooding resulted in fertile, productive farmlands. Flooding renews wetlands where it can balance their healthy ecology. Healthy wetlands promote healthy water supplies and improve the surrounding air quality. Flooding contributes fresh water and waste to the wetlands that carry and deposit nutrient-rich sediments which support both the plant and animal life of the wetlands. - 999 - The fire service and police are involved with rescue and evacuation. - The Red Cross supports the emergency services. ## 2. Three Common Types Of Flooding Flash flooding Flash flooding happens when rain falls so fast that the underlying ground cannot absorb the water or drain it away, fast enough. Roads can become like rivers and if there is a lot of water, it can flood buildings and carry cars away. So, if the rain is falling too fast for the ground or drains to cope, there is a risk of flash flooding. Most rivers flow fairly gently as they slope slowly towards the sea. Therefore, when a river floods it does so quite slowly as it takes time for the rain to percolate through the ground and into the rivers and out to sea allowing time for some warning. With flash flooding there is often very little time between the rain falling and flash flooding occurring. Flash flooding happens more commonly where rivers are narrow and steep, so they flow more quickly. It can also occur away from small rivers in built-up urban areas where hard surfaces such as roads and concrete don't let the water drain away into the ground. This leads to surface overflow and can often overwhelm local drainage systems leading to flash flooding. The flooding of Boscastle in Cornwall in 2004 is one of the most well-known examples of flash flooding. Fluvial (river) flooding Fluvial flooding occurs when rivers burst their banks as a result of sustained or intense rainfall. The likelihood of a river bursting its banks and flooding is determined by factors in the surrounding landscape, such as steepness of the river valley, the amount of vegetation and the prevailing rock-type. The faster the rainwater reaches the river channel, the more likely it is to flood. The following factors may encourage flooding: - A steep-sided channel - a river channel surrounded by steep slopes causes fast surface run-off. - A lack of vegetation or woodland - trees and plants intercept precipitation i.e. they catch or drink water. If there is little vegetation in the drainage basin then surface run-off will be high. Useful websites: MET office www.metoffice.gov.uk/learning/rain/flash-floods www.metoffice.gov.uk/learning/learn-about-the- weather/weather-phenomena/case-studies BBC GCSE Bitesize www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/geography/ water_rivers/river_flooding_management_rev1.shtml Welsh Government site http://gov.wales/topics/environmentcountryside/epq/ flooding/nationalstrategy/strategy/?lang=en Coastal flooding Coastal regions are particularly vulnerable to flooding. Tidal levels are a crucial factor especially when combined with other weather conditions, including low pressure and high winds. These conditions can lead to coastal defenses being breached or overtopped, resulting in flooding. The extreme tidal conditions that can lead to coastal flooding occur because of three main mechanisms, either individually or in combination. - High tide levels - variations in tidal levels due to gravitational effects of the sun and moon can result in higher sea levels. There is an approximate twice daily variation between high and low tide, onto which is superimposed a spring-neap tide cycle when extra high and low tides occur. - Surge - an increase in sea level above tidal level caused by low atmospheric pressure which may be exacerbated by the wind acting on the sea. - Wave action - dependent on wind speed and direction, local topography and exposure. - A drainage basin consisting mainly of impermeable rock - this will mean that water cannot percolate through the rock layer, and so will run faster over the surface. - A drainage basin in an urban area - surfaces in urban areas tend to consist largely of impermeable concrete, which encourages overland flow. Drains and sewers take water quickly and directly to the river channel. Houses with sloping roofs further increase the amount of run-off. All these factors increase the likelihood of fluvial flooding. You could also investigate pluvial flooding. Local Government Association https://www.local.gov.uk/topics/civil-emergencies/ flooding Natural Resources Wales http://naturalresources.wales/flooding/what-to-do-beforea-flood/?lang=en Natural Resources Wales http://naturalresources.wales/flooding/5-day-floodforecast/?lang=en ## 3. History Of Flooding In Wales Wales has extensive coastline and river networks and a high rainfall. The steep valleys of the South East result in fast reacting rivers where flash flooding is more common in urban areas, whereas the topography of the North lends to larger floods across flood plains. Flooding isn't new. The tsunami of 1607 devastated settlements in Porthcawl and the Gwent levels resulting in many deaths, and a tidal surge in the late 1800s affected much of Llanelli. The Crown has always had a duty to defend against incursion by the sea and the power to order the construction of defenses. From Victorian times, legislation provided powers, through various bodies, to provide for the drainage of land, mainly for agricultural purposes. The key principle was that flooding could be prevented if water could be drained effectively from the land. The legislation enshrined this principle in the various Land Drainage Acts from 1930 through to 1976. ## 4. Flood Risk Management Widespread flooding in 1998 and 2000 in England and Wales lead the Environment Agency and Government to fundamentally review how it dealt with floods, and led to a change in emphasis. It became obvious that we cannot prevent flooding, neither can we "protect" ourselves from it. In turn this lead to a study of flood risk, and the simple realisation that what we actually do is find the best ways to manage the flood risk to our communities. The concept of "Flood Risk Management" more clearly represents both what we can do and what we actually do. The Welsh Government's 'The National Strategy for Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management' in Wales, published Nov 2011, sets out four over-arching objectives: Alternative format; large print or another language, please contact: enquiries@naturalresourceswales.gov.uk 0300 065 3000 Email: education@naturalresourceswales.gov.uk www.naturalresources.wales The 1989 Water Act shifted the emphasis from Land Drainage (and Local Land Drainage Committees) to Flood Defense with the formation of the Regional Flood Defense Committees and Local Flood Defense Committees. This recognised a shift from draining the land for agricultural use to defending our communities. Many of our flood defenses were built in the period following the devastating flood in Wales in 1979 when the capital city was under water, and there was huge public pressure to "defend" our communities against flooding. To an extent this approach misled the public into a false sense of security. The "defenses" do not remove the hazard of flooding; they only reduce the frequency and impact of flooding. Indeed they are not the most effective way of protecting people from the risks that come from floods. 1 Reducing the consequences for individuals, communities, businesses and the environment from flooding and coastal erosion; 2 Raising awareness of and engaging people in the response to flood and coastal erosion risk; 3 Providing an effective and sustained response to flood and coastal erosion events; and 4 Prioritising investment in the most at risk communities. ## References: - SE Wales: From land drainage to flood risk management - Environment Agency Wales - Flood and coastal erosion risk management in Wales http://naturalresources.wales/media/680131/floodcoastal-erosion-risk-management-in-wales-2014-2016.pdf

en

1750-pdf

For HMRC use only Proof of identity documents produced 1 2 Date DD MM YYYY ## Who Needs To Register? If your business operates as a subcontractor in the construction industry it needs to register for the Construction Industry Scheme (CIS). Who this form is for Use this form if you are a partnership and want to register as a subcontractor in the construction industry. Only 1 partner can fill in this form - that person will be known as the 'registering partner'. It is up to the partnership to decide who the registering partner is. Both the partnership and registering partner must already be registered for Self Assessment and have a Unique Tax Reference (UTR). ## Registering Partner'S Details The registering partner, Partner (1), is responsible for registering the partnership 1 4 Registering partner's name 2 Registering partner's address Registering partner's Unique Tax Reference (UTR) HM Revenue & Customs CIS Subcontractor Registrations Benton Park View Newcastle upon Tyne NE98 1ZZ CIS Helpline 0300 200 3210 Textphone 0300 200 3219 You may want to show this form to your tax adviser if you have one. If you want to register as a contractor, please phone the New Employer Helpline on 0300 200 3200. Help We are happy to help you with any part of this form or with anything in the guidance notes. Please phone the CIS Helpline on **0300 200 3210** or go to www.hmrc.gov.uk/new-cis Registering partner's National Insurance number, if known. If you do not have a National Insurance number, see page 3 of the guidance notes. Where registering partner is a Company, its Company Registration Number (CRN), if known 5 Registering partner's daytime phone number 6 Registering partner's mobile number Registering partner's e-mail address 7 ## Partnership Details Continued 8 Trading name Enter your full partnership name 9 Partnership address Address Postcode 10 The partnership's Unique Tax Reference (UTR), see page 3 of the guidance notes. 11 Daytime phone number 12 Alternative phone number 13 On what date did the partnership start, or plan to start, working in the UK construction industry? DD MM YYYY 14 Type of work the partnership does in the construction industry, for example, plumbing, carpentry, electrics. ## Tax Treatment Payment under deduction Contractors will make deductions from the partnership on account of tax at the standard CIS deduction rate. Gross payment The partnership's net construction turnover must equal or exceed £30,000 x the number of partners in box 32, or equal or exceed £200,000, to register for gross payment. 15 If the partnership has a trading name that is different from the name in box 8, enter it in the box below. It is important to tell us if you use a different name for trading purposes. If we cannot match the details the partnership gives to the contractor to verify how the partnership will be paid, a higher rate of deduction will be taken from the partnership's payments. If the partnership does not have a different trading name, leave the box below blank. 16 The partnership trading address (if different from box 9) Address Postcode 17 Partnership VAT number, if you have one 18 Tax adviser If the partnership would like to use its existing self assessment tax adviser for the Construction Industry Scheme, put 'X' in the box below. 19 Has the partnership been paid as a subcontractor in the construction industry since 6 April 2007? Put 'X' in 1 box No Yes If 'Yes' what is the verification number given to you by the contractor? If the partnership has more than 1 verification number, give the details on a separate sheet of paper. 20 How does the partnership want to be paid? Put 'X' in the appropriate box and follow the instructions. Payment under deduction - fill in the Declaration only. Gross payment - fill in the remainder of the form and the Declaration. ## Other Partners' Details For gross payment the partnership has to give us details of other partners. You have already given us your details as registering partner (Partner (1)) on page 1. We now need details of the other partners in the partnership. 21 Partner (2) name and address (in capital letters) 22 Partner (2) Unique Tax Reference (UTR) 23 Partner (2) National Insurance number, if known. Complete if the partner is an individual. ## Employer Details 27 Are you the registering partner also an employer in your own right? Put 'X' in 1 box. If 'Yes' what is your Accounts Office reference? You will find this on the front of your Payslip Booklet. If you are not sure, phone the CIS Helpline. If the registering partner has more than 1 Accounts Office reference number please give details below. If you need more space, please provide the same details on a separate sheet of paper and attach to this form. ## Business Details If you do not fill in questions 29 to 31, the partnership will not be considered for gross payment. The name in which your business account is held 29 24 Partner (3) name and address (in capital letters) 25 Partner (3) Unique Tax Reference (UTR) 26 Partner (3) National Insurance number, if known Complete if the partner is an individual. We have only allowed room for 2 other partners. If there are more than 2, please provide the same details on a separate sheet of paper and attach it to this form. 28 Is the partnership also an employer? Put 'X' in 1 box. reference number please give details below. If you need more space, please provide the same details on a separate sheet of paper and attach to this form. 30 Sort code where your business account is held Account number where your business account is held 31 ## Turnover Test For gross payment the partnership has to pass a turnover test - read the note below. The turnover test is based on the amount the partnership earns in the construction industry compared to an amount set by law. If in the last 12 months the partnership's net turnover (gross income from construction work less the cost of materials): - equals or exceeds £30,000 x the number of partners in box 32 - equals or exceeds £200,000 the partnership will pass the turnover test. The partnership can apply to be paid gross as soon as it reaches this limit; it does not have to wait for 12 months before it can pass the test. The partnership can use recent paid invoices and records (for example, payment receipts from contractors) as well as accounts to do this turnover test. The partnership's net construction turnover must equal or exceed £30,000 x the number of partners in box 32, or equal or exceed £200,000 to register for gross payment. If this is **not** the case go back to Tax treatment and: - put an 'X' in the payment under deduction box (question 20) - cross through the gross box (question 20) - go straight to, and fill, in the Declaration ## Declaration I declare that: - the partnership carries out construction work or arranges for it to be done - the information I have given on this form is correct and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief If you give false information, your application will be refused and you may face penalties of up to £3,000. Tax advisers are not allowed to sign on your behalf. ## What You Need To Do Now Make sure that: - you have answered all the relevant questions - you sign and date the declaration - If you **have** a National Insurance number, send this form to HMRC CIS Contractor Registrations Benton Park View NEWCASTLE UPON TYNE NE98 1ZZ - If you **do not have** a National Insurance number, you will need to call the CIS Helpline on 0300 200 3210 32 Enter the maximum number of partners during the 12-month period to the date of this application, see page 4 of the guidance notes. 33 If the partnership's net construction turnover in the last 12 months equals or exceeds £30,000 x the number of partners in box 32, or equals or exceeds £200,000, fill in the boxes below (A) Gross amount of payments (not including VAT) £ • (B) Cost of materials (not including VAT) £ • (C) Net construction turnover (A minus B) £ • You must be able to provide evidence of turnover, if asked, in support of your gross payment request. 34 Registering partner's signature Date DD MM YYYY 35

en

0177-pdf

# Carr Junior School City Of York Council Internal Audit Report 2015/16 Head Teacher: Mrs C Ryder Status: Final Reference: 15606/003 ## Summary And Overall Conclusions Introduction The audit was carried out in on Wednesday 10th and Thursday 11th February 2016 as part of the Internal Audit plan for Children's Services, Education and Skills for 2015/16. Schools are audited in accordance with a detailed risk assessment. ## Objectives And Scope Of The Audit The purpose of this audit was to provide advice to the Governors, Head Teacher and the Authority's Section 151 Officer about the financial management procedures and assurance that internal controls of the school are operating effectively to manage key risks, both financial and otherwise. The audit covered the following areas in accordance with the specification issued on 11th January 2016 : - Governance and Financial Management - System Reconciliation - Banking Arrangements - Contracts, Purchasing and Authorisation - Income - Capital and Property - Extended Schools Provision - Human Resources - Payroll and Staff Costs - School Meals - Pupil Numbers - School Fund - Data Protection and Information technology - Insurance and Risk Management - Inventories - Safeguarding ## Key Findings Systems within the school are operating well. The school has faced challenges this year with the implementation of the new CYC finance system and significant effort has been put into working around these to ensure that the finances are well managed even when it was not possible to undertake all the standard financial procedures. The finding in the report relates to the timing of requesting sickness information in the school's referencing procedures. Advice received from the VAT section of the council was also provided to the school in relation to one of their lettings. ## Overall Conclusions It was found that the arrangements for managing risk were very good. An effective control environment appears to be in operation. Our overall opinion of the controls within the system at the time of the audit was that they provided High Assurance. ## 1 Human Resources | Issue/Control Weakness | Risk | |----------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------| | Sickness information is requested before a conditional offer of employment | The school is in breach of the Equalities Act 2010 and may | | be open to challenge | | ## Findings The school ask for references for job applicants prior to a conditional offer of employment being made, and these reference requests include a request for sickness information. ## Recommendation The school should only request sickness information after a conditional offer of employment is made. The reference request forms to be used to obtain references for candidates if these are been requested prior to an offer being made are available on the HR section of the schools workforce portal. Agreed Action 1.1 Agreed Priority 3 Responsible Officer Head Teacher Timescale Immediate ## Audit Opinions And Priorities For Actions Audit Opinions Audit work is based on sampling transactions to test the operation of systems. It cannot guarantee the elimination of fraud or error. Our opinion is based on the risks we identify at the time of the audit. Our overall audit opinion is based on 5 grades of opinion, as set out below. Opinion Assessment of internal control | High Assurance | |--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | Substantial | | Assurance | | Overall, good management of risk with few weaknesses identified. An effective control environment is in | | operation but there is scope for further improvement in the areas identified. | | | | Reasonable | | Assurance | | Overall, satisfactory management of risk with a number of weaknesses identified. An acceptable control | | environment is in operation but there are a number of improvements that could be made. | | Limited Assurance | | Overall, poor management of risk with significant control weaknesses in key areas and major | | improvements required before an effective control environment will be in operation. | | No Assurance | | Overall, there is a fundamental failure in control and risks are not being effectively managed. A number of | | key areas require substantial improvement to protect the system from error and abuse. | | | ## Priorities For Actions Priority 1 A fundamental system weakness, which presents unacceptable risk to the system objectives and requires urgent attention by management. Priority 2 A significant system weakness, whose impact or frequency presents risks to the system objectives, which needs to be addressed by management. Priority 3 The system objectives are not exposed to significant risk, but the issue merits attention by management. Where information resulting from audit work is made public or is provided to a third party by the client or by Veritau then this must be done on the understanding that any third party will rely on the information at its own risk. Veritau will not owe a duty of care or assume any responsibility towards anyone other than the client in relation to the information supplied. Equally, no third party may assert any rights or bring any claims against Veritau in connection with the information. Where information is provided to a named third party, the third party will keep the information confidential.

en

3119-pdf

## Reducing Criminal Opportunity: Vehicle Security And Vehicle Crime Research Report 87 Nick Morgan, Oliver Shaw, Andy Feist and Christos Byron January 2016 ## Table Of Contents Acknowledgements .............................................................................................................................. 4 Executive summary ............................................................................................................................... 5 1: Background, aims and structure ...................................................................................................... 12 Aims and Structure ....................................................................................................................................... 16 2: Vehicle security and vehicle theft in England and Wales ................................................................. 19 The first vehicles and the first wave of vehicle security ................................................................................ 19 The vehicle crime rise of the 1980s and early 1990s and the security response ............................................. 21 The Car Theft Index and the arrival of electronic immobilisers ..................................................................... 25 Evidence relating to the effectiveness of specific security devices ................................................................ 27 Thefts from inside the vehicles ..................................................................................................................... 28 Thefts of vehicles ......................................................................................................................................... 28 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................... 29 3: Modelling the spread of electronic immobilisers and the timing of their likely impact on vehicle thefts .................................................................................................................................................. 31 The model .................................................................................................................................................... 32 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................... 40 4: Analysis of vehicle theft trends and methods in Great Britain ......................................................... 42 Aims, data and methods .............................................................................................................................. 42 Findings - National level .............................................................................................................................. 43 Findings - Police force area level .................................................................................................................. 55 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................... 57 5: Evidence from other nations ........................................................................................................... 58 The spread of immobilisers internationally .................................................................................................. 59 Analysis of theft trends ................................................................................................................................ 63 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................... 69 6: The current vehicle crime landscape ............................................................................................... 70 7: Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................... 75 Appendix 1: Diffusion, displacement and switching ............................................................................ 78 Appendix 2: The effect of LoJack on car thefts in the US ..................................................................... 83 Appendix 3: Why does crime spike? .................................................................................................... 87 Appendix 4: Two local-area cases studies: Western Australia and Merseyside ................................... 92 Appendix 5: Other reasons for the rise and fall in vehicle crime ......................................................... 97 Appendix 6: Time series modelling (written by Christos Byron) ........................................................ 104 ## Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Amanda White, Mike Warren, Andrew Kent, Daniel Heap, Tony O'Donnell, and Chris Lyons for their comments, suggestions and/or fact-checking. We would also like to thank the two independent academics who peer reviewed different draft versions of the report: Pat Mayhew and Ben Vollaard. . This report analyses trends in vehicle security devices and tries to determine the extent to which improved security has driven down vehicle-related theft in England and Wales and other nations. For the first half of the 20th century, few vehicle thefts were recorded and vehicle security devices were rare. Then thefts started rising in the 1960s and steering locks were introduced as a result. These checked rather than halted rising crime, leading to a 'second wave' of security devices in the 1980s and 1990s including central locking, car alarms and - most importantly - electronic immobilisers1. To begin with, these devices appeared to have little effect as vehicle crime levels rose faster than ever up until 1993. But then crime began to fall sharply as many of the 'second-wave' devices spread through the vehicle fleet, see Figure 1. Using a mixedmethods approach, this report attempts to assess the degree to which improved vehicle security might have caused the vehicle crime decline by reducing the number of opportunities for wouldbe offenders. Findings are supportive of a marked crime-reduction effect. But the results also suggest that security has not been universally effective, nor does it seem to be the only factor that has made vehicle crime rise and fall so sharply over the last 50 years. Sources: Department for Transport statistics (Table VEH0103); ONS police recorded crime. The key policy issues arising from the analysis are as follows:  Different types of security devices have had different levels of success in reducing theft, partly because some crimes are harder to prevent than others. Within vehicle crime, for example, evidence in this report suggests that there were two clear instances of security devices driving down thefts of vehicles: steering locks and electronic immobilisers. But, despite the similar trends shown in Figure 1, the evidence that security was involved in the large reductions in thefts from vehicles is less clear. For all but the most organised offender, stealing a vehicle requires the ability to drive it away, which provides a clear 'break-point' for security to target. This is not quite the same for offences like theft from vehicles or burglary where multiple points of entry need to be secured and there is no direct equivalent to not being able to drive the car away.  The evidence also suggests that security devices that have been proven to be effective have worked because they made the theft more difficult, not because they led to more offenders being caught. Vehicle crime detection rates changed little through the sharp rise and fall in offences. Also, the devices with the strongest evidence of effectiveness required no knowledge or conscious action by the consumer - most people do not know their car has an electronic immobiliser, and are not required to switch it on.  Another reason for the variable effectiveness of security devices is longevity. Whereas previous devices (e.g. steering locks) seem to have kept thieves at bay for a limited period, electronic immobilisers have remained a strong deterrent for more than two decades.  The speed with which a new security measure spreads is almost as important as the effectiveness of the device itself. Highly effective security may have little effect on overall crime if it protects only a minority of the target population. This is demonstrated by analysis of the spread of electronic immobilisers. Whilst the devices first appeared between 1989 and 1992 in all seven nations studied, estimates suggest it took between eight and 14 years for half the vehicle fleet to become protected. During that period, theft trends varied. While vehicle crime fell in England and Wales, it continued to rise until 2001 in Australia, where the initial effects of improved security were most likely overwhelmed by other upward crime pressures until the pool of unprotected vehicles became sufficiently small.  The spread of electronic immobilisers happened more quickly in Europe and Australia than in the US or Canada due partly to the presence and timing of legislation mandating the installation of electronic immobilisers in new vehicles, see Table 1. This creates a 'natural experiment' for determining both the effectiveness of the devices and the timing of their impact. As Figure 2 shows, despite the variation in trends to that point, once electronic immobilisers were installed on around half the vehicle fleet all these nations saw a sharp decline in vehicle thefts of around 40 per cent. Eng + Wales Scotland Netherlands Sweden Australia US Canada 1991-92 1991-92 1991-92 1991-92 1989-1990 1988-1992 1988-1992 Dates of electronic immobiliser spread Estimated first appearance of electronic immobilisers in mass market vehicles Year in which electronic immobilisers mandated on new vehicles 1998 1998 1998 1998 2001 None 2007 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2006 2006 Estimated year in which 50% of all vehicles have electronic immobilisers (threshold) Changes in numbers of police-recorded vehicle thefts Five years pre-threshold -33% -31% -5% 9% 9% -2% -6% Five years post-threshold -41% -35% -44% -39% -46% -34% -46% Sources: Police figures for different nations, full sources in Technical Appendix.  Several further conclusions follow from these results. Legislation requiring new vehicles to have an electronic immobiliser probably played a part in reducing crime rates by speeding up the spread of devices. But had the legislation applied to all vehicles rather than just new vehicles, more crime might have been prevented because spread would have been faster. Legislation may also have been important in putting the onus onto manufacturers rather than consumers - there was little evidence of consumers retrofitting electronic immobilisers to existing vehicles.2  A common criticism of security is that it simply displaces crime somewhere else (i.e. if would-be offenders cannot steal a new vehicle, they will steal an older vehicle without an immobiliser). Overall, the analysis is consistent with other studies in finding that while displacement does occur it rarely overwhelms the effect of improved security completely. Offenders did switch to stealing older vehicles, but overall thefts still went down. However, two further points need to be made. As the example of Australia demonstrates, displacement can eliminate crime-reduction gains for a number of years if there is still a sufficiently large pool of unprotected targets available. Secondly, improved security seems to have deterred all but the most committed offenders, which has had a large effect on the volume of thefts in many nations. But some of the remaining offenders switched to higher-harm vehicle theft methods, like car-key burglary and robbery, as a result.  The findings in this report also touch on the validity of the 'security hypothesis', which has suggested that improvements in the quality and quantity of security may be the main reason why overall crime has fallen. This report offers mixed support. On the one hand, the cross-national evidence from Table 1 and Figure 2 demonstrates that electronic immobilisers clearly drove a reduction in thefts of vehicles. But for many nations, England and Wales included, the crime decline was already well underway by the 2000s, which is when electronic immobilisers seemed to have their greatest effect.  Vehicle crime in England and Wales rose and then fell very quickly in the period before electronic immobilisers reached 50 per cent penetration (Figure 1). There have been examples of security improvements driving large changes in trend like this, but these occurred when a large proportion of the target population was protected in a very short space of time, as happened with steering locks in the Federal Republic of Germany in the 1960s or more recently with mobile phone security3. This was not the case with the second wave of vehicle security devices, like central locking, alarms and immobilisers. At the 1993 turning-point in recorded vehicle crime, estimates suggest only the newest cars would have had electronic immobilisers, amounting to fewer than five per cent of vehicles on the road, and thieves had shown a preference for stealing older vehicles anyway.  The percentage of vehicles with other security features - car alarms, mechanical immobilisers and central locking - would have been higher in 1993, but the evidence of effectiveness for these devices is more mixed than for electronic immobilisers. Analyses of theft rates by age of vehicle show that only vehicles manufactured from 1992 onwards had markedly lower theft rates even though car alarms and central locking began appearing in new models in the mid 1980s. In addition, the fact that thefts increased so sharply in the early 1990s, as central locking, mechanical immobilisers and car alarms were spreading through the vehicle fleet also suggests they were not the catalyst for the initial drop in crime. Even taking into account all the improving combinations of security devices, there was still a large pool of unprotected vehicles during the 1990s and both Car Theft Index data and findings from the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW)4 show that during the initial period of the vehicle theft decline, rates fell sharply in vehicles without security as well as in protected vehicles. Overall then, the analysis suggests that vehicle security - and electronic immobilisers in particular - made an important contribution to an already falling trend rather than causing the initial crime turn-around.  Two exploratory attempts were made to model the proportion of the fall in thefts of vehicles attributable to electronic immobilisers. Retrospectively attempting to establish causality and quantify the size of effects is fraught with difficulty due to the lack of a control group, so these results should be treated as exploratory only. But the two different methods produced reasonably similar results, tentatively suggesting that at least a quarter and possibly as much as half of the drop in thefts of vehicles in England and Wales could be attributed to electronic immobilisers. No estimates were attempted for thefts from vehicles.  That other factors were probably involved is also suggested by the fact that other types of crime tended to peak at the same time as vehicle-related theft and then fall with an initially similar trajectory. Certainly the rise and fall in vehicle crime was highly correlated with burglary in England and Wales and Australia, and with violence in the US, see Figure 3. This implies either that:  improved vehicle security had a marked effect on other crime too; or  that that there was a simultaneous and equally large improvement in other types of security: household security in England and Wales and Australia, and security relating to violent crime in the US; or  that there was a large shift upwards and then downwards in some other factor, or combination of factors, that would affect crime trends more generally. Sources: Police figures for different nations, full sources in Technical Appendix.  This analysis found little convincing evidence for the first option. The second option was not covered in this study. Security improvements on houses and other products were not examined in detail and neither were place-based security devices like CCTV. So it is possible that these had a separate effect on vehicle crime, burglary and other types of vehicle crime. In relation to the third option, it is important to ask what might have driven such a change. There is a vast literature on possible reasons for the crime drop and it is beyond the scope of this report to summarise them. Changes to policing, economic conditions, incarceration rates and long-term demographic shifts may all have played some role, as may the timing of drug epidemics. Previous Home Office research has shown that epidemics also follow a sharply rising and then falling pattern and affect multiple crime types. In that light, one further finding from this report - that joy-riding declined relative to more profit-driven theft even through the vehicle crime rise - may be relevant.  The final section of this report looks at the nature of vehicle crime today. Overall, vehicle crime levels are about a fifth of what they were in the mid 1990s, despite eight million more vehicles on the roads5. However, if this impressive decline is linked to the gradually reducing pool of vehicles on the road without electronic immobilisers, as data suggest, then some of the downward pressure on crime may be petering out. Fewer than three per cent of vehicles on the road in 2013 were made before 1997, meaning virtually all vehicles now have electronic immobilisers. So to further reduce crime, new interventions to tackle the minority of thieves who have been able to get around current security levels may be required.  Indeed, the latest figures for the year to June 2015 showed a three per cent increase in police-recorded thefts of vehicles in England and Wales, the first rise in two decades. This appears to be mainly due to an increase in stolen scooters and motorcycles. Motorbike thefts fell in line with other crime from 1995 to 1999, but from 1999 numbers of thefts have been quite stable, while thefts of cars fell sharply. This was probably due to the fact that motorbikes are less well protected by security for the simple reason that they are easier to transport away from the scene without cracking the immobiliser. It also means that trends in motorbike/scooter theft can now drive trends in overall vehicle theft. Exploring ways to better protect motorcycles may therefore be an important element of future thinking on vehicle crime prevention.  Finally, a crucial policy question that this report has been unable to resolve fully is whether new technology is changing vehicle security dynamics again. The technology to overcome electronic immobilisers certainly exists and is available6 but current theft rates suggest it is not being used by a large number of offenders (relative to the 1990s). There are perhaps four reasons. 1) There are simply fewer would-be offenders now - so even though the technology exists, it is not being used. 2) The price, and the need to buy the technology in advance (i.e. to plan the theft), may raise the bar sufficiently to deter many opportunist car thieves. If high crime levels of the past have been predominantly about less-organised offenders exploiting straightforward opportunities that required little preparation or planning, then it is possible that the new methods of theft may have only a small impact on crime levels. 3) Other types of security, like CCTV or number-plate recognition technology, continue to make vehicle theft unattractive to more opportunistic offenders. 4) Word simply has not spread yet. This is the most worrying option - i.e. that once the knowledge of electronic compromise spreads from more seasoned offenders to more casual ones, thefts will start to rise.  Presently it is hard to know which of these explanations applies. Either way, but particularly in the case of the fourth, there is a case for manufacturers and others to be thinking carefully about a 'third wave' of vehicle security to ensure they stay ahead of the technological curve. ## 1: Background, Aims And Structure The idea that security might be an important driver of crime has come a long way in the last 40 years thanks to pioneering work by Home Office researchers among others. Indeed, the origins of what is now called 'the security hypothesis' can be traced to the growing recognition that 'opportunity' is a key driver of crime. Three papers tell the story of this process: 'Crime as Opportunity' (Mayhew *et al*. 1976), 'Opportunity Makes the Thief' (Felson and Clarke, 1998) and 'Opportunity Makes the Thief. Really? And so what?' (Clarke, 2012). As these papers outline, 'opportunity theory' began as an opposition movement. It challenged the perceived wisdom of the time, which placed criminals at the centre of the quest to reduce crime, rather than crime itself. The new adherents wondered whether crime could be reduced not just by making people less criminal but by changing the crime environment to make situations less conducive to crime. As Ronald Clarke put it: Is opportunity a cause of crime? The question was unavoidable because if opportunity is a cause, then reducing it could be expected to reduce crime without displacing it; if opportunity merely determined when and where crime occurred, but did not cause it, then the expected result of reducing opportunity would simply be to displace it. Source: Clarke, 2012. This inquiry began a body of work that drew together several different theoretical strands, in particular 'routine activity theory' (Felson, 1998), 'crime pattern theory' (Brantingham and Brantingham, 1991) and 'rational choice theory' (Clarke and Felson, 1993). The links between these approaches and opportunity is eloquently outlined in Felson and Clarke (1998) and interested readers are signposted there. But briefly, routine activity theory suggests that crime is influenced by what people do on a daily basis rather than simply being driven by ingrained criminological tendencies. Crime pattern theory looked at how crime was influenced by aspects of place and physical geography and not just individuals; and rational choice theory suggested that an individual's actions could be influenced by aspects of the environment that changed the costs and benefits of committing a crime. One of the most important aspects of this research agenda was that it focused on designing and testing on-the-ground interventions that could have immediate crime-reduction impacts. There are now hundreds of studies which suggest that altering the crime environment to lower opportunity can reduce crime. Though these studies vary considerably in the quality of their research design, most attempts to summarise the evidence base conclude that situational crime prevention, as it has become known, is effective. For example, a recent systematic review of interventions that aimed to reduce repeat victimisation found that crimes decreased by onesixth, on average, relative to controls (Grove *et al*., 2012). Burglary interventions produced the biggest crime reduction effects and of these, the authors found that "appropriately tailored and implemented situational crime prevention measures, like target hardening and neighbourhood watch, appear to be the most effective" (ibid.). A review of 102 situational interventions also found a high level of effectiveness and while displacement did occur in some cases, it never completely offset the main crime-reduction effect and in some cases a diffusion of benefits occurred (Guerette and Bowers, 2009). The concepts of displacement and diffusion are crucial when evaluating opportunity/security effects, so Appendix 1 explores these issues in more detail. A wide range of approaches came to be incorporated under the opportunity banner. For example, although improved security and target hardening was clearly part of the approach, Felson and Clarke (1998) also link opportunity theory to problem-oriented policing, defensible space architecture, and crime prevention through environmental design. For evidence of the effectiveness on these approaches see Weisburd, *et al*. (2008) and Cozens, *et al*. (2005). This in turn meant that opportunity approaches could be applied to crimes other than just theft. A review of evidence on violence in the night-time economy found that several elements of the physical and social environment predicted violence levels.7 And more recently the techniques of situational crime prevention have been applied to crimes as diverse as internet child pornography (Wortley and Smallbone, 2006), suicide bombings (Clarke and Newman, 2006), and organised crimes of various kinds (Tremblay *et al*., 2001; Bullock *et al*., 2010; Chiu *et al*., 2011). Overall, Clarke (2012) summarises the achievements of work on opportunity and security as follows. 1) It has supported the development of situational crime prevention, a highly effective means of crime control. 2) It has helped make credible the claim that the cumulative effect of situational prevention, whether or not implemented under that label, has brought about widespread drops in crime in Western countries. 3) It has helped to clarify that most criminological theories are theories of criminality not theories of crime - in other words, criminological theorizing has been preoccupied with the question of why certain individuals or groups become involved in crime and not the question of why crime occurs. This latter question cannot be answered simply by explaining why some people are more likely to be delinquent or criminal; it must also be explained by how situational factors facilitate or encourage the actual commission of criminal acts. 4) It has supported the development of an alternative set of crime (or opportunity) theories that will enable the growth of crime science. There is a considerable body of evidence to support the first, third and fourth of these points. The second point - that situational crime prevention may have been the main cause of the crime drop - provides the context for the rest of this paper. There have been a number of attempts to link opportunity and security to aggregate-level crime trends. As Felson and Clarke (1998) pointed out, "for a long time, the routine activity approach provided the best explanation for the rise in burglary in the United States and western Europe during the 1960s and 1970s." This was based on the increase in women's labour participation during that period, which left more houses empty during the day, and consumer/technological growth which meant more tempting (and light-weight) products available to steal. This was extended to violence too: "the most general explanation of crime rate trends is an indicator of the dispersion of activities away from family and household settings. As people spend more time among strangers and away from their own homes, their risk of personal and property victimization rises." Felson and Clarke, 1998 This hypothesis has been challenged from two directions. Firstly by Eisner (2008), who notes that many of the variables used to explain the rise in crime - more disposable income to spend on alcohol, urban growth and increased leisure time - were also rising from 1840 to 1950 when all available evidence suggests that homicide, violence and some types of property crime were declining across the developed world. More recently, the hypothesis has been somewhat wrong-footed by the crime drop, which has featured sometimes very sharp falls in the rates of violence, theft and homicide without an obvious curtailment in either the opportunity to socialise and consume alcohol or the number of stealable goods people own.8 And while some environmental changes seemed to have had surprisingly large effects - Clarke and Mayhew (1988) showed that making domestic gas less poisonous reduced UK suicides markedly without displacement to other methods - other changes had surprisingly little effect. For example, the Licensing Act 2003, which came into force in November 2005, abolished set licensing hours in England and Wales, effectively allowing bars and pubs to sell alcohol on a 24-hour basis if they obtained a licence. In the run-up to implementation, there was widespread concern that the legislation would lead to '24-hour drinking' and an increase in associated problems (Hough et al.,2008); a concern perfectly in line with opportunity theory. Yet an evaluation suggested that the change had essentially no effect on the overall volume of offences. All that happened was that a small amount of the violence that previously occurred earlier in the evening was displaced to the early hours (ibid.)9 Recently then, some opportunity proponents looking for effects on *aggregate-level* crime trends have moved away from routine activities to an extent, and focused instead on security. This has given rise to the 'security hypothesis', which has been set out in a series of recent papers (see in particular Farrell *et al*. 2014). Briefly, the argument is that increasing opportunities for offending (more cars on the road, more consumer goods to steal etc.) drove up crime but also generated a security backlash. That is, rising crime led to fear of crime which led to pressure from consumers and governments for security improvements (van Dijk and Vollaard, 2012). These arrived in the form of improved anti-theft devices on cars and houses, but also public-space measures like CCTV, private security guards and so on. In other words, opportunity drove crime up and security has driven it back down again. Evidence in support of the security hypothesis mainly comes in two forms: studies testing the effectiveness of security devices in a local context; and studies looking at the introduction and spread of improved security nationally to see whether it correlates with falling crime.10 The impact of electronic immobilisers has been central to the hypothesis because it has been studied in both contexts. Research has demonstrated that cars with electronic immobilisers are far less likely to be stolen than cars without immobilisers (van Ours and Vollaard, 2014; Farrell, Tseloni, and Tilley, 2011; Brown, 2013). More recently though, it has also been suggested that the introduction and spread of electronic immobilisers played an important part in causing the crime turning point in nations like England and Wales, the US, the Netherlands and Australia (Farrell *et al*., 2014). Research has also examined the effectiveness of other security measures. Farrell *et al*. (2011) suggest that vehicles with certain combinations of security (particularly electronic immobilisers and central locking) were up to 25 times less likely to be stolen than vehicles without security. Other studies have focused on how the benefits of improved housing security may have reduced burglary rates (Vollaard and van Ours, 2011; Tseloni *et al*., 2014). But to this point the evidence that improvements in housing security coincided with crime's turning point is more limited.11 This is important because - as Figure 3 demonstrates - the crime drop occurred in many types of crime more or less simultaneously. In England and Wales and Australia, for example, burglary and vehicle theft rose and fell with very similar trajectories. For the security hypothesis, this implies either that: - marked security improvements occurred on houses and cars at more or less the same time; and/or that - the benefits from a particular security device 'diffused' almost instantaneously from one crime type to the other. Farrell *et al*., (2014) have suggested two mechanisms by which the benefits of vehicle immobilisers may have spread to other types of acquisitive crime and violence. The first of these, the *debut crimes hypothesis,* is based on the evidence that vehicle theft is frequently one of the first offences that offenders commit, but that it can be followed by a long and diverse criminal career (Cooper *et al*., 2013). This means that deterring vehicle theft may stop a criminal career at the earliest stage, preventing other types of offences. The other possibility, the keystone *crime hypothesis*, is based on the evidence that stolen cars are used to commit, or are implicated in, other crimes like burglary or theft from vehicles. Many of the vehicle theft offenders interviewed by Light *et al*., (1993) said they stole cars to commit other crimes or to sell-on the contents (often the stereo) rather the vehicle itself. Thus, deterring theft of vehicles might prevent various other crime types. This paper seeks to add to the evidence base by attempting a systematic examination of trends in vehicle crime and the spread of vehicle security devices, particularly electronic immobilisers, in England and Wales and six other nations. ## Aims The main aims of this paper are as follows: i) to outline the main trends in vehicle security and vehicle crime in England and Wales, with briefer descriptions of trends in several other nations; ii) to model the spread of electronic immobilisers in England and Wales and assess their likely crime impact; iii) to test the modelling results against actual crime trends, both within England and Wales and internationally, to see whether the data suggest that electronic immobilisers reduced vehicle crime and if so when; iv) to analyse the effects of electronic immobilisers on other types of crime i.e. to look for signs of displacement and/or diffusion of benefits; v) to analyse the current vehicle crime landscape in England and Wales to see whether security still provides a deterrent. Throughout these sections, policy-relevant conclusions are also drawn out wherever possible. One of the most important of these relates to the overall extent to which security has driven down vehicle crime. It is difficult to know where to prioritise resources for the future if past trends have not been fully explained. In relation to the 'security hypothesis' and the fall in crime, it is therefore important to point out that this paper only covers the aspects of the hypothesis that relate to vehicle crime. The paper does not look at improvements in housing or other types of security (including some that could have applied directly to vehicle crime, like CCTV and number plate recognition technology), or at other aspects of situational crime prevention. It is perfectly possible that these made important and separate contributions to the crime decline and it is also possible that these interacted with the security devices examined here to enhance their effectiveness. In this report, the intention is simply to assess the role played by security improvements made to the vehicle itself, and in that sense this paper is only a partial examination of the security hypothesis. ## Structure The remainder of the report is divided into five sections and a number of appendices. The first section (Chapter 2) provides background information on long-term trends in vehicle security and vehicle crime in England and Wales. In Chapter 3, data from England and Wales are used to model the spread of immobilisers and the timing of their likely impact in relation to the crime turning point in the mid 1990s. Chapter 4 continues the examination of the likely timing of an electronic immobiliser impact by examining trends in vehicle thefts and methods of theft nationally and at police force area level within England and Wales. Police Recorded Crime (PRC) and Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) data are used. Chapter 5 employs a panel dataset with seven nations (England and Wales, Scotland, the US, Canada, Australia, the Netherlands and Sweden) to test for the magnitude and timing of any electronic immobiliser impact on numbers of vehicle thefts and whether the benefits diffused to other crime like burglary. Chapter 6 analyses current data on vehicle crime to ascertain whether the security improvements from the 1990s are still effective. This is followed by a brief conclusion, outlining the main findings. Six appendices provide further information on some aspect of the analysis or in some cases they explore some conclusions which do not directly relate to the relationship between vehicle security and vehicle crime in England and Wales, but which may be of interest. Details of the appendices are shown below: Appendix 1: Diffusion, displacement and switching Appendix 2: The effect of LoJack on car thefts in the US Appendix 3: Why does crime spike? Appendix 4: Two local-area case studies: Western Australia and Merseyside Appendix 5: Other factors that might have driven vehicle crime trends Appendix 6: Time series modelling ## Data For England and Wales, the main datasets used are the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW), Police Recorded Crime (PRC) and the Car Theft Index (CTI). For the analysis testing the effects of electronic immobilisers, PRC is mainly used for the central variable of interest: the number of motor vehicle thefts.12 The main reason is that police statistics are available for a large number of nations over several decades and are also available sub-nationally in some instances. This gives police recorded crime a huge advantage - in terms of sample size - over victimisation surveys, which are the other possible source of figures on vehicle thefts. Police statistics suffer from well-known limitations. They capture only the crimes that are reported to and recorded by the police and are therefore subject to any variation in reporting rates or in recording practice. Because of these limitations it is often preferable to use victimisation surveys when looking at trends in crime. However, vehicle theft (and to a lesser extent burglary, which is also used throughout this report) may represent an exception to this general rule. This is because vehicle theft tends to be one of the best reported and recorded offences and is therefore subject to far less variation due to changes in recording practice. The Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) suggests that reporting rates for vehicle theft are consistently above 90 per cent, most likely because victims are required to report the offence for insurance reasons. As a result, for England and Wales and the US (two nations with comprehensive victimisation survey data), there is a high degree of similarity, both in the level and trend of vehicle theft nationally, between police statistics and victimisation surveys, see Figure 4. Sources: Office of National Statistics (ONS) for England and Wales; FBI Uniform Crime Reports and the National Crime Victimisation Survey for the US. It would seem that, in the case of vehicle theft, police statistics are comparable in their reliability to victimisation surveys. Hence they are used throughout this report and details of how recording practice changes and crime-type changes were incorporated can be found in the Technical Appendix. Where possible, survey data are also employed to triangulate results. Descriptions of the method and other data used are provided within each section, with supplementary material in a Technical Appendix (Appendix 7). ## 2: Vehicle Security And Vehicle Theft In England And Wales This chapter looks at existing evidence on the history of vehicle security and vehicle theft. It also highlights some evidence gaps, which the subsequent analysis will try and fill. ## The First Vehicles And The First Wave Of Vehicle Security According to the National Motor Museum, the first motor vehicle appeared in the UK in the 1890s and official statistics show that by 1909 there were nearly 150,000 motor vehicles on the road. There was little in-built security on these early vehicles, with the cabs of the first cars being completely open (Webb, 1994). Registration plates were introduced in 1904, partly with the intention of preventing re-sale of stolen vehicles, but anecdotal evidence suggests this was hardly enforced initially (Webb and Tilley, 2005). Gradually security became more of a concern and door-locking systems and devices for protecting ignition switches were introduced and improved (Karmen, 1981). Despite the initially rudimentary security, statistics on vehicle theft through the first half of the 20th century suggest that theft levels were very low, see Figure 5. However, there is evidence of concern about vehicle theft registering with the Metropolitan Police Service as early as 1918 (Webb and Tilley, 2005), and the number of thefts were probably not as low as Figure 5 implies as they did not include thefts in which the vehicle was subsequently recovered. These were included from 1968 onwards, and, as the 1968 step-change in the red line in Figure 5 (top chart) demonstrates, this had a very large effect on the number of thefts recorded. Indeed, statistics show that from 1968, the majority of police recorded thefts were cases in which the vehicle was recovered. This can occur because the theft was motivated by joy-riding, by the need to travel, or by desire for the contents of the vehicle rather than the vehicle itself. Stolen vehicles that are not recovered are often sold abroad or stripped for parts (Light *et al*.,1993; Sallybanks and Brown, 1999). Figure 5 demonstrates the remarkable rise and fall in vehicle thefts that has occurred over the last half-century. Webb (1994) argues that the growth of both vehicles on the road, and the number of thefts, through the 1950s and 1960s led to demands for improved security. This culminated in the introduction of legislation in Europe and in the US in the 1960s and 1970s which for the first time required manufacturers to fit cars with steering column locks13 (ibid.) The impact of the legislation has been examined by Webb (1994). He shows that steering locks had a significant effect on vehicle theft rates in the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) where legislation made them mandatory on all vehicles in 1961. The number of thefts fell 20 per cent in three years after the legislation (ibid.). Thefts started to increase again after that, but at a rate roughly proportional to the growth in vehicles on the road, hence the rate of vehicle theft stabilised. However, there was some evidence of displacement into motorbike theft and the legislation had no apparent effect on theft *from* vehicles. Webb (1994) also suggested that there were positive impacts on vehicle thefts in the UK and the US though these were more muted and delayed because steering locks were only mandated on *new* vehicles rather than all vehicles, so they spread through the vehicle fleet gradually. In England and Wales, there was no immediate fall in the absolute volume of thefts, but by the late 1970s and throughout the 1980s vehicle theft in England and Wales rose in line with, rather than faster than, numbers of vehicles on the road. This first wave of improved security provides an introduction to three concepts that will be important to the rest of this paper. 1) Timing: It shows that the impact of security devices may be different depending on whether they are introduced on all vehicles or only on new vehicles. If they are installed on all vehicles simultaneously an effect can be expected immediately; if they are installed on new vehicles, the main effect on crime is likely to be delayed. 2) The security arms race: The German example suggests that devices may be successful initially but that success may wane over time as thieves gradually find ways to bypass security. 3) Displacement and diffusion: A key question for this report is whether the net impact of vehicle security on crimes other than vehicle theft is negative, positive or neutral. In the case of steering locks, it appears that in the Federal Republic of Germany there may have been some displacement to other crimes (though almost certainly not enough to offset the gains from better security in cars), while in the other nations the effect was broadly neutral. There was no evidence for diffusion of benefits, even to theft *from* vehicles. The vehicle crime rise of the 1980s and early 1990s and the security response During the 1980s, there were some important changes in the nature of vehicle crime in England and Wales. As Figure 5 shows, throughout the 1970s, both thefts of vehicles and thefts from vehicles had risen faster than the number of vehicles on the road. But in the 1980s, theft of vehicle rates stabilised, while the rate of thefts from vehicles accelerated. Webb (1994) lists three possible reasons for this divergence in trends. o Security: Security devices may have suppressed 'theft of' offences but had little effect on 'theft from' offences. This would apply if the effect of steering column locks were delayed until the 1980s when enough vehicles on the road had the devices. o Increased reporting: The Crime Survey showed that reporting rates for thefts from vehicles increased from 30 per cent in 1981 to 55 per cent in 1991 (though rates decreased again after that). By contrast, reporting rates for thefts of vehicles rose only from 90 per cent to 95 per cent. Reporting could therefore account for a large proportion of the 141 per cent rise in police-recorded thefts *from* vehicles over that period. But it does not explain all of it, because the Crime Survey - which is unaffected by shifts in reporting to the police - shows a 92 per cent rise in thefts from vehicles over the same period. o Better items to steal: Many researchers suggest that the increasing tendency for vehicles to contain desirable stereo systems and/or radios was an important cause in the rise of thefts from vehicles during the 1980s. In a survey of offenders in Manchester, 77 per cent said they would break into a car to steal the radio/cassette player (Smythe, 1990). While there is good evidence for all these factors playing a role, trends also suggest another shift in the nature of vehicle crime occurring at that time. Up to 1980, thefts of vehicles were dominated by incidents in which the vehicle was subsequently recovered, suggesting that joyriding was the primary motive.14 But from 1980, there is some evidence to suggest that vehicle crime became more about financial gain. The rise in thefts from vehicles is one example15, but another is that within thefts of vehicles, numbers of thefts in which the vehicle was subsequently recovered stabilised in the 1980s and only 'unrecovered' thefts increased (Webb and Laycock, 1992). Given that unrecovered theft normally implies a profit-motive (either the car is broken up for parts or exported) whereas recovered theft can imply joy-riding, these trends suggest that vehicle theft became more profit-motivated during the 1980s. At this time, one of the explanations offered was that improved security had ended (or at least seriously curtailed) the 'culture of car theft' and joy-riding that had persisted in the 1970s. It was felt that security had been part of the reason why vehicle crime seemed to have become more the domain of serious profit-driven offenders (who might be less deterred by security) rather than younger thieves seeking mainly excitement and a relief from boredom (Clarke and Harris, 1992; Webb and Laycock, 1992, see also Appendix 5). Certainly, there was much discussion of improved security during the 1980s, led by the Home Office. Southall and Ekblom (1985) showed the potential for vehicle security to be markedly increased with "minimal interference to the design of cars, at relatively little cost and in a manner which imposes no inconvenience to the motorist". This was part of a process aimed at cajoling industry to take security more seriously. The statistics show that vehicle security almost certainly did improve during the 1980s. While Ekblom (1985) found that only a handful of new and very expensive models of car had central locking in 1985, by 1991 the Crime Survey suggests that more than a third of vehicles did. It also suggests that around a quarter (23%) had mechanical immobilisers and about the same recovered but with property missing were recorded as 'thefts from vehicle' but after 1980 they were included in the theft of vehicle category. proportion (23%) had alarms, see Table 2. | | 1991 | 1995 | 1999 | 2001/02 | |------------------------|--------|--------|--------|-----------| | Car alarm | 23% | 38% | 49% | 54% | | Central locking | 35% | 50% | 66% | 75% | | Any immobiliser | 23% | 46% | 63% | 70% | | Electronic immobiliser | n/a | n/a | 45% | 55% | | Mechanical immobiliser | n/a | n/a | 40% | 42% | | Any audio security | n/a | n/a | 74% | 80% | | - removable stereo | n/a | n/a | 42% | 44% | | - security pin number | n/a | n/a | 55% | 63% | | | | | | | Note: The increases in car alarms, central locking and 'any immobiliser' are all significant between 1991 and 2001/02 as are the increases in electronic immobilisers and 'any audio security' from 1999 to 2001/02. Source: ONS, Crime Survey for England and Wales. In addition, people had become far less likely to leave their vehicle unsecured. Field tests in which researchers checked cars in car parks showed that around 22 per cent of vehicles were left unlocked in 1971, but this had fallen to four per cent by 1992 (Webb and Laycock, 1992). As already discussed, the proportion of recovered thefts fell from around 80 per cent to around 60 per cent (according to both police and Crime Survey data), suggesting that casual thieves were being deterred, a fact reinforced by trends in attempted thefts, see Figure 6. ## Figure 6: Thefts Of And From Vehicles And Attempts, England And Wales From 1981 To 2014/15 Source: ONS, Crime Survey for England and Wales. Figure 6 suggests that in 1981, only around one in nine theft attempts were unsuccessful. This proportion increased through the 1980s so that during the early 1990s around 40 per cent were unsuccessful, which suggests that thefts of and from vehicles became harder during the decade. However, despite these apparent improvements in security, vehicle crime of all kinds surged markedly in the early 1990s, whether measured by the Crime Survey or by police figures (see Figures 5 and 6) and the consensus was that the security improvements to that point remained insufficient to deter large-scale theft. In a 1992 paper, which contained interviews with car thieves from Greater Manchester, 20 per cent claimed they could enter a car and drive away in 30 seconds or less with a further 18 per cent saying the process would take between 30 and 60 seconds (Webb and Laycock, 1992). A year earlier, WHICH? magazine published similar estimates showing the inadequacy of car security (WHICH?, 1991). So, although central locking was later suggested to be an effective security measure, particularly in conjunction with an electronic immobiliser (Farrell *et al*., 2011), it was either not widespread enough or not effective enough to prevent the rapid rise in vehicle crime of the early 1990s (or both). Table 2 shows that around a third of vehicles had central locking in 1991 and about 50 per cent did in 1995, a decade after Ekblom noted the presence of the first centrally locked cars.16 It was not just internal car security that was coming under threat. Theft from vehicles also surged to new levels in the early 1990s, following a slight lull in thefts around 1987/88.17 It is hard to piece together the types of items stolen during this crime surge and during the later decline, because data are imperfect. But CSEW trends are available from 1991, see Figure 7, and some additional conclusions from earlier years can also be drawn (notably that external parts were probably the most stolen items in the late 1980s as well as in the late 1990s - see the Technical Appendix). Note: As multiple types of items can be stolen in an incident of theft, the combined total of items in the chart above will exceed the number of incidents of thefts from motor vehicles. Despite the inconsistencies in the data, the analysis of items stolen in thefts from vehicles suggests four tentative conclusions.  Though other evidence suggests stereo thefts increased through the 1980s (Smythe, 1990), the trends in Figure 7 show that stereo thefts peaked in 1991 at the latest and declined thereafter.  Thefts of external vehicle parts made up a sizable component of all thefts from vehicles, featuring in between a quarter and two-thirds of thefts depending on the year. Thefts of external parts seem to have surged in 1987 (see Technical Appendix) and to a lesser extent in 1997.  For the final years of the rise in thefts from vehicles (1991 to 1993), thefts of other items from inside the car - i.e. not stereos or exterior fittings - also drove up theft levels.  From the crime peak to 2014 thefts of virtually all types of items have fallen.18 The fall in stereo thefts has been particularly sharp, the decline in thefts of external parts and valuables from inside the car, slightly less so. A number of reasons have been offered for the high levels of thefts of external car parts. Sallybanks and Thomas (2000) suggest three possibilities: i) that the cost of replacing these parts fed a stolen goods market; ii) that stolen number plates were used to alter a vehicle's identity; iii) youth 'crazes' for wearing car badges. Other authors have also cited this final point (see Clarke and Webb, 1999), and the apparently high levels of external parts theft at the end of the 1980s would fit with available evidence on the youth fashion 'craze' which was sparked in England and Wales by members of US rap-rock group 'the Beastie Boys' wearing Volkswagen car badges in their music videos (ibid.). Newspaper articles from 1987, when songs by the Beastie Boys were high in the charts and the band toured the UK, suggest that badges were very easy to remove and that thefts were rife in both the US and the UK at that time. Reports suggest that Volkswagen dealerships gave out hundreds of free replacements each day to replace stolen badges (Bromley, 2012).19 ## The Car Theft Index And The Arrival Of Electronic Immobilisers As a result of these rising vehicle crime levels, and given the growing influence of situational crime prevention in general, there was increased pressure applied by the Home Office for vehicle manufacturers to further boost security levels. This culminated in the publication of the first Car Theft Index in 1992 (Houghton, 1992). It graded types of cars by their theft rates with the aim of informing consumers about the vehicles most targeted and hence encouraging manufacturers to beef up security. Several types of security were promoted, including alarms, window etching and central locking. But perhaps the most promising was the electronic immobiliser, which aimed to prevent thieves 'hot-wiring' vehicles once entry was gained. Electronic immobilisers were devices fitted to vehicles to prevent the starting of the engine without the correct key. They seemed to have started appearing on special high-end models of car in the UK, the US and Australia during the late 1980s and early 1990s. Brown (2013) speaks of certain 'anti-theft devices' that resembled electronic immobilisers appearing on a few top-of-the-range cars in the US from around 1987. Geason and Wilson (1990) say that "an electronically-operated deadlock system" was fitted on the top-line Commodore (Australia's top-selling brand of car in the early 1980s) in 1989 and also mention special security concept cars from the UK. Research suggested that these new cars with electronic immobilisers had markedly lower theft rates (Geason and Wilson, 1990; Hazelbaker, 1997).20 Even so, spread of the devices seems to have been quite gradual initially. Modelling by Farrell et al. (2014) using the CSEW suggests that electronic immobilisers were a negligible presence before 1993 in England and Wales, relative to total cars on the road. In interviews with UK car thieves carried out in 1992, the devices were not mentioned once and though there was some evidence of older vehicles being easier to steal than newer ones, car security in general was largely regarded as risible - probably because at that point there were still so many relatively unprotected vehicles on the road (Light *et al*., 1993). The spread of electronic immobilisers was given fresh impetus in 1995 by European Union Directive 74/61/EEC, which made installation of electronic immobilisers on all new passenger cars sold in the EU mandatory from October 1998 (Farrell *et al*., 2014). The result was that many more manufacturers began fitting electronic immobilisers on new models in anticipation of the law change. A survey of anti-theft measures by the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (Dixon, 1996) found that electronic immobilisers were standard equipment on 95 per cent of new UK manufactured models and 74 per cent of imported models in 1996. The survey examined 879 models accounting for over 80 per cent of new registrations. Brown and Thomas (2003) suggest this may over-estimate the speed of the spread of electronic immobilisers slightly. They say that although by 1994 immobilisers were widely fitted to most new mid- to topof-the-range cars, (medium/large/luxury saloons, sports cars, 4x4s and people carriers), minis/superminis and small saloons were not widely fitted with electronic immobilisers until around 1997. These types of car made up just over 60 per cent of the vehicle fleet according to 1996 Car Theft Index data. Despite these difficulties in determining the exact speed of spread, when the law came into effect in 1998, it can be taken for granted that virtually all new vehicles in England and Wales (and indeed throughout Europe) had electronic immobilisers. But it would take some time for the majority of *total* vehicles on the road to be protected. Data from the Crime Survey suggest that about 45 per cent of vehicles remained without electronic immobilisers by 2001/02, though overall vehicle security had clearly improved through the 1990s, see Table 2. By the late 1990s, crime had begun to fall. Police recorded thefts from vehicles declined from 1992 and thefts of vehicles started falling from 1993. Total crime, as measured by the CSEW dropped from 1995. This sets up the possibility that the second-wave security devices (those in Table 2) were wholly or partly responsible for the crime turn-around. ## Evidence Relating To The Effectiveness Of Specific Security Devices As Farrell *et al*. (2011) have noted, the different types of security in Table 2 aim to prevent different types of vehicle crime. Farrell *et al*. (2011) rated security devices on their own and in combination with other devices. The metric they developed was the 'security protection factor' (SPF), which compared theft rates of vehicles with different combinations of security against theft rates for vehicles with no security, using CSEW data from 2001 to 2007. An SPF of 3, for example, would imply that the vehicle with that level of security had a theft rate three times lower than a vehicle with no security. This was done for both theft of and theft from vehicles. Though their results have some important caveats21, the authors generally found that the more devices a vehicle had the better it was protected with the most effective combinations of security having theft rates up to 25 times lower than vehicles with no security. In addition though, they also found that, with the exception of car alarms, most devices offered better protection against theft of the vehicle than against theft from the vehicle. The best combinations of security resulted in 'theft from vehicle' rates that were around six and half times better than no security, rather than 25 times lower for 'theft of vehicles'. In other words, theft from vehicles was found to be harder to prevent than theft of vehicles. As Southall and Ekblom (1985) point out in their paper aimed at designing perfect vehicle security, this is likely to be because vehicle immobilisation has a single aim: preventing the thief from starting the car without the keys. Entry to the vehicle, which is all that is needed for theft from vehicle, can be achieved through the doors, the windows, the boot or the bonnet, requiring multiple types of effective security (ibid.) Thefts of external items do not even require entry to the vehicle, making them even harder to prevent. For that reason it is important to examine the effectiveness and spread of vehicle devices in relation to the thefts in which they aimed to prevent. Thefts of external parts: Security measures aimed at reducing these thefts include alarms and target hardening of external parts. Available evidence suggests car alarms first started appearing in the mid 1980s but spread only very gradually, such that around half the vehicle fleet remained without them in 1999 (Table 2). In their CSEW analysis, Farrell *et al*. (2011) found that, on their own, alarms had only a very marginal effect on reducing theft of vehicle rates (SPF = 1.2) but were slightly more effective against thefts from vehicles (SPF = 1.5). There is also some evidence that target hardening of external parts occurred - for example the use of locking wheel nuts may have reduced thefts of wheels (Sallybanks and Thomas, 2000) and Volkswagen did redesign their badges to try and reduce thefts - but current news articles suggest that a motivated thief can still steal a very large number of car badges in a short space of time22, which perhaps suggests that the downward trend in external parts thefts was more to do with changing fashions and the end of the craze for wearing badges. ## Thefts From Inside The Vehicles For thefts of items from inside the car, alarms, audio security and central locking may all have been relevant. Table 2 suggests that audio security was present on about three-quarters of all vehicles by 1999, but limited data are available before that. As such, it is hard to determine whether improved security was the main factor in the decline of stereo thefts throughout the 1990s and 2000s. Evidence on their effectiveness is somewhat mixed. Braga and Clarke (1994) report statistical data from Germany and Australia suggesting that security-coded radios have reduced theft and Kock *et al*. (1996) report that thieves avoided these radios. On the other hand, there are some reports that thieves defeated coding with little difficulty (Sutton, 1998). More data are available on central locking, which was first seen in vehicles in the mid 1980s and was present on about half of all vehicles in 1995. Though no studies could be located that test the effect of central locking using experimental or quasi-experimental methods, the results from Farrell *et al*. (2011) suggest that on its own central locking halves the rates of thefts from vehicles (SPF = 2.0). This suggests that the spread of central locking might have played an important role in reducing thefts from inside the vehicle. Yet evidence demonstrates that the number of vehicles with central locking must have been increasing through both the sharp (52%) rise in thefts from vehicles from 1989 to 1992 (which Figure 7 shows was mainly an increase in items stolen from *inside* the vehicle) and during the fall thereafter. Therefore, if central locking was the deciding factor, a sharp 'tipping point' must have occurred.23 Though this is certainly a possibility, a survey of offenders carried out in 1992, on the eve of the crime turning point, suggested that alarms were more of a deterrent than locking at that time (Light et al., 1993).24 In fact the report concluded that: "Vehicle security is seen as lamentably weak, offenders having little or no trouble in overcoming door and ignition locks." This does not suggest that the growing penetration of cars with central locking was about to reverse the trend in vehicle theft. And though alarms may have been a greater deterrent, their spread was even more gradual than central locking, according to Table 2. Overall then, the current evidence suggests that better security almost certainly put some downward pressure on trends in thefts from vehicles and that this would have been likely to accelerate as more vehicles became protected by devices like central locking and car alarms. However, the fact that certain types of thefts are much harder to prevent with these devices (notably thefts of car badges) and that generally their spread through the vehicle fleet was gradual, it seems likely that other factors were also involved in the very sharp crime turning point. ## Thefts Of Vehicles Arguably, all the devices in Table 2 might have had a crime-reduction effect on theft of vehicles. Of those devices, however, only mechanical and electronic immobilisers might be expected to only have an effect on theft of vehicles as they prevent the vehicle being driven away and do not offer any deterrent against entering the vehicle or external-part theft. Only partial data are available on the introduction and spread of mechanical immobilisers, which were consumerpurchased products fitted usually to the steering wheel and aimed to prevent the vehicle being driven away. Manufacturers of these items first appeared in the mid 1980s25 and the CSEW suggests that around one in four households owned one by 1991. The survey did not explicitly separate electronic and mechanical immobilisers until1999, but given that electronic immobilisers would have been rare until 1992 it seems likely that most of the 23 per cent of households in 1991, who said they had an immobiliser (Table 2), had a mechanical immobiliser or 'crook lock', as they were better known. During the 1990s penetration of mechanical immobilisers reached around 40 per cent and then stalled. In all likelihood this was because more effective electronic immobilisers were beginning to be installed in a larger and larger number of vehicles. Testing by experts found that many mechanical immobilisers could be overcome quite quickly.26 But Farrell *et al*. (2011) found that a mechanical immobiliser on its own had an SPF of 2.8 for theft of vehicles compared with an SPF of 4.0 for electronic immobilisers, suggesting that many thieves operating in the 1990s were not particularly expert. In combination with central locking the SPF for mechanical immobilisers increased to 5.4 (compared with 11.8 for electronic immobilisers, though as with other devices, the SPF figures were far lower for theft *from* vehicle). Like car alarms and central locking then, the spread of mechanical immobilisers began during the late 1980s. In the absence of other factors, it is not clear therefore why thefts would have increased so markedly during the early 1990s when numbers of cars on the road with the devices would have been rising from a negligible to a noticeable level. The only device which was *first* introduced to the mass-market in line with the crime turn-around was the electronic immobiliser. And as the SPF results show, it is also the device with the most evidence of effectiveness. In fact, the effectiveness of electronic immobilisers has also been tested in a number of other ways including via more robust, quasi-experimental methods and in all cases it has been found to reduce 'theft of vehicle' rates significantly (see Brown, 2013 for a review). As such, the next two sections focus on the evidence relating to electric immobilisers. The next chapter attempts to model their spread through the vehicle fleet in England and Wales and Chapter 4 looks in more detail at trends in vehicle theft and methods of theft. The existing evidence on vehicle security and vehicle theft demonstrates that both were minor concerns generally through the first half of the 20th century. Rising crime of the 1960s changed this and governments mandated the installation of steering column locks. This had an immediate impact in the Federal Republic of Germany where the devices were mandated on all vehicles simultaneously, and possibly a more muted and delayed impact in England and Wales, and the US, where they were only mandated on new vehicles, meaning that they took much longer to spread through the vehicle fleet. Despite having some success, steering column locks failed to halt the overall rise in vehicle crime which continued through the 1980s and accelerated in the early 1990s in England and Wales. During this period there is some evidence that a greater proportion of thefts were profit motivated and fewer were motivated by joy-riding. Thefts *from* vehicles surged particularly high. This was probably driven by a trend for stealing external parts like vehicle badges and increasing thefts of vehicle stereos up to 1991. Rising crime of the 1980s prompted a 'second wave' of security devices including car alarms, mechanical immobilisers and central locking. There is some evidence of success for these devices although the rapid acceleration in crime in the early 1990s probably occurred after they had started spreading through the vehicle fleet. There is far stronger evidence for the success of electronic immobilisers which would have begun appearing more or less in line with the point in 1992/93 when vehicle crime of all kinds began to fall sharply. Like other 'second-wave' devices, electronic immobilisers were introduced on new vehicles only - a process that was mandated across the European Union in 1998. The legislation speeded up the spread of electronic immobilisers relative to other second-wave security devices (which spread very gradually) but even so, it probably took a number of years before most vehicles were protected. This review of existing evidence has a number of evidential gaps. More evidence is required on the methods and types of theft that drove the early 1990s' rise in vehicle crime given that most measures suggest security was improving at that time. Were car alarms and central locking only successful in conjunction with electronic immobilisers or was their initial effectiveness overwhelmed by other upward pressures? The evidence is clear that electronic immobilisers were effective during the crime decline, but it is not clear on exactly *when* they would have affected national-level crime trends and how big that effect might have been. The rest of this report aims to examine these questions and draw out policy conclusions. ## 3: Modelling The Spread Of Electronic Immobilisers And The Timing Of Their Likely Impact On Vehicle Thefts This chapter examines the spread of electronic immobilisers in more detail. Though much of the research is not of the highest quality (few studies have control groups for example), the evidence that electronic immobilisers are effective is consistent - see Brown (2013) for a review. Most studies find that the devices have a large crime-reducing effect on theft rates, relative to vehicles without electronic immobilisers. This suggests that transforming the vehicle fleet from one without electronic immobilisers to one in which all vehicles have the devices would be likely to markedly reduce numbers of thefts. But the *timing* of that impact has been less well explored. Given that electronic immobilisers were not introduced on all vehicles at the same time, it is hard to know exactly when thefts would have begun falling. Would the impact begin when they were first introduced on new vehicles? Or would it only become visible later, when a sufficient portion of the fleet became protected and displacement to older, unprotected vehicles was more difficult? Answering this question is the main aim of this section. There are at least three reasons why the main impact of electronic immobilisers might be delayed. - The vehicle fleet is mostly comprised of older vehicles: New vehicles make up a minority of vehicles on the road. Office for National Statistics data consistently show that for the period 1994–2013 only about eight per cent of cars on the road in Great Britain (England, Wales and Scotland) were less than a year old, and the average vehicle was around seven years old, see Figure 8. So because electronic immobilisers were first introduced on new vehicles only, their spread through the fleet would have been gradual. Laycock (2004) estimated that it would take around a decade for the majority of vehicles on the road to be protected. - Thieves prefer to steal older vehicles: Studies show that, both before and after the introduction of electronic immobilisers, theft rates were higher for older vehicles, even taking into account their greater numbers on the road. In the 1992 Car Theft Index, the highest rate of theft occurred in vehicles registered in 1985 (Houghton, 1992). Sallybanks and Brown (1999) list five reasons: improved security on recent models; older vehicles having higher demand for used parts; knowledge of how to steal older vehicles being more widely disseminated among car thieves; older vehicles being more common in areas in which car thieves operate; and older vehicles being more susceptible to insurance fraud. - Displacement: If the introduction of electronic immobilisers on new vehicles caused thieves to switch (to an even greater degree) to older vehicles, then the initial benefits of the devices could be all or partially offset. Evidence of such displacement has been identified by Brown and Thomas (2003) and van Ours and Vollaard (2014), and the issue is explored further below. The offsetting effect of displacement might be large at first, given the considerable pool of vehicles without electronic immobilisers, but could be expected to reduce over time as that pool shrank. For these reasons, most researchers agree that it would probably have taken a number of years from the point at which electronic immobilisers were first fitted on new vehicles until they had a material impact on vehicle theft trends. For example, Houghton (1992) notes that: ".... improvements in car security introduced into new vehicles by manufacturers will take many years to impact upon the overall level of car crime - even if they are effective and all manufacturers adopt them." Cherbonneau and Copes (2006) say: "The overall benefits of the recent legislation mandating electronic immobilizers to newer cars manufactured after 1997 may only exist after a sufficiently large proportion of cars are protected by immobilizers; meanwhile target displacement to unprotected vehicles is likely to occur."27 ## The Model To try and model the exact timing of impact, three main data sources were used. Car Theft Index (CTI) data: The CTI was first produced in 1992 and then ran annually from 1997 to 2006, after which it was discontinued. The series was based on car theft data from the Police National Computer and on information provided by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency which was used to calculate numbers of cars on the road. By combining those two sources of information, the Index provided the most stolen types of cars in Great Britain relative to their presence in the vehicle fleet. The 1992 Index employed a different methodology from the subsequent publications, each of which contained data from the previous year. For example, the Index titled '2006 Car Theft Index' used data on thefts and cars on the road from 2005. So in terms of data, there is a consistent series available from 1996 to 2005. It relates to cars only, however; motorbikes and commercial vehicles are excluded. Office for National Statistics (ONS) vehicle data: ONS produce a series for total vehicles on the road in Great Britain and a series for total *cars* in Great Britain broken down by age of the car. ## Police Recorded Crime Data For Vehicle Thefts: Total Motor Vehicle Thefts Data Were Sourced From ONS for England and Wales and from the Scottish Government for Scotland. The first task was to try and estimate the proportion of *new* vehicles that would have had electronic immobilisers, annually. To help with this, the total number of thefts recorded in each year of the CTI was broken down by age of the stolen vehicle. This is shown for a series of years in Figure 9. ## Manufactured Source: Car Theft Index. Methodological notes: The y-axis shows thefts rate computed by dividing the number of car thefts by the number of cars on represents the number of thefts, in 1996, of cars made in 1985 divided by the total number of cars on the road in 1996 that were made in 1985. The average lines on these graphs are simply the total number of thefts for each year divided by the total number The first chart, for thefts in 1996, demonstrates thieves' preference for older vehicles, regardless of immobilisers. Cars registered in 1985 have the highest theft rates that year, even though cars made later, in 1988 for example, would not have had electronic immobilisers either. In part, this may demonstrate the initial effectiveness of devices like central locking, car alarms and mechanical immobilisers, which would have started appearing on vehicles from around 1985 onwards. Moving forwards a year, the 1997 chart shows a very similar distribution of thefts, but the rates have decreased regardless of the age of the vehicle. Between 1996 and 1997, the Car Theft Index data show that theft rates on cars made in the 1990s (so ones that may have had electronic immobilisers) fell by about 17 per cent, while rates of cars made in the 1980s or before (which would have been very unlikely to have electronic immobilisers) fell an almost identical 16 per cent.28 Thereafter though, the distribution of thefts changes considerably. Theft rates stay low on vehicles made in 'post-immobiliser' years (manifested by a lengthening left-hand tail of the distribution) but rise on older models made in 'pre-immobiliser' years, probably as a result of partial displacement. Cars registered in 1990, for example, were stolen at a rate of about 0.02 in 1997 and at more than 0.03 in 2003 despite an overall decline in theft rates between those dates. Whilst this clearly suggests the effectiveness of security introduced on cars made after 1992, it also suggests that there was still a large pool of cars made in 1990 that were more easily targeted. In other words, the earlier security devices - like car alarms, central locking and mechanical immobilisers - were either not as effective as electronic immobilisers or they were not installed in enough vehicles in the early 1990s to deter thieves. By 2005, all cars up to ten years old have below-average rates of theft, a clear sign that something has changed thieves' behaviour, given that ten-year-old cars were among the most popular at the beginning of the series. Taking the charts collectively, the transition to lower theft rates seems to occur in cars made between 1992 and 1996, with all cars made after that year having low theft rates in all charts and cars made before 1992 having low theft rates to begin with but high rates by the end of the series. This transition period is largely consistent with the qualitative evidence relating to the spread of electronic immobilisers, which probably first appeared on the mass market around 1992 and were installed on the vast majority of new vehicles by 1997 (Dixon, 1996; Brown and Thomas, 2003). In other words, whether or not electronic immobilisers would have achieved this reduction of theft rates on their own or were helped by the combination of additional security devices like car alarms and central locking, the evidence suggests that it was only once electronic immobilisers first appeared in mass-produced vehicles that the long-term pattern of vehicle theft really changed. Other security devices would have been present on cars made between 1986 and 1991, but thieves still found ways to steal these in large numbers eventually. For cars made after 1992, however, and certainly for those made after 1996, theft rates *remained* low showing that thieves were more permanently deterred. For the purpose of modelling impact, it was therefore assumed that the numbers of vehicles on the road with electronic immobilisers was negligible before 1992, but that it increased linearly from that year until 1996 and that by 1997 all new vehicles were equipped with the devices, a year earlier than the law enforced this. Under these assumptions, it is possible to split the figures for total cars on the road between those with electronic immobilisers and those without, for each year. The method for this is shown graphically in Figure 10 for a sample year (2000) with the full results in Table 3. concluded from these results that: "The significant reduction in vehicle thefts observed in Australia was owing to factors other than just the introduction of electronic immobilisers." Source: ONS vehicle statistics. Note: The percentages shown are the percentage of vehicles registered in those years that are assumed to have electronic immobilisers. So the size of the blue bar indicates the number of vehicles registered in each year (which clearly does not increases in a linear fashion) whereas the percentages indicate the proportion of new vehicles for that year that are assumed to have electronic immobilisers, and these percentages do increase linearly. i.e. the 1991 value is 0 per cent and the 1997 value is 100 per cent. and without electronic immobilisers % Year Total vehicles on the road (ONS) Estimated number of vehicles with electronic immobilisers % Estimated number without electronic immobilisers 1991 24,511,000 - 0% 24,511,000 100% 1992 24,577,000 653,999 3% 23,923,001 97% 1993 24,826,000 1,321,250 5% 23,504,750 95% 1994 25,231,000 2,014,207 8% 23,216,793 92% 1995 25,369,000 3,400,416 13% 21,968,584 87% 1996 26,301,921 5,219,513 20% 21,082,408 80% 1997 26,973,790 7,552,522 28% 19,421,268 72% 1998 27,538,412 10,009,459 36% 17,528,953 64% 1999 28,367,560 12,588,515 44% 15,779,045 56% 2000 28,897,581 15,145,392 52% 13,752,189 48% 2001 29,747,130 17,925,963 60% 11,821,167 40% 2002 30,556,673 20,739,325 68% 9,817,348 32% 2003 31,207,359 23,293,103 75% 7,914,256 25% 2004 32,258,856 25,943,061 80% 6,315,795 20% 2005 32,897,383 28,025,893 85% 4,871,490 15% 2006 33,070,484 29,461,370 89% 3,609,114 11% 2007 33,650,981 30,921,740 92% 2,729,241 8% 2008 33,883,382 31,849,531 94% 2,033,851 6% 2009 33,958,429 32,426,713 95% 1,531,716 5% 2010 34,120,148 32,934,665 97% 1,185,483 3% 2011 34,228,594 33,290,013 97% 938,581 3% 2012 34,522,322 33,750,973 98% 771,349 2% 2013 35,034,487 34,383,277 98% 651,210 2% Source: ONS, Car Theft Index. This method does not take into account the possibility that older cars may have been retrofitted with electronic immobilisers once their effectiveness became clear. If this was done to any significant degree the results could change. However, no data could be located to estimate retrofits and van Ours and Vollaard (2014) examined retrofitting in the Netherlands and concluded that its rate of application was almost certainly "low".29 Furthermore, the modelled estimates are comparable with the series from the CSEW, which asked respondents from the 1999 survey onwards whether their main vehicle had an electronic immobiliser. Following Farrell *et al*., (2014) this trend has been extrapolated back using a polynomial trend-line30 and is shown alongside the modelled estimates from the Car Theft Index in Figure 11. Though there are differences, particularly in the more recent period, generally the two methods tell a similar story for the initial spread of electronic immobilisers. Both suggest that up to around 1995 probably fewer than ten per cent of vehicles had electronic immobilisers, and that it took until around 2000 for more than half of vehicles to be protected.31 Sources: Car Theft Index; CSEW; Farrell *et al*., 2014. The next aim of the modelling was to understand how this gradual spread of electronic immobilisers would influence the timing of the impact on theft trends. To do this, the number of vehicles on the road was used as a baseline. It was assumed that - in the absence of changes to security levels and other factors - the number of vehicle thefts would track the number of vehicles on the road. As Figure 5 showed, this was more or less true through the 1970s and 1980s. As the number of cars increased, the number of thefts rose by about the same proportion. So, to model the *counterfactual,* the estimated theft trend in the absence of electronic immobilisers, it was assumed that the *rate* of theft (per vehicle on the road) would have remained constant. In 1991 there were 626,181 vehicle thefts in Great Britain32 and 245,110,000 vehicles on the road (ONS) giving a theft rate per vehicle of 0.026; or 26 per 1,000 vehicles. Our predicted counterfactual trend assumes this rate stays constant as the number of cars on the road increases. This is shown in Figure 12. Sources: ONS, PRC, Scottish Government. The effect of electronic immobilisers was modelled by assuming that vehicles without them continued to be stolen at the same rate while vehicles with electronic immobilisers were stolen at a reduced rate. To calculate the rate of theft for vehicles *without* electronic immobilisers the overall theft rate from 1991 was used but this was adjusted for age of vehicle using the earliest year for which the age breakdown of car thefts was available (1996), see Figure 13.33 Source: Car Theft Index 1997. The total number of thefts in 1991 was distributed according to the distribution shown in Figure 13, and a rate for each age of vehicle was calculated. In other words, in the absence of electronic immobilisers, it was assumed that vehicles almost a decade old would continue to be stolen at a higher rate than newer vehicles. To model the reduction in rate caused by electronic immobilisers, scenario analysis was used. Rates of theft on vehicles *with* electronic immobilisers were reduced by a fixed proportion (relative to the counterfactual). These proportions were 20 per cent, 40 per cent, 60 per cent and 80 per cent (and are effectively net of displacement - see below), so the aim was to illustrate the resulting trends at different levels of immobiliser effectiveness. The results are shown in Figure 14.34 ## Figure 14: Modelled Trends In Vehicle Thefts At Different Levels Of Assumed Electronicimmobiliser Effectiveness There are several points to make about Figure 14. Firstly, it is important to recognise that the measure of effectiveness is a 'net effect' that takes account of any hypothetical displacement. So "40 per cent effectiveness" could mean that rates of theft fell 40 per cent in vehicles with electronic immobilisers and rates of theft in older, unprotected cars were unaffected. Or it could mean that theft rates on new cars fell 60 per cent, but that a third of this effect was offset by displacement to older vehicles. Evidence suggests the latter is more likely. Brown and Thomas (2003) offer empirical evidence of displacement to older vehicles in England and Wales and van Ours and Vollaard (2014) actually quantify the effect using data from the Netherlands for 1995 to 2008. They find that on average through the period, theft rates on cars with immobilisers were reduced by 72 per cent but that "displacement to older, less-protected cars was substantial during the first 10 years after the regulatory change." They calculated that this displacement offset the theft reduction by more than a third, meaning the net effect was a reduction in the theft rate of 46 per cent for protected cars relative to non-protected cars. Figure 14 also shows that the bigger the net effect of immobilisers, the larger the reductions in thefts through the period. However, even an 80 per cent net effect does not produce a reduction in thefts as great as the reduction that actually occurred. Furthermore, irrespective of the level of effectiveness, the modelled theft trends are much flatter through the early years of the series, when numbers of vehicles with electronic immobilisers were relatively small. Levels of modelled thefts do not decrease by more than five per cent (relative to their level at the beginning of the series) until 1999 in the 80 per cent effectiveness scenario, 2000 in the 60 per cent scenario and 2003 in the 40 per cent scenario. Thereafter, however, thefts fall quickly. These results suggest that electronic immobilisers may have made an important contribution to the fall in vehicle thefts but that most of the impact would have been felt in the 2000s rather than around the crime turning point. One way to estimate the proportion of thefts prevented by electronic immobilisers is to use the 46 per cent net effectiveness figure generated by van Ours and Vollaard (2014) using data from the Netherlands and apply it to the model. The difference between estimated thefts prevented by electronic immobilisers and the actual reductions in thefts recorded can then be calculated. Using this method, it was estimated that around 43 per cent of the drop in vehicle thefts from 1992 to 2013 was due to electronic immobilisers. This amounts to around four million fewer offences over the 20-year period. Caution is required. Models are not intended to capture all real-world effects; they are intended to deliver simplified, but helpful conclusions. Levels of effectiveness might have been higher or lower in England and Wales than they were in the Netherlands. And the modelling strips out other factors that might have influenced vehicle thefts. It is possible that electronic immobilisers could have caused larger reductions during the early years of the series if benefits from the small proportion of protected vehicles diffused to the rest of the fleet. For example, if thieves were unable to tell which vehicles were protected, even a small percentage of new cars with electronic immobilisers might act as a significant deterrent. Ayres and Levitt (1997) find effects of this kind when examining another vehicle security device, LoJack, see Appendix 2. But van Ours and Vollaard (2014) tested for this kind of 'diffusion of benefit' in relation to electronic immobilisers in the Netherlands and found no effect. The modelling also does not take into account other types of vehicle security improvements (or interaction effects between electronic immobilisers and other security devices) or indeed other factors that might drive theft trends more generally, like changes in police activity, sentencing, drug use and so on. Even so, the model findings still suggest that if van Ours and Vollaard's estimate of electronic immobiliser effectiveness is translatable from the Netherlands to England and Wales, then electronic immobilisers probably had a marked crime-reduction effect. But it also suggests that - *on their own –* the devices were probably not the catalyst for the initial turning point in vehicle theft. This section outlined the methodology and results for modelling the spread of immobilisers and their impact on car theft. The main conclusions are: - Electronic immobilisers may have first appeared on new vehicles in Great Britain during the late 1980s but they were probably a negligible presence in the fleet as a whole before 1992. In 1993, when recorded vehicle crime peaked, both CSEW and CTI data suggest that only around one in 20 vehicles would have been likely to have an electronic immobiliser and thieves generally stole older vehicles anyway. Thereafter they probably increased gradually such that around half of all vehicles were likely to be protected by 2000. - Analysis of Car Theft Index data shows that up to 1997 theft rates fell sharply on all cars, regardless of their age and security level. But after that point there is clear evidence of a change in theft patterns driven by improved security. Theft rates on new vehicles fell and remained low, while theft rates on much older vehicles increased. The timing of this transition matches the introduction of electronic immobilisers though the displacement to older vehicles makes it unclear when national-level theft trends would have been most affected. - Exploratory scenario modelling suggests that a major crime-reduction impact would have been unlikely before a majority of cars were protected by electronic immobilisers in the 2000s, but that after that point, drops in vehicle thefts due to electronic immobilisers might have been substantial, explaining around 43 per cent of the drop in total vehicle thefts through to 2013. ## Methods In Great Britain Aims, Data And Methods This chapter presents analysis of vehicle theft data in Great Britain (England and Wales and Scotland) in an attempt to examine some of the evidential gaps noted in Chapter 2. It also seeks to test the modelling from Chapter 3, which tentatively suggested that electronic immobilisers spread quite gradually through the vehicle fleet in Great Britain and may not have had a marked effect on numbers of thefts until around half the fleet was protected in 2000. Two data sources were used: Police Recorded Crime (PRC) and the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW). The former has data on numbers of thefts nationally and sub-nationally for 42 police force areas in England and Wales35. CSEW data are only available at national level but also include information on method and type of theft.36 The analysis focused on specific questions relating to the following. The crime peak: The previous section looked at the crime turning point in relation to trends in electronic-immobiliser spread and suggested that the devices could not have caused the crime turning point without marked and rapid diffusion of benefits. In this section the analysis is extended to police force area level trends. The shape of the crime decline: Modelling found that the introduction of electronic immobilisers would - in the absence of other factors - have caused a transition from a slowly rising trend in thefts to a slowly falling trend to a steeply falling trend. This is tested using national and subnational figures. The method of theft: If electronic immobilisers were effective, methods for stealing vehicles would be likely to change. When this occurred therefore provides a useful test of when the main immobiliser impact occurred. The correlation and sequencing of falls in different crime types: If the crime-reducing benefits of electronic immobilisers diffused to other crime types via the keystone/debut-crime method, or via some other mechanism, trends in other crimes might be expected to correlate with vehicle theft or to follow it with a slight lag. Reductions in other crime types would not be expected to precede falls in vehicle theft, unless other effects were involved. This is tested using PRC data on burglary and theft from vehicles. These crimes were selected for three reasons: i) they are high volume offences - burglary and vehicle crime comprised more than half of all recorded offences at the peak; ii) they have reasonably high reporting rates (burglary rates are around 60 to 70 per cent and theft from vehicles 30 to 55 per cent according to the CSEW37) and figures are also available on the CSEW so trends can be checked for reporting/recording biases; and iii) if benefits from electronic immobilisers were to diffuse to other crime types, these would seem likely candidates given the evidence that stolen cars are used to commit burglaries and that vehicles are often stolen for their contents rather than for the vehicle itself (Light *et al*., 1993). ## Findings - National Level The national-level vehicle theft trends for England and Wales, and for Scotland, are shown in Figures 15 and 16. ## Figure 15: Vehicle Theft Trends In England And Wales Sources: ONS Crime Survey for England and Wales, ONS police recorded crime, Scottish Government statistics. ## Figures 15 And 16 Show That Vehicle Thefts In England And Wales Peaked In 1993, And In Scotland they peaked in 1992. The modelling in the previous section estimated that about five per cent and three per cent of all vehicles in Great Britain had electronic immobilisers in 1993 and 1992, respectively. The peak is also relatively sharp in both cases, rather than the gradual transition predicted by the modelling. Though England and Wales had a rising trend in the 1980s and Scotland a falling trend (with some volatility in each case), both experienced a recorded crime rise of around 50 per cent in just two years at the start of the 1990s and a drop of almost exactly the same amount in the four years after that. There was a slight levelling-off period in the England and Wales CSEW series between 1991 and 1995, but after 1995 it also falls quickly. The sharp early 1990s rise in crime does not correlate well with the gradually improving security for this period outlined in Chapter 2 (fewer vehicles left unlocked, more central locking), so other factors are likely to have been involved. Analysis of CSEW data shows that the rise in theft of vehicles from 198738 to 1993 was mainly (over 80%) due to thefts in which the vehicle was either not recovered or was recovered with items (like the stereo) missing, see Figure 17. Note: Inspection of responses in 1999 show that a much higher proportion of victims reported that 'external fittings' were stolen, and were subsequently missing, than in other years. Given the abruptness of the break in trends for just those thefts where the vehicle was recovered (blue and red lines), it is possible that this anomalous year may be caused by slightly altered questioning of victims. Caution is therefore required for interpreting the trends for that year, which is why they have been shown with dotted lines. Source: ONS, Crime Survey for England and Wales. If it can be assumed that most recovered vehicle theft in which nothing went missing is joyriding, then these results suggest that joy-riding was high but stable during the sharp rise in vehicle crime of the early 1990s. It was categories of economically motivated theft that largely drove the increase, which may help determine which other factors were pushing crime up at that time.39 Increased heroin/crack use, rising unemployment or rising demand for stolen goods from Eastern Europe following the fall in the Berlin Wall may all have been involved (see Appendix 5 for more on these). One further fact about the peak in crime is worth mentioning. In 1993, theft of vehicles made up 11 per cent of police recorded crime and three per cent of CSEW crime. Total vehicle crime made up 38 per cent and 23 per cent respectively. But they were not the only crimes to fall subsequently. In fact *total* CSEW crime fell 60 per cent, only a slightly smaller decline than the 78 per cent drop in vehicle crime.40 For improvements in vehicle crime (especially those like electronic immobilisers which deterred thefts of vehicles more than thefts from vehicles) to have driven the overall fall in crime would therefore put quite a weight on the diffusion of benefits hypothesis. Though both England and Wales, and Scotland, had a sharp four-year fall in vehicle thefts following the peak, trends differed slightly in the late 1990s. Offences in England and Wales continued to fall, while trends in Scotland stabilised from 1997–1999. From 2000, both series fall sharply with each reaching a level about an eighth as high as at the crime peak by 2013. One implication of these trends is that vehicle thefts fell at a faster rate during the five years immediately after the crime peak than during the five years after that, when a far greater number of vehicles would have been likely to have had electronic immobilisers. This is shown in Table 4. England and Wales Scotland PRC vehicle Cumulative fall PRC vehicle Cumulative fall thefts % change on previous year from peak thefts % change on previous year from peak 1990 494,209 25.6% 36,103 24.2% 1991 581,901 17.7% 44,280 22.6% 1992 587,856 1.0% 47,433 7.1% 1993 597,519 1.6% 42,816 -9.7% -4,617 1994 541,749 -9.3% -55,770 41,962 -2.0% -5,471 1995 508,450 -6.1% -89,069 37,156 -11.5% -10,277 1996 493,489 -2.9% -104,030 32,504 -12.5% -14,929 1997 407,239 -17.5% -190,280 27,857 -14.3% -19,576 1998 389,223 -4.4% -208,296 29,290 5.1% -18,143 1999 374,081 -3.9% -223,438 28,881 -1.4% -18,552 2000 338,135 -9.6% -259,384 25,555 -11.5% -21,878 2001 326,737 -3.4% -270,782 23,146 -9.4% -24,287 2002 318,507 -2.5% -279,012 20,881 -9.8% -26,552 2003 291,858 -8.4% -305,661 17,604 -15.7% -29,829 2004 242,732 -16.8% -354,787 15,633 -11.2% -31,800 2005 214,182 -11.8% -383,337 14,041 -10.2% -33,392 2006 193,384 -9.7% -404,135 15,000 6.8% -32,433 2007 170,038 -12.1% -427,481 12,105 -19.3% -35,328 2008 147,238 -13.4% -450,281 11,551 -4.6% -35,882 2009 117,684 -20.1% -479,835 9,304 -19.5% -38,129 2010 106,162 -9.8% -491,357 8,716 -6.3% -38,717 2011 92,056 -13.3% -505,463 7,060 -19.0% -40,373 2012 79,821 -13.3% -517,698 5,731 -18.8% -41,702 2013 75,330 -5.6% -522,189 5,976 4.3% -41,457 Sources: ONS, Scottish Government. For England and Wales, thefts fell by 208,296 in the five years immediately after the peak (1994– 1998) at an average rate of 8.1 per cent per year. In the five years after that (1999–2003), thefts fell a further 97,365 at an average rate of 5.6 per cent per year.41 In Scotland, thefts fell by 19,576 in the first five years after the 1992 peak and by a further 6,976 thefts in the five years after that. For both series, just over half the entire drop in thefts is achieved by 2000, *before* the majority of vehicles on the road would have been likely to have had electronic immobilisers. In the last chapter, data from the Car Theft Index suggested that during the initial fall in crime, rates of theft fell on all types of vehicle, regardless of security. This was further tested using the CSEW. Full details of the methodology are in the Technical Appendix (section 8), but essentially data were extracted for survey years between 1991 and 2001/02 in which a proportion of respondents were asked about the level of security on their main vehicle (if it was a car or light van). These were then cross-referenced with the question asking about whether the respondent had had a car/van stolen. This allowed for the calculation of 'theft of car/van' rates for households whose main car had car alarms and/or central locking and households whose main vehicle had neither. Figure 18 shows the difference in these theft rates between 1991/1993 (pooled together) and 1999/2001/02 (pooled together). ## Figure 18: Household Incidence Rates Of Past Motor Vehicle Theft By The Security Features Of The Current, Main Car/Van Used Source: CSEW. (p<.05) when individual years are compared - see Technical Appendix section 8. There are two possible conclusions from Figure 18, though both require caution. The first conclusion is that rates of car/van theft fell during the 1990s, regardless of the vehicle's security level. Both households with and without security on their main vehicles experienced statistically significant declines in theft over the period. This is in line with the Car Theft Index evidence presented earlier. More surprising perhaps, is that Figure 18 also *appears* to show that rates of theft were actually higher for households whose main car/van had security than for households with no security. Importantly, this difference is not statistically significant in either period and in our judgement it is likely to be a spurious conclusion caused by the limitations in this analysis (see below). The most obvious limitation is that the 'no security' category does not include electronic or mechanical immobilisers, so it possible that the lower rates of theft in this group may be driven by cars/vans with no central locking or alarms but *with* a mechanical or electronic immobiliser. However, this is unlikely to bias the results significantly because it would be unlikely for a vehicle to have had an electronic immobiliser and not to have had also an alarm or central locking. Farrell et al. (2011) found that all vehicles with electronic immobilisers had at least one other security device. In relation to mechanical immobilisers, these were not included in the 'no security' group because they were not asked about in all the years of the survey shown in Figure 18. However, analysis of the data in years for which mechanical immobilisers *could* be included still suggested that there was a significant fall in thefts of vehicles without any security (see Technical Appendix, section 8). A far more important limitation of the analysis is that households' main vehicle may not have been the vehicle that was actually stolen. It would have been preferable to compare the security profile of stolen cars with the security features in the total 'population' of cars, as Farrell *et al*. (2011) attempt to do. This is not possible, however, for years before 2001/02 as the survey only asked households about security features on their current main car/van, not on the vehicle that was stolen. It is quite possible therefore, that a household's second or third car may have been stolen, but it is not known what security features these secondary vehicles had (probably inferior to the primary car). Similarly, in some cases victims of vehicle theft may have obtained a replacement car with better security, or improved the security on the stolen vehicle if it was recovered. Additional analysis suggested these reasons may help to explain the counterintuitive result that surveyed households with better vehicle security experienced higher (but not statistically significantly higher) rates of theft. It is important to note, however, that these issues - thefts of secondary cars and changes to a car's security following a theft - should *not* affect the finding that theft rates fell during the 1990s for secure and non-secure vehicles alike. This is because it is unlikely that a household would have a second car with better security than its main car, and it seems even more unlikely that a household would get a car with inferior security after experiencing a vehicle theft. As such, we can reasonably assume that for households whose main, current car has no alarm/central locking, past thefts were also of cars with no alarm/central locking. In general then, the data show a similar pattern to the Car Theft Index data. Both sources suggest that the decline in vehicle thefts had two phases: an initial one in which thefts rates fell on all vehicles, regardless of their level of security; and a second phase, beginning around 2000, in which improved security drove theft rates very low on new vehicles and caused some displacement to older, unprotected vehicles. Another way to assess the extent of improved security's role in the pre-2000 declines in vehicle crime is by analysing data relating to the type and methods of vehicle theft. Bässman (2011) has suggested that comparing trends in successful vehicle crime and attempted vehicle crime can be one way of assessing the success of security. Figure 6 showed that the ratio of attempted thefts to successful thefts increased through the 1980s, suggesting improved security. But Bässman (2011) also hypothesised that if security, rather than any change in numbers of motivated offenders, were the catalyst for the vehicle crime fall then there would be a marked short-term rise in attempted thefts following the peak in actual thefts, as thieves who had previously committed vehicle crimes were deterred. He found evidence of such an effect in Germany. Figure 6 shows the relevant CSEW trends for England and Wales. The evidence is rather inconclusive. The graph appears to show a slight rise in attempted thefts and a fall in actual thefts between 1993 and 1995, but neither of these changes is reported as being statistically significant42 and after 1995 both trends decline in unison until the early 2000s when attempted thefts drop faster. So on that measure there is little strong evidence to suggest a marked security impact in the early stages of the crime decline.43 1996. From 1996 the trend shows a year-on-year fall in incidents of attempted theft of vehicles. Data are also available from 1995 for England and Wales on the method of entry for vehicle theft and whether the vehicle was subsequently recovered. These are shown in Table 5 and Figure 19 below. Theft of vehicle Significant 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 difference 1995 1997 1999 2001 2004/05 - /02 /03 /04 /05 /06 /07 /08 /09 /10 /11 /12 /13 /14 2013/14 Offender forced lock or tried to 65 66 66 61 62 53 55 50 51 36 40 48 35 22 25 18 * Offender broke window or tried to 13 16 13 17 20 23 21 21 20 20 16 18 18 14 10 12 Door was not locked 3 3 3 7 6 6 12 9 10 9 10 2 13 9 11 16 Offender forced/broke/prised door . . . . . . . . 3 7 0 1 0 3 0 0 Offender used a key 9 7 8 12 9 12 12 15 15 19 29 24 26 46 41 46 * Window was left open 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other 12 8 11 6 5 8 6 8 5 9 6 7 16 11 13 15 Unweighted base 239 156 183 215 222 204 203 164 155 179 117 74 62 75 44 43 Source: ONS, Crime Survey for England and Wales. In Table 5 there are no statistically significant year-on-year changes from 1995 to 1999. From then on there is a general trend for vehicle thefts via forced locks to decline, slowly at first, and then steeply. The method: 'offender had a key' follows the opposite pattern. Over the last ten years, the change in these trends is statistically significant. A number of studies have shown that some offenders reacted to electronic immobilisers by targeting car keys in other types of theft (van Ours and Vollaard, 2014). One example is 'carkey burglaries' in which houses are raided with the intention of taking the car keys and hence the vehicle outside. Data show a rise in car-key burglaries in England and Wales once most vehicles had electronic immobilisers. This implies that, regardless of any potential diffusion of benefits pushing crime like burglary down, electronic immobilisers also drove a limited amount of displacement pushing burglary levels up.44 Levesley *et al*., (2004), using data from Northumbria and Greater Manchester police, found that 85 per cent of stolen cars registered after 1997 (those that would definitely have had electronic immobilisers) were taken using keys and that burglary was the most common method. The CSEW shows that this shift to car-key burglary occurred from around 2000 which might therefore suggest - in line with the modelling - that electronic immobilisers were not present in enough vehicles to drive big changes in offender behaviour before that.45 An alternative possibility would be that only more serious and committed offenders would make the switch to car-key burglaries and more casual, opportunistic thieves may have given up offending at even a low level of immobiliser penetration. One way to further examine these possibilities is to look at recovery rates of stolen vehicles. Given that thefts in which the vehicle is recovered are more likely to indicate opportunistic offending (joy-riding or for-transport thefts) and unrecovered theft in which the vehicle is presumably either broken for parts or exported is more likely to indicate a higher degree of organisation or professionalism, some researchers have suggested that a downward shift in recovered thefts, relative to unrecovered thefts, might be a sign of improved security because devices would be more likely to deter opportunistic thieves than professional ones (Farrell *et al*., 2014; Brown, 2013). Figure 19 shows that, generally, there has been a shift from recovered thefts to unrecovered thefts over the last 25 years, a potential sign of overall improved security. But careful examination suggests that this happened in two distinct periods. From 1987 to 1995, as vehicle crime largely increased, there was a shift downwards in the proportion of recovered thefts. Figure 17 showed that this was due to a rise in unrecovered thefts rather than a fall in recovered thefts (i.e. a rise in profit-driven, more organised offending potentially). During the initial crime decline from 1995 to 2000/01, however, the proportion of recovered stolen vehicles did not change significantly. The declines in vehicle theft occurring during this period affected recovered and unrecovered vehicles alike. There is then a sharp second downward shift in the proportion of recovered vehicles from 2001/2 to 2003/4. It is possible that this represents the impact of electronic immobilisers reaching critical mass within the vehicle fleet, i.e. the downward shift could have been caused by falling numbers of opportunistic offenders relative to more professional offenders as a result of electronic immobilisers. Again though, any conclusion must be extremely tentative given that they rest on several assumptions about the links between types of theft and types of offenders that have not always been borne out in empirical studies. For example, van Ours and Vollaard (2014) found that electronic immobilisers were very effective in reducing unrecovered thefts as well as recovered ones. Taken together though, the data on types of theft and method of entry are consistent with an electronic immobiliser effect, but one that was most prominent in the 2000s rather than the 1990s. What does this imply for the issue of displacement or diffusion to other crime types? Figure 20 shows the trends in vehicle thefts compared to those for burglary and for theft from vehicle. ## England And Wales46 In England and Wales there is a very high degree of correlation between the three crimes, particularly from 1989 onwards, as Table 6 shows. In Scotland the correlation is less strong in the 1980s but becomes stronger through the crime-drop period of the 1990s and 2000s. England and Wales PRC burglary and theft of vehicle PRC burglary and theft from vehicle PRC theft of vehicle and theft from vehicle 1980-2013/14 0.96 0.96 0.92 1990-2013/14 0.99 0.99 1.00 Scotland PRC burglary and theft of vehicle PRC burglary and theft from vehicle PRC theft of vehicle and theft from vehicle 1980-2013/14 0.87 0.85 0.90 1990-2013/14 0.96 0.97 0.96 Note: All the above correlations are significant at the one per cent level These high correlation coefficients certainly support the hypothesis that whatever was driving vehicle theft trends at this point was driving trends in other types of theft too. However, there are complexities. The indexed chart for England and Wales demonstrates that through the period of the crime 'spike' of the 1990s, all three offence types rose and fell at a very similar rate, but that through the 2000s vehicle thefts fell faster. Table 7 shows that in Scotland vehicle thefts fell more slowly than the other crimes in the 1990s but about as fast or faster in the 2000s. England and Wales PRC burglary PRC theft from vehicle PRC theft of vehicle 1980-89 4% 9% 2% 1990-92 18% 8% 9% 1993-99 -5% -5% -6% 2000-09 -5% -7% -11% Scotland PRC burglary PRC theft from vehicle PRC theft of vehicle 1980-89 2% 10% -2% 1990-91 11% 10% 23% 1992-99 -9% -9% -5% 2000-2009 -6% -11% -10% Methodological note: The 1990s is broken into two in both cases to show the different trends either side of the crime turning point. Arguably, Table 7 and Figure 20 suggest two possible narratives, one that supports an almost perfect diffusion of benefits and one that moderately contradicts the notion that benefits from immobilisers spread to other crimes. In the first narrative, electronic immobilisers had an immediate impact from the moment they appeared in the vehicle fleet in the 1990s, reversing an upward trend in vehicle thefts and reversing similar trends in related theft types.47 In the second narrative, another factor or factors drove all types of theft up and then down sharply in the 1990s and then electronic immobilisers had an *additional* effect during the 2000s, causing vehicle thefts to fall at a faster rate than most other crimes. The sequencing of crime peaks offers some support for both possibilities. The CSEW has all three crime types in England and Wales peaking in 1993, in line with potential diffusion of benefits. But police recorded crime trends generally run counter to the hypothesis. In England and Wales theft *from* vehicles peaked first in 1992, followed by burglary and theft of vehicles in 1993. In Scotland, PRC burglary and theft from vehicles peaked in 1991 followed by theft of vehicles in 1992. It is difficult to be certain which measure offers the more trustworthy picture of sequencing.48 CSEW trends will be unaffected by any reporting or recording influences but rely on the accurate recall of interviewees making the determination of precise turning points somewhat problematic. Another way to analyse the likely effect of electronic immobilisers is via time series modelling. Full details of the methodology and results are in Appendix 6. But in brief, an initial model confirmed that trends in burglary and theft from vehicles were strongly significant predictors of the trend in thefts of vehicles in England and Wales from 1980 through to 2013. This suggests the possible presence of a common factor linked to general propensity for theft, which drove all three crime types up initially and then down from 1992–3. However, the model also showed that these relationships were not constant over time. Using maximum likelihood estimation, it was possible to determine the presence of two statistically significant 'break-points' in the relationship between burglary and thefts of vehicles, suggesting the presence of another influence on vehicle thefts over and above any 'common factor'. The first break-point occurred in 1992 in line with the introduction of electronic immobilisers. At this point, thefts of vehicles began decreasing at a slightly faster rate than burglary, but this accelerated considerably at the second break-point in around 2004 when a majority of vehicles would have been protected by the devices. From this point onwards, thefts of vehicles began falling much faster. Using this method, it is possible to estimate a trend in thefts of vehicles for a hypothetical scenario in which electronic immobilisers had not been introduced. This is shown in Figure 21. By calculating the difference between the fall in thefts in this hypothetical scenario and the actual fall, it is possible to generate an estimate for the contribution of electronic immobilisers. Using this approach suggests that 23 per cent of the fall in vehicle thefts can be attributed to electronic immobilisers. Like the modelling from the previous section, caution needs to be applied to these results due to the lack of experimental conditions and the assumptions being made. The assumptions are mostly the same as in Chapter 3, i.e. no attempt is made to model the additional benefits of other types of vehicle security or any interaction between those and electronic immobilisers. But there is also one important additional assumption central to this modelling approach: electronic immobilisers were assumed to have no effect on burglary. These findings implicitly assume that there was no displacement or diffusion of benefits. For that reason, it is perhaps not surprising that this exercise produced a lower estimate than the method employed in Chapter 3. As such, 23 per cent can probably be viewed as a lower bound on the proportion of the fall in thefts of vehicles that can be attributed to electronic immobilisers. ## Findings - Police Force Area Level Moving from the national to the local level, 15 of 42 police forces in England and Wales (36%) show sequencing that supports a diffusion of benefits hypothesis (i.e. their trend in vehicle thefts peaks in line with or before their trends in burglary, other theft or theft from vehicles). See Table A7.3 in the Technical Appendix. Breaking trends down to police force area level allows another examination of electronic immobiliser impact. For the most part their introduction can probably be thought of as a 'national' effect. That is, their spread would be likely to have been fairly uniform across areas given that legislation mandating them on all new vehicles applied to all police force areas at the same time. There will have been some variation, as some areas are likely to have had a higher percentage of new vehicles than others, but generally it might be expected that electronic immobilisers would have caused a downward trend in vehicle thefts across all areas at more or less the same time. To test the two possible narratives, Figure 22 takes the six police forces with the largest average annual volume of vehicle thefts and shows their trends, indexed first to the national vehicle crime peak in 1993 and then to the point at which the modelling suggested a that a majority of vehicles would have electronic immobilisers, in around 2000/01. ## Figure 22: Vehicle Theft Trends In The Six Highest-Volume Police Force Areas, Indexed To 1993/94 (Top Chart) And 2000/01 (Bottom Chart) Source: ONS, police recorded crime. The top chart shows a great deal of variation in vehicle theft trends both before and after the indexation point (1993). For example, vehicle thefts in Merseyside49 and West Midlands continue to rise for a period after 1993 and in West Yorkshire there is a large increase in thefts in the early 1990s followed immediately by a large decrease, but then thefts stabilise until the early 2000s at which point they fall sharply again. So 1993 does not appear to mark a uniform downward shift in police-force-area vehicle theft trends. By contrast, the bottom chart shows that from around 2000 on (West Yorkshire arguably see a slightly later effect) the six police forces had relatively uniform declines of sizeable magnitude. Broadening the analysis to all areas using a similar approach, Table 8 shows the number of police forces areas with rises or falls in vehicle thefts for each five-year period from 1981 to 2010. There is some variation up to 2000 after which every police force in England and Wales has a decade of consistent decline. | | 1981-85 | 1986-1990 | 1991-1995 | 1996-2000 | 2001-2005 | 2006-2010 | |-------------------------------|-----------|-------------|-------------|-------------|-------------|-------------| | Number of forces seeing rises | 36 | 40 | 23 | 3 | 0 | 0 | | Number of forces seeing falls | 6 | 2 | 19 | 39 | 42 | 42 | | | | | | | | | This chapter examines available data from England and Wales and Scotland on trends and methods of vehicle theft. All three nations had a sharp rise and then fall in vehicle thefts during the 1990s, with numbers of thefts falling fastest in the years immediately after the crime turning point, when data suggest that fewer than five per cent of vehicles on the road would have had electronic immobilisers. The analysis also adds further evidence that, whilst joy-riding was still a common motive for vehicle theft, the bulk of the early 1990s rise in crime was due to a surge in economically motivated offending. Analysis of data on household vehicle security through the crime turning point revealed evidence to suggest that devices like central locking and car alarms were limited in their effectiveness up to 1993 and that the initial fall in crime saw theft rates decrease sharply on all vehicles, regardless of their security levels. This, along with the low numbers of vehicles with electronic immobilisers at the crime turning point and the sharp falls in other types of acquisitive crime, suggest perhaps that other factors were likely to be driving crime down at that time. This was further supported by an examination of data on vehicle theft methods, an analysis of vehicle thefts by police force area and time series modelling. The latter showed that electronic immobilisers were pushing down on vehicle thefts from their introduction in 1992, but that the effect was small until a majority of vehicles were protected in 2000. Ultimately these analyses suggest that although other factors may have been more important around the crime turning point and immediately afterwards, electronic immobilisers had an additional and substantial impact on vehicle crime during the 2000s. This was consistent across police force areas and has persisted at least to 2013/14. They changed the security 'arms race' in a way that other devices like steering locks, central locking and car alarms were unable to do, driving at least a quarter of the total fall in thefts of vehicles to that point and perhaps up to a half.50 important ways. This is examined in more detail in Appendix 4. The aim of the analysis in this section is to test the conclusions reached so far using data from other nations. Given the trends in electronic immobiliser spread, vehicle thefts and other types of crime in Great Britain, two specific hypotheses were developed. i) The 'immediate impact' hypothesis: That electronic immobilisers had a marked impact on vehicle crime and possibly other types of offence from the point at which they *first* started appearing on new vehicles. ii) The 'delayed impact' hypothesis: That the impact from electronic immobilisers was small until a significant portion of the fleet was protected at which point the devices drove a marked fall in vehicle thefts largely irrespective of trends in other crimes. These hypotheses were tested, against the possibility that immobilisers did not have an impact, on national-level trends using data from a panel of seven nations: England and Wales, Scotland, the US, Canada, Australia, the Netherlands and Sweden. These nations were selected for data reasons. They were the only nations for which complete datasets could be located for the relevant police recorded crime types going back to 1980. Cross-national crime comparison has numerous pitfalls. Crime categories that sound similar often have subtle differences that can affect levels and/or trends markedly. However, the primary crime of interest here was theft of vehicles, which is subject to less variation in interpretation than other offences like violence. Police recorded crime statistics were used throughout. For the panel of seven nations, these were collected from the country-specific statistical or governmental authority. These sources are fully referenced in the Technical Appendix. To test the hypotheses, trend analysis similar to that from the previous section was employed. As in that section, the analysis was necessarily retrospective meaning it can really only suggest conclusions, rather than prove them. However, as the speed of electronic immobiliser spread was examined across nations it became clear that a 'natural experiment' of sorts could be used to strengthen the analysis. The evidence suggests that electronic immobilisers first appeared in all nations at more or less the same time in the early 1990s but that their spread was faster in Australia and Europe than in the US and Canada. This provided an opportunity to check more robustly the 'delayed impact' hypothesis, by examining whether the marked impact visible in approximate range. England and Wales occurred later in the US and Canada, in line with the slower spread of electronic immobilisers in those nations. ## The Spread Of Immobilisers Internationally This section briefly examines available evidence on the introduction and spread of immobilisers in the seven nations used for the main analysis, though England, Wales and Scotland have already been covered. ## The Us In the US, most researchers agree that electronic immobilisers began to be fitted on new vehicles at around the same time as in Europe - i.e. from the late 1980s and early 1990s - but that the spread was slower. Brown (2013) and Fujita and Maxfield (2012) both cite a 1998 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration report stating that certain anti-theft devices were fitted on some new models of car in the US from the late 1980s. It is hard to be certain whether these were actually electronic immobilisers or simply 'electrical systems' which were easier for thieves to overcome (Bässman, 2011). More certain is that the first mass-market cars to be fitted with electronic immobilisers in the US were BMWs in 1995 (Fujita and Maxfield, 2012). Unlike Europe, the US did not have legislation making electronic immobilisers mandatory in new vehicles which meant some manufacturers took longer to introduce them. Two sets of researchers have attempted to estimate the spread of immobilisers in the US: Fujita and Maxfield (2012) and van Ours and Vollaard (2014). Both suggest that electronic immobilisers were a negligible presence in the early 1990s and that the spread was gradual such that by 2010 only around 30 per cent of all cars on the road had electronic immobilisers. These estimates may under-estimate the speed of spread slightly. Separate analysis by Fujita (2011) examining samples of parked vehicles in New Jersey between 2005 and 2009 found that almost half had electronic immobilisers at that time51. The National Institute for Highway Safety suggested that 86 per cent of new vehicles were fitted with electronic immobilisers by 2009 (van Ours and Vollaard, 2014). Using this and data on average age of vehicles on the road in the US52, an estimate of immobiliser spread was produced, see Figure 23. ## Figure 23: Estimated Penetration Of Electronic Immobilisers Within The Us Vehicle Fleet Sources: National Institute for Highway Safety estimates, EPA vehicle data. According to this estimate, it was not until the late 2000s that around half of all vehicles became protected, though some uncertainty around the precise trend exists. ## Canada As with all other nations studied, the first reports of electronic immobilisers in Canada appeared in the late 1980s and early 1990s. But available evidence suggests that spread of the devices was more similar to the gradual progression in the US rather than the swifter adoption seen in Europe. Unlike the US, Canada did introduce legislation mandating installation of electronic immobilisers on new vehicles, but not until 2007. However, the Canadian Theft Deterrent Standard was published in 1998, which began a programme aimed at encouraging manufacturers to voluntarily introduce electronic immobilisers on new vehicles. Wallace (2003) shows that the late 1990s saw a shift to thefts of older vehicles just as in England and Wales and Australia (see below), and that around 50 per cent of new vehicles had electronic immobilisers in 2000. The Insurance Bureau of Canada reported that this had increased to 60 per cent by 2003 (IBC, 2003). Assuming roughly linear increases in the introduction of electronic immobilisers on new vehicles from the early 1990s to the early 2000s would imply that adoption of electronic immobilisers in Canada was slower than in England and Wales but followed a similar trajectory to that in the US. In other words, while the 2007 legislation may have speeded up the end of the process, with the proportion of new vehicles with electronic immobilisers going to 100 per cent in 2007, most of the spread was dictated by the date of introduction and the gradual increase of new vehicles with the devices during the 1990s and 2000s. ## Australia Evidence suggests immobiliser spread in Australia resembled Europe more than the US or Canada. In fact, improved security may have affected the mass market in Australia even before it did in Europe. Geason and Wilson (1990) say that "an electronically operated deadlock system" was fitted on the top-line Commodore (Australia's top-selling brand of car in the early 1980s) in 1989. Potter and Thomas (2001) note that Ford and Holden began incorporating electronic immobilisers in their biggest selling models as early as 1992.53 Electronic immobilisers were made mandatory on all new vehicles in Western Australia in 1999, following two years of a voluntary scheme that encouraged the retrofitting of immobilisers to older vehicles. National legislation enforcing immobiliser installation on new vehicles was introduced in 2001. The earlier legislation in Western Australia therefore constitutes something of its own natural experiment, which is examined in Appendix 4. Here the focus remains on the national trends. Whilst the national legislation in 2001 almost certainly increased the speed of spread, evidence suggests electronic immobilisers were already well established in Australia by this point. Kriven and Ziersch (2007) find that almost half (47%) of cars already had immobilisers in 2000 with the majority of those being of the approved 'Australian standard' variety. This statistic would put Australia on an almost identical trajectory to Great Britain and the Netherlands (see below). In each case, about half of the fleet became protected in around 2000. This is further supported by data on thefts by age of vehicle, which is available from the CARS data analyser (see https://ncars.on.net/statistics.html). Figure 24 shows the age distribution of vehicles stolen in 2004. ## Figure 24: Cars Stolen In 2004 In Australia, By Age Source: Kriven and Ziersch (2007). This distribution is similar to those produced for Great Britain earlier in the report (Figure 9). If it was primarily electronic immobilisers that caused lower theft rates on newer vehicles, then the chart suggests that the introduction of the devices on new vehicles probably occurred from about 1989 to 1992. If that is true, then the majority of vehicles were probably already protected by the time legislation was introduced in 2001. ## The Netherlands Spread of electronic immobilisers in the Netherlands has been estimated by van Ours and Vollaard (2014), see Figure 25 below. This trajectory is almost identical to the estimates presented earlier for Great Britain, with a low percentage of vehicles having the devices before 1995 and a majority being protected from 2000 on. Figure 25 also shows an estimated trend for the US, which suggests a slower take-up than that proposed in this report, as explained above. Source: van Ours and Vollaard, 2014. Sweden Very little evidence relating to electronic immobilisers was identified for Sweden. However, being subject to the same EU legislation as Great Britain and the Netherlands it seems reasonable to assume that the spread of the devices would have been similar to that in England and Wales provided the age profile of the vehicle fleets were similar. Eurostat data suggest that the average age of passenger cars in Sweden increased from about seven to nine years during the 1990s, whereas it was constantly around six years old for the UK and the Netherlands. So Sweden had a slightly older age profile and hence the spread of electronic immobilisers may have been fractionally slower in Sweden than in the UK or the Netherlands. However, modelling work showed this effect to be small.54 ## Analysis Of Theft Trends To analyse the effects of electronic immobilisers, data were gathered on police recorded theft of vehicles and burglary for the period from 1980 to 2013 for seven nations.55 These were: England and Wales, Scotland, the US, Canada, Australia, the Netherlands and Sweden. Full information on data sourcing is contained in the Technical Appendix. Table 9 shows changes in vehicle theft levels for each of the nations by decade, along with dates related to electronic immobiliser spread from each nation. ## Table 9: Changes In Vehicle Theft Levels, By Decade Eng + Wales Scotland Netherlands Sweden Australia US Canada Dates of electronic immobiliser spread Estimated first appearance of electronic immobilisers in mass market vehicles 1991-92 1991-92 1991-92 1991-92 1989-1990 1988-1992 1988-1992 Year in which electronic immobilisers mandated on new vehicles 1998 1998 1998 1998 2001 None 2007 Estimated year in which 50% of all vehicles have electronic immobilisers (threshold) 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2006 2006 Changes in numbers of police-recorded vehicle thefts 1980-90 52% 12% 89% 120% 94% 45% 18% 1990-00 -32% -29% 43% -16% 1% -29% 40% 2000-10 -69% -66% -53% -66% -61% -36% -42% Sources: Police figures for each nation, see Technical Appendix for details. Table 9 shows that all nations had rising trends in vehicle thefts during the 1980s, though with variation of magnitude. During the 1990s trends are mixed with four nations seeing overall falls and three seeing rises (though the rise in Australia is just one per cent). In the 2000s, all the European nations had a decline of more than 50 per cent, while levels in the US and Canada fell around 40 per cent.56 The data in Table 9 offer support for an immobiliser effect, given the size of the declines in the 2000s. There is stronger support for the 'delayed impact' hypothesis than for the 'immediate effect' hypothesis. The Netherlands, Canada and Australia all have higher levels of vehicle thefts in 2000 than in 1990 even though a far greater number of vehicles would have had electronic immobilisers by the end of that decade. But the fact that the falls during the 2000s are similar in the European nations and smaller in Canada and the US would be in line with a substantial effect at or around the point when the majority of vehicles became protected. To further investigate this, trends for each nation were plotted and indexed to 2000, the year in which it was estimated that Australia and the European nations would have a majority of vehicles protected. 56 Canada's vehicle theft trend is particularly interesting because it does not follow trends in other types of recorded acquisitive crime. While most types of recorded theft (and violence) began falling around 1991 in Canada, thefts of vehicles peaked in 1996 and did not fall sharply until around 2007. Dauvergne (2008) shows that there was variation at the state level within Canada. For the period 1997–2007, for example, most Canadian states saw drops in vehicle thefts in line with other types of recorded acquisitive crime, but Manitoba and Alberta saw large volume increases, which kept the overall Canadian level of thefts high. This could be due to different trajectories of security adoption, but in Manitoba at least, it seems to be connected instead to a surge in joy-riding amongst 15- to18-year-old offenders (ibid.). In other words, available evidence suggests Canada may share some similarities with Australia in that during the period in which penetration of electronic immobilisers was partial, other upward pressures on crime caused displacement to older vehicles and theft trends continued to rise until greater penetration was achieved. Sources: police figures for each nation, see Technical Appendix for details. Figure 26 shows that prior to 2000, trends across the nations were highly variable. But after 2000, the trends become uniform and cluster into two groups. The European nations and Australia have substantial declines from 2000, whereas the US and Canada have declines of a similar magnitude beginning several years later in about 2006/07. The results of the 'natural experiment' are highly supportive of a marked crime-reduction effect for electronic immobilisers. But they also demonstrate the benefits of government legislation because nations that mandated the installation of electronic immobilisers earlier had earlier drops in crime. Even so, it is worth considering how things might have gone even better. Vehicle thefts dropped even more quickly several decades earlier in FRG following the mandatory introduction of steering locks on *all* vehicles rather than just new ones. Had any country adopted a similar policy for electronic immobilisers in the 1990s, the evidence in this report suggests it would have been highly effective. A question for future policy-making is the role that consumer choice played in these declines in vehicle thefts. The aim of the original Car Theft Index in 1992 was to encourage manufacturers to install better security by highlighting to consumers each vehicle's relative vulnerability to theft. If security became part of the consumer choice process when buying a vehicle - the logic went - then manufacturers would be forced to up their game and install the latest security devices. It is hard to gauge how effective this process was. Thefts certainly fell in England and Wales shortly after the Car Theft Index first appeared, but the findings above suggest that the speed at which the majority of the fleet was protected was the crucial factor and this was achieved just as quickly in other nations that did not produce theft indices (to our knowledge). Furthermore, the US, which did have a series of theft indices beginning in the 1980s, had a much slower improvement in security. Taken together this perhaps suggests that consumers paid relatively little attention to security indices, or not enough to affect manufacturers' decision-making process markedly. In a study using data obtained from *Motoring Which*'s annual review of new and used vehicles, Shaw and Pease (2010) attempted to test the degree to which security was used in the decision-making process to recommend vehicles. Their results were somewhat equivocal. They tested two separate years and price was the only factor that was consistently significant as part of the decision to recommend vehicles in both years (with more expensive vehicles being more likely to be recommended). Security was significant in one of the two years, along with several other factors. In addition, the results shown in Figure 26 demonstrate that the spread of electronic immobilisers through the vehicle fleet, and the crime reduction benefits this brought, was ultimately brought about for the most part by the natural churn of vehicle purchasing. Countries had to wait for enough new vehicles with electronic immobilisers to be bought before their national-level crime trends benefitted from their effectiveness. Outside of Western Australia there was little evidence of significant numbers of individuals retrofitting the devices to older vehicles despite their success; and even in Western Australia the limited success of retrofitting required significant subsidies (see Appendix 4). Yet it would probably be a mistake to write off consumer-driven theft-reduction policies entirely. Shaw and Pease's result suggests that security levels may play some role in vehicle selection, and even if legislation rather than the Car Theft Index was ultimately the most important factor in driving down crime, the move to create an Index may have spurred the legislative process on and brought manufacturers to the table. Also, the lack of retrofitting may have been a failure of communication rather than consumer willingness. Table 2 showed that a significant number of consumers were willing to spend their own money on security devices like mechanical immobilisers, so perhaps if the benefits of electronic immobilisers had been detected and communicated more widely and more quickly a larger amount of retrofitting may have taken place. It also seems possible that a more tangible device like a mechanical immobiliser might have been more popular with consumers than the invisible - but actually more effective - electronic immobiliser. A further question about the results shown in Figure 26 concerns whether the security benefits, so evident in relation to vehicle thefts, also diffused to other crimes. As such, burglary trends were analysed to see whether the correlation and sequencing of trends supported a diffusionof-benefits hypothesis. The main results are shown in Table 10. Eng + Wales US Canada Australia Netherlands Sweden Scotland 1980-2013 correlation 0.96 0.37 0.19 0.86 0.55 0.76 0.87 Vehicle theft peak 1993 1991 1996 1991 1994 1990 1992 Burglary peak 1993 1980 1991 2000 1994 1992 1991 Sequencing Simultaneous Burglary first Burglary first VT first Simultaneous VT first Burglary first Five years pre-threshold (VT) -33% -2% -6% 9% -5% 9% -31% Five years pre-threshold (B) -33% 4% -10% 13% -23% -8% -34% Five years post- threshold (VT) -41% -34% -46% -46% -44% -39% -35% Five years post-threshold (B) -29% -4% -24% -40% 5% -16% -33% Note: Correlation coefficients (top line) are significant at the one per cent level for all nations except the US, which is significant at the five per cent level and Canada, which is not statistically significant. The first row of Table 10 shows the correlation coefficients between burglary and vehicle theft in each nation from 1980 to 2013. There is generally a high correlation in the European nations and in Australia, but much lower correlation coefficients for the US and Canada. The next three rows look at the timing and sequencing of the peaks. This reveals a mixed picture with three nations having peaks simultaneously or with burglary following vehicle theft with a short lag (Sweden) or long lag (Australia). Broadly speaking, these would support a diffusion-of-benefits hypothesis. But in three other nations the sequencing is reversed and in the US in particular, burglary peaks more than a decade earlier than vehicle theft. The final four rows are an attempt to look at displacement and/or diffusion to burglary at the point at which most evidence suggests electronic immobilisers had their greatest impact. This is referred to as a notional 'threshold' in Table 10 and is set at 2000 for the European nations and Australia and 2006 for Canada and the US in line with the evidence presented above. The table shows the percentage change in levels of the two crime types for the five years before and after the threshold. Pre-threshold, trends in both crime types are variable, with falling trends of differing magnitude in five countries and rising trends in two countries. After the threshold, trends become uniform for vehicle theft with all nations seeing falls of between 34 per cent and 46 per cent. Burglary figures after the threshold remain quite varied, though all countries apart from the Netherlands experience falls of between four per cent and 40 per cent. Another way to analyse diffusion and/or displacement impacts would be to look for deviations in trend at the point of maximum immobiliser impact. Figure 27 shows a panel of charts with burglary and vehicle theft trends for each nation. For most nations, burglary trends do not seem to deviate markedly at the 'threshold' point, when electronic immobilisers were installed in more than half the vehicles on the road. If anything the two trends often separate at this point, suggesting that immobilisers affected one but not the other. In other words, there does not appear to be significant evidence of either displacement or diffusion. Australia is an exception. In Australia, the trend in burglary does deviate sharply at the threshold point, falling more or less in line with vehicle theft. Australia is also the only country in which the estimated threshold point is in line with the turning point for overall recorded crime. An attempt was made to repeat this analysis for trends in theft from vehicles, to see whether there was evidence of diffusion of benefits. However, data could not be sourced for all nations and the results - shown in full in the Technical Appendix - were somewhat inconclusive. For the US and Canada, trends in theft from vehicles show little if any deviation when theft of vehicles starts falling in 2006. But for most other nations, theft from vehicles does show signs of deviation from 2000 on, falling at the same rate, or slightly slower than, vehicle thefts. There is partial support, then, for the theory that benefits from electronic immobilisers diffused to theft from vehicles, once a majority of vehicles on the road had the devices. Available evidence suggests that electronic immobilisers *first* appeared in new vehicles in the late 1980s or early 1990s for all the seven developed nations studied. However, due to differences in legislation, the speed of spread was different in different countries. In particular, it was slower in the US and Canada than elsewhere. Analysis shows that trends in thefts of vehicles were varied across nations, with different peaks at different times. But at the point where electronic immobilisers were installed in around half of all vehicles, which occurred in around 2000/2001 for most nations but later for the US and Canada, thefts fell sharply and uniformly by around 40 per cent. This suggests that electronic immobilisers were effective but that they were not necessarily the catalyst for the falls in vehicle thefts in all nations. These results also imply that government legislation was an important factor in bringing down theft, but that had the legislation applied to all vehicles rather than just new ones, crime reductions could have occurred even more rapidly. Tests were also conducted to check for diffusion of benefits to burglary at the time when electronic immobilisers appeared to have their greatest crime reduction impact. For the most part little evidence of diffusion was found, although there was some tentative evidence in relation to theft from vehicles. ## 6: The Current Vehicle Crime Landscape This section examines current data on vehicle crime, with the aim of drawing out policy conclusions in relation to whether security remains a deterrent for thieves. In 2014 in England and Wales, there were 75,000 recorded vehicle thefts and 246,000 recorded thefts from vehicles (the corresponding figures for the CSEW were 58,000 and 668,000).57 This represents a fall of more than 75 per cent in total vehicle crime since the mid 1990s on both sources. Despite this large fall in offences, rates at which offenders are charged for vehicle offences remain low. In 2014/15, 86 per cent of the outcomes assigned to vehicle thefts were: "Investigation complete - no suspect identified" and only five per cent resulted in an offender being charged.58 It is hard to determine precise trends over time as recording practice has shifted several times, but examination of historical reports suggests that detection rates for vehicle crime shifted little during the 1990s, through the rise and then fall in crime. So there is little evidence to suggest that the fall has been due to an increased number of offenders being caught. Evidence presented in the rest of this report suggests instead that other factors are likely to have been responsible for the fall in vehicle crime, including the spread of electronic immobilisers, which deterred offenders rather than causing more to be apprehended. However, two separate strands of recent evidence have been cited to suggest that security effectiveness may now be waning. These are: 1) **The effect of technological change**: Evidence shows that tools are available (and easy to buy via the internet59) which allow thieves to bypass current car security. A number of recent research studies have examined this phenomenon and concluded that "electronic immobilisers are now prone to getting hacked". (Choudhuri et al., 2014; Mason, 2012). 2) **Current trend data**: Though vehicle crime remains at a historically low level in virtually every nation studied in this report, there are signs that the downward trend may be slowing. The latest Police Recorded Crime statistics for England and Wales showed a three per cent rise in 'theft of vehicles' for the year to June 2015 and the trend for vehicle thefts in Western Australia has also turned upwards. To examine the current situation, data were sourced from the Metropolitan Police Service (which has also seen its first annual rise in vehicle thefts for around 20 years) on vehicle thefts in London for 201260 and 2014, broken down by age and type of vehicle. These data have slightly higher annual totals than are captured in PRC because they include vehicles stolen in burglaries (which are recorded as burglaries, rather than thefts of vehicles in police figures). This small discrepancy aside, comparing the two years of data showed that the slight rise in vehicle thefts in London is due to an increase in the theft of motorbikes. Whereas car thefts in 2014 were down by 15 per cent compared with 2012 (equating to around 2,800 fewer offences), motorbike thefts had increased by 44 per cent (around 2,900 extra offences). Separate but unpublished analysis by the Retail Motor Industry Federation (RMIF) using data from the Police National Computer, which looked at the whole of England and Wales, also suggests a rise in motorcycle thefts during 2014.61 It is not clear why motorbike theft appears to be increasing. The rise is not simply a reflection of increased motorbikes on the road, as Department for Transport statistics show that whereas numbers of registered cars are rising again following a lull after the 2008 recession, numbers of motorbikes have been largely flat for the last five years. It is possible that there is some displacement from car theft as a result of security deterrence (though no direct evidence of this could be located). Media reports have also suggested that stolen motorbikes are being used to commit other crimes: data released by the MPS showed that there were 1,240 recorded crimes in London in which suspects rode mopeds or motorbikes during the 12 months to February 2015. The Crime Survey shows that, due to the drop in car thefts, motorbike thefts have gradually made up a bigger proportion of all vehicle thefts (grouping together the years since 2010, this proportion currently stands at about 40 per cent). That means fluctuations in the trend for motorbike thefts can now affect the trend in all vehicle thefts, see Figure 28. ## Figure 28: Thefts Of Cars/Vans And Motorbikes From 1995 To 2013/14 The thefts data from the MPS was also broken down by age of vehicle to see whether the pattern for lower theft rates among newer vehicles - visible in Figure 9 - has been maintained through to 2014. Figures 29 and 30 demonstrate that it has. Figure 29 shows that in volume terms, newer cars make up a far higher proportion of stolen vehicles than older cars, but that once this is adjusted for numbers of cars on the road, those vehicles that were made in the 1980s (before the second wave of vehicle security began) are still more likely to be stolen even though they collectively make up less than two per cent of vehicles on the road. In other words, it appears as though vehicle security may still be keeping theft rates down, with only a few offenders bypassing the security to steal newer vehicles, and some thieves *still* seeking out older cars with weaker security. Similar trends from the CSEW also support this. Figure 31 suggests the fall in thefts of vehicles through the 2000s has been wholly driven by the gradually reducing pool of older, more vulnerable cars on the road. These trends are consistent with the conclusion that most vehicle theft offenders operating today are more organised criminals capable of bypassing current security levels. Hence new security devices may be required. The results from Farrell *et al*., (2011) suggest that tracking devices may be highly effective but that they are only installed on a minority of vehicles currently. Anecdotal evidence from officers working on vehicle crime in the Metropolitan Police Service suggests that some offenders routinely park a vehicle in a safe location for a few days immediately after stealing it to check it is not being tracked. This would suggest that boosting the number of vehicles with tracking devices might reduce the 'rump' of more organised vehicle theft that remains. However, trackers may also have limitations. Jamming devices which prevent stolen vehicles being tracked are also available online (Choudhuri et al., 2014; Mason, 2012). A further point to make in relation to Figure 31 is that it is slightly at odds with the new research suggesting that current electronic vehicle security can be easily compromised and that newer cars are therefore easy to steal again, despite the presence of electronic immobilisers and other security devices. Two possibilities suggest themselves: i) the degree to which security has been compromised has been somewhat exaggerated; and/or ii) security is easier to overcome, and hence the *opportunity* for committing car theft has increased markedly, but thefts remain low for another reason. It is hard to determine which of these two positions is closest to the truth. But given the potential threat for electronic compromise of security, there is a clear priority for policy-makers to try and better understand the degree to which new technology does or does not make cars easier to steal. The other main conclusion from this section is that security on motorbikes does not seem to be as effective at preventing thefts as security on cars, hence looking at methods for better protecting motorbikes should also be a priority if the long-standing decline in vehicle crime is to continue. The Home Office published a discussion paper on opportunity/security as a driver of crime in line with the Home Office hosted crime and policing conference in January 2015. The paper provoked much debate on this issue. This analytical report has attempted to clarify some points and add further to the discussion. The idea that opportunity and security might cause crime and hence drive crime trends has come a long way in the last 40 years (Clarke, 2012). Before that, crime causation theories focused mainly on the development of criminality within individuals and assumed that changes to this process drove aggregate trends. The research of Clarke and others challenged this view, giving rise to situational crime prevention, which showed that altering the crime environment by improving security or lowering opportunity *could* reduce numbers of crimes committed. This is now reasonably well accepted and has become an important plank of policy-making. Neither the discussion paper, nor this research report, sought to challenge the importance of that journey. Opportunity/security is an important driver of crime; but not the *only* driver of crime. The main aims of this report were to examine long-term trends in vehicle security; to draw out policy lessons and to examine a new strand of opportunity-based research: 'the security hypothesis'. The hypothesis suggests that better security, particularly on cars and houses may be the main reason why crime has declined (Farrell *et al*., 2014). The most studied example has been the electronic immobiliser and numerous reports have demonstrated its effectiveness in preventing vehicle theft. The analysis presented here has added to that evidence base. Unlike earlier advances in vehicle security - which may have deterred thieves for a while - but which clearly provided limited deterrence by the end of the 1980s, electronic immobilisers seem to have been one of the main reasons why vehicle thefts have fallen further than just about any type of crime in many of the nations studied in this report, and why they have continued to decline through to 2014. But were electronic immobilisers the catalyst for the vehicle crime turning point? On balance, the evidence presented in this report suggests not. Rather, the main impact of electronic immobilisers appears to have been delayed until they reached critical mass within the vehicle fleet. In many nations, the crime decline was well under way by then. In England and Wales for example, all types of theft - vehicle crime, burglary and personal theft (as measured by the CSEW) - fell sharply from the mid 1990s. For immobilisers to have caused that, they would not only have had to reverse a steeply rising trend in stolen vehicles *and* in other types of theft, but they would need to have done this at a time when fewer than one in ten cars on the road had the devices. This is not impossible, but it places a heavy burden on the power of the debut crime/keystone crime hypotheses to transmit benefits to other crimes. Furthermore, thefts of vehicles made up just three per cent of crime in England and Wales at the crime peak according to the Crime Survey (total vehicle crime made up 22 per cent), so it seems unlikely that 'diffusion' from electronic immobilisers can fully explain the fact that overall crime fell 62 per cent between 1995 and 2013/14. Alternatively, strong evidence may emerge that other types of vehicle security, like central locking, may have had an earlier impact. Or that housing security improved markedly at the same point in time, negating the need for diffusion of benefits from immobilisers to burglary. But even then, further explanations would be required. In the US, and in certain parts of the UK (Merseyside and Edinburgh), burglary peaked far earlier than it did elsewhere, which would suggest two-speed trends in housing security levels. And if central locking was important, why did vehicle thefts rise so sharply in the early 1990s when this technology was first spreading? Arguably more plausible is that better security is just one of several factors that explain the decline in crime, and some of these are explored in Appendix 5. Whatever the driving force, one fact about crime trends that emerges from the analysis in this report, from the local to the national, and whether they relate to violence or property crime, is the sharpness of many of the crime turning points (see Figures 20, A2.1, A2.2, A3.3). Crime generally did not gradually switch from a rising to a falling trend; it spiked. Whilst it was not the purpose of this paper to try and explain this phenomenon, some thoughts are offered in Appendix 3. It should be acknowledged that there are limitations to the analysis in this report as well as several bits of missing data that could strengthen or disprove the conclusions. Trying to explain a change that has already happened is a complex exercise that is subject to bias given that no prospectively generated control groups are available. This report has attempted to use systematically gathered trends at different geographical levels and employed some natural experiments to generate findings, but ultimately the exercise involves looking for patterns in historic data and triangulating where possible. As such, it is difficult to be conclusive about any findings. All that can really be said is that the findings represent a plausible explanation of the data available. And further data would help. It would be useful, for example, to have more information about immobiliser spread in the US and Canada. It would also be helpful to see Australian theft rates by age of car from the early 1990s to check that the low rates on vehicles up to ten years old was a phenomenon that emerged through that decade, in keeping with improved security, or was always the case. Where does this evidence leave the security hypothesis? This paper has provided some challenges, particularly in relation to claims that security may have been the catalyst for the initial turn-around in crime. But it has also provided further evidence that better security did play an important role in the drop in vehicle thefts and probably also contributed to the decline in thefts from vehicles. Further analysis may yet add more evidence in relation to security improvements to houses and shops and possibly even in relation to violent crime. Certainly, the example of electronic immobilisers clearly suggests that changes to security levels can change national levels of crime, and hence that situational crime prevention must remain a crucial pillar of any crime reduction programme, even if other factors also played a role in the crime drop. Indeed, from an opportunity perspective, the scope and reach of cyberspace has arguably created the greatest ever challenge for crime and policing policy-makers. As well as providing the opportunity for potential victims and offenders to come together in ways that were unimaginable a few decades ago, it also means that methods for overcoming security can be disseminated quickly and universally. Instruction manuals for how to bypass electronic immobilisers and steal cars quickly are now available on the internet. At the timing of writing, however, there is limited evidence that this is having an effect on levels of vehicle theft, which remain at historic lows. It is hard to know whether to interpret this as evidence of the long-lasting impact of security or as an indication that the number of people who would even think to look online or elsewhere for methods of stealing cars has decreased since the 1980s and 1990s. Certainly there is ample evidence that crime is only one type of risky behaviour that has fallen over the last two decades, which would suggest that there has been a general shift in young people's attitudes that has accompanied improved security and the fall in crime (Mishra *et al*., 2009; HM Government Horizon Scanning Programme, 2014). The roots of these attitudinal changes remain to be fully explained, but *something* appears to have worked and it would be helpful to identify more precisely what that is. So whilst the evidence in this paper suggests that reducing opportunity and improving security remain important crime reduction tools in the new (cyber) crime landscape - and the equivalent of the electronic immobiliser for cyberspace would certainly be welcome - it perhaps also suggests that proven interventions aimed at preventing criminal careers and reducing long-term propensity for crime should remain part of the policy-makers' toolkit. As the above discussion has emphasised, it is impossible to analyse the degree to which opportunity and security have affected aggregate-level crime trends without understanding the concepts of displacement and diffusion (of benefits). Hence this brief section will seek to explain these terms as well as to distinguish them from 'switching', which - as it is defined below - is a separate but equally important phenomenon in this context. A brief summary of the evidence in relation to these effects is also attempted. - Displacement and diffusion (of benefits), in this context, are effects that may or may not occur in reaction to some kind of crime-reduction intervention. For example, if CCTV is introduced in a car park with the intention of reducing the number of offences, it may be the case that offences reduce in that car park but increase in a neighbouring one, as thieves simply switch locations. That is displacement. But it is also possible that the neighbouring car park *also* experiences reduced offences. This phenomenon - which is called diffusion of benefits - could occur if offenders are put off crime entirely by the introduction of CCTV. As Felson and Clarke (1998) point out, there are at least five ways in which displacement/diffusion might occur (their list below relates to displacement but theoretically diffusion might operate through similar channels): o *geographic displacement* (crime moves from one location to another); o *temporal displacement* (crime moves from one time to another); o *target displacement* (crime moves from one target to another); o *tactical displacement* (one method of committing crime can be substituted for another); o *crime-type displacement* (one type of crime can be substituted for another). Measuring all these different types of displacement/diffusion is not easy and requires very carefully constructed control groups to be done properly. For example, in an environment in which crime is falling generally, it is very easy to mistake a general trend for diffusion of benefit from an intervention and vice versa. - Switching, in this context, refers to a change in criminal behaviour that is not caused by a crime-reduction intervention but for some other reason. This may relate to conditions related to opportunity and security. For example, mobile phone thefts increased sharply in the late 1990s while theft of other goods (like car stereos) decreased. This suggests the possibility that thieves switched target as a result of the increased opportunity to steal phones. Mobile phones were rare in the early 1990s but ubiquitous by the end of the decade. However, switching might also occur for reasons unrelated to opportunity, like a change in the relative value of the two goods or simply a change in fashion. A great deal of research has examined displacement and diffusion. A review by the Dutch Ministry of Justice (Hesseling, 1994) examined 55 studies that measured displacement/diffusion effects following a situational intervention. In six of the 55 studies, no evidence of displacement was found but there was evidence of diffusion of benefits. In 16 studies there was no evidence of either displacement or diffusion and in the remaining 33 studies, displacement occurred but not to the extent that the original crime reduction benefit was completely offset. In other words, there was always a benefit to the intervention. This finding has been reinforced by more recent studies. A systematic review of 102 situational crime interventions by Guerette and Bowers (2009) found evidence of displacement in 26 per cent of the studies and diffusion of benefit in 27 per cent. Another systematic review by Grove et al. (2012) also found that a diffusion of benefit was about as likely to be observed as displacement. As Felson and Clarke (1998) have pointed out, this is powerful evidence that changing the crime environment can have important crime reduction effects, and that crime does not simply move elsewhere. In the current context though, it is important briefly to note some limitations of this evidence. Firstly, quality of research design is slightly variable amongst the studies and very few measured all types of possible displacement. Of particular relevance to this paper is that in both the Hesseling (1994) and Guerette and Bowers (2009) reviews very few studies examined displacement/diffusion effects in relation to other crime types (Johnson *et al*., 2014) and fewer than ten per cent measured temporal displacement. Most studies looked at local, spatial displacement/diffusion only (ibid.). Secondly, the results - powerful though they are in demonstrating the effectiveness of individual situational interventions - do not really tell us much about the extent to which situational crime prevention as a whole has driven *aggregate* level crime trends. To determine that, it would be necessary to estimate a trend in situational crime prevention over time. For example, many of the reviews highlighted above demonstrate that problem-solving policing is an effective tactic that reduces crime without displacement. Yet it is still difficult to say how much this has contributed to the crime drop as we do not know how the amount of problem-solving policing has changed over time. This is not to say that situational crime approaches have not affected national-level trends. In some cases, like those relating to immobilisers and vehicle crime examined in this paper, the evidence is compelling. Another example is the study by Mayhew *et al*. (1989) showing that legislation requiring motorcyclists to wear helmets triggered a fall of around 100,000 motorbike thefts within six years. Given the absence of any other potential explanation and the fact that a similar drop occurred when the same legislation was introduced in England and Wales, the authors concluded that the fall was caused by an opportunity effect: offenders wanting to steal a motorbike now had to go equipped with a helmet (Mayhew *et al*., 1989). Furthermore, although there was some evidence in Germany of displacement to thefts of cars, and possibly also bicycles, it did not offset the drop in motorbike thefts, in volume terms at least (ibid.). Again, this is good evidence that making criminal opportunity harder is a very valid way of reducing crime, even at the national level. But like most of the vehicle-crime examples above, the motorcycle legislation produced a national-level effect on motorbike theft only. It did not, in Germany or in England and Wales, cause a crime turning point in several different crime types at the same time. This is important for the analysis in this paper because it identifies instances in which crime types have risen and fallen simultaneously at the national level but also instances when a single crime type moves in a quite unique way. Generally, the available evidence on displacement seems to suggest that the latter instances are more likely to be driven by opportunity/security changes. Or to put it another way - when the opportunity to commit a particular type of offence is reduced through improved security or some other method, the most common result seems to be a reduction *in that type of offence only.* Sometimes there may be a little displacement to other crimes, but this generally does not offset the benefits of the intervention entirely, but almost never - to our knowledge - is there an obvious example in which diffusion of benefits has occurred to alternate crime types at the national level. The motorbike example drove a drop in motorbike thefts, but not a drop in car or bike thefts. When an earlier vehicle crime security device was introduced, it had a large crime-reduction effect on car theft, but there was some possible displacement to motorbike theft and no discernible effect at all on theft from vehicles (Webb, 1994). Two more recent examples have similar results. Metal thefts increased in England and Wales from 2009 to 2011, as they did in many other nations, due in all likelihood to the rise in global metal prices during that period (Sidebottom *et al*., 2014). Yet the rest of acquisitive crime continued to fall. And when a combination of enforcement and legislation (beginning in early 2012) reduced the opportunity to dispose of stolen metal profitably by restricting and then banning cashless trading at scrap metal yards, metal thefts reduced markedly. But again, there was no obvious deviation in the trajectory of other acquisitive crime trends, see Figure A1.1. Sources: Energy Networks Association data for metal thefts; ONS, police recorded crime for total acquisitive offences. One final example is important here. Another recent security success appears to have been the introduction of activation locks on mobile phones. Initial analysis has suggested these had an instant impact on mobile phone thefts in London (BIT and Home Office, 2014). In the 12 months to September 2013, recorded thefts from the person were up by seven per cent in England and Wales with i-phone thefts particularly prominent. Then Apple introduced its activation lock via the operating system ios7, which was incorporated on almost 80 per cent of i-phones within three months. This quick rate of penetration (far faster than that for vehicle security during the 1990s62) seemed to have an instant effect. Data for the 12 months after ios7 was launched showed that theft from the person was down by 24 per cent. In this instance benefits probably *did* cut across crime types. But this is because phone theft is not a crime category on its own. Phones may be stolen in thefts from the person, but also in robberies or in 'other thefts'. They'd be less likely to be stolen in burglaries, thefts of vehicles or incidents of shoplifting. This makes detection of displacement and/or diffusion of benefits more difficult. Figure A1.2 shows an apparently big crime-reduction effect for theft from the person, and possibly a smaller effect for robbery and other theft. But the year-on-year trends in other crime types seem largely unaffected.63 In other words, it does not seem to be the case that the benefits from the activation locks on phones diffused to theft generally. Overall then, there are many persuasive examples of security bringing down levels of the crime against which the security is targeted. But there is no strong evidence from these examples that the benefits diffuse from one type of crime to another. A separate point needs to be made in relation to switching. Farrell *et al*., (2014) has used the fact that mobile phone thefts increased while thefts of other items fell in the late 1990s as a test for crime-drop hypotheses. The argument being: "Phone theft ... is a street crime which increased when others were decreasing (Mayhew and Harrington, 2001), and at the time of writing in 2013 is experiencing a resurgence due to expensive smart phones. More generally, theft of valuable electronic goods such as laptops and GPS-Satnavs have increased. Any explanation of the decline in other crime types must not contradict these facts. Most hypotheses fail this test because they suggest that all types of crime should have decreased. This is because their focus is the number or the motivation of offenders." Farrell *et al*., 2014. The logic of this test is not clear to the current authors. The type of goods stolen will change over time as fashions, values and opportunities shift, but it seems perfectly possible for this to co-exist with a rising or falling offender population and for that to be the key factor in driving crime. Put differently, if there were 10,000 active offenders in the 1980s and just 100 in the 2000s, the latter would still commit more mobile phone theft and internet-related offences because mobile phones and the internet did not (effectively) exist in the 1980s. But overall crime would still be down, due to the vast fall in numbers of offenders. ## Appendix 2: The Effect Of Lojack On Car Thefts In The Us The analysis in the main report suggests that the fall in vehicle crime in the US from 1991 would be unlikely to be caused by electronic immobilisers given that such a small proportion of vehicles would have had them installed at that time. However, it is possible that another security device was responsible: LoJack tracking equipment. Its effectiveness was examined by Ayres and Levitt (1997), who concluded that LoJack reduced vehicle thefts, though more so in some parts of the US than others, and that benefits diffused to other crime types. A subsequent study (Gonzalez-Navarro, 2013), found that LoJack also proved to be effective in Mexico when it was introduced, very publicly, on a specific model of car that was previously much stolen. However, LoJack also appeared to cause some displacement. Gonzalez-Navarro (2013) found that in the state in which LoJack was introduced on a specific car, the theft rate of that car was much reduced and theft rates on other cars were largely unaffected; however, in neighbouring states theft rates for the same model of car (which in those states did *not* have LoJack fitted) increased. In other words, there was displacement to the same type of car in a different state (where LoJack was not used), rather than to other cars in the same state. In this brief appendix, the effectiveness of LoJack is analysed in a different way. The concern here is not simply whether LoJack was effective in reducing theft rates; overall the evidence suggests that it was (with qualifications). Instead this analysis looks at whether the penetration of LoJack correlates with the turning point in crime at the state level within the US and hence whether it can be seen as a catalyst for the decline. LoJack was introduced at different times in different states. Ayres and Levitt (1998) write that: "LoJack was first introduced in Massachusetts in 1986, and Massachusetts remains LoJack's strongest market today. LoJack was subsequently introduced in South Florida in 1988 and three additional markets in 1990. As of December 1994, LoJack served 12 markets." Other evidence (IDCH, 2003) agrees that LoJack was first introduced in Massachusetts in 1986. It came to Florida in December 1988 and to Los Angeles, Michigan, Illinois and New Jersey in 1989. Georgia, Rhode Island and Virginia became LoJack markets in the early 1990s and the devices first appeared in New York in 1994 (ibid.). The IDCH (2003) reports states that: "By year-end 1989, LoJack had "installed 35,000 systems in Massachusetts and south Florida ... and recovered over 900 cars for clients." Given that around 50,000 vehicles per year were stolen in Massachusetts at that time and around 80,000 in Florida that suggests LoJack's influence may have been small at first. Indeed Ayres and Levitt note that because installation occurred almost exclusively on new vehicles, initial penetration into markets tended to be quite slow, as was the case with electronic immobilisers. Using data obtained from LoJack, they estimated that after five years in a market, LoJack's typical coverage was less than 2% of total registered vehicles. The company estimated that by late May 1997, LoJack was installed in about 15 per cent of all new cars in Massachusetts and about ten per cent of new vehicles in Florida, New York and California. Given these relatively low percentages, and the fact that new cars make up only a fraction of cars on the road, it seems initially unlikely that LoJack was the catalyst for the nationwide fall in vehicle thefts from 1991. However, Ayres and Levitt find that LoJack was effective even at very low penetration levels. They argue that this could be due to the fact that many vehicle-theft offenders are prolific offenders, stealing perhaps hundreds of cars per year. In that scenario, even if LoJack is present on just 2 in 100 cars, it could raise their risk of apprehension in any given year considerably. In addition, the IDCH report (2003) lists research suggesting that many car thefts at the time were committed by drug addicts who took the vehicles to chop-shops for selling of parts. Ayres and Levitt (1998) note that chop-shops would therefore encounter hundreds of stolen cars each month, hence even a low percentage of LoJack devices could significantly increase their chances of being detected by enforcement services. To test the possibility that LoJack may have markedly driven down vehicle theft rates from the outset, this appendix attempts some simple analysis looking at trends in the states affected by LoJack to see whether the security device appears to be a credible reason for the turning point in overall vehicle thefts. From the evidence above, a table of states was constructed containing the year in which LoJack was introduced. It was assumed that the other states did not have any LoJack penetration before 1995, as suggested by both Ayres and Levitt (1998) and the IDCH report (2003). | Year LoJack | Vehicle theft | |----------------|------------------| | introduced | peak | | | | | Massachusetts | 1986 | | Florida | 1988 | | California | 1989 | | Michigan | 1989 | | Illinois | 1989 | | New Jersey | 1989 | | Georgia | 1990–94 | | Rhode Island | 1990–94 | | Virginia | 1990–94 | | New York | 1994 | | Other States | n/a | Source: Uniform crime reports, FBI. At first glance, the table does not demonstrate much support for LoJack being a central factor in the reversal of vehicle theft trends within states. Of the ten LoJack states, four had vehicle theft peaks *before* LoJack was introduced. And the average peak for the non-LoJack states was in 1991, which must also have been before LoJack was a presence in these markets. These facts clearly suggest that other factors must have been involved. However, looking in more detail at the trends in each state reveals a slightly more mixed picture. All evidence suggests that Massachusetts achieved the highest initial LoJack penetration and that this was initially focused in the state's major city, Boston. Trends for both the state of Massachusetts and Boston are shown in Figure A2.1. The FBI's uniform crimerecording data tool has data at the state level from 1960 and at the city level from 1985. ## Figure A2.1: Vehicle Theft Trends In Massachusetts And Boston Source: Uniform crime reports, FBI. Figure A2.1 shows that vehicle thefts at the state level rose from 1980 to 1990 while remaining at a lower level than in the 1970s 'spike' in thefts. However, in Boston, thefts fell from 1986, the year LoJack appeared in the city. Furthermore, Figure A2.1 also shows that violence continued to rise in Boston through to 1991 in line with other parts of the US and with the city's crack epidemic (Braga, 2003). Given that violence and vehicle theft correlate strongly at the national level in the US (Farrell *et al*., 2014), possibly due to the link between drug markets, stolen cars and violence (Blumstein and Rosenfeld, 2008)64, it seems possible that in Boston, LoJack broke that link. That is, the earlier penetration of LoJack may have driven down vehicle theft even as other crimes continued to rise. Similarly, as Ayres and Levitt (1997) show, other cities within LoJack states like Chicago (the major city in Illinois) also start to see falling trends in vehicle thefts more or less in line with the introduction of LoJack. However, Miami in Florida continued to see a rising trend for several years after LoJack's introduction while New York experienced sharp falls in motor vehicle thefts and violence for three years *before* LoJack appeared in 1994, see Figure A2.2. Overall then, this analysis suggests that LoJack may have been a contributor to the turnaround in vehicle crime in some areas, particularly in Boston. However, it was certainly not the only factor involved and it appears to have affected vehicle thefts only, rather than crime more generally. A central finding from the examination of crime trends presented in this report is that numbers of offences do not, in general, gradually switch from rising to falling trends or vice versa. Instead these reversals often happen very sharply, with periods of steeply rising crime followed by periods of steep falls. This brief section offers some tentative thoughts on this issue. The first reason for this phenomenon that often comes to mind is that the cause is some sort of blip or shift in the way the data are recorded, i.e. that the trend is not real but an artefact of the data collection process. In some cases, this may be what has occurred. The trend in police recorded burglary offences in England and Wales is shown in Figure A3.1. Clearly this has one very large 'spike' in the middle of the series but also another rise and then fall (admittedly more of a bump than a spike) occurred in about 2002. The latter may well have been driven by recording practice changes. The National Crime Recording Standard came into effect in 2002 and this had the effect of increasing the number of recorded burglaries by around three per cent according to a Home Office report (Simmons *et al*., 2003). It is possible that this initial rise in recording eroded, either correctly or incorrectly, in subsequent years to give rise to the trend above. Overlaying the trend with the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) equivalent suggests that this small spike may have been artificial. Clearly though, the main spike in the middle of the series does not seem to be an artefact of any data collection process for the simple reason that it is present in both series, despite the fact that their data collection processes are quite different. This, and the fact that spikes seem to crop up with incredible regularity, particularly in local-area data (see Figure A3.3), suggests that there is more to the phenomenon than simply data recording issues. Source: Police recorded crime, ONS One explanation is that changes to the crime environment create sudden 'breaches' that drive up offending until they are spotted at which point the breach is closed and crime falls again. Killias (2006) has documented a number of instances of this kind including the "mass production and consumption of spirits" which coincided with crime increases in the early 19th century and the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 which opened up a new market for stolen goods in Eastern Europe. The latter is a good example of a 'breach' that is in line with opportunity theory. A new market for goods does not directly affect the number of potential offenders or their propensity for crime, it just increases the potential reward and hence the temptation to indulge in crime. But Killias (2006) also talks of breaches that more directly affect numbers of potential offenders, like drug epidemics, where numbers of new users have a tendency to rise and fall sharply irrespective of precautionary activity (Morgan, 2014). Another explanation has been offered by Paul Ormerod (2011) in his book 'Butterfly Economics'. In the chapter on crime trends, Ormerod notes the large number of sharp fluctuations present in crime data. For him, the explanation is that human behaviour is not simply the result of an individual's own preferences, but that human behaviour is instead profoundly influenced by the behaviour of others. Ormerod shows that this effect can be modelled and that it gives rise to the kind of sharp spikes seen in the data. For example, when modelling crime he divides the population into three groups: those who are unlikely to commit crime regardless of the behaviour of others (he includes most women and all pensioners in this group), those who are active criminals, and those who are *susceptible* to criminality. Crucially the number of offences committed by this last group depends on the size of the active offender population. So when the number of active criminals increases, this drags an ever-increasing number of those susceptible into crime, and vice versa. Though a proper examination of the validity of Ormerod's approach is beyond the scope of this report, it is worth noting that there is very strong evidence that one type of behaviour frequently linked to crime - heroin/crack-cocaine use - does operate in a way that seems to fit with Ormerod's model. Numerous studies have shown that heroin use, for example, spreads through networks of friends and relatives rather than via drug dealers and pushers. An ethnographic study of heroin users in the Wirral in Merseyside, found that nine out of every ten users said that they had first received heroin from a friend or relative, rather than from a dealer (Parker et al., 1988). In their seminal book on the spread of heroin epidemics Hunt and Chambers (1976) describe the process as follows: Heroin use.... spreads within groups of closely associated youths by a process of peer emulation and influence. Exactly why one person should copy the behaviour of another, and voluntarily adopt his attitudes and practices, is no clearer for heroin use than for religious conversions, but both are empirical facts. … Though the idea of peer-influenced spread was well established, at least in the scientific literature, its implications seem to have been mostly overlooked. If heroin use is transmitted among friends, being as often sought by the non-user as offered by the initiator, then it is contagious ... (underline added). Source: Hunt and Chambers, 1976. And of course, if there is a relationship between heroin use and crime, as other research has suggested (Morgan, 2014) then it follows that crime too is contagious to some degree. The London riots offer another example from a completely different context. Many of the explanations offered by the rioters for their actions suggest that they were influenced by the behaviour of others and that criminality bred further criminality. For example: "All right then, well, everyone's getting free stuff, I'm joining in, like, coz it's fucking my areas." "*After it all kicked off and everyone was doing it, you just joined in and it felt fine*." Source: Lewis *et al*., 2011. If there is any truth at all in this approach, it has some quite important implications both for crime research and crime policy. The obvious research implication is that the standard economic models of crime need to be revised. These are based on the notion that an individual rationally makes up his or her mind whether to commit crime based on the relative costs and benefits of the situation. These models therefore assume that the number of other people committing crime in the vicinity is irrelevant to the individual (except via indirect ways65). If Ormerod is correct, these models will never accurately capture crime trends and the explanatory variables that drive them. Instead, different models that incorporate the way in which human behaviour is influenced by, and influences, the behaviour of others, need to be employed. For crime policy, the most obvious implication is that 'tipping points' are likely to exist and that once reached, sharp changes could occur that may be impossible for policy action to prevent. Crime is currently falling, which, following Ormerod's logic, means that - other things equal - crime is likely to go on falling as fewer and fewer criminals influence fewer and fewer susceptibles. But if something should cause the number of criminals to increase, even slightly, history suggests this could tip the trend into a sharp reverse. There are, indeed, parallels between the current situation and that in 1960. Then, as now, homicide rates, and crime rates generally, were at historic lows. Yet within a decade the number of murders had increased by nearly 75 per cent66 and the number of recorded robberies rose more than three-fold. It is still not clear exactly why this happened, which means it is hard to be certain that something similar will not occur in the next decade. In other words, though crime has been falling for 20 years in England and Wales, without a fuller understanding of the mechanisms that have driven this decline, we cannot be absolutely sure it will continue. ## Appendix 4: Two Local-Area Cases Studies: Western Australia And Merseyside This appendix analyses trends from the state of Western Australia and the police force area of Merseyside in England. These areas show important differences from their respective nationallevel crime trends and may therefore shed light on the underlying causal mechanisms. ## Western Australia The state of Western Australia has been cited by many as a 'natural experiment' for testing the effectiveness of electronic immobilisers because it introduced legislation promoting the devices earlier than the rest of Australia. Electronic immobilisers were made mandatory in new vehicles in Australia in 2001, but in Western Australia a scheme commenced in 1997 in which subsidies were provided to encourage retrofitting of electronic immobilisers. Due to the limited take-up, this was followed in 1999 by legislation mandating the installation of electronic immobilisers on all new vehicles, two years earlier than the same legislation was passed at the national level. Importantly though, the Western Australia legislation had an additional component. It also mandated the installation of an electronic immobiliser on any car that was transferred (i.e. bought and sold) as long as it was less than 25 years old. In other words, anyone wanting to buy a second-hand car in Western Australia after 1999 had to first ensure it was fitted with an electronic immobiliser. An obvious question then, is whether the earlier action taken by Western Australia in relation to electronic immobilisers caused an earlier fall in vehicle thefts compared with Australia generally. Figure A4.1 shows trends in police recorded vehicle thefts in Western Australia compared with the national trend. Figure A4.1 shows that vehicle thefts did fall earlier in Western Australia than in Australia generally. The evidence is not totally conclusive, because Western Australia had a different trend from the rest of the country prior to the introduction of the voluntary scheme in 1997 and, arguably, numbers of thefts began falling from around 1995. But certainly the state experienced a sustained fall in thefts that commenced shortly after the scheme came into effect and which occurred before a similar fall was observed in the rest of the country. In line with the analysis in the main report, the Western Australia example provides little support for the hypothesis that the benefits from electronic immobilisers diffused immediately to other acquisitive crime types. Figure A4.2 shows that, unlike vehicle thefts, recorded burglaries did not start falling earlier in Western Australia. Like burglaries nationally, they continued to rise until the early 2000s and actually peaked a year later (in 2002) than for Australia overall. The pattern in Figure A4.2 is also reflected in the trend for 'other theft.' Numbers of these incidents continued to rise in Western Australia until 2002, after which they fell 22 per cent in four years. This again is very similar to the national picture and perhaps suggests that another factor, affecting Australia more generally, also contributed to the fall in acquisitive crime during the early 2000s. One candidate is the reduction in numbers of heroin users that occurred at this time. Other evidence suggests that trends in heroin use correlated with general acquisitive crime trends in a number of countries through the crime turning point (Morgan, 2014). For Australia, available prevalence estimates suggest that numbers of heroin users rose for at least two decades up the late 1990s but then abruptly halved in the early 2000s (Hall et al., 2000a; Degenhardt et al., 2004). To further examine the effect of the electronic immobiliser legislation in Western Australia, analysis was conducted to look at the breakdown of car thefts by the age of the vehicle stolen. Figure A4.3 shows this breakdown, in comparison to Australia as a whole, for thefts in 2000 and 2008. In 2000, the distribution of car thefts in Western Australia was very similar to that of Australia as a whole, with thieves displaying a clear preference for cars that were between 10 and 20 years old. This is further evidence that the introduction of the early electronic immobilisers from around 1990 had an important impact on criminal behaviour. From this date, there is clear displacement of thefts to older vehicles, though total thefts continued to rise initially. So although Western Australia had earlier legislation, the initial spread of immobilisers was probably quite similar to that seen nationally. By 2008 though, Western Australia shows a distribution that is quite different from the national picture. Nationally, thefts are still skewed towards older vehicles with the mode group being those aged 15–19 years, which is the youngest group of cars that will contain some vehicles without electronic immobilisers. In Western Australia though, the retrofitting scheme (and the compulsion for buyers of older cars to have an electronic immobiliser fitted) appears to have had a clear effect. In Western Australia, the most stolen group in 2008 is the group of vehicles aged 0–4 years. Overall then, whether the earlier legislation in Western Australia drove an earlier fall in vehicle thefts in that state is debatable, given the trend was heading downwards anyway and up until 2000, there is little evidence that theft patterns were that different from the national picture. But what this evidence does suggest is that by mandating retrofitting as well as installation on new vehicles, Western Australia may have driven a greater fall in thefts in a shorter space of time because the pool of vehicles to which thieves could turn shrunk far more quickly due to the legislation. In Western Australia the peak-to-trough fall in vehicle thefts was 64 per cent and this was achieved by 2009. Nationally, the fall reached 62 per cent by 2013. In this light, Western Australia may also provide a glimpse of what the 'post-immobiliser' landscape may look like, once only a negligible number of cars on the road do not have the devices. If Western Australia is representative, it might be expected from the evidence in Figure A4.3 that new cars will be targeted more than older vehicles and that there may be renewed upward pressure on total thefts, given that car thefts in Western Australia increased about 15 per cent between 2008 and 2013. ## Merseyside Merseyside provides an illuminating example of a different sort because it is one of the few areas in England and Wales in which vehicle thefts show a different trend from the other highvolume acquisitive crime types: burglary and theft from vehicles. Table A7.3 shows that 41 of the 44 police force areas had peaks in all these acquisitive crimes more or less simultaneously between 1990/91 and 1996/7. The Metropolitan Police Service, West Midlands and South Yorkshire each have one crime type that peaks at a different time, but Merseyside is the major exception. None of its crime types peaks in the early 1990s. As Figure A4.4 shows, burglary and thefts from vehicles peaked in the mid-1980s, while theft of vehicles was largely flat (with some volatility) through till 2000 when it began to fall sharply. Previous Home Office research has suggested that a possible explanation for the different trends in Merseyside is that it had a different trajectory of heroin use compared to most of the rest of the British Isles (Morgan, 2014). Merseyside had a steep increase in the number of heroin users in the early 1980s in line with several other parts of the UK, including Manchester and Glasgow (Parker, 1998). But Addicts Index data suggest that by the 1990s, Merseyside was the only area in England and Wales in which the heroin problem was in decline (Morgan, 2014). By contrast, most other areas experienced their sharpest increase in heroin users during the late 1980s/early 1990s (ibid.). In this context, however, the Merseyside example is interesting because, regardless of its different trends up to that point, Merseyside still has a substantial fall in vehicle thefts from 2000, at the point in which the modelling in this report suggests that the main effect of electronic immobilisers would be likely to occur. ## Fall In Vehicle Crime This appendix explores other factors that may have been important drivers of vehicle crime trends in England and Wales. It is broken up into six sections: opportunity, economics, drugs, policing, prison and other factors. ## Opportunity Figure 5 showed that between 1975 and 1990 the trend in vehicle thefts tracked the increasing trend in cars on the road to a reasonable degree. This does not, of course, prove that there was any relationship, but it is perhaps suggestive that an increasing number of targets, and hence opportunity for criminality, probably played some role in that long-term increase. Similarly, for thefts from vehicles, the data presented in this report suggest that when victims and manufacturers increased the opportunity for criminality by putting reasonably valuable and easily-stolen stereos into vehicles during the 1970s and 1980s, thefts increased at an even faster rate than numbers of vehicles on the roads. However, there is less evidence to suggest that opportunity played an important role in the sharp rise and then fall in vehicle crime that occurred in the majority of police force areas during the 1990s. Department for Transport statistics show that, having risen every year from the end of World War 2, the number of licensed vehicles on the road in Great Britain actually fell from 1990 to 1992, during the period when both thefts of and from vehicles saw their sharpest increases. This fact, which was almost certainly due to the recession of the time, does not suggest that opportunity - in its simplest sense - was driving the vehicle crime trend. The rising trend in licensed vehicles resumed in 1993. Between 1993 and 2014, around 8 million more cars have been registered, so the decline in thefts is nothing to do with the number of vehicles on the road. It must have been due to security and/or other factors. ## Economics There is a huge literature on the relationship between economic factors and crime. The results remain inconclusive and much debated. Much of the debate reflects the fact that economic conditions correlated strongly with the rise in crime in the early 1990s, the sharp turning point and then the long fall in crime through to 2008. The correlation ended at that point, however. This is demonstrated by Figure A5.1, which shows unemployment in England and Wales (proxied by male claimant count) and numbers of recorded burglaries. ## Figure A5.1 Recorded Burglaries And Male Claimant Count In England And Wales Source: ONS, Police Recorded crime; NOMIS. The two series show a strong correlation for most of the period, and especially during the early 1990s. But there was no rise in crime during the 2008 recession. This suggests either that the earlier correlation was spurious or that by the time of the later recession, the relationship had either ended or changed in some way. For example, there is some evidence that the 2008 recession was different from previous recessions. Unemployment rose in 2008, but not by nearly as much as in the early 1990s; and though cuts to household consumption were actually worse than in previous recessions, the type of reductions were different, with a greater reliance on cutting back on nondurable expenditure and less of an effect on durable items (Crossley et al., 2013). This could suggest that people were not finding it as hard to purchase essential items like food. Also, as US criminologist Richard Rosenfeld has argued, the economy entered the 2008 recession with historically low levels of inflation (Rosenfeld, 2014). This was the opposite of earlier downturns, which had shown stronger links with crime. Perhaps even more importantly, as the Institute of Fiscal Studies has shown, income inequality actually decreased from 2008 to 2012 (in sharp contrast to earlier recessions) as real earnings for those in work fell, while benefits and tax credit incomes remained robust (Cribb *et al*., 2013). So if income inequality or bottom-decile incomes are important factors (as suggested by Machin and Meghir in a 2004 paper), then it may not be surprising that there was no obvious crime rise during the 2008 downturn. Regardless of what happened in 2008 though, unemployment is one of the few data series that offers compelling correlation with vehicle crime (and other types of theft) during the sharp rise and fall in numbers of offences during the early 1990s. Given that this report has found little correlation with security or opportunity trends during that period (though both are clearly important at other times), the early 1990s recession and swift recovery must remain potentially important factors in explaining the vehicle crime turning point. ## Policing If changes in policing have been important in driving vehicle crime trends, there are probably two ways in which this could have happened. Firstly, there could be a relationship with police resources. This is a fairly obvious formulation: if police resources increase, crime might be expected to fall and if resources decrease they might be expected to rise. Many studies have attempted to test this hypothesis with mixed results (see for example: Klick and Tabarrok, 2005 Evans and Owens, 2007). But whatever the specific relationship between crime and police resources, it seems unlikely that it played an important part in the vehicle crime turning point in England and Wales, for the simple reason that there was no marked change in police officer numbers at this point, see Figure A5.2. ## Figure A5.2: Crime And Police Officer Numbers In England And Wales Sources: CSEW, Home Office Police Statistics. The other way in which policing might affect crime levels is through improved tactics and techniques. This has been cited as a major reason for the crime decline in the US, particularly in New York City (Zimring, 2001; 2012). In England and Wales too, some have linked falling crime to improvements in policing, either via raised detection rates (Bandyopadhyay *et al*., 2012), or through the increased adoption of problem-solving policing (Economist, 2013). It is beyond the scope of this paper to test these claims, due in part to the fact that it is very difficult to obtain data at the aggregate level on the degree to which police practices (like the adoption of problem-solving policing) have changed. So it remains a possibility that changes to policing played an important part in the overall crime decline. But policing is perhaps unlikely to have been the main cause of the sharp spikes in crime visible at the local-level in the mid 1990s, because that would imply police tactics got markedly worse and then markedly better in a short space of time. ## Prison For the most part, studies that have looked at the relationship between incarceration and crime levels have yielded significant but small effects. Overall, they suggest that increases in the prison population have probably played some role in the crime decline but that they are unlikely to be the main driver of trends. The mid 1990s turn-around in crime in England and Wales did coincide with an increase in the prison population and the prison population has continued to rise as crime has continued to fall, see Figure A5.3. ## Figure A5.3: Crime And The Prison Population In England And Wales Sources: CSEW, MOJ Prison Population Statistics. Other nations (notably Canada) saw crime turn downwards during the 1990s without raising their prison populations, which suggests the possibility that the correlation in England and Wales is spurious. However, the number of prisoners increased by around 50 per cent between 1993 and 1998, meaning that around 24,000 more individuals were in prison in 1998 than at the crime peak in 1993 (Ministry of Justice, 2013). Table A5.1 shows a breakdown of the sentenced prison population (it does not include prisoners on remand) from 1990 to 2013. It shows that violent and sexual offenders made the biggest contribution to the prison population increases over the whole period. But during the 1990s - when crime turned around - many more offenders of all types were incarcerated. It therefore seems possible that at least some of the most prolific vehicle crime offenders went to prison at this time and that this contributed to the sharply falling vehicle crime rate. Increase 1990-2000 Increase 1990-2013 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2013 Violence against the person 7,477 8,781 11,217 15,178 20,247 19,473 50% 160% Sexual offences 3,018 3,668 5,090 6,185 9,304 10,540 69% 249% Robbery 4,052 5,372 6,353 8,378 8,834 8,873 57% 119% Burglary 5,885 5,953 8,982 8,082 6,857 7,073 53% 20% Theft and handling 3,042 3,729 5,044 4,126 3,850 4,500 66% 48% Fraud and forgery 795 1,167 1,016 1,454 1,544 1,320 28% 66% Drug offences 2,829 4,256 8,473 10,661 11,064 10,175 200% 260% Motoring offences na 1,678 2,328 2,163 931 723 na na Other offences 3,280 2,628 3,723 5,289 7,353 7,625 14% 132% Offence not recorded 3,148 1,631 866 664 887 479 -72% -85% All offences 33,526 38,863 53,092 62,180 70,871 70,781 58% 111% Sources: Data for 1990 to 1993: Prison Statistics England and Wales (1999), Table 1.7 (motoring offences were included in 'other offences'). Data for 1994 to 2004: Offender management caseload statistics England and Wales 2004, Table 8.2. Data for 2005 to 2013: Annual prison population (2013), Table A1.3b. Drugs Heroin and crack-cocaine use has been linked to the rise and fall in vehicle crime in both England and Wales (Morgan, 2014) and in the US (Blumstein and Rosenfeld, 2008). Certainly, available surveys of heroin/crack-cocaine users show a high self-reported volume of thefts of and from vehicles. Table A5.2 shows the total self-reported offending by a cohort of 1,699 heroin and/or crack-using arrestees in England and Wales during a 12-month period from the mid 2000s. ## Table A5.2: Self-Reported Annual Offending By Regular Heroin/Crack-Using Arrestees In England And Wales Similar results have been found in other studies (see Morgan, 2014 for a review) and certainly suggest that any changes in the number of heroin/crack users may have had an important effect on the rise and fall of vehicle crime, given that numbers of heroin/crack users increased from the low thousands to the hundreds of thousands in both the UK and the US. Blumstein and Rosenfeld (2008) noted that the high correlation between violence and theft of vehicles in the US may have been due to declining crack markets and the fact that stolen vehicles were often traded for drugs (see Jacobs, 1999). Morgan (2014) has suggested that the heroin epidemic may have contributed to the rise and fall in acquisitive crime (including vehicle crime) in England and Wales, noting that peaks in heroin use tended to coincide with peaks in theft both locally and internationally, which could explain some of the variations in trend, notably the fact that Merseyside peaks earlier than the rest of England and Wales (see Appendix 4) and the earlier peak in theft in the US and the later peak in Australia. However, data difficulties mean it is hard to track the progress of drug epidemics precisely. Epidemic models suggest numbers of users can both increase and decrease very quickly at the local level, which would fit with the 'spikes' in crime shown in Figure A3.3, but it is hard to measure the national peak in heroin/crack use precisely. In that light, the changes to both unemployment and the prison population may be important. Evidence suggests a link between job markets and heroin spread (Parker *et al*., 1987; Pearson, 1987), so the vastly improved unemployment situation from 1993 may have helped to curtail numbers of new users; and given the highly prolific level of offending by some heroin/crack users (Table A5.2), if even a proportion were incarcerated during the rise in the prison population from 1993, this could have had a marked effect on crime levels. One objection to the hypothesis that heroin/crack use may have played a role in driving vehicle crime trends is that drug use is not particularly compatible with joy-riding, and so if joy-riding was the major component of vehicle thefts it is unlikely that drug use would play a role. The evidence shows, however, that thefts of vehicles typically made up about 10–15 per cent of all vehicle crime on the CSEW, hence joy-riding is far from the main component of all vehicle crime. Indeed, the proportion of thefts committed purely for joy-riding (or for reasons other than financial gain) is hard to quantify, but Figure 17 shows that the sharp rise in crime was more do to with economically motivated offending than joy-riding. In interviews with car thieves from the early 1990s, Light *et al*., (1993) found that although excitement and relief from boredom were the main reasons for first stealing a car, the main reason for continuing in car crime was listed as "money". Arguably the latter would probably account for the majority of offences, given that crime is generally skewed to a few highly prolific offenders. In the US, evidence suggests joy-riding had reduced markedly by the time vehicle thefts peaked. At the height of the vehicle crime peak in New York in the early 1990s, a hearing that convened a series of experts to discuss the problem, concluded that joy-riding typified the vehicle crime problem "25 years earlier" and that it accounted for only five per cent of vehicle thefts by 1990. "Profit-making" was seen instead as the main motive (Committee on the Judiciary, 1992). It is probably fair to say though, that while the evidence is stronger for a security effect on theft of vehicles, due to the research on electronic immobilisers particularly, the evidence regarding heroin/crack use is probably stronger for theft from vehicles. There is considerable evidence to suggest heroin/crack users committed large amounts of stereo thefts from cars (Ball and Wikngaart, 1994; Akhtar and South, 2000). And areas like Merseyside and the US, that had a heroin epidemic peak before 1990, often had peaks in burglary and theft (including thefts from vehicles) at the same time. But their peaks in thefts of vehicles did not correlate with trends in heroin use and instead peaked far later (though in line with the peak in the crack-cocaine epidemic in the case of the US). For those areas that had heroin peaks after 1990, however - like most parts of England and Wales and Australia - the drug trends seem to correlate well with all types of theft, including thefts of vehicles. It is not totally clear why this should be the case, but one possibility is that when heroin use peaked in the 1970s in the US and in the early 1980s in Merseyside, theft of vehicles was still dominated by joy-riding and hence was less affected by the epidemic. But after that point, as rates of joy-riding declined and financial motivations increased, vehicle theft trends became more aligned with heroin/crack trends. Part of this story may also involve the development of a new market for stolen cars from 1989 when the Berlin Wall came down and opened up a new source of illegal demand from Eastern Europe. ## Other This appendix has summarised some of the other factors that have been suggested as possible causes of the fall in vehicle crime (and other types of crime) in developed nations around the world. But there are many more and it is beyond the scope of this report to examine them all in great detail. This final section will simply note therefore that many of the other theories for crime's decline involve long-term or generational impacts, which are generally not consistent with the sharp crime spikes seen in Figures 5 and A3.3. One of these is demographic change. There is some evidence that the number of young males in the population shifted downwards shortly before crime fell in England and Wales and certainly the ratio of old to young increased through the crime drop. This may therefore have contributed to the overall shift from rising to falling crime, but arguably it cannot have happened quickly enough to offer a compelling explanation for the sharp reversal in vehicle crime that occurred in the 1990s. The same can be said of theories relating that operate on a generational basis like the lead hypothesis offered by Nevin in a 2007 paper or the abortion hypothesis put forward by Donuhue and Levitt (2001). These approaches argue that a significant change occurred a generation before the crime drop (a marked drop in atmospheric lead levels in the case of the first hypothesis and the legalisation of abortion in the case of the second), which would have lowered the crime propensity of later generations and caused falling crime. It should be acknowledged that there is considerable evidence to support the notion of a generational change in relation to the crime drop in England and Wales. Certainly the decline has occurred in line with falls in risky behaviours of all kinds (speeding, traffic accidents, alcohol use, smoking, etc.) which suggests a general attitudinal change amongst young people may have occurred (Mishra *et al*., 2009; HM Government Horizon Scanning Programme, 2014). But again, whilst this may be a hugely important part of the story of the crime decline overall, it does not offer a compelling explanation for the sharp shifts in trends that occurred around the crime turning point. Generational change, almost by definition, has to be gradual. ## 1. Initial Analysis Looking at the national police recorded crime dataset for 'heff of motor vehicle' (TOM/); 'heff from motor vehicle' (TFM/) and burglary, with 41 forces aggregated[67], an initial model[68] was formulated as follows: $$\textbf{(A)}\quad\textbf{Y=a+b*U+c*V+d*T}$$ where,  Y = TOMV  U = TFMV  V = Burglary  T = time (in calendar years) ## Table A6.1: Initial Model Results | Parameter Estimates | | |-----------------------------|-------------------------| | Dependent Variable:sum_TOMV | | | Parameter | 95% Confidence Interval | | Partial Eta | | | B | Std. Error | | Intercept | 43740.413 | | sum_Burglary | .240 | | sum_TFMV | .310 | | Time | -5169.181 | The findings in Table A6.1 show that burglary and TFMV are significant predictors of TOMV. The coefficient on the 'Time' variable indicates that over the whole time period there was a decline in Y (TOMV) after taking account of U (TFMV) and V (Burglary). It implies that for every year the number of vehicles stolen above what U and V predict decreases by 5,169 (CI=4,332 and 6,007), i.e. at T=1 there were 5,169 fewer vehicles stolen than U and V alone would predict, at T=2 there were 2 x 5169 fewer, etc. However, further inspection of the data revealed a problem with this approach. This is illustrated in Figure A6.1, which shows the ratio of Y/U and Y/V by time across all forces. The graph shows that the ratios are not constant over time. Overall, both lines fall from the beginning of the series to the end. This in itself is not a problem. It merely suggests that something reduced TOMV more than burglary and TFMV over the period - at an average rate of about 5,000 fewer offences per year. The problem is that the lines are not linear, as was assumed in the initial model. The *rate* of decrease also varies with time. Therefore, a better model would allow for this variation across time. In particular, we want to test whether the nonlinearity in the downward trend matches the evidence on electronic immobilisers. Put more simply - does TOMV start falling faster than the other crimes once electronic immobilisers are introduced and begin to spread through the vehicle fleet. The chart also shows that the ratio of Y/U falls very sharply at the beginning of the series. Whilst this could be due to changes in vehicle security that affected TOMV but not TFMV it is probably more likely that most of the effect is caused by an increased rate of TFMV reporting, as outlined in the main report. Crime Survey data for that period showed clearly that a greater percentage of TFMV were reported to the police in the early 1990s than in the early 1980s. Using U as a 'general theft propensity' variable is therefore problematic.69 It was therefore excluded from the final research hypothesis and model - as outlined below - and burglary alone was used as the proxy for `general theft propensity'. 2. Research hypothesis ## The Research Hypothesis Was Developed As Follows.  There is a time-varying (latent) variable Z, which is an underlying measure of "propensity for general theft" that cannot be measured directly but which affects both TOMV (Y) and burglary (V).  Some unknown function of Z, affects V across the whole period from 1980 to 2013.  V can be thought of as a function of Z (and also of time T, as there may be some other time-varying effect on V other than the function of Z).  Y is also a function of Z (and T). However, unlike for V, we hypothesise that at an unknown time point t0, the introduction of electronic immobilisers changes Y (but not V). In other words, this modelling assumes no displacement or diffusion; the introduction of electronic immobilisers is assumed to have no effect on burglary.  Therefore, up to t0, Y is only a function of Z and T (general theft propensity), but after t0, Y becomes a function of Z, T and also a new time-varying variable which we will call X (the electronic immobiliser variable).  Given the other evidence showing a possible acceleration of the immobiliser effect when a majority of vehicles became protected, we hypothesise that there would be two discontinuities. It is important to note that does not mean there genuinely *are* only two. The modelling is set up with the presumption that there are two discontinuities and we test merely whether they are significant and what their effects are. ## 3 The Model The final model70 was therefore: Y = a*V + b0* V* D0* (T-t0) + b1* V* D1* (T-t1) where: - V=burglary - Y=TOMV - t0=1992 - t1=2004 - D0=0 if T<t0 & D0=1 if T>=t0 - D1=0 if T<t1 & D0=1 if T>=t1 Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE) was used to identify the "most likely" years where discontinuity takes place (T0 and T1), i.e. it identifies years in which the trend in TOMV changes in a way that would not be expected by the trend in burglary. This is in order to identify potential effects from the introduction and spread of electronic immobilisers. It is an iterative process equivalent to fitting models hypothesising a discontinuity in each and every year of the time series (34 years in total), and picking the model with the "best fit". The MLE was set up to find the "best model" when allowing for two point-changes. ## 4 Results The MLE resulted in t0=1992 and t1=2004. This means that the model with these specific change points results in the best fit, which in this case translates to the minimum "Root Mean Square Error (RMSE)". This means, in effect, that the best-fit discontinuities are in line with other evidence on the introduction and spread of electronic immobilisers, i.e. the devices were introduced in England and Wales in around 1992 and had spread to half the vehicle fleet by the early 2000s. Model results are shown below: Table A6.2: Main model results | Parameter Estimates | | |--------------------------------|-------------------------| | Dependent Variable:sum_TOMV | | | Parameter | 95% Confidence Interval | | Lower | Partial Eta | | B | Std. Error | | Upper | | | Bound | Squared | | sum_Burglary | .447 | | sum_Burglary * d_1992 * t_1992 | -.008 | | sum_Burglary * d_2004 * t_2004 | -.016 | The interpretation is as follows: - up to the first change (1992), Y (TOMV) can be predicted as being 44.7 per cent of the value of V (burglary) ## - Between 1992 And 2004, This Reduces By 0.8 Percentage Points Per Year - from 2004, the rate of reduction increases by a further 1.6 percentage points per year, so a 2.4 percentage point reduction per year in total. In other words, the model suggests that from the introduction of electronic immobilisers in 1992, TOMV starts falling at a slightly faster rate than theft generally (as proxied by burglary). But the effect is quite small until around 2004, when TOMV starts falling at a much faster rate, relative to burglary. To more directly visualise the effect of the spread of electronic immobilisers relative to other factors, it is helpful to partition the model-predicted Y into its two components: Yz (i.e. the part of TOMV that burglary can predict) and Yx (i.e. the part of TOMV that is over and above what burglary can predict): a) prediction of TOMVs if no intervention: Yz= a*V Figure A6.2 shows Y together with the model-predicted value for Y and also the modelpredicted value for Yz. ## And Estimated Trend In Theft Of Vehicles In The Absence Of Electronic Immobilisers Source: ONS, police recorded crime. Comparing the blue (Y) and green (predicted Y) lines, we can confirm that the model fits very well for all time points. The red dotted line shows Yz. This is the same as the predicted Y up to 1992 (i.e. the green and red lines are the same); after 1992, the red dotted line shows the estimated number of thefts of vehicles if electronic immobilisers had not been introduced. Note that it still falls considerably from its level during the early 1990s. This implies that 'general theft propensity' decreased from that point, but that electronic immobilisers had an additional effect. b) prediction of prevented TOMVs after intervention: Yx = b0*V*(T-t0) + b1*V*(T-T1) Figure A6.3 shows Yx after 1992 (i.e. the change in Y that cannot be predicted by V), together with Yz, Y and predicted Y. Yx can be seen as a direct estimate of the number of TOMV offences prevented by electronic immobilisers. ## Figure A6.3: Theft Of Vehicles, Actual And Modelled, And The Estimated Number Of Thefts Prevented By Immobilisers Source: ONS, police recorded crime. Reading from the chart above, the actual numbers for 2013 are Yz=196,100 and predicted Y=62,887. This implies that without electronic immobilisers 'theft of vehicle' volumes would be about three times higher than they currently are, demonstrating the marked effect of immobilisers. But this analysis suggests that the downward shift in 'general theft propensity' contributed even more to the drop in TOMV offences. The black line (prevented TOMVs: Yx) goes down from 0 (in 1992) to -133,213 (at 2013), implying that 133,213 vehicle thefts in 2013 were prevented by electronic immobilisers. The modelled number of total vehicle thefts fell by about 539,000 between 1992 and 2013 (shown by the fall in the green line). Taken together, these results suggest that around a quarter of the fall in vehicle thefts (133,213/539,000) from 1992 to 2013 can be attributed to electronic immobilisers. In reality this may be a lower bound for the actual effect because of the assumption that no benefits from electronic immobilisers diffused to burglary.71 The results from this section suggest that there has been a strong relationship between trends in burglary and vehicle theft from 1980 to 2013. This implies that a factor or factors affecting general propensity for theft played an important role in both the rise and fall in crime. However, the results also show the presence of an additional factor depressing levels of vehicle theft from 1992, which is in line with the introduction of electronic immobilisers. Results suggest that these devices prevented more thefts year on year from 1992 and that their effectiveness accelerated further from 2004, once a majority of vehicles were protected. Overall, the results imply that at least a quarter of the total decline in vehicle thefts between 1992 and 2013 were directly attributable to the devices even assuming no diffusion of benefits. This technical appendix contains additional methodological details and findings. ## 1) Police Recorded Crime Trends Used In This Report This brief section gives details of the recorded crime trends used in this report including how recording practice and crime-type changes were incorporated. For 'theft of vehicles' counts of crime type 48: 'Theft or unauthorised taking of a motor vehicle' were used. In 1992 the offence of 'aggravated vehicle taking' was created (code: 37.2) and these were also included in the annual totals as these were offences that would previously have been incorporated into crime type 48. In 1998/99 the offence of 'vehicle interference and tampering' was made notifiable. This offence, which was created in the 1981 Criminal Attempts Act, was a summary offence prior to 1998/99 and therefore would not have appeared in total police recorded crime figures. It includes "recorded crime offences where there is evidence of intent to commit either theft of or from a vehicle or taking without consent (TWOC), but there is either (i) no evidence of intent to commit one of these three offences specifically, or (ii) there is evidence of intent to commit TWOC (TWOC is a summary offence but, under the provisions of the Criminal Attempts Act 1981, it is not legally valid to have an attempted summary offence)" (Home Office, 2010). In other words, a proportion of attempted theft of vehicles (those that were not intended to be permanent thefts) would be included in 'vehicle interference and tampering' rather than in 'theft of vehicles', but they *should* have been excluded from the latter throughout the period 1981 to 2013/14. This means that the trend in crime type 48, with the addition of crime type 37.2 should be unbiased throughout the series - it will not include all attempted thefts but the types of thefts excluded should remain constant. However, in practice this may not have occurred, according to (Povey et al., 1998). They write that making 'vehicle interference and tampering' a notifiable offence may have caused some forces to shift offences previously recorded as (attempted) 'theft of vehicle' into the new category. To investigate this, the trend in 'vehicle interference and tampering' was examined along with trends in total recorded vehicle thefts and a count of the police-recorded attempted thefts that were included in crime type 48 (the main 'theft of' category). The latter was obtained from a supplementary data collection that ran from 1996 to 2002/03. These trends are shown in Figure A7.1 below. ## Interference And Tampering Figure A7.1 shows that from 2002/03 onwards 'vehicle interference and tampering' has a similar trend to total vehicle thefts. Both fell by around 75 per cent between 2002/03 and 2013/14. Between 1998/99 and 2002/03 though, 'vehicle interference and tampering' rises sharply. There are two possible reasons for this. The first is that, as suggested in Povey *et al*. (1999), there was some transference from 'theft of vehicle' into 'vehicle interference and tampering' during that period. Looking at the proportion of total thefts that were recorded as attempts, this remained constant at around 11.5 per cent of total thefts in 1996 and 1997, but from then on it fell sharply - i.e. the green line in Figure A7.1 declines more sharply than the blue line. This suggests that some attempted thefts may have moved into 'vehicle interference and tampering'. One way to estimate the degree of transference is to assume that if the new crime category had not been introduced, the proportion of attempted thefts recorded within 'theft of vehicle' would have remained constant. Assuming this, it is possible to estimate an adjusted trend in 'theft of vehicles'. This is shown in Figure A7.2. Figure A7.2 suggests that although the introduction of 'vehicle interference and tampering' may have led to subsequent 'theft of vehicle' figures being *under*-estimated, any effect would have been slight with the degree of deflation ranging from 1.8 per cent to around seven per cent depending on the year. However, there is another reason why 'vehicle interference and tampering' may rise sharply from 1998/99 to 2002/03. During that period all recorded crime was affected by two recording practice changes that culminated in the introduction of the National Crime Recording Standard (NCRS) in 2002. Full details of these changes can be found in Povey *et al*., (1998) and Simmons *et al*., (2003). In general though, the changes had the effect of increasing the number of offences recorded. Violence was the crime category most affected, but available evidence suggests that there was also a smaller impact on vehicle crime and burglary, with some crimes being recorded that would not previously have been. Available estimates of these effects are shown in Table A7.1. Table A7.1 shows that the impact of the 1998/99 recording change on burglary and vehicle crime was small; the uplift was less than one per cent in all cases. For the introduction of the NCRS the impact was bigger, though separate estimates were not attempted for theft of and from vehicles. However, separate analyses (see Table 3.04 in Thorpe (2005)) suggests that the majority of the uplift would likely have come from 'theft from vehicles' and that 'theft of vehicles' was very well reported and recorded even prior to 2002. Table 3.04 in Thorpe (2005) also shows that the impact of the recording changes on recorded *attempted* thefts may have been much larger. So it could be that the rise in the red line in Figure A7.2 simply represents improved recording of the attempted vehicle thefts (both thefts of and from) that would never have been included in the 'theft of vehicles' trend. In addition, Table A7.1 shows that regardless of the impact of 'vehicle interference and tampering' the rule changes would have *inflated* the vehicle crime and burglary figures slightly (burglary and theft of vehicles would have been affected only marginally, with an uplift of up to 1.5 per cent at most, though there was probably a bigger effect on theft from vehicles). This would have counteracted any transference into 'vehicle interference and tampering' to some extent. Indeed, comparison with the CSEW suggests the unadjusted vehicle theft trend gives a better representation of the true trend. The decline from 1993 to 2013/14 on the CSEW is 88 per cent. On the unadjusted PRC trend it is 87 per cent and on the adjusted PRC trend which inflates figures post 1998/99 to account for vehicle interference and tampering, the fall is 86 per cent.72 As a result, the decision was taken, not to adjust the 'theft of vehicles' trend to take into account 'vehicle interference and tampering' for the purposes of the analyses in this report. This does mean however, that although the trend is very similar to the CSEW trend, see Figure 4, it will not include all attempted vehicle thefts. This is not the only difference between the series. The CSEW does not include offences against commercial targets and offences against individuals in institutions. ## To Summarise: - In theory, the fact that 'vehicle interference and tampering' became notifiable in 1998/99 should not affect the theft of vehicles trend used in this report because the offences included should have been separate both before and after the change. - But, evidence suggests some crimes previously recorded as 'theft of vehicle' may subsequently have been recorded as 'vehicle interference and tampering' during the period from 1998/99 to 2002/03. This would have a small *deflationary* impact on the 'theft of vehicles' trend from 1998/99 onwards. - However, during the period from 1998/99 to 2002/03 there were two recording practice changes. These would have had a small *inflationary* impact on the 'theft of vehicles' trend from 1998/99 onwards. - As a result of the evidence presented above, and the fact that the two effects will counterbalance to some extent (a fact supported by looking at the CSEW trend), the decision was taken not to try and incorporate any or all of the 'vehicle interference and tampering' figures into the 'theft of vehicles' trend. But aggravated vehicle taking was included. For the national and force-level burglary trends used in the main report, the PRC category of 'total burglary' was used which incorporates recorded attempts. No further adjustments were made as the likely uplift due to the 1998–2002 recording changes would have been around 1.5 per cent at most. For theft from vehicles, trends in crime type 45 'theft from a vehicle' were used and no attempt was made to adjust for 'vehicle interference and tampering' becoming a notifiable offence (because in theory this should not affect the trend, as explained above). However, an adjustment was made for the recording practice changes in line with the evidence presented in Povey *et al*., (1998) and Simmons *et al*., (2003) and set out in Table A7.1 above. The effect of this is shown in Figure A7.3 below. The relevant analyses were also run with the unadjusted figures and results remained broadly the same. Sources: ONS, police recorded crime; Povey *et al*., (1998); Simmons *et al*., (2003) ## 2) Theft Rates Computed From Car Theft Index Data In section 3, statistics relating to theft rates for cars registered in the 1990s and the 1980s are quoted. Table A7.2 provides the data from which these figures were computed. Theft rate per car on the road Total cars registered in the 1980s or before Theft of cars registered in the 1980s or before Change of theft rate compared with previous year 1996 Car Theft Index 11,864,930 337,094 0.028 1997 Car Theft Index 11,084,781 265,767 0.024 -15.6% 1998 Car Theft Index 9,618,991 230,319 0.024 -0.1% 1999 Car Theft Index 8,133,109 200,975 0.025 3.2% Theft rate per car on the road Total cars registered in the 1990s Theft of cars registered in the 1990s Change of theft rate compared with previous year 1996 Car Theft Index 12,418,241 148,601 0.012 1997 Car Theft Index 14,092,225 140,175 0.010 -16.9% 1998 Car Theft Index 16,253,185 156,505 0.010 -3.2% 1999 Car Theft Index 18,123,251 169,488 0.009 -2.9% Note that the 1996 Car Theft Index (CTI) employed a slightly different methodology from that used in subsequent years. This resulted in it capturing a slightly lower proportion of all thefts than the other years. To adjust for this, the number of thefts recorded by the CTI was compared to vehicle thefts in the official police recorded crime (PRC) statistics. There are important differences between these series. The Car Theft Index records thefts of cars only but includes data from Scotland, whereas the police recorded crime data excludes Scotland but includes thefts of other types of vehicle. Also, the Car Theft Index data are recorded on a calendar-year basis whereas PRC switches to financial years in 1998/99. (Hence, the data point shown below as 1998/99 for the red line is actually the 1998 data.) Despite these differences, the two series show similar levels and trends for total numbers of thefts, see Figure A7.4. ## Vehicle Thefts Recorded By Police Recorded Crime Sources: Car Theft Index, ONS police recorded crime. The correlation for the two series is very close except that the CTI recorded 87,000 fewer thefts in 1996 due to the different methodology. For the modelling then, the total number of thefts in the 1996 Index was converted to the PRC thefts total, but the *distribution* of thefts (in terms of age of vehicle) was maintained from the original Car Theft Index data. As such, it should not bias the results unless the missing 18 per cent of thefts had a different age distribution. There seems no obvious reason why this should be the case. Also, Table A7.2 shows that theft rates for both 1990s-registered and 1980s-registered cars fell between 1997 and 1998 too (though only marginally in the case of the older vehicles). It is only in 1999 that theft rates on older vehicles start to rise, indicating possible displacement consistent with the impact of electronic immobilisers. ## 3) Calculations For Immobiliser Effectiveness In section 3 of the main report, modelling of immobiliser impact is calculated using a range from "20 per cent effectiveness" to "80 per cent effectiveness." This was calculated by assuming that vehicles without electronic immobilisers continued to be stolen at the same rate as they were before the devices began appearing on any vehicles (adjusted for age using the 1996 Car Theft Index distribution as explained in the main report). For vehicles that did have electronic immobilisers the same method and theft rates were used but they were multiplied by a given fraction depending on the level of effectiveness. So for the "20 per cent effectiveness" model, all theft rates for vehicles with immobilisers were multiplied by 0.8 to give a 20 per cent reduction. In the "40 per cent effectiveness" model, the multiplier was 0.6, and so on. ## 4) The Sequencing Of Peaks For All Police Force Areas In England And Wales Table A7.3 gives the full results for the analysis of sequencing at a police force area level. The datasets used for this analysis contained counts of crimes in each financial year and the peak year is shown for burglary, theft of vehicle, theft from vehicle and other theft. Areas in which theft of vehicle peaked at the same time or before the other crime types were coded as being in accordance with a diffusion of benefits hypothesis. Peak Crime Year Police Force Theft from Area Burglary Theft of Vehicle Vehicle Other Theft Avon and Somerset 1992/93 1993/94 1992/93 1993/94 NO Bedfordshire 1992/93 1993/94 1991/92 1996/97 NO Cambridgeshire 1993/94 1995/96 1996/97 1991/92 NO Cheshire 1993/94 1992/93 1993/94 1999/00 YES Cleveland 1995/96 1993/94 1990/91 1992/93 NO Cumbria 1992/93 1991/92 1992/93 1991/92 YES Derbyshire 1993/94 1995/96 1992/93 1992/93 NO Devon and Cornw all 1993/94 1993/94 1993/94 1992/93 NO Dorset 1995/96 1990/91 1995/96 1992/93 YES Durham 1995/96 1993/94 1991/92 1993/94 NO Dyfed-Pow ys 1992/93 1992/93 1992/93 1991/92 NO Essex 1993/94 1992/93 1991/92 2000/01 NO Gloucestershire 1993/94 1993/94 1993/94 2000/01 YES Greater Manchester 1992/93 1992/93 1991/92 1992/93 NO Gw ent 1997/98 1993/94 1991/92 1992/93 NO Hampshire 1992/93 1991/92 1992/93 1992/93 YES Hertfordshire 1993/94 1992/93 1995/96 1991/92 NO Humberside 1993/94 1994/95 1993/94 1991/92 NO Kent 1995/96 1992/93 1993/94 1993/94 YES Lancashire 1996/97 1993/94 1993/94 1992/93 NO Leicestershire 1994/95 1993/94 1992/93 1993/94 NO Lincolnshire 1993/94 1993/94 1992/93 1992/93 NO Merseyside 1986/87 1987/88 1987/88 1995/96 NO Metropolitan 1992/93 1982/83 1992/93 1991/92 (YES) Norfolk 1993/94 1991/92 1992/93 2000/01 YES North Wales 1992/93 1992/93 1993/94 1991/92 NO North Yorkshire 1994/95 1995/96 1994/95 1995/96 NO Northamptonshire 1993/94 1993/94 1991/92 1992/93 NO Northumbria 1991/92 1991/92 1990/91 1985/86 NO Nottinghamshire 1993/94 1991/92 1991/92 1992/93 YES South Wales 1992/93 1994/95 1991/92 1991/92 NO South Yorkshire 1993/94 1993/94 1993/94 1984/85 NO Staffordshire 1993/94 1992/93 1993/94 2000/01 YES Suffolk 1993/94 1991/92 1992/93 1993/94 YES Surrey 1993/94 1992/93 1992/93 2000/01 YES Sussex 1992/93 1991/92 1992/93 2000/01 YES Thames Valley 1993/94 1993/94 1993/94 1992/93 NO Warw ickshire 1992/93 1993/94 1992/93 1991/92 NO West Mercia 1993/94 1993/94 1996/97 1993/94 YES West Midlands 1992/93 1996/97 1987/88 2000/01 NO West Yorkshire 1993/94 1991/92 1991/92 1992/93 YES Wiltshire 1992/93 1991/92 1993/94 1991/92 YES Fits with Immobiliser sequencing Fifteen of 42 forces have sequencing that supports a diffusion of benefits hypothesis and 26 have sequencing that runs counter to the hypothesis73. Arguably 'other theft' is less reliably recorded compared to the other offences. When this crime type is excluded the number of forces with sequencing supporting a diffusion hypothesis rises to 22. ## 5) Sources For The International Times Series Full sources for the data in the international time series used in this report are listed below. ## England And Wales Police recorded crime from ONS was used for all years. See: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/historical-crime-data ## Scotland Police recorded crime sourced from the Scottish government was used for all years. This was obtained by email. ## The United States Police recorded crime data from the Uniform Crime Reports data tool was used for all years. See: http://www.ucrdatatool.gov/ ## Canada Police recorded crime data sourced from Statistics Canada. For the years from 1981–2001, data were sourced from Table 1 in this document: https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/lbrr/archives/jrst85-002-x2003001-eng.pdf. For the years after 2001, table 252-0051 was used from here: http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/COR-COR/COR- COR/objList?lang=eng&srcObjType=SDDS&srcObjId=3302&tgtObjType=ARRAY ## Australia Police recorded crime data sourced from the Australian Institute of Criminology. For the years from 1980 to 1995, data were sourced from this publication: http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/8/C/D/%7B8CDE7EA6-7019-40D3-BAFA- DA1040BE608C%7DRPP07.pdf and converted from rates to volumes using population data from here: http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/3105.0.65.0012014?OpenDocument. For the years from 1996 to 1999, data were sourced from this document: http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/4510.02000?OpenDocument. For the years from 2000 to 2009 data were sourced from here: http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/4510.02009?OpenDocument and for the remaining years data were sourced from here: http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/4510.02013?OpenDocument ## *The Netherlands* Recorded crime data on vehicle thefts from RDW (the Netherlands Dept. of Motor Vehicles). Recorded crime data on burglary for 1980–1992 from this paper: http://www.crim.cam.ac.uk/people/academic_research/david_farrington/cnscj.pdf with rates converted to volumes using population data from here: http://statline.cbs.nl/Statweb/publication/?DM=SLEN&PA=37556eng&D1=0,21&D2=81- 115&LA=EN&HDR=T&STB=G1&VW=T. Recorded burglary data from 1993 onwards were sourced from Eurostat (http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat). ## Sweden Police recorded crime data for all years sourced from the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention. See: http://www.bra.se/bra/bra-in-english/home/crime-and-statistics/crimestatistics/statistical-tables.html ## 6) Analysis Of Theft From Vehicles Trends, Looking At Possible Displacement/Diffusion Figure A7.5 shows a panel of charts with indexed trends in theft of vehicles and theft from vehicles. The aim was to see whether trends in theft from vehicles deviated at the point at which immobilisers would be likely to have their maximum impact. However, data for theft from vehicles could not be sourced for the US, Australia or the Netherlands. For the US, therefore, Figure A7.5 shows theft of vehicles compared to the category of 'larceny-theft' which contains thefts from vehicles but also other types of theft. Similarly for Australia, the larger category of 'other theft' (which contains thefts from vehicles) was used in Figure A7.5. No suitable category could be found for the Netherlands. Figure A7.5 reveals a mixed picture. For the US and Canada, trends in theft from vehicle (or larceny-theft in the case of the US) show little if any deviation when theft of vehicles starts falling in 2006. But for most of the other nations (except Scotland), theft from vehicles (or for Australia, the wider theft category containing that offence) does show signs of deviation from 2000 on, often falling at the same rate as, or slightly slower than, vehicle thefts. There is certainly some support, then, for the theory that benefits from electronic immobilisers diffused to theft *from* vehicles as well as preventing theft of vehicles. This is in accordance with the evidence that some vehicles are stolen more for their contents than for the vehicle itself (Light et al., 1993). However, in the European nations and Australia, the degree of correlation through the entire series, even back to 1980 so long before immobilisers appeared, is very high. This perhaps suggests that other factors were also involved in driving both trends at certain points. ## 7) Csew Trends In Types Of Items Stolen In 'Theft From Vehicle' Offences Although the CSEW has contained questions on items stolen since 1981, the types of items listed have changed substantially making it difficult to construct consistent trends. Generally, over time, more categories have been added, both to increase precision and to reflect changing technology. For instance, the 1987 survey had only 17 possible categories, while the 2005/06 survey had 68 (Table A7.4). Crucially, from 1991 onwards respondents were asked what types of vehicle parts/accessories were stolen (Table A7.4). This allows us to know whether these items were stolen from inside or from off the outside of the vehicle. It also potentially allows us to know whether 'radio/audio equipment' relates to car stereos or other types of stereo equipment that just happened to be in the vehicle. Two approaches were used to create meaningful groups of categories. - The first was to use the groupings used in the ONS publication 'Focus on property crimes'. For surveys back to 2001/02 there is a set of derived variables that automatically give this particular grouping. For surveys back to 1991, the groupings had to be created manually. For surveys before this point, it is not possible to create this grouping as the detail on motor vehicle parts/accessories is required. (Table A7.5) - The second was to condense these groupings into four categories: external fittings and parts (e.g. bumper, wheels, brakes), non-electronic valuables (e.g. purse, cash, jewellery), stereo-hi-fi/car radio, and other items likely to be inside vehicle (e.g. tools, mobile phone, camera). (Table A7.6) The second grouping revolved around the type of security required to defend against that type of theft. For example, central locking aims to prevent thieves from entering the vehicle. It might therefore be expected that as these devices spread through the vehicle fleet, thefts from inside the car would fall, but thefts of exterior parts might be unaffected. ## Table A7.4: Stolen Item Categories For Selection Of Csew Years | 1981 | 1987 | 1991 | 1997 | 2001/02 | 2005/06 | |-------------------------|----------------------------|-------------------------|----------------------|--------------------------|--------------------| | Cash | Car/van | Car/van | Car/van | Car/van | Car/van | | Cheque book/credit card | Motorcycle/scooter | Motorcycle/scooter | Motorcycle/scooter | Motorcycle/scooter | Motorcycle/scooter | | Car/van | Vehicle parts | Vehicle parts | Vehicle parts | Vehicle parts | Vehicle parts | | Motorbike/scooter | Handbag | Handbag | Briefcase/handbag | Briefcase/handbag | Briefcase/handbag | | Motorvehicle parts | Wallet | Wallet | Purse/wallet | Purse/wallet | Purse/wallet | | Bicycle | Purse | Purse | Cash | Cash | Cash | | Car radio/car cassette | Cash | Cash (not from meter) | Cheque book | Cheque book | Cheque book | | TV | Money from meter | Money from meter | Credit card | Credit/switch/debit card | Plastic card | | Radios/cassette player | Cheque book/credit card | Cheque book/credit card | Bicycle | Mobile phone | Mobile phone | | Tapes/cassettes | Bicycle | Bicycle | Video equipment | Jewellery | Jewellery | | Bicycle parts | Video equipment | Video equipment | Television | Clothes | Clothes | | Personal papers | Television | Television | Stereo/hi-fi | Documents | Documents | | Purse/wallet, handbag | Stereo/hi-fi | Stereo/hi-fi | Camera | Video equipment | Video equipment | | Cameras | Camera | Camera | Computer equipment | Television | Television | | Jewellery | Jewellery | Jewellery | Mobile phone | Stereo/hi-fi | Stereo/Hi-fi | | Garden equipment | Silverware | Silverware | Jewellery | Camera | Camera | | Tools | Other | Tools | Tools | Computer equipment | Computer equipment | | Petrol | Clothes | Clothes | CDs/tapes/videos | CDs/tapes/DVDs | | | | | | | | | | Clothing | Documents | Documents | House keys | House keys | | | | | | | | | | Sports equipment | Other | Other | Car keys | Car keys | | | | | | | | | | Toys | Tools | Tools | | | | | | | | | | | | Alcohol | Bicycle | Bicycle | | | | | | | | | | | | Food/tobacco | Garden furniture/equipment | Garden furniture | | | | | | | | | | | | Household equipment | Wheely bin/dustbin | Wheely bin/Dustbin | | | | | | | | | | | | Other items | Children's toys | DVD player | | | | | | | | | | | | Household items | Work materials | | | | | | | | | | | | | Sports equipment | Caravan | | | | | | | | | | | | | Other | Children's toys | | | | | | | | | | | | | Household items | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Sports equipment | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Food/drink/alcohol | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Toiletries/make up | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Animals/pets | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Cigarettes/tobacco | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Glasses | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Furniture | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Doors/windows | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Books | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Bicycle parts | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Baby or child items | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Other | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Radio/tape/CD/stereo | Radio/tape/CD/stereo | Radio/tape/cd/stereo | Radio/tape/CD/stereo | | | | In-car telephone | In-car telephone | In-car telephone | In-car telephone | | | | | | | | | | | Two-way radio | Two-way radio | Two-way radio | Two-way radio | | | | | | | | | | | Instruments | Instruments | Instruments | Instruments | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Interior fittings | Interior fittings | Interior fittings | Interior fittings | | | | | | | | | | | Exterior fittings | Exterior fittings | Exterior fittings | Exterior fittings | | | | Motor vehicle parts | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Wheel/tyre | Wheel/tyre | Wheel/tyre | Alloy wheels | | | | accessories | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Tools kept in car | Tools kept in car | Tools kept in car | Non-Alloy wheels | | | | | | | | | | | Mechanical parts | Mechanical parts | Mechanical parts | Tools kept in car | | | | | | | | | | | Fuel | Fuel | Fuel | Mechanical parts | | | | | | | | | | | Other | Other | Tax disc | Fuel | | | | | | | | | | | Air bags | Tax disc | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Other | Airbags | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Number plates | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Other | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Bumpers | Bumper | | | | | | | | | | | | | Hub caps | Hub caps | | | | | | | | | | | | | Wheel trims | Wheel trims | | | | | | | | | | | | | Aerials | Aerials | | | | | | | | | | | | | Exhaust | Exhaust | | | | | | | | | | | | | Exterior fittings | | | | | | | Number plates | Number plates | | | | | | | | | | | | | Maker's badge | Maker's badge | | | | | | of motor vehicle | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Luggage rack | Luggage/bicycle rack | | | | | | | | | | | | | Wing-mirror | Wing-mirrors | | | | | | | | | | | | | Wipers | Windscreen wipers | | | | | | | | | | | | | Other | Lights | | | | | | | | | | | | | Other | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | PERCENTAGES 19 9 1 19 9 3 19 9 5 19 9 7 19 9 9 2 0 0 1/ 0 2 2 0 0 2 / 0 3 2 0 0 3 / 0 4 2 0 0 4 / 0 5 2 0 0 5/ 0 6 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 2 0 0 7/ 0 8 2 0 0 8 / 0 9 2 0 0 9 / 10 2 0 10 / 11 2 0 11/ 12 2 0 12 / 13 2 0 13 / 14 External fittings 20.7 19.0 27.9 36.4 31.1 28.4 31.7 30.0 30.4 37.1 34.2 35.4 36.8 38.7 40.5 36.8 36.3 36.6 Stereo/hifi 38.8 30.6 30.9 27.9 23.9 24.6 23.5 23.6 24.8 19.7 18.0 16.7 12.4 11.2 7.5 7.3 4.7 4.4 Valuables 17.5 19.5 14.8 13.3 16.2 18.1 17.0 20.3 16.8 16.8 15.4 15.2 13.0 16.1 15.2 17.6 19.6 19.2 CDs/Tapes/DVDs 9.1 11.7 12.7 13.9 10.5 9.6 8.8 7.6 8.4 5.4 6.5 5.5 4.7 Other (non vehicle parts) 18.9 25.7 20.4 15.4 23.1 9.5 7.2 10.0 10.2 7.3 6.8 7.0 8.0 5.0 5.7 5.6 6.0 5.2 Tools 7.9 8.4 7.9 6.4 8.3 9.2 9.1 9.0 6.7 5.2 5.4 6.0 5.8 4.4 5.9 5.0 4.5 5.2 Mobile phone (or in-car telephone) 1.3 2.9 2.6 2.4 4.1 4.1 5.2 5.5 6.6 4.5 3.5 3.7 3.0 2.7 2.6 2.3 3.1 3.3 Other vehicle parts 5.7 8.4 5.9 4.0 6.7 4.7 3.6 3.8 5.4 7.9 7.7 5.7 7.6 7.7 8.1 9.3 10.4 12.8 Wheels/tyres 3.3 4.1 4.4 7.5 5.9 4.9 2.7 1.5 3.0 3.0 2.5 2.8 3.2 1.7 2.5 2.2 2.3 3.0 Electrical goods 0.3 1.0 1.0 0.7 2.0 2.0 1.6 2.8 2.6 2.6 9.4 11.6 14.0 14.8 13.5 16.1 16.0 18.9 Fuel 2.9 1.0 1.4 2.7 0.8 1.2 1.1 0.8 1.3 0.6 0.9 0.7 0.9 House keys 1.1 0.5 1.1 camera 1.0 0.8 1.3 1.0 0.8 0.9 0.8 1.2 0.8 0.8 1.6 1.0 0.7 1.6 1.2 1.2 1.1 0.7 Tax disc 1.3 1.3 1.0 Household items 3.7 2.5 1.3 0.5 0.9 0.4 1.0 1.5 1.1 1.3 1.7 2.3 1.8 Car keys 0.3 0.4 0.5 Vehicle stolen 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.6 1.7 0.6 0.5 Garden equipment 0.3 0.3 0.0 Bicycle 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 food/toiletries/cigarettes 1.3 1.3 1.6 2.0 1.4 1.4 2.3 3.1 1.9 VOLUMES (000s) 19 9 1 19 9 3 19 9 5 19 9 7 19 9 9 2 0 0 1/ 0 2 2 0 0 2 / 0 3 2 0 0 3 / 0 4 2 0 0 4 / 0 5 2 0 0 5/ 0 6 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 2 0 0 7/ 0 8 2 0 0 8 / 0 9 2 0 0 9 / 10 2 0 10 / 11 2 0 11/ 12 2 0 12 / 13 2 0 13 / 14 External fittings 500.6 482.6 695.1 783.1 559.7 416.0 441.0 389.1 356.7 402.3 372.7 338.1 373.2 320.5 342.3 323.9 275.1 263.4 Stereo/hifi 938.9 775.8 770.5 600.7 430.8 360.7 326.8 306.6 291.0 214.1 196.4 160.0 125.7 92.6 63.3 63.9 35.8 31.7 Valuables 422.1 494.8 368.8 286.3 292.2 265.9 236.2 264.1 197.0 182.5 167.9 144.7 132.1 133.7 129.0 154.8 148.4 138.1 CDs/Tapes/DVDs 133.9 161.9 165.1 163.5 114.2 105.0 83.9 77.5 69.7 46.1 57.1 41.6 33.6 Other (non vehicle parts) 456.3 651.8 508.5 331.8 416.3 139.6 99.6 130.3 119.9 78.9 74.2 66.6 80.8 41.1 48.2 49.7 45.8 37.2 Tools 189.8 213.7 196.6 136.9 149.9 135.3 126.8 117.3 78.0 56.7 58.8 56.9 58.4 36.4 50.1 43.7 34.0 37.6 Mobile phone (or in-car telephone) 32.2 74.4 66.0 52.0 73.0 59.9 71.9 71.4 77.0 49.4 38.4 35.6 30.1 22.7 21.8 20.2 23.6 23.6 Other vehicle parts 138.9 212.6 147.8 87.0 119.9 69.5 50.6 48.7 63.8 85.7 84.4 54.0 77.4 64.2 68.3 81.8 78.9 92.4 Wheels/tyres 79.4 102.8 108.7 160.2 105.6 71.5 38.1 20.0 35.5 32.6 27.1 26.4 32.1 14.5 21.5 19.7 17.5 21.5 Electrical goods 7.1 25.3 25.5 15.1 36.7 29.9 21.9 36.8 30.6 28.2 102.6 110.8 141.7 123.1 113.9 142.2 121.2 135.8 Fuel 69.9 24.2 21.2 38.0 10.2 14.0 11.6 8.5 12.0 6.4 7.3 5.6 8.4 House keys 15.5 7.2 14.9 camera 24.6 19.3 32.3 20.6 14.0 13.7 10.6 15.8 9.5 8.5 17.7 10.0 6.7 13.1 10.0 10.3 8.4 5.4 Tax disc 18.4 18.1 13.6 Household items 53.8 35.2 16.3 5.4 9.7 4.2 9.7 15.2 8.7 11.2 15.0 17.7 12.9 Car keys 3.7 6.0 6.8 Vehicle stolen 9.8 9.0 1.8 10.7 24.6 8.6 6.2 Garden equipment 4.0 4.1 0.5 Bicycle 2.4 1.9 0.0 0.0 9.6 0.4 0.6 0.0 0.4 1.5 0.6 0.0 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.0 1.9 0.0 food/toiletries/cigarettes 14.2 14.2 15.7 20.2 11.2 12.1 20.6 23.7 13.9 Source: ONS, Crime Survey for England and Wales. | 1991 | 1993 | 1995 | 1997 | 1999 | 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 | |----------------------------|--------|--------|--------|--------|-------------------------------------------| | PERCENTAGES | | | | | | | External parts | | | | | | | 25% | 24% | 32% | 42% | 34% | 34% | | Stereo-hifi/car radio | | | | | | | 39% | 31% | 31% | 28% | 24% | 25% | | Other items inside vehicle | | | | | | | 34% | 44% | 36% | 30% | 45% | 41% | | Valuables | | | | | | | 17% | 20% | 15% | 13% | 16% | 18% | | ESTIMATED VOLUMES (000s) | | | | | | | External parts | | | | | | | 602 | | 596 | | 807 | | | Stereo-hifi/car radio | | | | | | | 939 | | 778 | | 772 | | | Other items inside vehicle | | | | | | | 820 | | 1,113 | | 894 | | | Valuables | | | | | | | 422 | | 496 | | 369 | | | | | | | | | It is worth pointing out that the 'external parts' category in the second grouping (Table A7.6) includes things like tyres and wheels, which are listed as separate items in the published grouping (Table A7.5). The tentative conclusions in the main report draw from the trends in Table A7.6 and are as follows. - Trends show that stereo thefts probably peaked in the 1980s (or at the latest 1991) and declined thereafter. - Thefts of external vehicle parts made up a sizeable component of all thefts from vehicles, featuring in between a quarter and two-thirds of thefts depending on the year. - For the final years of the rise in thefts from vehicles (1991 to 1993), thefts of other items from inside the car - i.e. not stereos or exterior fittings - drove up theft levels. - From the crime peak to 2014 thefts of virtually all types of items have fallen. The fall in stereo thefts has been particularly sharp, the decline in thefts of external parts, valuables and electrical goods from inside the car, slightly less so. In addition, some further conclusions arise from looking at some of the smaller categories in Table A7.5. - Electrical goods are the one category of good that buck the generally downward trend from the mid 1990s. These rise markedly in the mid-to-late 2000s before falling back slightly in the most recent years. This surge in thefts may be connected to GPS satellite navigation systems becoming commonplace. - In the most recent period (since 2010), most types of items have seen falling trends, but there are some exceptions. Thefts of valuables have remained fairly stable and thefts of 'other internal vehicle parts' have risen. It is not entirely clear what is driving the latter trend. ## 8) Csew Trends In Theft Of Vehicle Incidents And Car Security One way of calculating rates of vehicle theft according to vehicle security is to, as Farrell *et al*. (2011) do, compare the security features of vehicles stolen, as reported by victims, with the overall security features of households' main vehicle. For example, if in the population five per cent of vehicles have no security, but this category makes up 50 per cent of stolen vehicles, it is clear that these types of vehicles are stolen at a higher rate than vehicles overall.74 However, before 2001/02 the CSEW did not ask victims of vehicle theft about the security features of the stolen vehicle. And only from the 1990s onwards did the survey ask about the security features of the household's most used car or van. Unfortunately, these questions changed for each survey in the 1990s, and the only security components consistently asked about were car alarms and central locking. (Note that no such questions were asked in the survey covering 1997.) Figure A7.6 shows how throughout the 1990s and 2000s the presence of alarms and/or central locking on households' main vehicles increased substantially - from 45 to 90 per cent over 15 years. The analysis in the main body of the text assumes that cars/vans without an alarm or central locking were very unlikely to have an electronic immobiliser. Indeed, when we look at households' main vehicle in the 2001/02 survey, only eight per cent of cars/vans with an electronic immobiliser did not have an alarm or central locking. Source: CSEW. Note: The black bars are sometimes lower than the other two bars as the 'all households' incidence rates households therefore cannot be victims of vehicle theft. Once vehicle-owning households are split into two groups - those whose main car/van had an alarm and/or central locking, and those whose main car/van did not have either feature - it is straightforward to calculate incidence rates of motor vehicle theft, as shown in Figure A7.7. However, there are a number of potential issues with using these incidence rates to compare the security of vehicles and their risk of theft. Some of the following were mentioned in the main text. 1.) Thefts of motorbikes and scooters are included in the incidence rates, but are not represented in the security questions. Therefore in the main body of the text and for the rest of this appendix rates of theft only relate to cars or vans. However, the method of computing these incidence rates is substantially more time-consuming meaning that only a few key years around the crime peak and fall (1991, 1993, 1999, and 2001/02) were investigated. 2.) Respondents are asked about the household's **main** car/van, meaning that if a second or third car/van is stolen, the security features of these vehicles are not necessarily represented correctly in the data. This is significant because secondary cars/vans are more likely to have worse security than the household's primary car/van, and are, therefore, at greater risk of being stolen. 3.) Respondents are asked about the household's **current** car. Regardless of whether the stolen vehicle is returned, if a household is a victim of car/van theft it is more likely that the security of the household's car/van will subsequently increase than if the household had not been victimised. For example, if the vehicle is not recovered, the victim is likely to buy a car/van with improved security, either as a conscious decision to prevent further thefts, or simply as a product of newer vehicles having improved security. Similarly, if a vehicle is recovered, the owner may decide to install security features to prevent further thefts. 4.) A final factor is that other security features not picked up by every wave of the survey, such as mechanical immobilisers, may be more likely on cars/vans without an alarm or central locking than those that did have those features. But the available data suggest this is not the case. In 1991 22 per cent of households whose main car had no alarm/central locking had a mechanical immobiliser, which was very similar to the proportion found for those households whose main car did have an alarm/central locking (24%). An important question is whether these limitations affect the conclusion - as stated in the main text - that vehicle thefts fell during the 1990s, regardless of security levels. The conclusion seems sensible given that it would be unlikely a household would have a second car with better security than its main car, and it seems even more unlikely that a household would get a car with inferior security after experiencing a vehicle theft. But Figure A7.8 shows the findings from some further analysis on this issue. It shows theft incidence rates for households whose main vehicle had no security for the individual years investigated. The decreases in these rates from the early 1990s to the late 1990s and 2000s are statistically significant (Table A7.7) just as they are when the years are pooled, as shown in the main body of the text. | Change between | p value | |--------------------|------------| | 1991 and 1999 | p<.05 | | 1993 and 1999 | p<.01 | | 1991 and 2001/02 | p<.05 | | 1993 and 2001/02 | p<.01 | Furthermore, to check that the fall in 'no-security' thefts was not being biased by the absence of mechanical immobilisers from the analysis, we re-calculated 'nosecurity' theft rates for two years in which these devices were asked about: 1991 and 1999. So households who had a mechanical immobiliser only were take out of the `no-security' group. This still showed a statistically significant fall in theft rates from the former year to the latter. ## References Aebi, M. (2004). 'Crime trends in Western Europe from 1990 to 2000', European journal on criminal policy and research, vol. 10(2-3), pp 163-186. Akhtar, S. & South, N. (2000). Hidden From Heroin's History: Heroin Use and Dealing within an English Asian Community - A Case Study. Crime Prevention Studies, 11, 153-178. Ayres, I. & Levitt, S. D. (1997). Measuring positive externalities from unobservable victim precaution: an empirical analysis of Lojack (No. w5928). National Bureau of Economic Research. Ball, J. C. & Wijngaart, C. F. (1994). A Dutch addict's view of methadone maintenance - an American and a Dutch appraisal. Addiction, 89(7), 799-802. Bandyopadhyay, S., Bhattacharya, S., Koli, M. & Sensarma, R. (2012). 'Acquisitive Crime, Sentencing and Detection: An Analysis of England and Wales'. Bässmann, J. (2011). Vehicle theft reduction in Germany: The long-term effectiveness of electronic immobilisation. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 17(3), 221-246. BIT (Behavioural Insights Team) and Home Office (2014). Reducing Mobile Phone Theft and Improving Security. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/3 90901/HO_Mobile_theft_paper_Dec_14_WEB.PDF Blumstein, A. & Rosenfeld, R. (2008, December). Factors contributing to US crime trends. In *Understanding crime trends: Workshop report* (pp. 13-44). Natl Academy Pr. Braga, A. A. (2003). Serious youth gun offenders and the epidemic of youth violence in Boston. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 19(1), 33-54. Braga, A. and R.V. Clarke (1994). Improved radios and more stripped cars in Germany: a routine activity analysis. *Security Journal*, Vol 5: 154-159. Brantingham, P. J. and Brantingham, P. L. (Eds). (1991). Environmental Criminology. Prospect Heights, OH: Waveland. Bromley, T (2012). Wired for Sound: Now That's What I Call An Eighties Music Childhood, Simon & Schuster, 2012. Brown, R. (2013). Reviewing the effectiveness of electronic vehicle immobilisation: Evidence from four countries. *Security Journal*. Brown, R. (2015). Explaining the property crime drop: The offender perspective. Trends & issues in crime and criminal justice. No. 495. Australian Institute of Criminology. Brown, R. and Clark, R. V. (2004) 'Police intelligence and theft of vehicles for export: Recent UK experience', Crime Prevention Studies, vol. 17, pp 173–192. Brown, R. & Thomas, N. (2003). Aging vehicles: Evidence of the effectiveness of new car security from the Home Office Car Theft Index. Security Journal 16: 45–53. Bullock, K., Clarke, R.V. and Tilley, N. (2010). Situational Prevention of Organized Crimes, Willan Publishing, Devon, England. Cherbonneau, M. and Copes, H. (2006). 'Drive it like you Stole it' Auto Theft and the Illusion of Normalcy. *British Journal of Criminology*, 46(2), 193-211. Chiu, Y-N., Leclerc, B. and Townsley, M. (2011). Crime script analysis of drug manufacturing in clandestine laboratories: Implications for strategic intervention. Br J Criminol, 51, 355–374. Choudhuri, S. B., Kumar, J. S. J., Venkatesh, B. & Pandey, R. K. (2014). Vehicle Anti-Theft and Passenger Safety System. Global Journal of Research and Engineering-GJRE-B, 14(1). Clarke, R. V. (2012). Opportunity makes the thief. Really? And so what?. Crime Science, 1(1), 1-9. Clarke, R. V. & Felson, M. (Eds.). (1993). Routine Activity and Rational Choice: Advances in Criminological Theory, New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books. Clarke, R. V. & Harris, P. M. (1992). Auto theft and its prevention. Crime and Justice, 1-54. Clarke, R. V. & Mayhew, P. (1988). The British gas suicide story and its criminological implications. *Crime and Justice*, 79-116. Clarke, R. V. & Newman, G. R. (2006). Outsmarting the terrorists. Greenwood Publishing Group. Clarke, R. V. & Webb, B. (1999). Hot products: Understanding, anticipating and reducing demand for stolen goods. Home Office, 1999. Available at: http://www.popcenter.org/tools/risky_facilities/PDFs/Clarke_1999.pdf. Committee on the Judiciary, (1992). Hearings before the Sub-Committee on Crime and Criminal Justice: Anti-Car Theft Act of 1992. Cooper, C. & Owen, N. (2013). 'The Start of a Criminal Career: Does the Type of Debut Offence Predict Future Offending?' Home Office. Cozens, P. M., Saville, G. & Hillier, D. (2005). Crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED): a review and modern bibliography. Property management, 23(5), 328-356. Cribb, J., Hood, A., Joyce, R. and Phillips, D. (2013) Living Standards, Poverty and Inequality in the UK: 2013. Institute of Fiscal Studies. Available at: <http://www.ifs.org.uk/comms/r81.pdf> Crossley, T. F., Low, H. & O'Dea, C. (2013). Household Consumption through Recent Recessions*. Fiscal Studies, 34(2), 203-229. Dauvergne, M. (2008). Motor vehicle theft in Canada, 2007. Juristat: Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, 28(10), 1B. Degenhardt, L., Rendell, V., Hall, W. D., Gilmour, S. & Law, M. (2004). Estimating the number of current regular heroin users in NSW and Australia 1997-2002. NDARC. Dhami, M. K. (2008). Youth auto theft: A survey of a general population of Canadian youth. *Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice*, 50(2), 187-209. Dixon, W. (1996) Car Crime: Vehicle Anti-Theft Measures London: Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders. Donohue, J. & Levitt, S. D. (2001) 'The impact of legalized abortion on crime', Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 116(2). Economist (2013) 'Where have all the burglars gone?' Available at: <http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21582041-rich-world-seeing-less-andless-crime-even-face-high-unemployment-and-economic> Eisner, M. (2008). Modernity strikes back? A historical perspective on the latest increase in interpersonal violence (1960–1990). International Journal of Conflict and Violence, 2(2), 288-316. Evans, W. N. & Owens, E. G. (2007) 'COPS and Crime', Journal of Public Economics, vol. 91(1), pp 181-201. Farrell, G., Tilley, N. & Tseloni, A. (2014). Why the Crime Drop?. Why Crime Rates Fall and Why They Don't, 43. Farrell, G., Tilley, N., Tseloni, A. & Mailley, J. (2011). The crime drop and the security hypothesis. *Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency*, 0022427810391539. Farrell, G., Tseloni, A. & Tilley, N. (2011). The effectiveness of vehicle security devices and their role in the crime drop. *Criminology and Criminal Justice*, 11(1), 21-35. Felson, Marcus (1998). Crime and Everyday Life, Second edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press. Felson, M. & Clarke, R. V. (1998). Opportunity makes the thief. Police research series, paper, 98. Fujita, S. (2011). Why are older cars stolen?: examining motive, availability, location, and security (Doctoral dissertation, Rutgers University-Graduate School-Newark). Fujita, S., & Maxfield, M. (2012). Security and the drop in car theft in the United States. *The International Crime Drop: New Directions in Research*, 231-249. Gant, F. & Grabosky, P. (2001). The stolen vehicle parts market. Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, (215), 1. Geason, S. & Wilson, P. R. (1990). Preventing car theft and crime in car parks (No. 5). Australian Institute of Criminology. Gonzalez-Navarro, M. (2013). Deterrence and geographical externalities in auto theft. *American Economic Journal: Applied Economics*, 5(4), 92-110. Gottfredson, M. R. & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford University Press. Grove, L. E., Farrell, G., Farrington, D. P. & Johnson, S. D. (2012). Preventing repeat victimization: A systematic review. Guerette, R.T. and K.J. Bowers (2009). 'Assessing the Extent of Crime Displacement and Diffusion of Benefits: A Review of Situational Crime Prevention Evaluations.' *Criminology* 47(4): 1331-1368. Hall, W., Ross, J., Lynskey, M., Law, M. & Degenhardt, L. (2000a). How many dependent heroin users are there in Australia? *Medical Journal of Australia*, 173, 528-531. Hazelbaker, K. (1997). 'Insurance Industry Analyses and the Prevention of Motor Vehicle Theft.' In M. Felson and R. Clarke (eds.), Business and Crime Prevention. Monsey, N.Y.: Criminal Justice Press. Hesseling, Rene (1994) 'Displacement: A review of the empirical literature.' Crime prevention studies 3: 197-230. HM Government Horizon Scanning Programme, 2014. Social Attitudes of Young People. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/3 89086/Horizon_Scanning_-_Social_Attutudes_of_Young_People_report.pdf Home Office (2010) *User Guide to Home Office Crime Statistics.* Available at: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110220105210/http:/rds.homeoffice .gov.uk/rds/pdfs10/crimestats-userguide.pdf Hough, M., Hunter, G., Jacobson, J. & Cossalter, S. (2008). The impact of the Licensing Act 2003 on levels of crime and disorder: an evaluation. Home Office. Available at: http://modgov.sefton.gov.uk/moderngov/documents/s539/Government%20evalu ation%20of%20LA03%20Report%20Annex%202.pdf Houghton, 1992: 1992 Car Theft Index, Home Office. http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218135832/http://rds.homeoffic e.gov.uk/rds/prgpdfs/fcpu33.pdf Hunt, L. G. & Chambers, C. D. (1976) The heroin epidemics: a study of heroin use in the United States, 1965-1975. New York, New York: Spectrum Publications. Available at: <http://www.getcited.org/pub/101602503> IBC, Insurance Bureau of Canada, (2002), 'Theft Trends by Vehicle Age.' www.ibc.ca. IBC, Insurance Bureau of Canada, (2003), 'Anti-theft immobilizers and public safety.' www.ibc.ca. International Directory of Company Histories (IDCH), (2003), Vol. 48. St. James Press, 2003. Available at: http://www.fundinguniverse.com/companyhistories/lojack-corporation-history/ Jacobs, B. A. (1999). *Dealing crack: The social world of streetcorner selling*. UPNE. Johnson, S. D., Guerette, R. T., & Bowers, K. J. (2012). Crime displacement and diffusion of benefits. The Oxford handbook of crime prevention, 337. Karmen. A.A. (1981). 'Auto Theft and Corporate Irresponsibility.' Contemporary Crises 5:63-81. Killias, M. (2006). The Opening and Closing of Breaches A Theory on Crime Waves, Law Creation and Crime Prevention. *European journal of criminology*, 3(1), 11-31. Klick, J., & Tabarrok, A. (2005). Using Terror Alert Levels to Estimate the Effect of Police on Crime*. Journal of Law and Economics, 48(1), 267-279. Kock, E., T. Kemp and B . Rix (1996). 'Disrupting the Distribution of Stolen Electrical Goods'. Crime Detection and Prevention Series, Paper 69. Police Research Group. London: Home Office. Kriven, S. & Ziersch, E. (2007). New car security and shifting vehicle theft patterns in Australia. Security Journal, 20(2), 111-122. Laycock, G. K. (2004). The UK car theft index: An example of government leverage, in Maxfield, M. G. & Clarke, R. V. G. (2004). Understanding and preventing car theft (Vol. 17). Criminal Justice Press. Levesley, T., Braun, G., Wilkinson., M. and Powell, C. (2004). Emerging Methods of Car Theft: Theft of Keys, Report No. 239, Home Office, London. Lewis, P., Newburn, T., Taylor, M., Mcgillivray, C., Greenhill, A., Frayman, H. & Proctor, R. (2011). Reading the riots: investigating England's summer of disorder. Available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/46297/1/Reading%20the%20riots(published).pdf Light, R., Nee, C. and Ingham, H. (1993). Car Theft: The Offender's Perspective. Home Office Research Study 130. London: Home Office. Machin, S., & Meghir, C. (2004) 'Crime and economic incentives', Journal of Human Resources, vol. 39(4), pp 958-979. Available at: <http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/3559034?uid=3738032&uid=2&uid=4&si d=21102898595831> Mason, S. (2012). Vehicle remote keyless entry systems and engine immobilisers: Do not believe the insurer that this technology is perfect. Computer Law & Security Review, 28(2), 195-200. Mayhew, P., Clarke, R. V., Sturman, A. & Hough, J. M. (1976). Crime as Opportunity. Home Office Research Study. No. 34. London, Home Office. Mayhew, P., Clarke, R. V., & Elliott, D. (1989). Motorcycle theft, helmet legislation and displacement. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 28(1), 1- 8. Ministry of Justice (2013) Story of the Prison Population: 1993 - 2012, England and Wales. London: Ministry of Justice. Mirlees-Black, C., Pat Mayhew and Andrew Percy. (1996) The 1996 British Crime Survey: England and Wales. Home Office, 1996. Available at: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218135832/http:/rds.homeoffice .gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/hosb1996.pdf Mishra, S. & Lalumiere, M. (2009). Is the crime drop of the 1990s in Canada and the USA associated with a general decline in risky and health-related behavior?. Social Science & Medicine, 68(1), 39-48. Morgan, N. (2014). The heroin epidemic of the 1980s and 1990s and its effect on crime trends - then and now. Home Office Research Report 79. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-heroin-epidemic-of-the-1980sand-1990s-and-its-effect-on-crime-trends-then-and-now Morgan, N. (2014b). The heroin epidemic of the 1980s and 1990s and its effect on crime trends - then and now: Technical Report. Home Office Research Report 79. Nevin, R. (2007). 'Understanding international crime trends: the legacy of preschool lead exposure', *Environmental research*, vol, 104(3), pp 315-336. Ormerod, P. (2011). *Butterfly economics*. Faber & Faber. Parker H. and Newcombe, R. (1987) 'Heroin Use and Acquisitive Crime in an English Community', British Journal of Sociology, vol. XXXVIII (3), pp 331–350. Available at: <http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/590692?uid=3738032&uid=2&uid=4&sid =21102679977071> Parker, H., Bakx, K. and Newcombe, R. (1988). Living With Heroin. Milton Keynes: Open University Books. Available at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=125283 Parker, H., Bury, C., Egginton, R., & Webb, B. (1998). New heroin outbreaks amongst young people in England and Wales. London: Home Office. Pearson, G. (1987). The New Heroin Users. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Available at: <http://www.getcited.org/pub/102608390> Potter, R. & Thomas, P. (2001). Engine immobilisers: how effective are they? National CARS project, Adelaide, Australia. Povey, D. and Prime, J. (1998) Recorded Crime Statistics: England and Wales, April 1998 to March 1999. Available at: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218135832/http:/rds.homeoffice .gov.uk/rds/pdfs/hosb1899.pdf Robins, L. N., Helzer, J. E., Hesselbrock, M. & Wish, E. (2010). 'Vietnam veterans three years after Vietnam: How our study changed our view of heroin', The American Journal on Addictions, vol. 19(3), pp 203-211. Available at: <http://www.rkp.wustl.edu/VESlit/RobinsChapter1980.pdf> Robins, L. N., Davis, D. H. & Nurco, D. N. (1974). 'How permanent was Vietnam drug addiction?' *American Journal of Public Health*, vol .64(12_Suppl), pp 38-43. Available at: <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1775687/pdf/amjph00813- 0048.pdf> Rosenfeld, R. (2014). Crime and Inflation in Cross-National Perspective. Crime and Justice, 43(1), 341-366. Sallybanks, J. & Brown, R. (1999). Vehicle crime reduction: turning the corner. Home Office, Policing and Reducing Crime Unit, Research, Development and Statistics Directorate. http://www.popcenter.org/problems/parking_garage_theft/PDFs/sallybanksbrow n.pdf Sallybanks, J. & Thomas, N. (2000). Thefts of external vehicle parts: an emerging problem. Crime Prevention & Community Safety, 2(3), 17-22. Shaw, D. & Pease, K. (2010). Car security and the decision to recommend purchase. Crime Prevention & Community Safety, 12(2), 91-98. Sidebottom, A., Ashby, M. & Johnson, S. D. (2014). Copper Cable Theft Revisiting the Price–Theft Hypothesis. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 51(5), 684-700. Simmons, J. (2002) Crime in England and Wales: 2001/2002. Home Office, 2002. Available at: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110220105210/rds.homeoffice.gov. uk/rds/pdfs2/hosb702.pdf Simmons, J., Legg, C. and Hosking, R. (2003). 'National Crime Recording Standard (NCRS): an analysis of the impact on recorded crime.' Home Office. Available at: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218135832/http:/rds.homeoffice .gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/rdsolr3103.pdf Smythe, G. (1990). Unpublished questionnaire survey. Greater Manchester Probation Service. Southall, D. & Ekblom, P. (1985). Designing for vehicle security: towards a crime free car. Great Britain, Crime Prevention Unit, Home Office. Sutton, M. (1998). Handling stolen goods and theft: a market reduction approach. Home Office Research Study, No. 178. London: Home Office. Thorpe, K. (2005) Comparing BCS estimates and police counts of crime 2004/05. Available at: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218135832/http://rds.homeoffic e.gov.uk/rds/pdfs05/comparingbcs.pdf Tilley, N., Farrell, G., & Clarke, R. V. (2014). Target Suitability and the Crime Drop. The Criminal Act: The Role and Influence of Routine Activity Theory. Tremblay, P., Talon, B., Hurley, D. (2001). Body switching and related adaptations in the resale of stolen vehicles: Script elaborations and aggregate crime learning curves. *Br J Criminol*, 41, 561–579. Tseloni, A., Thompson, R., Grove, L., Tilley, N. & Farrell, G. (2014). The effectiveness of burglary security devices. *Security Journal*. Available at: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/sj/journal/vaop/ncurrent/pdf/sj201430a.pdf van Dijk, J. & Vollaard, B. (2012). Self-limiting crime waves. The International Crime Drop: New Directions in Research, 250. van Ours, J. C. & Vollaard, B. (2014). The Engine Immobiliser: A Non‐Starter For Car Thieves. *The Economic Journal*. Vollaard, B. (2013). Preventing crime through selective incapacitation*. The Economic Journal, 123(567), 262-284. Vollaard, B. & Van Ours, J. C. (2011). Does Regulation of Built‐in Security Reduce Crime? Evidence from a Natural Experiment*. *The Economic Journal*, 121(552), 485-504. Wallace, M. (2003). Motor vehicle theft in Canada, 2001. Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics. Webb, B. (1994). Steering column locks and motor vehicle theft: Evaluations from three countries. Crime prevention studies, 2, 71-89. Webb, B. & Laycock, G. (1992). Tackling Car Crime: the nature and extent of the problem. Great Britain, Crime Prevention Unit. Webb, B. & Tilley, N. (2005). Preventing vehicle crime. Handbook of crime prevention and community safety, 458-485. Weisburd, D., Eck, J. E., Hinkle, J. C. & Telep, C. (2008). The Effects of Problem-Oriented Policing on Crime and Disorder: A Systematic Review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 4(14). Which? (1991). Car Security League. February, p107-109. (Cited in Webb & Laycock, 1992, above). Wortley, R. K. & Smallbone, S. (2006). Applying situational principles to sexual offending against children. Zimring, F. E. (2001). The Great American Crime Decline. US: Oxford University Press. Zimring, F. E. (2012). The City that Became Safe: New York's Lessons for Urban Crime and its Control. New York, US: Oxford University Press. ISBN: 978-1-78655-062-0 ISSN: 1756-3666 ## © Crown Copyright 2016 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk.

en

2983-pdf

## Support For Disabled Victims And Witnesses Of Crime Information And Guidance Introduction This guide is about the support available to disabled victims and witnesses of crime. Inside this you will find information about the types of support available and where to access them. Also included: • How the CPS approaches crimes against disabled people • Support for disabled victims and witnesses of crime • Example of support given to a disabled victim during a prosecution ## How The Cps Approaches Crimes Against Disabled People As a group, disabled people are at a higher risk of crime than the general population. They also experience unequal access to justice and safety.1 ## The Crime Survey For England And Wales Found People With Limiting Disabilities Are: Hostility Can Be Described As: Aggression Ill-Will Antagonism Spite Prejudice Confrontation Crimes against disabled people may be disability hate crimes. This is where the person carrying out the crime (the perpetrator) is motivated by hostility or shows hostility towards the victim's disability. This means they are targeting someone because of their hostility towards someone's difference, or perceived difference. The perpetrator can also be a friend, carer or acquaintance who exploits their relationship with the disabled person for financial gain or some other criminal purpose. 1 Victim Support, 'An Easy Target? Risk factors affecting victimisation rates for violent crime and theft', April 2016, Polly Rossetti, Tamar Dinisman, Ania Moroz, www.victimsupport.org.uk The **CPS Public Policy Statement on Crimes Against Disabled People** explains the way the CPS deals with and prosecutes these cases and what victims and witnesses can expect from the CPS. The CPS' approach incorporates the **Social Model of Disability**, which says disability is caused by the way society is organised as opposed to a person's impairment or difference. The model looks at ways of removing barriers which restrict life choices for disabled people. When barriers are removed, disabled people can be independent and equal in society, with choice and control over their own lives. View the Public Policy Statement **here**. The CPS will not make judgements about a person's credibility or reliability as a witness because of an impairment and will challenge others that do. ## Support For Disabled Victims And Witnesses Of Crime Everyone is different and the support needed by one victim or witness to go through the criminal justice process will be different to the support needed by another victim or witness. Some impairments are physical and may be obvious to other people. Other impairments can be hidden - such as mental health problems, learning disabilities and autism. There are things we can do to help people whatever their impairment, which can be tailored to individuals. It is for the individual to choose whether they take up any offers of support. Support from the Citizens Advice Witness Service is available at any point during the court process. More detailed information about the support available to you as a disabled victim of crime can be found in the Code of practice for Victims of Crime (Victims' Code) and the Witness Charter. General support can also be accessed through the following agencies: • Disability Rights UK • Dimensions UK • Foundation for People with • MIND • National Autistic Society • National Hate Crime Report Learning Difficulties and Support Centre Wales • SCOPE • Stop Hate UK • True Vision • Victim Support • Mencap • People First ## Recognising Hate Crime What Help Is Available? Reporting A Crime The police will support you when you call 999 or 101. You can also report online via **Crimestoppers** or, for Hate Crime, **True Vision**. ## During The Police Investigation The police will support you by carrying out an assessment of your needs. You may be asked if you wish to give a **Victim Personal Statement** to say how the crime has affected you or made you feel. You may also ask for decisions to be looked at again through the Police Victims' Right to Review Scheme. ## After Someone Is Charged The CPS will support you by working with the **Witness Care Unit (WCU)** to assess your needs. We will give you progress updates and talk to you about what to expect at trial. We will ask for any **special measures** and may apply for media reporting restrictions in exceptional circumstances. You may have access to a **pre-trial witness interview**. You may ask for decisions to be looked at again through the CPS Victims' Right to Review scheme. i You will be notified by the **Victim Liaison Unit (VLU)** if the CPS decides to stop the case or substantially alter the charge. Citizens Advice Witness Service Support can help you with practical information and emotional support. They can also arrange for you to visit the court before the trial so you know what to expect on the day and offer enhanced services for vulnerable and intimidated witnesses. ## After The Trial The CPS and the Witness Care Unit will support you by informing you of the outcome of the trial and any **sentence** passed. When they are sentencing, Judges can tell the person who committed the crime they have to pay you compensation if something has been lost or damaged or if you have been hurt. There is more information on this in the victims' code. The National Probation Service can support you if you opt into the Victim Contact Service (VCS). ## Going To Court The CPS will support you by helping you read witness statements in court. You will be introduced to the CPS representative who will be prosecuting the case in court before you give your evidence. We can provide more information about **special measures at court** and the **Prosecutors' Pledge**. If you have a speech impairment you may be able to write down your evidence at court. Qualified sign language interpreters or lipspeakers can help you if you are deaf or have a hearing impairment. Interpreters can also help you give evidence in a different language. i The CPS will try to release you from the court building as soon as possible after you have given evidence. Sometimes the CPS may ask someone from the courts or police to let you know you can leave. Her Majesty's Court and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) will support you by providing, where possible, a separate room to wait in and offering materials in formats such as braille, large print or audio if you have a sight impairment. Wheelchairs may be available if you have a mobility issue. Citizens Advice Witness Service Support can help with practical and emotional support at court. Judges and magistrates have an **Equal Treatment Bench Book** which explains how they should treat people fairly in court. ## Special Measures Special measures are things which help victims and witnesses give evidence in court. The CPS can ask for special measures on behalf of victims and witnesses with disabilities. The court makes the final decision on whether special measures will be given or not. ## Special Measures Include, But Are Not Limited To: More information about legal guidance on special measures is available from the CPS. ## Example Of Support Given To A Disabled Victim Arun was charged with assault by beating after punching and kicking his mother, Moubani, who suffers from osteoporosis and arthritis. While carrying out the assault Arun used derogatory language about Moubani's disability. He also assaulted his girlfriend, Priya. Moubani explained being able to see her son in court would cause her significant distress. A special measures application was made to the court to use screens so she would not have to see Arun while she gave evidence. Arun was found guilty and sentenced to an 18-month community order, increased by six months in recognition of the hostility Arun had shown towards Moubani's disability. In addition, he was given a 20-day rehabilitation order, which was increased by 10 days, also because of the hostility Arun had demonstrated towards his mother's disability. He was fined £120, ordered to pay both costs of £450 and compensation to both Moubani and Priya, and given a restraining order forbidding contact with either of them. ## Example Of Support Given To A Disabled Witness Jane and her husband Mark took their son Tom, the victim, to the hospital's Accident and Emergency department. Tom was found to have serious injuries and a healing fracture. Jane was the only person who had seen what happened. She had a learning disability and difficulties expressing herself. Jane told the police Mark had lost his temper because Tom was crying. She explained that Mark had physically assaulted Tom and had been violent in the past. Jane gave evidence over a video link with help from someone to explain the questions she was asked. This person is called an intermediary. She also had a pre-trial visit to the court room and met the lawyers. The intermediary made sure the court understood Jane had difficulty explaining "when" something had happened so questions must be linked to specific events like birthdays. This meant that Jane felt calmer and more confident when she was explaining what happened. Mark was convicted and sentenced to 14 years' imprisonment. All names have been changed in these examples. The CPS defines disability as any physical or mental impairment. This definition fully incorporates the definition of disability for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010. This guide has been produced by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) with involvement from the Police, HM Courts and Tribunal Service, Her Majesty's Prison and Probation Service, National Probation Service and the Citizens Advice Witness Service. This guide was produced with the support of CPS Disabled Staff Network and Nottingham Mencap. CPS DSN Disabled Staff Network ## About The Crown Prosecution Service The CPS is responsible for prosecuting most cases heard in the criminal courts in England and Wales. It is led by the Director of Public Prosecutions and acts independently on criminal cases investigated by the police and other agencies. The CPS is responsible for deciding the appropriate charge in more serious or complex cases and provides information, assistance and support to victims and witnesses.

en

2631-pdf

Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) Diversity and Equality Report 2015-16 in response to the Equality Act 2010 ## Contents Section 2 - Regard for Equality within the FCO's Activities............................................................ 16 Foreword by Karen Pierce, Chief Operating Officer and FCO Board Diversity Champion . .................... 3 Foreign Policy..................................................... 16 Introduction......................................................... 4 Freedom of Religion or Belief. .......................................16 Women's rights. ...........................................................16 Section 1 - The FCO's employees......................... 5 Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGB&T) rights. .17 Recorded data. ..................................................... 5 Disability rights.............................................................18 Mar 2016. ......................................................................5 Racism.........................................................................18 Mar 2015. ......................................................................5 Consular services................................................ 18 Profile of the workforce....................................... 6 Gender profile of the workforce.....................................6 Support for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender travellers. ......................................................................19 Ethnic profile of the workforce.......................................6 Forced Marriage Unit. ...................................................19 Disability profile of the workforce...................................6 Digital transformation of consular services making them more accessible............................................................20 Sexual orientation profile of the workforce.....................7 Religion and belief profile of the workforce....................7 Age profile of the workforce. ..........................................7 Maternity Leave profile...................................................8 Recruitment. ......................................................... 9 Equality of Pay. ................................................... 10 FCO 2015 Staff Engagement Survey................... 11 FCO Diversity Policy and and Engagement. ......... 12 Disability Policy and Support in the FCO............. 13 FCO Staff Associations. ....................................... 14 ## Foreword By Karen Pierce, Chief Operating Officer And Fco Board Diversity Champion The FCO is a strong advocate of diversity and inclusion in Government. We want to look more like the country we serve. And we want to take advantage of the different insights and understanding that diversity brings. Diversity in our staff and an inclusive approach gives us an advantage in the way we consider and challenge issues. A diverse workforce and inclusive practices enhances the UK's reputation overseas and promotes our policy as well as our corporate goals. Promoting diversity and inclusion helps us attract, retain and motivate talented staff from every part of the UK and helps those staff develop in the best way that they can. This is critical to the success of the FCO as a branch of Government. In 2008 we set ambitious targets for the Senior Management Structure (SMS) on Gender, Ethnicity and Disability. When the targets were reviewed in 2014 we were one of the first Whitehall Departments to set a target for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT). You will read of our progress against those targets in this report. Targets are a useful tool in increasing diversity, but this is not policy by numbers. Diversity also means removing the barriers to getting the right person into the right job, regardless of background. I am proud of our achievements this year: > > In 2008 our SMS was only 17.5% female; this year we passed 30%. > > In 2008 we had 22 female Heads of Mission. We now have 50 female Heads of Mission and Posts. > > We have appointed a number of first ever female Ambassadors to countries including Greece and Italy. > > An FCO fine room has been renamed to celebrate Dame Anne Warburton, Britain's first serving female Ambassador. > > The FCO LGBT Staff Association, FLAGG, was recognised in the Inclusive Networks Top 100 Awesome Networks for 2015. > > The FCO was awarded the "Best New Flexible Working Initiative" from Working Families in 2015. > > The FCO Disability Staff Association, Enable, successfully got hundreds of staff to change their font size and colour to make it more accessible to all staff; and we are making good progress towards fully accessible buildings in London and across the world. > > We launched a bespoke development programme aimed at junior BME staff to diversify our talent pipeline. > > Diversity data recording rates rose significantly over the past year, with LGBT and Disability rising over 30%. There is still progress to be made but I am confident the FCO will continue moving in this positive direction. ## Introduction This report is part of the FCO's response to the Equality Act. It is intended to offer data on the equality impact of the FCO's employment practices and activities. The *Equality Act 2010* creates a public sector equality duty to: > > Consider how different people will be affected by our activities > > Deliver services which, while efficient and effective, are accessible to all and meet diverse needs > > Have **due regard** for the need to eliminate unlawful discrimination, advance equality of opportunity and foster good relations between people (both employees and others) who share a protected characteristic and those who do not. Protected characteristics covered by the equality duty are: > > age > > disability > > gender reassignment > > marriage and civil partnership > > pregnancy and maternity > > race (embracing ethnic or national origins, colour and nationality) > > religion or belief > > sex > > sexual orientation Note: The FCO has not incurred the expense of collecting data specifically for the purpose of this publication other than staff resource. These are online publications and therefore no additional printing costs have been incurred. The majority of data presented represents a snapshot of the FCO as at 31 March 2016. Where data represents a different time period it is highlighted. ## Section 1 - The Fco'S Employees The FCO has two different categories of employees. The UK Diplomatic Service and other Home Civil Servants working for the FCO are known collectively as *UK-based staff*. These staff take a range of jobs during their careers both in the UK and at diplomatic posts abroad. But the majority of the FCO's employees are hired to perform specific functions at individual posts abroad and are known as *Local Staff*. It is unusual for these employees to transfer between diplomatic missions or to work in the UK. The diversity data in this report does not include FCO Services or Wilton Park, Executive Agencies of the FCO, or staff working for the UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI). Both UK-based and Local Staff are graded into a hierarchy as follows: Foreign Office Grades Civil Service Grade UK based Staff | Grade 6 | D7 | D7(L) | |----------------------------|------|---------| | Grade 7 | D6 | D6(L) | | Senior Executive Officer | C5 | C5(L) | | Higher Executive Officer | C4 | C4(L) | | Executive Officer | B3 | B3(L) | | Administrative Officer | A2 | A2(L) | | Administrative Assistant | A1 | A1(L) | | Non-Professional functions | N/A | S1-S3 | ## Recorded Data The FCO collects and holds human resources data on a centralised Management Information (MI) system. The gender and age of all staff is automatically recorded on this database, as is maternity leave when taken. UK-based staff are asked to add information about their ethnicity, disability status, flexible working patterns, sexual orientation and religion or belief. In 2015, staff were asked also to report their caring responsibilities. Supplying this data is voluntary. Although the FCO encourages staff to supply it, declaration rates vary by characteristic. To protect the privacy of staff who do not wish to record any of this personal information, it is possible for individuals to record on the database that they do not wish to declare. Local Staff are able to record their ethnicity, disability status, flexible working patterns and caring responsibilities but we do not require them to do so. This is due to sensitivities linked to the recording of some characteristics in a number of countries. Recording rates amongst Local Staff are therefore far too low to enable us to report on the representation of different groups. As a result, data on gender is included in this report, but not data on other diversity characteristics. However, the diversity of our Local Staff, who come from countries around the world, is something we celebrate. The recording rates amongst UK-based staff, including those who have stated that they do not wish to declare are as follows: ## Ethnic Profile Of The Workforce Profile Of The Workforce Gender Profile Of The Workforce The FCO employs almost 12,500 people, a third of whom are UK based and two thirds Local staff. ## Disability Profile Of The Workforce Sexual Orientation Profile Of The Workforce Age Profile Of The Workforce Maternity Leave Profile Maternity/Adoption Leave Profile By Age Staff Retention The figures below show the grade, gender, ethnicity, disability and age percentage breakdown of staff that left the organisation due to retirement, resignation, termination of employment, or through career breaks, permanent transfers to other departments or due to death in service. Overall 3.5% of the FCO's UK-based staff left the FCO between 1 April 2015 and 31 March 2016. ## Recruitment The FCO seeks to recruit talented British nationals from all backgrounds and from across the UK. We want to ensure that we are the best Diplomatic Service we can be and to represent more effectively the country we serve. In line with the Civil Service recruitment freeze, we only recruit to the Diplomatic Fast Stream and other business critical roles. We are following and implementing the Civil Service Recruitment Principles of fair and open competition. ## Progress In 2015–16 Fast Stream And Other Specialist Recruitment > > 30 Fast Stream Band C entrants and 36 specialists (including two Fast Track Commercial Apprentices) recruited at various grades in 2015-16. > > 42% of Fast Stream entrants were female, 35% declared a Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) background, and 10% declared a disability. Of the 2014 intake, 39% were female, 12% were BME, and 6% disabled. > > Our university roadshow sought to enhance the diversity of our Fast Stream recruitment, supported by a digital campaign: #beforeignoffice. This targeted universities with a high proportion of students from BME and low socio-economic backgrounds. Band A (Administrative Officer) and B (Executive Officer) recruitment > > Exceptionally recruited 44 staff at Band A, including two apprentices, and eight staff at B3. This recruitment - the first at these grades since 2010 and 2006 respectively - aimed to fill gaps and to maintain the diversity of the talent pipeline. > > Worked with community and faith-based organisations and schools and colleges in areas of social economic disadvantage to attract people from diverse backgrounds. > > Piloted a relocation allowance to encourage more applicants from outside Greater London. > > Of the new recruits, 44% were women, 17% declared as BME and 10% declared a disability. ## Interns > > Our work experience scheme encourages people of all backgrounds to consider the FCO as an employer. 52 interns were employed. 33 interns worked for between 7 and 12 months with a further 19 working between 2 and 12 weeks. > > 57% of interns were female, 30% declared as BME, and 6% declared a disability. Future recruitment activities will see us recruit further apprentices as part of the Government's goal of 3 million apprenticeships by 2020. ## Experience Of Working In The Fco As A Summer Intern "The summer placement gave me a truly valuable, in depth and realistic experience of the work of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Working in the Human Rights and Democracy Department, I worked on real projects. I saw the things I had been studying in action, and was able to gain a greater understanding of the way our government works to fulfil its aims through international institutions. The placement gave me a great sense of the realities of working in the public sector, and enhanced my understanding of how British foreign policy is created and implemented, as well as cementing my intention of devoting my career to it! I wholeheartedly recommend you apply." —Rebecca Viney, University of York: Social and Political Sciences ## Equality Of Pay FCO pay is determined by a range of factors including grade, performance and length of time in employment. As part of the FCO's commitment to putting equal pay into practice, regular monitoring of the impact of pay practices is carried out, including Annual Equal Pay Audits. The table below illustrates that when comparisons are made within roles of the same grade (of equal work) when broken down by grade the average pay gaps in the Delegated Grades of the FCO are between 0% and 2.71%. The overall average (mean) pay gap across the FCO is 13.61%. This is mainly the result of the composition of the FCO workforce, with more male staff in more senior grades whose salaries are therefore higher. The overall mean gender pay gap in the Civil Service is 12.8%. Grade Average Female Pay Average Male Pay % Average Pay gap SMS 3&4 £120,512 £134,707 -10.54% SMS 2 £87,754 £90,198 -2.71% SMS 1 £68,837 £68,783 +0.08% D7 £57,931 £58,878 -1.61% D6 £49,114 £49,031 +0.17% C5 £35,535 £36,317 -2.15% C4 £29,364 £29,525 -0.55% B3 £24,796 £24,759 +0.15% A2 £21,138 £20,849 +1.39% A1 £18,520 £18,520 0% ## Fco Average Base Pay For Uk-Based Staff By Ethnicity The table below is using the data based on those who have reported their ethnicity. The comparison by delegated grade shows pay gaps of between 0% and 2.2%. The average salary pay gap is 24.49%. The workforce comparison data shows that this is because of the smaller proportion of disclosed BME staff at more senior grades. Average White Pay % Average Pay gap Grade Average Minority Ethnic Pay SMS 3&4 £114,515 £130,724 -12.4% SMS 2 £88,545 £89,486 -1.05% SMS 1 £68,602 £68,975 -0.54% D7 £57,492 £58,557 -1.82% D6 £49,982 £48,905 +2.2% C5 £35,374 £35,984 -1.7% C4 £29,073 £29,460 -1.31% B3 £24,546 £24,834 -1.16% A2 £21,105 £20,997 +0.51% A1 £18,520 £18,520 0% ## Fco 2015 Staff Engagement Survey Alongside the Civil Service, all FCO staff can take part in a Staff Engagement Survey (SES) in October each year. The 2015 SES had a 79% response rate. The FCO's overall engagement score (based on five questions which show how positive, attached and motivated staff feel) increased one percent from 67% to 68%. This engagement score is 10% above the Civil Service average. As part of the survey, staff are also asked if they have been subjected to bullying/harassment or discrimination (BHD), at work, in the previous year. Reports of bullying and harassment across the FCO have remained flat at 12% since 2011. The discrimination figure increased from 13% to 14%. Very few demographic groups appear to be more vulnerable to BHD than others, with the notable exception of staff with a disability. 2015 saw a positive drop in staff with a disability reporting BHD from 2014. But the LGBT discrimination scores disappointingly rose by 4%. The results shown below are broken down by age, gender, disability status, sexual orientation and ethnicity. However, some staff did not supply this demographic data, which means that the disaggregate data can appear in some cases to be incompatible with the overall results. | Discriminated against | Bullied or Harassed | |--------------------------|-----------------------| | 2015 | | | 2014 | 2013 | | 2015 | | | 2014 | 2013 | | Overall | | | 14% | | | 13% | 13% | | 12% | | | 12% | 12% | | Gender | | | Male | | | 11% | | | 12% | 11% | | 9% | | | 10% | 10% | | Female | | | 14% | | | 13% | 13% | | 12% | | | 12% | 13% | | Disability | | | No | | | 13% | | | 12% | 12% | | 11% | | | 11% | 12% | | Yes | | | 21% | | | 27% | 29% | | 18% | | | 23% | 23% | | Black or Minority Ethnic | | | Non BME | | | 11% | | | 11% | 11% | | 9% | | | 11% | 11% | | BME | | | 14% | | | 14% | 14% | | 12% | | | 11% | 12% | | Sexual Orientation | | | Straight | | | 12% | | | 12% | 12% | | 11% | | | 11% | 11% | | LGBT | | | 17% | | | 13% | 16% | | 14% | | | 14% | 13% | | Age | | | 20-24 | | | 11% | | | 13% | 11% | | 13% | | | 12% | 10% | | 25-29 | | | 13% | | | 12% | 12% | | 12% | | | 11% | 12% | | 30-34 | | | 13% | | | 14% | 12% | | 12% | | | 12% | 12% | | 35-39 | | | 13% | | | 13% | 13% | | 11% | | | 10% | 12% | | 40-44 | | | 12% | | | 12% | 12% | | 9% | | | 10% | 12% | | 45-49 | | | 11% | | | 11% | 11% | | 9% | | | 10% | 11% | | 50-54 | | | 12% | | | 11% | 12% | | 10% | | | 12% | 10% | | 55-59 | | | 9% | | | 9% | 10% | | 8% | | | 7% | 9% | | 60-64 | | | 7% | | | 10% | 10% | | 4% | | | 10% | 7% | | 65+ | | | 2% | | | 6% | 10% | | 8% | | | 8% | 6% | The scores on BHD continue to be above the Civil Service average. We take complaints of BHD seriously and recognise that we have a specific set of challenges not common to the wider civil service. The FCO is a global organisation and our workforce reflects this. Adapting to differing cultures is a fundamental part of our work, but operating on a worldwide platform can create barriers to effectively addressing BHD. Encouraging Posts to adopt a best practice approach in supporting all staff, also means expecting all staff to appreciate and understand our values. In some countries there is a difference between our values and those of the society we are working in. Protecting our staff and ensuring that they continue to feel supported can be difficult. We are committed to proactively supporting staff by providing clear information about the situation in-country and through our 24-hour Employee Assistance Programme (EAP). Underpinning this, we have internal guidance and a global network of BHD "points of contact" in place to respond to staff concerns. In 2016 the FCO Management Board appointed a Board Champion to reduce BHD and lead work on creating a more inclusive culture within the organisation. ## Fco Diversity Policy And And Engagement The FCO continues to increase the diversity of our workforce in the UK and of our representation overseas. This includes visible diversity but also promoting diversity of thought, skills and background. We have targets for the diversity of our Senior Management Structure (SMS) to be achieved by October 2019. Progress made towards these targets can be seen below: Target 2019 target (% SMS) 31 March 2015 31 March 2016 Female 39% 27% 30.1% BME 7% 4.1% (based on 86.9% SMS recording rate) 4.1% (based on 92.6% SMS recording rate) Disabled 7% 4.7% (of total SMS due to low reporting rates) 9.9% (based on 63.6% SMS recording rate) LGBT 6% 3.4% (of total SMS due to low reporting rates) 5.3% (based on 72.1% recording rate) In April 2015 the FCO Board agreed five new diversity priorities. Strong progress was made against all: 1. Driving a step change in leadership and line manager capability and behaviour on diversity including diversity of thought: Over 85% of SMS staff completed face-to-face unconscious bias by 31 March 2016; the Board and senior leaders made specific #iwill pledges to support diversity and inclusion; in the Staff Engagement Survey, our leadership scores increased by 7% and Leadership Statement scores were in the top three across the Civil Service. 2. Providing further support for talent from under-represented groups: 27 FCO staff secured places on targeted Learning & Development schemes, including a new talent development programme for BME staff. Successful university outreach roadshow (see case study below) and digital campaign reached out to diverse potential applicants. 3. Improving the experience of, and support for, staff with disabilities: The FCO has taken forward a number of initiatives to improve the support available to disabled staff (see Disability Policy section below). Case study #beforeignoffice: attracting a talented and diverse workforce and representing today's Britain 4. Improving the FCO's diversity data to inform future actions: A campaign to improve Diversity Data Recording rates led to significant voluntary increases of 9% on ethnicity, 26% on disability, and 29% on sexual orientation, giving a much more accurate basis on which to target interventions. 5. Agreeing a new 'business deal' with staff associations: This helped provide better support for our 11 Staff Associations. Now in its third year, the 2015-16 FCO university roadshow aimed to encourage students to apply for the Diplomatic Fast Stream by explaining the FCO's work in the UK and overseas. We targeted universities across all English regions, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, with a high proportion of Black Minority Ethnic and low socio-economic background students. FCO participants included the Permanent Under Secretary, Board members, Heads of Mission and recent entrants. The FCO Open House Weekend in September 2015 and a recruitment event in January 2016 opened the doors of King Charles Street to prospective applicants. To reach out to a broader audience ahead of the Fast Stream application deadline, we engaged via social media with a live one hour Q&A reaching 54,709 accounts followed by a Fast Stream Q&A reaching 25,097 accounts together with videos on Snapchat and vlogs. Our #beforeignoffice "whiteboard" campaign highlighted the diversity of our current staff. In 2016-17, we will implement the Bridge Group's recommendations to engage further with students, schools and applicants from diverse backgrounds. ## Disability Policy And Support In The Fco Disability support for UK based staff is provided by the Disability Policy & Support Team (DPST) based in our Human Resources Directorate (HRD). The DPST work closely with the (DWP-led) Civil Service Workplace Adjustment Service (CWAS), in parallel, DPST also use the contracted DWP disability provider OH Assist for the provision of expert advice and support for staff in line with the provisions of the Equality Act 2010. Terms and conditions for Local Staff working at FCO Posts abroad are governed by local law but the FCO encourages Posts to adopt a best practice approach in terms of support for their Local Staff, with advice and support on disability issues available to them on a request basis. Disabilities disclosed by UK-based staff cover a broad range of conditions, including neuro-diverse conditions (e.g. dyslexia, dyspraxia & Asperger's), mobility issues and hearing or visual impairments. Further details of the workforce who have disclosed disabilities are provided below. The provision of workplace adjustments for disabled staff can include an expert disability assessment; the supply of specialised office equipment or provision of IT software and appropriate training. More general awareness training and support is also available to disabled staff, their managers and (where appropriate) their team colleagues. Staff who are profoundly deaf or with a significant hearing impairment can additionally request the support of qualified British ## Sign Language (Bsl) Interpreters & Lip Speakers The FCO is also a member of the Business Disability Forum (BDF), a not-for-profit member organisation that makes it easier and more rewarding to do business with and employ disabled people in the UK. In September 2015 the FCO again hosted the Business Disability Forum roundtable meeting designed to get disability support teams from across Whitehall departments together to hear about the latest developments on disability issues and to network and share best practice. ## Fco Staff Associations The FCO's Diversity and Inclusion team and senior management work closely with staff networks and with the Diplomatic Service Families Association (DFSA) to understand and address issues faced by staff. As part of this we support a group of senior Champions who provide staff networks with coaching, strategic direction and champion the issues they represent with senior leadership. Our staff networks are: FCO Women: has seen a 30% increase in membership. Over 1000 votes were cast from the FCO in elections to select a new chairperson and steering group. It has run master-classes bringing together senior staff and women from across the FCO. It has run internal speaker series including with women who have served in challenging posts and external speaker events including a an International Women's Day reception marking the 70th anniversary of the first female entrants to the Diplomatic Service, a panel discussion with female members of the House of Lords and events with British Olympian and Paralympian medallists. FCO Women has increased engagement across the FCO network through more regular communications and new local associations opening-up in the Asia Pacific Region and Brazil and built links across Whitehall and outside to share best practice and do joint events. FLAGG: was awarded the overall FCO Staff Award for Excellence (voted for by staff) and shortlisted for Employee Network of the Year at the European Diversity Awards and the British LGBT Awards; organised a high-profile first gathering of UK LGBT Heads of Mission; set up a learning set providing LGBT staff an opportunity and safe space to share experiences, interact and develop; engaged in internal and external communication through blogs and Twitter (@FCOflagg); promoted LGBT issues through events (eg Mark Gatiss, LGBT History Month); and developed LGBT role models through an in-house Stonewall training course. Enable: has changed the profile of people with disabilities in the FCO, helping raise diversity recording rates. It's given greater visibility on disability issues across the whole organisation. Activity includes a review of the Spain network (with the Business Disability Forum), disability learning sets, a global community site with 200+ members, guest speaker events and blogs. Increasing awareness of topics like stammering, mental health and UN International Day of Persons with Disabilities has helped the FCO turn a corner with influence and support from the FCO Board. Minority Ethnic Action Group: is a forum for FCO staff primarily from Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) backgrounds. We are passionate about enhancing diversity across the organisation to make it look and feel ethnically inclusive to everyone who works in it and with it. MEAG works with its members, the FCO Board, HR and across Whitehall to: support the development and progression of BAME staff; celebrate our cultural diversity; provide a safe space for all staff to talk about race, inclusion and cultural diversity; and offer practical support to help the FCO find real solutions to overcome barriers for BAME staff development. Flexible Working Network: provides advice and support to individuals and departments on Flexible Working options; supports the jobshare register and coffee mornings; and runs events promoting FW including during National Work-Life week in September 2015. FCO/DSFA (Diplomatic Service Families Association) Carers' Network: raising awareness in the FCO of the issues faced by those with caring responsibilities, providing advice on how to manage a work/care balance situation including when overseas e.g. with elderly parents at home. A Carer's Charter setting out the FCO's commitment as an employer to supporting carers in the workplace was being agreed for 2016. Single Parents Network: pursues casework, supports and advocates for staff members and monitors other areas - accommodation, travel package, post reports - to level the playing field and remove barriers to single parents working for the FCO. Mothers' Support Network (MSN): a peer support group offering advice from personal experience on some of the challenges that parenthood can bring. Religion and Belief Group: manages the FCO's Multi-Faith Prayer Room and undertakes a programme of events to raise awareness of the way in which religion impacts the life of staff. Wellbeing Network: The Wellbeing Network was launched in June 2015 and offers support, guidance and advice on any issues which affect FCO staff wellbeing. The Network regularly runs events in the UK to promote good mental health in the workplace and help staff recognise and address personal or organisational pressures which can cause undue stress. The Network also acts as a point of contact and source of information, advising colleagues of the various paths available to them for professional support within and outside the organisation. The Network also arranged for the opening of staff wellbeing rooms in all FCO buildings in the UK. ## Bme 19% Section 2 - Regard For Equality Within The Fco'S Activities Foreign Policy The promotion of human rights, including equalities issues, is at the heart of British foreign policy. This means all FCO Posts have a responsibility to monitor and raise human rights in their host countries. Government Ministers and FCO staff raise our concerns with host governments and where possible take action on individual cases and lobby for changes in discriminatory practices and laws. The FCO publishes an Annual Human Rights Report each spring which covers our global work on human rights issues over the preceding year. ## Freedom Of Religion Or Belief Worldwide, we have continued to promote the right to freedom of religion or belief in four ways. We have: acted through multilateral organisations and with a wide range of international partners; raised issues bilaterally; funded targeted project work; and continued to improve the religious literacy of our own staff, to equip them better to engage with faith groups and to appreciate the many ways in which the right to freedom of religion or belief may be violated. In the multilateral system we have worked to ensure that the two resolutions on this subject—the EU- sponsored text on Freedom of Religion or Belief and the parallel text led by the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) on combating religious intolerance —were again adopted by consensus at the March session of the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) and then at the UN General Assembly (UNGA). Over the course of the year, every FCO minister has raised individual cases where individuals' freedom of religion or belief has been violated and discriminatory legislation and practices in the countries for which they are responsible. Despite the intrinsic difficulty of designing effective projects on this topic, we increased the number of good quality bids to our Human Rights and Democracy Programme Fund. Amongst other projects, we funded a programme in the **Middle East/ North Africa** region to help teachers develop lesson plans including the concept of freedom of religion or belief, and worked to improve dialogue between religious groups in Sri Lanka. We also continued our contribution to the Global Community Engagement and Resilience Fund (GCERF). This is a new global fund, which aims to draw on resources from both public and private sectors, dedicated to building resilience against violent extremist agendas through local community based projects. We continued to run a programme of religious literacy training for our staff, holding a training course three times in the year and continuing our regular series of lunchtime seminars. Topics covered this year have included Sikhism and a presentation from the US government's first ever Special Representative to Muslim communities. A prominent speaker in this series was the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby and the Grand Imam of al-Azhar. ## Women'S Rights The promotion and protection of women's rights is enshrined in international human rights law, and we believe that it is essential for stable and prosperous societies that women fully participate in political, economic and social life. Women's rights are at the centre of our human rights work globally. Whether by supporting projects that tackle violence against women and girls; promoting the equal representation of women in political and public life; or lobbying to challenge discriminatory laws and practices, we are making a difference for women and girls the world over. The recently agreed UN Sustainable Development Goals demonstrate a clear commitment to ending discrimination and to ensuring women's full and active participation in decision-making (SDG5). Gender equality is also vital to the realisation of all development goals and to poverty reduction. Without the participation of women in conflict resolution and peace-building, there can be no sustainable and equitable peace. Tackling those issues is a priority for the UK and central to our work to advance gender equality and empower women. 2015 marked the 20th anniversary of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action which set out an agenda for women's empowerment as well as the 15th anniversary of the UN Security Council Resolution 1325 which underlined that women's rights had to be at the heart of any successful search for peace and security. FCO officials attend regular meetings with other UK government departments to ensure that all our efforts are consistent and complementary, including meetings chaired by the Home Office to chart progress against the government's Violence Against Women Action Plan. Within this plan, the FCO has specific commitments, which include raising awareness of forced marriage, supporting the ratification of and carrying out lobbying in support of the full implementation of the Convention of the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). We are committed to supporting innovative new projects in the poorest countries and working with international organisations and governments overseas to promote women's rights globally and reduce the impact of conflict on women and girls. In 2015 the Human Rights and Democracy Programme fund spent over £550,000 on projects aimed at promoting women's rights including political participation in the peace process in the Philippines and engaging male leaders and community members as active promoters of women's rights in Afghanistan. In 2016 we will continue to support women's rights projects through the Magna Carta Fund for Human Rights and Democracy. The FCO has also supported the "Week of Women" initiative which aims to indentify and bring together future women leaders and promote women's economic and political leadership. Over 60 international delegates, nominated by our Embassies and High Commissions, attended "Week of Women" events including the Women of the Future Summit and Awards ceremony. We will also be supporting the Week of Women again this year from 14-18 November. The FCO marked International Women's Day on 8 March with Missions in all regions staging a number of innovative events designed to further women's political and economic empowerment. As part of an FCO-funded project run by the Westminster Foundation for Democracy, women MPs from across the Middle East and North Africa met at the Moroccan Parliament to discuss issues of gender equality and how, as parliamentarians, they can best support efforts to tackle violence against women and girls across the region. Our High Commission in New Delhi launched further local language versions of a manual, developed alongside local women's rights NGOs, academics, and legal-practitioners, which sets out local best practice on confronting sexual violence against women and girls. In London we ran a social media campaign inviting men and women from around the world to share their views of what gender equality meant to them through posting a video or message of their own using #inmywords. Over 70 videos were uploaded to social media. For the whole month of March, FCO officials in China ran the #Be Y♀urself Campaign aimed at promoting gender equality and empowering women to be able to achieve whatever they want to achieve. The launch event, hosted by British Ambassador to China Barbara Woodward, brought together a panel of women and men to discuss how everyone can participate in furthering progress towards a more equal society. Over twenty events took place in cities around China throughout in support of the #Be Y♀urself Campaign. ## . Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual And Transgender (Lgb&T) Rights The authorities in many countries actively persecute LGB&T people. In 73 countries consensual samesex relations remains criminalised, and even where homosexuality is legal people still face discrimination and violence. We believe that the international community must stand firm against all forms of discrimination, including on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, and that we should all accept, respect and value diversity. This is why we and like-minded countries work through the UN to address discrimination and violence against LGB&T people, and why we work with individual countries to encourage them to review, revise and abolish discriminatory laws and policies. We continue to support civil society activists through soft-diplomacy and project work. In 2015 FCO supported a number of projects, including improving the prosecution of homophobic hate crimes in Montenegro and supporting an online platform for LGB&T people to access various services, including legal and health advice, across the Caribbean region. This year we will continue to support LGB&T rights projects through the Magna Carta Fund for Human Rights and Democracy. UK diplomats have raised concerns about legislation in Belize, Kyrgyzstan, Nigeria and Uganda. A positive example of UK influence is that lobbying by the British High Commission led to changes to Mozambique's Penal Code, decriminalising "acts against nature", widely interpreted as referring to homosexuality. In 2015, UK Posts around the world marked Pride in a number of ways including a "Love is Great" campaign led by the British Embassy in Vienna to coincide with Eurovision week, a "Love is Great" banner and Facebook postings from by our Embassy in Bucharest and a speech by the UK's Ambassador to the Dominican Republic stressing the fact that tolerance, non-discrimination and a respect for LGB&T people are UK values. British Embassies and High Commissions in over 70 countries worked with the British Council and British Film Institute as part of the "fiveFilms4Freedom" social media campaign which promoted awareness and tolerance of LGB&T rights. Over 5 million people in 135 countries watched the films, with a footprint of 75 million posts on social media. The UK government offers a consular same-sex marriage service in 26 countries and a conversion service in 11 countries. By offering these services we have drawn attention to the lack of local legislation for same-sex marriages and prompted wider debate on LGB&T issues, helping to inform public opinion in countries where the national authorities - and many in wider society - are not yet ready to countenance same-sex marriage. ## Disability Rights The FCO supports international initiatives which help realise the vision of disabled people able to achieve their potential as fully participating members of society, whilst removing barriers which impede this, for all disabled people around the world. We consistently advocate special consideration of the rights of persons with disabilities in all relevant UN intergovernmental negotiations. The UK has co-sponsored resolutions supporting the realisation of the Millennium Development Goals and other internationally-agreed development goals for persons with disabilities, and to mainstream disability in the UN development agenda beyond 2015. We are also strong advocates for better evidencebased policy formulation and service delivery for persons with disabilities including through national and international data collection systems that disaggregate relevant data by age, sex, and disability. ## Racism The UK government remains committed to tackling all forms of racial intolerance and discrimination, and to standing up for victims of racism around the world. The UK plays an active part in the key international institutions fighting racism, and supports the role of the UN in tackling racism. During 2015 we sought to ensure the international community focused on strengthening national, regional and international legal frameworks in accordance with the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action and the International Convention on the Elimination of All forms of Racial Discrimination, and ensuring their full and effective implementation. Our priority in international discussions is to focus on the real and pressing problems faced by racial minorities in all parts of the world. In 2015, along with our EU partners, we sought to ensure that the UN addressed racism through its various processes and mechanisms. We will continue to remain vigilant to any manifestations of racism, and work actively with international partners to ensure that the aims of equality and non-discrimination are advanced through the multilateral system and bilaterally. ## Consular Services The FCO's Consular Service offers assistance to British nationals in difficulty abroad. The customer charter of the Consular Service commits to: "Be professional, non-judgemental, polite and helpful to you whatever your gender, race, age, sexual orientation, marital status, disability, religion or belief." Our travel advice and information for travellers is available online, and is aimed at helping all British nationals travel safely. It includes tailored advice for disabled travellers; lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender travellers; and those with mental health needs. We take advantage of opportunities such as the Pride parade in London, and world mental health day to highlight the advice available. Over the last year, Consular staff have handled over 400,000 enquiries and over 18,000 consular cases. The FCO does not collect data on the diversity (gender, ethnicity or other protected attributes) of those to whom it provides services, except in the case of Emergency Travel Documents (ETDs), for which we do collect data on gender: | Age | Gender | |--------|----------| | 0–15 | | | Male | 1,715 | | Female | 1,539 | | 16–30 | | | Male | 5,765 | | Female | 3,819 | | 31–50 | | | Male | 6,503 | | Female | 3,367 | | 51+ | | | Male | 4,839 | | Female | 3,297 | Consular staff are trained to provide high quality assistance to British nationals overseas, tailored to the need of the individual. This includes dedicated training and support consular staff worldwide to support customers with mental health needs. In 2015, the FCO dealt with 521 cases where British Nationals required assistance when experiencing mental health needs abroad, an increase of 4% on 2014. In 2015, these cases covered 171 countries/territories, with the highest number of cases in Spain, USA and Thailand. ## Support For Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual And Transgender Travellers We introduced consular same sex marriage services in June 2014. We have performed over 280 consular same sex marriages across a network of 26 countries where the service is available. We received 1,855 notices of intended marriage, civil partnership or overseas relationship. Specific cases have highlighted that some same sex couples may face challenges when foreign authorities do not recognise their status as next of kin because they are in a civil partnership or same sex marriage. In response, if necessary, our embassies are now able to issue a document confirming that the UK will normally view a same sex spouse or civil partner as next of kin in the same way that we would view opposite sex couples as next of kin. While there is no guarantee that a foreign authority will take the same view if it does not recognise same sex marriage, it will make clear to those authorities the UK position. Where the local authorities will not recognise same-sex partners or spouses on death certificates, we will also now accept applications for consular death registrations from the spouse/partner as the Informant and record that relationship, even in foreign countries where we do not routinely make consular registrations. The British Government can consider approaching the local authorities if LGBT prisoners are not treated in line with internationally accepted human rights standards. This may include lobbying against discrimination on the grounds of gender or sexuality, requesting appropriate medical treatment and raising concerns about the safety of any prisoner. ## Forced Marriage Unit The Forced Marriage Unit (FMU) is a joint Home Office and Foreign and Commonwealth Office Unit that provides assistance in cases of forced marriage in the UK and consular cases involving British nationals overseas, including dual nationals. Forced marriage is a crime (it became a criminal offence on the 14th June 2014); is a serious abuse of human rights and a form of domestic abuse. Where children are involved, it is child abuse. Staff are also trained in the specific issues relating to victims who are LGBT or who have a disability and provide tailored assistance in these cases. The FMU also runs an extensive outreach programme, which raises awareness of forced marriage and related issues among potential victims and statutory agencies including police, social services and health professionals. Statistics from the FMU suggest young people aged between 16 and 25 are most at risk of being forced into marriage. In 2015 the FMU gave advice or support related to a possible forced marriage in 1,220 cases1: > > Where the age was known, 14% of cases involved victims below 16 years, 13% involved victims aged 16-17, 20% involved victims1 aged 18-21,15% involved victims aged 22-25, 9% involved victims aged 26-30, 6% involved victims aged 31-40, and 2% involved victims aged 41 or over. 20% involved an adult whose age was not known. > > 80% of cases involved female victims and 20% involved male victims. > > The FMU has handled cases involving a total of over 90 different countries2. In 2015 this included: Pakistan (44%), India (6%), Bangladesh (7%), Afghanistan (2%), Somalia (3%), Turkey (1%), Iraq (1%), and Sri Lanka (1%). The origin was unknown in 7% of cases. > > 14% of the cases handled by the FMU were domestic and had no overseas element. > > Within the UK the regional distribution was: London 22%, West Midlands 14%, South East 9%, Yorkshire and Humberside 9%, North West 10%, East 7%, East Midlands 4%, Scotland 2%, South West 3%, Wales 2%, North East 1%. The region was unknown in 18% of cases. > > 141 cases involved victims with disabilities. > > 29 involved victims who identified themselves as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT).. ## Digital Transformation Of Consular Services Making Them More Accessible Since 2014, the FCO has worked hard on the services it offers the public, transforming them from paper forms to digital services which we have made as accessible as possible. We test the words we use to make sure they are easy to understand. We test the forms with people with different levels of computer skills and disabilities: with the FCO's disability community Enable, and in specialist testing centres around the country. Finally, our contact centre staff are always at the end of a telephone to assist people filling in the digital forms, either by helping them with specific issues or in some cases, asking people the questions on the form and filling it on their behalf. The services are significantly simpler and quicker to use than the old paper forms, making consular services easier to access for everyone. A partially sighted user tests the new digital service to legalise a document using magnifying software at the Digital Accessibility Centre in Neath A member of the FCO's Enable community tests the digital application for an Emergency travel document using both high contrast text and a screenreader. Foreign & Commonwealth Office King Charles Street London SW1A 2AH gov.uk/fco

en

3223-pdf

1 Establish a programme of work to establish and embed the right information management culture in the new IT environment. This should be closely integrated with planned IT change.  Drawing on good practice examples of work to improve culture and behaviours from organisations in the IMA programme, including HM Treasury and Welsh Government.  Appointing an overall board-level champion for information and records management to lend support to planned initiatives.  Ensuring a focus on recognised issues and risk areas such as improving how staff work with and manage email, the retention of drafts and key context, and the unnecessary capture and retention of ephemeral material. DfT has been through an intense period of technology change in the past year with new hardware and software being rolled out to staff. Culture change around the rollout of TiME is ongoing and the arrival of new tools such as One Note, One Drive etc and the O365 phase 2 project means that work around this is adapting and changing against a backdrop of constantly shifting sands. KIM team is working hard to ensure that it is represented on the right projects, that it talks to the right people within Digital Services, that the right messages are being promoted and that it is listening to feedback from users and using this to help shape the way forward. Commentary last updated: April 2019 Enabling/supporting actions Owner Commentary on progress Completion due Status Done December 2019 Identify senior KIM champion Head of KIM/DRO and DS senior team Director, Major Rail Project Development given the role of Senior KIM Champion with the support of the Permanent Secretary Senior KIM Champion has joined the IMM programme board. His input from a business perspective has been invaluable so far, as his business area was one of the early adopters of TiME. Head of KIM meets with Senior KIM Champion and together are exploring other ways of supporting KIM across DfT. Ongoing Ongoing Strengthen SIRO responsibility by delivering SIRO briefings Head of KIM/DRO and CISO New Chief Information Security Officer (KIM reports into the CISO) arrived in October he is shaping plans to better raise awareness of information risks to the SIRO. Our work as part of the Better Information for Better Government information risk work will also help us to better articulate information management risks and severity. Ongoing Ongoing Develop a Behavioural Change Charter/Strategy KIM team, IMM team, Change Manager Whilst we haven't developed a charter/strategy there has been significant progress here. User research took place in autumn 2019 with teams who had already had TiME rolled out in order to understand their user experience, any sticking points and positives. The results of this were reported into the IMM project Board and used to improve the migration process. Digital Adoption team recruited a Change Manager (arrived late 2018) who is now supporting the IMM project. Is working on ways of measuring how successful the project has been in changing behaviours. Behavioural change is a key part of the process of migration to TiME. This is covered in early engagement with business areas including senior managers and Project Champions and Local Information Managers are encouraged to promote this. It is also covered in the training and guidance. | Ongoing | Ongoing | KIM Policy & | |--------------------------------------------------------|------------|--------------------------------------------| | Engagement | | | | Ensure that KIM requirements are taken into | | | | account on projects that impact on physical or | | | | digital information. | | | | KIM is now represented on the Digital Design | | | | Authority (DDA). The DDA has been set up so that all | | | | new technologies or substantial projects to | | | | introduce new information management tools are | | | | discussed before they are installed/developed. | | | | | | | | KIM is also represented on the O365 phase 2 project | | | | which is looking at the next phase of rollout | | | | including Teams, planner etc. Also involved with | | | | work to set up IM solutions for ICCAN and Disabled | | | | Persons Transport Advisory Committee. | | | | | | | | Head of KIM presented at a recent Project | | | | Management Office network meeting on KIM and | | | | the importance of managing project records. KIM | | | | team has a representative on this network too. | | | | | | | | | | | | Ongoing | Ongoing | Review and refresh guidance on What, Where | | and Why to keep corporate records | | | | KIM Policy & | | | | Engagement | | | | As the department moves to cloud services for its | | | | information holdings, many different tools are being | | | | rolled out. Guidance will need to reflect these areas | | | | once their proposed purpose has been defined. | | | | | | | | KIM team has started reviewing guidance on My DfT. | | | | What to keep, why and where is covered in training | | | | that business areas received as part of process of | | | | migrating to TiME and in guidance. Also covered in | | | | engagement activities such as blog produced by | | | | Head of KIM (Dec 2018), presentation at policy week | | | | and to PMO. | | | | | | | | | | | KIM is engaging with the Digital Adoption team as they provide training in O365 tools such as One Drive and One Note to ensure that this is aligned with KIM requirements on what to . Aim to provide guidance to give a steer around the use of tools outside our designated corporate systems such as Trello but not started yet due to other priorities. KIM Policy & Engagement End 2019 To start Summer 2018 Produce an information management toolkit explaining the information/user lifecycle and what is required when. Work has started to review existing KIM guidance and identify gaps. Progress has slowed due to the demands of other projects such as IMM and staff shortage. We also need to take account of impact of other projects such as O365 and ensure that our messages are aligned. ## 2 Establish And Communicate A Clear Vision And Strategy For Information Management. Using the information management modernisation project's future information principles as a starting point.  Adopting a format-blind approach that encompasses data and records management outcomes.  Establishing concrete plans to socialise and implement the strategy. Work on the strategy was been delayed due to staff changes. New Head of KIM/DRO recruited in June 2018 and work on strategy started in Autumn 2018. Progress slightly slower than planned due to the reshaping of the IMM project and consideration of how the KIM and Digital Technology can be better aligned. Our Permanent Secretary is bought into the importance of good knowledge and information management as demonstrated by her commitment to supporting the Better Information for Better Government programme. Commentary last updated: April 2019 | Enabling/supporting actions | Owner | Commentary on progress | |--------------------------------------------------------|----------|---------------------------| | due | | | | Status | | | | | | | | Spring 2019 | | | | | | | | In progress | | | | | | | | Head of | | | | KIM/DRO | | | | Draft a KIM Strategy and ensure that it aligns | | | | with other strategies (for example, Digital | | | | Strategy, IMM Future Information Principals | | | | ) | | | | to | | | | form a unified and coherent approach to | | | | information management. | | | | | | | | Strategy drafted (taking into account IMM future | | | | info principles) and currently with Digital | | | | Architecture team for comment. In talks with DA to | | | | consider possibility of incorporating KIM strategy as | | | | part of the wider Digital Technology Strategy or at | | | | least ensure that the two strategies are aligned. | | | | Senior KIM champion has offered to do a workshop | | | | with the KIM team on the strategy to see how he can | | | | help. | | | | | | | | Not identified | | | | | | | | Not yet started | | | | | | | | Gain senior sign off for the KIM Strategy and | | | | publish and communicate. | | | | Head of | | | | KIM/DRO | | | | | | | | Depends on whether this is incorporated into DT | | | | strategy as above. CIO would likely sign off the | | | | strategy but he is leaving DfT and will be a caretaker | | | | leader for the foreseeable future. | | | | Spring 2019 | | | | | | | | In progress | | | | | | | | Head of | | | | KIM/DRO | | | | Develop an implementation plan for the KIM | | | | Strategy and decide how success will be | | | | monitored and how progress will be reported. | | | | Activities in order to implemement strategy have | | | | been identified and are included with the strategy. | | | | These will be incorporated into KIM business plan | | | | and KIM team objectives for 2019/20 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | End 2019 | | | | | | | | In progress | | | | | | | | Using the Information Management Self- | | | | Assessment tool work with the Agencies to | | | | implement and co-ordinate the action plans | | | | | | | | Head of | | | | KIM/DRO, | | | | Agency | | | | Records | | | | Officers | | | | DfTs Executive Agencies are in the process of | | | | completing the IM Self Assessment tool. Agency | | | | Records Officers to use results to produce action | | | | plans. Share and capitalise on good practice | | | | approaches. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 3 Apply continued focus to the delivery of an improved IT environment that will make good information management practice easier to achieve.  Formally establishing the link between the information management modernisation project and the forthcoming roll out of the wider Office 365 environment.  Adopting a whole IT environment approach to information architecture and information capture and storage, with consideration given to proportionate use of controls to help shape behaviours and limit the potential for bad practice. Much of the KIM teams focus in 2017 was on the development of TiME which has impacted on its ability to carry other KIM work. As a result a separate team was temporarily established to lead on the rollout of TiME and migration. It is a formal project with a Senior Responsible Owner and the Project Board includes representatives from across the business and meets monthly. The KIM team still has overall ownership of TiME both in terms of policy and development and business as usual support and is closely involved with the work. Personnel changes within the IMM team have put some pressure on project delivery as have other department priorities (which have impacted on business area engagement) and the opportunity was taken in late 2018/early 2019 to review the project and make some changes to our approach in order to ensure we delivered the outcomes stated in the business case. This has meant that KIM team resource has once again been drafted into IMM reducing the time we have to spend on other tasks such as the KIM strategy and guidance. Steps have been taken to ensure that the IMM project is aligned with the O365 project and KIM is represented on the latter. Commentary last updated: April 2019 Enabling/supporting actions Owner Commentary on progress Completion due Status Summer 2019 In progress Roll out TiME across DfT(c) IMM project team, KIM team A plan for migration has been put together and rollout has now started. The IMM project team is leading on this with input from the KIM team. Migration leads are working with business areas to analyse their information and file structures to prepare to migrate. DfT is working with Automated Intelligence (AI) to facilitate this. | In progress | KIM Services | |--------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------| | & | | | Compliance | | | | | | Ongoing - will | | | progress in line | | | with TiME | | | rollout | | | Make shared drives Read Only as information is | | | analysed and migrated into TiME or other data | | | repositories. Have an audit process in place to | | | ensure appropriate treatment of locked down | | | information i.e. Transfer to TNA or destruction is | | | carried out. | | | Shared drives are locked down as information is | | | migrated into TiME. The project team will pass | | | information on the categorisation of information in | | | the shared drives to the KIM team to enable to | | | ongoing management of information which needs to | | | be retained in line with retention. | | | In progress | DRO + KIM | | Policy & | | | Engagement | | | Work with Digital Architecture team to | | | understand the future O365 offering and have | | | clear mandate for each of the O365 applications, | | | alongside clear KIM Governance. | | | KIM team has representation on the O365 phase 2 | | | project and is working closely with the digital | | | architecture team on what each app should be used | | | for. DfT is also part of the cross government task and | | | finish group on policies around O365 apps which will | | | help to shape DfTs approach to this. | | | Currently | | | March 2019, | | | however this | | | work will | | | progress in line | | | with the O365 | | | project | | | Complete | Implement tools, guidance and processes for | | effective email management. | | | KIM Policy & | | | Engagement | | | September | | | 2018 | | | Included as part of the new TiME offering is the AI | | | SyncPoint tool which integrates TiME with Outlook, | | | allowing users to save and file emails more easily. As | | | part of the rollout plan users are invited to | | | classroom training which shows how it works as well | | | as explaining the benefits to the department and | | | user in IM. Further guidance to highlight processes | | | and benefits will be produced and published on My | | | DfT. | | | Ongoing | In progress | | architecture in SharePoint platform. | | | KIM Policy & | | | Engagement | | | DfT rolled out SharePoint 'Classic view' to the pilot | | | users in 2018, however the SharePoint offering is | | | now the 'Modern view' and the IMM and KIM team | | | have made substantial changes to the information | | | architecture in line with this move. As new aspects of | | | SharePoint are introduced i.e. Teams and Planner | | | the information architecture will be determined and | | | implemented at that time. KIM team is part of the | | | O365 Phase 2 project where a lot of the discussions | | | around this are happening. | | | | | | March 2018 | |--------------------------------------------------------| | Engagement | | Implement 'Open by Default' policy on new | | information management platforms, with | | appropriate controls where necessary. | | The TiME system has been set up to ensure | | information is 'Open by Default'. As information is | | migrated, sensitive areas are identified and | | restricted permissions are put in place to protect it. | | All other information is 'open' to allow better | | collaboration and greater transparency across the | | department. | | | | Ongoing | | | | In progress | | | | DRO and KIM | | Policy and | | Engagement | | | | Work with digital architecture team to discover | | what other online tools are being used across | | DfT (for example, Trello) and decide on | | governance approach. | | Some early discussions with the architecture team, | | digital adoption and security colleagues on this. Will | | need to produce policies and guidance around this. | | | | | 4 Build on the work to embed digital continuity as part of the proposed information principles, putting in place concrete plans for KIM and IT staff to deliver digital continuity and information management priorities.  Ensuring digital continuity principles are applied to the whole IT environment, including the wider Office 365 environment, current and legacy email holdings.  Ensuring that consideration of retention and digital continuity are factored into the IT procurement process as standard.  Putting in place a clear policy in relation to the migration of information at risk of digital continuity loss including non-identifiable formats. [Commentary on progress against main recommendation heading] Commentary last updated: April 2019 | Enabling/supporting actions | Owner | Commentary on progress | Completion | |------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------| | due | | | | | Status | | | | | | | | | | March 2019 | In progress | Carry out a digital obsolescence review and take | | | action where necessary | | | | | KIM Service | | | | | and | | | | | Compliance | | | | | Scan of all drives has been carried out and this has | | | | | identified the formats used in DfT systems. | | | | | | | | | | The resulting report is now with KIM Policy & | | | | | Engagement to research options and produce a plan | | | | | of action for the most vulnerable material. | | | | | March 2019 | In progress | Email archive plan to be created and | | | implemented. | | | | | KIM Policy | | | | | and | | | | | Engagement | | | | | Ongoing discussions around this difficult issue. A | | | | | paper was presented to the Digital Service Board in | | | | | September and a risk was included on the O365 | | | | | project risk register. Still working to agree a way | | | | | forward. Plan to raise a risk to SIRO on this. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Not yet started | Ensure KIM team aware of spend controls. | KIM Team | Organise a session with Digital Spend control team | | | | | | | September | | | | | 2018 | | | | | End 2018 | Complete | KIM team to be invited to attend O365 project | | | boards. | | | | | KIM is now represented on the O365 Phase 2 project | | | | | | | | | | DRO & KIM | | | | | Policy and | | | | | Engagement | | | | | Ongoing | In progress | Implement a Data Migration Strategy from | | | shared drives to O365 and other cloud platforms. | | | | | DS senior | | | | | team and | | | | | DRO | | | | | Google Cloud Platfotm project has now kicked off. | | | | | KIM team are working to ensure to ensure that KIM | | | | | requirements are taken into account throughout. | | | | | | | | | | Ongoing | In progress | | | | | | | | | Investigate the use of digital tools to help | | | | | analyse and tackle the digital heap. | | | | | | | | | | KIM Policy | | | | | and | | | | | Engagement | | | | | DfT KIM team has additional tools available to them | | | | | to analyse the shared drives. These are functional | | | | | rather than intelligent tools. | | | | | | | | | | The KIM team will work with Information Assurance | | | | | colleagues to understand the market and options | | | | | available. | | | | | | | | | O365 has inbuilt tools/reports that will provide analysis of activities and formats but additional tools will be required Look at what other departments are starting to do here including Cabinet Office with AI data lift. Draw on any available advice and guidance from The National Archives/Better Information for Better Government programme 5 Review corporate descriptions of information and records management related risk to ensure causes and mitigating actions reflect the wider current and future IT environment, including the planned introduction of Office 365.  Reviewing the impact and likelihood of the risk and ensuring scrutiny at a directorate as well as a divisional level.  Updating the information risk policy to provide a clear steer on information and records management related risk, including structures and roles for managing it. DfT should consider extending this to business ownership of compliance related risk, drawing on best practice examples that already exist within the department.  Defining the risks related to digital continuity and logging these at an appropriate level.  Ensuring the role of information and records management is factored into definitions of other information related risks including those relating to cyber security and loss of personal and sensitive information. Also incorporating Recommendation 7 Build on the existing information asset governance framework and seek opportunities to surface and manage information and records management related risks to information assets.  Ensuring KIM and information assurance staff work together to ensure risks relating to disposal of information assets are identified and monitored.  Ensuring KIM and information security staff work together to identify and monitor risks relating to digital continuity of information assets and datasets, especially bespoke data sets held outside the core system that needs to be held over the long term. Information Assurance team has been very short staffed and mimimal progress has been made on the first few actions. However, a new Critical Assets Manager has been recruited which should help move things forward here. KIM team has made some progress on the risk side of things through its work on the BI4BG information risk working group. Commentary last updated: April 2019 | Enabling/supporting actions | Owner | Commentary on progress | |----------------------------------------------------|-------------|------------------------------------------------| | due | | | | Status | | | | | | | | Ongoing | Not started | | | | | | | Review DfTs corporate information risk profile | DS Senior | | | team, | | | | Information | | | | Assurance | | | | and DRO | | | | Ongoing | Not started | | | | | | | Review and update the Information risk policy | DS Senior | | | team, | | | | Information | | | | Assurance | | | | and DRO | | | | Ongoing | Not started | Produce guidance on IM risk, working with | | teams and projects that are affected by the risks. | | | | | | | | | | | | DS Senior | | | | team, | | | | Information | | | | Assurance | | | | and DRO | | | | Ongoing | In progress | All information systems that impact on digital | | continuity of information must have an IM risk in | | | | their project risk register | | | | . | | | | DS Senior | | | | team, | | | | Information | | | | Assurance | | | | and DRO | | | | Where KIM team is engaged with projects we are | | | | ensuring that information management risks are | | | | identified and managed appropriately, for example, | | | | O365 project. | | | | | | | | Ongoing | Started | Work with Better Information Information for | |---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------| | Better Government programme work on | | | | information management risk. | | | | DRO and KIM | | | | Policy and | | | | Engagement | | | | DfT has played a key role in the BI4BG information | | | | risk working group helping to develop an information | | | | risk model and thenm feeding into the development | | | | and testing of a information risk management tool. | | | | Will use this to help us improve our approach to | | | | managing information management risks within DfT | | | | including the development of a KIM risk register | | | | Ongoing | In progress | KIM team to work more closely with Information | | Assurance team | | | | | | | | KIM Team | The KIM team require BROs to submit a return each | | | year detailing their holdings and levels of IM | | | | compliance. | | | | | | | | KIM now works with the Information Assurance | | | | team to provide details of previously unknown | | | | information assets which are uncovered as part of | | | | their interactions with BROs. | | | | | | | | KIM has recently worked closely with the | | | | Information Assurance team helping identify | | | | information that would be within scope of GDPR | | | | requirements. | | | | | | | | March 2019 | Complete | KIM Team | | has taken actions from that board to work with | | | | those areas which carry the greatest risk i.e. HR and | | | | Procurement | | | | | | | | KIM team to work closely with Data Protection | | | | team in relation to the changes in requirements | | | | for personal data in line with the | | | | implementation of GDPR. This will cover | | | | corporate systems as well as shared drives. | | | | | | | | | | | | 6 | | | | Engage with the business and establishing more concrete and tailored principles that establish what information staff need to capture | | | | and keep. | | | | | | |  Reviewing information and records management policy to ensure key requirements set out in the Section 46 Code of practice are factored in, paying particular attention to key areas such as email chains, drafts, evidence of decision and key context.  Ensuring consistent coverage of information and records management as part of induction and leavers processes.  Clearly establishing required behaviours for all staff including managers and senior staff in information management policy.  Publishing retention schedules on GOV.UK in line with recommendations in Sir Alex Allan's Records Review. Intention was for KIM team to be able to focus its attention on policy and guidance work once IMM team was in place and up and running. However, due to personnel changes in the IMM team and a necessary change to the migration process, KIM team's time has been unexpectedly IMM heavy in the past few months. This has impacted on our ability to work on policy and guidance. Now that the TiME rollout is underway and is being led by the IMM project team, KIM team can turn its attention to updating policies and guidance around what information to keep. This is even more important given office moves, the introduction of new technology and smarter, more flexible working. Commentary last updated: April 2019 Enabling/supporting actions Owner Commentary on progress Completion due Status End 2019 In progress KIM Policy & Engagement New records retention policy and guidance to be developed - to cover emails, P drives, shared drives, and corporate systems. As DfT has moved to new IM systems this has allowed a reconsideration of how it deals with retention and disposal. New policies have been determined and now requires the documentation to support. New guidance will be developed in line with new IM systems. A paper was presented to the Digital Service Board on our approach to retention. The intention is that this will form the basis of an overarching policy on retention. End 2019 In progress KIM Policy & Engagement Information and records policies to be reviewed and updated to incorporate key requirements of S46 code of practice. Work has started to review existing KIM guidance and identify gaps. Progress has slowed due to the demands of other projects such as IMM and staff shortage. We also need to take account of impact of other projects such as O365 and ensure that our messages are aligned. S46 code is being reviewed and updated. DfT are part of the drafting group for this work. Autumn 2019 In progress New joiners, movers and leavers policies. New guidance and processes for both corporate and local requirements. Digital Service & KIM team We have fed into joiners and leavers policies for DS staff and are currently trying to get the managers checklist for joiners updated on my DfT. We train BROs/LIMs who then in turn provide training for new starters on good information and records management and TiME. ## 7  Now Incorporated With Recommendation 5 (See Above) 8 Strengthen Arrangements For Information Management Governance And Oversight Of Performance In The New It Environment  Appointing business champions for information management (Local Information Managers - LIM) on a business as usual basis, beyond the SharePoint Online roll-out period.  Defining the relationship between this role and the BRO role (or its successor) to allow system administration and promotion of required behaviours across the IT environment as a whole. In the meantime DfT should continue to support the BRO role.  Ensuring information management representation on IT, data and digital focussed governance boards.  Establishing requirements for a robust monitoring regime once the new IT environment is in place to map the maturity and capability of business areas. DfT needs to ensure good practice can be shared and poorly performing areas can be identified and targeted. ## The KIM team has recently been through a restructure to ensure that it has appropriate resource to support governance and oversight of the new IT environment amongst other things. The Head of KIM is now supported by two SEO Leads one taking responsibility for KIM policy and engagement and the other KIM services and compliance. These SEOs are supported by three HEO KIM advisors. One additional EO administrator post has also been created to support both KIM and FOI teams. Since the last progress review one of our HEOs moved into ## another role outside DfT. We have recruited a replacement (due to start late spring 2019). Following a review of the IMM project at the end of 2018 it was agreed that two HEO posts would be moved from the project to be recruited permanently into the KIM team and they will also start in late spring 2019. Although these posts will still focus on IMM initially it will enable us to put more resource to this work in the long term. Commentary last updated: April 2019 Enabling/supporting actions Owner Commentary on progress Completion due Status Summer 2018 Complete KIM Policy & Engagement Attend Digital Design Authority meetings and ensure that IM requirements are considered alongside the technical requirements A KIM representative now attends the DDA meetings and ensures that where the technical solutions have an impact on the management of information these are highlighted and considered before a decision is agreed on for a proposed way forward. March 2019 In progress KIM Policy & Engagement Agree process to analyse and action destruction process for leavers email accounts and personal drives Before destruction can be carried out a full audit of these accounts is required to ensure DfT is meeting its obligations for the Independent Inquiry into Child Sex Abuse. The KIM team have been working with Information Assurance colleagues to determine a clear process and a draft has been produced. This is expected to be finalised during summer 2018 and work commenced soon after. However, this work could not be started due to the migration of p drives and email accounts into O365. Now that this has happened the process is in place and the first tranche of leavers accounts has been searched. The process will become BAU after a trial period. Summer 2018 Complete KIM Policy & Engagement Personal (P) drives held in shared drives have had a technical control in place for 5 years. KIM has agreed Ensure technical controls to assist in the management of personal drives is in place and reflected in DfTs IM policy. technical controls to be in place for personal drives as they migrate into O365. Spring 2019 Complete KIM Service & Compliance Replace Business Records Officer (BRO) role with the new governance role of Local Information Manager (LIM), introducing a new curriculum/skills framework for LIM role. A LIM role description has been created. LIM training has been developed and will be delivered to LIMs as they move to TiME. Further training/networking opportunities will be rolled out as required. Complete Winter 2018- 19 Review and update annual IM Healthcheck to cover O365 environment KIM Service & Compliance BRO and LIM survey updated and completed in late 2018. XX% completion which was really positive. Did some analysis of the survey results and produced a report. Currently considering how we use this. Ongoing Ongoing Actively monitor non-compliance with KIM policies and actively support where issues arise KIM Service & Compliance We are working with the Change Manager to draw out what we want to measure in terms of the move to TiME and what success looks like in terms of user behaviour. We held a workshop in April on this. The intention is to survey business areas three months after the rollout and then return six months later to do some more in depth user research. Also intend to look at what statistics we can draw from our systems but until more teams have moved to TiME this will be of limited value. ## 9 Increase Oversight Of Digital Information And Develop A Process For Its Appraisal, Selection And Transfer.  Ensuring a clear vision of what information needs to be in scope across the IT environment as a whole. Datasets and data analytics outputs should be factored in.  Establishing a plan for the information held outside the shared drives including its email legacy and for ensuring material that should form part of the record is captured.  Engaging with The National Archives and cross-government work around the sensitivity review of digital information.  Working with The National Archives to establish a plan for the routine transfer of digital records. This should include identification of material that would benefit from transfer before deadlines established by the Public Records Act. ## The TiME rollout and migration should help us to get a better sense of what is held out in business areas. Business areas are being asked to categorise information into four types: A - material for migration, B - to be maintained within the AFP and disposed of in line with retention schedule, C- information to be disposed of, D - database that will be migrated to the cloud. Following the review of the IMM project in late 2018 and taking into account lessons learned from the project so far, KIM team will take more of a role in the categorisation of data using our knowledge and system data to make decisions about what constitutes category A data and will be migrated into the new filing structure. We have also now agreed a basic plan for category B data, which will be lifted and shifted into a separate area of TiME. Commentary last updated: April 2019 Enabling/supporting actions Owner Commentary on progress Completion due Status Ongoing In progress KIM Service & Compliance Carry out a DfT wide information audit to establish a plan for ensuring that information held outside of the corporate systems are captured. This is partly being taken forward as part of the plan to migrate to TiME. We determine all the areas where the tema hold records and move them into a more acceptable place as part of the work. 2019/20 In progress Appraisal report to be created identifying which digital records should be considered for selection and transfer to TNA. KIM Service & Compliance Progress on producing an appraisal report has slowed due to the demands of the IMM project. However, have started to identify likely themes and key events for this and would hope to be able to pick up on this again in 2019/20. | Ongoing | In progress | Establish a new process to review digital | |----------------------------------------------------------|----------------|-----------------------------------------------------| | material, to include selection and sensitivity | | | | review | | | | KIM Service | | | | & | | | | Compliance | | | | At present we are manually reviewing early digital | | | | records to ensure we remain compliant with the PRA | | | | These early digital records are quite bitty and DfT | | | | was still consistently producing paper records during | | | | this period. We haven't identified anything worthy of | | | | transfer to TNA so far. | | | | | | | | We are aware that we need to develop a proper | | | | process for digital review going forward and this is a | | | | key part of our KIM business objectives for 2019/20 | | | | and beyond. This may require more business area | | | | involvement and in some areas of the department | | | | this may be resource intensive. A paper would need | | | | to be submitted to ExCo getting agreement for the | | | | proposed way forward. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | To be delayed | Not started | Take steps to begin a first digital transfer to TNA | | digital transfer process with. So far our digital review | | | | work has not yet unearthed a collection of records | | | | that we could pilot digital transfer with. | | | | | | |

en

1856-pdf

## Forestry Statistics 2019 A compendium of statistics about woodland, forestry and primary wood processing in the United Kingdom Release date: 26 September 2019 Coverage: United Kingdom Coverage: Country (where possible) Issued by: Forest Research 231 Corstorphine Road, Edinburgh, EH12 7AT Enquiries: Robert Stagg 0300 067 5238 statistics@forestresearch.gov.uk Statistician: Sheila Ward 0300 067 5236 Website: www.forestresearch.gov.uk/statistics/ ## Contents Introduction ........................................................................................... 5 Chapter 1: Woodland Area and Planting ..................................................... 8 Introduction ........................................................................................ 8 Key findings ........................................................................................ 9 1.1 Woodland Area .............................................................................. 10 1.2 Certified woodland area .................................................................. 16 1.3 Land use ....................................................................................... 18 1.4 National Forest Inventory ............................................................... 20 1.5 Area of Farm Woodland .................................................................. 37 1.6 New planting and publicly funded restocking ..................................... 39 1.7 Felling .......................................................................................... 52 Chapter 2: UK-Grown Timber .................................................................. 57 Introduction ....................................................................................... 57 Key findings ....................................................................................... 58 2.1 Wood production ........................................................................... 59 2.2 Deliveries of UK-grown roundwood................................................... 68 2.3 Sawmills - All Mills ......................................................................... 73 2.4 Sawmills - Larger Mills .................................................................... 82 2.5 Pulp & paper ................................................................................. 90 2.6 Wood-based panels ........................................................................ 93 2.7 Miscellaneous products ................................................................... 98 2.8 Exports ....................................................................................... 101 2.9 Certification ................................................................................ 102 2.10 Woodfuel and pellets .................................................................. 105 Chapter 3: Trade ................................................................................. 110 Introduction ..................................................................................... 110 Key findings ..................................................................................... 111 3.1 Apparent consumption of wood in the UK ........................................ 112 3.2 Apparent consumption of wood products in the UK ........................... 115 3.3 Flow of recovered paper ............................................................... 117 3.4 UK import quantities by product .................................................... 118 3.5 UK export quantities by product..................................................... 120 3.6 UK import values by product ......................................................... 122 3.7 UK export values by product ......................................................... 124 3.8 Origin of wood imports ................................................................. 126 Chapter 4: Carbon ............................................................................... 129 Introduction ..................................................................................... 129 Key findings ..................................................................................... 130 4.1 Forest carbon stock ...................................................................... 131 4.2 Woodland Carbon Code ................................................................ 132 4.3 Public Opinion of Forestry - climate change ..................................... 136 Chapter 5: Environment ........................................................................ 138 Introduction ..................................................................................... 138 Key findings ..................................................................................... 138 5.1 Populations of wild birds ............................................................... 139 5.2 Public Opinion of Forestry - tree health ........................................... 142 5.3 Woodland Fires ............................................................................ 145 Chapter 6: Social ................................................................................. 147 Introduction ..................................................................................... 147 Key findings ..................................................................................... 148 6.1 Visits to woodland - household surveys .......................................... 149 6.1.2 Wales ...................................................................................... 152 6.2 Visits to woodland - on-site surveys ............................................... 157 Chapter 7: Employment & Businesses ..................................................... 161 Introduction ..................................................................................... 161 Key findings ..................................................................................... 162 7.1 Employment: Annual Business Survey (ABS) ................................... 163 7.2 Employment in primary wood processing ........................................ 164 7.3 Health & safety ............................................................................ 164 7.4 Establishments in the primary wood processing industries ................ 167 7.5 VAT and/or PAYE registered businesses .......................................... 168 Chapter 8: Finance & Prices ................................................................... 169 ## Introduction Forestry Statistics is a compilation of statistics on woodland, forestry and primary wood processing in the UK. Where possible, statistical information in this publication covers the whole of the United Kingdom, and is broken down to give figures for England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. However, there are some topics for which data are currently only available for some parts of the UK, and these tables are labelled accordingly. The tables within each chapter (including data for charts), along with longer time series (for some topics) are available to download in spreadsheet format from the Statistics Data Downloads page at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/toolsand-resources/statistics/data-downloads/. Further information on data sources and methodology are provided in the Sources chapter. Selected statistics from this publication are provided in "Forestry Facts and Figures 2019", available at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-andresources/statistics/forestry-statistics/. We also publish a range of other Official Statistics, available at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/statistics/. ## Organisational Change From 1 April 2019, the Forestry Commission's functions in Scotland transferred to Scottish Forestry and to Forestry and Land Scotland. At the same time, "Forest Enterprise England" was renamed "Forestry England" and remains an agency of the Forestry Commission. The Forestry Commission's functions in Wales transferred to the Welsh Government and to Natural Resources Wales on 1 April 2013. We have used current organisation names throughout this publication, rather than the names of the organisations that existed at the time to which the data refer. ## Statistical Release Practices We aim to release statistics as soon as they are available. All of our National Statistics and other Official Statistics publications are available on our website www.forestresearch.gov.uk/statistics/. Release dates are published on our website for the year ahead. Publications are made available at 9.30 am on the day of release. ## Statistical Revisions Policy Revisions to statistics can occur when further data become available or errors are corrected. We will normally revise statistics when the figures next appear in any publication. However, if the revision is significant (i.e. resulting in a major change to the published figures), a note showing the revisions will be published as soon as possible on the Forest Research website and distributed to all known recipients. In addition, the web versions of any current publications affected will be revised. See our full revisions policy at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/documents/4355/FCrevisions.pdf for further information. ## Quality Summary information on quality is available in the Sources chapter of this publication. More details are provided in quality reports for individual topics, available at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statistics/aboutour-statistics/code-of-practice/quality-of-official-statistics/. ## Review Of Forestry Statistics We are currently reviewing Forestry Statistics, to ensure that it meets the needs of users. Please tell us your views by completing the online survey at www.smartsurvey.co.uk/s/NWXKV/ by 31 December 2019. ## National Statistics Status National Statistics status means that our statistics meet the highest standards of trustworthiness, quality and public value, and it is our responsibility to maintain compliance with these standards. The continued designation of these statistics (Forestry Statistics and Forestry Facts & Figures) as National Statistics was confirmed in March 2012 following an assessment by the UK Statistics Authority (now the Office for Statistics Regulation) against the Code of Practice for Statistics. Since the latest assessment of these statistics in 2012, we have made improvements including: - Expansion of content to cover data on additional topics, including felling, public opinion on tree health and woodland fires. - The addition of key findings at the start of each chapter, to provide users with a brief overview of the statistics. - Provision of more detailed information on the methodology used, particularly in relation to the estimation of woodland area. ## Chapter 1: Woodland Area And Planting Introduction This chapter contains statistics on: - UK woodland area; - certified woodland area; - areas of new planting and restocking; and - felling. Estimates for England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are included in addition to UK totals. International comparisons are provided in the International Forestry chapter. Further information on the data sources and methodology used to compile the figures is provided in the Sources chapter. Figures on woodland area and certified woodland area at March 2019 and on new planting and restocking for the period 2018-19 were previously published in "Provisional Woodland Statistics: 2019 edition", released on 13 June 2019, and have not been revised. Some figures for Statutory Plant Health Notices in previous years have been revised from those previously published. For further details on revisions, see the Woodland Areas and Planting: Felling section of the Sources chapter. A copy of all woodland area and planting tables, along with longer time series (where available) can be accessed in spreadsheet format from the Data Downloads web page at https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-andresources/statistics/data-downloads/. The main findings are: - The area of woodland in the UK at 31 March 2019 is estimated to be 3.19 million hectares. This represents 13% of the total land area in the UK, 10% in England, 15% in Wales, 19% in Scotland and 8% in Northern Ireland. - Of the total UK woodland area, 0.86 million hectares (27%) is owned or managed by Forestry England, Forestry and Land Scotland, Natural Resources Wales or the Forest Service (in Northern Ireland). - The total certified woodland area in the UK at 31 March 2019 is 1.40 million hectares, including all Forestry England/Forestry and Land Scotland1/Natural Resources Wales/Forest Service woodland. Overall, 44% of the UK woodland area is certified. - Thirteen thousand hectares of new woodland were created in the UK in 2018-19, with conifers accounting for 60% of this area. A total of 842 sites were served with a Statutory Plant Health Notice in 2018- 19, requiring a total of 3.8 thousand hectares of woodland to be felled. (This excludes areas felled within the Phytophthora ramorum management zone in south west Scotland, where a Statutory Plant Health Notice is not required). ## 1.1 Woodland Area Woodland is defined in UK forestry statistics as land under stands of trees with a canopy cover of at least 20% (25% in Northern Ireland), or having the potential to achieve this. The definition relates to land use, rather than land cover, so integral open space and felled areas that are awaiting restocking are included as woodland. Further information, including how this UK definition compares with the international definition of woodland, is provided in the Sources chapter. Statistics on woodland area are used to inform government policy and resource allocation, to provide context to UK forestry and land management issues and are reported to international organisations. They are also used in the compilation of natural capital accounts. Increases in woodland area result from the creation of new woodland. This can be achieved through new planting or by natural colonisation of trees on land near existing woodland. Further information is available in the section on New Planting. Decreases in woodland area result from the conversion of woodland to other land uses. Regulatory approval is usually required before trees can be felled. Felling approval will normally require the area to be restocked, but there are some cases in which trees may be permanently removed, generally for environmental reasons. The permanent removal of trees may also be authorised under planning regulations, to enable development. Most public sector woodland is managed by Forestry England (FE), Forestry and Land Scotland (FLS), Natural Resources Wales (NRW) and the Forest Service (FS) in Northern Ireland. Other public sector woodland (e.g. owned by local authorities) is included with privately owned woodland as "private sector" in this release. The Natural Resources Wales woodland areas and land areas shown in this release relate to areas previously owned or managed by Forestry Commission Wales. They exclude any areas previously owned or managed by other parts of Natural Resources Wales, such as the former Environment Agency in Wales and the former Countryside Council for Wales. ## 1.1.1 Area Of Woodland: 2019 The area of woodland in the UK at 31 March 2019 is estimated to be 3.19 million hectares (Table 1.1). Of this total, 1.5 million hectares (46%) is in Scotland, 1.3 million hectares (41%) is in England, 0.3 million hectares (10%) is in Wales and 0.1 million hectares (4%) is in Northern Ireland. Conifers account for around one half (51%) of the UK woodland area, although this proportion varies from around one quarter (26%) in England to around three quarters (74%) in Scotland. thousand hectares Forest type and ownership1,2 England Wales Scotland NI UK Conifers FE/FLS/NRW/FS 151 98 428 56 732 Private sector 189 54 645 11 899 Total 340 152 1 072 67 1 631 Broadleaves FE/FLS/NRW/FS 64 19 41 7 131 Private sector 904 138 343 40 1 426 Total 968 158 385 46 1 557 Total FE/FLS/NRW/FS 215 117 469 62 863 Private sector 1 093 192 988 51 2 325 Total 1 308 309 1 457 113 3 187 Source: Forestry Commission, Forestry England, Scottish Forestry, Forestry and Land Scotland, Natural Resources Wales, Forest Service, National Forest Inventory. Notes: 1. FE: Forestry England, FLS: Forestry and Land Scotland, NRW: Natural Resources Wales, FS: Forest Service (Northern Ireland). NRW estimates only relate to woodland formerly owned/managed by FC Wales. 2. Private sector: all other woodland. Includes woodland previously owned/managed by the Countryside Council for Wales and the Environment Agency in Wales, other publicly owned woodland (e.g. owned by local authorities) and privately-owned woodland. 3. Figures for England, Wales and Scotland are based on data obtained from the National Forest Inventory (NFI) and adjusted for new planting, but at present no adjustment is made for woodland recently converted to another land use. Further information on how the figures have been estimated is available in the Sources chapter. 4. Figures for Northern Ireland are obtained from the Northern Ireland Draft Woodland Register. 5. Broadleaves include coppice and coppice with standards. ## 1.1.2 Area Of Woodland: Changes Over Time The 3.19 million hectares of woodland in the UK in 2019 represents 13% of the total land area. This comprises 10% in England, 15% in Wales, 19% in Scotland and 8% in Northern Ireland (Table 1.2). percentage1 Year England Wales Scotland Northern Ireland UK 10862 ~15 .. .. .. .. c13502 ~10 .. ~4 .. .. 17thC2,3 ~8 .. ~4 ~1.5 .. 19053 5.2 4.2 4.5 1.1 4.7 1924 5.1 5.0 5.6 1.0 5.0 19473 5.8 6.2 6.6 1.7 5.9 1965 6.8 9.7 8.4 3.1 7.4 1980 7.3 11.6 11.8 4.9 9.0 1995-99 8.4 13.8 16.4 6.0 11.3 19984 9.5 14.4 16.7 6.0 12.0 20195,6 10.0 14.9 18.7 8.2 13.1 Source: Forestry Commission, Forestry England, Scottish Forestry, Forestry and Land Scotland, Natural Resources Wales, Forest Service, National Forest Inventory. Notes: 1. Percentage of the total surface area excluding inland water. The total surface areas, excluding inland water, are taken from the UK Standard Area Measurements (published by the Office for National Statistics). 2. Estimates for England and Scotland before 1905 come from a variety of sources, including the Domesday Survey of England, Scottish Woodland History (TC Smout ed, 1997) and Roy maps c1750. 3. For Northern Ireland, 17th century figure is estimate for all Ireland, 1905 figure is estimate for Province of Ulster 1908, 1947 figure assumes no change from 1939-40 Census. 4. 1998 figures shown for England, Wales and Scotland have been revised from those originally published to produce estimates that are consistent with subsequent data from the National Forest Inventory. 5. Figures for England, Wales and Scotland are based on data obtained from the National Forest Inventory (NFI) and adjusted for new planting, but at present no adjustment is made for woodland recently converted to another land use. Further information on how the figures have been estimated is available in the Sources chapter. 6. Figures for Northern Ireland are obtained from the Northern Ireland Draft Woodland Register. 7. .. Denotes data not available. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. Figure 1.1 shows woodland area by country since 1998. Woodland area in the UK has risen by around 270 thousand hectares since 1998, an increase of 9% over the period. Source: Forestry Commission, Forestry England, Scottish Forestry, Forestry and Land Scotland, Natural Resources Wales, Forest Service, National Forest Inventory. Notes: 1. Woodland areas for England, Wales and Scotland shown in this figure are based on data from the National Forest Inventory. The trends shown take account of areas of new planting and identifiable permanent woodland loss. Areas of woodland loss that are not yet identifiable (e.g. conversion of woodland for the restoration of open habitats) are not accounted for. Further information on the National Forest Inventory is available at https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-andresources/national-forest-inventory/. 2. Figures for 1998 to 2009 for England, Wales and Scotland were revised from those initially published, to produce results that are consistent with the National Forest Inventory and enable comparisons over time. ## 1.1.3 Woodland Area By Ownership Forestry England, Forestry and Land Scotland, Natural Resources Wales and the Forest Service in Northern Ireland owned or managed 27% of the total woodland area in the UK in 2019 (Table 1.3). This proportion ranged from 16% of the woodland area in England to 55% in Northern Ireland. thousand hectares Ownership England Wales Scotland NI UK FE/FLS/NRW/FS woodland1 2015 215 117 478 62 871 2016 215 117 470 62 864 2017 214 117 469 62 863 2018 215 117 470 62 864 2019 215 117 469 62 863 Private sector woodland2 2015 1 091 189 954 50 2 283 2016 1 091 190 965 50 2 295 2017 1 092 191 968 50 2 301 2018 1 092 192 976 50 2 310 2019 1 093 192 988 51 2 325 Total woodland 2015 1 305 306 1 432 112 3 155 2016 1 305 307 1 435 112 3 159 2017 1 306 308 1 438 112 3 164 2018 1 307 309 1 446 113 3 174 2019 1 308 309 1 457 113 3 187 Source: Forestry Commission, Forestry England, Scottish Forestry, Forestry and Land Scotland, Natural Resources Wales, Forest Service, National Forest Inventory. Notes: 1. FE: Forestry England, FLS: Forestry and Land Scotland, NRW: Natural Resources Wales, FS: Forest Service (Northern Ireland). NRW estimates only relate to woodland formerly owned/managed by FC Wales. 2. Private sector: all other woodland. Includes woodland previously owned/managed by the Countryside Council for Wales and the Environment Agency in Wales, other publicly owned woodland (e.g. owned by local authorities) and privately owned woodland. 3. Figures for England, Wales and Scotland are based on data obtained from the National Forest Inventory (NFI) and adjusted for new planting, but at present no adjustment is made for woodland recently converted to another land use. Further information on how the figures have been estimated is available in the Sources chapter. 4. Northern Ireland figures are obtained from the Northern Ireland Draft Woodland Register. 5. Areas as at 31 March. ## 1.2 Certified Woodland Area Certified woodland in the UK has been independently audited against the UK Woodland Assurance Standard. Forestry certification schemes are owned by international non-governmental organisations and exist to promote good forest practice. They offer product labels to demonstrate that wood or wood products come from well-managed forests. Figures for certified woodland areas are often used as an indicator of sustainable forest management. However, it should be noted that woodland that is not certified may also be managed sustainably. Most changes to the certified woodland area figures over time are a result of new areas being certified or certificates not being renewed upon expiry. Temporary changes can also occur if there is a time lag between expiry and renewal. 1.40 million hectares of woodland in the UK were certified in March 2019 (Table 1.4). This represented 44% of the total UK woodland area, 25% in England, 47% in Wales, 59% in Scotland and 58% in Northern Ireland. Ownership England Wales Scotland NI UK FE/FLS/NRW/FS woodland1 215 117 469 62 863 Private sector woodland2 110 29 395 3 538 Total woodland area certified 325 146 864 66 1 400 Source: Forest Stewardship Council, Forestry Commission, Forestry England, Scottish Forestry, Forestry and Land Scotland, Natural Resources Wales, Forest Service, National Forest Inventory. Notes: 1. FE: Forestry England, FLS: Forestry and Land Scotland, NRW: Natural Resources Wales, FS: Forest Service (Northern Ireland). NRW estimates only relate to woodland formerly owned/managed by FC Wales. 2. Private sector: all other woodland. Includes woodland previously owned/managed by the Countryside Council for Wales and the Environment Agency in Wales, other publicly owned woodland (e.g. owned by local authorities) and privately owned woodland. 3. All certified woodland in 2019 is certified under the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) scheme. Some of these woodlands are also certified under the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) scheme. 4. The estimates are based on UK data published by FSC, supplemented by data from individual certificates and other sources. Where possible, figures are for the woodland area certified, rather than the land area certified. 5. All FE/FLS/NRW/FS woodland is certified. The FE/FLS/NRW/FS areas are the latest areas, as shown in Table 1.1, rather than the areas shown on the certificates. Data: Longer time series of the above table are available from the Data Downloads webpage. Notes: 1. All certified woodland is certified under the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) scheme. Some of these woodlands are also certified under the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) scheme. 2. The estimates are based on UK data published by FSC, supplemented by data from individual certificates and other sources. Where possible, figures are for the woodland area certified, rather than the land area certified. 3. Figures for earlier years were revised for consistency with results from the National Forest Inventory. ## 1.3 Land Use Not all land that is owned or managed by Forestry England, Forestry and Land Scotland, Natural Resources Wales and the Forest Service in Northern Ireland is woodland; other land uses include agricultural land, mountain areas and moorland. The woodland areas and land areas shown for Natural Resources Wales relate to areas previously owned or managed by Forestry Commission Wales. They exclude any areas previously owned or managed by other parts of Natural Resources Wales, such as the former Environment Agency Wales and the former Countryside Council for Wales. Woodland accounted for 79% of all Forestry England/ Forestry and Land Scotland/ Natural Resources Wales/ Forest Service land in the UK at 31 March 2019 (Table 1.5). This proportion was highest in Wales (95%) and lowest in Scotland (74%). thousand hectares Year England Wales Scotland Northern Ireland UK Woodland 2015 215 117 478 62 871 2016 215 117 470 62 864 2017 214 117 469 62 863 2018 215 117 470 62 864 2019 215 117 469 62 863 Other land2 2015 38 7 171 13 229 2016 38 7 170 13 228 2017 39 7 169 13 227 2018 39 6 169 13 227 2019 38 6 165 13 223 Total land area 2015 253 124 649 75 1 100 2016 253 124 640 75 1 092 2017 253 124 638 75 1 090 2018 253 123 639 75 1 090 2019 253 123 634 75 1 085 Source: Forestry England, Forestry and Land Scotland, Natural Resources Wales, Forest Service. Notes: 1. FE: Forestry England, FLS: Forestry and Land Scotland, NRW: Natural Resources Wales, FS: Forest Service (Northern Ireland). NRW estimates only relate to woodland formerly owned/managed by FC Wales. 2. "Other land" includes agricultural land and areas of moorland and mountain. 3. Areas as at 31 March. ## 1.4 National Forest Inventory This section contains interim results from the National Forest Inventory (NFI). The statistics are based on field survey data combined with information from the NFI woodland map, which is a spatial representation of woodland areas in Great Britain. Figures presented in this chapter are interim estimates at 31 March 2012, published in the NFI "50-year forecast of softwood timber availability" and "50- year forecast of hardwood timber availability" reports, released in April 2014. Both reports are available at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-andresources/national-forest-inventory/. The figures presented in Tables 1.6 to 1.9 (and Figures 1.3, 1.4a and 1.4b) relate to stocked areas. These differ from the woodland areas presented in earlier tables, as stocked areas exclude felled areas and (for private sector land) areas of integral open space. The figures on growing stock presented in Tables 1.10 and 1.11 form the basis for the softwood and hardwood availability forecasts (see Tables 2.4a and 2.4b). Further information on the National Forest Inventory is available at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/national-forest-inventory/. ## 1.4.1 Woodland Area By Age: Conifers Table 1.6 presents the area of conifers, broken down by age class, ownership and country. Sixty-one percent of the coniferous woodland area in Great Britain was occupied by stands of 40 years old or younger (Table 1.6). A further 9% of stands were aged over 60 years. thousand hectares Age class (years) England Wales Scotland GB FE/FLS/NRW1 0-20 33 24 76 134 21-40 38 25 145 208 41-60 39 25 111 176 61-80 12 7 25 44 81-100 4 1 6 11 100+ 1 0 3 4 All age classes 128 82 367 576 Private sector2 0-20 17 8 126 151 21-40 54 22 231 306 41-60 83 15 116 214 61-80 19 1 18 38 81-100 3 2 6 11 100+ 3 1 9 12 All age classes 179 47 505 732 Total 0-20 51 32 202 285 21-40 92 46 376 514 41-60 123 39 227 389 61-80 31 8 43 82 81-100 7 2 12 22 100+ 3 1 12 16 All age classes 307 129 872 1 308 Source: National Forest Inventory: 50-year forecast of softwood availability (Forestry Commission, April 2014), (supporting data). Notes: 1. FE: Forestry England, FLS: Forestry and Land Scotland, NRW: Natural Resources Wales. NRW estimates only relate to woodland formerly owned/managed by FC Wales. 2. Private sector: all other woodland. Includes woodland previously owned/managed by the Countryside Council for Wales and the Environment Agency in Wales, other publicly owned woodland (e.g. owned by local authorities) and privately owned woodland. 3. Stocked area only: excludes felled areas and (for private sector land) open space. 4. Areas at 31 March 2012. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## 1.4.2 Woodland Area By Age: Broadleaves Table 1.7 presents the area of broadleaves, broken down by age class, ownership and country. Around one half (53%) of the broadleaved area was occupied by stands of 40 years old or younger (Table 1.7). More than one quarter (28%) of stands were aged over 60 years. thousand hectares Age class (years) England Wales Scotland GB FE/FLS/NRW1 0-20 8 7 11 25 21-40 6 2 5 13 41-60 13 2 4 19 61-80 13 2 4 19 81-100 4 1 2 7 100+ 10 3 5 18 All age classes 54 16 32 102 Private sector2 0-20 217 30 84 332 21-40 227 33 84 344 41-60 145 22 58 225 61-80 117 15 22 154 81-100 92 11 9 112 100+ 51 10 7 67 All age classes 849 121 265 1 235 Total 0-20 225 37 95 357 21-40 232 36 90 357 41-60 157 24 63 244 61-80 130 17 26 173 81-100 97 12 11 119 100+ 61 12 12 85 All age classes 902 137 297 1 337 Source: National Forest Inventory: 50-year forecast of hardwood availability (Forestry Commission, April 2014), (supporting data). Notes: 1. FE: Forestry England, FLS: Forestry and Land Scotland, NRW: Natural Resources Wales. NRW estimates only relate to woodland formerly owned/managed by FC Wales. 2. Private sector: all other woodland. Includes woodland previously owned/managed by the Countryside Council for Wales and the Environment Agency in Wales, other publicly owned woodland (e.g. owned by local authorities) and privately owned woodland. 3. Stocked area only: excludes felled areas and (for private sector land) open space. 4. Areas at 31 March 2012. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## 1.4.3 Woodland Area By Age: Summary Figure 1.3 presents the age profile of woodland in Great Britain for conifers and for broadleaves. It shows that broadleaves are more evenly distributed across the age classes than conifers. Notes: 1. Stocked area only: excludes felled areas and (for private sector land) open space. 2. Areas at 31 March 2012. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## 1.4.4 Woodland Area By Species: Conifers Table 1.8 presents the area of conifers, broken down by principal species, ownership and country. Sitka spruce accounts for around one half (51%) of the conifer area in Great Britain (Table 1.8), followed by Scots pine (17%) and larches (10%). Sitka spruce is less dominant in England, accounting for just one quarter (26%) of the conifer area there. thousand hectares Principal species England Wales Scotland GB FE/FLS/NRW1 Sitka spruce 49 50 225 323 Scots pine 17 2 45 64 Corsican pine 27 2 2 30 Norway spruce 7 5 11 23 Larches 10 12 26 48 Douglas fir 10 5 5 20 Lodgepole pine 4 3 49 56 Other conifers 5 3 3 11 All conifers 128 82 367 576 Private sector2 Sitka spruce 32 27 282 341 Scots pine 45 1 109 154 Corsican pine 14 0 1 15 Norway spruce 21 3 15 38 Larches 30 8 39 78 Douglas fir 15 3 7 25 Lodgepole pine 3 1 39 44 Other conifers 19 2 8 29 All conifers 179 47 505 732 Total Sitka spruce 80 77 507 665 Scots pine 61 3 154 218 Corsican pine 40 2 3 46 Norway spruce 27 8 25 61 Larches 40 20 66 126 Douglas fir 25 9 12 46 Lodgepole pine 8 4 88 100 Other conifers 24 5 11 40 All conifers 307 129 872 1 308 Source: National Forest Inventory: 50-year forecast of softwood availability (Forestry Commission, April 2014). Notes: 1. FE: Forestry England, FLS: Forestry and Land Scotland, NRW: Natural Resources Wales. NRW estimates only relate to woodland formerly owned/managed by FC Wales. 2. Private sector: all other woodland. Includes woodland previously owned/managed by the Countryside Council for Wales and the Environment Agency in Wales, other publicly owned woodland (e.g. owned by local authorities) and privately-owned woodland. 3. Stocked area only: excludes felled areas and (for private sector land) open space. 4. Areas at 31 March 2012. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## 1.4.5 Woodland Area By Species: Broadleaves Table 1.9 presents the area of broadleaves, broken down by principal species, ownership and country. The most commonly occurring broadleaved species in Great Britain are birch (accounting for 18% of broadleaf woodland), oak (16%) and ash (12%) (Table 1.9). Birch is more dominant in Scotland, accounting for 43% of the broadleaf area there. thousand hectares Principal species England Wales Scotland GB FE/FLS/NRW1 Oak 16 3 3 21 Beech 13 2 1 15 Sycamore 1 0 0 2 Ash 3 1 0 4 Birch 6 2 11 19 Sweet chestnut 1 0 0 1 Hazel 0 0 0 1 Hawthorn 0 0 0 0 Alder 1 0 1 1 Willow 0 0 0 0 Other broadleaves 14 9 15 38 All broadleaves 54 16 32 102 Private sector2 Oak 151 23 23 198 Beech 59 5 15 78 Sycamore 74 9 21 105 Ash 120 18 15 153 Birch 90 11 116 217 Sweet chestnut 28 0 0 28 Hazel 64 14 8 86 Hawthorn 57 8 8 73 Alder 30 10 16 56 Willow 41 11 13 65 Other broadleaves 133 12 29 174 All broadleaves 849 121 265 1 235 Total Oak 167 26 26 219 Beech 72 6 15 94 Sycamore 75 9 22 106 Ash 123 19 16 157 Birch 96 12 128 236 Sweet chestnut 28 0 0 29 Hazel 65 14 8 87 Hawthorn 57 8 8 73 Alder 31 10 17 58 Willow 41 11 13 65 Other broadleaves 146 21 44 212 All broadleaves 902 137 297 1 337 Source: National Forest Inventory: 50-year forecast of hardwood availability (Forestry Commission, April 2014). Notes: 1. FE: Forestry England, FLS: Forestry and Land Scotland, NRW: Natural Resources Wales. NRW estimates only relate to woodland formerly owned/managed by FC Wales. 2. Private sector: all other woodland. Includes woodland previously owned/managed by the Countryside Council for Wales and the Environment Agency in Wales, other publicly owned woodland (e.g. owned by local authorities) and privately owned woodland. 3. Stocked area only: excludes felled areas and (for private sector land) open space. 4. Areas at 31 March 2012. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## 1.4.6 Woodland Area By Species: Summary Figures 1.4a and 1.4b show that, whilst the conifer area is dominated by a small number of species (Sitka spruce and Scots pine together account for around two thirds of the conifer area), broadleaves are more varied. Notes: 1. Stocked area only: excludes felled areas and (for private sector land) open space. 2. Areas at 31 March 2012. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. Notes: 1. Stocked area only: excludes felled areas and (for private sector land) open space. 2. Areas at 31 March 2012. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## 1.4.7 Growing Stock By Species: Conifers Growing stock is the volume of timber in living trees. It is also often referred to as the standing volume. Table 1.10 presents the volume of coniferous growing stock, broken down by principal species, ownership and country. The total volume of coniferous growing stock in Great Britain in 2012 was 355 million m3 overbark standing (Table 1.10). Sitka spruce accounted for around one half (51%) of the conifer growing stock, followed by Scots pine (15%) and larches (10%). This largely reflects the distribution of species by area (see Table 1.8). million m3 overbark standing Principal species England Wales Scotland GB FE/FLS/NRW1 Sitka spruce 8.9 11.1 52.1 72.0 Scots pine 4.0 0.5 8.8 13.3 Corsican pine 5.5 0.6 0.4 6.4 Norway spruce 1.7 1.5 3.5 6.7 Larches 1.7 2.7 4.8 9.2 Douglas fir 2.7 1.3 1.4 5.4 Lodgepole pine 0.8 0.6 8.2 9.6 Other conifers 1.5 1.1 1.0 3.6 All conifers 26.8 19.4 80.2 126.4 Private sector2 Sitka spruce 11.4 9.5 88.0 108.9 Scots pine 14.7 0.3 24.5 39.4 Corsican pine 4.7 0.2 0.3 5.3 Norway spruce 7.1 1.3 5.9 14.4 Larches 10.7 3.3 12.3 26.3 Douglas fir 6.4 1.6 3.5 11.5 Lodgepole pine 1.0 0.3 7.4 8.7 Other conifers 7.6 1.1 3.0 11.7 All conifers 63.7 17.9 146.7 228.4 Total Sitka spruce 20.3 20.6 140.0 180.9 Scots pine 18.6 0.8 33.3 52.7 Corsican pine 10.2 0.8 0.7 11.7 Norway spruce 8.8 2.8 9.4 21.1 Larches 12.4 6.0 17.1 35.6 Douglas fir 9.1 2.9 4.9 16.9 Lodgepole pine 1.8 0.9 15.5 18.3 Other conifers 9.1 2.2 4.1 15.4 All conifers 90.5 37.4 226.9 354.7 Source: National Forest Inventory: 50-year forecast of softwood availability (Forestry Commission, April 2014). Notes: 1. FE: Forestry England, FLS: Forestry and Land Scotland, NRW: Natural Resources Wales. NRW estimates only relate to woodland formerly owned/managed by FC Wales. 2. Private sector: all other woodland. Includes woodland previously owned/managed by the Countryside Council for Wales and the Environment Agency in Wales, other publicly owned woodland (e.g. owned by local authorities) and privately owned woodland. 3. Areas at 31 March 2012. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## 1.4.8 Growing Stock By Species: Broadleaves Table 1.11 presents the volume of broadleaved growing stock, broken down by principal species, ownership and country. The total volume of broadleaved growing stock in Great Britain in 2012 was 245 million m3 overbark standing (Table 1.11). Oak (28%), ash (16%) and beech (12%) accounted for the majority of the broadleaved volume. To some extent, this reflects the distribution of species by area (see Table 1.9). million m3 overbark standing Principal species England Wales Scotland GB FE/FLS/NRW1 Oak 3.3 0.5 0.6 4.4 Beech 2.8 0.4 0.1 3.4 Sycamore 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 Ash 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.5 Birch 0.5 0.1 1.7 2.3 Sweet chestnut 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 Hazel 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Hawthorn 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Alder 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 Willow 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other broadleaves 1.3 0.8 1.2 3.3 All broadleaves 8.7 1.9 3.9 14.5 Private sector2 Oak 51.7 7.7 5.6 65.0 Beech 19.8 1.6 5.2 26.6 Sycamore 16.2 2.4 4.8 23.4 Ash 30.1 6.9 2.8 39.8 Birch 11.3 1.2 8.5 20.9 Sweet chestnut 7.7 0.2 0.0 7.9 Hazel 5.0 0.9 0.4 6.4 Hawthorn 2.8 0.4 0.3 3.4 Alder 6.8 2.1 1.9 10.8 Willow 4.9 0.8 0.9 6.5 Other broadleaves 16.0 1.1 2.6 19.6 All broadleaves 172.3 25.4 32.9 230.6 Total Oak 55.0 8.1 6.3 69.4 Beech 22.6 2.0 5.3 29.9 Sycamore 16.4 2.4 4.9 23.6 Ash 30.5 7.0 2.8 40.3 Birch 11.8 1.3 10.1 23.2 Sweet chestnut 7.8 0.2 0.0 8.0 Hazel 5.1 0.9 0.5 6.5 Hawthorn 2.8 0.4 0.3 3.4 Alder 6.9 2.2 1.9 11.0 Willow 4.9 0.8 0.9 6.5 Other broadleaves 17.2 1.8 3.8 22.9 All broadleaves 181.0 27.3 36.8 245.1 Source: National Forest Inventory: 50-year forecast of hardwood availability (Forestry Commission, April 2014). Notes: 1. FE: Forestry England, FLS: Forestry and Land Scotland, NRW: Natural Resources Wales. NRW estimates only relate to woodland formerly owned/managed by FC Wales. 2. Private sector: all other woodland. Includes woodland previously owned/managed by the Countryside Council for Wales and the Environment Agency in Wales, other publicly owned woodland (e.g. owned by local authorities) and privately owned woodland. 3. Areas at 31 March 2012. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## 1.5 Area Of Farm Woodland Agricultural Censuses run by Defra (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) and the devolved administrations collect annual information on the land-use of farms. Table 1.12 below shows the area of woodland on farms. The area of farm woodland in the UK has increased from 0.7 million hectares in 2009 to 1.0 million hectares in 2018 (Table 1.12). Slightly over one half (52%) of all farm woodland was in Scotland in 2018, with a further 37% in England, 10% in Wales and the remaining 2% in Northern Ireland. thousand hectares Year England Wales Scotland Northern Ireland UK 2009 303.7 60.8 350.8 10.3 725.7 2010 295.3 69.1 399.8 10.2 774.0 2011 304.9 44.2 426.1 10.8 785.9 2012 308.4 62.6 445.4 11.0 827.5 2013 324.9 63.4 466.8 10.3 865.4 2014 331.3 75.7 479.4 11.1 897.5 2015 347.6 78.0 524.0 11.1 960.6 2016 370.5 89.2 502.4 16.1 978.2 2017 368.5 92.8 560.1 15.8 1 037.2 2018 371.7 96.8 531.5 16.3 1 016.3 Source: June Agricultural Census - Defra, The Scottish Government, Welsh Government, Northern Ireland Executive. Notes: 1. Changes in the area of farm woodland over time indicate a change in the area of farm land that is reported as woodland and do not necessarily indicate a change in woodland area. Source: June Agricultural Census - Defra, The Scottish Government, Welsh Government, Northern Ireland Executive. Notes: 1. Changes in the area of farm woodland over time indicate a change in the area of farm land that is reported as woodland and do not necessarily indicate a change in woodland area. ## 1.6 New Planting And Publicly Funded Restocking New Planting New planting is the creation of new areas of woodland by planting trees on land that was not previously woodland. The statistics presented here also include new woodland that is created by natural colonisation of trees on land near existing woodland. Statistics on new planting are used to inform government policy and resource allocation and are used in producing annual estimates of woodland area. There are a number of factors that can affect the level of new planting in the UK. These include: - choices by landowners reflecting their own motivation and needs; - the costs and availability of land for conversion to woodland; - the availability of grants for new planting, the level of grant payments available and the awareness of grants among potential recipients; - the tax benefits available from owning woodland; - expected future markets for wood products such as timber and woodfuel; - income from payments for ecosystem services, particularly carbon storage; - national and local initiatives, for example on biodiversity, green infrastructure and water management. ## Restocking Restocking is the replacement of trees on areas of woodland that have been felled; this can be done either through replanting or natural regeneration. The statistics presented here include felled areas that have been restocked by both natural regeneration and replanting. As restocking takes place on woodland that has been previously harvested and it is a condition of most felling licences that the area is restocked, restocking rates are mainly driven by harvesting levels (with a time lag, usually of around 2 years, between harvesting and restocking). Figures for timber harvesting (wood production) are available in the UK-Grown Timber chapter. Economic factors, including grant rates, may have some effect on the species choice at restocking. In addition, the precise timing of restocking may be affected by weather conditions. This release only covers publicly funded restocking, that is: - restocking of Forestry England/ Forestry and Land Scotland/ Natural Resources Wales/ Forest Service Woodland and - grant aided restocking of private sector woodland. Grant support for restocking of conifers changed with the introduction of Rural Development Contracts in Scotland in 2008 and again with the introduction of the Forestry Grant Scheme in 2015. This will have led to a reduction in the proportion of private sector restocking that is grant aided and therefore reported for Scotland. Grant support in England is now provided by the Countryside Stewardship scheme, which opened for applications in early 2016. Funding for restocking under Countryside Stewardship is only available under limited circumstances (through the tree health grant). The restoration (and restocking with native species) of PAWS (plantations on ancient woodland sites) is also supported by the HS2 Woodland Fund. No estimate has been made for restocking in England that is no longer supported by grants and therefore restocking in England in recent years is under-reported in this release and other statistics. ## 1.6.1 New Planting And Restocking By Forest Type Thirteen thousand hectares of new woodland were created in the UK in 2018- 19. In addition, 15 thousand hectares of publicly funded restocking were reported (Table 1.13). Conifers accounted for three fifths (60%) of the new planting area in 2018-19. thousand hectares Year (ending 31/3) Conifer Broadleaves Total England 2014-15 0.08 2.35 2.43 2015-16 0.00 0.82 0.82 2016-17 0.10 1.05 1.15 2017-18 0.24 1.26 1.50 2018-19 0.42 1.00 1.42 Wales 2014-15 0.00 0.10 0.10 2015-16 0.04 0.10 0.14 2016-17 0.16 0.23 0.40 2017-18 0.13 0.12 0.24 2018-19 0.25 0.27 0.52 Scotland 2014-15 2.48 5.08 7.56 2015-16 1.90 2.73 4.63 2016-17 3.22 1.54 4.76 2017-18 4.68 2.46 7.14 2018-19 7.27 3.94 11.21 Northern Ireland 2014-15 0.02 0.19 0.21 2015-16 0.00 0.05 0.05 2016-17 0.08 0.13 0.21 2017-18 0.11 0.10 0.21 2018-19 0.10 0.14 0.24 UK 2014-15 2.58 7.72 10.30 2015-16 1.94 3.71 5.65 2016-17 3.56 2.96 6.51 2017-18 5.15 3.94 9.09 2018-19 8.05 5.35 13.40 Source: Forestry Commission, Forestry England, Scottish Forestry, Forestry and Land Scotland, Natural Resources Wales, Forest Service, grant schemes. Notes: 1. Private sector new planting figures are based on grant-supported new planting and (where possible) with estimates for areas planted without grant aid. 2. Figures for grant-aided planting relate to areas for which grants were paid during the year. 3. Estimates for areas planted without grant aid are believed to be under-reported and, as a result, the reported figures are likely to under-estimate the true level of planting activity. For England, woodland planting funded by sources other than the Countryside Stewardship Woodland Creation Grant include planting supported by the Woodland Trust, by the Environment Agency, by Natural England and land acquired by the National Forest Company. For Scotland, a small amount of new planting without grant aid was included for 2016-17 and 2018-19. 4. The planting season lies both sides of 31 March, and the weather can cause planting to be advanced or delayed. 5. Includes woodland formed by natural colonisation (where known). Data: Longer time series of the above table are available from the Data Downloads web page. thousand hectares Year (ending 31/3) Conifer Broadleaves Total England 2014-15 2.01 4.39 6.41 2015-16 2.17 1.14 3.31 2016-17 2.03 0.97 3.00 2017-18 1.58 0.47 2.04 2018-19 1.26 0.39 1.65 Wales 2014-15 1.30 0.64 1.94 2015-16 1.20 0.58 1.78 2016-17 1.12 0.55 1.67 2017-18 1.00 0.71 1.71 2018-19 0.90 0.54 1.44 Scotland 2014-15 6.58 1.87 8.45 2015-16 5.99 1.83 7.82 2016-17 9.09 1.99 11.07 2017-18 8.14 1.52 9.66 2018-19 9.12 2.07 11.19 Northern Ireland 2014-15 0.94 0.10 1.04 2015-16 0.74 0.07 0.81 2016-17 1.15 0.17 1.31 2017-18 0.85 0.08 0.94 2018-19 0.72 0.11 0.83 UK 2014-15 10.84 7.00 17.84 2015-16 10.10 3.63 13.73 2016-17 13.39 3.67 17.06 2017-18 11.57 2.77 14.34 2018-19 12.00 3.11 15.12 Source: Forestry Commission, Forestry England, Scottish Forestry, Forestry and Land Scotland, Natural Resources Wales, Forest Service, grant schemes. Notes: 1. No estimates are available for restocking without grant aid. 2. The planting season lies both sides of 31 March, and the weather can cause planting to be advanced or delayed. 3. Includes woodland restocked by natural regeneration (where known). Data: Longer time series of the above table are available from the Data Downloads web page. ## 1.6.2 New Planting And Restocking By Ownership In 2018-19 most new planting (92%) took place on private sector land (Table 1.14). thousand hectares Year FE/FLS/ (ending 31/3) NRW/FS Private sector Total England 2014-15 0.00 2.43 2.43 2015-16 0.00 0.82 0.82 2016-17 0.02 1.13 1.15 2017-18 0.00 1.50 1.50 2018-19 0.03 1.39 1.42 Wales 2014-15 0.00 0.10 0.10 2015-16 0.00 0.14 0.14 2016-17 0.00 0.40 0.40 2017-18 0.00 0.24 0.24 2018-19 0.00 0.52 0.52 Scotland 2014-15 0.40 7.16 7.56 2015-16 0.71 3.93 4.63 2016-17 1.06 3.70 4.76 2017-18 0.87 6.27 7.14 2018-19 1.03 10.19 11.21 Northern Ireland 2014-15 0.00 0.21 0.21 2015-16 0.00 0.05 0.05 2016-17 0.00 0.21 0.21 2017-18 0.00 0.21 0.21 2018-19 0.00 0.24 0.24 UK 2014-15 0.40 9.90 10.30 2015-16 0.71 4.94 5.65 2016-17 1.08 5.44 6.51 2017-18 0.87 8.23 9.09 2018-19 1.06 12.34 13.40 Source: Forestry Commission, Forestry England, Scottish Forestry, Forestry and Land Scotland, Natural Resources Wales, Forest Service, grant schemes. Notes: 1. Private sector new planting figures are based on grant-supported new planting and (where possible) with estimates for areas planted without grant aid. 2. Figures for grant-aided planting relate to areas for which grants were paid during the year. 3. Estimates for areas planted without grant aid are believed to be under-reported and, as a result, the reported figures are likely to under-estimate the true level of planting activity. For England, woodland planting funded by sources other than the Countryside Stewardship Woodland Creation Grant include planting supported by the Woodland Trust, by the Environment Agency, by Natural England and land acquired by the National Forest Company. For Scotland, a small amount of new planting without grant aid was included for 2016-17 and 2018-19. 4. The planting season lies both sides of 31 March, and the weather can cause planting to be advanced or delayed. 5. Includes woodland formed by natural colonisation (where known). Data: Longer time series of the above table are available from the Data Downloads web page. thousand hectares Year FE/FLS/ (ending 31/3) NRW/FS Private sector Total England 2014-15 2.25 4.15 6.41 2015-16 2.30 1.02 3.31 2016-17 2.39 0.61 3.00 2017-18 2.04 0.00 2.04 2018-19 1.57 0.08 1.65 Wales 2014-15 1.56 0.38 1.94 2015-16 1.47 0.32 1.78 2016-17 1.44 0.23 1.67 2017-18 1.55 0.16 1.71 2018-19 1.22 0.23 1.44 Scotland 2014-15 6.50 1.95 8.45 2015-16 6.55 1.27 7.82 2016-17 6.67 4.41 11.07 2017-18 5.78 3.87 9.66 2018-19 7.15 4.05 11.19 Northern Ireland 2014-15 0.88 0.16 1.04 2015-16 0.75 0.06 0.81 2016-17 1.25 0.06 1.31 2017-18 0.86 0.08 0.94 2018-19 0.79 0.04 0.83 UK 2014-15 11.20 6.65 17.84 2015-16 11.06 2.67 13.73 2016-17 11.74 5.31 17.06 2017-18 10.23 4.11 14.34 2018-19 10.72 4.40 15.12 Source: Forestry Commission, Forestry England, Scottish Forestry, Forestry and Land Scotland, Natural Resources Wales, Forest Service, grant schemes. Notes: 1. No estimates are available for restocking without grant aid. 2. The planting season lies both sides of 31 March, and the weather can cause planting to be advanced or delayed. 3. Includes woodland restocked by natural regeneration (where known). Data: Longer time series of the above table are available from the Data Downloads web page. ## 1.6.3 New Planting And Restocking: Time Series Figure 1.6 shows areas of new planting by country since the year ending March 1976. Trends in new planting rates have been influenced by changes to the incentives available to land owners (in the form of grants and regulations). In recent years, areas of new planting in the UK have dropped to lows of under 6 thousand hectares in 2009-10 and in 2015-16 and have risen to highs of around 13 thousand hectares in 2011-12, 2013-14 and 2018-19. These fluctuations are likely to have been influenced by changes in grant schemes across the UK. At 13.4 thousand hectares in 2018-19, the current level of new planting represents a 47% increase from the 9.1 thousand hectares achieved in the previous year and continues the increase from 2015-16. This increase was largely in Scotland and was likely to have been influenced by the availability of grant funding and increased confidence in forestry arising from strong timber values. For further information, see the New Planting and Restocking section of the Sources chapter. Notes: 1. Private sector figures are based on grant-supported new planting and (where possible) with estimates for areas planted without grant aid. 2. Figures for grant-aided planting relate to areas for which grants were paid during the year. 3. Estimates for areas planted without grant aid are believed to be under-reported and, as a result, the reported figures are likely to under-estimate the true level of planting activity. For England, woodland planting funded by sources other than the Countryside Stewardship Woodland Creation Grant include planting supported by the Woodland Trust, by the Environment Agency, by Natural England and land acquired by the National Forest Company. For Scotland, a small amount of new planting without grant aid was included for 2016-17 and 2018-19. 4. The planting season lies both sides of 31 March, and the weather can cause planting to be advanced or delayed. 5. Includes woodland formed by natural colonisation (where known). Figure 1.7 shows reported areas of restocking by country since the year ending March 1976. It indicates an increase in restocking rates during the period. Over the same period, there has been a general increase in UK wood production (see UK-Grown Timber chapter). The reported area of restocking fell significantly after a peak of 19 thousand hectares in 2006-07. This followed changes to grant support for restocking in Scotland, that resulted in some non-grant aided Sitka spruce restocking being excluded from the estimates. Results from the Forestry Commission's Nursery Survey (an annual survey of forest nurseries in Great Britain) indicate that, following a dip in the 2009/10 planting year, sales of Sitka spruce plants to Scotland have been relatively stable in recent years. The chart shows a dip in the area of restocking in 2015-16, following changes to grant schemes across the UK. Reported restocking has continued to fall in England, where grant aid is now only available in very limited circumstances. The reported area of publicly funded restocking in the UK in 2018-19 represents a 5% increase from the previous year, but remains below the level reported for 2016-17. For further information, see the New Planting and Restocking section of the Sources chapter. Source: Forestry Commission, Forestry England, Scottish Forestry, Forestry and Land Scotland, Natural Resources Wales, Forest Service, grant schemes. Notes: 1. Private sector figures are based on areas for which grants were paid during the year. 2. Estimates of areas planted without grant aid are also included (where possible) up to 2009-10, but no estimates are available since then. As a result, the reported figures are likely to under-estimate the true level of planting activity. 3. The planting season lies both sides of 31 March, and the weather can cause planting to be advanced or delayed. 4. Includes woodland restocked by natural regeneration. 5. Restocking by natural regeneration in non-clearfell areas may be under-represented. ## 1.7 Felling Felling Approval for the felling (cutting down) of trees in the UK is granted through felling licences issued by the Forestry Commission, Scottish Forestry, Natural Resources Wales or the Forest Service in Northern Ireland. Felling licences may be conditional (where felling approval is granted subject to replanting) or unconditional (where tree felling is approved without the requirement to replant). Unconditional licences are routinely issued for silvicultural thinning operations and in these cases no woodland loss takes place. However, an unconditional felling licence without the requirement to replant may be issued if there are overriding environmental considerations, for example to enable the restoration of important habitats. The removal of trees may also be authorised under planning regulations, to enable development (including for windfarms). In this case, a felling licence is not required. The removal of trees might also be required through a Statutory Plant Health Notice (SPHN). A SPHN may require the felling and destruction of infected trees or containment of infested material on site, and is issued by the Forestry Commission, Scottish Forestry, Natural Resources Wales or the Forest Service to prevent the spread of pests and diseases. Similar actions are also required within the public woodland estate managed by these organisations. There is no legal requirement for woodland to be restocked after felling under a SPHN. Since 2010/2011, SPHNs have mainly been issued to attempt to slow down the spread of Phytophthora ramorum, first found in the UK in 2002 on viburnum, and in 2009 on Japanese larch, a significant sporulating host resulting in a dramatic upsurge in the disease. Statutory felling of infected P. ramorum infected larch does not apply within the designated P. ramorum management zone in south west Scotland where the high levels of infection and proportion of larch in the area make this unfeasible. However, felling licences are still required, and movement licences are required to stop spread out of this area. In Wales' P. ramorum Core Disease Zone SPHNs are still served to contain material on site, but felling still requires a felling licence. Further information on felling and Statutory Plant Health Notices is provided in the Sources chapter. ## Woodland Loss Information on unconditional felling licences that do not relate to thinning may be seen as an indication of the level of woodland loss on land that is not owned or managed by Forestry England, Forestry and Land Scotland, Natural Resources Wales or the Forest Service. However, the data relates only to felling licences issued, so does not provide information on whether the felling actually took place (or the timing of the felling). In addition, felling licences do not cover woodland loss that is authorised under planning regulations. The National Forest Inventory report "Preliminary estimates of the changes in canopy cover in British woodlands between 2006 and 2015" (August 2016) has reported: - thousand hectares of observed permanent woodland loss between 2006 and 2015; - a further 0.7 thousand hectares of ground under development and 0.2 thousand hectares of newly established habitats; - 69% of the clearfelled area observed in 2006 had been restocked by 2012, leaving around 33.9 thousand hectares of woodlands in transition and open areas; - 63% of the area observed as clearfelled between 2006 and 2009 had been restocked by 2012, leaving around 28.6 thousand hectares of woodlands in transition and open areas. These are interim estimates that are likely to underestimate the final position; updated estimates from NFI second cycle field survey are scheduled to be available by 2020. Further information is available in the report at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/national-forest-inventory/. ## 1.7.1 Felling Licences Table 1.15 shows the area covered by unconditional felling licences issued by the Forestry Commission, Scottish Forestry and Natural Resources Wales in the last 10 years. The figures do not include unconditional felling licences issued to permit thinning of woodlands. The table covers woodland in England, Scotland and Wales that is not owned or managed by Forestry England, Forestry and Land Scotland or Natural Resources Wales only; it does not cover felling that is exempt from felling licence approval (such as authorisations for felling under planning regulations, felling required under a Statutory Plant Health Notice or felling that is approved on condition that the area is restocked). A total of 0.7 thousand hectares of woodland in England and 0.1 thousand hectares in Wales was covered by unconditional felling licences (with no requirement to restock) in the year to March 2019. The level in Scotland was under 50 hectares. thousand hectares Year England Wales Scotland GB 2009-10 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.7 2010-11 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.6 2011-12 0.6 0.0 0.1 0.7 2012-13 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.9 2013-14 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.6 2014-15 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.3 2015-16 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.5 2016-17 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 2017-18 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 2018-19 0.7 0.1 0.0 0.8 Source: Forestry Commission, Scottish Forestry, Natural Resources Wales Notes: 1. Felling licences issued in the period. Excludes areas exempt from felling licence approval and licences issued for thinning. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## 1.7.2 Statutory Plant Health Notices Table 1.16a shows the number of sites where a Statutory Plant Health Notice has been served in the UK since 2010-11 and Table 1.16b shows the area required to be felled under these Notices. The tables cover all woodland, including sites owned or managed by Forestry England, Forestry and Land Scotland, Natural Resources Wales or the Forest Service in Northern Ireland. As Statutory Plant Health Notices are not issued in the Phytophthora ramorum management zone in south west Scotland, the figures presented here do not cover all felling of infected larch. A total of 842 sites were served with Statutory Plant Health Notices between April 2018 and March 2019. | Year | England | Wales | Scotland | |----------|------------|----------|-------------| | Northern | | | | | Ireland | | | | | UK | | | | | 2010-11 | 114 | 46 | 1 | | 2011-12 | 131 | 90 | 14 | | 2012-13 | 168 | 89 | 123 | | 2013-14 | 244 | 272 | 76 | | 2014-15 | 140 | 71 | 9 | | 2015-16 | 73 | 57 | 34 | | 2016-17 | 75 | 53 | 71 | | 2017-18 | 43 | 153 | 71 | | 2018-19 | 136 | 215 | 491 | Source: Forestry Commission, Scottish Forestry, Natural Resources Wales, Forest Service. Note: 1. The number of sites where infection of larch by Phytophthora ramorum has been confirmed, or where there is sufficient suspicion of infection, and a Statutory Plant Health Notice has been served on the landowner. 2. Excludes felling within the Phytophthora ramorum management zone in south west Scotland, where Statutory Plant Health Notices are not issued. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. Areas requiring felling under Statutory Plant Health Notices totalled 3.8 thousand hectares in 2018-19. Around one half (49%) of the area to be felled in 2018-19 was in Wales, 36% was in Scotland and 15% in England. thousand hectares Year England Wales Scotland Northern Ireland UK 2010-11 1.2 0.8 0.0 0.3 2.3 2011-12 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.1 1.1 2012-13 0.5 1.5 0.4 0.2 2.5 2013-14 0.8 4.6 0.3 0.5 6.2 2014-15 0.3 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.7 2015-16 0.1 1.5 0.1 0.0 1.8 2016-17 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.7 2017-18 0.1 1.3 0.3 0.1 1.7 2018-19 0.6 1.9 1.4 0.0 3.8 Source: Forestry Commission, Scottish Forestry, Natural Resources Wales, Forest Service. Note: 1. The area that is required to be felled within the Statutory Plant Health Notice. 2. Excludes felling within the Phytophthora ramorum management zone in south west Scotland, where Statutory Plant Health Notices are not issued. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## Chapter 2: Uk-Grown Timber Introduction This chapter covers the production of timber from woodland and the primary processing of harvested wood to give basic wood products. Estimates for England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are included, in addition to UK totals, where possible. International comparisons of timber production are available in the International Forestry chapter. Further information on the data sources and methodology used to compile the figures is provided in the Sources chapter. Timber originating from conifers is known as softwood and that from broadleaves is known as hardwood. Please refer to the Glossary for a definition of other terms used in this chapter. Figures for 2018 were previously published in "UK Wood Production and Trade: 2018 Provisional Figures", released on 16 May 2019. Some figures have been revised from those previously published. For further details on revisions, see the Timber section of the Sources chapter. A copy of all UK-grown timber tables can be accessed in spreadsheet format from the Data Downloads web page at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-andresources/statistics/data-downloads/. The main findings for 2018 are (with percentage changes from 2017): Removals2 (harvesting) of UK roundwood: - 11.4 million green tonnes of softwood (+4%); - 0.8 million green tonnes of hardwood (+13%). ## Deliveries1 Of Uk Roundwood To Wood Processors And Others: - Total: 11.6 million green tonnes of roundwood (softwood and hardwood) (+3%), of which: - Sawmills: 6.5 million green tonnes (-2%); - Wood-based panels: 1.2 million green tonnes (+14%); - Integrated pulp and paper mills: 0.5 million green tonnes (+10%); - Woodfuel: 2.6 million green tonnes (+18%); - Other uses, including round fencing, shavings and exports of roundwood: 0.8 million green tonnes (-10%). Production of wood products in the UK included: - 3.7 million cubic metres of sawnwood (-1%); - 3.1 million cubic metres of wood-based panels (-3%); - 3.9 million tonnes of paper and paperboard (+1%). ## 2.1 Wood Production Wood production (also referred to as removals) refers to the harvesting of roundwood (trunk and branch wood) from coniferous (softwood) and nonconiferous (hardwood) trees. Figures are generally expressed here in green tonnes (weight when freshly felled). Removals should not be confused with deliveries, which are the quantities of UK-grown roundwood that is delivered to processors (mills) or for other uses (such as woodfuel and exports). Deliveries statistics are presented in Tables 2.5 and 2.6. A comparison of removals and deliveries of UK softwood roundwood is provided in the Sources chapter. The figures on removals of UK roundwood are used to monitor trends in the UK forest sector. The data is also used alongside figures for standing volume (the volume of standing trees) and increment (the growth rate of standing trees) to compile natural capital accounts for inclusion in the UK Environmental Accounts released by the Office for National Statistics. The data are derived from a number of sources: - FE/FLS/NRW/FS figures are obtained from Forestry England, Forestry and Land Scotland, Natural Resources Wales and Forest Service administrative systems; - Private sector softwood figures are obtained from the Private Sector Softwood Removals Survey; - Total hardwood figures are estimated from hardwood deliveries figures, which are compiled from surveys of the UK-grown timber industry, trade associations and expert estimates. ## 2.1.1 Summary: Wood Production It is estimated that a total of 12.2 million green tonnes of roundwood was removed from UK woodlands in 2018. Softwood accounted for most (93%) removals from UK woodland and totalled 11.4 million green tonnes in 2018 (Table 2.1). This represented a 4% increase on the previous year's figure. Hardwood removals totalled 0.8 million green tonnes in 2018. Private sector woodlands accounted for 60% of softwood production and 90% of hardwood production in 2018. FE/FLS/ Year NRW/FS1 woodland 2009 5 126 3 266 8 392 2010 4 625 4 633 9 258 2011 4 870 5 186 10 056 2012 4 836 5 259 10 095 2013 5 084 5 852 10 936 2014 4 900 6 627 11 527 2015 4 691 5 968 10 659 2016 5 011 5 734 10 745 2017 4 862 6 075 10 938 2018 4 523 6 827 11 351 FE/FLS/ Year NRW/FS1 woodland 2009 5 126 3 266 8 392 2010 4 625 4 633 9 258 2011 4 870 5 186 10 056 2012 4 836 5 259 10 095 2013 5 084 5 852 10 936 2014 4 900 6 627 11 527 2015 4 691 5 968 10 659 2016 5 011 5 734 10 745 2017 4 862 6 075 10 938 2018 4 523 6 827 11 351 thousand green tonnes Private sector2 Total woodland softwood thousand green tonnes Private sector2 Total woodland softwood3,4 Notes (table 2.1a & 2.1b): 1. FE: Forestry England, FLS: Forestry and Land Scotland, NRW: Natural Resources Wales, FS: Forest Service (Northern Ireland). 2. Private sector: removals from all other woodland (including some publicly owned woodland). 3. Most hardwood production in the UK comes from private sector woodland; the figures are estimates based on reported deliveries to wood processing industries and others. 4. The increase in hardwood removals between 2016 and 2017 is largely attributed to a revised estimate for deliveries of UK grown hardwood used for woodfuel (see Table 2.6). This new estimate should not be interpreted as an increase in a single year. Data: Longer time series of the above table, including estimates by country (England/ Wales/ Scotland/ Northern Ireland) are available from the Data downloads web page at: https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statistics/data-downloads/. ## 2.1.2 Origin Of Private Sector Softwood Removals It is estimated that 74% of all softwood removals from private sector woodlands were harvested in Scotland, 17% in England, 9% in Wales and the remainder in Northern Ireland in 2018 (Table 2.2). There has been an overall increase in the level of UK private sector softwood removals in the last decade. thousand green tonnes Year England Wales Scotland Northern Ireland UK 2009 533 321 2 388 24 3 266 2010 678 427 3 471 57 4 633 2011 738 501 3 894 53 5 186 2012 847 611 3 761 40 5 259 2013 929 695 4 205 23 5 852 2014 1 165 739 4 691 33 6 627 2015 1 052 686 4 203 28 5 968 2016 1 013 643 4 043 34 5 734 2017 961 783 4 295 36 6 075 2018 1 130 628 5 022 47 6 827 Source: Private Sector Softwood Removals Survey Data: Longer time series of the above table, including estimates for hardwood removals and for removals from FE/FLS/NRW/FS woodlands are available from the Data Downloads web page at: https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statistics/data-downloads/. ## 2.1.3 Origin Of Fe/Fls/Nrw/Fs Removals Information on removals from Forestry England (FE), Forestry and Land Scotland (FLS), Natural Resources Wales (NRW) and Forest Service (FS) woodlands is obtained from administrative systems. A total of 4.5 million green tonnes of softwood was removed from FE/FLS/NRW/FS woodlands in 2018, a 7% decrease from the 2017 figure (Table 2.3). Over one half (54%) of FE/FLS/NRW/FS softwood removals in 2018 occurred in Scotland, 23% in England, 15% in Wales and 7% in Northern Ireland. In comparison to private sector softwood removals (see Table 2.2), FE/FLS/NRW/FS softwood removals have been relatively stable over the last decade. thousand green tonnes Year England Wales Scotland Northern Ireland UK 2009 1 213 717 2 773 423 5 126 2010 1 142 644 2 434 405 4 625 2011 1 185 689 2 566 430 4 870 2012 1 154 663 2 627 392 4 836 2013 1 188 693 2 819 384 5 084 2014 1 064 722 2 749 365 4 900 2015 1 023 692 2 644 333 4 691 2016 1 146 778 2 745 343 5 011 2017 1 087 758 2 668 349 4 862 2018 1 048 696 2 440 339 4 523 Source: Forestry England (FE), Forestry and Land Scotland (FLS), Natural Resources Wales (NRW), Data: Longer time series of the above table, including estimates for hardwood removals and for removals from private sector woodlands are available from the Data Downloads web page at: https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statistics/data-downloads/. 2.1.4 Softwood availability forecast The National Forest Inventory "50-year forecast of softwood availability" and "50-year forecast of hardwood availability" were published in April 2014. They are forecasts of potential availability rather than production, as they do not take account of management objectives, financial factors or the state of markets, all of which will affect the level of and timing of harvesting. More information on the forecasts and detailed breakdowns are available on the National Forest Inventory web pages at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/toolsand-resources/national-forest-inventory/. The forecasts are outside the scope of National Statistics, but are provided here to give more context to the data on wood production. As these forecasts were produced in 2014, they do not take into account any of the findings from the 'preliminary estimates of the changes in canopy cover in British woodlands between 2006 and 2015', released in August 2016. The key assumptions underpinning the headline softwood forecast scenario include: - Private woodland is managed in a way that maximises total production. - The estate of Forestry England, Forestry and Land Scotland and Natural Resources Wales is managed according to current management plans; note that Forestry England, Forestry and Land Scotland, and Natural Resources Wales intend to cap production below the level set out in Table 2.4a. Under the above scenario, softwood availability for Great Britain averages 15.2 million cubic metres a year over the 50-year period 2013 to 2061 (Table 2.4a). The majority (66%) of this softwood is projected to come from private sector woodland. thousand m3 overbark standing Annual average in the period England Wales Scotland GB FE/FLS/NRW1 2013 - 2016 1 632 1 082 4 220 6 933 2017 - 2021 1 330 991 3 658 5 980 2022 - 2026 1 211 895 3 516 5 622 2027 - 2031 1 159 778 3 789 5 726 2032 - 2036 1 066 934 3 215 5 216 2037 - 2041 1 013 794 2 936 4 744 2042 - 2046 1 055 531 2 730 4 316 2047 - 2051 1 014 585 3 280 4 879 2052 - 2056 828 495 2 886 4 209 2057 - 2061 1 250 679 2 339 4 269 Private sector2 2013 - 2016 2 945 901 5 708 9 554 2017 - 2021 3 225 949 6 997 11 171 2022 - 2026 2 903 1 087 7 830 11 820 2027 - 2031 2 986 775 8 910 12 671 2032 - 2036 2 850 736 8 847 12 433 2037 - 2041 2 224 679 8 133 11 035 2042 - 2046 1 848 490 6 527 8 865 2047 - 2051 1 523 521 4 986 7 030 2052 - 2056 1 431 734 5 679 7 845 2057 - 2061 1 603 694 5 627 7 924 Total softwood 2013 - 2016 4 577 1 983 9 928 16 487 2017 - 2021 4 555 1 940 10 656 17 151 2022 - 2026 4 113 1 982 11 346 17 442 2027 - 2031 4 145 1 553 12 700 18 398 2032 - 2036 3 916 1 670 12 062 17 649 2037 - 2041 3 237 1 473 11 069 15 779 2042 - 2046 2 903 1 021 9 257 13 181 2047 - 2051 2 537 1 106 8 266 11 909 2052 - 2056 2 259 1 229 8 566 12 054 2057 - 2061 2 853 1 373 7 966 12 193 Source: National Forest Inventory: 50-year forecast of softwood availability (Forestry Commission, April 2014)3 Notes: 1. The estate of Forestry England (FE), Forestry and Land Scotland (FLS) and Natural Resources Wales (NRW) is assumed to be managed according to current management plans; note that Forestry England, Forestry and Land Scotland and Natural Resources Wales intend to cap production below the level set out in Table 2.4a. 2. Private woodland is assumed to be managed in a way that maximises total production. 3. More recent softwood availability forecasts, covering a 25 year period only, are available from the NFI web pages at: www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/national-forest-inventory/. 4. An update to these figures is due to be published in 2020. 5. To convert softwood 'overbark standing' into green tonnes multiply by 0.818. See the Sources chapter for more details on conversion factors. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## 2.1.5 Hardwood Availability Forecast The key assumptions underpinning the headline hardwood forecast scenario include: - In private woodland, harvesting is limited to areas with evidence of recent thinning activity. - The estate of Forestry England, Forestry and Land Scotland and Natural Resources Wales is managed according to current management plans. Under the above scenario, hardwood availability for Great Britain averages 1.6 million m3 a year over the 50-year period (Table 2.4b). The majority (89%) of this hardwood is projected to come from private sector woodland. If these woodlands were managed to maximise total production, the forecast would be much higher, as illustrated in the full National Forest Inventory report available at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/national-forest-inventory/. thousand m3 overbark standing Annual average in the period England Wales Scotland GB FE/FLS/NRW1 2013 - 2016 126 12 9 147 2017 - 2021 92 11 9 111 2022 - 2026 110 17 10 137 2027 - 2031 86 12 10 108 2032 - 2036 99 14 15 128 2037 - 2041 129 19 24 172 2042 - 2046 189 56 31 276 2047 - 2051 116 19 40 175 2052 - 2056 134 28 45 208 2057 - 2061 146 28 64 237 Private sector2 2013 - 2016 122 20 83 225 2017 - 2021 333 46 139 519 2022 - 2026 538 77 193 808 2027 - 2031 720 100 233 1 054 2032 - 2036 825 115 262 1 202 2037 - 2041 1 047 153 367 1 567 2042 - 2046 1 915 243 586 2 743 2047 - 2051 1 678 227 675 2 580 2052 - 2056 1 254 198 554 2 006 2057 - 2061 645 139 343 1 127 Total hardwood 2013 - 2016 249 32 92 373 2017 - 2021 425 58 148 631 2022 - 2026 648 94 203 945 2027 - 2031 806 112 244 1 162 2032 - 2036 923 130 277 1 330 2037 - 2041 1 176 171 391 1 738 2042 - 2046 2 104 299 616 3 019 2047 - 2051 1 795 246 715 2 755 2052 - 2056 1 388 227 599 2 214 2057 - 2061 791 167 406 1 364 Source: National Forest Inventory: 50-year forecast of hardwood availability (Forestry Commission, April 2014) Notes: 1. The estate of Forestry England (FE), Forestry and Land Scotland (FLS) and Natural Resources Wales (NRW) is assumed to be managed according to current management plans. 2. In private woodland, harvesting is assumed to be limited to areas with evidence of recent thinning activity. If these woodlands were managed to maximise total production, the forecast would be much higher, as illustrated in the full National Forest Inventory report available at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/national-forest-inventory/. 3. An update to these figures is due to be published in 2020. 4. To convert hardwood 'overbark standing' into green tonnes multiply by 0.900. See the Sources chapter for more details on conversion factors. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## 2.2 Deliveries Of Uk-Grown Roundwood Figures for deliveries relate to the quantity of UK-grown roundwood that is delivered to processors (mills) or for other uses (such as woodfuel and exports). They are expressed in green tonnes (weight when freshly felled). Statistics on roundwood deliveries are used to monitor trends in the supply of, and demand for, UK-grown wood. Deliveries should not be confused with removals, which are the quantities of roundwood that is harvested from UK woodland. Removals statistics are presented in Tables 2.1 to 2.3. A comparison of removals and deliveries of UK softwood roundwood is provided in the Sources chapter. The data are derived from a number of sources, including surveys of the UK- grown timber industry, trade associations and expert estimates. ## 2.2.1 Softwood Deliveries In 2018, deliveries of UK roundwood (softwood and hardwood) totalled 11.6 million green tonnes, a 3% increase from the previous year (Tables 2.5 and 2.6). Most UK roundwood deliveries (93%) were softwood and totalled 10.7 million green tonnes in 2018 (Table 2.5). 6.4 million green tonnes (60% of UK softwood deliveries) were used by sawmills, a 2% decrease from the previous year. A further 1.9 million green tonnes were used for wood fuel (a 19% increase), 1.2 million green tonnes were used to produce wood-based panels (a 14% increase), 0.5 million green tonnes by integrated pulp and paper mills (a 10% increase), and 0.7 million green tonnes for other uses, including round fencing, shavings and exports of roundwood (an 11% decrease). The increase in softwood deliveries for woodfuel in recent years reflects an increase in wood use for heating and energy production in the UK (see the Sources chapter for further information). thousand green tonnes Wood- Year Sawmills Pulp based Fencing **Wood** mills fuel1 Other2 Exports Total panels 2009 5 133 511 1 135 367 650 160 347 8 304 2010 5 616 428 1 375 349 900 135 467 9 269 2011 5 859 453 1 417 363 900 145 585 9 722 2012 6 073 461 1 269 338 1 000 154 535 9 831 2013 6 407 465 1 263 332 1 250 191 640 10 547 2014 6 725 465 1 283 317 1 500 176 437 10 903 2015 6 168 435 1 334 288 1 600 164 276 10 265 2016 6 511 423 1 248 277 1 550 178 231 10 419 2017 6 572 442 1 059 295 1 600 170 331 10 468 2018 6 424 486 1 210 273 1 900 174 264 10 731 Source: Industry surveys, industry associations. Notes: 1. Woodfuel derived from stemwood, includes estimates of roundwood use for biomass energy. The figures are estimated by the Expert Group on Timber and Trade Statistics and make use of woodfuel data reported in the Private Sector Softwood Removals Survey. 2. Includes shavings and poles. Quantities for some uses are estimates by the Expert Group on Timber and Trade Statistics. Source: industry surveys, industry associations. ## 2.2.2 Hardwood Deliveries There was a total of 0.8 million green tonnes of UK hardwood deliveries in 2018 (Table 2.6). The majority of UK hardwood deliveries (84% in 2018) were used for woodfuel. thousand green tonnes Wood- Year Sawmills Pulp based Woodfuel Other Total mills panels 2009 76 0 1 400 59 536 2010 75 0 1 400 59 535 2011 81 0 1 400 59 541 2012 75 0 2 400 57 534 2013 74 0 0 400 58 532 2014 77 0 0 400 60 537 2015 76 0 0 400 91 566 2016 75 0 0 400 122 597 2017 66 0 0 600 71 738 2018 67 0 1 700 66 834 Source: industry surveys, industry associations. Notes: 1. Figures are based on processing industries' purchases of hardwood grown in the UK and estimates for woodfuel and other uses. 2. Woodfuel reported here is derived from stemwood and includes estimated roundwood use for biomass energy. 3. The apparent increase in woodfuel from 2016 to 2017 reflects a new estimate of the level of hardwood deliveries for woodfuel and should not be interpreted as an increase in a single year. 4. Other includes round fencing and roundwood exports. Source: industry surveys, industry associations. Notes: 1. Other includes round fencing and roundwood exports. 2. The apparent increase in woodfuel from 2016 to 2017 reflects a new estimate of the level of hardwood deliveries for woodfuel and should not be interpreted as an increase in a single year. ## 2.3 Sawmills - All Mills Data are collected by Forest Research in an annual Sawmill Survey. The following section includes summary results, covering number of mills, consumption and production are available for all mills. In addition, there are also more detailed figures for larger mills only. The threshold defining larger mills was changed for the collection of 2016 data, from annual sawnwood production of 10 thousand m3 to annual sawnwood production of 25 thousand m3. Further information on this change is provided in the section on Larger Mills within this chapter and in the Sawmill Survey section of the Sources chapter. Consumption units are given in green tonnes. For production, the units used are m3 sawnwood. For conversion factors between different units, see the Timber section of the Sources chapter. ## 2.3.1 Summary: Consumption & Production In 2018, sawmills in the UK consumed a total of 6.7 million green tonnes of softwood, a 1% decrease from 2017 (Table 2.7). A further 0.1 million green tonnes of hardwood were consumed by UK sawmills in 2018. Most of the logs, 6.4 million green tonnes softwood and 0.1 million green tonnes hardwood, were grown in the UK. A total of 3.7 million m3 of sawnwood was produced in the UK in 2018, a 1% decrease from 2017. There has been an overall increase in the levels of softwood consumption and sawn softwood production in the UK between 2009 and 2018. In addition to producing sawnwood, sawmills also generate other products. Further information on other products produced by larger mills are provided in Tables 2.18 and 2.18a. UK Imported Total grown Year soft soft soft wood wood wood 2009 5 133 158 5 291 76 19 95 2010 5 616 103 5 719 75 19 94 2011 5 859 125 5 984 81 20 100 2012 6 073 124 6 198 75 17 93 2013 6 407 126 6 532 74 13 88 2014 6 725 159 6 884 77 14 91 2015 6 168 182 6 350 76 14 89 2016 6 511 209 6 720 75 17 92 2017 6 572 267 6 838 66 13 80 2018 6 424 325 6 749 67 13 80 Source: Sawmill Survey thousand m3 sawnwood Year Softwood production Hardwood production 2009 2 809 48 2010 3 053 48 2011 3 227 52 2012 3 361 48 2013 3 536 46 2014 3 716 47 2015 3 451 46 2016 3 624 47 2017 3 721 42 2018 3 674 41 Source: Sawmill Survey thousand green tonnes UK Imported Total grown hard hard hard wood wood wood ## 2.3.2 Number Of Sawmills By Size A total of 157 sawmills processed UK roundwood in 2018 (Table 2.8). Most mills (82%) produced less than 25 thousand m3 sawnwood (softwood and hardwood) during the year. Over the past ten years, the number of active sawmills has reduced by 19%. Most of this decrease has occurred in the smallest size categories. | 5 - | 50 - | |---------|----------| | Year | < 1 | | 1 - | | | <5 | <10 | | 10 - | | | <25 | | | 25 - | | | <50 | <100 | | 100+ | Total | | 2009 | 79 | | 2010 | 75 | | 2011 | 70 | | 2012 | 69 | | 2013 | 67 | | 2014 | 69 | | 2015 | 66 | | 2016 | 61 | | 2017 | 61 | | 2018 | 60 | Source: Sawmill Survey Notes: 1. Categories are based on total sawnwood production (softwood and hardwood), in thousand m3. Data: Longer time series of the above table are available from the Data Downloads web page at: https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statistics/data-downloads/ ## 2.3.3 Number Of Sawmills By Country Around one half (53%) of the 157 active sawmills in 2018 were in England, around one third (33%) were in Scotland, 8% in Wales and 6% in Northern Ireland (Table 2.9). | Year | England | Wales | Scotland | |----------|------------|----------|-------------| | Northern | | | | | Ireland | | | | | UK | | | | | 2009 | 101 | 17 | 68 | | 2010 | 98 | 17 | 64 | | 2011 | 96 | 16 | 63 | | 2012 | 95 | 15 | 61 | | 2013 | 92 | 15 | 59 | | 2014 | 92 | 15 | 57 | | 2015 | 92 | 15 | 55 | | 2016 | 89 | 15 | 54 | | 2017 | 88 | 14 | 53 | | 2018 | 83 | 13 | 52 | Source: Sawmill Survey Data: Longer time series of the above table, and for mills in England by region, are available from the Data downloads web page at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statistics/data-downloads/. ## 2.3.4 Number Of Sawmills By Type Of Wood Sawn Around two thirds (66%) of the 157 active sawmills in 2018 processed softwood only (Table 2.10). A further 28% processed both softwood and hardwood, and the remaining 6% processed only hardwood. Year Softwood only Hardwood only Both Total 2009 130 10 55 195 2010 122 10 56 188 2011 120 10 54 184 2012 118 11 51 180 2013 118 11 46 175 2014 115 9 49 173 2015 112 9 50 171 2016 110 9 48 167 2017 110 10 44 164 2018 104 9 44 157 Source: Sawmill Survey ## 2.3.5 Consumption Of Softwood By Size Of Mill Despite accounting for only 18% of all sawmills (see Table 2.8), those with total annual sawnwood production of 25 thousand m3 or more accounted for 86% of the total softwood consumed by sawmills in 2018 (Table 2.11). thousand green tonnes 5 - 50 - Year < 1 1 - <5 <10 10 - <25 25 - <50 <100 100+ Total 2009 35 201 145 664 670 1 323 2 253 5 291 2010 35 194 147 744 537 1 373 2 689 5 719 2011 32 188 148 685 615 830 3 486 5 984 2012 33 185 175 539 738 1 133 3 395 6 198 2013 36 185 169 578 702 777 4 085 6 532 2014 36 167 156 588 731 1 090 4 117 6 884 2015 31 168 196 553 795 801 3 805 6 350 2016 29 155 191 588 372 1 117 4 270 6 720 2017 29 173 152 671 339 1 352 4 122 6 838 2018 32 152 117 626 585 1 102 4 134 6 749 Source: Sawmill Survey Notes: 1. Categories are based on total sawnwood production (softwood and hardwood), in thousand m3. Data: Longer time series of the above table are available from the Data downloads web page at: https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statistics/data-downloads/ ## 2.3.6 Consumption Of Softwood By Mills In Each Country Mills in Scotland consumed around one half (51%) of the 6.7 million green tonnes of softwood delivered to UK sawmills in 2018 (Table 2.12). A further 30% was consumed by mills in England, 10% in Wales and 9% in Northern Ireland. thousand green tonnes Year England Wales Scotland Northern Ireland UK 2009 1 548 538 2 672 532 5 291 2010 1 694 583 2 913 528 5 719 2011 1 726 634 3 082 543 5 984 2012 1 821 654 3 195 528 6 198 2013 1 879 702 3 420 532 6 532 2014 1 982 711 3 661 530 6 884 2015 1 917 655 3 247 531 6 350 2016 1 984 737 3 441 558 6 720 2017 2 086 691 3 479 583 6 838 2018 2 030 656 3 423 640 6 749 Source: Sawmill Survey Data: Longer time series of the above table, and for mills in England by region, are available from the Data downloads web page at: https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statistics/datadownloads/ ## 2.3.7 Production Of Sawn Softwood By Size Of Mill UK sawmills produced a total of 3.7 million m3 of sawn softwood in 2018, a 1% decrease from the 2017 figure (Table 2.13). Sawmills with total annual sawnwood production of 25 thousand m3 or more accounted for 86% of the total sawn softwood produced by sawmills in 2018. | 5 - | 50 - | |---------|----------| | Year | < 1 | | 1 - | | | <5 | <10 | | 10 - | | | <25 | | | 25 - | | | <50 | <100 | | 100+ | Total | | 2009 | 20 | | 2010 | 20 | | 2011 | 18 | | 2012 | 18 | | 2013 | 20 | | 2014 | 20 | | 2015 | 18 | | 2016 | 17 | | 2017 | 17 | | 2018 | 19 | Source: Sawmill Survey Notes: 1. Categories are based on total sawnwood production (softwood and hardwood), in thousand m3. Data: Longer time series of the above table, are available from the Data downloads web page at: https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statistics/data-downloads/ ## 2.3.8 Production Of Sawn Softwood By Mills In Each Country 1.9 million m3 (51%) of sawn softwood was produced by sawmills in Scotland in 2018 (Table 2.14). A further 31% was produced by mills in England, 9% in Wales and the remaining 10% in Northern Ireland. Over the last 10 years production of sawn softwood in the UK has increased by 31%. For mills in England, Wales and Scotland, most of this increase has occurred in the earlier part of this period, whilst there has been a more recent increase in Northern Ireland. thousand m3 Year England Wales Scotland Northern Ireland UK 2009 860 267 1 413 268 2 809 2010 927 291 1 560 275 3 053 2011 954 316 1 666 291 3 227 2012 1 001 326 1 747 288 3 361 2013 1 026 349 1 873 289 3 536 2014 1 091 354 1 985 286 3 716 2015 1 056 324 1 787 284 3 451 2016 1 093 366 1 871 294 3 624 2017 1 156 319 1 920 326 3 721 2018 1 122 313 1 888 351 3 674 Source: Sawmill Survey Data: Longer time series of the above table, and for mills in England by region, are available from the Data downloads web page at: https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statistics/datadownloads/ ## 2.4 Sawmills - Larger Mills The following, more detailed, tables are available for larger mills (those producing at least 25 thousand m3 sawnwood annually) only. These larger mills are estimated to account for 86% of all sawn softwood produced in 2018 (see Table 2.13). In order to provide consistent time series, data presented in this section for 2014 and 2015 is also restricted to sawmills that produced at least 25 thousand m3 sawnwood in the relevant year. The tables cover the following topics: - Source of softwood logs; - Sawn softwood product markets; - Other softwood products; and - Sawmill employment. ## 2.4.1 Softwood Consumption And Production Total softwood consumption by the 28 sawmills covered by the detailed sawmill survey in 2018 was 5.8 million green tonnes (Table 2.15). Sawn softwood production by these mills was 3.2 million m3 and other softwood products (chips, bark, sawdust, etc) amounted to 2.8 million tonnes. Sawmills in Scotland accounted for over one half (52%) of all softwood consumption by larger mills. A further 29% was consumed by mills in England, 9% in Wales and the remaining 10% in Northern Ireland. England Wales Scotland Northern Ireland UK Number of mills 10 2 14 2 28 Consumption (thousand green tonnes) 1 682 520 3 024 596 5 821 Sawnwood production (thousand m3) 934 239 1 656 328 3 157 Other products (thousand tonnes) 621 275 1 672 255 2 823 Source: Sawmill Survey (detailed) Notes: 1. Sawmills producing at least 25 thousand m3 sawnwood (softwood and hardwood). ## 2.4.2 Source Of Softwood Logs Of all softwood sawlogs consumed by larger sawmills in 2018, 58% came from Scotland, 19% from England, 12% from Wales and 4% from Northern Ireland (Tables 2.16 and 2.16a). The remaining 6% were imported from other countries. This was similar to the breakdown by source in previous years. 97% of softwood sawlogs used by Scottish mills in 2018 came from Scotland. The corresponding proportions of mills' log use coming from within the same country were 58% for England, 76% for Wales and 44% for Northern Ireland. thousand green tonnes Source England Wales Scotland Northern Ireland UK England 981 44 99 0 1 124 Wales 333 393 0 0 726 Scotland 368 83 2 925 11 3 386 Northern Ireland 0 0 0 260 260 Total UK logs 1 682 520 3 024 271 5 496 Other countries 0 0 0 325 325 Total log consumption 1 682 520 3 024 596 5 821 Source: Sawmill Survey (detailed) Notes: 1. Sawmills producing at least 25 thousand m3 sawnwood (softwood and hardwood). Other Year England Wales Scotland Northern Ireland countries Total 2014 20 13 60 4 3 100 2015 19 13 60 4 3 100 2016 20 14 59 5 4 100 2017 20 14 57 4 5 100 2018 19 12 58 4 6 100 Source: Sawmill Survey (detailed) Notes: 1. Sawmills producing at least 25 thousand m3 sawnwood (softwood and hardwood). ## 2.4.3 Sawn Softwood Product Markets In 2018, 36% of sawn softwood produced by larger sawmills was used for fencing, 33% for construction, 24% for packaging and pallets, and the remaining 7% went to all other markets (Tables 2.17 and 2.17a). per cent of total softwood product markets Product market England Wales Scotland Northern Ireland UK Construction 18 20 42 43 33 Fencing 54 27 28 33 36 Packaging/ pallets 24 41 22 18 24 Other 4 12 9 6 7 Total 100 100 100 100 100 per cent of total softwood product markets Year Construction Fencing Packaging/ pallets Other Total 2014 28 35 31 6 100 2015 27 36 30 6 100 2016 28 35 30 7 100 2017 32 36 24 8 100 2018 33 36 24 7 100 Source: Sawmill Survey (detailed) Notes: 1. Sawmills producing at least 25 thousand m3 sawnwood (softwood and hardwood). ## 2.4.4 Other Softwood Products Sawmills were asked to estimate the quantity of other products (excluding sawnwood) that they generated from softwood and sold to different industries. The figures presented below are based on these estimates. Other softwood products amounted to 2.8 million tonnes in 2018 (Table 2.15). Around one third (34%) of other softwood products were sold to wood processing industries in the form of chips and 12% were sold to these industries in sawdust and other formats (Table 2.18). A further 24% of other products were sold to bio-energy (including pellet manufacturers), 25% were sold to others and 5% were used internally for heat or energy. per cent of total other softwood products Destination and type of product2 England Wales Scotland NI UK Sold to wood processing industries Wood chips 32 56 36 0 34 Bark 0 0 0 0 0 Sawdust & other 14 22 12 0 12 Total 46 78 48 0 46 Sold to bio-energy (incl pellet manufacturers) Wood chips 9 6 13 64 16 Bark 0 0 0 10 1 Sawdust & other 0 0 8 21 7 Total 10 6 20 95 24 Other sales Wood chips 20 0 10 1 10 Bark 7 11 7 1 7 Sawdust & other 11 4 9 2 8 Total 37 15 25 5 25 Internal use for heat/energy Wood chips 6 0 4 0 4 Bark 0 1 2 0 1 Sawdust & other 0 1 0 0 0 Total 7 2 6 0 5 Source: Sawmill Survey (detailed) Notes: 1. Sawmills producing at least 25 thousand m3 sawnwood (softwood and hardwood). 2. The table does not show sales of firewood and other products disposed of as waste, which together accounted for less than 0.5% of other softwood products. The proportions of other products that were reported as sold to wood processing industries has reduced over the last five years, whilst other sales have increased (Table 2.18a). per cent of total other softwood products Sold to bio- Sold to wood energy Year processing (incl pellet industries manufacturers) 2014 59 22 17 3 100 2015 60 21 17 2 100 2016 58 21 19 2 100 2017 56 22 19 3 100 2018 46 24 25 5 100 Source: Sawmill Survey (detailed) Notes: 1. Sawmills producing at least 25 thousand m3 sawnwood (softwood and hardwood). 2. Total includes sales of firewood and other products disposed of as waste. Internal use Other for heat/ Total2 sales energy ## 2.4.5 Sawmill Employment There were estimated to be 2.9 thousand full-time equivalent staff employed directly by sawmills producing at least 25 thousand m3 of sawnwood in 2018 (Tables 2.19 and 2.19a). full-time equivalents Employment type England Wales Scotland Northern Ireland UK Direct Line & production workers 810 165 1 151 313 2 439 Managerial & administrative staff 165 28 124 112 429 Haulage of logs to the mill 58 0 16 2 76 Total direct employment 1 033 193 1 291 427 2 944 Others2 Line & production workers 12 0 64 0 76 Managerial & administrative staff 0 0 3 0 3 Total contract employment 12 0 67 0 79 Source: Sawmill Survey (detailed) Notes: 1. Sawmills producing at least 25 thousand m3 sawnwood (softwood and hardwood). 2. 'Others' refers to others undertaking work for the sawmill, including contractors and their employees. 3. The results exclude any employment on harvesting, and any employment at the site not directly related to the sawmill (e.g. exclude work producing pallets or other wood products from sawn wood). 4. Excludes haulage employment on contract. full-time equivalents Line & Managerial & Haulage Total Employment production administrative of logs to employment workers staff the mill Direct 2014 2 422 385 43 2 850 2015 2 341 394 44 2 779 2016 2 456 384 45 2 885 2017 2 369 428 79 2 875 2018 2 439 429 76 2 944 Others2 2014 124 1 .. 125 2015 58 0 .. 58 2016 50 2 .. 52 2017 76 3 .. 79 2018 55 2 .. 57 Source: Sawmill Survey (detailed) Notes: 1. Sawmills producing at least 25 thousand m3 sawnwood (softwood and hardwood). 2. Excludes haulage employment on contract. 3. .. Denotes data not available. ## 2.5 Pulp & Paper Statistics on inputs to the pulp & paper industry only cover the integrated pulp & paper mills in the UK that use UK roundwood. There were four such mills until 2003, three from 2004 and two from spring 2006. Figures on inputs are provided by the Confederation of Forest Industries (Confor). Figures on production of pulp and paper are provided by the Confederation of Paper Industries, and cover all paper production in the UK, not just from mills using UK roundwood. ## 2.5.1 Inputs For The Integrated Pulp & Paper Mills The integrated pulp & paper mills in the UK consumed a total of 0.5 million tonnes of material (all softwood) in 2018, an 8% increase from the 2017 total (Table 2.20). UK roundwood represented 90% of the inputs for the integrated pulp & paper mills in 2018, with the remaining 10% coming from sawmill products. thousand green tonnes Year UK roundwood2 Sawmill products Total 2009 511 120 631 2010 428 98 526 2011 453 99 552 2012 461 79 540 2013 465 83 548 2014 465 97 562 2015 435 101 536 2016 423 82 505 2017 442 61 503 2018 486 55 541 Source: Confor Notes: 1. Excludes inputs of recycled paper and cardboard. All inputs are softwood. 2. UK roundwood derived from stemwood. Source: Confor ## 2.5.2 Production Of Paper Figures for the production of paper (Table 2.21) are provided by the Confederation of Paper Industries. They cover all paper production from UK mills, not just those using UK roundwood. Most UK paper production uses recovered waste paper or imported pulp. A total of 3.9 million tonnes of paper and paperboard was produced in the UK in 2018, an increase of 1% from the previous year. Packaging materials accounted for 49% of the total UK paper production in 2018, graphic papers (including newsprint) for 25%, and sanitary and household papers for 19%. thousand tonnes Graphic Sanitary & Total paper papers Packaging Year household & (incl materials Other papers paperboard newsprint) 2009 1 609 736 1 702 246 4 293 2010 1 637 729 1 640 294 4 300 2011 1 669 766 1 600 307 4 342 2012 1 616 795 1 798 271 4 480 2013 1 636 802 1 851 272 4 561 2014 1 544 768 1 801 284 4 397 2015 1 053 772 1 894 251 3 970 2016 897 730 1 800 250 3 677 2017 918 734 1 935 270 3 858 2018 962 738 1 904 291 3 894 Source: Confederation of Paper Industries ## 2.6 Wood-Based Panels Wood-based panels include oriented strand board (OSB), wood chipboard and cement bonded particleboard (which are all types of particleboard), and medium density fibreboard (MDF) and other fibreboard (which are both types of fibreboard). Statistics on wood-based panels are provided by the Wood Panel Industries Federation (WPIF). ## 2.6.1 Inputs For Wood-Based Panel Products Table 2.22 and Figure 2.4 show the inputs to mills that produce wood-based panels in the UK. The mills used a total of 3.8 million tonnes of material in 2018, representing a 1% increase from 2017. The inputs in 2018 comprised 1.2 million green tonnes of roundwood (32%), 1.6 million green tonnes of sawmill products (42%), 0.9 million tonnes of recycled wood fibre (23%) and 0.1 million tonnes (3%) of imports. | Year | UK roundwood | |---------|------------------| | 1 | | | | Sawmill products | | 2 | | | | | | 2009 | 1 135 | | 2010 | 1 375 | | 2011 | 1 417 | | 2012 | 1 269 | | 2013 | 1 263 | | 2014 | 1 283 | | 2015 | 1 334 | | 2016 | 1 248 | | 2017 | 1 059 | | 2018 | 1 210 | Source: Wood Panel Industries Federation Notes: 1. UK roundwood derived from stemwood. 2. Imports include roundwood, wood products and products from imported wood. thousand green tonnes Year UK roundwood1 Sawmill products Imports2 2009 1 0 0 2010 1 0 1 2011 1 0 0 2012 2 0 0 2013 0 0 0 2014 0 0 0 2015 0 0 5 2016 0 0 29 2017 0 0 22 2018 1 0 74 Source: Wood Panel Industries Federation Notes: 1. UK roundwood derived from stemwood. 2. Imports include roundwood, wood products and products from imported wood. thousand green tonnes Year Softwood Hardwood Recycled wood fibre1,2 2009 2 570 1 1 065 2010 3 013 2 1 120 2011 3 196 1 952 2012 3 120 2 909 2013 2 972 0 853 2014 3 092 0 812 2015 3 033 5 852 2016 3 007 29 838 2017 2 785 22 923 2018 2 806 75 877 Source: Wood Panel Industries Federation Notes: 1. Recycled wood fibre is wood fibre recovered from both pre- and post-consumer wood waste for use in woodbased panel production. It comprises wood originally grown in the UK and wood originally grown in forests outside the UK. 2. Quantities are as delivered, with an assumed average moisture content of 25%. To convert to green tonnes (assuming moisture content of 52%), multiply by 1.56. Source: Wood Panel Industries Federation. Note: 1. Recycled wood fibre data not available before 1999. ## 2.6.2 Production Of Wood-Based Panel Products Total production of wood-based panels in 2018 was 3.1 million m3, a 3% decrease from 2017 (Table 2.23). Over three quarters (76%) of wood-based panel products produced in the UK in 2018 were particleboard (including oriented strand board (OSB)). The marked decrease between 2011 and 2012 largely results from the closure of a panel mill in 2012. thousand m3 Year Particleboard1 Fibreboard2 Total 2009 2 370 660 3 030 2010 2 594 776 3 370 2011 2 625 759 3 384 2012 2 215 788 3 003 2013 2 276 756 3 032 2014 2 319 749 3 068 2015 2 324 756 3 080 2016 2 349 684 3 033 2017 2 501 675 3 176 2018 2 355 724 3 079 Source: Wood Panel Industries Federation Notes: 1. Includes Oriented Strand Board (OSB). 2. Includes Medium Density Fibreboard (MDF). 3. Changes in the mix of materials used and type of product produced can result in apparent discrepancies between the trends for inputs (Table 2.22) and production. ## 2.7 Miscellaneous Products Softwood Data for softwood fencing are obtained from the Survey of Round Fencing Manufacturers. Figures for other uses are reported by manufacturers or are estimated by representatives of the wood processing industries. 1.9 million green tonnes of UK softwood were estimated to have been used directly for woodfuel (including biomass energy) in 2018, an increase of 19% from the previous year (Table 2.24). A further 273 thousand green tonnes of UK softwood were consumed by round fencing manufacturers and 174 thousand green tonnes for other uses in 2018. thousand green tonnes Year Fencing Woodfuel1 Other2 Total 2009 367 650 160 1 178 2010 349 900 135 1 384 2011 363 900 145 1 408 2012 338 1 000 154 1 492 2013 332 1 250 191 1 773 2014 317 1 500 176 1 992 2015 288 1 600 164 2 052 2016 277 1 550 178 2 006 2017 295 1 600 170 2 064 2018 273 1 900 174 2 347 Source: Survey of Round Fencing Manufacturers, industry associations. Notes: 1. Woodfuel derived from stemwood. Includes estimates of roundwood use for biomass energy. The figures are estimated by the Expert Group on Timber and Trade Statistics and make use of woodfuel data reported in the Private Sector Softwood Removals Survey. 2. Includes shavings and poles. Quantities for some uses are estimates by the Expert Group on Timber and Trade Statistics. ## Hardwood An estimated 700 thousand green tonnes of UK hardwood were used for woodfuel (including biomass energy) in 2018. A further 30 thousand green tonnes were estimated to have been consumed by round fencing manufacturers and 36 thousand green tonnes for other uses, including exports. ## 2.7.1 Softwood Round Fencing Manufacturers There were 48 active round fencing manufacturers in 2018 (Table 2.25). Around two thirds of round fencing manufacturers (65%) consumed less than 5 thousand green tonnes of softwood annually. | Year | < 1 | 1 - < 5 | 5 - < 10 | 10 + | Total | |---------|--------|------------|-------------|---------|----------| | 2009 | 22 | 26 | 13 | 7 | 68 | | 2010 | 21 | 24 | 13 | 6 | 64 | | 2011 | 21 | 24 | 10 | 8 | 63 | | 2012 | 21 | 21 | 11 | 7 | 60 | | 2013 | 20 | 22 | 11 | 7 | 60 | | 2014 | 18 | 21 | 10 | 7 | 56 | | 2015 | 15 | 19 | 10 | 6 | 50 | | 2016 | 17 | 16 | 11 | 6 | 50 | | 2017 | 16 | 17 | 9 | 8 | 50 | | 2018 | 15 | 16 | 9 | 8 | 48 | Source: Survey of Round Fencing Manufacturers Notes: 1. Categories are based on total softwood consumption, in thousand green tonnes. ## 2.7.2 Roundwood Purchased By Softwood Round Fencing Manufacturers A total of 294 thousand green tonnes of softwood (UK grown and imported) was purchased by softwood fencing manufacturers in 2018 (Table 2.26). This represents a decrease of 8% from the 2017 total of 319 thousand green tonnes. thousand green tonnes Year < 1 1 - < 5 5 - < 10 10 + Total 2009 7 66 82 239 394 2010 7 63 86 213 369 2011 8 65 60 250 383 2012 8 57 69 226 360 2013 7 57 79 204 346 2014 7 54 74 201 335 2015 6 46 79 185 316 2016 7 41 78 177 303 2017 6 45 71 197 319 2018 6 39 60 188 294 Source: Survey of Round Fencing Manufacturers Notes: 1. Categories are based on total softwood consumption, in thousand green tonnes. 2. This table includes purchases of both UK grown and imported softwood, whereas table 2.24 relates to UK grown softwood only. Data: Longer time series of roundwood purchased by round fencing manufacturers, by size category and by country (England/ Wales/ Scotland/ Northern Ireland) are available from the Data downloads web page at: https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statistics/data-downloads/. ## 2.8 Exports UK softwood exports in 2018 consisted of 67 thousand green tonnes of industrial roundwood (excluding sawlogs) and 197 thousand green tonnes of sawlogs, giving a total of 264 thousand green tonnes of roundwood (Table 2.27). The quantity of softwood roundwood exports decreased by 20% between 2017 and 2018. The UK also exported 112 thousand tonnes of softwood chips in 2018, a 22% increase from the previous year. thousand green tonnes Roundwood Total Chips Year Industrial roundwood1 sawlogs roundwood 2009 244 104 347 125 2010 301 166 467 136 2011 415 171 585 158 2012 405 130 535 142 2013 379 260 640 126 2014 228 209 437 151 2015 75 202 276 86 2016 48 183 231 51 2017 124 207 331 92 2018 67 197 264 112 Source: industry associations Notes: 1. Includes all roundwood other than sawlogs. ## 2.9 Certification Forest certification assesses forest management practices against an agreed standard and awards a label to those forest products that meet the standard. In order for products to achieve certification, both forest management practices and the Chain of Custody, which tracks timber from forest to retail outlet, must be assessed. The following tables provide information on the level of certified wood produced in the UK (Table 2.28) and the number of sawmills and round fencing manufacturers holding Chain of Custody certificates (Table 2.29). Information on areas of certified woodland is provided in Chapter 1. ## 2.9.1 Volume Certified Respondents to the industry surveys run by Forest Research were asked to report on volumes of wood that is certified. 71% of private sector softwood removals in 2018 were from certified sources (Table 2.28). The percentage of private sector softwood removals that are certified has fluctuated over recent years; industry experts have indicated a general reduction in the level of certification amongst smaller estates and an increase in production from larger estates. As nearly all removals from Forestry England, Forestry and Land Scotland, Natural Resources Wales and Forest Service woodland are certified, this equates to around 82% of all softwood removals in 2018 from certified sources. 64% of sawmills' roundwood consumption in 2018 was certified. For round fencing manufacturers, 54% of total softwood consumption was certified. | Softwood | Total softwood | |-------------|-------------------| | removals | removals | | from | (including all | | Year | | | Private | removals from | | sector | FE/FLS/NRW/FS | | 2 | | | | | | woodland | woodland) | | 2009 | 68 | | 2010 | 73 | | 2011 | 72 | | 2012 | 70 | | 2013 | 76 | | 2014 | 72 | | 2015 | 69 | | 2016 | 66 | | 2017 | 75 | | 2018 | 71 | Source: Forestry England (FE), Forestry and Land Scotland (FLS), Natural Resources Wales (NRW), Forest Service (FS) and industry surveys Notes: 1. The accompanying data tables include a country breakdown of certified softwood removals for 2018. These are currently Experimental statistics. per cent certified volume Consumption Consumption (softwood (softwood) by and round fencing hardwood) manufacturers by sawmills ## 2.9.2 Chain Of Custody Certificates Sawmills and round fencing manufacturers were also asked whether they held a Chain of Custody certificate. 72% of sawmills for which the certification status was known held a Chain of Custody certificate in 2018 (Table 2.29). This proportion varied with size of mill, from 39% for mills producing less than 5 thousand m3 sawnwood to 100% for those producing 25 thousand m3 sawnwood or more. One half (50%) of round fencing manufacturers for which the certification status was known held a Chain of Custody certificate. | Mills | Mills | Certification | |---------------|-------------|------------------| | | | | | holding | without | status not | | 1 | | | | | | | | certificate | certificate | known | | Sawmills | | | | 2 | | | | | | | | (size of mill | | | | 3 | | | | ) | | | | | | | | < 5 | 7 | 11 | | 5 - < 25 | 9 | 5 | | 25 + | 26 | 0 | | All sawmills | 42 | 16 | | Round fencing | | | | manufacturers | | | | 8 | 8 | 32 | Source: industry surveys Notes: 1. Includes non-respondents to survey in current year. 2. For large sawmills (those producing at least 25 thousand m3) that did not report whether or not they held a certificate or did not respond to the 2018 survey, the certification status was obtained from the FSC database, where possible. 3. Categories are based on total sawnwood production (softwood and hardwood), in thousand m3. ## 2.10 Woodfuel And Pellets Wood from various sources can be used for fuel, including roundwood, chips and sawdust from wood processing, specific products such as pellets and briquettes, and recycled wood. The following pages provide data on: - recycled wood used for woodfuel (Table 2.30 below); - woodfuel supply by sawmills and round fencing manufacturers (Table 2.31); and - wood pellet production (Table 2.32) and feedstock (Table 2.33). In addition, estimates of roundwood used directly for woodfuel are provided in tables 2.5 and 2.6. ## Recycled Wood Used For Woodfuel Estimates of recycled wood used for woodfuel have been obtained from the Wood Recyclers' Association. In 2018, it is estimated that around 2.1 million tonnes of recycled wood were used for woodfuel, an increase of 24% from the 2017 estimate of around 1.7 million tonnes. Year2 Total3 2011 0.59 2012 0.76 2013 0.83 2014 1.34 2015 1.45 2016 1.55 2017 1.66 2018 2.10 Source: Wood Recyclers Association Notes: 1. Post consumer recovered wood, comprising wood originally grown in the UK and wood originally grown in forests outside the UK. 2. Figures for 2014 to 2018 relate to capacity, rather than consumption. 3. Quantities are as delivered, with an assumed average moisture content of 25%. To convert to green tonnes (assuming moisture content of 52%), multiply by 1.56. ## These Figures Are Outside The Scope Of National Statistics. 2.10.1 Woodfuel Supply By Sawmills And Round Fencing Manufacturers An estimated 797 thousand green tonnes (mainly softwood) of woodfuel were supplied by sawmills in 2018 and a further 72 thousand green tonnes were supplied by round fencing manufacturers (Table 2.31). 80% of the total woodfuel supplied was sold to bioenergy. thousand green tonnes Used Sales as internally Sales to Total bioenergy firewood for heat/energy Sawmills 2014 676 27 72 775 2015 614 12 45 671 2016 583 14 65 661 2017 623 15 96 734 2018 638 7 152 797 Round fencing manufacturers 2014 55 5 1 61 2015 51 7 2 60 2016 57 7 1 65 2017 55 7 3 66 2018 58 9 5 72 Source: Sawmill Survey, Survey of Round Fencing Manufacturers Notes: 1. Material reported as sales/use for woodfuel but may have been used for other purposes. ## 2.10.2 Wood Pellet Production Wood pellets and briquettes are processed wood products that can be made from roundwood, sawmill products and/or recycled wood. Some of the wood used to make wood pellets and briquettes will be accounted for elsewhere in this release (e.g. in Tables 2.30 and 2.31). Wood pellets and briquettes are often used for woodfuel, but pellets may also be used for other purposes (such as horse bedding or cat litter). A total of 279 thousand tonnes of wood pellets and briquettes are estimated to have been produced in the UK in 2018. This represents a 3% decrease from the 2017 estimate of 287 thousand tonnes. thousand tonnes Year2 Total3 2009 118 2010 197 2011 244 2012 278 2013 301 2014 354 2015 343 2016 329 2017 287 2018 279 Source: Survey of UK Pellet and Briquette Production ## 2.10.3 Wood Pellet Feedstock A total of 679 thousand tonnes of feedstock was used to produce wood pellets in the UK in 2018 (Table 2.33). Roundwood accounted for around two thirds (67%) of the feedstock. thousand tonnes2 Year Roundwood Sawmill products1 Total 2014 393 306 699 2015 332 290 621 2016 377 320 697 2017 354 295 648 2018 453 226 679 Source: Survey of UK Pellet and Briquette Production Notes: 1. May also include wood from other sources (e.g. energy crops, arboriculture arisings and recycled wood). 2. Tonnes as delivered. ## Chapter 3: Trade Introduction This chapter contains information about UK imports and exports of wood products, and about the level of apparent consumption estimated from data for UK production, imports and exports. Information on imports and exports mainly comes from the Overseas Trade Statistics compiled by HM Revenue & Customs. Estimates are provided at a UK level only. International comparisons of apparent consumption are provided in the International Forestry chapter. Further information on the data sources and methodology used to compile the figures is provided in the Sources chapter. Figures for 2018 were previously published in "UK Wood Production and Trade: 2018 Provisional Figures", released on 16 May 2019. Some figures for 2018 and earlier years have been revised from those previously published. For further details on revisions, see the Trade section of the Sources chapter. A copy of all trade tables can be accessed in spreadsheet format from the Data Downloads web page at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-andresources/statistics/data-downloads/. The main findings are: UK imports: - 7.2 million cubic metres of sawnwood in 2018, a 6% decrease from the 2017 figure; - 3.9 million cubic metres of wood-based panels in 2018, a 2% increase from 2017; - 8.0 million tonnes of wood pellets in 2018, a 16% increase from 2017; - 5.5 million tonnes of paper in 2018, a 2% decrease from 2017. - The total value of wood product imports in 2018 was £8.3 billion, representing a 5% increase from 2017; of which £4.1 billion was pulp and paper. - Sawn softwood, particleboard, fibreboard, and paper and paperboard were overwhelmingly imported from EU countries in 2018. - Sawn hardwood and wood pulp imports originated from a range of both EU and non-EU countries in 2018. - The vast majority of UK imports of plywood and wood pellets in 2018 came from countries outwith the EU. - Apparent consumption of wood in the UK was 56.4 million m3 WRME underbark in 2018, representing a 1% decrease from the previous year. UK exports: - The total value of wood product exports in 2018 was £1.8 billion, a 3% decrease from 2017; of which £1.6 billion was pulp and paper. ## 3.1 Apparent Consumption Of Wood In The Uk Apparent consumption is the amount of timber used as wood and wood products by people and industries in the United Kingdom. It is calculated as total United Kingdom production plus imports, minus exports. Apparent consumption differs from actual consumption by the extent of changes in the level of stocks. It is not practical to collect information on actual consumption. As table 3.1 covers a broad range of products (including secondary processed wood products), volumes are expressed in wood raw material equivalent (WRME) underbark. WRME volumes represent the amount of wood that would have been required to make the product. UK production of roundwood totalled 11.3 million m3 WRME underbark in 2018 (Table 3.1). A further 49.0 million m3 WRME underbark of wood and wood products were imported to the UK and 3.9 million m3 WRME underbark were exported, giving apparent consumption of 56.4 million m3 WRME underbark. This represented a 1% decrease in apparent consumption from the previous year. These figures exclude recycled wood and recovered paper (see Table 3.3 for statistics on recovered paper). Imports accounted for 81% of all wood (production + imports) in the UK in 2018. | Year | UK production | |-------------|-----------------| | 2 | | | | Imports | | Apparent | | | Consumption | | | 2009 | 8.6 | | 2010 | 9.6 | | 2011 | 10.0 | | 2012 | 10.1 | | 2013 | 10.8 | | 2014 | 11.2 | | 2015 | 10.6 | | 2016 | 10.8 | | 2017 | 10.9 | | 2018 | 11.3 | Source: Industry surveys, industry associations, UK overseas trade statistics (HM Revenue & Customs) and conversion factors to Wood Raw Material Equivalent (WRME). Notes: 1. Excludes recovered paper. 2. UK production of roundwood is estimated from deliveries to wood processing industries and others, as in tables 2.5 and 2.6. Source: Industry surveys, industry associations, UK overseas trade statistics (HM Revenue & Customs) and conversion factors to Wood Raw Material Equivalent (WRME). Notes: 1. Excludes recovered paper. 2. 2. UK production of roundwood is estimated from deliveries to wood processing industries and others, as in tables 2.5 and 2.6. ## 3.2 Apparent Consumption Of Wood Products In The Uk Table 3.2 provides volumes of UK production, trade and apparent consumption in selected wood products. It differs from table 3.1 in terms of both coverage (table 3.1 covers a wider range of wood and wood products, including secondary processed products) and in terms of units (wood raw material equivalents in table 3.1, volumes of product in table 3.2). UK production accounted for 35% of the UK sawnwood market, 46% of the UK wood-based panel market and 45% of the UK paper market in 2018 (Table 3.2). Product UK production Imports Exports Apparent consumption Sawnwood3 (thousand m3) Coniferous 3 674 6 626 218 10 082 Non-coniferous 41 587 20 608 Total 3 715 7 213 238 10 690 Wood-based panels (thousand m3) Veneer sheets 0 30 2 28 Plywood 0 1 598 79 1 519 Particleboard 2 355 1 328 159 3 524 Fibreboard 724 922 55 1 591 Total 3 079 3 878 295 6 662 Paper & paperboard (thousand tonnes) Graphic papers 962 2 887 367 3 482 Sanitary & household papers 738 391 33 1 096 Packaging materials 1 904 2 212 355 3 760 Other paper & paperboard 291 36 16 311 Total 3 894 5 525 771 8 648 Source: Industry surveys, industry associations, UK overseas trade statistics (HM Revenue & Customs). Notes: 1. Excludes other wood products, e.g. fuelwood and round fencing. 2. Excludes roundwood and intermediate products (e.g. sawmill products, pulp and recovered paper) to avoid double-counting. 3. Includes sleepers. ## 3.3 Flow Of Recovered Paper UK production of recovered paper (the amount recovered from businesses and households in the UK) totalled 7.5 million tonnes in 2018 (Table 3.3) a decrease of 3% from 2017. Imports increased by 12% and exports decreased by 4% between 2017 and 2018, resulting in a 1% fall in apparent consumption over this period (Table 3.3). thousand tonnes Year UK production Imports Exports Apparent consumption1 2009 8 155 94 4 444 3 805 2010 8 003 115 4 388 3 730 2011 8 036 177 4 479 3 733 2012 8 099 160 4 447 3 812 2013 7 901 184 4 248 3 837 2014 8 014 136 4 436 3 714 2015 7 912 305 4 881 3 336 2016 7 825 125 4 932 3 018 2017 7 772 107 4 733 3 147 2018 7 547 120 4 540 3 127 Source: Confederation of Paper Industries, UK overseas trade statistics (HM Revenue & Customs). Notes: 1. Apparent consumption of recovered paper refers to use of recycled paper pulp in the UK. ## 3.4 Uk Import Quantities By Product Wood imports to the UK in 2018 included 7.2 million cubic metres of sawnwood (a 6% decrease from the previous year), 3.9 million cubic metres of woodbased panels (2% increase) and 8.0 million tonnes of wood pellets (16% increase) (Table 3.4a & Table 3.4b). A total of 5.5 million tonnes of paper was imported into the UK in 2018, a decrease of 2% from 2017. thousand m3 Wood-based Other Year Sawn wood4 panels3 wood2 2009 5 240 2 500 821 2010 5 699 2 701 1 071 2011 4 936 2 827 985 2012 5 179 2 650 965 2013 5 488 2 964 1 267 2014 6 425 3 260 1 329 2015 6 323 3 215 1 378 2016 6 794 3 410 1 121 2017 7 663 3 800 1 379 2018 7 213 3 878 1 766 Source: UK overseas trade statistics (HM Revenue & Customs), industry associations Notes: 1. There are reliability concerns for some of these figures, particularly for individual products (see Sources chapter). 2. Includes roundwood, wood charcoal, chips, particles, residues and from 2017, includes recovered wood. 3. Includes veneer sheets. 4. Sawnwood includes sleepers from 2017. thousand tonnes Total pulp Year Wood pellets Paper Pulp Recovered paper & paper 2009 45 7 018 940 94 8 052 2010 551 7 254 1 094 115 8 462 2011 1 015 6 887 1 009 177 8 073 2012 1 487 6 631 1 021 160 7 812 2013 3 432 5 929 1 100 184 7 213 2014 4 773 5 949 1 234 136 7 319 2015 6 573 6 032 1 223 305 7 560 2016 6 782 5 876 1 092 125 7 092 2017 6 885 5 610 1 081 107 6 798 2018 7 992 5 525 1 066 120 6 711 Source: UK overseas trade statistics (HM Revenue & Customs), industry associations 1. There are reliability concerns for some of these figures, particularly for individual products (see Sources chapter). ## 3.5 Uk Export Quantities By Product A total of 5.3 million tonnes of pulp and paper (including recovered paper) was exported from the UK in 2018 (Table 3.5a & Table 3.5b), representing a 4% decrease from 2017. thousand m3 Wood-based Other Year Sawn wood4 panels3 wood2 2009 203 451 657 2010 195 509 1 029 2011 162 546 1 430 2012 141 597 1 779 2013 167 432 1 267 2014 175 404 1 083 2015 187 286 1 018 2016 193 314 810 2017 218 374 638 2018 238 295 595 Source: UK overseas trade statistics (HM Revenue & Customs), industry associations Notes: 1. There are reliability concerns for some of these figures, particularly for individual products (see Sources chapter). 2. Includes roundwood, wood charcoal, chips, particles, residues and, from 2017, includes recovered wood. 3. Includes veneer sheets. 4. Sawnwood includes sleepers from 2017. thousand tonnes Total pulp Year Wood pellets Paper Pulp Recovered paper & paper 2009 12 896 22 4 444 5 361 2010 60 926 35 4 388 5 349 2011 38 974 32 4 479 5 485 2012 54 1 102 36 4 447 5 585 2013 106 1 119 23 4 248 5 390 2014 98 1 010 21 4 436 5 467 2015 88 807 24 4 881 5 712 2016 21 760 7 4 932 5 700 2017 126 788 7 4 733 5 528 2018 63 771 15 4 540 5 326 Source: UK overseas trade statistics (HM Revenue & Customs), industry associations Notes: 1. There are reliability concerns for some of these figures, particularly for individual products (see Sources chapter). ## 3.6 Uk Import Values By Product Wood product imports in 2018 were valued at a total of £8.3 billion, a 5% increase from 2017 (Table 3.6a & Table 3.6b). Pulp and paper (including recovered paper) imports were valued at £4.1 billion in 2018 (almost half of the total value of wood product imports). Sawnwood imports were valued at £1.7 billion in 2018, wood-based panels at £1.2 billion and wood pellets at £1.1 billion. £ million Wood-based Other Year Sawn wood4 panels3 wood2 2009 953 677 104 2010 1 199 781 110 2011 1 080 838 79 2012 1 084 791 75 2013 1 180 882 88 2014 1 420 936 80 2015 1 311 957 88 2016 1 423 1 010 85 2017 1 636 1 155 90 2018 1 743 1 201 122 Source: UK overseas trade statistics (HM Revenue & Customs), industry associations Notes: 1. There are reliability concerns for some of these figures, particularly for individual products (see Sources chapter). 2. Includes roundwood, wood charcoal, chips, particles, residues and, from 2017, includes recovered wood. 3. Includes veneer sheets. 4. Sawnwood includes sleepers from 2017. £ million Total pulp Year Wood pellets Paper Pulp Recovered paper & paper 2009 7 3 635 425 11 4 071 2010 69 3 997 593 17 4 607 2011 129 4 049 613 34 4 696 2012 185 3 727 519 21 4 266 2013 412 3 644 500 21 4 165 2014 547 3 667 509 19 4 196 2015 780 3 711 642 23 4 375 2016 915 3 434 557 13 4 003 2017 961 3 418 572 14 4 004 2018 1 117 3 415 639 21 4 075 Source: UK overseas trade statistics (HM Revenue & Customs), industry associations Notes: 1. There are reliability concerns for some of these figures, particularly for individual products (see Sources chapter). ## 3.7 Uk Export Values By Product Wood product exports from the UK were valued at a total of £1.8 billion in 2018, a 3% decrease from the 2017 total (Table 3.7a & Table 3.7b). Total exports of wood products in 2018 comprised 88% pulp and paper (mainly paper), 6% wood-based panels, 4% sawnwood and 2% other wood. £ million Wood-based Other Year Sawn wood4 panels3 wood2 2009 41 104 20 2010 47 113 35 2011 41 128 50 2012 34 130 51 2013 37 109 47 2014 43 107 39 2015 44 75 35 2016 50 91 26 2017 55 109 41 2018 64 103 41 Source: UK overseas trade statistics (HM Revenue & Customs), industry associations Notes: 1. There are reliability concerns for some of these figures, particularly for individual products (see Sources chapter). 2. Includes roundwood, wood charcoal, chips, particles, residues and, from 2017, includes recovered wood. 3. Includes veneer sheets. 4. Sawnwood includes sleepers from 2017. £ million Total pulp Year Wood pellets Paper Pulp Recovered paper & paper 2009 2 1 010 10 342 1 362 2010 7 1 068 18 524 1 610 2011 3 1 044 11 595 1 650 2012 4 1 048 10 531 1 589 2013 5 1 017 8 494 1 519 2014 2 997 7 476 1 480 2015 1 901 7 534 1 441 2016 0 838 4 465 1 307 2017 6 997 5 649 1 651 2018 5 1 022 5 570 1 597 Source: UK overseas trade statistics (HM Revenue & Customs), industry associations Notes: 1. There are reliability concerns for some of these figures, particularly for individual products (see Sources chapter). ## 3.8 Origin Of Wood Imports Table 3.8 presents data on the source of selected wood products that have been imported into the UK in 2018. Sawn softwood, particleboard, fibreboard, and paper and paperboard were overwhelmingly imported from EU countries in 2018 (Table 3.8): - Sweden (41%), Latvia (17%) and Finland (14%) provided the majority of imports of sawn softwood to the UK. - Most particleboard imports to the UK came from Germany (20%), France (17%), Ireland and Belgium (both 14%). - Ireland (31%), Germany (18%) Spain (11%) and Belgium (10%) were the principal sources of fibreboard imports. - Most paper and paperboard imports came from Germany (18%), Finland and Sweden (both 17%). Sawn hardwood and wood pulp imports originated from a range of both EU and non-EU countries in 2018: - The USA (16%), Estonia (14%) and France (10%) provided around two fifths of sawn hardwood imports to the UK. - Sweden (29%) and Brazil (18%) provided almost one half of wood pulp imports to the UK. The vast majority of UK imports of plywood and wood pellets came from countries outside the EU in 2018: - China (39%) and Brazil (16%) were the principal sources of plywood imports to the UK. - The USA (61%) and Canada (19%) provided the majority of wood pellet imports to the UK. per cent of total UK imports (volume) in each category Paper Sawn1 Sawn1 Ply Particle Fibre & Source soft hard -wood board board Pellet Wood pulp wood wood paper board Sweden 41 1 1 0 1 0 29 17 Germany 7 4 1 20 18 0 4 18 Finland 14 1 8 0 1 0 7 17 Latvia 17 8 2 12 8 11 0 0 France 0 10 1 17 1 0 0 8 Netherlands 0 3 0 0 0 0 13 4 Ireland 6 3 0 14 31 0 0 1 Italy 0 8 1 3 0 0 0 4 Austria 0 1 2 1 0 0 12 3 Belgium 1 1 1 14 10 0 0 3 Portugal 0 0 0 8 1 3 1 2 Spain 0 0 1 5 11 0 3 1 Estonia 2 14 0 0 0 3 0 0 Other EU-28 4 7 1 5 6 0 0 3 Total EU-28 94 61 19 99 90 18 70 81 USA 0 16 0 0 0 61 4 4 Canada 1 3 1 0 0 19 0 2 China 0 0 39 0 2 0 0 1 Brazil 0 1 16 0 3 0 18 1 Russia 5 1 8 1 3 2 0 1 Norway 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 4 Malaysia 0 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 Cameroon 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other non-EU 0 5 12 0 2 0 6 6 Total non-EU 6 39 81 1 10 82 30 19 Source: UK overseas trade statistics (HM Revenue & Customs), industry associations. Notes: 1. Sawnwood imports in this table exclude sleepers. Figure 3.2 shows the main sources of imports of sawn softwood to the UK since 1962. The total level of sawn softwood imports has fluctuated between around 5 million m3 and 10 million m3 from 1962 to present. Imports to the UK from Canada have reduced substantially since the early 1990s. In contrast imports from the Baltic States increased between 1992 and 2003 and, although there was some decline between 2003 to 2012, imports from the Baltic States to the UK have started to increase again in recent years. Since 1993 Sweden has consistently been the principal country of origin for UK sawn softwood imports. Notes: 1. Sawn softwood imports in this chart exclude sleepers. ## Chapter 4: Carbon Introduction This chapter contains information on: - carbon in forests; - the Woodland Carbon Code; and - public attitudes to forestry and climate change. Estimates for England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are included, where possible, in addition to UK totals. International comparisons of carbon stocks are provided in the International Forestry chapter. Further information on the data sources and methodology used to compile the figures is provided in the Sources chapter. All of the statistics presented in this chapter have been previously released. A copy of all carbon tables can be accessed in spreadsheet format from the Data Downloads web page at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-andresources/statistics/data-downloads/. In addition to the statistics presented here, information on UK forests and climate change is available from "Combating Climate Change - a role for UK forests" (The Read Report), an independent assessment of the science published in November 2009 and available at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/documents/2062/SynthesisUKAssessmentfinal.pdf. This chapter previously included statistics on net annual changes in carbon in UK woodlands. No update is currently available, and this data will be updated in Forestry Statistics 2020. Previous results can be accessed from Forestry Statistics 2018 at https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-andresources/statistics/forestry-statistics/forestry-statistics-2018/uk-forests-andclimate-change/carbon-sequestration/. The main findings are: - The total carbon stock in UK forests is estimated to have increased between 1990 and 2015, and to continue increasing to 2020. - A total of 187 projects had been validated to the Woodland Carbon Code at 31 March 2019, covering almost 8,300 hectares and projected to sequester 3.4 million tonnes of carbon dioxide over their lifetime. - In 2019, 88% of the UK public agreed with the statement "a lot more trees should be planted" in response to the threat from climate change. ## 4.1 Forest Carbon Stock Forest carbon stock is the amount of carbon that has been sequestered from the atmosphere and is now stored within the forest ecosystem, mainly within living biomass and soil, and to a lesser extent also in dead wood and litter. Table 4.1 presents estimates of UK forest carbon stock that were compiled in 2018 for submission to international organisations. The total carbon stock stored within UK forests is estimated to have increased between 1990 and 2015, and to continue increasing to 2020 (Table 4.1). The carbon stored in forest soils accounts for around 70% of total forest carbon stock. million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent 1990 2000 2010 2015 2020 Carbon in above-ground biomass 376 482 586 630 674 Carbon in below-ground biomass 135 174 211 227 242 Carbon in dead wood 130 138 143 147 149 Carbon in litter 165 175 182 188 190 Soil carbon 1, 3 2 366 2 533 2 629 2 726 2 761 Total forest carbon 3 172 3 502 3 750 3 918 4 016 Source: Forest Research Notes 1. Carbon in soil depth 0 to 100 cm. 2. To convert tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) to tonnes carbon (C), multiply by 12/44. 3. Changes in soil carbon stocks over the period can be attributed to changes in UK forest area. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## 4.2 Woodland Carbon Code The Woodland Carbon Code is a voluntary standard, initiated in July 2011, for woodland creation projects that make claims about the carbon they sequester (take out of the atmosphere). All projects must be placed on the UK Woodland Carbon Registry. Their claims about potential carbon sequestration are validated by an independent certification body. Validated projects are then verified on a regular basis to confirm the progress of carbon sequestration. Further information on Woodland Carbon Code projects is provided in the Sources chapter and at www.woodlandcarboncode.org.uk/. Table 4.2a provides annual data on projects registered under the Woodland Carbon Code. The table provides information on the number of projects, area of woodland covered by the projects and the total projected carbon sequestration over the lifetime (up to 100 years) of the projects. A total of 187 projects had been validated (including those that had also been verified) to the Woodland Carbon Code at 31 March 2019, covering almost 8,300 hectares and projected to sequester 3.4 million tonnes of carbon dioxide over their lifetime. Of the validated projects, 70 were also verified by the end of March 2019. These projects cover around 2,400 hectares and are projected to sequester 1.1 million tonnes of carbon dioxide over their lifetime. A total of 266 projects were registered under the Woodland Carbon Code at 31 March 2019, covering around 17,400 hectares of woodland and projected to sequester 6.2 million tonnes of carbon dioxide. Awaiting Verified Validated only validation Total Number of projects March 2013 0 36 69 105 March 2014 0 67 135 202 March 2015 0 100 99 199 March 2016 1 121 108 230 March 2017 3 140 107 250 March 2018 37 119 83 239 March 2019 70 117 79 266 Area of woodland (hectares) March 2013 0 1 488 2 073 3 561 March 2014 0 2 824 12 576 15 401 March 2015 0 3 322 12 063 15 385 March 2016 5 4 749 11 087 15 841 March 2017 148 4 993 11 028 16 170 March 2018 1 578 3 680 10 868 16 125 March 2019 2 404 5 856 9 134 17 394 Projected carbon sequestration2 (thousand tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent) March 2013 0 655 1 137 1 792 March 2014 0 1 323 4 364 5 687 March 2015 0 1 588 4 091 5 679 March 2016 2 2 278 3 519 5 799 March 2017 79 2 385 3 476 5 940 March 2018 713 1 790 3 285 5 788 March 2019 1 093 2 331 2 760 6 184 Source: Provisional Woodland Statistics: 2019 Edition Notes: 1. Projects can be validated/ verified individually or come together as part of a group. The statistics presented here show the number of projects validated or verified whether they were put through the process individually or as part of a group. 2. Figures for carbon sequestration indicate the total projected sequestration of the projects over their lifetime of up to 100 years, and include the amount claimable by a project plus the amount allocated to a shared "buffer" in case of unanticipated losses. Awaiting validation: is when a project or group is undergoing assessment by a certification body. Validated: is the initial evaluation of a project or group against the requirements of the Woodland Carbon Code. Upon completion a project/group will receive a 'Validation Opinion Statement'. The project/group will then be certified for a period of up to 5 years. Verified: Verification is the evaluation of a project as it progresses to confirm the amount of CO2 sequestered to date as well as that it continues to meet the requirements of the Code. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. Together, all validated (including verified) projects were predicted to sequester 2,458 thousand tonnes of carbon dioxide in Scotland, 838 thousand tonnes in England, 118 thousand tonnes in Wales and 11 thousand tonnes in Northern Ireland over their lifetime (Table 4.2b). England Wales Scotland NI UK Number of projects Awaiting validation 18 33 28 0 79 Validated only 51 9 55 2 117 Verified 27 3 40 0 70 Total validated 78 12 95 2 187 Total 96 45 123 2 266 Area of woodland (hectares) Awaiting validation 313 300 8 520 0 9 134 Validated only 1 207 128 4 498 22 5 856 Verified 286 52 2 066 0 2 404 Total validated 1 494 180 6 564 22 8 261 Total 1 807 480 15 085 22 17 394 Projected carbon sequestration2 (thousand tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent) Awaiting validation 153 106 2 501 0 2 760 Validated only 672 85 1 563 11 2 331 Verified 165 33 895 0 1 093 Total validated 838 118 2 458 11 3 424 Total 991 224 4 959 11 6 184 Source: Provisional Woodland Statistics: 2019 Edition Notes: 1. Projects can be validated/ verified individually or come together as part of a group. The statistics presented here show the number of projects validated or verified whether they were put through the process individually or as part of a group. 2. Figures for carbon sequestration indicate the total projected sequestration of the projects over their lifetime of up to 100 years, and include the amount claimable by a project plus the amount allocated to a shared "buffer" in case of unanticipated losses. Awaiting validation: is when a project or group is undergoing assessment by a certification body. Validated: is the initial evaluation of a project or group against the requirements of the Woodland Carbon Code. Upon completion a project/group will receive a 'Validation Opinion Statement'. The project/group will then be certified for a period of up to 5 years. Verified: Verification is the evaluation of a project as it progresses to confirm the amount of CO2 sequestered to date as well as that it continues to meet the requirements of the Code. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## 4.3 Public Opinion Of Forestry - Climate Change Forest Research has conducted similar surveys of public attitudes to forestry and forestry-related issues every two years since 1995. The most recent set of separate surveys was conducted in 2019 (in Northern Ireland, Wales, and across the UK as a whole) and 2017 (in Scotland). The full results are available on our website at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-andresources/statistics/statistics-by-topic/public-opinion-of-forestry/. In the UK survey in 2019, questions were asked to gauge the public's agreement on climate change issues, including on the management of UK forests in response to the threat of climate change (Table 4.3). Some of the public views presented below do not reflect expert opinion. There were high levels of agreement (respondents stating that they agreed or strongly agreed) with the statements: - "A lot more trees should be planted", supported by 88% of the UK public in 2019; and - "Different types of trees should be planted that will be more suited to future climates", supported by 78% in 2019. - Conversely, there were much lower levels of agreement with the statements: - "No action is needed, let nature take its course", supported by 26% in 2019; and - "Trees should not be felled under any circumstances, even if they are replaced", supported by 29%. percent of respondents who agree or strongly agree 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 A lot more trees should be planted 90 86 80 84 88 74 71 67 76 78 Different types of trees should be planted that will be more suited to future climates Trees should not be felled in any circumstances, even if they are replaced 21 22 25 26 29 No action is needed, let nature take its course 21 18 22 24 26 Source: UK Public Opinion of Forestry Surveys. Notes: 1. Figures are based on all respondents: weighted totals = 2011 (2,068), 2013 (1,927), 2015 (1,804), 2017 (2,113), 2019 (2,174). 2. The range of uncertainty around any result should be no more than ±3.5% in any of the years shown. To compare results over time, a difference of at least 5 percentage points is required to indicate that there is a significant difference. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## Chapter 5: Environment Introduction This chapter presents a range of information about the woodland environment, mostly using sources that are outside the scope of National Statistics. They are included to provide additional context to the topic. Estimates for England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are included, where possible, in addition to UK or GB totals. Further information on the data sources and methodology used to compile the figures is provided in the Sources chapter. All of the statistics presented in this chapter have been previously released. The statistics on the populations of wild birds (Table 5.1 and Figure 5.1) have been revised since "Forestry Statistics 2018". For further details on revisions, see the Environment section of the Sources chapter. A copy of all environment tables can be accessed in spreadsheet format from the Data Downloads web page at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-andresources/statistics/data-downloads/. The main findings are: - The UK woodland bird index has remained relatively stable since the early 1990s, following a period of long-term decline. Most of this decline has occurred in woodland specialist species. - In 2019, 85% of the UK public agreed with the statement "action should be taken by authorities and woodland managers to protect trees from damaging pests and diseases". ## 5.1 Populations Of Wild Birds Bird populations provide a good indication of the broad state of wildlife in the UK. This is because they are a well-studied taxonomic group, enabling a more informed interpretation of observed changes, who occupy a range of habitats while still responding to the same environmental pressures that also operate on other groups of wildlife. Indices of wild bird populations in the UK are produced annually by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) in conjunction with the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), the British Trust for Ornithology (BTO) and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC), and cover a range of species that are native to the UK. This data has been produced since the early 1970s for the majority of habitat groups, meaning there is considerable long-term data available on the changes in bird populations, which aids in the interpretation of more short-term variation. The latest statistical release on Wild Bird Populations was published in November 2018 and includes data to 2017. The index for woodland birds was expanded in 2007 to cover 38 species. A further change in 2015 resulted in a reduction to 37 species, of which 12 are generalists and 25 are woodland specialists (those that breed or feed mainly or solely in woodland). Since the early 1990s, when the majority of species group indices stabilised, the UK woodland bird index has generally been about 20 per cent below the level of the early 1970s, with the decline predominantly in woodland specialist species (Figure 5.1). Causes for the long-term decline in the woodland bird index may include a lack of diversity in habitats and food sources, loss of habitats and food sources through damage caused by increasing deer populations, and a reduction in some migratory species following pressures in other parts of the world. index (year 2000 = 100) Total Farmland Woodland Woodland Year breeding birds Seabirds Woodland birds generalists specialists birds 2008 100.4 92.2 83.5 102.4 105.0 99.1 2009 95.9 89.5 89.4 89.8 98.0 83.8 2010 97.4 86.9 86.5 100.6 101.9 97.6 2011 95.8 86.5 80.8 103.2 98.8 103.3 2012 96.9 87.3 78.0 104.6 102.2 103.7 2013 89.6 79.1 76.9 90.5 89.7 88.6 2014 96.4 80.4 84.3 100.4 103.3 96.9 2015 99.5 85.2 81.6 100.9 105.3 96.6 2016 96.3 77.6 .. 95.5 102.8 90.2 2017 97.5 80.6 .. 92.8 104.0 85.7 Source: British Trust for Ornithology (BTO), Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC), Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB). Notes: 1. Based on data in Wild Bird Populations in the UK, 1970-2017 statistical release (Defra, November 2018). 2. .. Denotes data not available. Source: British Trust for Ornithology (BTO), Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC), Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB). Notes: 1. Based on data in Wild Bird Populations in the UK, 1970-2017 statistical release (Defra, November 2018). ## 5.2 Public Opinion Of Forestry - Tree Health Forest Research has conducted similar surveys of public attitudes to forestry and forestry-related issues every two years since 1995. The most recent surveys were conducted in 2019 (with separate surveys in Wales, Northern Ireland and across the UK as a whole) and in 2017 (in Scotland). Full results are available within the Public Opinion of Forestry reports available on our website at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statistics/statisticsby-topic/public-opinion-of-forestry/. Respondents to the UK survey in 2019 were asked their views on a range of statements relating to tree health. The highest level of agreement was seen with the statement "action should be taken by authorities and woodland managers to protect trees from damaging pests and disease", with 85% of UK respondents agreeing (agree or strongly agree) (Figure 5.2 and Table 5.2). This compares with only 23% agreeing with the statements "there is very little that anyone can do to prevent the spread of damaging tree pests and diseases". visiting woodlands to help prevent the spread of damaging tree pests If I buy an imported tree, it is more likely to carry tree pests and diseases than a tree grown in the I am aware that possible tree pests and diseases can be reported using the Tree Alert app or website Source: UK Public Opinion of Forestry Survey 2019. Base: 2,000 UK respondents. Notes: 1. The range of uncertainty around any result should be no more than ±3.2%. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. Percent of respondents who agree or strongly agree 2015 2017 2019 75 85 85 Action should be taken by authorities and woodland managers to protect trees from damaging pests and diseases 57 74 74 Everyone should take action when visiting woodlands to help prevent the spread of damaging tree pests and diseases 55 65 65 I would be willing to look out for and report sightings of pests and diseases on trees, if appropriate information and advice was available to me If I buy an imported tree, it is more likely to carry tree pests and diseases than a tree grown in the UK 42 48 46 I am aware that possible tree pests and diseases can be reported using the Tree Alert app or website 22 23 25 There is very little that anyone can do to prevent the spread of damaging tree pests and diseases 21 23 23 Source: UK Public Opinion of Forestry Surveys. Note: 1. Figures are based on all respondents: weighted totals = 2015 (1,804), 2017 (2,113), 2019 (2,174). 2. The range of uncertainty around any result should be no more than ±3.5% in any of the years shown. To compare results over time, a difference of at least 5 percentage points is required to indicate that there is a significant difference. ## 5.3 Woodland Fires The Home Office and Devolved Administrations produce estimates of the number and area of wildfires each year, using data recorded by Fire and Rescue Services using the Incident Reporting System. These figures were previously produced by the Department for Communities and Local Government. By analysing the wildfire data with the National Forest Inventory woodland map, it has been possible to produce estimates of fires that occur within woodlands in Great Britain. No update is currently available, so the results shown below are as published in Forestry Statistics 2018. Table 5.3a shows the number of woodland fires in 2010-11 to 2016-17. There has been some fluctuation in the number of woodland fires in Great Britain over this period, with a high of around 9 thousand fires in 2011-12 and a low of around 2,500 in 2012-13. Most fires occurred in England. The total number of woodland fires in Great Britain in 2016-17 (around 4,200) represents 4% of the total of around 119,000 outdoor fires in Great Britain in 2016-17 (Home Office, Welsh Government, Scottish Government). | Financial year | England | Wales | Scotland | GB | |-------------------|------------|----------|-------------|-------| | 2010-11 | 6 182 | 618 | 1 186 | 7 986 | | 2011-12 | 7 238 | 620 | 1 059 | 8 917 | | 2012-13 | 1 794 | 176 | 484 | 2 454 | | 2013-14 | 3 899 | 383 | 776 | 5 058 | | 2014-15 | 2 360 | 288 | 490 | 3 138 | | 2015-16 | 3 333 | 345 | 1 389 | 5 067 | | 2016-17 | 2 570 | 193 | 1 423 | 4 186 | Source: Fire & Rescue Service Incident Recording System, National Forest Inventory. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. Table 5.3b shows the area covered by woodland fires between 2010-11 and 2016-17. There was a peak of around 8,700 hectares burnt in 2011-12, with the vast majority of this area occurring in Scotland. Around 800 hectares of woodland in Great Britain were burnt in 2016-17. hectares Financial year England Wales Scotland GB 2010-11 979 167 129 1 276 2011-12 278 416 7 982 8 675 2012-13 48 107 268 423 2013-14 101 1 089 318 1 508 2014-15 81 38 762 881 2015-16 117 757 536 1 410 2016-17 29 93 682 804 Source: Fire & Rescue Service Incident Recording System, National Forest Inventory. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## Chapter 6: Social Introduction This chapter contains statistics on: - the number and profile of visits to all woodlands from household surveys; and - the number and profile of visits to Forestry England/ Forestry and Land Scotland/ Natural Resources Wales/ Forest Service woodlands from onsite surveys and administrative sources. Geographical coverage for recreation statistics varies. Estimates are presented at country level and, where possible, UK or GB totals are included. Further information on the data sources and methodology used to compile the figures is provided in the Sources chapter. Most of the statistics presented in this chapter have been previously released by other organisations. The latest year figures for day visitors to Forest Service sites in Northern Ireland are published for the first time in this release. Figures for earlier years have not been revised from those previously published. For further details on revisions, see the Recreation section of the Sources chapter. The frequency with which the estimates in this chapter are updated varies depending on the data sources used. Whilst some of the information presented is now several years old, it represents the latest available data and has been included to provide a more rounded picture of forest recreation in the UK. Further information on the advantages and disadvantages of household surveys and of on-site surveys is provided in the Recreation section of the Sources chapter. A copy of all social tables can be accessed in spreadsheet format from the Data Downloads web page at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-andresources/statistics/data-downloads/. Previous editions of Forestry Statistics have also included statistics on public access to woodland in this chapter, using data from the Woodland Trust's Woods for People and Spaces for People projects. As no new data is available, this section has now been excluded; the latest results can be accessed from Forestry Statistics 2018 at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-andresources/statistics/forestry-statistics/forestry-statistics- 2018/recreation/public-access-to-woodland/. The main findings are: - There were an estimated 437 million visits to woodland in England in 2017-18. (Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment 2017- 18). - There were an estimated 117 million visits to woodland in Scotland in 2017-18. (Scotland's People and Nature Survey 2017/18). - "Health and exercise" and "fresh air or to enjoy pleasant weather" were important reasons for visits to woodlands in Wales. (National Survey for Wales, 2016-17 and 2017-18). - Over three fifths (63%) of the UK population have visited woodland in the last few years. (UK Public Opinion of Forestry Survey 2019). - Around 532 thousand people visited Forest Service sites where a charge is made in Northern Ireland in 2018-19. ## 6.1 Visits To Woodland - Household Surveys The information shown below in Table 6.1 has been obtained from the following general population household surveys. - UK Day Visits Surveys (1994, 1996, 1998) - GB Day Visits Survey (2002/3) - Scottish Recreation Survey (2004 to 2012) - England Leisure Visits Survey (2005) - Welsh Outdoor Recreation Survey (2008, 2011, 2014) - Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment (England, 2009- 10 onwards) - Scotland's People and Nature Survey (2013, 2017/18) It is likely that differences in survey design and methodology have contributed to a considerable proportion of the differences in results between these surveys. The figures in Table 6.1 should not be interpreted as time trends but instead as separate results from each survey. Further information on the differences between surveys is provided in the Recreation section of the Sources chapter. In common with all sample based surveys, the results from each survey are subject to the effects of chance, depending on the particular survey method used and the sample achieved, thus confidence limits apply to all results from these surveys. Results from the Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment 2017- 18 estimate a total of 437 million visits to woodlands in England (Table 6.1). This is not significantly different from the 2016-17 figure. The Welsh Outdoor Recreation Survey 2014 estimates a total of 68 million visits to woodlands by Welsh residents. This is a statistically significant decrease from the estimated total of 86 million in 2011, but similar to the 2008 estimate (64 million). Scotland's People and Nature Survey 2017/18 reports an estimated total of 117 million visits to woodlands in Scotland. This is a statistically significant increase from the 2013 estimate of 90 million visits. million visits Year England Wales Scotland GB 1994 273 12 18 303 1996 308 11 26 346 1998 321 11 22 355 2002 222 12 18 252 2004 .. .. 70 .. 2005 170 .. 62 .. 2006 .. .. 76 .. 2007 .. .. 72 .. 2008 .. 64 62 .. 2009 317 .. 57 .. 2010 326 .. 63 .. 2011 358 86 65 .. 2012 357 .. 62 .. 2013 378 .. 90 .. 2014 417 68 .. .. 2015 446 .. .. .. 2016 439 .. .. .. 2017 437 .. 117 .. Sources: 1994, 1996, 1998: UK Day Visit Surveys, carried out by National Centre for Social Research (not available online); 2002: GB Day Visits Survey 2002-03, carried out by TNS Travel & Tourism; England 2005: England Leisure Visits Survey (ELVS), carried out by Research International; England 2009 on: Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment (MENE), carried out by TNS; Wales 2008, 2011, 2014: Welsh Outdoor Recreation Survey carried out by IPSOS-MORI (2008) and by TNS (2011, 2014); Scotland 2004 - 2012: Scottish Recreation Survey (ScRS), carried out by TNS; Scotland 2013, 2017: Scotland's People and Nature Survey (SPANs), carried out by TNS. Notes: 1. The UK and GB Day Visits Surveys collected data about day trips from home, for all countries of GB. The 1994, 1996 and 1998 surveys covered calendar years; the 2002-03 survey covered a 12-month period starting in March 2002. 2. ELVS and MENE covered trips taken in England, including those from holiday bases, by respondents living in England. ELVS ran for 12 months from February 2005. MENE results relate to 12 month periods from March to February. 3. The Welsh Outdoor Recreation Survey totals shown are for trips with woodland as the main destination. 4. The Scottish Recreation Survey ran from July 2003 until December 2012. It was replaced by Scotland's People and Nature Survey that ran from March 2013 to February 2014 and from May 2017 to April 2018. Both surveys covered visits to the outdoors for leisure and recreation in Scotland by people living in Scotland. The total shown is for all trips that included a visit to woodland. 5. In each survey, visits to overseas destinations are excluded. 6. .. Denotes data not available. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## 6.1.1 England Household surveys in England In March 2009 fieldwork commenced on the Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment (MENE) survey, which includes collecting information on visits to the outdoors in England. Further information on the survey, including copies of annual reports and online data viewers to access more detailed results, is available at www.gov.uk/government/collections/monitor-ofengagement-with-the-natural-environment-survey-purpose-and-results. Table 6.2 shows the main characteristics of visits to woodlands over the most recent 5 years. In 2017-18, walking was the main mode of transport for around one half (52%) of visits to woodland. Over one half (56%) of visits to woodland were within 2 miles. per cent of respondents 2014- 2015- 2016- 2017- 2013- 14 15 16 17 18 Main mode of transport On foot 62 60 60 54 52 Car/ van 33 36 36 42 44 Bicycle 3 2 2 2 1 Distance travelled (one way) Less than 1 mile 36 39 32 28 29 1 to 2 miles 27 25 31 28 27 3 to 5 miles 22 19 20 21 23 6 to 10 miles 7 9 8 11 11 Over 10 miles 8 9 10 12 10 Source: Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment (MENE), carried out by TNS, for Natural England and Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (Defra). Notes: 1. All trips that included a visit to woodland. 2. .. Denotes data not available. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## 6.1.2 Wales Household surveys in Wales The National Survey for Wales began in March 2016 and replaced a number of separate surveys of households in Wales, including the Welsh Outdoor Recreation Survey (WORS). The survey is completed by around 12,000 people each year and covers a wide range of topics. Further information on the survey, including copies of reports and data, is available at https://gov.wales/national-survey-wales. Table 6.3 shows the reasons provided for their visit to the outdoors by respondents who stated that the main destination of visit was woodland. "Health and exercise" and "fresh air or to enjoy pleasant weather" were important reasons for visits to woodlands in Wales. per cent of respondents Reasons for visit 2016-17 2017-18 For health or exercise 47 55 For fresh air or to enjoy pleasant weather 50 47 For pleasure / enjoyment 42 42 To spend time with family 39 41 To relax and unwind 34 41 To enjoy scenery and wildlife 38 39 To exercise the dog 38 30 For peace and quiet 22 29 To spend time with friends 16 22 Source: National Survey for Wales (Welsh Government). Notes: 1. Visits where the main destination was woodland. 2. Respondents were able to select more than one option, so results do not sum to 100%. 3. Excludes other reasons for visiting, each reported by fewer than 20% of respondents in 2017-18. ## 6.1.3 Public Opinion Of Forestry Survey - Woodland Visitors The Public Opinion of Forestry Survey is carried out every two years and obtains people's attitudes to forestry and forestry-related issues, including visits to woodland. Copies of reports and detailed data tables are available at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statistics/statistics-bytopic/public-opinion-of-forestry/. The results shown in Tables 6.4 and 6.5 and Figure 6.1 have been taken from the UK and country reports on the latest surveys in 2019 and from surveys in earlier years. The reports also include other recreation-related results, such as whether the woodlands visited were in towns or the countryside and any reasons given by survey respondents for not visiting woodlands. In the UK 2019 survey, over three fifths (63%) of respondents said that they had visited woodland in the last few years for walks, picnics or other recreation (Table 6.4). per cent of respondents Year England Wales Scotland Northern Ireland UK 2003 66 62 64 77 67 2005 65 69 50 67 65 2007 76 79 75 62 77 2009 77 .. 57 .. 77 2010 .. .. .. 72 .. 2011 68 68 75 .. 67 2013 65 64 76 .. 66 2014 .. .. .. 75 .. 2015 55 64 78 .. 56 2017 62 72 84 .. 61 2019 63 77 .. 78 63 Source: UK/GB, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland Public Opinion of Forestry Surveys Base: UK/GB = 4,000 respondents (2003 to 2007), 2,000 respondents (2009 to 2019); Scotland and Wales = 1,000 respondents each; Northern Ireland = 120 respondents (2003), 1,000 respondents (all other years). Notes: 1. Those stating that they had visited woodland in the last few years. 2. The range of uncertainty around any result should be no more than ±3.5% (for surveys with around 2,000 respondents) and ±4.7% (for surveys with around 1,000 respondents). To compare results over time, a difference of at least 5 percentage points (for surveys each with around 2,000 respondents) and at least 7 percentage points (for surveys each with around 1,000 respondents) is required to indicate that there is a significant difference. 3. .. Denotes data not available (survey not run that year or question not asked) These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. Survey respondents were asked how frequently they had visited during the previous summer and winter. Figure 6.1, which presents aggregated UK results for the 2015 to 2019 surveys, shows that respondents visited much more often during the summer, with 44% of respondents visiting at least once a month in the summer compared to around one quarter (27%) in the winter. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## 6.1.4 Public Opinion Of Forestry Survey - Woodland Visitors By Age Group In the UK 2019 Public Opinion of Forestry survey, 71% of respondents aged 35 to 54 said that they had visited woodland in the last few years for walks, picnics or other recreation (Table 6.5). This compares with around three fifths (61%) of respondents aged 16 to 34 and 56% of those aged 55 or over. per cent of respondents Year Aged 16 to 34 Aged 35 to 54 Aged 55 and over Total 1999 73 74 55 67 2001 75 77 63 72 2003 71 72 60 67 2005 66 74 56 65 2007 79 82 69 77 2009 78 84 69 77 2011 65 74 63 67 2013 62 75 60 66 2015 54 62 53 56 2017 60 68 55 61 2019 61 71 56 63 Source: UK and GB Public Opinion of Forestry Surveys, 1999 to 2019. Base: 2,000 respondents (1999, 2001, 2009 to 2019); 4,000 respondents (2003 to 2007). Notes: 1. Those stating they had visited woodland in the last few years. 2. The range of uncertainty around any result should be no more than ±3.5% (for surveys with around 2,000 respondents) and ±2.3% (for surveys with around 4,000 respondents). To compare results over time, a difference of at least 5 percentage points (for surveys each with around 2,000 respondents) is required to indicate that there is a significant difference. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## 6.2 Visits To Woodland - On-Site Surveys The previous section provided information on visits to all woodlands (regardless of ownership), based on data from household surveys. This section provides information on visits to Forestry England/ Forestry and Land Scotland/ Natural Resources Wales/ Forest Service woodland only, based on data from on-site surveys and administrative sources. The information provided in this section covers: - Visits to the National Forest Estate in Scotland (Forestry and Land Scotland woodlands) from the All Forests Scotland surveys run from 2004 to 2007 and in 2012-13. An updated estimate of total visits in 2016 is also provided. - Day visitors to Northern Ireland Forest Service sites where an admission charge was made. Further information on these and other sources of on-site visit data are available from the Sources chapter and from the recreation statistics web pages at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statistics/statisticsby-topic/recreation-statistics/. ## 6.2.1 Scotland All Forests Survey All Forests surveying in Scotland has been undertaken on two occasions. The first All Forests Survey in Scotland was carried out across a three-year period from June 2004 to June 2007, with over 5,000 hours of fieldwork undertaken over 1,158 days, achieving almost 2,700 face to face interviews. The study estimated that around 8.2 million visits are made annually to Forestry and Land Scotland woodland. An estimated 150-200 thousand visits to events in forests and around 300 thousand visits during the hours of darkness (when fieldwork was not undertaken) were also made, giving an overall total of around 8.7 million visits per year. The second All Forests Survey was carried out from November 2012 to October 2013. The survey made greater use of data from automatic counters, but also achieved over 400 days of fieldwork and 1,970 face-to-face interviews. The 2012-13 survey estimated an annual total of 9.1 million visits (including visits to events and in the hours of darkness) to Forestry and Land Scotland woodland. This represents a 5% increase on the estimated overall total of 8.7 million visits from the 2004-2007 survey. The estimated number of visits has been updated using data from 224 automatic counters at 165 sites. For sites without counters, estimates have been produced using the results from the 2012-13 All Forests Survey and advice from local managers. This gives an overall estimate of 10.2 million visits to Forestry and Land Scotland woodland in 2016, a 12% increase from 2012-13. Table 6.6 provides a summary of the key characteristics and results obtained from the Scotland All Forests surveys and appears to show some change in visit characteristics over time, with a general trend towards longer, more distant and less frequent visits. From the 2012-13 survey, around two thirds of visitors to Forestry and Land Scotland woodlands were on a day trip from home. Walking (with or without a dog) was the main activity undertaken by around three quarters of visitors. Over four fifths travelled to the site by car or van and around one third travelled more than 15 miles to get to the site. Around one third of visitors were on short trips, spending one hour or less in the forest. Around one half of respondents visited the site at least monthly. per cent of respondents Woodland visit characteristics 2004-2007 2012-13 Type of trip Day trip 82 67 Overnight trip 18 33 Main activity during visit Dog walking 50 43 Other walking 29 29 Cycling 11 8 Main transport Car / van 78 85 Walked 18 11 Cycled 2 2 Distance travelled (one way) Less than 6 miles 58 43 6 to 15 miles 19 25 | 16 to 25 miles | 10 | 12 | |------------------------------------------|-------|-------| | Over 25 miles | 12 | 20 | | Duration of visit (time spent in forest) | | | | Up to 1 hour | 59 | 35 | | Over 1 hour, up to 2 hours | 24 | 36 | | Over 2 hours, up to 3 hours | 10 | 16 | | Over 3 hours | 7 | 13 | | Frequency of visit to site of interview | | | | More than once a day | 7 | 3 | | Once a day | 13 | 9 | | 1 to 3 times per week | 25 | 22 | | 1 to 3 times per month | 17 | 14 | | 1 to 3 times per year | 17 | 18 | | Less often | 5 | 7 | | First ever visit | 16 | 27 | Source: Scotland All Forests Survey 2004-2007 and All Forests Survey 2, carried out by TNS. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## 6.2.2 Northern Ireland Forest Service Day Visitors Information on visitors to Forest Service sites in Northern Ireland is provided by the Forest Service and relates only to sites where an admission charge is made. In Northern Ireland in 2018-19, 532 thousand people visited those Forest Service sites where an admission charge was made (Table 6.7). This represented a 5% increase from the previous year, but remained lower than the peak in 2016-17. | Year | Visitors to Forest Service sites | |---------|-------------------------------------| | 2009-10 | 473 | | 2010-11 | 468 | | 2011-12 | 430 | | 2012-13 | 340 | | 2013-14 | 364 | | 2014-15 | 397 | | 2015-16 | 432 | | 2016-17 | 584 | | 2017-18 | 509 | | 2018-19 | 532 | Source: Forest Service Notes: 1. Number of people visiting sites where an admission charge was made, excluding campers. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## Chapter 7: Employment & Businesses Introduction This chapter contains information on: - employment in forestry and wood processing; - health & safety; and - numbers of businesses. All of the statistics presented in this chapter relate to UK totals. Further information on the data sources and methodology used to compile the figures is provided in the Sources chapter. Most of the statistics presented in this chapter have been previously released. Some of the figures in this chapter have been revised since Forestry Statistics 2018. For further details on revisions, see the Employment section of the Sources chapter. A copy of all Employment & Businesses tables can be accessed in spreadsheet format from the Data Downloads web page at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statistics/data-downloads/. The main findings are: - The Annual Business Survey reported average employment1 in 2017 of 16 thousand in forestry and 27 thousand in primary wood processing. - There was estimated to be a total of 7.7 thousand full time equivalent staff employed1 by primary wood processors in the UK in 2018, a 2% decrease from the total for 2017. - Accident rates in forestry and wood products have tended to decline in recent years but are still higher than the averages in agriculture and manufacturing respectively. - There were 213 establishments in the primary wood processing industries in the UK using UK-grown roundwood in 2018. ## Note: Business Survey (ABS) and the full time equivalent figures obtained from the annual surveys of the UK timber industry run by Forest Research (FR). In particular, the ABS figures cover employment by all businesses in the relevant sectors that pay VAT and/ or PAYE. This will include businesses that do not use UK grown timber. The FR surveys include businesses below the VAT and PAYE thresholds, but exclude businesses that do not use UK grown timber. ## 7.1 Employment: Annual Business Survey (Abs) The Annual Business Survey (ABS), carried out by the Office for National Statistics (ONS), includes statistics on employment broken down by Standard Industrial Classification (SIC 2007). In wood processing, SIC 16 (wood products) and SIC 17 (pulp, paper and paper products) have a much wider scope than the data on employment in primary wood processing (Table 7.2), as they include primary processing of imported material and also some secondary processing. The latest ABS survey was published in May 2019 and includes data to 2017. It recorded average employment in 2017 of 16 thousand in forestry and 27 thousand in primary wood processing (sawmilling, panels and pulp & paper) (Table 7.1). thousands Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)1 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Forestry 14 16 17 17 16 Wood products Sawmilling 8 9 8 9 9 Panels 5 5 5 5 5 Secondary products 51 65 56 67 60 Total 64 79 69 81 74 Pulp, paper & paper products Pulp & paper3 13 13 13 13 13 Articles of paper & paperboard 41 44 43 43 42 Total 54 57 56 56 55 Total wood processing 118 136 125 137 129 Total primary wood processing 26 27 26 27 27 Source: Annual Business Survey - average employment in year (Office for National Statistics, May 2019) Notes: 1. Categories are based on the UK Standard Industrial Classification (SIC 2007) categories. Further details on the SIC codes used are provided in the Sources: Employment and businesses page. 2. Excludes other wood-using industries. 3. Pulp and paper breakdowns for 2013 to 2017 have been suppressed in the figures released by ONS. The figures shown here are estimated from 2008 figures. ## 7.2 Employment In Primary Wood Processing Information on employment in primary wood processing is obtained annually via the sources used to collect data on UK-grown timber (presented in Chapter 2). There was estimated to be a total of 7.7 thousand full time equivalent staff employed by primary wood processors in the UK in 2018 (Table 7.2), a 2% decrease from the total for 2017. Over one half (57%) of the total employment in 2018 worked in sawmills and over one quarter (28%) worked in wood-based panel mills. Full-time equivalents Year Sawmills Pulp & paper Wood-based panels Fencing Total 2014 4 382 703 2 091 407 7 583 2015 4 319 702 2 100 361 7 483 2016 4 450 697 2 250 388 7 785 2017 4 593 700 2 110 427 7 830 2018 4 411 693 2 175 402 7 681 Source: industry surveys, industry associations. Notes: 1. Some businesses operate sawmills and round fencing mills. Employment for such businesses may be recorded under sawmills, round fencing manufacturers or shared between the two categories. ## 7.3 Health & Safety Accidents involving absence from work of at least seven days are required to be reported to the Health & Safety Executive (HSE). Prior to this time, reporting was required for absences of at least three days. The latest major accident rates for Great Britain, covering 2017-18, show an increase from the previous year for the forestry sector and a decrease for the wood products sector. Over the longer term, the rates for both sectors have generally declined, but they continue to remain higher than the averages in agriculture and manufacturing respectively (Table 7.3 and Figure 7.1). Standard Number of accident4 Industrial major rate rate/ Classification accidents4 (SIC)2 employees Forestry 2013-14 51 3.8 116 8.6 2014-15 26 1.7 101 6.5 2015-16 34 2.0 111 6.5 2016-17 31 1.9 120 7.3 2017-18 provisional 38 2.3 95 5.8 Wood products 2013-14 155 2.9 523 9.6 2014-15 136 2.4 510 8.9 2015-16 129 2.5 561 10.9 2016-17 149 3.0 557 11.1 2017-18 provisional 125 2.4 514 9.7 Pulp, paper & paper products 2013-14 85 1.5 322 5.8 2014-15 75 1.3 303 5.4 2015-16 67 1.4 284 6.1 2016-17 71 1.5 257 5.5 2017-18 provisional 60 1.1 245 4.3 Source: Health & Safety Executive. Notes: 1. Employees only; excludes self-employed. 2. Categories are based on the UK Standard Industrial Classification (SIC 2007) categories. Further details on the SIC codes used are provided in the Sources: Employment and businesses page. 3. Excludes other wood-using industries. 4. Major accidents include fatal accidents, which averaged around 1 per year for forestry and 2 per year for wood processing. There were no fatal accidents in the period shown for pulp, paper and paper products. | Major | Total | |-----------|------------| | Total | | | reported | | | number of | | | accident | | | reported | | | 1000 | rate/ 1000 | | accidents | | | employees | | Source: Health & Safety Executive. Notes: 1. Employees only; excludes self-employed. 2. Categories are based on the UK Standard Industrial Classification (SIC 2007) categories. Further details on the SIC codes used are provided in the Sources: Employment and businesses page. 3. As a result of a change in reporting requirements, data from 2012-13 is not directly comparable with previous years. ## 7.4 Establishments In The Primary Wood Processing Industries Table 7.4 shows the number of primary wood processors, according to the sampling frames used for Forest Research surveys of establishments using UK timber. The figures in Table 7.4 do not correspond with the VAT and PAYE registration information given in Table 7.5. The figures here count establishments (sites) rather than businesses and include those that do not need to register for VAT or PAYE. They also have a different basis for classification, so some businesses that are excluded from Table 7.5 because of their VAT/PAYE classification are included in this table (typically businesses where primary wood processing is a small part of their total activity), and some businesses included in Table 7.5 are excluded here (usually because they do not use UK-grown timber). The number of establishments in the primary wood processing industries using UK-grown roundwood has reduced from 273 in 2009 to 213 in 2018, a 22% decrease. | Wood-based | Round fencing | |---------------|------------------| | Year | Sawmills | | Pulp & | | | paper mills | panel mills | | Total | | | 1 | | | | | | 2009 | 195 | | 2010 | 188 | | 2011 | 184 | | 2012 | 180 | | 2013 | 175 | | 2014 | 173 | | 2015 | 171 | | 2016 | 167 | | 2017 | 164 | | 2018 | 157 | Source: industry surveys, industry associations Notes: 1. A single mill may be recorded twice, as a sawmill and a round fencing manufacturer. ## 7.5 Vat And/Or Paye Registered Businesses Table 7.5 shows the number of VAT and/or PAYE registered businesses classified under forestry and primary wood processing. The headings shown potentially include businesses not traditionally regarded as forestry or primary wood processing, and some businesses traditionally included in forestry and primary wood processing are excluded as they are classified to other headings of the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC). A total of 4,150 forestry businesses, 540 sawmilling businesses, 130 woodbased panel businesses and 240 pulp & paper businesses were registered for VAT and/or PAYE purposes in the UK in 2018. There has been an overall increase in forestry businesses over the last ten years, whilst sawmilling and pulp and paper businesses have declined. Year Forestry Sawmilling Panels Pulp & paper 2009 3 100 685 130 270 2010 3 095 640 135 255 2011 3 170 605 135 250 2012 3 375 585 135 255 2013 3 505 560 130 240 2014 3 685 555 130 230 2015 3 925 555 125 230 2016 4 050 550 125 225 2017 4 060 540 120 240 2018 4 150 540 130 240 Source: UK Business: Activity, Size and Location: 2018 (Office for National Statistics, October 2018). Notes: ## Chapter 8: Finance & Prices Introduction This chapter contains statistics on: - timber prices; - gross value added (GVA); - Government expenditure on forestry; and - grant schemes. Estimates for England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are included, where possible, in addition to UK or GB totals. Further information on the data sources and methodology used to compile the figures is provided in the Sources chapter. Most of the statistics presented in this chapter have been previously released. Some of the figures for earlier years have been revised since Forestry Statistics 2018. For further details on revisions, see the Finance & Prices section of the Sources chapter. A copy of all Finance & Prices tables can be accessed in spreadsheet format from the Data Downloads web page at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-andresources/statistics/data-downloads/. Previous editions of Forestry Statistics have also included statistics on financial returns from forestry investment in this chapter, from the Investment Property Databank (IPD) UK Forestry Index. As no new data is available, this section has now been excluded; the latest results can be accessed from Forestry Statistics 2018 at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-andresources/statistics/forestry-statistics/forestry-statistics-2018/financeprices/financial-return-from-forestry-investment/. The main findings are: - The Coniferous Standing Sales Price Index for Great Britain was 26.8% higher in real terms in the year to March 2019, compared with the previous year. - The Softwood Sawlog Price Index for Great Britain was 32.5% higher in real terms in the 6 months to March 2019, compared with the corresponding period of the previous year. - Gross value added (GVA) in primary wood processing (sawmilling, panels and pulp & paper) was £1.48 billion in the UK in 2017. GVA in forestry was £0.70 billion. - Net expenditure on public forests by Forestry England and by Forestry and Land Scotland totalled £27 million in 2018-19. A further £97 million was spent by the Forestry Commission and Scottish Forestry on other activities. - A total of £76.6 million was paid in grants by the Forestry Commission, Scottish Forestry and the Welsh Government in 2018- 19. ## 8.1 Timber Prices Timber Price Indices are based on sales of softwood (conifers) by Forestry England, Forestry and Land Scotland and Natural Resources Wales and are released every 6 months. The Coniferous Standing Sales Price Index monitors changes in the average price received per cubic metre for timber that Forestry England/ Forestry and Land Scotland/ Natural Resources Wales sold standing, where the purchaser is responsible for harvesting. The Softwood Sawlog Price Index monitors changes in the average price received per cubic metre of sawlogs (roundwood with a top diameter of 14 cm or more, destined to be sawn into planks or boards) sold at roadside by Forestry England/ Forestry and Land Scotland/ Natural Resources Wales. Standing timber and sawlogs are distinct markets, and may show different price movements. The data are averages for historic periods, so may be slow to show any turning points. These indices are used to monitor trends in timber prices and to provide information on the state of the UK timber industry. They are also used by the UK timber industry, alongside other economic indicators, in contract reviews. There is little other information currently available on wood prices before primary processing and no price index is available for broadleaves. Prices for outputs of primary wood processing are collected by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) in the Producer Price Indices (PPIs), and these are available in the MM22 dataset which gives detailed PPIs monthly. Table 8.1 presents the coniferous standing sales and sawlog price indices for Great Britain to March 2019. The coniferous standing sales price index for Great Britain was 26.8% higher in real terms in the year to March 2019, compared with the previous year (Table 8.1). The softwood sawlog price index was 32.5% higher in real terms in the 6 months to March 2019, compared with the corresponding period in the previous year. index (period to September 2016 = 100) Standing sales3 Standing sales3 Sawlog index Sawlog Year in nominal index in real in nominal index in real terms3 terms4 terms3 terms4 2012 83.9 89.7 88.2 94.6 2013 78.6 82.4 97.9 102.8 2014 90.9 93.6 109.5 113.1 2015 108.8 110.6 103.2 106.0 2016 98.5 99.4 97.1 98.6 2017 110.0 108.5 110.8 109.4 2018 143.5 138.7 133.9 129.6 2019 185.5 175.9 180.6 171.7 Source: Timber Price Indices: data to March 2019 Notes: 1. The price indices are constructed from information on sales by Forestry England/ Forestry and Land Scotland/ Natural Resources Wales only. 2. The standing sales index uses the Fisher method with 5 year chain linking to take account of changes in the size mix over time. 3. Nominal prices are the actual prices at that point in time. 4. Real terms values are obtained by using the GDP deflator to convert to "constant prices" (in this case prices in 2016). This allows trends in timber prices to be tracked without the influence of inflation. 5. The standing sales index excludes sales by Natural Resources Wales from April 2017. 6. Sawlog prices in Wales in the year to March 2018 include long term contract rates for the clearance of infected larch. Source: Timber Price Indices: data to March 2019 Notes: 1. The price indices are constructed from information on sales by Forestry England/ Forestry and Land Scotland/ Natural Resources Wales only. 2. The standing sales index uses the Fisher method with 5 year chain linking to take account of changes in the size mix over time. 3. Real terms values are obtained by using the GDP deflator to convert to "constant prices" (in this case prices in 2016). This allows trends in timber prices to be tracked without the influence of inflation. 4. The standing sales index excludes sales by Natural Resources Wales from April 2017. 5. Sawlog prices in Wales in the year to March 2018 include long term contract rates for the clearance of infected larch. ## 8.2 Gross Value Added Gross value added (GVA) measures the contribution to the economy of each individual producer, industry or sector in the United Kingdom. It is the difference between the value of outputs and the value of intermediate consumption, so mainly comprises employment costs and profits. The Annual Business Survey (ABS) carried out by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) includes statistics on gross value added for different industries, classified using the UK Standard Industrial Classification (SIC 2007). Further information on the ABS is available from the ONS website. Table 8.2 shows that, in 2017, GVA in primary wood processing (sawmilling, panels and pulp & paper) was reported to be £1.48 billion and GVA in forestry was £0.70 billion. £ million Standard Industrial Classification 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 (SIC)1 Forestry 504 540 658 596 701 Wood products Sawmilling 518 356 474 413 437 Panels2 267 436 323 316 363 Secondary products 1 797 1 955 2 477 2 850 2 597 Total 2 582 2 747 3 275 3 579 3 397 Pulp, paper & paper products Pulp & paper 578 596 738 610 682 Articles of paper & paperboard 3 115 3 197 2 749 2 786 2 554 Total 3 693 3 793 3 487 3 396 3 236 Total wood processing 6 275 6 540 6 762 6 975 6 633 Total primary wood processing 1 363 1 388 1 535 1 339 1 482 Source: Annual Business Survey (Office for National Statistics, May 2019) Notes: 2. The 2013 to 2016 figures for panels have been suppressed in the figures released by ONS, so the figures here cover both panels and the manufacture of assembled parquet floors (SIC 16.22) for those years. Panels accounted for 99% of the total of SIC codes 16.21 (panels) and 16.22 in 2017. 3. Excludes other wood-using industries. ## 8.3 Government Expenditure On Public Forests Table 8.3 provides information on net expenditure on public forests by Forestry England and by Forestry and Land Scotland. This covers expenditure less income for land that is owned or managed by Forestry England/ Forestry and Land Scotland. Other expenditure by the Forestry Commission and Scottish Forestry is covered in Table 8.5. Figures for Wales on a comparable basis are currently unavailable. Net expenditure on public forests by Forestry England/ Forestry and Land Scotland in 2018-19 totalled £27 million. This comprised £15 million in Scotland and £12 million in England. Recreation, conservation & heritage accounted for £70 million of the total expenditure in 2018-19, harvesting & haulage for £43 million and other expenditure on public forests for £111 million. Timber sales generated a total income of £131 million in 2018-19. Recreation, conservation & heritage accounted for a further £32 million and other income from public forests for £35 million. £ million 2015- 2016- 2017- 2018- 2014- 15 16 17 18 19 GB Harvesting & haulage 36.6 37.9 35.9 36.8 42.6 Recreation, etc4 70.2 67.8 70.9 72.8 70.2 Other 81.9 89.2 89.0 96.5 111.3 Timber -103.1 -99.1 -104.3 -111.3 -131.2 Recreation, etc4 -24.3 -24.8 -29.6 -32.1 -31.5 Other -25.1 -26.8 -27.7 -23.1 -34.7 Net expenditure 36.2 44.2 34.2 39.6 26.7 England Harvesting & haulage 9.8 10.6 10.6 11.3 14.0 Recreation, etc4 41.8 45.0 49.7 49.4 49.4 Other 24.5 29.2 31.3 32.9 38.3 Timber -37.3 -36.7 -38.9 -43.4 -53.2 Recreation, etc4 -18.3 -21.1 -26.2 -28.3 -27.8 Other -11.1 -9.3 -8.6 -5.8 -8.8 Net expenditure 9.4 17.7 17.9 16.1 11.9 Scotland Harvesting & haulage 26.8 27.3 25.3 25.5 28.6 Recreation, etc4 28.4 22.8 21.2 23.4 20.8 Other 57.4 60.0 57.7 63.6 73.0 Timber -65.8 -62.4 -65.4 -67.9 -78.0 Recreation, etc4 -6.0 -3.7 -3.4 -3.8 -3.7 Other -14.0 -17.5 -19.1 -17.3 -25.9 Net expenditure 26.8 26.5 16.3 23.5 14.8 Source: Forestry England, Forestry and Land Scotland Notes: 1. Expenditure by Forestry England and by Forestry and Land Scotland only. Excludes expenditure incurred by other departments. 2. Excludes notional cost of capital and any surplus/deficit on sale of properties. 3. Excludes gain on revaluation of biological assets and value of timber felled. 4. Recreation, etc includes conservation and heritage. ## 8.4 Other Government Expenditure On Forestry Table 8.4 provides information on other expenditure (excluding public forests) by the Forestry Commission and Scottish Forestry. It includes expenditure by National Offices in England and Scotland as well as expenditure on GB level functions. Figures for Wales on a comparable basis are not currently available. Expenditure on land that is owned or managed by Forestry England/ Forestry and Land Scotland is covered in Table 8.3. In addition to expenditure on public forests, the Forestry Commission/ Scottish Forestry spent a total of £97 million on other activities in 2018-19 (Table 8.4). £63 million was used by the national offices in England and Scotland for grants and partnership funding and a further £12 million for policy, regulation & administration in 2018-19. At a GB level, £22 million was used for international & GB support services and £12 million for research. £ million 2015- 2016- 2017- 2018- 2014- 15 16 17 18 19 GB Grants and partnership funding3 82.0 57.2 61.6 57.6 62.9 Policy, regulation & administration 11.9 13.1 12.2 11.9 12.1 Research - GB funded4 8.6 8.4 9.6 10.5 11.8 International & GB support services4 32.5 32.1 28.4 25.4 21.6 -20.3 -20.7 -16.1 -13.0 -11.3 Less recovery of support service costs from countries Total 114.7 90.1 95.7 92.4 97.1 England Grants and partnership funding3 37.4 24.8 24.0 13.8 8.3 Policy, regulation & administration5 2.0 1.8 2.2 1.9 0.7 Total 39.4 26.6 26.2 15.7 9.0 Scotland Grants and partnership funding3 44.6 32.4 37.6 43.8 54.6 Policy, regulation & administration5 9.9 11.3 10.0 10.0 11.4 Total 54.5 43.7 47.6 53.8 66.0 Source: Forestry Commission, Scottish Forestry Notes: 1. Forestry Commission/ Scottish Forestry expenditure only. Excludes expenditure incurred by other departments. 2. Excludes miscellaneous income. 3. EU co-financing not subtracted from grant expenditure. In England authority for the Rural Development Programme for England (RDPE) grant scheme rests with Defra. 4. The estimates for GB funded research exclude work by Forest Research funded by external organisations. The increase in "Research - GB funded" and corresponding decrease in "International & GB support services" from 2015-16 to 2016-17 largely reflect organisational change within the Forestry Commission, with the transfer of some functions into Forest Research in April 2016. 5. Country costs for "policy, regulation & administration" include shares of GB support service costs. ## 8.5 Grant Schemes Private sector woodland in Great Britain is supported by a range of grants for creating new woodland and managing existing woodland. The Woodland Grant Scheme (WGS) was introduced in 1988, at the same time as tax relief was phased out. In Scotland, WGS was replaced by the Scottish Forestry Grant Scheme (SFGS) in 2003, by Rural Development Contracts in 2006 and has now been replaced by the Forestry Grant Scheme. The English Woodland Grant Scheme (EWGS) was launched in July 2005 and has now been replaced by Countryside Stewardship. Better Woodlands for Wales (BWW) was launched in December 2005 and has now been replaced by Glastir (administered by the Welsh Government). Because of the differences between these schemes, it is increasingly difficult to provide comparable statistics across the three countries. The following tables provide information relating to planting and grants: - Table 1.14 for total areas of new planting and restocking; - Table 8.4 for expenditure by the Forestry Commission/ Scottish Forestry on grants and partnership funding; - Table 8.5 (below) for grant expenditure by the Forestry Commission (including grant expenditure managed by the Forestry Commission on behalf of Defra), by Scottish Forestry and by the Welsh Government. Table 8.5 presents information on grant money paid in 2009-10 to 2018-19. A total of £76.6 million was paid in grants in 2018-19, a 37% increase from the total for the previous year. At a country level, £50.2 million was paid in grants in Scotland in 2018-19 (an increase of 32% from the previous year), £20.5 million was paid in England (a 52% increase) and £5.9 million in Wales (an increase of 27%). £ million England1 Wales2 Scotland3 GB 2009-10 24.4 2.9 5.7 33.0 2010-11 28.7 3.8 18.9 51.4 2011-12 32.5 5.4 34.2 72.1 2012-13 32.8 5.0 32.3 70.1 2013-14 33.9 4.1 35.5 73.5 2014-15 32.4 1.8 39.2 73.4 2015-16 23.0 3.6 27.5 54.1 2016-17 23.8 3.3 30.5 57.5 2017-18 13.5 4.7 37.9 56.1 2018-19 20.5 5.9 50.2 76.6 Source: Forestry Commission, Scottish Forestry, Welsh Government Notes: 1. England includes grant scheme expenditure managed by the Forestry Commission on behalf of Defra. 2. Wales relates to grant paid by the Welsh Government. 3. Scotland includes grants paid under the Forestry Grant Scheme and legacy schemes (including Rural Development Contracts). The total grant money paid in Great Britain has fluctuated over recent years, with levels often dipping around the times that new grant schemes are introduced, followed by a sharp recovery. Source: Forestry Commission, Scottish Forestry, Welsh Government Notes: 1. England includes grant scheme expenditure managed by the Forestry Commission on behalf of Defra. 2. Wales relates to grant paid by the Welsh Government. 3. Scotland includes grants paid under the Forestry Grant Scheme and legacy schemes (including Rural Development Contracts). ## Chapter 9: International Forestry Introduction This chapter contains information about world forestry, presenting global figures by region alongside data for the UK and the EU. Topics covered include woodland area, carbon stocks, wood removals, production and apparent consumption of wood products and international trade in forest products. The data are produced by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO). Further information on the data sources and methodology used to compile the figures is provided in the Sources chapter. All of the statistics presented in this chapter have been previously released by the FAO. For further details on revisions, see the International Forestry section of the Sources chapter. Data for the European Union (EU) relate to all 28 current EU members, including the UK, for all of the years shown. Data for Europe cover 27 of the EU members (excluding Cyprus), the Russian Federation and a number of other European countries, including Norway, Switzerland, Serbia and Ukraine. A copy of all International Forestry tables can be accessed in spreadsheet format from the Data Downloads web page at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statistics/data-downloads/. The main findings are: - At around 13% forest cover in 2015, the UK is one of the least densely forested countries in the European Union. This compares with 38% for the EU as a whole and 31% worldwide. - The global forest area reduced by around 3.3 million hectares (0.1%) per year between 2010 and 2015. - Carbon stocks in forest living biomass have increased in both Europe and North & Central America between 2010 and 2015, but have decreased at a global level. - A total of 3.8 billion m3 underbark of wood was removed from global forests in 2017, of which around one half (50%) was for use as woodfuel and the remainder was industrial roundwood (for use by wood processors). - Global production of wood products in 2017 totalled 486 million m3 of sawnwood, 404 million m3 of wood-based panels and 414 million tonnes of paper & paperboard. - Europe consumed around one quarter (24%) of all sawnwood, around one fifth (20%) of the world's wood-based panels and around one fifth (22%) of all paper and paperboard in 2017. - The UK was the second largest net importer (imports less exports) of forest products in 2017, with net imports of US $7.6 billion. The largest net importer was China. ## 9.1 Forest Cover: International Comparisons The FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment (FRA) is a collation of forest data undertaken by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) at the global level every five years. The UK is one of the least densely forested countries in the European Union with around 13% of its total land area covered in forest in 2015 (Table 9.1, Figure 9.1). This compares with 38% for the EU as a whole and 31% worldwide. Total land area Country Forest area (million ha) (million ha) Forest as % of land area Europe United Kingdom 3 24 13 Denmark 1 4 14 Finland 22 30 73 France 17 55 31 Germany 11 35 33 Ireland 1 7 11 Italy 9 29 32 Spain 18 50 37 Sweden 28 41 68 Other EU 50 148 34 Total EU-281 161 424 38 Russian Federation 815 1 638 50 Total Europe2 1 015 2 214 46 Africa 624 2 987 21 Asia 593 3 118 19 North & Central America 751 2 134 35 Oceania 174 850 20 South America 842 1 747 48 World 3 999 13 049 31 Source: FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015. Notes: 1. Cyprus is included in EU-28 total but is part of FAO's Asia region. 2. The Europe region covers 27 EU countries (excluding Cyprus), the Russian Federation and other countries, including Norway, Switzerland, Serbia and Ukraine. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. Source: FAO. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## 9.2 Forest Area By Country Figure 9.2 shows the countries with the largest forest areas. Around one half (49%) of the total forest area of 3,999 million hectares in 2015 is located in four countries (the Russian Federation, Brazil, Canada and the USA). These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## 9.3 Annual Changes In Forest Area The global forest area has reduced from around 4,128 million hectares in 1990 to 3,999 million hectares in 2015. This represents a decrease of around 7.3 million hectares (0.2%) per year between 1990 and 2000, of around 4.0 million hectares (0.1%) per year between 2000 and 2010 and of around 3.3 million hectares (0.1%) per year between 2010 and 2015 (Table 9.2). The forest area has reduced in most regions since 1990, except for Europe (where the area increased in each time period) and Asia (where the area reduced between 1990 and 2000 but has increased by more between 2000 and 2015). percentage change in forest area Region 1990-2000 2000-2010 2010-2015 Europe UK 0.6 0.3 0.5 EU-281 0.5 0.3 0.2 Total Europe 0.1 0.1 0.0 Africa -0.5 -0.5 -0.4 Asia 0.0 0.4 0.1 North and Central America -0.1 0.0 0.0 Oceania 0.0 -0.3 0.2 South America -0.4 -0.4 -0.2 World -0.2 -0.1 -0.1 Source: FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015. Notes: 1. Cyprus is included in EU-28 total but is part of FAO's Asia region. 2. UK figures for 2015 are 2013-based estimates. Revised estimates (from Chapter 1) suggest that Table 9.2 slightly under-estimates the change in forest area in the UK in the most recent time period. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. Between 2010 and 2015, the largest decrease in forest area was in Brazil (1.0 million hectares per year on average) and the largest increase was in China (1.5 million hectares per year on average) (Figure 9.3). Source: FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015. Notes: 1. Countries with changes of at least 0.3 million hectares per year only. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## 9.4 Forest Carbon Stocks Carbon stocks in forest living biomass have increased in Europe and North & Central America between 2010 and 2015, but have decreased at a global level, reflecting continuing trends since 1990 (Table 9.3). The overall decrease has mainly been driven by declines in South America and Africa, where forest areas have decreased. Carbon stocks in biomass also declined slightly in Asia, where carbon sequestered in new plantations is not yet able to balance out carbon losses from areas of deforestation. giga tonnes of carbon Region 1990 2000 2005 2010 2015 Europe 41.4 42.5 43.2 44.4 45.5 Africa 66.5 63.5 62.1 60.8 59.7 Asia 38.1 37.7 37.2 36.8 36.3 North and Central America 33.9 34.9 35.3 35.6 35.9 Oceania 16.1 15.9 15.9 15.9 15.7 South America 111.5 107.8 105.5 104.0 103.1 World 307.6 302.3 299.2 297.6 296.2 Source: FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015. Notes: 1. A giga tonne is a thousand million tonnes (109 tonnes). These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. Source: FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## 9.5 Wood Removals A total of 3.8 billion m3 underbark of wood was removed from global forests in 2017, of which around one half (50%) was for use as woodfuel and the remainder was industrial roundwood (for use by wood processors) (Table 9.4). North & Central America and Europe together accounted for around three fifths (59%) of all industrial roundwood removals in 2017. Globally, removals of industrial roundwood increased by 3% between 2015 and 2017, resulting from increases in all regions. Three quarters (74%) of woodfuel removals in 2017 took place in Asia and Africa. Globally, removals of woodfuel increased by 2% between 2015 and 2017. million m3 underbark Region 1990 2000 2010 2015 2017 Industrial roundwood Europe UK 6 8 8 9 9 EU-281 317 344 338 351 362 Total Europe 517 521 531 579 599 Africa 61 71 72 75 74 Asia 268 269 370 389 405 North & Central America 595 632 485 516 523 Oceania 34 47 58 63 70 South America 110 147 198 217 231 World 1 585 1 688 1 713 1 840 1 903 Woodfuel Europe UK 0 0 1 2 2 EU-281 68 79 98 109 119 Total Europe 138 103 136 157 170 Africa 445 551 643 679 693 Asia 897 808 764 735 725 North & Central America 162 129 129 136 153 Oceania 9 13 11 10 10 South America 162 185 162 171 169 World 1 814 1 789 1 845 1 889 1 920 Total roundwood Europe UK 6 8 10 11 11 EU-281 385 423 435 460 481 Total Europe 655 624 667 736 769 Africa 506 623 715 754 767 Asia 1 166 1 077 1 134 1 125 1 130 North & Central America 757 761 613 652 676 Oceania 43 60 68 73 80 South America 272 332 359 388 400 World 3 399 3 477 3 557 3 729 3 823 Source: FAO. Notes: 1. Cyprus is included in EU-28 total but is part of FAO's Asia region. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## 9.6 Production Of Wood Products Global production of wood products in 2017 totalled 486 million m3 of sawnwood, 404 million m3 of woodbased panels and 414 million tonnes of paper & paperboard (Table 9.5). Europe produced around one third (34%) of all sawnwood in 2017 (mainly in EU countries), with around one quarter (28%) in Asia and a further quarter (27%) produced in North & Central America. Overall, sawnwood production increased by 7% between 2015 and 2017, driven by increases in most regions. Wood-based panels were more commonly produced in Asia, accounting for around three fifths (60%) of global production in 2017. Around one fifth (22%) were produced in Europe (mainly EU countries) and 12% in North & Central America. At a global level, wood-based panel production increased by 4% between 2015 and 2017, driven by increases in all regions. Asia also accounted for almost one half (48%) of paper and paperboard production in 2017, with around one quarter (26%) in Europe and a further 21% in North & Central America. At a global level, paper and paperboard production increased by 2% between 2015 and 2017. | Region | 1990 2000 2010 2015 2017 | |------------------------------|-----------------------------| | Sawnwood (million m | | | 3 | | | ) | | | Europe | | | UK | 2 | | EU-281 | 82 | | Total Europe | 149 | | Africa | 8 | | Asia | 105 | | North and Central America | 129 | | Oceania | 6 | | South America | 22 | | World | 419 | | Wood-based panels (million m | | | 3 | | | ) | | | Europe | | | UK | 2 | | EU-281 | 36 | | Total Europe | 48 | | Africa | 2 | | Asia | 27 | | North and Central America | 44 | | Oceania | 2 | | South America | 4 | | World | 126 | | Paper & paperboard (million | | | tonnes) | | | | | | Europe | | | UK | 5 | | EU-281 | 63 | | Total Europe | 74 | Africa 3 4 4 4 3 Asia 57 95 170 191 197 North and Central America 92 111 94 89 88 Oceania 3 4 4 4 4 South America 8 11 15 15 16 World 235 325 392 406 414 Source: FAO. Notes: 1. Cyprus is included in EU-28 total but is part of FAO's Asia region. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## 9.7 Apparent Consumption Of Wood Products Apparent consumption (defined as production + imports - exports) of wood products around the world totalled 481 million m3 sawnwood, 398 million m3 wood-based panels and 413 million tonnes of paper and paperboard in 2017 (Table 9.6). Two fifths (40%) of all sawnwood in 2017 was consumed in Asia and around one quarter each in North & Central America (26%) and in Europe (24%). Reflecting the increased production of sawnwood (see Table 9.5), apparent consumption of sawnwood increased by 8% overall between 2015 and 2017. This was driven by increases in apparent consumption in most regions. Asia consumed around three fifths (59%) of the world's wood-based panels in 2017, around one fifth (20%) was consumed in Europe and 15% in North & Central America. Apparent consumption of wood-based panels worldwide increased by 4% between 2015 and 2017, largely resulting from increased demand in Europe. One half (50%) of all paper and paperboard in 2017 was consumed in Asia, around one fifth (22%) in Europe and a further one fifth (21%) in North & Central America. At a global level, apparent consumption of paper and paperboard increased by 3% between 2015 and 2017. Region 1990 2000 2010 2015 2017 Sawnwood (million m3) Europe UK 13 10 9 10 11 EU-281 96 100 90 89 95 Total Europe 158 121 110 107 114 Africa 10 10 17 19 17 Asia 112 78 116 169 192 North and Central America 119 143 95 119 126 Oceania 6 8 8 8 9 South America 20 27 26 25 24 World 426 387 372 447 481 Wood-based panels (million m3) Europe UK 5 6 6 6 6 EU-281 40 51 53 56 63 Total Europe 52 57 67 73 81 Africa 1 2 3 4 5 Asia 25 50 139 233 237 North and Central America 44 64 48 56 60 Oceania 2 2 3 3 3 South America 3 6 12 14 13 World 127 181 272 382 398 Paper & paperboard (million tonnes) Europe UK 9 12 11 9 9 EU-281 62 84 85 80 81 Total Europe 71 90 95 91 92 Africa 4 5 7 8 8 Asia 62 103 178 197 206 North and Central America 88 110 91 86 87 Oceania 3 5 5 4 4 South America 8 12 16 16 16 World 236 325 391 403 413 Source: FAO. Notes: 1. Cyprus is included in EU-28 total but is part of FAO's Asia region. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. ## 9.8 World Trade In Forest Products Figures 9.6 and 9.7 show the largest net importers and exporters (by value) of forest products in 2017. This covers trade in roundwood, sawnwood, woodbased panels, wood pulp and paper and paperboard, but excludes trade in secondary processed wood (e.g. furniture made from wood). Values are expressed in US dollars (the units reported in the data published by FAO). The UK was the second largest net importer (imports less exports) of forest products in 2017, with net imports of US $7.6 billion (Figure 9.6). The largest net importer in 2017 was China (US $36.6 billion) and Japan was the third largest net importer (US $7.1 billion). Source: FAO Notes: 1. Excludes trade in secondary wood products. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter. The largest net exporters (exports less imports) of forest products in 2017 were Canada (with net exports valued at US $18.5 billion), Finland (US $11.4 billion) and Sweden (US $11.0 billion) (Figure 9.7). Source: FAO Notes: 1. Excludes trade in secondary wood products. These figures are outside the scope of National Statistics. For further information see the Sources chapter.

en

0708-pdf

## Keyland Developments Ltd Bartin Farmhouse Structural Walkover Survey February 2017 ## | JOB NUMBER: | SH11840 | |----------------|------------| | REPORT NUMBER: | 4a | ## Keyland Developments Ltd Bartin Farmhouse Structural Walkover Survey This report has been prepared by Wardell Armstrong LLP with all reasonable skill, care and diligence, within the terms of the Contract with the Client. The report is confidential to the Client and Wardell Armstrong LLP accept no responsibility of whatever nature to third parties to whom this report may be made known. No part of this document may be reproduced without the prior written approval of Wardell Armstrong LLP. ENERGY AND CLIMATE CHANGE ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY INFRASTRUCTURE AND UTILITIES LAND AND PROPERTY MINING AND MINERAL PROCESSING MINERAL ESTATES AND QUARRYING WASTE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Wardell Armstrong is the trading name of Wardell Armstrong LLP, Registered in England No. OC307138. ## 1 Structural Walkover Survey - Bartin, (Includes Drainage And Access) 1.1 Introduction 1.1.1 Keyland Developments Ltd are proposing to redevelop the farm buildings known as Bartin, located on Nether Lane, Bradshaw, near Bilberry Reservoir, which is close to the village of Holme in West Yorkshire. Wardell Armstrong were instructed to survey the buildings, which comprise of an old farm house, barn and small outbuilding, reporting on the form of construction and present condition. 1.1.2 The walkover survey was undertaken on 5th July 2016 by one of Wardell Armstrong's Associate Directors. 1.1.3 In the descriptions which follow, the terms "north", "south", "west" and "east" are used, with the entrance to the farm house facing south and the entrance to the barn facing east. 1.1.4 At the time of the site visit, the weather was dry, visibility was good there was full access to the area around the buildings. 1.1.5 Photographs from the site visit are provided in Appendix A. ## 1.2 Description 1.2.1 There are two buildings that make up the property known as Bartin, a two storey farm house and an adjacent barn. Both are stone built with a pitched, stone covered roof. 1.2.2 The external walls appear to be solid stone, approximately 9" thick. 1.2.3 The window and door openings in all elevations have stone lintels and stone window sills. The majority of the ground floor windows have been blocked up with stonework in the past. Neither building has downpipes. 1.2.4 The farm house has localised brick wall thickening internally at lower levels and some internal walls remain. The chimney stack of the farm house is located on the western elevation 1.2.5 The roof structure of the farm house was not visible but is thought to be similar to the barn roof. The barn roof is of timber truss construction with rafters and purlins supporting the roofing stone. The timber structure is supported by the stone walls and is built-in to each gable end. 1.2.6 Both buildings have earth/broken stone floors. The inside of the house is in a bad state of repair and is not currently habitable. ## 1.3 Observations General 1.3.1 All walls are showing signs of movement to a greater or lesser extent. 1.3.2 Door frames were in poor condition. ## Farm House 1.3.3 Rear (north) elevation showing minor signs of movement with no significant defects. 1.3.4 Eastern Gable Wall shows significant bowing and is restrained at first floor level. At ground floor level the wall bows outwards and above the first floor level the wall is bowing inwards. Significant movement is indicated by cracks appearing at eaves level 1.3.5 Front (south) elevation showing significant signs of movement around first floor windows. Sections of the upper wall now protrude significantly. 1.3.6 Western Gable Wall (including chimney stack) is listing away from the building and significant cracks are evident at the joints at eaves level. The wall is restrained at first floor level. 1.3.7 The roof was not accessible or visible from the inside but from external observations the roof is sagging significantly and showing signs of failure. ## Outbuilding 1.3.8 The rear wall is partially collapsed and the roof has become separated from the farm house. 1.3.9 Exposed roof timbers have rotted away. 1.3.10 The western wall has a partially repaired hole at ground level. ## Barn 1.3.11 Rear (west) elevation showing minor signs of movement with no significant defects. 1.3.12 Northern Gable Wall showing minor signs of movement with no significant defects. 1.3.13 Front (east) elevation showing minor signs of movement with no significant defects. 1.3.14 Southern Gable Wall showing minor signs of movement with no significant defects. 1.3.15 Internally localised repairs are required to the walls 1.3.16 Roof timbers are showing significant signs of woodworm infestation and rot to most timbers. ## 1.4 Recommendations For Remedial Works 1.4.1 Appendix B contains a sketch drawing showing the following recommendations. 1.4.2 House Rear (north) Wall - underpin to prevent further movement 1.4.3 House Eastern Gable Wall - fully dismantle and rebuild on new foundations 1.4.4 House Front (south) Wall - underpin to prevent further movement; dismantle to first floor level and rebuild. 1.4.5 House Western Gable Wall - underpin to prevent further movement; dismantle to first floor level and rebuild. 1.4.6 House Roof -new roof timbers required. 1.4.7 Outbuilding rear wall - to be dismantled and rebuilt on new footings. 1.4.8 Outbuilding western elevation - to be underpinned and repaired locally 1.4.9 Outbuilding Roof - requires new timbers. 1.4.10 Barn Walls - all walls require underpinning to prevent further movement 1.4.11 Barn Roof - requires new timbers 1.4.12 Barn Internally - localised repairs required to walls. ## 1.5 Observations Based On Proposed Development 1.5.1 It is understood that there are plans to refurbish the farm house and convert the barn into accommodation, linking the two buildings to provide a single dwelling. 1.5.2 As regards the structural repairs to the house, the shell of the building will be suitable for refurbishment subject to the necessary requirements and approvals from the relevant authorities and building control. 1.5.3 The minor repairs, underpinning and new roof timbers would provide a structurally stable shell that would facilitate occupation. A first floor could be added by supporting the new floor with a structural frame off new foundations. 1.5.4 Any new link buildings would need to be self-supporting. 1.5.5 Ground investigation would be required to allow foundation calculations to be undertaken. It will be necessary to carry out calculations to confirm the structural adequacy of any alterations to the existing buildings once further scheme proposals are available. This would for example include the sizing of steelwork for any new openings. ## 2. Access Survey 2.1 An overall plan of the area is shown on drawing SH11840-SD-007 provided in Appendix B. There are two possible routes to access the proposed development from existing junctions. There is a junction to the north where Springs Road meets the main A635, and a junction to the east where White Walls Lane meets Acres Lane. ## Existing Access Via Springs Road 2.2 Springs Road is an old cart track. The original York Stone Slabs still cover most of the track and are heavily rutted. Where the slabs are missing and between the slabs the earth has eroded significantly. This track is only currently passible by farm vehicles. 2.3 The junction is oblique to the A635 and whilst vehicles heading west on the main road would be able to leave safely, vehicles heading east would struggle to make the turn in one movement. 2.4 Vehicles leaving Springs Road have no visibility to the west and limited visibility to the east. 2.5 The A635 is a fast road with a 60 mph speed limit. 2.6 Springs road is a gated bridleway. 2.7 Significant surface water drains over the surface of the track. 2.8 This route does not provide viable access and should be discounted. ## Existing Access Via White Walls Lane 2.9 White Walls Lane, which becomes Shay Lane and then Nether Lane is gated farm track and bridleway surfaced with unbound stone. 2.10 In relatively good repair but showing signs of water damage and with significant ponding, the track is passible by 4x4 off-road vehicles and vans. 2.11 There is some evidence of surface water drainage works which has had some success, however in other areas significant degradation has taken place. The damage is however readily repairable using stone or road plainings. Simple regular maintenance of the surface would be sufficient to maintain access. 2.12 Visibility Splays are shown on drawing SH11840-SD-006, provided in Appendix B 2.13 With an 'x' distance of 2.4m, visibility at the junction with Acres Lane extends 127m to the southeast towards the junction with Green Gate Road. The junction is visible and any approaching vehicles would be leaving the junction having turned into Acres Lane at a speed lower than 30 mph. Acres Lane serves only two residential properties and quickly narrows to a width of 3.5m. approach speeds would therefore be low, and a 'y' distance of 127m should be adequate. 2.14 With an 'x' distance of 2.4m, visibility at the junction with Acres Lane extends 92m to the northwest along Acres Lane to the next bend in the road. The bend is fully visible. This section of Acres Lane varies in width from 3.5 to 4.4m with no road markings. Vehicles traveling in both directions would be straddling the centre of the road and so would be proceeding at reduced speeds with caution. Providing access for only two existing residential properties and with no recreational parking, Acres Lane receives only a low volume of traffic. Whilst the visibility does not meet the minimum standards, given the location and mitigating factors, we consider that the available visibility should be deemed adequate. 2.15 This proposed route is narrow in places but provides opportunity for many passing points. Possible passing point locations are shown on drawing SH11840-SD-006, provided in Appendix B. 2.16 With some minor repair, drainage works and regular maintenance White Walls Lane could provide a suitable access. ## 3. Domestic Drainage Survey 3.1 There are no surface water, foul or combined drains serving the property. 3.2 A survey of the nearby Goodbent Lodge has confirmed that there are no surface water, foul or combined drains in the vicinity of the site. There was no evidence of any septic tank or treatment system for domestic foul sewage. A drainage field is assumed to be the means of disposal. Existing surface water runoff is allowed to run down the moorland, away from the property. 3.3 There are no existing positive drainage connections from either soil or vent pipes from either the farm house or barn. 3.4 We propose to maintain the existing surface water regime of overland runoff. 3.5 We propose a standalone solution for foul water collection. Small domestic sewage treatment plants for up to 6 people are available as an 'off the shelf' solution. ## 4. Services 4.1 There are no existing services to the site or to the nearby Goodbent Lodge. 4.2 Service provision will be small in scale using standalone techniques that are in-keeping with the location. ## Appendices BARTIN HOUSE North-western Gable wall 2.034m 1.905m 0.279m 1.884m 4.00s 5.800m TEL 01823 703100 EDINBURGH TEL 0131 555 3311 LONDON TEL 020 7287 2872 LONDON TEL 020 7287 2872 TAUNTON TEL 01823 703100 Structural Walkover Survey

en

1874-pdf

## A Joint 'Connected Customers' Project With North Warwickshire Borough Council And Nuneaton And Bedworth Borough Council The Issue And Context North Warwickshire Borough Council (NWBC) and Nuneaton and Bedworth Borough Council (NBBC) have been working together for a number of years on website design and content to reduce duplication and help share cost, ideas and skills. The two councils also use the same customer relationship management (CRM) system and work together on wider customer access initiatives as part of the Warwickshire Direct Partnership. In common with other local authorities these two councils are aiming to minimise costs and improve services by progressing towards a more efficient and customer focused approach. For example, NWBC's customer access strategy revolves around the following vision: 'To provide efficient, excellent access to high-quality services, driven by the needs of our customers.' This vision is supported by a series of aims and commitments that will deliver real, practical improvements, which will be recognisable to customers, staff and partner organisations as customer-focused, accessible and effective. Over recent years there has been a steady growth in the number of customers accessing the councils' websites. However, keeping abreast of innovations is a continual challenge. For example, in the last 12 months both councils have seen huge growth in the numbers of people using their websites and online services from smartphones and tablets (a shift of 5.5 per cent from desktop computers to mobiles devices), and the existing website was not designed with this in mind. Consequently, the councils applied to the Digital Experts Programme for funding to enable them to launch a new, jointly hosted web site that was mobile friendly and had a responsive design. The online forms utilised by the councils would also be reviewed and streamlined and other services, such as webchat, would be investigated. ## The Project Objectives And Targets The content management system (Jadu), which is used by both councils, is now available in a version which makes it easy to use regardless of the device. The system is based on a concept known as 'responsive design' which allows the content to be displayed in a dynamic order depending on the type of device used to access the content. Both councils are now committed to implementing this solution. In addition, the funding provided through the Digital Experts programme would allow the council to investigate and develop additional features which both councils regard as essential to their work to: - Increase online accessibility to services - Support the emerging 'connected customer' and - Reach out and support those customers not yet engaged with the digital world. It would also be used to improve dialogue with customers and enable the councils to develop approaches that involve their customers and communities in service and usability testing so that any solutions better meets their needs. A further outcome would be methodologies to help the councils better evaluate the success of the move online. The councils planned to use the funding to help achieve the following specific objectives: ## Customer Engagement And Service Impact - Feedback and improvement - to commission development to enable customers to easily comment on the online services they receive and enable staff to enter into dialogues to improve services and deliver the service customers expect. - Engagement - to continue investigating web chat and to pilot its use by customer services staff with people visiting the websites, as a way of providing 'right first time' services and learning from popular customer contact practices in the private sector. - Channel shift - to work on enhancing and expanding the councils' online promotion campaign which aims to increase awareness of online services and encourage customers to change behaviours and channel shift. - Customer account - to investigate and if possible commission integration between the councils' CMS and CRM so that customers have a single way of signing on and either registering interest in a service or viewing their previous service interactions. ## Information Management - Bring in expertise to help to explore the level of commonality between the information the two councils publish on their websites and between the services delivered. - Resource a feasibility study into the development of common information. If possible manage a pilot project in a service area to assess any approach identified, recognising that the two councils provide very similar services, but that there are differences in approach, service levels and costs. ## Democracy - Commission development to enable the councils to improve the quality of the information held about council decisions and councillors. - Bring in expertise to encourage staff and councillors to develop the skills needed and then to engage with people using social media. - Investigate and pilot different social media to enable better voice and video interaction. The councils envisaged this work would link to other projects that they are collaborating on including the provision of a mobile IT 'bus', provision of services from community hubs and a commitment to the Get Online campaign and active 'Learn my Way' courses. In this way the councils aimed to: - Save £9,000 per annum in each council through joint hosting - Increase the number of people who choose to self-serve, through improved mobile access, by 10 per cent within the first 12 months of going live - Increase website traffic via mobile devices by 15 per cent - Increase visitors' satisfaction with the website and self-service. This will be measured through a decrease in negative comments or in service failures by 25 per cent and by increasing the average page rating over the period between golive and 12 months into operation - Increase the number of payments made via the website (both by direct debit and by card payment) by 5 per cent. - Implement web chat. ## The Approach And Progress To Date The web sites were redesigned, using Jadu, to provide a cleaner, simpler image utilising the responsive design technology. For example, the original front page of North Warwickshire's website, which had been designed with the functionality of the desktop in mind, looked like: Looking at best practice from other sites and guidance from the Government Digital Service the redesigned page looks like: ## Nbbc Updated Their Site In The Same Way. The improved accessibility and image of the website was also enhanced by improved content that was re-written according to newly developed guidelines so that it was more 'mobile-friendly'. Extracts from these guidelines are available via the LGA website. The next step taken by the councils involved the redesign of their online forms (or e-forms) to make the site simpler to use. For example, a new online form was developed to allow customers to report fly tipping: The new forms also had additional features added, for example the inclusion of a map to locate the fly tipping: These new forms were developed in conjunction with front-line users via a series of workshops that not only secured buy-in from them but also resulted in improved processes. For example, analysis of the forms used for missed bins, replacement bins and new bins in NBBC resulted in a streamlined service with improved reporting that was not only simpler and easier for the customer to use but also delivered a real cost saving for the waste management service. Web chat has also been introduced on a trial basis with NWBC offering the option from 10.00 am to 12.00 noon and from 2.00 pm to 4.00 pm each day. ## The Outcome - Successes And Challenges Financial Benefits This project has delivered an annual saving of **£45,000** for Nuneaton and Bedworth and £28,500 for North Warwickshire. These figures are calculated as follows: ## Nbbc  The decision to jointly host the web site has delivered a direct saving of **£9,000** per annum.  Accurate figures for web visits do not exist for the old system so a direct comparison cannot be made but the use of web forms is indicative and these have grown by 67 per cent (from 7364 to 12318) in the nine months since the new system was introduced. There is also a corresponding drop in phone and face-to-face transactions that was measured.  The number of phone calls has fallen by 1643 over the last year as a result of customers using the website to self-serve. Using the standard SOCITM channel cost, of £2.83 per phone call, this generates a saving of **£4,650** per annum.  The number of face-to-face transactions has fallen by 2450 over the year and, again using the SOCITM channel cost of £8.62 per visit; this generates a saving of £21,119 per annum.  The streamlining of the waste management process for dealing with missed bins etc. has resulted in a post being deleted at a saving of at least **£10,000** per annum. ## Nwbc  The decision to jointly host the web site has delivered a direct saving of **£9,000** per annum.  The number of phone calls to the contact centre has fallen by 3432 over a comparable six-month period before and after the launch of the new website. Extrapolating this to a full year and applying the standard SOCITM channel cost of £2.83 per phone call, this generates a saving of approximately **£19,500** per annum.  This calculation reflects a very real change that has seen a staff reduction of 1.5 FTE in the contact centre over the year. ## Non-Financial Benefits The partnership between the two councils worked well because the councils are relatively similar (i.e. two small to medium sized borough councils) and the skill sets that they contributed were complementary rather than competitive. The project has strengthened this relationship. The project has resulted in better services and happier customers and staff and has received comments such as: This type of success encourages further take-up of online services and enhances the councils' reputations and supports further work to improve and add services online. ## Lessons Learnt During this project a number of lessons were learnt:  Don't be afraid to plagiarise. There are plenty of examples, experience and expertise in other councils and this should be utilised wherever possible - there is no need to re-invent everything locally. Copy the best.  Involve staff in a range of roles, particularly those on the frontline early and often in order to get buy-in and ownership.  There may be problems getting timely buy-in from third-party suppliers when there is no financial benefit to them, so it is important that they are involved early in the process and managed throughout the project.  The councils should have done more benchmarking before the start of the project so that benefits could be measured and reported more easily to help secure ongoing investment in other work.  A 'big bang' isn't always necessary and there are benefits to a more careful, 'agile' and pragmatic approach.  Moving customers to self-service using online facilities can be made more difficult if you provide a good, responsive telephone and face-to-face service therefore, you need to actively promote the online services. ## Next Steps This project is considered, by both councils, to be a great success but is only one step in an ongoing journey and there are many further developments either planned or being evaluated. These include:  The development of customer profiles which will include customer accounts and allow customers to monitor the status of an order (e.g. when will my new bin be delivered?) and to pre-load online forms.  The generation of the next customer access strategy (the current version runs to 2017) which will focus on the customer and the use of social media channels.  Developments to allow more agile working by members of staff - so that systems can be accessed and updated from across the boroughs and do not fail in areas where the signal is patchy or non-existent.  The development of more sophisticated and interactive links between the website, the CRM and back-office systems.  It is expected that the use of webchat will grow. However, the current experience indicates that the queries being raised by customers tend to be quite complicated and can result from a failure to resolve an issue online. Therefore the councils aim to gather the learning from these interactions in order to simplify processes so that more customers can self-serve via the website. In addition to these future developments, the website must also keep up with changing requirements as and when they occur. For example, in response to a decision to charge for replacement bins. ## Further Information For further information on this project please contact: Petar Balac Business Improvement Nuneaton and Bedworth Borough Council Email: petar.balac@nuneatonandbedworth.gov.uk Phone: 024 7637 6309 Town Hall Coton Road Nuneaton CV11 5AA or Linda Bird Assistant Director (Corporate Services) North Warwickshire Borough Council Email: lindabird@northwarks.gov.uk Council House South Street Atherstone Warwickshire CV9 1DE

en

0423-pdf

Disclosure ref: 68 Sent: 23rd December 2019 ## Freedom Of Information Act 2000 Request Information Regarding The Charges And Convictions For The Offence Gross Negligence Manslaughter Request 1. Please provide the number of charges and convictions brought for the offence of Gross Negligence Manslaughter for work related health and safety related accidents between 1st November 2017 - 30th September 2018. - Please provide the answers for the relevant charges and convictions in a spreadsheet with the columns including [charge] [issue date of charge] [conviction] [date of conviction], alongside total number of charges and total number of convictions. 2. Please provide the number of charges and convictions brought for the offence of Gross Negligence Manslaughter for work related health and safety related accidents between 1st November 2018 to 30th September 2019. - Please provide the answers for the relevant charges and convictions in a spreadsheet with the columns including [charge] [issue date of charge] [conviction] [date of conviction], alongside total number of charges and total number of convictions. 3. Please provide the details of the length of custodial sentences (including suspended sentences) and details of fines imposed on individuals for those convicted of Gross Negligence Manslaughter for work related health and safety offences 1st November 2018 - 30th September 2019. - For the relevant custodial sentences, please provide information on reason for each custodial sentence and length, and details of the fine issued. In relation to the original response on 8th October 2019 (where we were directed to following web page: https://www.cps.gov.uk/publication/freedom-information-releases-2019), we note that you have set out that charges for Gross Negligence Manslaughter (GNM) and H&S have been issued against individuals and companies. However we require detail of convictions for GNM only and the levels of sentences and fines for those convictions. Crown Prosecution Service, Information Management Unit, Floor 8, 102 Petty France, London SW1H 9AJ United Kingdom www.cps.gov.uk We also note that some entries are misleading; for example, Cheshire Gates and Automation was charged with GNM but convicted of corporate manslaughter (with no individual charges). Lion Steel and Cotswolds Geotechnical were both convicted of corporate manslaughter with no individual offences against individual directors, hence our request for clarification on these and others which may require checking. Response The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) holds data regarding charges brought during the specified timescales in points one and two, in respect of the offences described. This data is shown in the table attached, and should be read in conjunction with the caveats appended to it. In accordance with the data held, no further information is held in relation to question three. Information Management Unit 020 3357 0788 IMU@cps.gov.uk

en

4790-pdf

## Appendix 1 - Activities And Amenities | Location | Activity | |-------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------| | Wales-wide | | | Recreation and | | | access opportunities | | | http://naturalresources.wales/out-and- | | | about/places-to-go/?lang=en | | | NRW offer a wide variety of recreation and access | | | opportunities on the land that we manage, from quiet | | | riverside walks through to adrenaline fueled mountain | | | biking routes with everything in between. Many of these | | | woodlands and National Nature Reserves are close to | | | where people live and work and are ideal locations for | | | introducing people to outdoor activity and the environment. | | | | | | www.walescoastpath.gov.uk | | | | | | Wales Coastal Path | The Wales Coast Path has been developed by the Welsh | | Government in partnership with Natural Resources Wales, | | | sixteen local authorities and two National Parks. It | | | provides 870 miles of continuous way marked walking | | | around the whole coast of Wales. There are stretches of | | | the path suitable for a range of walking abilities and some | | | are suitable for wheelchair users. | | | | | | Come Outside! | The Come Outside! Programme provides a catalyst for | | bringing together the outdoor sector with organisations | | | who work with those experiencing deprivation or | | | disadvantage. These are often the people who have the | | | most to gain from positive outdoor experiences, in terms of | | | health and wellbeing benefits. The Programme is currently | | | operating within twelve Communities First cluster areas in | | | North and South Wales. | | | Come Outside! Regional Co-ordinators | | | : | | | Kate McCabe - Swansea, Cardiff, Barry | | | Ian Thomas - Merthyr Tydfil, Rhondda Fach | | | RCT, Newport, Caerphilly, Torfaen | | | Nia Williams - Gwynedd, Rhyl | | | Doug Don - Wrexham | | | Adell Bridges - South Wales multi-activity | | | events | | | comeoutside@naturalresourceswales.gov.uk | | | | | | Flood Awareness | | | Wales | | | The Flood Awareness Wales Programme aims to increase | | | community resilience and recovery to flooding, which | | | includes social and emotional impacts. The programme | | | targets geographical high flood risk areas across Wales. | | | Delivery is focused upon working collaboratively with | | | Flood Awareness Wales - Project Manager | | | amanda.paton@cyfoethnaturiolcymru.gov.uk | | | | | | Flood Awareness Wales email account; | | | FAW generic email account | | communities and other professional partners to develop and test community plans, which are locally owned and supported by Volunteer Flood Wardens. Involvement in these plans has increased social capital, increased local awareness of assets available and in some cases resulted in establishment of food co-ops, allotment groups and other local support initiatives. Signing up to be a volunteer has also demonstrated numerous benefits to individual wellbeing and local community resilience (confidence, sense of worth and purpose). Community food growing on NRW estate NRW works in partnership with the Community Land Advisory Service and the Federation of City Farms & Community Gardens to enable community food growing on appropriate areas of the NRW estate. South East Wales Methyr Tydfil Cynefin Programme Cynefin Place Co-ordinators have been developing ways to help improve the integration of support and services in communities, and the empowerment and involvement of those communities in developing local assets and building local resilience. They focus on helping deliver goals identified by the communities in which they are working, and on helping existing programmes and services deliver more effectively to those communities. Cynefin was able to act as a facilitating resource to bring together key individuals from the health sector, voluntary organisations, activity providers and landowners to look at ways of using existing resources in a more co-ordinated way in order to unlock the potential wellbeing benefits the natural environment could deliver. Llanwonno Woodland development Llanwonno is a Priority Woodland, areas of the Welsh Government Woodland Estate identified as having the greatest potential to drive economic and social improvement in their local communities. The key aim of this Facebook page (for volunteer wardens) Flood Awareness Wales Facebook link Helen Howells Communities & Regeneration helen.howells@cyfoethnaturiolcymru.gov.uk Norma Greene Cynefin Co-ordinator for Merthyr norma.greene@cyfoethnaturiolcymru.gov.uk Gareth Roberts NRW Local Area Manager gareth.roberts@cyfoethnaturiolcymru.gov.uk project is to invest in an important but often neglected NRW asset to encourage greater use and enjoyment. Over a quarter of local residents surveyed in 2011 had never visited Llanwonno. Our aim is that through investment, a new Recreation & Access Plan and by working with the community, we can help to kick start greater use and enjoyment of the area. Welcome to Our Woods (Cwm Saerbren) Jonathan Price NRW Community Ranger jonathan.price@cyfoethnaturiolcymru.gov.uk Welcome to Our Woods is a community-led project developing and delivering a vision for Cwm Saerbren, a Priority Woodland, based on improving health, increasing engagement and generating opportunities for a sustainable local economy. Helen Fletcher NRW Communities & Regeneration helen.fletcher@cyfoethnaturiolcymru.gov.uk Space Saviours A Big Lottery-funded partnership project, working with four Registered Social Landlords across SE Wales. The aim is to work with tenants to create and/or improve outdoor green space for health and other benefits. Garwnant Visitor Centre garwnant@cyfoethnaturiolcymru.gov.uk Garwnant visitor centre is situated at the southern gateway to the Brecon Beacons National Park. With both walking and bike trails, a play area and an award-winning restaurant, this site provides facilities to meet a wide range of needs Newport Wetlands National Nature Reserve Newport Wetlands National Nature Reserve lies south east of Newport on the Severn Estuary. Home to numerous species of birds and insects, the site offers a network of paths across reed beds and saltmarshes which are suitable for wheelchair users and buggies. Facilities include an Environmental Education and Visitor Centre (which is run by the RSPB), coffee shop, toilets and a car park. Let's Go We are working with the WLGA National Exercise Referral Scheme, Cwm Taf Health Board, Sport Wales, Welsh Government, Methyr and RCT Local Authorities to Norma Greene Cynefin Co-ordinator for Merthyr norma.greene@cyfoethnaturiolcymru.gov.uk Helen Fletcher NRW Communities & Regeneration helen.fletcher@cyfoethnaturiolcymru.gov.uk mainstream GP referral to the outdoors for patients who would benefit from physical activity prescription in the Cwm Taf Health Board Area. This project provides an opportunity to promote the provision and improvement of access to open spaces and outdoor recreation; collect evidence of the practical experience of instigating GP outdoor referral in Cwm Taf; tackle health inequalities and deliver improvements to local greenspaces and environmental quality. The project will start in September/October 2015 and run for two years. It will be run by a steering group involving all partners. Two Let's Go coordinators will support GPs to refer patients to local greenspaces and will also take action to improve local green spaces. One coordinator will be based in the Rhondda and one in Merthyr. Geminie Drinkwater Project Engagement Officer geminie.drinkwater@cyfoethnaturiolcymru.go v.uk South West Wales Llynfi Woodland The Llynfi 20 project has been established by Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Health board to tackle the poor healthy life expectancy of the people living in the Llynfi valley, one of the most deprived wards in Wales. We have successfully submitted a bid to Welsh Government's Nature Fund to create a woodland in the Llynfi valley that will support the delivery of the Llynfi20 initiative, and will be designed with community benefit at its heart. This will include walking routes and infrastructure (green gym) that are fully risk assessed and appropriate for the local GP surgeries to prescribe as exercise on prescription. The steering group to for the woodland creation includes representatives from the Llynfi20 project, Bridgend County Borough Council, Communities First and the Local Service Board. | afanforestpark@npt.gov.uk | Afan Forest Park | Afan Forest Park near Port Talbot has world-class mountain | |---------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------| | bike trails, a low level cycle route and many marked circular | | | | walks. The visitor's centre provides information on the | | | | amenities available. | | | | | | | | Hamish Osborn | | | | hamish.osborn@cyfoethnaturiolcymru.gov.uk | | | | | | | | Fran Rolfe | | | | fran.rolfe@cyfoethnaturiolcymru.gov.uk | | | | | | | | Clear Streams | This is a project aimed at making sure that the streams, | | | rivers and sea in Swansea are clean, healthy, free from | | | | pollution and can be enjoyed by everyone. | | | | | | | | Clear Streams takes an integrated approach to managing | | | | water quality, both tacking pollution at source as well as | | | | driving forward a 'softer' agenda aimed at raising people's | | | | awareness of and sensitivity to, the environment. | | | | | | | | It | works | by | | organisations in a range of activities, focusing on some of | | | | the harder to reach communities and areas in which the | | | | environment is often not prioritised. | | | | | | | | Hamish Osborn | | | | hamish.osborn@cyfoethnaturiolcymru.gov.uk | | | | | | | | Sarah Bennett | | | | sarah.bennett@cyfoethnaturiolcymru.gov.uk | | | | | | | | Smart Coast | Smart coasts is a project that provides real time information | | | on bathing water quality to the public at Swansea Bay. The | | | | project is a partnership between Aberystwyth University, | | | | NRW and the City and County of Swansea. The | | | | development of the model was funded by INTERREG. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Mid Wales | | | | Bwlch Nant yr Arian | | | | Visitor centre | | | | Bwlch Nant yr Arian visitor is in the Cambrian Mountains, | | | | east of Aberyswyth. There a range of walking and mountain | | | | bike trails, an adventure play areas, Animal Puzzle Trail and | | | | a café. | | | | | | | | Dyfi National Nature | | | | Reserve | | | | ynyslas@cyfoethnaturiolcymru.gov.uk | | | | | | | | Dyfi National Nature Reserve is situated between | | | | Aberystwyth and Machynlleth. It includes part of the Dyfi | | | | Estuary, Ynyslas dunes and Cors Fochno. Visitors can walk | | | | on a boardwalk over the dunes or take a circular route | | | across Cors Fochno, one of the largest and finest examples of a raised peat bog in Britain. Facilities include Ynyslas visitor centre, interactive displays, a marine aquarium, shop and toilets. North Wales Coed y Brenin Visitor centre coedybrenin@cyfoethnaturiolcymru.gov.uk Coed y Brenin visitor centre is set within Snowdonia National Park. It has world-class mountain bike trails, family walks, an all-ability play area, an easy access trail. Facilities include a café and cycle shop. Cadair Idris National Nature Reserve Cadair Idris National Nature Reserve is in southern Snowdonia National Park. Facilities include a visitor centre with an exhibition on wildlife and local folklore, tea room, toilets and ample parking. Cwm Idwal National Nature Reserve enquiries@cyfoethnaturiolcymru.gov.uk Cwm Idwal National Nature Reserve is in northern Snowdonia National Park.Visitors can walk up to and around the glacial Llyn Idwal while the cwm, which forms a steep sided basin around the lake, is popular for climbing and scrambling. Facilities include a new visitor centre, toilets and pay and display parking.

en

4449-pdf

## # Operational Selection Policy Osp37 ## # Freedom Of Information Act Records ## (Covering Data Protection Act And Environmental Information Regulations Records) ## 1 Authority 1.1 The National Archives' Acquisition and Disposition policy statements announced our intention of developing, in consultation with departments, Operational Selection Policies across government. These policies would apply the collection themes described in the policy to the records of individual departments and agencies. 1.2 The National Archives' Appraisal Policy statement (August 2004) announced a new emphasis to Operational Selection Policies: The National Archives' will develop generic archival appraisal guidance for categories of records such as those produced by similar types of departments (agencies, regulatory bodies) or those produced by activities common to many departments (research papers, inspection reports). (section 2.4.3.6) This Policy provides generic appraisal guidance for records relating to activities conducted under or relating to the Freedom of Information Act 2000, as detailed in section 2 below. 1.3 Operational Selection Policies are intended to be working tools for those involved in the selection of public records. This policy may, therefore, be reviewed and revised in the light of comments received from the users of the records or from archive professionals, the department's experience of using the policy, or as a result of newly discovered information. There is no formal cycle of review but we would welcome comments at any time. The extent of any review and revision exercise will be determined according to the nature of the comments received. If you have comments on this policy, please e-mail: records-management@nationalarchives.gov.uk or write to: Acquisition and Disposition Manager Records Management Department The National Archives Kew Richmond Surrey TW9 4DU ## 2 Scope 2.1 This Operational Selection Policy covers the policy on selection of public records generated by the processing of Freedom of Information Act (FOI) access requests and on the selection of the information that has been requested: 2.1.1 Records containing information released in response to FOI access requests; 2.1.2 Information made available via websites following FOI access requests; 2.1.3 Records contained in systems established by departments to track FOI access requests. As the regimes covering access to environmental information under the Environmental Information Regulations and to personal information under the Data Protection Act are covered by sections 39 and 40 of the FOI Act respectively, all references here to records created in the process of handling FOI requests should be understood to include records generated by requests under those regimes also. 2.2 The policy does not cover non-public records generated by authorities covered by the Act but which are not public record bodies. 2.3 This policy does not cover the development of overall government FOI policy in the Home Office or the Department for Constitutional Affairs (DCA) at times when they were responsible for FOI policy (or the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural affairs for Environmental Information Regulations policy), or departmental policy in The Office of the Information Commissioner and The National Archives. Nor does it cover policies developed by authorities detailing how they intend to handle access requests. The selection of such records will be considered on a case-by-case basis in each department according to future Operational Selection Policies and existing Acquisition Policy criteria applying locally. 2.4 This policy does not cover publication schemes issued under the Freedom of Information Act, which will be covered in the Operational Selection Policy OSP 36 *Publications and Grey Literature*. 2.5 The records addressed in this Operational Selection Policy fall within the scope of the following Acquisition Policy themes: 2.2.1.2 Formulation of policy and management of public resources by the core executive1 2.2.2 Interaction of the state with its citizens 2.6 This Operational Selection Policy provides guidance on the identification of records for permanent preservation. It does not provide guidance on access to selected records. ## 3 Methodology 3.1 Initial guidance to government departments on the selection of records related to Freedom of Information Act activities was drawn up by The National Archives in consultation with the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Department for Constitutional Affairs in January 2005. It was intended that this guidance would be revised in the light of experience of the operation of the Act. Following consideration of the guidance by the Records Selection and Appraisal sub-group of The National Archives' Management Board at its Spring 2005 meeting, it was agreed that the revision should take the form of an Operational Selection Policy. 4 Selection policy for categories of Freedom of Information act information 4.1 Information released following an FOI access request By its very nature, information released by departments following FOI access requests will constitute an undifferentiated mix. While there may be patterns evident from the totality of requests made to any authority under the Act, the value of any one piece of released information is likely to be primarily of interest to the requester. It is clear that while some pieces of released information would satisfy The National Archives' published acquisition criteria, many will not, so any decision to take in all released information would necessarily gather in a large proportion of material which does not satisfy The National Archives' Acquisition Policy criteria. The benefits of capturing such an amorphous set of information would be minimal and would not outweigh the costs to The National Archives of doing so. Therefore The National Archives will not automatically acquire all information released in response to an FOI access request. Such information should continue to be appraised according to its merits as part of the record(s) of which it forms a part under the existing general arrangements for appraisal of records applying in the authorities or more specific Operational Selection Policies where they exist.. However, the possibility exists that information of some historical interest may be released under FOI which comes from records already identified as not required by The National Archives, or likely not to be picked up during routine file review, (e.g. significant incidents recorded in an otherwise uniform and largely uninteresting case file series). Departments should make arrangements to ensure that such 'hidden nuggets' can be notified by FOI staff to colleagues conducting selection reviews to ensure that they can be considered under the appropriate appraisal criteria. 4.2 Systems established by departments to track FOI requests Most public record authorities have put in place systems, either workflow based or using other available tools, to track FOI access requests. The authorities will have a long-term need to retain this information to inform future work and to answer possible appeals or complaints, but it would be possible for The National Archives to take copies of such system information. This system information in itself might contain much information subject to exemptions in any authority where access requests are frequently refused if the system records details of the exempt information or arguments for or against disclosure. It is likely that future researchers will want to assess the operation of the Act and would value the preservation of at least some of these systems. This would allow researchers in the future to have an independent line separate from the analysis that will be done by the Information Commissioner. However, The National Archives feels it is not appropriate at this stage to identify which authorities' systems should be earmarked for preservation. Our strategy is to await the Information Commissioner's appraisals of departmental performance (in reports under s49 of the FOI Act), from which The National Archives could determine the main foci of requests and any authorities which were failing in their administration of the Act, and make appraisal decisions in the light of this information. Reports monitoring central government performance under the FOI regime are also likely to be issued by DCA and these will provide further information to be considered in reaching this decision. Departments should be aware that The National Archives has a potential interest in the records of these systems, to be determined in due course in the light of the Information Commissioner and DCA reports on the operation of the Act, and that therefore no information should be deleted from these systems until The National Archives is in a position to make an appraisal decision. It should be emphasised that The National Archives' interest is in the records of the handling of access requests, not in the identity of the individuals who made the requests. Therefore there will be no requirement for departments to retain personal information relating to enquirers for longer than these details are needed for the departments own internal administrative needs in handling the access requests. The trigger for considering such a tracking system for permanent preservation will come from Information Commissioner or DCA reports, but it will be possible to issue formal selection criteria for such systems. The National Archives will therefore work towards the production of an Operational Selection Policy to establish criteria for the selection of records from FOI tracking systems. This would not be a stand-alone criterion - rather it should form part of a wider Policy on case handling systems, with general criteria for selection similar to those set out in OSP 30, *Government and People: the interaction of the State with the Citizen*. This Policy will be considered for production approximately two years after the implementation of the Act, to take proper account of reports issued by the Information Commissioner, DCA and other sources on FOI research. ## 4.3 Information Made Available Via Websites Following Access Requests Following the government decision that all central government departments should proactively publish FOI disclosure logs on their websites, it is expected that most departments will make the information they release available over their websites either via an underlying database or by posting pages of information or the text of answers directly onto the website. Where the latter course is followed, it is likely that The National Archives' existing website harvesting activity will capture the information without further action for the departments whose websites we are already acquiring (see OSP 27, The Selection of Government Websites). Where a database is created, that information will almost certainly not be harvested. It is further considered that The National Archives could not be certain that an authority will have placed all its released information into such an arrangement, so we could not start from the assumption that such a collection would include all released information. Some departments may create separate websites solely for the purpose of publishing disclosure log information, and these will not be routinely collected by The National Archives' website harvesting exercise. To make special efforts to collect electronic information from these databases would be contrary to the policy set out at paragraph 5.1 above. The National Archives therefore concludes that databases of released information designed for web access should not be acquired separately. The National Archives will periodically reappraise the scope of the website harvest detailed in OSP 27 following the initial Information Commissioner and DCA reports into the operation of the Act (firstly alongside the proposed exercise to identify tracking systems information worthy of permanent preservation detailed at paragraph 5.2 above). If it appears that an authority which is placing released information on line that is not being captured by The National Archives' regular harvest merits special attention, then consideration will be given to adding the website to the harvest. ## 4.4 Publication Schemes A key part of the operation of the FOI Act is the regular publication of information by bodies according to agreed publication schemes. Publication schemes are not covered in this Operational Selection Policy, and are instead dealt with in the Operational Selection Policy OSP 36 Publications and Grey Literature, which deals generally with issues on the selection of published public records. ## 4.5 Office Of The Information Commissioner Records The Office of the Information Commissioner agreed in 2004 to develop an Operational Selection Policy with The National Archives, but the pressure of work in the run-up to the Act has prevented this being taken forward. A Policy will be developed when resources allow this work to be taken forward. ## 5 Implementation Departments should establish procedures to ensure that staff handling FOI requests inform those responsible in departments for review work where access requests result in the release of significant historical information2 from series not or not likely to be selected, and that file reviewers should take this into account during selection review. Where series are scheduled for automatic destruction, an alternative approach should be devised to safeguard records containing 'hidden nuggets' from disposal without further consideration. The National Archives' next revision of the *Documentation of Records Work* standard will address this issue. It is not intended that departments establish formal procedures to achieve the safeguarding of such 'hidden nuggets' - rather that staff handling information access requests are made aware by means of routine internal communications of the possibility of such items being discovered, and of the possibility of flagging them up for the attention of departmental record staff. Such 'hidden nuggets' are not expected to be found frequently in any given authority, and there would be no value in establishing formal procedures or in amending FOI handling processes and systems to accommodate this requirement. Departments should note that the approach set out in this Operational Selection Policy will raise the possibility that released information will be used and perhaps cited directly by researchers, writers or campaigners, but that the information itself will not be permanently preserved as part of a selected record. This emphasises again the importance of welldocumented and robust disposal policy and practice in departments, which may be called upon to explain the destruction of previously released information. Departments should refer to The National Archives' Documentation of Records Work standard to ensure that their practice meets the required standard. Guidance on disposal scheduling for the records produced when processing requests made under the FOI Act can be found in The National Archives' model retention and disposal schedule 14, *FOI Model Retention Schedule*. Departments will ensure that request handling information recorded on FOI tracking systems is preserved until The National Archives completes its exercise to develop selection criteria for such case handling systems.

en

3852-pdf

## Quarterly Information: 1 January - 31 March 2013 GIFTS GIVEN OVER £140 The Rt Hon George Osborne MP, Chancellor of the Exchequer Date gift given To Gift Value (over £140) Nil return The Rt Hon Danny Alexander MP, Chief Secretary to the Treasury Date gift given To Gift Value (over £140) Nil return Greg Clark MP, Financial Secretary Date gift given To Gift Value (over £140) Nil return David Gauke MP, Exchequer Secretary Date gift given To Gift Value (over £140) Nil return Sajid Javid MP, Economic Secretary Date gift given To Gift Value (over £140) Nil return Lord Deighton, Commercial Secretary (2 January 2013 - Present) Date gift given To Gift Value (over £140) Nil return | From | Gift | Value | Outcome | |----------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------|-----------|-----------| | | | | | | GIFTS RECEIVED OVER £140 | | | | | | | | | | The Rt Hon George Osborne MP, Chancellor of the Exchequer | | | | | Date gift | | | | | received | | | | | Lucasfilm | Children's toys | Over the | | | limit | | | | | 9 | | | | | February | | | | | 2013 | | | | | From | Gift | Value | Outcome | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | The Rt Hon Danny Alexander MP, Chief Secretary to the Treasury | | | | | Date gift | | | | | received | | | | | Nil return | | | | | From | Gift | Value | Outcome | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Greg Clark MP, Financial Secretary | | | | | Date gift | | | | | received | | | | | Nil return | | | | | From | Gift | Value | Outcome | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | David Gauke MP, Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury | | | | | | | | | | Date gift | | | | | received | | | | | Nil return | | | | | From | Gift | Value | Outcome | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Sajid Javid MP, Economic Secretary | | | | | Date gift | | | | | received | | | | | Nil return | | | | | From | Gift | Value | Outcome | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Lord Deighton, Commercial Secretary (2 January 2013 - Present) | | | | | Date gift | | | | | received | | | | | Nil return | | | | | | | | | Held by Department HOSPITALITY RECEIVED1 The Rt Hon George Osborne MP, Chancellor of the Exchequer Date of hospitality Name of organisation - Type of hospitality received 14 January 2013 The Telegraph (Tony Gallagher) Lunch Dinner 15 January 2013 The Financial Times (Lionel Barber) Dinner 22 January 2013 News Corporation (Rupert Murdoch) Breakfast 30 January 2013 News Corporation (James Murdoch) 28 February 2013 The Times (John Witherow) Lunch 27 March 2013 The Telegraph Lunch 28 March 2013 BBC Lunch The Rt Hon Danny Alexander MP, Chief Secretary to the Treasury Date of hospitality Name of organisation - Type of hospitality received 14 January 2013 EEF Manufacturers' Organisation Dinner 15 January 2013 Trade Union Congress Reception Reception 30 January 2013 The Centre for British Influence in Europe Dinner 5 February 2013 National Association of Pension Funds 11 February 2013 Whizz Kids Dinner 28 February 2013 Business for New Europe Breakfast Lunch 1 March 2013 Aberdeen and Grampian Chamber of Commerce 11 March Archbishop of Canterbury Breakfast Greg Clark MP, Financial Secretary Date of hospitality Name of organisation - Type of hospitality received 24 January 2013 Manchester Civic Society Lunch and gave a speech Dinner 29 January 2013 Ashurst LLP, Prudential, Cenkos Securities, Just Retirement, ICAP, JP Morgan, RSA Insurance Group, 1 Does not normally include attendance at functions hosted by HM Government; 'diplomatic' functions in the UK or abroad; functions hosted by overseas governments; minor refreshments at meetings, receptions, conferences, and seminars; and offers of hospitality which were declined. * accompanied by spouse/partner or other family member or friend. Lloyds Banking Group, Newton Asset Management, 13 February 2013 Association of British Insurers Dinner 26 February 2013 Inter-Continental Exchange Breakfast 27 February 2013 British Bankers' Association Breakfast 5 March 2013 London Stock Exchange Lunch 6 March 2013 Corporation of London Dinner and gave a speech 7 March 2013 British Chambers of Commerce Dinner 12 March 2013 Association of British Insurers, AXA, Standard Life, Lloyds Banking Group, Royal London Asset Management, Direct Line, Legal and General 14 March 2013 AON Dinner 27 March 2013 Financial Times Lunch David Gauke MP, Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury Date of hospitality Name of organisation - Type of hospitality received 8 January 2013 Chartered Institute of Taxation Lunch 21 January 2013 Quoted Companies Alliance Lunch 28 January 2013 ITV News Lunch 5 February 2013 Federation of Small Businesses Dinner 7 February 2013 KPMG Breakfast 12 February 2013 Bell Pottinger Private Lunch 25 February 2013 Evening Standard Lunch 28 February 2013 Politeia and TaxPayers' Alliance Dinner 5 March 2013 EEF The Manufacturers' Association 12 March 2013 TaxPayers' Alliance Dinner 21 March 2013 The Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales Sajid Javid MP, Economic Secretary Date of hospitality Name of organisation - Type of hospitality received 5 February 2013 Investment Management Association 7 February 2013 Daily Mail and Independent Lunch 26 February 2013 Association of British Insurers Breakfast 13 March 2013 Lloyds Banking Group Breakfast Dinner Dinner Dinner Dinner Lord Deighton, Commercial Secretary (2 January 2013 - Present) Date of hospitality Name of organisation - Type of hospitality received 31 January 2013 UK Contractors Group Dinner and gave a speech 6 February 2013 Odgers Berndtson Dinner and gave a speech 8 February 2013 Network Rail Breakfast and gave a speech 19 February 2013 Korn/Ferry Lunch and gave a speech 25 February 2013 Reform Lunch and gave a speech 26 February 2013 Westminster Advisors Breakfast and gave a speech 5 March 2013 Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales Dinner and gave a speech 6 March 2013 The Business Services Association Dinner and gave a speech 13 March 2013 Innovate UK Breakfast and gave a speech Destination Purpose of The Rt Hon George Osborne MP, Chancellor of the Exchequer Date(s) of trip trip 'Scheduled' 'No 32 (The Royal) Squadron' or 'other RAF' or 'Chartered' or 'Eurostar' RAF 3 £393 8 January 2013 Berlin, Germany Speech, Bilateral with German Finance Minister 23 January 2013 Davos, Switzerland RAF and Scheduled World Economic Forum ECOFIN Eurostar £745 Brussels, Belgium 11 February 2013 G20 Scheduled £1,724 Moscow, Russia 14 February 2013 ECOFIN RAF 2 £569 5 March 2013 Brussels, Belgium Destination Purpose of The Rt Hon Danny Alexander MP, Chief Secretary to the Treasury Date(s) of trip trip 'Scheduled' 'No 32 (The Royal) Squadron' or 'other RAF' or 'Chartered' or 'Eurostar' Eurostar £544 Versailles, France 17-18 January 2013 Franco British Colloque - Working Group on the Future of Europe and Banking 2 * Indicates if accompanied by spouse/partner or other family member or friend. Total cost including travel and accommodation of Minister only Number of officials accompanyin g Minister, where nonscheduled travel is used £1,100 Total cost including travel and accommodation of Minister only Number of officials accompanying Minister, where nonscheduled travel is used Destination Purpose of Greg Clark MP, Financial Secretary Date(s) of trip trip 'Scheduled' 'No 32 (The Royal) Squadron' or 'other RAF' or 'Chartered' or 'Eurostar' Scheduled £656 14-15 January 2013 Berlin and Frankfurt, Germany To engage with German officials and politicians on financial services ECOFIN Eurostar £356 21-22 January 2013 Brussels, Belgium Destination Purpose of David Gauke MP, Exchequer Secretary Date(s) of trip trip 'Scheduled' 'No 32 (The Royal) Squadron' or 'other RAF' or 'Chartered' or 'Eurostar' Nil return Destination Purpose of Sajid Javid MP, Economic Secretary Date(s) of trip trip 'Scheduled' 'No 32 (The Royal) Squadron' or 'other RAF' or 'Chartered' or 'Eurostar' Nil return Destination Purpose of Lord Deighton, Commercial Secretary (2 January 2013 - Present) Date(s) of trip trip 'Scheduled' 'No 32 (The Royal) Squadron' or 'other RAF' or 'Chartered' or 'Eurostar' Nil return Total cost including travel and accommodation of Minister only Number of officials accompanying Minister, where non-scheduled travel is used Total cost including travel and accommodation of Minister only Number of officials accompanying Minister, where non-scheduled travel is used Total cost including travel and accommodation of Minister only Number of officials accompanying Minister, where non-scheduled travel is used Total cost including travel and accommodation of Minister only Number of officials accompanying Minister, where non-scheduled travel is used Name of External Organisation Purpose of Meeting ## Meetings With External Organisations (Including Meetings With Newspaper And Other Media Proprietors, Editors And Senior Executives)3 The Rt Hon George Osborne Mp, Chancellor Of The Exchequer Date Of Meeting | January 2013 | BBC | General discussion | |------------------------|-------------------------------|-----------------------| | January 2013 | Big Society Capital | To discuss promoting | | social investment | | | | January 2013 | Tesco | To discuss promoting | | UK growth and | | | | investment | | | | January 2013 | UBS | To discuss promoting | | UK growth and | | | | investment | | | | January 2013 | Citibank | To discuss promoting | | UK growth and | | | | investment | | | | January 2013 | Facebook | To discuss promoting | | UK growth and | | | | investment | | | | January 2013 | Lucchini UK | To discuss promoting | | UK growth and | | | | investment | | | | January 2013 | Bill Gates | To discuss | | international | | | | development | | | | February 2013 | FSB | To discuss promoting | | UK growth and | | | | investment | | | | February 2013 | Dr Roubini | To discuss global | | economic affairs | | | | February 2013 | Institute of Economic Affairs | To discuss global | | economic affairs | | | | February 2013 | The Telegraph | General discussion | | February 2013 | Lucasfilm | To discuss Star Wars | | being produced in the | | | | UK | | | | February 2013 | Lloyds | To discuss UK | | financial services and | | | | lending | | | | February | The Telegraph | General discussion | | February 2013 | TUC | Budget representation | | meeting | | | | February 2013 | INEOS | To discuss promoting | | UK growth and | | | investment February 2013 British Chambers of Commerce Budget representation meeting February 2013 EEF Budget representation meeting February 2013 Institute of Directors Budget representation meeting February 2013 BBC General discussion February 2013 FSB Budget representation meeting February 2013 The Sunday Times (Martin Ivens) General discussion General discussion February 2013 Conservative Home (Tim Montgomerie) February 2013 CBI Budget representation meeting February 2013 The Economist General discussion February 2013 ITV (Peter Fincham) General discussion February 2013 AstraZenca To discuss business long-term strategy March 2013 The Telegraph General discussion March 2013 The Daily Mail General discussion March 2013 Santander To discuss UK financial services and lending Name of External Organisation Purpose of Meeting The Rt Hon Danny Alexander MP, Chief Secretary to the Treasury Date of Meeting January 2013 The Independent General discussion January 2013 Aberdeen Asset Management To discuss financial services January 2013 BBC General discussion January 2013 National Infrastructure Plan Strategic Engagement Forum To discuss infrastructure January 2013 National Infrastructure Plan Strategic Engagement Forum To discuss infrastructure February 2013 Flybe To discuss aviation February 2013 Evening Standard General discussion February 2013 British Retail Consortium Budget representation meeting March 2013 FairfuelUK Budget representation meeting March 2013 MOSAIC Discussion with schoolchildren about enterprise Spending round discussion on equalities March 2013 Equality and Human Rights Commission, Disability Charities Consortium, Equality 2025, National Black Women's Network, Stonewall, Lesbian and Gay Foundation, Race for Opportunity, Age UK, Gender Identity Research and Education Society March 2013 The Times General discussion Name of External Organisation Purpose of Meeting Greg Clark MP, Financial Secretary Date of Meeting January 2013 Besso Insurance To discuss UK financial services January 2013 Wedgwood Museum tour January 2013 Emma Bridgewater Factory tour To discuss UK banking January 2013 Bully-Banks and Federation of Small Businesses January 2013 Marsh To discuss UK financial services February 2013 The Community Development Finance Association To discuss community finance To discuss issues relevant to TheCityUK Advisory Council February 2013 TheCityUK, Aberdeen Asset Management, Alliance Trust, Allianz Global Investors Europe, Association of British Insurers, Aviva, Bank of America Merrill Lynch, Bank of Ireland, BNP Paribas UK, Brewin Dolphin, British Bankers' Association, Canary Wharf Cass Business School, Citi Group, City of London Corporation, Clifford Chance, CMS Cameron McKenna, Confederation of British Industry, Credit Suisse, Deloitte, Deutsche Bank UK, Citigroup, Ernst & Young, Bank of New York Mellon, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, Friends Life Group plc, Goldman Sachs International, Hargreaves Lansdown, Hibu, HSBC, JP Morgan UK, KPMG, Legal & General, Lloyds Banking Group, Lloyd's of London, London Stock Exchange, Mayer Brown International, Morgan Stanley, Nationwide, Nomura International, Nomura Europe Holdings plc, NYSE Liffe, Old Mutual Group, Permira, PricewaterhouseCoopers, Prudential, Royal bank of Scotland , Santander UK, Scottish Financial Enterprise, SEB Private Banking, Standard Life, Starr Companies, Thomson, Reuters, UBS Investment Bank February 2013 Northern Trust To discuss UK financial services February 2013 Standard Chartered To discuss UK and European financial services To discuss the Drury Report recommendations February 2013 Authors of the Drury report: Axiom Capital, Styperson Pope Ltd, Love PR and Communications Ltd, City Road Communications Ltd, Hardman and Co, Charles Stanley and Co Ltd March 2013 Marshall Wace LLP To discuss European financial services March 2013 Business Growth Fund-Government Liaison Committee To discuss business growth fund March 2013 Association for Financial Markets in Europe (AFME) To discuss UK and European financial services March 2013 Barclays To discuss UK financial services Islamic Finance Task Force March 2013 Oakstone Merchant Bank, Dentons, SNR Denton UK LLP, DDGI Limited, City of London Corporation, The CityUK, Gatehouse Bank, Corporation of City of London March 2013 Association of British Insurers To discuss UK financial services Marc 2013h Heathrow Airport Introductory meeting with Heathrow apprentices To discuss UK banking Marc 2013h British Bankers' Association, JD Hughes, Tribourne Catering, Federation of Small Businesses Name of External Organisation Purpose of Meeting David Gauke MP, Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury Date of Meeting To discuss tax matters January 2013 Pump Court Chambers, The Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales, Berkeley Group, Chartered Institute of Taxation, Law Society's Capital Taxes Sub Committee January 2013 London Advertising To discuss tax matters To discuss tax matters January 2013 Chartered Institute of Taxation, Deloitte, Ernst & Young, Confederation of British Industry, Slaughter and May, KPMG January 2013 TaxPayers' Alliance To discuss tax matters January 2013 UK Payments Council To discuss tax matters January 2013 Bar Council To discuss tax matters January 2013 BioIndustry Association To discuss tax matters January 2013 Berkeley Group To discuss tax matters February 2013 VocaLink To discuss tax matters February 2013 Federation of Small Businesses To discuss tax matters February 2013 Amazon To discuss tax matters To discuss tax matters February 2013 Chartered Institute for Securities and Investment To discuss tax matters February 2013 The Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales February 2013 British Bankers' Association To discuss tax matters February 2013 Confederation of British Industry To discuss tax matters February 2013 Financial Times General discussion February 2013 Low Incomes Tax Reform Group To discuss tax matters March 2013 Aon Plc To discuss tax matters To discuss tax matters March 2013 Staffline, Professional Passport, Saffrey Champness, Recruitment and Employment Confederation, Freelancer and Contractor Services Association, Ernst & Young, Extraman Live transfer of PAYE information to HMRC March 2013 Chartered Institute of Taxation, The Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales, Low Incomes Tax Reform Group, National Farmers' Union, Federation of Small Businesses To discuss tax matters March 2013 The Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales Name of External Organisation Purpose of Meeting Sajid Javid MP, Economic Secretary Date of Meeting January 2013 Royal Bank of Scotland To discuss financial services January 2013 Equitable Life Trapped Annuitants To discuss financial services January 2013 Energy UK To discuss energy January 2013 Goldman Sachs To discuss financial services January 2013 Toyota To discuss transport January 2013 Credit Suisse To discuss financial services January 2013 Goldman Sachs To discuss financial services January 2013 Consumer Finance Association To discuss financial services January 2013 British Bankers' Association To discuss financial services January 2013 East Sussex Credit Union, Bristol Credit Union To discuss financial services January 2013 Renewable Energy UK To discuss energy January 2013 UK Chamber of Shipping To discuss the shipping industry January 2013 Citizens Advice Bureau To discuss financial services January 2013 London Stock Exchange To discuss financial services January 2013 Oil and Gas UK To discuss oil and gas January 2013 Greene King To discuss the alcohol industry Meeting with Gilt market makers January 2013 AXA, Aviva, Investment Management Association, Insight Investment, The Society of Pension Consultants, Kames Capital, Legal & General, M&G, National Association of Pension Funds, Nationwide, BlackRock, PIMCO, State Street Global Advisors, Swiss Re, Barclays, BNP Paribas, Citigroup, Credit Suisse, Deutche Bank, Goldman Sachs, HSBC, Jeffries, JP Morgan, Llloyds, Merill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, Nomura, RBC, Royal Bank of Scotland, Santander, Scotiabank, Societe Generale, TD Securities, UBS January 2013 Lending Standards Board To discuss financial services January 2013 Nationwide To discuss financial services January 2013 National Pawnbrokers Association To discuss financial services February 2013 British Beer and Pub Association To discuss the alcohol industry February 2013 Phillip Morris Limited To discuss the tobacco industry February 2013 Tobacco Manufactures Association To discuss the tobacco industry February 2013 Wine and Spirit Trade Association To discuss the alcohol industry February 2013 Federation of Wholesale Distributors To discuss the alcohol industry February 2013 The Scotch Whisky Association To discuss the alcohol industry February 2013 Action on Smoking and Health To discuss the tobacco industry February 2013 Association of Convenience Stores To discuss the alcohol industry February 2013 National Association of Cider Makers To discuss the alcohol industry February 2013 Imperial Tobacco To discuss the tobacco industry February 2013 Confederation of British Industry To discuss pensions February 2013 Remote Gambling Association To discuss the gambling industry February 2013 Which? To discuss financial services February 2013 Bingo Association To discuss the gambling industry February 2013 Co-operatives UK To discuss financial services February 2013 National Casino Industry Forum To discuss the gambling industry February 2013 JX Nippon To discuss oil and gas February 2013 British Amusement Catering Trade Association To discuss the gambling industry February 2013 Enova To discuss financial services February 2013 The Association of British Bookmakers To discuss the gambling industry To discuss environmental issues February 2013 Green Alliance, RSPB, WWF, Green Peace, Confederation of British Industry, EEF, NCC, Friends of the Earth, Environment Industries Commission, Environment Services Association, UK Green Building Council March 2013 Oil and Gas UK To discuss oil and gas March 2013 Association of British Insurers To discuss insurance February 2013 JX Nippon To discuss oil and gas March 2013 Association of British Insurers To discuss finance services March 2013 Women's Business Council To discuss equality Name of External Organisation Purpose of Meeting Lord Deighton, Commercial Secretary (2 January 2013 - Present) Date of Meeting January 2013 Somerley Ltd To discuss infrastructure funding January 2013 Transport for London To discuss Transport for London's projects January 2013 Blackstone Group Introductory meeting January 2013 Governor of Tokyo To discuss Olympic legacy January 2013 Edf Energy Ministerial contact meeting with energy companies January 2013 RWE npower Ministerial contact meeting with energy companies January 2013 Lloyds Banking Group To discuss Olympic legacy and the Minister's new role January 2013 Thames Water To discuss the Thames Tunnel January 2013 Centrica Ministerial contact meeting with energy companies February 2013 Transport for London To discuss Transport for London's projects February 2013 China Investment Corporation Introductory meeting February 2013 Thames Water To discuss the Thames Tunnel February 2013 Broadway Partners Introductory meeting February 2013 Green Investment Bank Introductory meeting February 2013 Heathrow Airport Introductory meeting February 2013 Aviva Investors Introductory meeting February 2013 British Chambers of Commerce Introductory meeting February 2013 British Telecom Introductory meeting February 2013 Crossrail Introductory meeting February 2013 Hafren Power Ministerial contact meeting with energy companies February 2013 E.ON Energy Ministerial contact meeting with energy companies March 2013 Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer To discuss public/private investment March 2013 Mineral Products Association Introductory meeting March 2013 Scottish Power Ministerial contact meeting with energy companies March 2013 Edf Energy To discuss Edf Energy projects March 2013 Edf Energy Ministerial contact meeting with energy companies March 2013 General Electric Introductory meeting March 2013 Edf Energy Ministerial contact meeting with energy companies

en

2178-pdf

## Developer Licence 2.0 Main Terms 1. This Licence (as defined in these Main Terms and the Small Print): a. is free of charge; b. relates to [Licensor] Data and Third Party [Licensor] Data that we make available specifically as data for research and development in accordance with the terms of this licence ("**Exploration Data**"); c. does not affect any existing licence arrangements already in place. If you have access to data under, for example, the terms of an Open Government Licence or a commercial licence, those licensing arrangements continue to apply; d. lets you use [Licensor] Data for **12 months**, unless we tell you, or you and we agree something else. It will renew automatically every **12 months** unless either of you or we choose to end it. This Licence will automatically end if 24 months have elapsed since your last request for updates to any Exploration Data; e. lets you use Third Party [Licensor] Data for **three months only**. f. lets you **do any of the permitted actions we list below**, so you can ## Permitted Actions  Evaluate Exploration Data to see if what we're offering is what you need.  Use Exploration Data to research and develop your ideas and propositions. It doesn't matter if you're not sure yet how Exploration Data might help you. For example, you may want to assess it for a potential commercial opportunity or see what potential benefits and value it could bring to you, helping you build your case for licensing Exploration Data for use in your business or organisation under a separate, commercial licensing arrangement with us. Note these research and development rights are subject to the provisions below regarding live trials or tests.  Display Exploration Data or create working prototypes using Exploration Data to demonstrate and promote on your own equipment how your ideas or propositions for using our data would work, which is ideal if you're talking to potential customers, agents, investors or other financial backers. With our prior agreement, you can also provide prototypes for a short time to any of these people on equivalent terms to this Licence solely to help them to make a better assessment of your idea or proposition.  Use Exploration Data in live trials or tests within your business or organisation for up to 3 months to determine whether you wish to license it as an internal business aid immediately after your live trial.  Use small extracts of Exploration Data to (to be agreed in advance) in time-bound events that promote collaboration and innovation, to provide better insight into specific uses or develop ideas or answer particular questions, for example, as part of competitions, hackathons and mash-ups.  Use small extracts of Exploration Data (to be agreed in advance) to promote your use of OS Data in articles and at events that intend to share or widen knowledge (such as academic papers, trade journals or industry conferences). g. is **subject to all of the following Requirements listed below and in the Small Print.** You agree to: ## Requirements ! Provide us with information about you and/or your company or organisation as requested when you register to access Exploration Data so that we know who we are licensing to, can communicate with you, and understand what you are wanting to do, so that we can comply with the terms of our privacy policy. ! Acknowledge that you're using Exploration Data and that you're doing so in the right way by using [insert details of any acknowledgement statement] Please note this doesn't mean you can use [Licensor] branding or trademarks or anything that can be confused with them, unless it forms an integral part of the Exploration Data and you are reproducing it in that context. ! Make sure any prototypes you provide or any [Licensor] Data you provide (or data created from it under another Licensor licence) to third parties is returned to you or destroyed within 7 days of the end of the assessment or event. Tell us in advance if doing this might disrupt your longer term plans and we can discuss appropriate licensing. ! Provide technological and security measures to make sure all Exploration Data supplied to you is secure from any unauthorised use or access. ! Maintain accurate, complete and detailed records relating to this Licence regarding access to the Exploration Data by your staff (including unauthorised access and information regarding any prototypes created) that shall be open to inspection and for copies of any necessary records to be taken by us or our representatives upon request. ## 2. Under This Licence You Agree To Comply With The Restrictions Below And The Small Print: Restrictions Ø Unless we expressly permit you to do so above, you will not make any Exploration Data available to third parties or create any products or services which have benefitted from, relied on or made any use of Exploration Data (including, without limitation, where you have created your products or services by copying, publishing, modifying, re-formatting, analysing or performing searches, look ups or enquiries using Exploration Data). You agree that, if you want to make Exploration Data available in this way, you will tell us and will not proceed until we agree the basis on which that can happen. Ø You shall not infringe or breach the intellectual property rights in the Exploration Data. ## The Small Print This United Kingdom Government Licensing Framework (UKGLF) licence is based on the Data Exploration Licence for the Geospatial Commission Partner Bodies (V2) ## 1 Parties This Licence is between [Licensor] (we/us/our/[Licensor]), a company registered in England and Wales (company registration number [xxxxxxx]), whose registered address is [insert details] and the person or organisation who downloads the Exploration Data ("you/**your"**). You and we are each a "**party"** and together the "**parties"**. ## 2 Licence 2.1 Subject to the restrictions and requirements referred to in this Licence, we grant you a free, non-exclusive, nontransferable, revocable licence to use Exploration Data for the relevant periods and for the Permitted Actions described in the Main Terms. 2.2 In consideration of the mutual obligations in this Licence, by downloading Exploration Data and benefiting from its use you agree to be bound by all of the terms and conditions in *The Small Print* and the Main Terms, which forms the data exploration licence between you and us (the "**Licence**"). Downloading Exploration Data constitutes acceptance by us of your request and establishes that a licence exists between you and us. 2.3 Please read all terms before accessing any Exploration Data so that you understand this Licence and what we agree you can and can't do with Exploration Data. 2.4 This Licence commences with effect from the date you first request access to Exploration Data. 2.5 When you access Exploration Data via an API Service made available by [Licensor], the terms of that service will apply in addition to this Licence. You will still be able to use Exploration Data in the ways stated above. ## 3 Intellectual Property Rights 3.1 We and/or our suppliers own all the intellectual property rights in Exploration Data. All rights not expressly granted are reserved to us and/or our licensors. 3.2 You shall notify us as soon as you become aware of, or suspect, any infringement or other breach by you or any other third party of the intellectual property rights in the Exploration Data. You agree to co-operate with us at no cost to us to provide all reasonable assistance in pursuing or dealing with any such infringement or breach. ## 4 Feedback At our request, you will give us reasonable details about your intended use for Exploration Data under this Licence by whatever means we might reasonably request. ## 5 No Warranty It is your responsibility to ensure that the Exploration Data you request is what you need. Exploration Data is provided 'as is' and without any warranty or condition express or implied, statutory or otherwise as to its quality or fitness for purpose. Except as expressly stated in this Licence, all conditions, warranties, terms and undertakings express or implied statutory or otherwise in respect of the Exploration Data are hereby excluded to the fullest extent permitted by law. ## 6 Liabilities 6.1 Subject to clause 6.2: a. neither party shall be liable to the other, whether in contract, tort (including negligence), breach of statutory duty, or otherwise, for any loss of profit, or any indirect, special or consequential loss or damage or any other financial loss (howsoever caused) arising as a result of the use of, or lack of performance of the Exploration Data; and b. there is nothing in this Licence that excludes or limits your liability for an infringement or breach of our intellectual property rights. 6.2 Nothing in this Licence shall limit or exclude either party's liability for: a. death or personal injury caused by its negligence, or the negligence of its employees, agents or subcontractors (as applicable); b. fraud or fraudulent misrepresentation; or c. any matter in respect of which it would be unlawful for either party to exclude or restrict liability. ## 7 Termination 7.1 Either party may terminate this Licence with immediate effect, by giving written notice to the other party. Termination or expiry of this Licence shall not affect either party's accrued rights and remedies. On the termination of this licence you shall (except in respect of any Exploration Data for which at the time of termination or expiry, you have an appropriate licence from us): a. immediately cease using the Exploration Data; b. destroy (or at our option return) all Exploration Data under this Licence that you hold or for which you are responsible including any Exploration Data that is embedded into any other material and provide written confirmation that you have done so at our request; and c. make sure anyone else you have supplied Exploration Data to under this Licence also adheres to these conditions. 7.2 Any provision that is expressly or by implication intended to survive the termination or expiry of this Licence shall continue in full force and effect. ## 8 Data Protection And Privacy 8.1 You shall comply with all relevant laws and regulations relating to the processing of personal data and privacy, including, without limitation any data protection legislation from time to time in force in the UK, including the Data Protection Act 2018. 8.2 We shall comply with the terms of our privacy policy available at: [Insert link to Licensor's privacy policy] ## 9 Confidentiality Neither you nor we will disclose to any person (either during the term of this Licence or after), any information which might reasonable be considered confidential information belonging to the other party which is in its possession as a result of this Licence, unless with the consent of the other party or due to a legal, governmental or regulatory requirement. You acknowledge that we are bound by the *Freedom of Information Act 2000* and the Environment Information Regulations 2004 which might require us by law to disclose confidential information. You will provide such assistance, without charge, as we shall reasonably request to assist us to comply with this legislation. ## 10 Other General Provisions 10.1 This Licence sets out the entire agreement and understanding between you and us in respect of the subject matter of this Licence. 10.2 We may change any part of this Licence, including the availability of the Exploration Data, at any time with immediate effect for valid and legal reasons where reasonable circumstances dictate this. If you continue to access updates of any Exploration Data after any such change is made, you shall be deemed to have accepted the modified terms. If you do not wish to accept the modified terms, you must terminate this Licence by giving us written notice. It is therefore recommended that you regularly access and review this Licence so that you are aware of the latest terms. 10.3 Any notice under this Licence shall be effected when given: a. by us to your e-mail address that you have provided to us; and b. by you to [insert email address] or other such address as we may provide to you. 10.4 a. You must not assign, transfer or sub-license your rights under this Licence to any other person. b. We shall be entitled to assign, transfer or novate the benefits and obligations of this Licence or any part thereof to: i) in the event of the transfer of all or any of our activities or functions to any other entity, to the entity to which our functions have been transferred; or ii) any private sector body which substantially performs the functions of us, provided that any such assignment, transfer or novation shall not increase the burden of your obligations under this Licence. 10.5 Our failure to exercise or enforce any rights under the provisions of this Licence shall not be deemed to be a waiver of such rights at any time or times thereafter. 10.6 If any of the provisions of this Licence are invalid, illegal or unenforceable, that will not affect the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions of this Licence. Each of the paragraphs of these Licence terms operates separately. If any court or relevant authority decides that any of them are unlawful, the remaining paragraphs will remain in full force and effect. 10.7 This Licence shall not constitute or imply any partnership, joint venture, agency, fiduciary relationship or other relationship between the parties other than the contractual relationship expressly provided for in this Licence. Neither party to this Licence shall have, nor represent that it has, any authority to make any commitments on the other party's behalf. 10.8 A person who is not a party to this Licence has no right as a third party to enforce or enjoy the benefit of any term of this Licence. 10.9 This Licence is governed by English law and both parties agree to the exclusive jurisdiction of the English courts.

en

2168-pdf

# Information Management Assessment Action Plan Review The Department For Culture, Media And Sport December 2012 ## Background The Information Management Assessment (IMA) programme is the bestpractice model for government bodies wishing to demonstrate commitment to the principles of good information management. An IMA of The Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) was conducted at the department's offices in Whitehall in February 2010. The department's IMA report was agreed in August 2010 and published in spring 2012 on The National Archives' website. Progress against the department's IMA action plan was reviewed in December 2012 and is summarised below. Work required to address outstanding recommendations is detailed at the end of this document under 'Next Steps'. ## Key Findings Of The 2010 Ima The IMA report gave DCMS a 'Good' rating for re-use on the IMA performance framework risk matrix. Performance under a further four headings was rated as 'Acceptable'. The report identified nine 'Development needed' performance areas and six 'Priority Attention' areas. The IMA report made a total of 54 recommendations for improvement, giving particular attention to the following:  DCMS had no strategy, vision or plan for information management. The role of information management in supporting business objectives was not defined or communicated corporately.  DCMS had no nominated board champion with corporate responsibility for information management. The department had not defined performance measures for information management and there was no evidence that key information management related risks and issues were regularly reported at board level.  DCMS had defined the risks associated with the information it held to a limited degree. Understanding of information risk was focussed narrowly on the security of personal information and there was no evidence that risks beyond this were being identified and reported. DCMS had no defined structure for Information Management. No compliance checking with policy was undertaken.  While DCMS recognised the need for a Departmental Records Officer, it had not defined ongoing resourcing requirements. At times the role had fallen vacant leaving DCMS with no identifiable strategic policy lead. The department had minimal oversight of records transfer and appraisal.  The department had made a start in defining business critical information but had not fully defined the value of its information or what information it needed to keep.  Staff did not consistently recognise in practice the sensitivity of the information the department held. Standards of information management were found to be inconsistent. ## Progress Against Recommendations Dcms Has Undergone A Period Of Realignment And Restructuring Following agreement of the department's 2010 Comprehensive Spending Review settlement. DCMS is consequently a smaller department today than it was at the time of the IMA, with a growing emphasis on flexible project-based working. Future provisions for information management are currently being reviewed by the Knowledge and Information Management (KIM) project established as a component of the overall DCMS Change Programme. This aims to establish a proportionate approach to information management within the department. The project was on hold for the period of the 2012 London Olympic Games, restarting in September of that year. Work to address recommendations made in the 2010 IMA report remains at an early stage. However, the assessment team notes the following developments:  DCMS has now identified its requirements for the role of Departmental Records Officer, which fell vacant in early 2012. DCMS is currently in the process of recruiting for that role.  The KIM project, reporting to the Corporate Committee, has raised the profile of information management and related risks. It has sought to define and gain agreement on ownership of information management at a senior and operational level.  The KIM project has identified and communicated the need for behavioural rather than systems change and emphasised the need for a strong mandate and leadership from the senior management team.  The KIM project has also sought to agree the future approach to storage of digital information and records. DCMS aims to streamline its EDRMS, Livelink; planned work is to include the establishment of standardised project filing structures, and may extend to consideration of restrictions on the use of personal repositories.  DCMS has recognised the need for better retention and sharing of corporate knowledge. Work in this area includes development of a handover report process to capture key role specific information. It includes a section on file and records management. This document has been built into the Leaver's checklist for development managers. ## Next Steps Implementation must be the next step now that priorities have been identified, and the department must ensure ongoing support to effect necessary levels of change. At the same time, DCMS should liaise with The National Archives to ensure it can take advantage of available support, networks and other opportunities. The outcomes of the KIM project have the potential to provide a solid base for information management within the department. Work in the areas below would address key concerns highlighted in the DCMS IMA report and help ensure DCMS has the right foundations in place:  DCMS must ensure that the role of DRO is positioned to enable oversight and control of paper and digital records, to perform decisions regarding the appraisal, selection and review of records due for transfer to The National Archives. DCMS should also ensure that the DRO role is positioned to exert strategic influence on the direction of digital information management within the department.  DCMS must clearly communicate the role of good information management in tackling information risk and enabling transparency. As a key component of this, the department must ensure senior sponsorship for knowledge and information management, to champion the agenda and demonstrate its ongoing importance.  DCMS should produce a documented high-level strategy or plan for information management with milestones to provide continuity and draw key goals together. This will enable overlapping and parallel work streams to be drawn together and viewed in context as coherent components of a single programme.  DCMS recognises the need to produce clear guidance for information management that is adopted by staff. DCMS should fully review and revise existing policy to ensure it addresses key information risks and establishes necessary standards in line with legal and business requirements. To support this work, DCMS should ensure that information's value in supporting strategic and day to day outcomes is clearly stated at a high level for staff, and actively promoted.  DCMS has recognised the need to develop performance measures. As a first step, it is important to gain an understanding of where information is being stored and in what quantities. To gain full assurance it is necessary to assess the quality as well as the volume of information stored. DCMS should consider how these measures will be reported and used to target key risk areas, driving adherence to policy.  Although the KIM project has raised at a senior level information risks beyond the security of personal information, information risk is not currently represented on the departmental risk register. In order to effectively address such risks, DCMS should ensure that they are defined and documented at a strategic level.  DCMS does not have a plan to consistently address risks to the completeness and availability of digital information. The National Archives offers Digital Continuity training, advice and guidance that would help DCMS build its capability in this regard.  This would have particular benefit in enabling development of the department's Information Asset Register, which does not currently support consistent description of risks, value or usage requirements. By expanding its Information Asset Register in line with The National Archives guidance and as laid out in the Knowledge Council's Information Principles, DCMS would be more able to effectively protect, manage and exploit the information assets it holds. The assessment team will continue to working closely with DCMS through the action plan monitoring process and standard meetings with the departmental Information Management Consultant. Further progress review meetings will be scheduled to measure progress against outstanding recommendations. Following agreed closure of the action plan, progress against any outstanding recommendations will be reviewed at the time of the next formal IMA in 2015. ## Risk Matrix The Table Recognises Progress Made By Dcms Since The Original Assessment. Governance And Leadership Strategic management ## Records Management Creation Storage Appraisal, disposal and transfer Sustainability of digital records Management Access to Information FOI/Data Protection Re-Use Security Compliance Staff responsibilities and delegations Policies and guidance Training Change management ## Key To Colour Coding

en

2551-pdf

# Uk Commission'S Employer Skills Survey 2011: Scotland Results Evidence Report 65 December 2012 Uk Commission'S Employer Skills Survey 2011: Scotland Results Ben Davies, Katie Gore, Catherine Riley, Jan Shury, David Vivian, Mark Winterbotham IFF Research Simon Fathers UK Commission for Employment and Skills December 2012 ## Foreword Paul McKelvie Paul McKelvie is a Commissioner of the UK Commission for Employment and Skills. He has held senior positions within the private sector since serving as Director of ScottishPower Learning and Corporate Responsibility between 2000 and 2007. He is a board member of both Skills Development Scotland and the Scottish Funding Council. Achieving economic growth is a significant challenge facing governments across the globe. Businesses, key to this achievement, continue to face the impacts of the global economic climate, technological advancements, funding challenges, and the squeeze on consumption as business and domestic customers continue to tighten their belts. The ability of businesses to adapt, respond and even thrive in such challenging times relies upon developing and harnessing the talents and skills of their people. There is a significant body of evidence pointing to the value of skills and training investment to individuals, businesses and the economy. For example, individuals with qualifications are more likely to be in employment and to earn more than those without; businesses that don't train are twice as likely to close down as those that do; and skills contributed to 20 per cent of the productivity gap between the UK and Germany in the early part of this century. The stock of skills in the UK is not keeping up with international competitors and some of our businesses do not adopt strategies which require, use and apply skills. As a Commissioner at the UK Commission for Employment and Skills, I recognise that understanding these issues within economic and labour market contexts can help us collectively anticipate skill needs, identify the best means of addressing them, monitor trends and benchmark and shape the supply of, and demand for, skills from business and individuals. The UK Commission's Employer Skills Survey provides a vital piece in the evidence jigsaw, from the all-important perspective of employers, and for the first time, we can compare this experience of employers across the UK, as well as comparing the results to earlier Scottish Employer Skills Surveys. This report provides analysis of the skills businesses in Scotland need; the pressures they face in effectively managing their businesses and accessing or developing those skills; how they respond to such difficulties; the extent to which they train and why some of them don't. The evidence that this report provides is useful for policy makers, businesses and those involved in the design and delivery of education and skills programmes, and we are grateful to the 2,500 businesses in Scotland who participated in the research. Training levels in Scotland are above those in the rest of the UK but some businesses in Scotland report skills deficiencies. Whilst those skills deficiencies are not large in number, they tend to be concentrated in specific sectors and geographies where they can have a significant impact on the business, through loss of business or increased workload of other staff. Indeed, the latter may impact on staff turnover and reflect the persistence of skills gaps in certain occupations, caused by staff being new in role. Thus the survey raises challenges for businesses, individuals, government, training providers and other partners about how to tackle the qualitative issues raised in the survey to ensure Scotland's prosperity is not held back in any way by a shortage of skills or by an inefficient use of skills in the workplace. We hope you find this report informative. We are also keen to get feedback on how we could make our research even more relevant. If you have any feedback or queries, or would like to know more about the Commission's other research, please e-mail info@ukces.org.uk, quoting the report title. ## Acknowledgements Many individuals and organisations have been involved in the design and execution of the UK Commission's Employer Skills Survey 2011 and the Scotland Results. Particular thanks are given to the 2,500 businesses in Scotland who gave their time to speak to us. As the lead contractor, we have been supported by the research agencies who conducted much of the fieldwork: BMG Research and Ipsos MORI. The project was sponsored by the four UK governments who came together to ensure the delivery of this first UK employer skills survey was possible. A steering group was established to guide the direction of the project. Members attending this group were: Mark Langdon, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS); Dominic Rice, BIS; Kathy Murphy, BIS; Euan Dick, Scottish Government; Sarah Munro, Scottish Government; Stuart King, Scottish Government; Joanne Corke, Welsh Government; Graeme Belshaw; Department for Employment and Learning Northern Ireland (DELNI); Linda Bradley, DELNI; Tim Devine, DELNI; Mauricio Armellini, Department for Work and Pensions (DWP); Jacqui Hansbro, DWP; Alasdair Yeo, DWP; Anthony Clarke, Department for Education (DFE); Muriel Bankhead, Alliance of Sector Skills Councils; Sally Walters, Alliance of Sector Skills Councils; Helen Lindsay, Alliance of Sector Skills Councils and Mark Spilsbury of the UK Commission for Employment and Skills. The report was completed with the assistance of Stuart King at the Scottish Government. Thanks are due to staff at the UK Commission who supported the preparation of this report, including Allan Noy and Carol Stanfield. Special thanks are due to the UK Commission project managers throughout the course of the survey, Dr Susannah Constable and Simon Fathers. Jan Shury Joint Managing Director, IFF Research Ltd. | Appendix G: Unweighted base sizes | |--------------------------------------| | | | Appendix H: Bibliography 55 | | | | | | | | | ## Table Of Graphs And Charts | Table 1.1 | Survey response rates 4 | |----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | | Figure 2.1 | Size distribution of establishments and employees | | | | | Figure 2.2 | Sectoral distribution of establishments and employment 8 | | | | | Figure 2.3 | Product Market Strategy positions 11 | | | | | Table 3.1 | Recruitment of leavers from Scottish education 13 | | | | | Figure 3.1 | Perceived work-readiness of education leavers in the last 2-3 years | | | | | Figure 4.1 | Summary of vacancy measures | | Figure 4.2 | Incidence, volume and density of vacancies: time series overall | | | | | Table 4.1 | Incidence, volume and density of vacancies: 2011 18 | | | | | Figure 4.3 | Incidence, volume and density of hard-to-fill vacancies: time series | | | | | Table 4.2 | Incidence, volume and density of hard-to-fill vacancies: 2011 | | | | | Figure 4.4 | Causes of hard-to-fill vacancies 21 | | | | | Figure 4.5 | Skill-shortage vacancies route map 22 | | | | | Figure 4.6 | Incidence, volume and density skill-shortage vacancies | | | | | Table 4.3 | Incidence, volume and density of skill-shortage vacancies: 2011 | | | | | Figure 4.7 | Impact of hard-to-fill vacancies | | | | | Figure 5.1 | Incidence, volume and density of skill gaps | | | | | Table 5.1 | Incidence, volume and density of skill gaps | | | | | Table 5.2 | Incidence, volume and density of skills gaps: profile by occupation | | | | | Figure 5.2 | Causes of skill gaps 31 | | | | | Figure 5.3 | Impact of skill gaps 32 | | | | | Figure 6.1 | Incidence of training activity by size 35 | | | | | Figure 6.2 | Incidence of training activity by sector 36 | | | | | Figure 6.3 | Incidence of training and further development by establishment size | | | | | Figure 6.4 | Incidence of training and further development by establishment sector | | | | | Table 6.3 | Volume of training 39 | | | | | Figure 6.5 | Incidence of training by occupation 40 | | | | ## Glossary This glossary gives a short guide to the key terms used in this report: ## Employment The overall number of people employed A single location of an organisation with people working at it. Establishment (also referred to as workplace, business, employer, site) Vacancy density The number of vacancies as a proportion of all employment. Hard-to-fill vacancies Vacancies which are proving difficult to fill, as defined by the establishment (from question: "Are any of these vacancies proving hard to fill?"). Hard-to-fill vacancy density The number of hard-to-fill vacancies as a proportion of all vacancies. Skill-shortage vacancies (SSVs) Vacancies which are proving difficult to fill due to the establishment not being able to find applicants with the appropriate skills, qualifications or experience. Skill-shortage vacancy density The number of skill-shortage vacancies as a proportion of all vacancies Skills gaps A "skills gap" is where an employee is not fully proficient, i.e. is not able to do their job to the required level. See Appendix A. Sector For definitions of the different sector groupings used in this report please refer to Appendix C. Occupations For definitions of the occupational groups used in this report please refer to Appendix D. ## Executive Summary The UK Commission's Employer Skills Survey 20111 is the key UK data source on employer demand for and investment in skills. This report focuses on the findings from the 2,500 interviews in Scotland which covered topics such as skill related recruitment difficulties, skills gaps, employer investment in training, product market strategy and the work-readiness of education leavers. Results are presented where possible by size and by sector. ## Work-Readiness Of Those Leaving Education In the last two to three years **27 per cent** of establishments have recruited a leaver of Scottish education. Establishments that had recruited education leavers generally found them well prepared for work; this perceived level of work-readiness increases with the amount of time recruits have spent in education with those recruited from university best prepared. Among those who felt education leavers were poorly prepared, a lack of working life experience or maturity was the most commonly cited reason. ## Recruitment And Skill Shortages At the time of fieldwork (March to July 2011) **13 per cent** of establishments had a total of 45,800 vacancies between them. This is consistent with the level seen in the 2010 Scottish Employer Skills Survey. The labour market is largely able to meet the requirements of most establishments. Four per cent had a vacancy they considered to be 'hard-to-fill'; a total of **10,200** hard-to-fill vacancies equivalent to **22 per cent** of all vacancies. Three per cent of establishments had a skill-shortage vacancy - that is a vacancy that was hard-to-fill because candidates lacked the skills, qualifications or experience the employer was looking for. Skill shortages represented **17 per cent** of all vacancies. Almost all establishments experiencing hard-to-fill vacancies reported that it had some impact on their establishment, most commonly on the workload of their staff but also on their ability to develop new offerings and meet their current objectives. ## Internal Skills Mismatch Most establishments reported that their entire workforce was fully proficient at doing their job. However **17 per cent** reported at least one of their staff was not fully proficient, that is, they had a "skills gap"; this amounted to **122,400** employees or **five per cent** of the workforce as a whole. Skills gaps are most commonly caused by transient factors such as staff being new to the role and training not being fully completed. For this reason they can be an inevitable part of bringing in new staff and developing new products, however they can become an issue when they start to impact on the establishment. Half of employers with skills gaps reported the workload of other staff members was impacted, and a quarter said they experienced increased operating costs and delays introducing new working practices. ## Employer Investment In Training And Workforce Development Encouragingly **71 per cent** of employers had provided either on- or off-the-job training to at least one member of staff in the 12 months preceding the survey. A further **18 per cent** had given staff other more informal development such as shadowing those in higher positions or allowing them to go beyond their current job role to develop. In total **1.4 million staff**, or **61 per cent** of the workforce, had received some training in the 12 months preceding the survey. Staff in Scotland overall had received an average of 4.2 days training each. This however means that **39 per cent** of staff are not receiving training, most commonly in Sales and Customer Services or Elementary occupations. ## 1 Introduction The UK Commission's Employer Skills Survey 2011 is the key UK data source on employer demand for and investment in skills. It is the first UK-wide employer skills survey and is also one of the largest employer skills surveys undertaken in the world with over 87,500 achieved interviews among large and small businesses in every sector. The full UK report is published on the UKCES website.2 This report, however, focuses on the findings from the interviews in Scotland in 2011 which enable time series comparisons with the earlier Scottish Employer Skills Surveys (SESS), carried out in Scotland from 2006 to 2010.3 The statistics contained in this report have been constructed on a consistent basis to be comparable with the population of establishments in Scotland surveyed in the previous SESS surveys from 2006 to 2010. The population previously surveyed varies slightly across the different nation states that comprise the UK and, therefore, the results contained in the present report are **not directly comparable** with those contained in the UK reports or those of the other individual nations.4 ## 1.1 Methodological Overview The UK Commission's Employer Skills Survey 2011 was a telephone-based survey. It was conducted in three parts: a core population survey of UK workplaces, and two (smaller) follow-up surveys of workplaces which had provided training for some of their employees in the 12 months preceding the survey, one looking at employers' investment in training ("Investment in Training Survey"), the other at whether employers that had trained their staff would have liked to have provided more workforce development ("Skills Equilibrium Survey").5 Below we briefly summarise the key features of the methodology adopted for the core survey. Further details can be found in Appendix B and the separate technical report. ## 1.1.1 Sampling The sample analysed for Scotland in this report comprises establishments (i.e. individual sites of an organisation) where at least one person is employed. It encompasses establishments across the full geographical spread of Scotland, in all sectors of the economy (across the commercial, public and charitable spheres). It should be noted that the presence of establishments from multi-site organisations in the survey means that in some instances interviews will have been completed with more than one site of the same organisation. A stratified random approach was taken to sampling the core UK survey, using population statistics from ONS's Inter-Departmental Business Register (IDBR), and setting quotas for establishment size crossed by sector. All of the employers interviewed for the follow-up surveys had previously been interviewed as part of the core survey (and had given their permission to be contacted for further research). ## 1.1.2 Questionnaire The core survey questionnaire was designed in several stages, with the co-operation of the four constituent nations of the UK. There were considerable pressures on the questionnaire both in terms of balancing the need for consistency across the UK with the need for continuity with legacy questionnaires; and also in terms of the drive to cover a wide range of issues without over-burdening employers and creating a lengthy questionnaire. The questionnaire was extensively piloted in May 2010 and again in February 2011, an exercise which included 10 follow-up cognitive interviews. ## 1.1.3 Fieldwork Fieldwork for the core UK survey was undertaken between March and July 2011, involving interviews averaging around 24 minutes in length. Table 1.1 illustrates the difference in sample size when the establishments with no employees are excluded to give the establishments on which the data in this report is based. The response rate for Scotland in the core survey was 39%. Interviews in Total interviews comparable Response rate population Core survey 2,503 2,453 39% ## 1.1.4 Data Weighting Findings from the core survey for this report have been weighted and grossed up to reflect the total population of establishments in Scotland with at least one person employed there. The weighting was designed and undertaken within Scotland on an interlocking size and sector basis. ## 1.2 Comparability With Previous Surveys It should be noted that the sample size for Scotland in 2011 is considerably smaller than the sample size used in previous SESS surveys (which tended to be around 6,000 interviews). This means that whilst the data for Scotland as a whole is robust, there are limitations on the sub-group analysis that can be conducted. As such, sub-group time series analyses are largely excluded from this report and it is recommended that such comparisons are treated with caution. Where differences are mentioned they are on sufficiently large base sizes to be robust, however some sectors and sizebands will be excluded from this analysis due to small base sizes. The survey questionnaire was designed to allow as much time series analysis as possible across the four nations, however inevitably some compromise was needed by each nation to allow for this. As a result, questions in the survey relating to on- and off-the-job training were asked in a different way in SESS to in UKCESS 2011. In SESS10 whether the establishments has trained or not is asked as one question; in UKCESS 2011 it is asked as two separate questions, once for off-the-job training and once for on-the-job. The act of asking it as two questions may lead to more "yes" responses than when it is asked as one, therefore caution must be exercised when comparing the two surveys to account for this difference. ## 1.3 Reporting Conventions The survey was carried out at an establishment level; the terms "establishment", "employer", "workplace" and "business unit" are used for this interchangeably throughout this report to avoid excessive repetition and to aid reading. The scale and scope of data collected by the UK Commission's Employer Skills Survey 2011 means that it is a valuable research resource supporting detailed and complex statistical analysis of the inter-relationships between employer characteristics, and their practices and experiences. The findings presented in this report have been produced through a more descriptive exploration of the data. The large base sizes on which the all-Scotland findings are based mean that we can have a good degree of confidence in the patterns that we describe; however as mentioned above subgroup analysis is limited due to smaller sample sizes and this document should not be read as a statistical report. A table showing confidence intervals is shown in Appendix E to give some indicative guidance as to what can be considered a "significant" difference at sub-group level. Throughout the report unweighted base figures are shown on tables and charts to give an indication of the statistical reliability of the figures. These figures are always based on the number of establishments answering a question, as this is the information required to determine statistical reliability. Therefore, where percentages are based on "all vacancies", the base figure quoted is the number of establishments with vacancies. As a general convention throughout the report, figures with a base size of fewer than 50 establishments are not reported (with a double asterisk, "**", displayed instead), and figures with a base size of 50 to 99 are italicised with a note of caution. In tables, "zero" is denoted as a dash "-" and an asterisk "*" is used if the figure is larger than zero but smaller than 0.5. ## 2 Nature Of Establishments In Scotland In order to give some context to the findings that are presented in this report, and to facilitate understanding of the differences in employers' experiences and practices, this section describes some of the key characteristics of the employer population in Scotland in terms of their size and sector distribution. ## 2.1 Size IDBR6 data shows us that the majority of establishments (58 per cent) were small, employing fewer than five people. Sites employing 50 or more staff represent only five per cent of all establishments but account for the majority (57 per cent) of overall employment (see Figure 2.1). 9,300 6,400 631k This picture is consistent with that seen in the previous Scottish Employer Skills Survey (SESS) in 2010 in terms of the number of establishments, and there is minimal variation in the distribution by size in the period since 2006. ## 2.2 Sector Sectoral analysis in this report is based on a 14 sector split, based on the establishment's Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code.7 IDBR statistics show that Health and Social Work is the sector employing the highest proportion of workers (16 per cent) and that there is a higher concentration of both establishments and workers in the Wholesale and Retail (15 per cent and 14 per cent respectively) and Real Estate Renting and Business Activities (13 per cent and 14 per cent respectively) sectors. A similar proportion of establishments are also to be found within the Construction industry (13 per cent). Commentary on the sectoral distribution concentrates only on the 2011 picture as the previous 2006, 2008 and 2010 SESS surveys used Sector Skills Council classification for sectoral breakdowns (as opposed to SIC codes) thus time series comparison is not possible. The differences seen in Figure 2.2 in the proportion of employers and employment in some sectors is a product of the typical size of establishment in these sectors. Sectors such as Health and Social Work and Manufacturing have a higher concentration of large establishments, hence their share of employment is far higher than their share of establishments. Conversely the Construction, Hotels and Restaurants and Transport and Communications sectors are characterised by smaller establishments, hence the opposite is true. Table 2.1 shows the size profile for each sector. 1-4 5-9 10-24 25-49 50-249 250+ Row % Scotland % 58 19 13 6 4 1 Agriculture % 82 15 3 * * * Mining and Quarrying % 36 28 26 4 4 2 Manufacturing % 44 16 13 15 9 2 Electricity, Gas and Water % 71 13 6 4 5 1 Construction % 77 11 8 2 1 * Wholesale and Retail % 47 28 16 5 3 1 Hotels and Restaurants % 51 26 15 6 2 * Transport and Communications % 68 13 11 5 3 * Financial Services % 56 24 14 4 1 2 Business Services % 57 12 15 10 5 * Public Administration % 65 13 13 3 4 1 Education % 22 18 28 12 17 2 Health and Social Work % 27 32 22 8 9 1 Community, Social and Personal Services activities % 64 20 10 2 3 1 Source: IDBR March 2010 '*' denotes figure larger than zero but smaller than 0.5. ## 2.3 Product Market Strategy In order to enable further exploration of business strategy, the UK Commission's Employer Skills Survey 2011 included a series of questions designed to locate establishments' product market strategies (PMS). Private sector employers were asked to rate their establishments on a scale of one to five, compared to others in their industry, in terms of: - the extent to which success of products/services was dependent on price; - the extent to which they perceive their establishment to lead the way in their sector in terms of developing new products, services or techniques; - whether they compete in a market for standard/basic or premium quality products or services; - and whether they offered a standard range of goods or services, or customised products/services with substantial differences according to customer requirements. Figure 2.3 (on the next page) shows overall responses to each of these individual position statements. This shows, for example, that establishments are positioned fairly evenly, with a concentration in the mid-range on price dependency. Establishments are also much more likely to report competing in a premium quality market than a standard or basic market. ## 3 Work-Readiness Of Education Leavers Chapter Summary - In the last two to three years 27 per cent of establishments have recruited a leaver of Scottish education. This is similar to proportions seen in 2010, however recruitment of those from FE College and University has seen a slight decrease. - As in previous surveys, establishments that had recruited education leavers generally found them well prepared for work; this perceived level of work-readiness increases with the amount of time recruits have spent in education with those recruited from university best prepared. - Among those who felt education leavers were poorly prepared, a lack of working world/life experience or maturity was the most commonly cited reason. ## 3.1 Introduction Before considering recruitment activity and skills levels more broadly (in Chapters Four and Five), this chapter looks at the recruitment and skill levels of education leavers. More specifically, it looks at the proportion of employers that have recruited anybody into their first job on leaving education in the past two to three years, before then exploring employers' perceptions of these recruits in terms of their readiness for work and their skills. Employers in Scotland were asked about three groups of leavers: those recruited straight from a Scottish secondary school, a Scottish FE College and a Scottish university. ## 3.2 Incidence Of Recruitment Of School, College And University Leavers In the two to three years preceding the survey 27 per cent had recruited at least one leaver from Scottish education to their first job, most commonly from a Scottish secondary school: 18 per cent had recruited a school leaver compared to nine per cent recruiting from Scottish FE Colleges and from Scottish universities. For the latter two this is slightly down on the proportions seen in 2010 (see Table 3.1 on page 13). 2006 2008 2010 2011 Unweighted Base 6,276 6,274 6,001 2,453 Column % % % % % Any 30 31 29 27 From a Scottish secondary school 17 18 17 18 From a Scottish FE College 12 13 12 9 From a Scottish university 15 14 13 9 Base: All establishments ## 3.3 Perceived Work-Readiness Of Education Leavers Most establishments recruiting leavers from Scottish education find them to be well prepared for work, and this perceived level of work-readiness increases with the amount of time spent in education. Figure 3.1 shows that this has been fairly consistent over time, and that among secondary school leavers there has been a slight upward trend over the last three surveys towards being more prepared. ## 3.4 Skills And Attributes Lacking Among Education Leavers Those employers in Scotland who reported that the education leavers they had recruited were poorly prepared for work were asked to indicate what skills or attributes they were lacking. A lack of working world or life experience or maturity was the most commonly cited reason for school leavers not being well prepared, cited by 18 per cent of all those who had recruited from this group. Poor attitude or personality or a lack of motivation was also commonly cited among those recruiting school leavers (13 per cent); poor education (six per cent) and poor literacy or numeracy (one per cent) were less commonly mentioned. A lack of required skills or competencies was the most common reason for FE College leavers (12 per cent, although the base size here is low and thus the figures should be viewed with caution). The base size for those recruiting from Scottish Universities is too low to report robust data on reasons for being poorly prepared. ## 3.5 Conclusions Employers who have recruited new staff directly from the Scottish education system in the past two to three years have generally found them well prepared for work. This perceived preparedness increases with the time spent in education, with university leavers seen as better prepared than school leavers. The small minority of employers who find education leavers poorly prepared for work most commonly cite 'lack of experience' as the main reason for this. In contrast, poor literacy and numeracy is very rarely cited as a cause of an education leaver's unpreparedness. ## 4 Employers, Recruitment And Skills Shortages Chapter Summary - Overall 13 per cent of establishments in Scotland had a current vacancy at the time of the 2011 fieldwork, consistent with the level recorded at the 2010 Scottish Employer Skills Survey. - The number of establishments experiencing hard-to-fill vacancies decreased from five per cent in 2010 to four per cent in 2011; there was also a marked drop in the proportion of all vacancies that are hard-to-fill from 35 per cent to 22 per cent, continuing a trend seen since 2006. - Despite the fall in hard-to-fill vacancies the proportion of establishments with skillshortage vacancies and the proportion of vacancies that are classed as skill-shortage vacancies has remained consistent with 2010 levels suggesting that the drop in hard-tofill vacancies is not due to an increase in the skills level, qualifications or experience of applicants. - Hard-to-fill and skill-shortage vacancies are more prevalent among larger establishments, and the increase in skill-shortage vacancies since 2010 was most marked among establishments with a workforce of 25 or more. ## 4.1 Introduction This chapter looks at the demand for and availability of new staff. Specifically it explores current vacancies across Scotland at the time of research; the ability of the market to meet employer demand for new staff and the level of hard-to-fill vacancies; causes of recruitment difficulties focusing particularly on those vacancies that are hard-to-fill specifically as a result of a lack of skills, qualifications or experience (skill-shortage vacancies); and the impact of hard-to-fill vacancies on establishments experiencing them. The measures covered by this chapter are summarised in Figure 4.1 on page 16. ## 4.2 What Is The Level Of Demand For New Staff? Overall, around one in eight establishments (13 per cent) in Scotland had a current vacancy at the time of the UK Commission's Employer Skills Survey fieldwork. Whilst this marks a decrease from the level recorded in the 2006 and 2008 Scottish Employers Skills Surveys it remains consistent with that recorded in the 2010 SESS survey. In total there were 45,800 vacancies across Scotland at the time of the survey equating to two vacancies per employee (Figure 4.2 on page 17). There is however some variation in the proportion of establishments with a vacancy by size and sector. Larger establishments were more likely to have a vacancy, however vacancy density (that is, vacancies as a proportion of current staff) was highest for the very smallest establishments. Education and Community, Social and Personal Services were the sectors where establishments were most likely to have a vacancy at the time of the survey; the latter of these also had a higher than average vacancy density measure with 2.7 vacancies per employee (see Table 4.1 on page 18). Comparing this to the findings of the 2010 survey suggests that the Business Services and Health and Social Work sectors, and to a lesser extent Construction, have seen a fall in vacancy levels. % of Number of Vacancy establishments vacancies density with a vacancy Unwtd base % Rounded to nearest 100 % Total 2,453 13 45,800 2.0 Size 1-4 328 8 7,800 4.3 5-9 317 11 4,100 2.0 10-24 537 19 6,400 1.9 25-49 388 38 7,000 2.4 50-249 727 46 12,400 2.0 250+ 156 56 8,100 1.2 Sector Agriculture 85 13 1,400 4.9 Mining and Quarrying 24 ** ** ** Manufacturing 176 18 2,900 1.4 Electricity, Gas and Water 79 7 600 1.6 Construction 223 8 2,700 2.0 Wholesale and Retail 311 13 6,000 1.9 Hotels and Restaurants 218 15 5,600 3.3 Transport and Communications 221 14 4,800 2.5 Financial Services 83 9 2,000 2.2 Business Services 338 10 6,100 1.9 Public Administration 136 11 2,600 1.7 Education 164 26 1,900 1.5 Health and Social Work 208 15 3,500 1.0 Community, Social and Personal Services activities 187 24 4,500 2.7 Base: All establishments in Scotland. Percentages in Column 3 are based on all employment, percentages therefore represent the number of vacancies as a proportion of all employment. Number of vacancies rounded to nearest 100. '**' denotes base size <25: too small to report. Figures in italics denote base size <100: treat figures with caution ## 4.3 The Ability Of The Market To Meet Employer Demand For New Staff Just four per cent of Scottish establishments reported having at least one hard-to-fill vacancy at the time of research, equating to a total of 10,200 hard-to-fill vacancies across Scotland (see Figure 4.3 on page 19). The incidence of hard-to-fill vacancies is slightly higher than that reported in 2010 but marks a drastic decrease since 2006 and 2008 when there were over three-times as many hard-to-fill vacancies reported. The proportion of vacancies reported as hard-to-fill (density) decreased to around one-in-five (22 per cent) continuing the downward trend seen since 2008. Overall it would appear that whilst the proportion of establishments reporting a current vacancy has remained relatively consistent, it has become less difficult to fill these vacancies. "Hard to fill vacancies as a proportion of vacancies" percentages are based on all vacancies, rather than all establishments with vacancies; proportions therefore show the percentage of vacancies which are hard-to-fill. Whilst larger establishments were more likely to have a hard-to-fill vacancy (by virtue of being more likely to have a vacancy in the first place), the proportion of vacancies considered hard-to-fill decreased with size of establishment. This means that although smaller establishments were least likely to have a hard-to-fill vacancy in the first instance, a higher proportion of vacancies in smaller establishments were hard-to-fill. This continues a trend seen across previous surveys. Vacancies in the Manufacturing sector were the most likely to be reported as hard-to-fill, with a third of all vacancies in that sector classified as such. Conversely vacancies in Education were least likely to be classed hard-to-fill (see Table 4.2). Comparing this to the findings from the survey in 2010 suggests that the overall fall in the number of hard-to-fill vacancies is driven primarily by the Construction, Wholesale and Retail, Business Services, Education and Health and Social Work sectors, which have seen the largest falls in both incidence and density of hard-to-fill vacancies. % of % of vacancies establishments Number of hard-to-fill that are hard to with a hard-tovacancies fill fill vacancy Unwtd Unwtd base % Rounded to base % nearest 100 Total 2,453 4 10,200 724 22 Size 1-4 328 2 2,600 23 ** 5-9 317 4 1,100 39 ** 10-24 537 6 1,600 104 25 25-49 388 10 1,800 132 25 50-249 727 13 1,900 342 16 250+ 156 21 1,300 84 16 Sector Agriculture 85 8 700 15 ** Mining and Quarrying 24 ** ** 6 ** Manufacturing 176 7 900 66 33 Electricity, Gas and Water 79 3 100 15 ** Construction 223 1 500 37 ** Wholesale and Retail 311 3 1,000 74 17 Hotels and Restaurants 218 6 1,700 90 30 Transport and Communications 221 7 1,500 63 32 Financial Services 83 1 * 13 ** Business Services 338 3 1,100 97 17 Public Administration 136 2 400 37 ** Education 164 3 100 77 7 Health and Social Work 208 3 600 75 18 Community, Social and Personal Services activities 187 7 1,100 59 24 Base: Columns 1 and 2: All establishments in Scotland; Column 3: All establishments with vacancies Percentages in Column 3 are based on all vacancies, percentages therefore represent the number of hard-to-fill vacancies as a proportion of all vacancies. Number of hard-to-fill vacancies rounded to nearest 100. '**' denotes base size <50: too small to report; figures in italics denote base under 100: treat figures with caution. '*' denotes a figure larger than zero but that rounding to the nearest 100 would round to zero. ## 4.4 Causes Of Hard-To-Fill Vacancies Understanding the causes of hard-to-fill vacancies is clearly a prerequisite to introducing effective measures aimed at easing recruitment difficulties and improving the effectiveness of the labour market. Most importantly, it can identify where there are issues finding applicants with the requisite skills to fill the role. One third (33 per cent) of hard-to-fill vacancies are caused by a low number of applicants with the skills required for the role. A quarter (25 per cent) are caused by a lack of work experience the company demands and one in six (16 per cent), poor terms and conditions offered for the post. (Figure 4.4). motivation or personality Base: All establishments with hard-to-fill vacancies (unwtd): 217 Responses given by more that five per cent of base shown Results are based on hard-to-fill vacancies rather than establishments with hard-to-fill vacancies; the figures therefore show the proportion of hard-to-fill vacancies caused by each factor reported by employers. Note: Summed percentages exceed 100 per cent because of multiple responses ## 4.5 Skill-Shortage Vacancies As discussed above, recruitment difficulties are commonly caused by issues with either the quality or quantity of applicants. Hard-to-fill vacancies caused specifically by a lack of **skills**, qualifications or **experience** among applicants are known as "skill-shortage vacancies"8. Where there is an issue with the attitude, personality or motivation of applicants, these are not skill-shortage vacancies. Figure 4.5 shows a "map" of how skill-shortage vacancies are defined. ## 4.5.1 The Incidence, Volume, Density And Distribution Of Skill-Shortage Vacancies For the vast majority of establishments, demand for skills is met through successful recruitment (or through their current workforce, as will be explored in the next chapter). Three per cent of establishments reported having vacancies at the time of the survey that they were having difficulties filling due to a lack of skills, qualifications or experience in applicants for the role (a "skill-shortage vacancy"). This is consistent with the level measured in 2011 and in absolute terms equates to 7,900 vacancies resulting from skill-shortages, again consistent with 2010 figures (see Figure 4.5). So although there was a drop in hardto-fill vacancies in the 12 months leading up to the survey, this did not necessarily result in a drop in skill-shortage vacancies, suggesting the drop in hard-to-fill vacancies was not due to an increase in the skill level, quality or experience of applicants. Similarly, there has been little change in the proportion of all vacancies in Scotland since 2010 that are caused by skill shortages (17 per cent at the time of the 2011 survey). "Skill-shortage vacancies as a proportion of vacancies" percentages are based on all vacancies, rather than all establishments with vacancies; proportions therefore show the percentage of vacancies which are hard-to-fill due to skill shortages. As seen at previous Scottish Employers Skills Surveys the proportion of establishments with skill-shortage vacancies increases with size of establishment. Establishments in the Manufacturing (seven per cent) and Community, Social and Personal Services activities (six per cent) sectors were most likely to report any skill-shortage vacancies. Although base sizes are small when breaking down skill-shortage vacancy density by sector, the data suggests that as with hard-to-fill vacancies Manufacturing is the sector where vacancies are most likely to be skill-shortage vacancies (see Table 4.3). The Construction, Wholesale and Retail, Business Services, Education and Health and Social Work sectors had seen the largest falls in skill-shortage vacancies. Conversely however some sectors have seen a rise, most notably Hotels and Restaurants and Manufacturing. % of Number of % of vacancies establishments SSVs that are SSVs with an SSV Unwtd Unwtd base % Rounded to nearest 100 base % Total 2,453 3 7,900 724 17 Size 1-4 328 2 2,100 23 ** 5-9 317 3 1,000 39 ** 10-24 537 4 1,100 104 17 25-49 388 8 1,500 132 21 50-249 727 10 1,300 342 10 250+ 156 16 1,000 84 12 Sector Agriculture 85 5 400 15 ** Mining and Quarrying 24 ** ** 6 ** Manufacturing 176 7 900 66 30 Electricity, Gas and Water 79 2 100 15 ** Construction 223 1 400 37 ** Wholesale and Retail 311 2 600 74 11 Hotels and Restaurants 218 4 1,300 90 23 Transport and Communications 221 5 1,200 63 25 Financial Services 83 * * 13 ** Business Services 338 3 900 97 15 Public Administration 136 2 300 37 ** Education 164 1 100 77 3 Health and Social Work 208 2 400 75 12 Community, Social and Personal Services activities 187 6 1,000 59 23 Base: Columns 1 and 2: All establishments in Scotland; Column 3: All establishments with vacancies. Percentages in Column 3 are based on all vacancies, percentages therefore represent the number of skill-shortage vacancies as a proportion of all vacancies. Number of skill-shortage vacancies rounded to nearest 100. '**' denotes base size <50: too small to report; figures in italics denote base under 100: treat figures with caution. '*' denotes a figure larger than zero but that rounding to the nearest 100 or nearest integer would round to zero. ## 4.6 Impact Of Hard-To-Fill Vacancies Having established the perceived causes of hard-to-fill vacancies, in particular where this cause relates to skill shortages in the labour market, this section focuses on the impact of all hard-to-fill vacancies on employers. Just two per cent of establishments with hard-to-fill vacancies said they had no impact on the establishment, leaving 98 per cent that have seen an impact. In the vast majority (92 per cent) of establishments with hard-to-fill vacancies, one reported impact is to increase the workload and demand on existing staff. Over half (53 per cent) of establishments with hard-to-fill vacancies reported that they caused a delay in developing new products or services and half (50 per cent) stated they have difficulties meeting customer service objectives. Hard-to-fill vacancies were less likely to cause difficulties in introducing technological change (15 per cent) or lead to the withdrawal from offering certain products or services altogether (13 per cent). ## 4.7 Conclusion The demand for staff is largely being met with just 22 per cent of vacancies being hard-to-fill vacancies, reflecting a steady fall since 2008 when it stood at 50 per cent and 35 per cent in 2010. This might be expected as fewer establishments recruiting will lead to fewer jobs available, so there will likely be more applicants per vacancy and as such more chance of finding a suitable applicant. The proportion of vacancies that are hard-to-fill due to skills shortages however has remained relatively constant since 2010, suggesting the fall in hard-to-fill vacancies can be attributed to an increased availability of applicants rather than any increase in the skills, qualifications or experience of applicants. Where hard-to-fill vacancies exist they can have a substantial impact on the establishment in question, with nearly all establishments experiencing a hard-to-fill vacancy saying it has had some impact. This was most commonly an increased workload for other staff, which in itself can lead to morale and retention issues, but also more tangible impacts such as delays in developing new products and services and difficulties meeting service objectives. ## 5 Internal Skills Gaps Chapter Summary - Most establishments report all their workforce to be fully proficient at doing their job, but 17 per cent report that at least one of their staff is not fully proficient, that is, they have a "skills gap". More than 120,000, or five per cent of the total workforce in Scotland, are reported to have a skills gap. - Although the proportion of establishments with skill gaps increased slightly between 2010 and 2011, the overall proportion of the workforce with a skills gap continued the downward trend seen since 2008. - Skills gaps are most commonly caused by transient factors, such as staff being new to the role and training only being partially completed. - Where skills gaps exist they can have a significant impact on the establishment. The most common impact was an increase in workload for other staff, but others report increased operating costs and difficulties in meeting quality standards. ## 5.1 Introduction Skills gaps occur when the skills of staff are not adequate to perform their job role, and can have an impact on the efficient functioning of establishments. This chapter will explore their incidence and volume over time, before reviewing the causes and the impact they are having on establishments. ## 5.2 The Incidence, Volume, Density And Distribution Of Skills Gaps For the majority of establishments (83 per cent) in Scotland, the entire workforce is regarded as being fully proficient at their job roles; however almost one-fifth (17 per cent) of establishments report having at least one member of staff that is not fully proficient (a 'skills gap'). In total 122,400 workers were considered to have skills gaps, equivalent to five per cent of the total workforce in Scotland. After a decrease in the proportion of *establishments* experiencing skills gaps in 2008 and 2010, the 2011 figures show that this figure has risen slightly. The proportion of the workforce considered to have a skill gap however continues to decrease, continuing the trend seen since the 2008 Scottish Employer Skills Survey (see Table 5.1). Larger establishments were more likely to report having skill gaps, however this appears to be simply a product of having more staff as the proportion of the workforce with skills gaps is larger for small-to-medium sized establishments. By sector it is the Hotels and Restaurants sector where skills gaps are most prevalent: establishments in this sector were one of the most likely to report having skills gaps, and staff working in Hotels and Restaurants were most likely to be reported as not being fully proficient (with 11 per cent of the workforce in this sector deemed not proficient to do their job to the required level). This is an increase on the levels of skills gaps reported for this sector in 2010. % of % of Number of workforce establishments that have skill gaps with a skills gap skill gaps Unwtd base % Rounded to nearest 100 % Total 2,453 17 122,400 5 Size 1-4 328 7 8,300 5 5-9 317 22 12,700 6 10-24 537 31 22,400 7 25-49 388 39 16,500 6 50-249 727 40 33,400 5 250+ 156 52 29,100 4 Sector Agriculture 85 17 1,900 7 Mining and Quarrying 24 ** ** ** Manufacturing 176 21 13,300 7 Electricity, Gas and Water 79 8 800 2 Construction 223 12 7,000 5 Wholesale and Retail 311 21 22,400 7 Hotels and Restaurants 218 27 18,400 11 Transport and Communications 221 13 7,100 4 Financial Services 83 31 3,300 4 Business Services 338 12 11,400 4 Public Administration 136 11 5,600 4 Education 164 25 4,000 3 Health and Social Work 208 17 20,300 6 Community, Social and Personal Services activities 187 12 6,300 4 Base: All establishments in Scotland. Percentages in Column 3 are based on all employment, percentages therefore represent the proportion of the workforce with a skills gap. Number of skills gaps rounded to nearest 100. '**' denotes base size <50: too small to report. Figures in italics denote base size <100: treat figures with caution Skills gaps tend to be most concentrated among the lower skilled occupations, specifically, Sales and Customer services staff and those in Elementary occupations. In both these cases, one-in-fourteen (seven per cent) staff are considered to be lacking in the necessary skills (see Table 5.2). % of workforce Number of skills gaps with skills gaps Column % Base % Managers 2,079 11,000 4 Professionals 645 8,700 3 Associate Professionals 612 9,700 6 Admin / Clerical 1,769 14,800 5 Skilled Trades 790 11,900 6 Caring, Leisure and Other services 475 11,100 5 Sales / Customer services 803 19,000 7 Machine Operatives 599 9,100 5 Elementary 1,214 27,100 7 Base: All establishments with staff in each occupation ## 5.3 Causes Of Skill Gaps The main causes of staff not being fully proficient are presented in Figure 5.2. Results are based on skills gaps rather than establishments with gaps; the figure shows what proportions of skills gaps are caused by the various factors reported by employers. Establishments could give more than one cause for skills gaps within each occupation. Training only being partially completed and staff being new to the role are by far the most common causes of skills gaps, with 52 per cent and 50 per cent of all skills gaps respectively being attributed, at least in part, to these reasons. Training proving ineffective (31 per cent), a lack of staff motivation and the introduction of new working practices (both 26 per cent) were also quite common causes of skills gaps. The recruitment and retention of staff are less likely to be cited with around one-in-seven (15 per cent) of employers stating that they are unable to recruit staff with the required skills and fewer than one-in-ten (nine per cent) mentioning problems retaining staff. ## 5.4 Impact Of Skill Gaps Overall, 59 per cent of establishments with skills gaps said they had an impact on the establishment. Half of establishments with skill gaps (50 per cent) said they had seen an increased workload for other staff; around one quarter (27 per cent) believe that their skill gaps lead to increased operating costs and a similar proportion (25 per cent) find they encounter difficulties introducing new working practices (see Figure 5.3). More than one-in-five (22 per cent) find that skills gaps create difficulties in meeting quality standards and fewer, although a sizeable number, report that skills gaps prohibit their business developing or growing specifically in terms of: losing business to competitors (17 per cent); or lead to delays in developing new services or products (14 per cent). ## 5.5 Conclusion The proportion of staff in the Scottish workforce that have skills gaps is at five per cent, a decrease that follows a pattern seen since 2008 when eight per cent of the workforce was deemed not proficient. The proportion of establishments experiencing these gaps has not decreased from the level seen in 2010, but the skills gaps they do have appear less severe: in 2010 around eight-in-ten reported the skills gaps they were experiencing were having an impact on the establishment, this was down to six-in-ten in the 2011 survey. Most commonly the impact was on other staff experiencing an increase in workload, but other practical impacts such as increased operating costs and difficulties in introducing new working practices were also cited as problems. The biggest causes of skills gaps are transient ones, that is, staff being new to the role or their training only being partially completed, or the introduction of new technology, products and working practices. Training is often a solution to these problems and a lack of training, or a time-lag in seeing the impact of training, can be a cause of these problems. The next chapter explores employer investment in training and in the skills of their staff. ## 6 Workforce Development Chapter Summary - Seven in ten establishments (71 per cent) had funded or arranged on- or off-the-job training for at least one of their employees over the 12 months preceding the survey. - A further 18 per cent had given staff other, more informal development such as supervision, shadowing those in higher positions or allowing them to go beyond their current job role. - In the 12 months preceding the survey employers in Scotland had provided training to approximately 1.4 million staff, 61 per cent of the current workforce, and provided 9.7 million training days. ## 6.1 Introduction This chapter reports on the quantity of training and development activity undertaken by employers in Scotland. More specifically the chapter discusses the proportion of establishments that engage in training or informal workforce development activities and how this varies by establishment size and sector. It also examines the quantity of training provided in terms of training days and the proportion of workers trained. Throughout the chapter, unless otherwise stated, an employer is described as providing training if in the previous 12 months they had funded or arranged one or both of the following for any of their employees based at their site: - off-the-job training or development: training away from the individual's immediate work position, whether on their premises or elsewhere; - on-the-job or informal training or development: activities which take place at the individual's immediate work position which would be recognised as training by recipients. Training as defined in this way is intended to capture all activity which employers and employees would recognise as training. However, broader activity can take place which leads to skill development but which may not be classified as training. For this reason the UK Commission's Employer Skills Survey 2011 also asked employers whether they had engaged in any broader development activities, specifically: supervision to ensure that employees are guided through their job role over time; opportunities for staff to spend time learning through watching others perform their job roles; and allowing staff to perform tasks that go beyond their strict job role and providing feedback on how well they had done. As we see later in this chapter, a significant number of employers did not provide on- or off-the-job training but did engage in some of these broader development activities. However, unless otherwise stated it is on- and off-the-job training activity which is described in this chapter. The way in which the training questions were asked in the previous Scottish Employer Skills Surveys differed slightly to the way it has been asked in the 2011 survey (see section 1.2 of this report). As such the data is not directly comparable for this measure and so time series data is only referred to in a qualitative manner as being indicative of a change rather than as being evidence for a change in levels of training. ## 6.2 The Extent Of Training And Workforce Development Activity The majority of establishments (71 per cent) had funded or arranged on-the-job or off-the-job training for at least one of their employees in the 12 months preceding the survey (see Table 6.1). Slightly more had provided on-the-job training (58 per cent of all workplaces) than had provided off-the-job training (52 per cent); two-fifths (39 per cent) had provided both types of training (see the first column in Figure 6.1). The likelihood that training is provided in a workplace is closely related to the number of staff working at the establishment; with the exception of the largest establishment size, incidence of training rises with size of establishment (see Figure 6.1). Whilst three-fifths (60 per cent) of workplaces with fewer than five staff members provided any training in the previous 12 months, more than four-fifths (82 per cent) of establishments with five to nine workers had provided any training, rising to more than nine-in-ten (93 per cent) of employers with 50-249 staff. The incidence of training varies widely by sector, as shown in Figure 6.2. Incidence of training is less common in the Construction (55 per cent) and Agriculture (58 per cent) sectors and highest in the Education (95 per cent) and Manufacturing (85 per cent) sectors. Differences in the type of training provided by sector was also apparent: on-the-job training was most likely to be provided by the Manufacturing (77 per cent) and Health and Social work (76 per cent) sectors, whilst off-the-job training was most commonly provided in the Education sector (85 per cent). 0% ## 6.3 Incidence Of Training And Workforce Development Activity Broader activity can take place in establishments which leads to skill development but which may not be classified as training. For this reason the UK Commission's Employer Skills Survey 2011 also asked employers whether they had engaged in any broader development activities, specifically: - supervision to ensure that employees are guided through their job role over time; - opportunities for staff to spend time learning through watching others perform their job roles; - allowing staff to perform tasks that go beyond their strict job role and providing feedback on how well they had done. This section explores the proportion of workplaces that have funded or arranged training or further development for their staff over the previous 12 months. In addition to the 71 per cent of establishments in Scotland who train staff, a further one-infive (18 per cent) have provided more informal development activity for their staff. The total proportion of establishments in Scotland that provide any form of staff development is 89 per cent; however 11 per cent of establishments offer no development at all for staff. Larger establishments are more likely to offer any form of development (Figure 6.3). The incidence of staff development varies by sector, as Figure 6.4 shows. The Business Services and Construction industries were least likely to offer staff any form of development, with approaching a quarter and a fifth of establishments respectively offering no development for staff. Education and Electricity, Gas and Water were most likely to offer staff development. ## 6.4 The Proportion Of The Workforce Receiving Training Having briefly considered broader development activities, the remainder of this section deals with on- and off-the job training. In the previous 12 months employers in Scotland had provided training to approximately 1.4 million staff. Notwithstanding possible double counting (staff being trained by two or more different employers in a 12 month period), this is equivalent to 61 per cent of the total workforce and a total of 9.6 million training days and averages to 4.2 training days per employee (see Table 6.3). Volume of training (proportion of workforce trained) by size of establishment was relatively consistent in the 12 months preceding the UK Commission's Employer Skills Survey with the exception of the smallest establishments in which around four-fifths (79 per cent) of the workforce were trained. Employees in the establishments with a workforce of 5-9 workers received the most number of days training (5.9 per employee). Volume of training was highest in the Financial Services sector, where 93 per cent of the workforce received training in the 12 months preceding the UK Commission's Employer Skills Survey; it was also within this sector that employees received the most amount of training (7.0 days per employee) although the low base size means figures for this sector need to be treated with some caution. % of Number of Days per Days per workforce days training employee trainee trained Unwtd base % Total 2,453 61 9.7m 4.2 6.8 Size 1-4 328 79 0.8m 4.5 5.7 5-9 317 61 1.2m 5.9 9.7 10-24 537 59 1.6m 4.8 8.1 25-49 388 57 1.5m 5.1 9.0 50-249 727 59 2.8m 4.4 7.5 250+ 156 59 1.8m 2.6 4.4 Sector Agriculture 85 49 0.1m 2.5 5.1 Mining and Quarrying 24 ** ** ** ** Manufacturing 176 52 0.5m 2.7 5.2 Electricity, Gas and Water 79 63 0.1m 3.9 6.2 Construction 223 67 0.5m 3.9 5.9 Wholesale and Retail 311 59 1.8m 5.7 9.6 Hotels and Restaurants 218 63 0.9m 5.5 8.7 Transport and Communications 221 53 0.5m 2.8 5.2 Financial Services 83 93 0.6m 7.0 7.5 Business Services 338 54 1.3m 4.2 7.7 Public Administration 136 52 0.7m 4.5 8.7 Education 164 58 0.4m 2.9 5.1 Health and Social Work 208 78 1.5m 4.2 5.4 Community, Social and Personal Services activities 187 48 0.5m 3.1 6.5 Base: All establishments. '**' denotes base <50: too small to report. Figures in italics denote base size <100: treat figures with caution Training was not evenly distributed across the workforce, with Machine Operatives least likely to have received training (43 per cent) and those in Professional occupations most likely to have done (73 per cent, see Figure 6.5). ## 6.5 Conclusions The majority of employers (71 per cent) had funded or arranged on- or off-the-job training for at least one of their employees over the 12 months preceding the survey. Informal development such as supervision, shadowing those in higher positions or allowing them to go beyond their current job role was provided by a further 18 per cent of employers. Scottish employers provided training to approximately 1.4 million staff, 61 per cent of the current workforce, and provided 9.7 million training days. As seen in previous surveys, training is not evenly distributed across the workforce. For example, Machine Operatives are less likely to be trained than other occupations (just 43 per cent are compared to 61 per cent of the workforce as a whole), as are staff in the Agriculture or Community, Social and Personal Services sectors. ## 7 Conclusions The UK Commission's Employer Skills Survey 2011 is a large scale employer survey covering an extensive range of topics, including recruitment, internal skills gaps, investment in training and product market strategies. This concluding chapter summarises the key messages coming out of the project for Scotland, and, in drawing comparisons with the previous Scottish Employer Skills Survey (SESS) series (carried out in Scotland most recently in 2010), discusses the ways employers are reacting to the economic climate. ## The Extent Of Skill Deficiencies Skills deficiencies measured by this project cover both internal skills gaps, where staff are not fully proficient to perform their job role, and external skills shortages where establishments are having difficulties finding people with the appropriate skills to fill vacancies ('skill-shortage vacancies'). The survey data shows that by and large the labour market is meeting employers' demand for skills, with just three per cent of employers experiencing a skill-shortage vacancy and 17 per cent having staff who are not proficient to do their job to the required level. Skill deficiencies are uncommon in Scotland but where they do occur they can impact on business performance. The most commonly reported impact of skill deficiencies is on the workload of other staff; also commonly mentioned were delays developing new products and increased operating costs. This suggests that skill deficiencies could be, for pockets of the economy, proving a barrier to growth and profitability. It needs to be borne in mind that having a skills gap can be caused by transient factors where some employees may be new to the role and developing proficiency, or where the nature of the role is changing to meet new business opportunities. In such cases skills gaps would be expected to decrease over time, and are not necessarily a negative thing as they may reflect a business that is innovating and evolving its offer to remain competitive. The skill deficiencies which do exist are represented unevenly across the economy in different sectors and occupations. Those sectors with higher than average rates of skill shortages include the Manufacturing sector and the Community, Social and Personal Services sector, while skills gaps are most common in the Hotels and Restaurants sector. Across all sectors skills gaps were most commonly seen in traditionally "lower skilled" roles of Sales and Customer Services and Elementary occupations. ## Training Activity The majority of employers (71 per cent) had funded or arranged on- or off-the-job training for at least one of their employees over the 12 months preceding the survey. Informal development such as supervision, shadowing those in higher positions or allowing them to go beyond their current job role was provided by a further 18 per cent of employers. Scottish employers provided training to approximately 1.4 million staff, 61 per cent of the current workforce, and provided 9.7 million training days. As seen in previous surveys, training is not evenly distributed across the workforce. For example, Machine Operatives are less likely to be trained than other occupations (just 43 per cent are compared to 61 per cent of the workforce as a whole), as are staff in the Agriculture or Community, Social and Personal Services sectors. ## Work-Readiness Of Education Leavers Employers who have recruited new staff directly from education in the past two to three years have generally found them well prepared for work. This perceived preparedness increases with the time spent in education, with university leavers seen as better prepared than school leavers. The small minority of employers who find education leavers poorly prepared for work most commonly cite 'lack of experience' as the main reason for this. In contrast, poor literacy and numeracy is very rarely cited as a cause of an education leaver's unpreparedness. ## Appendix A: A Note On Proficiency And Skills Gaps To ascertain the number of staff with skills gaps, respondents were asked, for each major (one-digit SOC 2010) occupation where they employed staff, how many of those they employed were fully proficient. If respondents asked for clarification, then a proficient employee was described as 'someone who is able to do their job to the required level'. 'Proficient employee', however, is clearly a subjective and relative term to the extent that: • different managers in an organisation may have different views on whether an individual member of staff is able to do the job to the required level. Indeed they may have different views on what the required level is that the organisation is looking for within an occupational category • an employee could be regarded as fully proficient but if the requirements of the job change (for example, some new machinery or technology is introduced) then they could be regarded as not being able to do their job to the required level, despite the fact that their skills were unchanged • the same is true if a person were to be promoted to a more demanding position - the company might go from having no skills gaps to saying that this newly promoted member of staff was not fully proficient in the new job, despite having the same proficiency as before • different companies may be more demanding and 'critical' of their staff than others: an individual considered fully proficient by one company might be seen as having a skills gap if performing the same role to the same standard in another company. A final point to note is that the survey categorises all staff as either fully proficient or not: it takes no account of the range that can clearly exist between those who are very nearly proficient and those who significantly lack the skills that employers require. While from a policy perspective, therefore, there is clearly interest in raising the skill levels of the workforce, survey data can only identify changes year on year in the proportion of staff reported as fully proficient, not cases where skills levels have been raised but where staff still remain below full proficiency. ## Appendix B: Technical Appendix A full Technical Report accompanies the main UK Commission's Employer Skills Survey report and can be downloaded from the UKCES website or obtained by contacting UKCES directly. This appendix provides brief details on the key areas of sampling, fieldwork and analysis. The data reported in this document came from the core survey in the UK Commission's Employer Skills Survey. ## Sampling This report uses a sample comparable to that used in SESS10, with all establishments with one or more people employed at them eligible. Quotas were set on a size by SSC within region basis, proportioned to give a robust base size in each subgroup of the overall sample. Sample was drawn from Experian's business database. ## Fieldwork A total of 2,503 interviews were completed in Scotland, by telephone using computerassisted telephone interviewing (CATI) technology, of which 2,473 had 1+ employees (records with 0 employees 2+ working proprietors were not in the SESS10 survey, so were excluded from the 2011 legacy analysis). Interviews were conducted with the most senior person at the site with responsibility for recruitment, human resources and workplace skills. Scotland fieldwork was undertaken by Ipsos MORI, and took place from March to July 2011. ## Response Rate The response rate for the survey in Scotland was 39%, calculated as a proportion of all completed contacts. A detailed breakdown of survey outcomes is shown below: % of complete Outcome Number of contacts % of all sample contacts Total sample 19140 100% Ineligible 1123 6% 'Live' / not available during fieldwork / out of quota 9589 50% Unobtainable number 1951 10% Total complete contacts 6477 34% 100% Achieved interviews 2503 13% 39% Respondent refusal 3114 16% 48% Quits during interview 154 1% 2% Company policy refusal 706 4% 11% ## Questionnaire Design The questionnaire design harmonised previous questionnaires used by the four nations of the UK in their own skills surveys. This included the National Employer Skills Survey series in England, the Scottish Employer Skills Surveys, the Northern Ireland Skills Monitoring Surveys and Future Skills Wales. A task and finish group chaired by the UK Commission and including IFF Research, and representatives from each of the four nations, was set up to drive this process. The group's aim was to develop a questionnaire that answered the Employer Skills Survey objectives, whilst maintaining time series data for each nation as far as was feasible in the framework of the ESS. The questionnaire is available on the UK Commission's website at: http://employersurveys.ukces.org.uk/ess/ess11/default.aspx. ## Weighting / Grossing Up Data for the survey was weighted and grossed up to population estimates of establishments and to the population of employees, as derived from the 2010 Inter-Departmental Business Register (IDBR). The data for Scotland in this report was weighted using interlocking grids of SSC by sizeband in each region of Scotland. Target weights were used to gross up the survey data to the population: - Population: 1+ employees (all establishments with one or more people employed, records with 0 employees / 2+ working proprietors were not in the SESS10 survey, so were excluded from the 2011 legacy analysis) - Strategy: Size by SSC within region - size bandings matched SESS10. ## Appendix C: Industry Coding Each establishment was allocated to one of 14 sectors, based on their Standard Industrial Classification (SIC). SIC 2007 was used to classify establishments using the following method. Using the four-digit Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) supplied for each record from the Experian database, a description of business activity was read out to each respondent. If they agreed that this description matched the main activity undertaken at the establishment, then the SIC on Experian's database was assumed to be correct. If however the respondent felt the description did not correspond to their main business activity at the site, a verbatim response was collected to find out what they do (see question A7 on the survey; questionnaire available at www.ukces.org.uk). At the analysis stage this was coded to a four-digit SIC which was then used as the basis for allocation into sector. The table below shows the 14 sectors and their corresponding SIC 2007 definitions. Sector SIC 2007 A - Agriculture, forestry and fishing (01-03) 1. Agriculture Including farming, hunting and other related service activities, forestry and logging, fishing and aquaculture B - Mining and quarrying (05-09) 2. Mining & Quarrying Including mining of coal, metals, sand/stone/clay, and extraction of crude petroleum and natural gas C - Manufacturing (10-33) 3. Manufacturing Including manufacture of food and beverage, textiles, chemicals and chemical products, basic pharmaceutical products, other mineral products, manufacture of metals and metal products, machinery, computer and electronic products and equipment, motor vehicles and other transport equipment, furniture, and repair and installation of machinery and equipment 4. Electricity, Gas and Water D - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply (35) E - Water supply, sewerage, waste management and remediation activities (36-39) Including electric power generation, transmission and distribution, manufacture of gas and distribution of gaseous fuels, steam and air conditioning supply, water collection, treatment and Sector SIC 2007 supply, sewerage and waste collection, treatment and disposal activities and materials recovery F - Construction (41-43) 5. Construction Including the construction of buildings, civil engineering (constructing roads, railways and other utility projects), demolition, and specialised activities such as electrical installation, roofing and scaffold erection 6. Wholesale and Retail G - Wholesale and retail trade; repair of motor vehicles and motor cycles (45-47) Including sale, maintenance and repair of motor vehicles, parts and accessories, non-vehicle wholesale (for example agriculture, food, household goods), and the retail trade of all products whether in stores, stalls, markets, mail order or online 7. Hotels and Restaurants I - Accommodation and food service activities (55- 56) Including hotels, campsites, youth hostels, holiday centres, villages and other short stay accommodation, restaurants and takeaways, event catering and licensed clubs, pubs and bars 8. Transport and Communications H - Transport and storage (49-53) J - Information and communication (58-63) Including land, water and air transport (passenger and freight), warehousing and support activities for transportation, postal and courier activities, publishing (books, journals, newspapers etc and software/computer games), television, film and music production, broadcasting, telecommunications, computer programming and consultancy, information service activities (e.g. data processing and hosting) 9. Financial Services K - Financial and insurance activities (64-66) Including banks and building societies, activities of holding companies, trusts, funds and similar financial entities, credit granting, pensions, insurance and reinsurance Sector SIC 2007 L - Real estate activities (68) 10. Business services M - Professional, scientific and technical activities (69-75) N - Administrative and support service activities (77-82) Including the buying, selling and renting of real estate, legal activities, accounting, bookkeeping and auditing, management consultancy, architectural and engineering activities, scientific research and development, advertising and market research, specialist design, photographic activities, translation and interpretation, veterinary activities, renting and leasing of tangible goods (motors, household, machinery), employment agencies, travel agencies and tour operations, security and investigation activities, office administration and business support 11. Public Administration O - Public administration and defence; compulsory social security (84) Including administration of the State and economic and social policy of the community, provision of services to the community as a whole such as defence activities, foreign affairs, justice and judicial activities, fire service and compulsory social security activities P - Education (85) 12. Education Including pre-primary, primary, secondary and higher education, other education (such as sports, driving schools, cultural education), educational support activities Q - Human health and social work activities (86-88) 13. Health and Social work Including Hospitals, medical and dental practices, residential care, social work activities R - Arts, entertainment and recreation (90-93) 14. Other Community, Social and Personal Services S - Other service activities (94-96) Including performing arts, libraries and museums, gambling and betting, sports facilities, amusement and recreation activities, activities of membership organisations (religious, political, trade union, professional), personal services (hairdressing, Sector SIC 2007 beauty, textile cleaning, well-being activities, funeral activities) T - Activities of households as employers; undifferentiated goods and services producing activities of households for own use (97-98) NOT COVERED IN SURVEY U - Activities of extraterritorial organisations and bodies (99) Including households as employers of domestic personnel, private households producing goods for own use ## Appendix D: Occupational Coding The occupational data collected in the survey were collected both pre-coded and verbatim. The former included the occupational breakdown of employment (question D5 to D8) where respondents were asked how many of their workforce fell into each of the nine major (onedigit) Standard Occupation Classification (SOC) 2010 categories (Managers, Directors and Senior Officials through to Elementary Occupations). However, on vacancy measures (for example the occupations in which vacancies exist - question C2) this information was collected verbatim. This was then coded at the analysis stage, where possible to a four-digit level SOC, if not three, two- or one-digit level. Examples of what might fall into each occupational band are as follows: Occupational group Service sectors (retail, business, finance, transport etc) Public sector (Public Admin, Health, Education etc) Primary sectors (Agriculture, manufacturing, construction etc) Managers, Directors and Senior Officials Site managers, Department Heads, Shift Managers (not supervisors) Directors, Managers / Branch/site managers, shift managers (not supervisors Police inspectors and above, department heads, Head teachers, Senior Officials Professionals Doctors, nurses, midwives, teachers, social workers, librarians Professional engineers, software and IT professionals, accountants, chemists, scientific researchers Solicitors, lawyers, accountants, IT professionals, economists, architects, actuaries Associate Professionals Science and engineering technicians, lab technicians, IT technicians, accounting technicians Insurance underwriters, finance/investment analysts and advisers, writers/journalists, buyers, estate agents Junior police/fire/prison officers, therapists, paramedics, community workers, H&S officers, housing officers Secretaries, receptionists, PAs, telephonists, bookkeepers Administrative staff Secretaries, receptionists, PAs, communication operators, market research interviewers, clerks Secretaries, receptionists, PAs, local government officers and assistants, office assistants, library and database assistants Chefs Skilled Trades Motor mechanics, printers, TV engineers, butchers Farmers, electricians, machine setters / tool makers, carpenters, plasterers Care assistants, nursery nurses Travel agents, travel assistants, hairdressers, housekeepers Caring, Leisure and Other Service Occupations Care assistants, home carers, nursery nurses, ambulance staff, pest control, dental nurses, caretakers Customer care operations Customer facing roles: sales staff and call centre agents Sales assistants and retail cashiers, telesales, call centre agents Sales and customer service occupations HGV, van, fork-lift, bus and taxi drivers Drivers, vehicle inspectors Process, plant and machine operatives Routine operatives, drivers, machine operators, sorters and assemblers Labourers, packers, goods handling and storage staff Elementary occupations Bar staff, shelf fillers, catering assistants, waiters/waitresses, cleaners Labourers, cleaners, road sweepers, traffic wardens, security guards ## Appendix E: Sampling Error And Statistical Confidence Sampling error for the survey results overall and for different sub-groups by which analysis is presented in the report is shown in Table F.1. Figures have been based on a survey result of 50 per cent (the 'worst' case in terms of statistical reliability), and have used a 95 per cent confidence level. Where the table indicates that a survey result based on all respondents has a sampling error of +/- 0.32 per cent, this should be interpreted as follows: 'for a question asked of all respondents where the survey result is 50 per cent, we are 95 per cent confident that the true figure lies within the range 49.68 per cent to 50.32 per cent'. These confidence intervals are based on the assumption of a normal distribution of responses. Sampling error (at the confidence 95 per cent level) associated with findings of 50 per cent Number of (Maximum) interviews Sampling Error Scotland 2,453 +/-1.98 By size of establishment 1-4 328 +/-5.41 5-9 317 +/-5.50 10-24 537 +/-4.23 25-49 388 +/-4.98 50-249 727 +/-3.63 250+ 156 +/-7.85 By sector Agriculture 85 +/-10.63 Mining & Quarrying* 24 +/-20.00 Manufacturing 176 +/-7.39 Electricity, Gas and Water 79 +/-11.03 Construction 223 +/-6.56 Wholesale and Retail 311 +/-5.56 Hotels & Restaurants 218 +/-6.64 Transport and Communications 221 +/-6.59 Financial Services 83 +/-10.76 Business Services 338 +/-5.33 Public Administration 136 +/-8.40 Education 164 +/-7.65 Health and Social Work 208 +/-6.80 Community, Social and Personal Services 187 +/-7.17 * Mining and Quarrying base size falls below the reporting threshold ## Appendix F: Weighted Base Sizes Throughout this report figures have been reported next to their unweighted base sizes to demonstrate statistical reliability. For reference, the following table shows the weighted number of employers this represents for the key measures in the report. Weighted base Scotland 165,910 Chapter 3: Work-readiness of those leaving education Taking on leavers from education in the last 2-3 years 44,176 From Scottish Secondary School 30,370 From Scottish FE College 14,623 From Scottish University 15,233 Chapter 4: Employers, Recruitment and Skills shortages With a vacancy 22,196 With a hard-to-fill vacancy 6,669 With a skill-shortage vacancy 5,235 Chapter 5: Internal Skills Mismatch With at least one skills gap 27,664 Chapter 6: Employer Investment in Training and Skills Providing any training 117,807 On-the-job training only 30,724 Off-the-job training only 22,179 Both on- and off-the-job training 64,904 Providing no training for staff 48,103 ## Appendix G: Unweighted Base Sizes This annex shows a reference table of the key unweighted base sizes used in this report. Note that throughout the report, figures are not reported where the base is under 25 and are highlighted in italics where the base is 25 to 49. Establishments with… Overall Vacancies Hard-to-fill vacancies Skills gaps Estab's that train Scotland 2,453 724 217 790 2114 Size 1-4 328 23 9 35 203 5-9 317 39 13 79 261 10-24 537 104 32 158 474 25-49 388 132 41 154 360 50-249 727 342 93 295 680 250+ 156 84 29 69 136 Sector Agriculture 85 15 8 20 55 Mining and Quarrying 24 6 4 5 21 Manufacturing 176 66 27 76 153 Electricity, Gas and Water 79 15 5 18 66 Construction 223 37 13 62 188 Wholesale and Retail 311 74 25 117 262 Hotels and Restaurants 218 90 31 104 190 Transport and Communications 221 63 18 50 184 Financial Services 83 13 1 28 75 Business Services 338 97 34 95 287 Public Administration 136 37 9 41 119 Education 164 77 11 48 156 Health and Social Work 208 75 18 68 198 Community, Social and Personal Service activities 187 59 13 58 160 ## Appendix H: Bibliography Futureskills Scotland (2007) *Skills in Scotland 2006*, Futureskills Scotland, Glasgow. Inter Departmental Business Register (March 2010). ONS. Labour Force Survey, UK, October-December 1993 and 2010. ONS. Scottish Government Social Research (2011) *Skills in Scotland 2010.* Scottish Government, Edinburgh. Scottish Government Social Research (2009) *Skills in Scotland 2008.* Scottish Government, Edinburgh. UKCES (2009) *Ambition 2020: World class skills and jobs for the UK - The 2009 Report.* UK Commission for Employments and Skills, Wath-upon-Dearne and London. UKCES (2011) Employer ownership of skills: securing a sustainable partnership for the long term. UK Commission for Employments and Skills, Wath-upon-Dearne and London. List of previous publications Executive summaries and full versions of all these reports are available from www.ukces.org.uk Evidence Report 1 Skills for the Workplace: Employer Perspectives Evidence Report 2 Working Futures 2007-2017 Evidence Report 3 Employee Demand for Skills: A Review of Evidence & Policy Evidence Report 4 High Performance Working: A Synthesis of Key Literature Evidence Report 5 High Performance Working: Developing a Survey Tool Evidence Report 6 Review of Employer Collective Measures: A Conceptual Review from a Public Policy Perspective Evidence Report 7 Review of Employer Collective Measures: Empirical Review Evidence Report 8 Review of Employer Collective Measures: Policy Review Evidence Report 9 Review of Employer Collective Measures: Policy Prioritisation Evidence Report 10 Review of Employer Collective Measures: Final Report Evidence Report 11 The Economic Value of Intermediate Vocational Education and Qualifications Evidence Report 12 UK Employment and Skills Almanac 2009 Evidence Report 13 National Employer Skills Survey 2009: Key Findings Evidence Report 14 Strategic Skills Needs in the Biomedical Sector: A Report for the National Strategic Skills Audit for England, 2010 Evidence Report 15 Strategic Skills Needs in the Financial Services Sector: A Report for the National Strategic Skills Audit for England, 2010 ## Evidence Report 16 Strategic Skills Needs In The Low Carbon Energy Generation Sector: A Report For The National Strategic Skills Audit For England, 2010 Evidence Report 17 Horizon Scanning and Scenario Building: Scenarios for Skills 2020 Evidence Report 18 High Performance Working: A Policy Review Evidence Report 19 High Performance Working: Employer Case Studies Evidence Report 20 A Theoretical Review of Skill Shortages and Skill Needs Evidence Report 21 High Performance Working: Case Studies Analytical Report Evidence Report 22 The Value of Skills: An Evidence Review Evidence Report 23 National Employer Skills Survey for England 2009: Main Report Evidence Report 24 Perspectives and Performance of Investors in People: A Literature Review Evidence Report 25 UK Employer Perspectives Survey 2010 Evidence Report 26 UK Employment and Skills Almanac 2010 Evidence Report 27 Exploring Employer Behaviour in relation to Investors in People Evidence Report 28 Investors in People - Research on the New Choices Approach Evidence Report 29 Defining and Measuring Training Activity Evidence Report 30 Product strategies, skills shortages and skill updating needs in England: New evidence from the National Employer Skills Survey, 2009 Evidence Report 31 Skills for Self-employment Evidence Report 32 The impact of student and migrant employment on opportunities for low skilled people Evidence Report 33 Rebalancing the Economy Sectorally and Spatially: An Evidence Review Evidence Report 34 Maximising Employment and Skills in the Offshore Wind Supply Chain Evidence Report 35 The Role of Career Adaptability in Skills Supply Evidence Report 36 The Impact of Higher Education for Part-Time Students Evidence Report 37 International approaches to high performance working Evidence Report 38 The Role of Skills from Worklessness to Sustainable Employment with Progression Evidence Report 39 Skills and Economic Performance: The Impact of Intangible Assets on UK Productivity Growth Evidence Report 40 A Review of Occupational Regulation and its Impact Evidence Report 41 Working Futures 2010-2020 Evidence Report 42 International Approaches to the Development of Intermediate Level Skills and Apprenticeships Evidence Report 43 Engaging low skilled employees in workplace learning Evidence Report 44 Developing Occupational Skills Profiles for the UK Evidence Report 45 UK Commission's Employer Skills Survey 2011: UK Results Evidence Report 46 UK Commission's Employer Skills Survey 2011: England Results Evidence Report 47 Understanding Training Levies Evidence Report 48 Sector Skills Insights: Advanced Manufacturing Evidence Report 49 Sector Skills Insights: Digital and Creative Evidence Report 50 Sector Skills Insights: Construction Evidence Report 51 Sector Skills Insights: Energy Evidence Report 52 Sector Skills Insights: Health and Social Care Evidence Report 53 Sector Skills Insights: Retail Evidence Report 54 Research to support the evaluation of Investors in People: Employer Survey Evidence Report 55 Sector Skills Insights: Tourism Evidence Report 56 Sector Skills Insights: Professional and Business Services Evidence Report 57 Sector Skills Insights: Education Evidence Report 58 Evaluation of Investors in People: Employer Case Studies Evidence Report 59 An Initial Formative Evaluation of Best Market Solutions Evidence Report 60 UK Commission's Employer Skills Survey 2011: Northern Ireland National Report Evidence Report 61 UK Skill levels and international competitiveness Evidence Report 62 UK Commission's Employer Skills Survey 2011: Wales Results Evidence Report 63 UK Commission's Employer Skills Survey 2011: Technical Report Evidence Report 64 The UK Commission's Employer Perspectives Survey 2012 Evidence Report 65 UK Commission's Employer Skills Survey 2011: Scotland Results Evidence Reports present detailed findings of the research produced by the UK Commission for Employment and Skills. The reports contribute to the accumulation of knowledge and intelligence on skills and employment issues through the review of existing evidence or through primary research. All of the outputs of the UK Commission can be accessed on our website at www.ukces.org.uk UKCES Sanctuary Buildings Great Smith St. Westminster London SW1P 3BT T +44 (0)20 7227 7800 UKCES Renaissance House Adwick Park Wath-upon-Dearne Rotherham S63 5NB T +44 (0)1709 774 800 F +44 (0)1709 774 801 This document is available at www.ukces.org.uk under "Publications" ISBN 978-1-908418-00-5 © UKCES 1st Ed/12.12

en

1647-pdf

## 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

en

1616-pdf

The text of this leaflet was originally prepared by Catherine Rickman ACR MIPC for the Museums & Galleries Commission, now MLA: The Museums, Libraries and Archives Council for its publication *Ours for Keeps,* and adapted for this publication. Suppliers of conservation quality storage and mounting materials Conservation by Design Ltd. Timecare Works, 5 Singer Way, Woburn Road Industrial Estate, Bedford MK42 7ATelephone 01234 853555 Website: www.conservation-by-design.co.uk Conservation Resources (UK) Ltd. Unit 2 Ashville Way, Oxford OX4 6TU Telephone 01865 747755 Website: www.conservationresources.com Falkiner Fine Papers 76 Southhampton Row London WC1B 4AR Telephone 020 7831 1151 John Purcell Paper 15 Rumsey Road, London SW9 OTR Telephone: 0207 737 5199 www.johnpurcell.net Photograph copyright - the Trustees of the British Museum For further information contact IPC email:information@ipc.org.uk www.ipc.org.uk Contact the Preservation Department Phone: +44 (0)20 8392 5200 email: preservation@nationalarchives.gov.uk www.nationalarchives.gov.uk The National Archives Kew Richmond Surrey TW9 4DU ## Caring For Your Prints, Drawings And Watercolours Works of art on paper appear in almost every private or public collection and cover a vast range, both in subject matter and value. In Europe, paper has been in common use as a picture support since the mid-fifteenth century and is still the material on which the majority of artists' images are produced. ## The Materials From old master drawings to contemporary prints, the paper is fundamentally made of cellulose in the form of finely broken down plant fibres. In its purest form, cellulose is extremely durable, but additives can cause deterioration, usually through acid degradation, which weakens the fibres. The media used on the paper may be unstable too: pigments can fade or darken, some drawing inks bleed or corrode the paper, pastels and charcoal get smudged, thick paint like oils and gouache can flake. ## Causes Of Damage Any exposure to light harms media and paper, but poor quality mounting and framing damages more works of art on paper than any other agent. Prints, drawings and watercolours can be ruined through contact with unsuitable framing materials, just as they can by amateur restoration and the use of inappropriate techniques in handling, storage and display. Watercolour by JMW Turner showing fading of pigments where exposed to light Atmospheric pollutants, for example sulphur and particulates, are implicated in the destruction of paper and they can change artists' colours too. Biological agents, like insects and mould, affect paper, but they will only flourish as a result of uncontrolled environmental factors, such as high humidity and temperature. ## Signs Of Damage Paper will turn brown and brittle when cardboard containing unpurified woodpulp is pressed against it and that is how so many framed works of art on paper are damaged. They are stained on the back and have a brown or orange line around the edge of the image where the acidic overmount has 'burnt' the paper. Most owners of old watercolours, drawings, maps and prints are familiar with the disfiguring brown spots called 'foxing'. The stains are caused by bacteria or mould which generally grows on acidic paper when the humidity is high, or when metallic particles from the paper making process become embedded in the fibres. Yellow stains on paper, especially in regular patches, can be due to glue or adhesive tapes used to fix the picture into a mount. Self-adhesive tapes are particularly damaging because the adhesive creeps into the paper and becomes impossible to remove. Too much light is usually to blame when you see a watercolour painting with a strange colour balance, or an ink drawing, which has lost its detail. The original colouring can often be found under the mount. A certain amount of cockling or undulation is usual in handmade paper, but if the work of art is badly distorted, bowing towards the glass in a frame and perhaps wrinkled or even torn at the corners, then it is probably stuck down around the edges. Paper moves naturally in response to changes in humidity and it is better not to restrain it. What you can do Storage and display The best way to keep most prints, drawings and watercolours is in a specially designed case called a Solander box. The works of art are mounted in conservation quality materials, or placed individually in acid-free paper folders, and protected from light and dirt by the box. Plastic sleeves are not suitable but translucent acid-free tissue paper is good for interleaving or wrapping small items. Boxes, folders and portfolios, which are all obtainable fabricated from conservation quality materials, must rest horizontally in drawers or on shelves. A foxed watercolour by Edward Barnard ## What You Can'T Do When it is too late for preventive conservation and the damage is already done, there is little that you as a collector can do to conserve and restore works of art on paper. Traditional remedies such as bread crumbsbreadcrumbs to clean off dirt and commercially produced tapes to repair tears will do more harm than good. When handling the work of art, you should touch the paper as little as possible and keep your fingers away from the image. Pastel and charcoal drawings need extra care because the image may offset or smudge with the slightest pressure, so you could consider keeping them permanently framed within a mount that has been rebated to prevent any static or friction. Contemporary prints should not be handled directly either, because their immaculate paper is easily marked with skin oil and moisture. Keep them in a mount or acid-free paper folder. *Artsorb* is a good barrier material from atmospheric pollutants or fluctuations in RH. Contact a paper conservator through the Institute of Paper Conservation and they will advise on the most appropriate treatment for your picture. With professional treatment, the condition of the paper and image can be stabilised so that their deterioration will not progress. Although faded colours cannot be restored to their original brightness and severe paper staining may only be reduced, most damage can be corrected by a skilled conservator. Protect framed prints, drawings and watercolours from daylight. Particularly avoid south facing light and try not to hang them directly against the interior of the outside wall of a building: the comparatively low temperature can cause condensation and mould growth inside a frame. Conversely, a radiator or spotlight will dry the air out, and incidentally concentrate dirt by convection currents. When choosing a suitable storage area, avoid damp cellars and uninsulated attics. If prints and drawings get really wet, for example from a burst pipe, it is better to lay them out separately on blotting paper to dry with good air circulation, rather than to use an artificial heat source. In the case of a serious flood or a fire, get help from a conservator as soon as possible. ## Mounting And Framing Finding a conservator IPC operates a professional accreditation scheme to protect the users of conservation services, whether individuals or large public institutions. The scheme is run in partnership with other conservation bodies. Accredited members are designated as ACR MIPC. IPC supplies free of charge, the names and addresses of ACRs either by geographical area or particular expertise. This service is open to both individuals and institutions, for a single item or collections. ACRs may also give advice on preventive conservation, disaster planning, storage and display. The Institute of Paper Conservation is the leading organisation devoted solely to the conservation and care of paper, books and related materials. The Institute of Paper Conservation e mail: information@ipc.org.uk website: www.ipc.org.uk The recommendations in this leaflet are intended as guidance only. IPC does not assume responsibility or liability. If you have been to a picture framer recently, you may already know that many now offer mounting and framing to 'conservation standards'. But you also need to know that these standards are not yet universally agreed or applied. You will still have to specify exactly what you want to safeguard your works of art. Ask the framer to follow the advice in the Institute of Paper Conservation leaflet, *Guidelines for Conservation Framing,* and explain that you are looking for positive answers to these five questions. Use UV protected glass. - Will both the front and the back of the mount be made of solid core 100% cotton board (known as 'museum board'), which is the best quality, or purified woodpulp board (known as 'conservation board')? - If there is no window or overmount, will the glazing material be spaced away from the picture surface? - Will the work of art be attached to the backmount only with acid-free paper hinges and a water-soluble adhesive? - Will there be an isolating layer between the backmount and a potentially damaging but necessary frame backboard, made of plywood or hardboard for example? - Will the frame itself have enough depth in the rebate to accommodate the mount, the isolating layer and the backboard and strength to take hanging fittings secured to the frame and not the backboard? - If you are not confident that the framer can meet these standards, ask a paper conservator to help you find one who can. Photograph copyright - the Trustees of the British Museum

en

4130-pdf

## Justice After Acquittal National Standards Of Support Justice After Acquittal - National Standards Of Support (Nss) Purpose Of National Standards Of Support In all murder cases involving an acquittal, the National Standards of Support (NSS) agreed between Justice After Acquittal (JAA), the police and CPS will be followed. The purpose of the National Standards of Support is to ensure that: x the police and CPS comply with the agreed processes set out below and that there is openness and transparency in all communications with the family and/or their representative; x the family and/or their representative is/are given every opportunity to discuss any issues they may have throughout the process; and x JAA are involved in the process if this is what the family chooses Attached to this document is a flowchart which outlines the agreed standards in diagram form. NATIONAL STANDARDS OF SUPPORT CPS offers a post acquittal meeting (PAM) The CPS will offer to meet with the victim's family and/or their representative following an acquittal. The offer will be made approximately 3 weeks after the acquittal, which will give the family the opportunity to consider any points they wish to raise at the meeting. This does not preclude any discussion which may take place with the family at court at the time the defendant is acquitted. At the PAM, the prosecutor will: x check the family has received a copy of the NSS document from the police (text and the flowchart); if not provide them with a copy; x deal with any questions that the family may have about the process, including the trial and verdict; x provide an explanation as to the high level of proof necessary to trigger an application to quash an acquittal - this is to manage any expectations raised in the minds of the family; x draw attention to the support available to the family through victim support groups including JAA; and x offer to act as a contact point for any queries up to three months after the verdict. The meeting will also provide the family with an opportunity to put forward their views about the proceedings and/or possible future actions. CPS and police reviews Following acquittal, both the CPS and the police will each conduct a case review. In some circumstances, they may conduct a joint review but this will be decided on a case by case basis. These reviews will consider the evidence in the case, how the evidence was presented during the trial and whether anything could have been done differently. The victim's family and/or their representative will not be present during the review stage but they will be kept informed throughout, in line with ACPO Authorised Professional Practice guidance (police reviews) and in accordance with CPS Casework Quality Standards. It is also important that the family and/or their representative are given the opportunity to put forward their views and to raise any additional issues not yet discussed. This may be via the Family Liaison Officer (FLO), the Senior Investigating Officer (SIO), the family's representative or following the PAM with the CPS. Case review meeting The purpose of this meeting is for the police and CPS to share their review findings with the victim's family and/or their representative and where appropriate, identify further actions. The meeting will be jointly chaired by the police (SIO) and CPS and may include the FLO and a representative from JAA if the family so desire. A record of the meeting will be taken. The case review meeting will include: x an explanation to the family, (if relevant), in relation to the law in respect of 'double jeopardy' legislation and whether any evidence from the case review may provide opportunity for a further trial; x a reference to the requirement for and availability of new and compelling evidence to support any subsequent proceedings; x where appropriate, identification of how new and compelling evidence will be obtained in this case; and x a discussion to establish the needs of the victim's family in relation to further contact and to identify and maintain, if possible, a specific point of contact. The meeting will also give the victim's family and/or their representative a further opportunity to ask any questions they may have and to express their views/opinions. It will also establish the needs of the victim's family and/ or representative in relation to further contact and to identify and maintain, if possible, a specific point of contact. Meeting following consideration of a case after acquittal ('double jeopardy') The CPS will offer to meet with the bereaved family where, following an acquittal, the case has been re-referred to the CPS for consideration of applying to the Court of Appeal to retry the defendant under Part 10 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 ('double jeopardy' cases). In exceptional circumstances the meeting may be conducted personally by the Director of Public Prosecutions. Ongoing Review A police review of these cases will be held every 2 years with new evidence/developments being submitted to the CPS as appropriate. There will also be an obligation on the police (or other single point of contact as agreed) to keep the family informed where there is new evidence or developments in the case progress. This does not prevent the family asking to be specifically informed every time there is a review, even if there is no update. Review and Monitoring Both the police and CPS will monitor compliance with the NSS in accordance with agreed local and national arrangements. Performance data on the number of joint police/CPS case review meetings held under the NSS will be presented to the JAA Steering Group meetings. Both the police and CPS are represented at these meetings. ## Acquittal Case Review Meeting Police FLO if family requested their presence Family (if they choose to attend) and/or representative JAA (if requested to attend by family) Independent legal advice Other, eg. National Homicide Service (if requested to attend by family) Record of meeting to be taken

en

0260-pdf

# 2017 Uk Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Final Figures Statistical Release: National Statistics ## This Is A National Statistics Publication 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 UK Statistics Authority: Code of Practice for 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. ## © Crown Copyright 2019 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk. Where we have identified any third-party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at: ClimateChange.Statistics@beis.gov.uk The responsible statistician for this publication is Amanda Penistone. Contact telephone: 0300 068 8090. ## Contents Executive Summary ____________________________________________________ 4 Introduction ___________________________________________________________ 6 2017 total greenhouse gas emissions ______________________________________ 7 UK performance against emissions reduction targets __________________________ 8 The Climate Change Act 2008 __________________________________________ 8 Kyoto Protocol target _________________________________________________ 9 EU Effort Sharing Decision ____________________________________________ 10 European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) _______________________ 11 Emissions by gas ______________________________________________________ 13 Emissions by sector ____________________________________________________ 15 Transport __________________________________________________________ 17 Energy supply ______________________________________________________ 18 Business ___________________________________________________________ 21 Residential _________________________________________________________ 22 Agriculture _________________________________________________________ 24 Waste management __________________________________________________ 25 Industrial processes __________________________________________________ 27 Public _____________________________________________________________ 28 Land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF)__________________________ 30 Emissions from UK-based international aviation and shipping bunkers ____________ 32 Revisions from provisional estimates of greenhouse gas emissions _______________ 34 Revisions to the UK's Greenhouse Gas Inventory _____________________________ 36 Estimating emissions on a temperature adjusted basis _________________________ 40 Background Information _________________________________________________ 41 Uncertainties _______________________________________________________ 41 Coverage of emissions reporting ________________________________________ 41 Emissions Trading ___________________________________________________ 43 Future updates to emissions estimates ___________________________________ 44 Further information ___________________________________________________ 44 Background notes ___________________________________________________ 44 ## Executive Summary This publication provides the latest estimates of 1990-2017 UK greenhouse gas emissions, which are presented in carbon dioxide equivalent units throughout this statistical release. Key findings In 2017, UK emissions of the basket of seven greenhouse gases covered by the Kyoto Protocol1 were estimated to be 460.2 million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO2e), a decrease of 2.7 per cent compared to the 2016 figure of 473.1 million tonnes. Greenhouse gas emissions in 2017 are estimated to be 42.1 per cent lower than they were in 1990. The decrease in emissions from 2016 was mainly caused by: - Reductions in emissions in the energy supply sector, down 7.6 per cent (9.2 MtCO2e). This was driven by the continued decrease in power station emissions due to the change in the fuel mix for electricity generation, in particular a reduction in the use of coal. - A decrease of 4.2 per cent (2.9 MtCO2e) in the residential sector, driven by a reduction in the use of natural gas for heating due to warmer weather in the first half of 2017. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the most dominant greenhouse gas from the Kyoto "basket" of greenhouse gases, accounting for 81 per cent of total UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2017. The latest figures show: - UK net 2017 CO2 emissions were estimated to be 373.2 million tonnes (Mt), which was 3.3 per cent lower than the 2016 figure of 385.8 Mt. This decrease in CO2 emissions was mainly due to the large decrease in the use of coal for electricity generation (as described above). - Between 1990 and 2017 UK net CO2 emissions are estimated to have decreased by 37.4 per cent. The UK has domestic targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions under the Climate Change Act known as carbon budgets, which set legally-binding limits on the total amount of greenhouse gas emissions the UK can emit for a given five-year period. The latest figures show: - The UK has met the second carbon budget, with annual 2013-2017 emissions that are each below the annual average emissions level of the budget period (556.4 MtCO2e). - UK emissions in 2017 were 42 per cent below the 1990 base year. ## Figure 1: Summary Of Key Findings Introduction This publication provides the latest estimates of UK greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from 1990-2017 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. In accordance with international reporting and carbon trading protocols, emissions from each of the gases included in these statistics is weighted by its global warming potential (GWP)2, 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. For the purposes of reporting, greenhouse gas emissions are allocated into sectors as follows: - Energy supply - Business - Transport - Public - Residential - Agriculture - Industrial processes - Land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF) - Waste management The geographic coverage of this report is UK only unless stated otherwise. The figures in this statistical release are used as the basis for reporting against UK greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets and provide information for users on the drivers of emissions trends since 1990. Note that as part of this release the 1990-2016 emissions figures have been revised since the previous publication in February 2018, to incorporate methodological improvements and new data. Details of these revisions can be found later in this statistical release. The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) also publish emissions projections based on assumptions of future economic growth, fossil fuel prices, electricity generation costs, UK population and other key variables3. ## 2017 Total Greenhouse Gas Emissions In 2017, UK emissions of the basket of seven greenhouse gases covered by the Kyoto Protocol were estimated to be 460.2 million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO2e), a decrease of 2.7 per cent compared to the 2016 figure of 473.1 million tonnes. Greenhouse gas emissions in 2017 are estimated to be 42.1 per cent lower than they were in 1990. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the most dominant greenhouse gas from the Kyoto "basket" of greenhouse gases, accounting for 81 per cent of total UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2017. UK net CO2 emissions were estimated to be 373.2 million tonnes (Mt) in 2017, which is 3.3 per cent lower than the 2016 figure of 385.8 Mt. Between 1990 and 2017 UK net CO2 emissions are estimated to have decreased by 37.4 per cent. ## Uk Performance Against Emissions Reduction Targets The Climate Change Act 2008 The UK has domestic targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions under the Climate Change Act 20084, which established a long-term legally-binding framework to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, committing the UK to reducing emissions by at least 80 per cent below 1990 baselines by 2050. To help set this trajectory, the Climate Change Act also introduced carbon budgets, which set legally-binding limits on the total amount of greenhouse gas emissions the UK can emit for a given five-year period5. The first carbon budget ran from 2008 to 2012. In 2014, the UK confirmed that it had met the first carbon budget, with emissions 36 MtCO2e below the cap of 3,018 MtCO2e over the first carbon budget period. A final statement for the second carbon budget, covering the period 2013-17, will be published in May 2019 to confirm overall performance against the budget level set. Under the coverage of the Climate Change Act6, UK greenhouse gas emissions for 2017 were 460.2 MtCO2e. Compliance with carbon budgets is assessed by comparing the budget level against the UK's 'net carbon account'. The net carbon account is currently defined as the sum of three components: - Emissions allowances allocated to the UK under the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS)7 - Emissions not covered by the EU ETS ('non-traded') - Credits/debits from other international trading systems In 2017 the net carbon account was 488.1 MtCO2e. Figure 3 shows that the UK has met the second carbon budget, with emissions 383.9 MtCO2e below the cap of 2,782 MtCO2e over the second carbon budget period. The net carbon account in 2017 was 3.4 per cent higher than that reported in 2016. This fluctuation is due to an increase to the UK's share of allowances under the EU ETS, in line with the planned supply of allowances across the EU during the third trading period8. Further information will be published in the UK's Annual Statement of 4 Climate Change Act 2008: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2008/27/contents Emissions for 2017, later this year9. Performance against all emissions reduction targets is presented in Excel data table 9 that accompanies this statistical release. Projected performance against future carbon budgets can be found in the latest UK energy and emissions projections publication10. ## Kyoto Protocol Target The Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is an international agreement. First Commitment Period (2008-2012) The UK met its emissions reductions target for the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol. Under the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol (2008-12), the EU and its Member States, Iceland and Norway collectively made a commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions across the EU by 8 per cent on 1990 levels by 2012 through the EU Emissions Trading System. As part of this, the UK undertook to reduce total greenhouse gas emissions by 12.5 per cent below base year levels over the five-year period 2008-1211. UK emissions of the basket of greenhouse gases covered by the Kyoto Protocol were an average 600.6 MtCO2e per year (exclusive of emissions trading) over the first commitment period (2008-12), 23 per cent lower than base year emissions12. Second Commitment Period (2013-2020) Under the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol (2013-2020) the EU and the Member States have a target to reduce emissions by 20 per cent relative to the reference year (1990) over the period. The commitments of the EU and the Member States, and those of Iceland, are being fulfilled jointly in accordance with Article 4 of the Kyoto Protocol. In line with this target, EU emissions are split into (i) 'traded sector' emissions, covered by the EU Emissions Trading System which gives an overall EU-wide 'cap' on emissions from participating sectors; and (ii) 'non traded sector' emissions, which are covered by Member State-level targets under the Effort Sharing Decision (ESD). The Kyoto Protocol second commitment period also covers emissions from the land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF) sector which are not covered by the ESD. The UK has now ratified the Doha Amendment, but it has not yet come into force. These statistics therefore do not include information on the UK's progress against its second commitment period target. Beyond 2020 Following the 21st Conference of the Parties (COP21) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Paris in December 2015, 195 countries committed to adopt a global climate change Agreement. The Paris Agreement on climate change entered into force on 4 November 2016. It was ratified by the UK on 18 November 2016. At COP24 held in Katowice, Poland, in December 2018, Parties reached agreement on a rulebook to support the implementation of the Paris Agreement. The Nationally Determined Contributions of the EU and the its Member States - the EU's central commitment under the Paris Agreement - is an at least 40 per cent domestic reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 compared to 1990 levels. This contribution will be fulfilled jointly by the EU and the Member States in accordance with EU legislation to be adopted in respect of both the emissions trading sector and the non-traded sector. ## Eu Effort Sharing Decision The UK has annual greenhouse gas emissions limits under the EU Effort Sharing Decision (ESD) for the period 2013-2020. The ESD was agreed as part of the 2008 EU Climate and Energy package and came into force from January 2013. It sets out targets for EU Member States to either reduce or limit emissions by a certain percentage in the non-traded sector (i.e. covering most sectors not included in the EU Emissions Trading System), by 2020 from a 2005 baseline. The UK's 2020 target, based on relative GDP per capita, is to reduce emissions by 16 per cent from 2005 levels, to be achieved through a declining limit for emissions for each year from 2013-202013. In November 2018 the European Commission confirmed for each Member State their performance against ESD for 201614. UK greenhouse gas emissions for 2016 under the ESD were confirmed to be 333.9 MtCO2e, 11.3 MtCO2e below the UK's annual limit for 2016 of 345.2 MtCO2e, meaning that the UK met its fourth annual target in the period. Provisional estimates indicate that greenhouse gas emissions for 2017 under the Effort Sharing Decision will also be below the annual emissions limit, by around 29 MtCO2e. UK and Gibraltar, 2013-2017 MtCO2e 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total greenhouse gas emissions excl. LULUCF and NF3 (A) 566.5 524.0 503.5 482.8 470.5 Total verified emissions from stationary installations under the EU ETS (B) 225.3 197.9 175.9 147.4 137.0 CO2 emissions from civil aviation (C) 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.6 Total ESD emissions (D = A - B - C) 339.5 324.4 326.0 333.9 331.9 Annual emissions allocation (E) 358.7 354.2 349.7 345.2 360.4 Difference (E - D) 19.3 29.8 23.7 11.3 28.5 Source: Table 9, Final UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2017 Excel data tables ## European Union Emissions Trading System (Eu Ets) The UK needs to take account of emissions trading through the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) when reporting against carbon budgets. The EU ETS works by putting a limit on overall emissions from covered installations and aviation operators on intra- EEA flights. This limit is reduced each year. Within the limit companies in Member States across the EU can buy and sell emission allowances as needed. This 'cap-and-trade' approach gives companies the flexibility they need to cut their emissions in the most cost-effective way. Phase II of the EU ETS coincided with the first Kyoto Commitment Period (2008-12). During this period each Member State held a specific quantity of allowances based on their EU- approved National Allocation Plan (NAP). This then resulted in net "sales" or "purchases" of emissions allowances reported from UK installations depending on whether total emissions were below or above the UK's Phase II allocation15. The third phase of the EU ETS (2013-20) phase builds upon the previous two phases and has been significantly revised to make a greater contribution to tackling climate change. Amongst other changes to the operating rules, the system shifted away from NAPs in favour of an EU- wide cap on the number of available allowances across Member States. In the absence of a UK-specific allocation plan, a notional cap has been estimated for the purpose of calculating carbon budget performance. Further details of this methodology are laid out in the Annual Statement of Emissions9. For further information please see the section on the European Union Emissions Trading System in the background information chapter at the end of this report. UK, 2008-2017 MtCO2e 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 19.3 (13.5) (7.6) (24.9) (14.5) 44.2 59.1 29.1 1.3 (27.6) Net purchases/(sales) by UK installations 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 - - - - - Net cancelled unallocated allowances/(sales) by UK Government1 - - - - - (0.1) (0.3) (0.2) (0.3) (0.3) Net UK domestic aviation emissions against aviation cap Net UK purchases/(sales) 20.2 (12.6) (6.7) (24.0) (13.6) 44.1 58.8 28.9 1.0 (27.9) Source: Table 9, Final UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2017 Excel data tables Note: 1. At the end of Phase II of the EU ETS, the UK was required to cancel all allowances which have not been either issued or auctioned by that point. As a consequence, allowances totalling 4.5 MtCO2e were cancelled in 2012. These cancelled allowances have the effect of reducing the overall cap for the whole of Phase II. For presentational purposes, this amount has been distributed evenly over the five years 2008-2012, effectively reducing the cap by 0.9 MtCO2e each year. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/final-statement-for-the-first-carbon-budget-period 2. Domestic aviation emissions are included in carbon budgets accounting from 2013. 3. From 2013, the EU ETS entered its third phase, which will end in 2020. Changes to the operating rules in this period mean that Member States no longer receive a national cap as the ETS operates at installation level. Therefore a 'notional' cap is estimated for the purpose of carbon budgets accounting. ## Emissions By Gas UK greenhouse gas emissions are broken down into the Kyoto "basket" of seven gases: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFC), perfluorocarbons (PFC), sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) and nitrogen trifluoride (NF3). The last four gases are collectively referred to as fluorinated gases or F gases. When broken down by gas, UK emissions are dominated by carbon dioxide, which is estimated to have accounted for about 81 per cent of the UK's greenhouse gas emissions in 2017. Weighted by global warming potential, methane accounted for about 11 per cent of UK emissions and nitrous oxide for about 4 per cent of emissions in 2017. Fluorinated gases accounted for the remainder, around 3 per cent. Source: Table 1, Final UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2017 Excel data tables Carbon dioxide has always been the dominant greenhouse gas emitted in the UK. Emissions of CO2 have reduced considerably by 37 per cent (over 200MtCO2) since 1990, mainly due to decreases in emissions from power stations and residential/industrial combustion. There have been much larger proportional falls in emissions from methane (61 per cent since 1990) and nitrous oxide (57 per cent). Fluorinated gas (F gas) emissions are estimated to be 14 per cent lower now than they were in 1990, with hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) being the dominant F gas. ## Table 3: Uk Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trends By Gas Uk, 1990-2017 MtCO2e 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2016 2017 Net CO2 emissions (emissions minus removals) 596.3 560.1 558.3 557.9 498.3 408.3 385.8 373.2 Methane (CH4) 132.5 125.9 108.4 86.9 63.9 52.7 51.1 51.5 Nitrous oxide (N2O) 48.2 38.6 28.5 24.4 21.3 20.3 20.2 20.5 Hydrofluorocarbons (HFC) 14.4 19.1 9.8 13.0 16.4 15.9 15.1 14.1 Perfluorocarbons (PFC) 1.7 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 Sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) 1.3 1.3 1.8 1.1 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.5 Nitrogen trifluoride (NF3) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total greenhouse gases 794.4 745.6 707.5 683.7 600.9 498.0 473.1 460.2 Source: Table 1, Final UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2017 Excel data tables Note: 1. The entire time series is revised each year to take account of methodological improvements. 2. Emissions are reported as net emissions, including removals from the atmosphere by carbon sinks. ## Emissions By Sector All the sectoral breakdowns below are defined as by source, meaning emissions are attributed to the sector that emits them directly, as opposed to where the end-user activity occurred. A breakdown of 1990-2017 UK emissions by end-user sector and fuel type will be published on Thursday 28th March 201916. In 2017, 27 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions in the UK were estimated to be from the transport sector, 24 per cent from energy supply, 17 per cent from business, 15 per cent from the residential sector and 10 per cent from agriculture. The rest was attributable to the remaining sectors; waste management, industrial processes, and the public sector. The land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF) sector acted as a net sink in 2017 so emissions were effectively negative. UK, 1990-2017 MtCO2e 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2016 2017 Transport 128.1 129.7 133.3 136.0 124.5 123.5 125.9 125.9 Energy supply 277.9 238.0 221.6 231.5 207.4 145.3 121.8 112.6 Business 114.0 111.8 115.4 108.9 94.1 85.1 81.4 80.1 Residential 80.1 81.6 88.7 85.7 87.5 67.4 69.8 66.9 Agriculture 54.0 52.9 50.3 47.9 44.6 45.1 45.2 45.6 Waste management 66.6 69.1 62.9 49.0 29.7 20.6 20.0 20.3 Industrial processes 59.9 50.8 27.1 20.6 12.6 12.7 10.6 10.8 Public 13.5 13.3 12.1 11.2 9.5 8.0 8.2 7.8 LULUCF 0.3 -1.7 -3.9 -7.1 -9.1 -9.7 -9.8 -9.9 Total 794.4 745.6 707.5 683.7 600.9 498.0 473.1 460.2 Source: Table 3, Final UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2017 Excel data tables MtCO2e Methane Nitrous oxide F gases Total Carbon dioxide Transport 124.6 0.1 1.2 : 125.9 Energy supply 106.0 5.8 0.8 : 112.6 Business 66.1 0.2 0.9 13.0 80.1 Residential 64.1 1.0 0.2 1.6 66.9 Agriculture 5.6 25.7 14.3 : 45.6 Waste management 0.3 18.6 1.4 : 20.3 Industrial processes 10.2 0.1 0.3 0.3 10.8 Public 7.8 0.0 0.0 : 7.8 LULUCF -11.3 0.0 1.4 : -9.9 Total 373.2 51.5 20.5 15.0 460.2 Source: Tables 3 to 7, Final UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2017 Excel data tables Note: A colon (:) means data are not available as there are no F gas emissions in these sectors ## Transport The transport sector consists of emissions from road transport, railways, domestic aviation, shipping, fishing and aircraft support vehicles. It is estimated to have been responsible for around 27 per cent of UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2017, almost entirely through carbon dioxide emissions. The main source of emissions from this sector is the use of petrol and diesel in road transport. Transport emissions remained at around the same level in 2017 as they were in 2016, despite a small increase in road traffic. Between 1990 and 2017, there has been relatively little overall change in the level of greenhouse gas emissions from the transport sector. Between 1990 and 2007 (when emissions peaked) there was a general increasing trend, with some fluctuations year to year. After this peak, emissions declined each year until 2013, at which point this trend reversed to show small increases most years. The overall effect of these fluctuations over time means emissions are estimated to have been around 2 per cent lower in 2017 than in 1990. The transport sector has historically been the second most emitting sector; however reductions over time in what was the largest sector (energy supply) mean that since 2016 transport has been the most emitting 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. While there was an increase in road traffic throughout the 1990s17, traffic volumes have remained at a similar level since the early 2000s, with a small dip in the early 2010s. In combination with lower petrol consumption outweighing an increase in diesel consumption18 and, more recently, improvements in fuel efficiency of both petrol and diesel cars,19 this has led to the volume of emissions from passenger cars generally decreasing since the mid-2000s. However, this decrease has been partially offset by an increase in emissions from light duty vehicles. 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. UK, 1990-2017 MtCO2e 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2016 2017 Carbon dioxide 125.4 126.8 131.0 134.3 123.4 122.2 124.6 124.6 Methane 1.3 0.9 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 Nitrous oxide 1.5 2.0 1.7 1.3 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.2 F gases : : : : : : : : Total 128.1 129.7 133.3 136.0 124.5 123.5 125.9 125.9 Source: Tables 3 to 7, Final UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2017 Excel data tables Note: A colon (:) means data are not available as there are no F gas emissions in this sector Source: Tables 3 to 7, Final UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2017 Excel data tables ## Energy Supply The energy supply sector consists of emissions from fuel combustion for electricity generation and other energy production sources. It is estimated to have been responsible for 24 per cent of UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2017, with carbon dioxide being by far the most prominent gas for this sector (94 per cent). The main source of emissions from this sector is the use of natural gas and coal in electricity generation from power stations. Between 1990 and 2017, there was a 60 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from the energy supply sector. This decrease has resulted mainly from changes in the mix of fuels being used for electricity generation, including the growth of renewables; together with greater efficiency resulting from improvements in technology. The energy supply sector has historically been the largest emissions sector; however these reductions mean that since 2016 it has been the second largest sector (the largest sector being transport). Since 1990 there has been a decline in the use of coal at power stations and an increase in the use of gas, which has a lower carbon content. Coal use in generation reduced by 89 per cent between 1990 and 201720. Final consumption of electricity was 8 per cent higher in 2017 than it was in 1990, although it peaked in 2005 and has decreased since then21. Electricity generation in 2017 was also 8 per cent higher than in 1990, again it peaked in 2005 and has decreased since22. There was a 26 per cent decrease in coal use for electricity generation between 2016 and 2017. This follows a large fall in 2016 driven by the increase in the carbon price floor in April 2015, from £9 per tonne of CO2 to £18 per tonne of CO2, which led to a shift away from coal towards gas23. In 2017 there was also a fall in the use of gas for electricity generation of 4 per cent, whereas renewables saw a 13 per cent increase. This led to an overall 8 per cent decrease in emissions from the energy supply sector between 2016 and 2017. In 2017, total greenhouse gas emissions from power stations, at 73.1 MtCO2e, accounted for 16 per cent of all UK greenhouse gas emissions. The other main factor which has noticeably contributed to the long-term decline in emissions in the energy sector has been in relation to coal mining. The production of deep-mined coal in particular has declined steadily over the period, with the last three large deep mines all closing in 2015. Emissions from coal mining and handling have fallen from 21.8 MtCO2e in 1990 to only 0.5 MtCO2e in 2017. UK, 1990-2017 MtCO2e | | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2010 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | |----------------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------| | Carbon dioxide | 242.1 | 210.3 | 204.0 | 219.1 | 197.3 | 137.6 | 115.2 | 106.0 | | Methane | 34.4 | 26.5 | 16.5 | 11.2 | 9.1 | 6.7 | 5.8 | 5.8 | | Nitrous oxide | 1.4 | 1.3 | 1.2 | 1.2 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.8 | 0.8 | | F gases | : | : | : | : | : | : | : | : | | Total | 277.9 | 238.0 | 221.6 | 231.5 | 207.4 | 145.3 | 121.8 | 112.6 | Source: Tables 3 to 7, Final UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2017 Excel data tables Note: A colon (:) means data are not available as there are no F gas emissions in this sector Source: Digest of United Kingdom Energy Statistics, Table 5.1.1 Fuel input for electricity generation, 1970 to 2017 https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/electricity-chapter-5-digest-of-united-kingdom-energy-statistics-dukes ## Business The business sector consists of emissions from combustion in industrial/commercial sectors, industrial off-road machinery, and refrigeration and air conditioning. It is estimated to have been responsible for 17 per cent of UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2017, 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 also significant. The business sector is responsible for the majority of emissions from F gases. In 2017, emissions from the business sector were 30 per cent lower than 1990 emissions. Most of this decrease came between 2001 and 2009, with a significant drop in 2009 likely driven by economic factors. There has been a gradual decline in emissions in recent years. The main driver of the decrease in emissions since 1990 is a reduction in emissions from industrial combustion (including iron and steel) which has led to a 41 per cent reduction in carbon dioxide emissions since 1990. However, emissions from F gases have increased significantly, mainly due to an increase in emissions from refrigeration and air-conditioning as HFCs replaced ozone depleting substances which were previously used as refrigerants. This increasing trend slowed in recent years and in the last two years has reversed, as tighter controls on emissions leakages have been introduced. Between 2016 and 2017 there was a 2 per cent decrease in emissions from the business sector, with the largest reduction in emissions being from commercial refrigeration as a result of the HFC phase down. UK, 1990-2017 MtCO2e 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2016 2017 Carbon dioxide 111.9 108.9 108.7 96.9 78.2 69.5 66.4 66.1 Methane 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 Nitrous oxide 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.9 F gases 1.0 1.8 5.7 11.1 14.9 14.6 14.0 13.0 Total 114.0 111.8 115.4 108.9 94.1 85.1 81.4 80.1 Source: Table 3 to 7, Final UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2017 Excel data tables Source: Tables 3 to 7, Final UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2017 Excel data tables ## Residential The residential sector consists of emissions from fuel combustion for heating and cooking, garden machinery, and fluorinated gases released from aerosols and metered dose inhalers. It is estimated to have been responsible for around 15 per cent of UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2017, with carbon dioxide being the most prominent gas for this sector (96 per cent). The main source of emissions from this sector is the use of natural gas for heating and cooking. It should be noted that since these figures are estimates of emissions by source, emissions related to residential electricity use, including electricity use for heating, are attributed to power stations; and are therefore included in the energy supply sector rather than the residential sector. Between 1990 and 2017, there has been considerable variation in greenhouse gas emissions from year to year in the residential sector. In general, carbon dioxide emissions from this sector are particularly heavily influenced by external temperatures, with colder temperatures driving higher emissions. Temperature was the main driver of the 4 per cent reduction in residential emissions between 2016 and 2017. The average temperature across the year was on average 0.3 degrees Celsius higher in 2017 than in 2016, and in particular was on average 1.7 degrees higher between February and April24, reducing the use of natural gas for heating. Further information on the impact of external temperatures on emissions can be found later in this statistical release. UK, 1990-2017 MtCO2e 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2016 2017 Carbon dioxide 78.3 79.6 85.6 82.5 84.5 64.5 66.9 64.1 Methane 1.5 1.1 1.0 0.7 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 Nitrous oxide 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 F gases 0.0 0.7 2.0 2.4 2.0 1.8 1.7 1.6 Total 80.1 81.6 88.7 85.7 87.5 67.4 69.8 66.9 Source: Tables 3 to 7, Final UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2017 Excel data tables ## Agriculture The agriculture sector consists of emissions from livestock, agricultural soils, stationary combustion sources and off-road machinery. It is estimated to have been responsible for 10 per cent of UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2017. Emissions of methane (56 per cent) and nitrous oxide (31 per cent) 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. Between 1990 and 2017, greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture decreased by around 16 per cent, with a general downward trend in emissions since the late 1990s. This was driven by a fall in animal numbers over the period, together with a decrease in synthetic fertiliser use. Between 2016 and 2017 there was a 1 per cent increase in emissions from the agriculture sector. UK, 1990-2017 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2016 2017 Carbon dioxide 6.5 6.5 5.5 6.1 5.4 5.5 5.5 5.6 Methane 30.3 29.6 28.7 26.8 25.2 25.6 25.6 25.7 Nitrous oxide 17.2 16.8 16.2 14.9 14.0 14.1 14.1 14.3 F gases : : : : : : : : Total 54.0 52.9 50.3 47.9 44.6 45.1 45.2 45.6 Source: Tables 3 to 7, Final UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2017 Excel data tables Note: A colon (:) means data are not available as there are no F gas emissions in this sector ## Waste Management The waste management sector consists of emissions from waste disposed of to landfill sites, waste incineration, and the treatment of waste water. It is estimated to have been responsible for around 4 per cent of UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2017, with methane being by far the most prominent gas (accounting for 92 per cent of emissions). The vast majority of these emissions are from landfill sites. Between 1990 and 2017, greenhouse gas emissions from the waste management sector decreased by 69 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 in the waste management sector rose by 1 per cent between 2016 and 2017 due mainly to increased emissions from landfill and waste-water handling. MtCO2e 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2016 2017 Carbon dioxide 1.3 1.0 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 Methane 64.5 67.3 61.4 47.6 28.2 19.0 18.4 18.6 Nitrous oxide 0.8 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.4 1.4 F gases : : : : : : : : Total 66.6 69.1 62.9 49.0 29.7 20.6 20.0 20.3 Source: Tables 3 to 7, Final UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2017 Excel data tables Note: A colon (:) means data are not available as there are no F gas emissions in this sector Source: Tables 3 to 7, Final UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2017 Excel data tables ## Industrial Processes The industrial processes sector consists of emissions from industry except for those associated with fuel combustion. It is estimated to have been responsible for 2 per cent of UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2017, with carbon dioxide being the most prominent gas. The largest source of emissions was cement production, with other processes such as sinter, lime, and iron and steel production also contributing significantly. Between 1990 and 2017, there was a large reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from the industrial process sector, with an overall decrease of 82 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 from which are now almost zero). Emissions in the industrial processes sector increased in 2017 compared to 2016 by 2 per cent. This was mainly caused by increased emissions from the use of gas in the production of ammonia and of iron and steel. UK, 1990-2017 MtCO2e 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2016 2017 Carbon dioxide 19.4 17.7 16.9 16.3 10.6 12.1 10.0 10.2 Methane 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Nitrous oxide 23.9 14.4 5.4 3.1 1.5 0.3 0.3 0.3 F gases 16.3 18.5 4.6 1.0 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 Total 59.9 50.8 27.1 20.6 12.6 12.7 10.6 10.8 Source: Tables 3 to 7, Final UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2017 Excel data tables ## Public The public sector consists of emissions from combustion of fuel in public sector buildings. It is estimated to have been responsible for less than 2 per cent of UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2017, with carbon dioxide making up almost all of these emissions. The main source of emissions from this sector is the use of natural gas for heating public buildings. Between 1990 and 2017 there has been a general downward trend in greenhouse gas emissions from the public sector, which have fallen by 42 per cent over this period. This has been driven by a change in the fuel mix, with less use of coal and oil, and more use of natural gas. Between 2016 and 2017 emissions decreased by 4 per cent in the public sector. As with the residential sector this is likely to be due to warmer temperatures reducing the use of gas for heating. UK, 1990-2017 MtCO2e 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2016 2017 Carbon dioxide 13.4 13.2 12.1 11.1 9.4 7.9 8.1 7.8 Methane ~0.0 ~0.0 ~0.0 ~0.0 ~0.0 ~0.0 ~0.0 ~0.0 Nitrous oxide ~0.0 ~0.0 ~0.0 ~0.0 ~0.0 ~0.0 ~0.0 ~0.0 F gases : : : : : : : : Total 13.5 13.3 12.1 11.2 9.5 8.0 8.2 7.8 Source: Tables 3 to 7, Final UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2017 Excel data tables Note: A colon (:) means data are not available as there are no F gas emissions in this sector. ~0.0 indicates where a value is non-zero but is less than 0.05 MtCO2 in magnitude. ## Land Use, Land Use Change And Forestry (Lulucf) The LULUCF sector consists of emissions and removals from forest land, cropland, grassland, settlements and harvested wood products. It acted as a net sink25 of UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2017, dominated by carbon dioxide removals. In general, cropland is the largest source of carbon dioxide emissions, and forest land is the dominant sink. In the UK the LULUCF sector is estimated to have gone from a small net emitter of greenhouse gases in 1990 (0.3 MtCO2e) to a net sink in every year from 1991-2017, with the estimated size of the sink in 2017 being 9.9 MtCO2e. This has been driven by a reduction in emissions from land being converted to cropland and an increase in the sink provided by 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. Between 2016 and 2017 there was a 1 per cent increase in the size of the net sink provided by the LULUCF sector. UK, 1990-2017 MtCO2e 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2016 2017 Carbon dioxide -2.0 -3.9 -6.0 -8.9 -10.7 -11.2 -11.3 -11.3 Methane ~0.0 ~0.0 ~0.0 ~0.0 ~0.0 ~0.0 ~0.0 ~0.0 Nitrous oxide 2.3 2.2 2.1 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.4 F gases : : : : : : : : Total 0.3 -1.7 -3.9 -7.1 -9.1 -9.7 -9.8 -9.9 Source: Tables 3 to 7, Final UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2017 Excel data tables Note: A colon (:) means data are not available as there are no F gas emissions in this sector ~0.0 indicates where a value is non-zero but is less than 0.05 MtCO2 in magnitude. ## Emissions From Uk-Based International Aviation And Shipping Bunkers Emissions from international aviation and shipping can be estimated from refuelling from bunkers26 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). It is important to note that whether emissions from refuelling at UK-based international aviation and shipping bunkers can be used as an accurate estimate of UK international aviation and shipping emissions will depend on what assumptions are being made about how to allocate international aviation and shipping emissions to different countries. In the International Civil Aviation Organisation, 191 states have agreed to implement a sectoral approach to tackling international aviation emissions, in the form of a "global market-based measure" known as the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA), which does not allocate emissions to states. Under the scheme, airlines will offset their international aviation emissions with reductions from other sectors, with the aim of delivering carbon-neutral growth of the sector from 202027. In 2017, emissions from international aviation fuel use were estimated to be 35.0 MtCO2e. This was 4 per cent larger than the 2016 figure. Between 1990 and 2006, when emissions peaked, emissions more than doubled from 15.5 MtCO2e to 35.6 MtCO2e. Since 2006 emissions have flattened out. High altitude aviation has a greenhouse effect over and above that of carbon dioxide emissions from fuel alone, but this is not reflected in these estimates. Emissions from UK international shipping bunkers were estimated to be 7.8 MtCO2e in 2017, a 9 per cent decrease from the 2016 level. Since 1990, emissions from UK shipping bunkers have fluctuated, as can be seen in the chart below, but in recent years have been at around the same level that they were in 1990. UK, 1990-2017 MtCO2e 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2016 2017 International aviation 15.5 20.1 30.2 35.1 31.8 33.5 33.7 35.0 International shipping 8.1 7.9 6.7 6.6 9.0 8.1 8.6 7.8 Total 23.7 28.0 36.9 41.7 40.8 41.6 42.3 42.8 Source: Table 8, Final UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2017 Excel data tables ## Revisions From Provisional Estimates Of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Provisional estimates of 2017 UK greenhouse gas and carbon dioxide emissions were published in March 2018, 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, use of actual data to estimate non-CO2 emissions which are only crudely estimated in the provisional estimates, and methodological changes to the way emissions are calculated. Typically the provisional estimates provide a better indication of emissions trends than of absolute emissions, as they do not take account of any methodological improvements that may be made to the way emissions are calculated and which can lead to revisions to the whole emissions time series from 1990 onwards. More information on revisions to the time series can be found in the next section. It was provisionally estimated that total greenhouse gas emissions in 2017 for the UK would be 455.9 million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent, representing a 2.6 per cent decrease on 2016 emissions. The final estimates show that 2017 emissions were 460.2 million tonnes, representing a 2.7 per cent decrease on 2016 emissions. The provisional greenhouse gas emissions estimates therefore slightly underestimated total greenhouse gas emissions (by 0.9 per cent) and slightly underestimated the percentage decrease in emissions from 2016 to 2017 (by 0.2 percentage point). The provisional estimates are focused on carbon dioxide emissions from the energy sector, and only provided a crude estimate of non-CO2 gases which assumed that 2017 emissions for non-CO2 gases were the same as emissions in 2016. Looking just at carbon dioxide emissions, it was provisionally estimated that net UK carbon dioxide emissions in 2017 would be 366.9 million tonnes. The final 2017 figure of 373.2 million tonnes therefore shows that the provisional estimate underestimated CO2 emissions by 1.7 per cent. The provisional estimate of non-CO2 gases was 89.0 MtCO2e (based on final 2016 emissions) and the final estimate is 87.0 MtCO2e so these emissions are 2.3 per cent lower than reported in the provisional estimates. This was largely due to methodological changes, as the final 2017 non-CO2 figure represents a 0.3 per cent decrease on 2016 emissions. UK, 2016-2017 MtCO2e Final 2017 Provisional estimates 2017 Final estimates Provisional 2016 to 2017 % change Difference between final and provisional 2016 to 2017 % change Total CO2 366.9 373.2 6.3 -3.2% -3.3% Total greenhouse gas emissions 455.9 460.2 4.3 -2.6% -2.7% Source: Table 1, Final UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2017 Excel data tables Table 1, Provisional UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 2017 Excel data tables ## Revisions To The Uk'S Greenhouse Gas Inventory The UK Greenhouse Gas Inventory (the time series of emissions from 1990 onwards which is the basis for these statistics), is reviewed every year internally and externally (including a review by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)), and the whole historical data series is revised where necessary to incorporate methodological improvements, changes to international reporting guidelines or 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). The methodological changes to the UK Greenhouse Gas Inventory can also impact future emissions projections. Full details of the methods used to produce the latest greenhouse gas emissions estimates will be published in the UK's National Inventory Report28 (NIR). These changes are applied back through the time series to 1990 in order to ensure that the trend in emissions from 1990 to the latest year is based on a consistent method. Therefore, it is not appropriate to compare the emissions time series 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. The most notable changes to the historical series since the 2018 Greenhouse Gas Inventory was published are revisions to the LULUCF and agriculture sectors. Details of the changes made to estimates of 1990 and 2016 emissions are given below. Revisions to other years of the time series are of a similar scale. MtCO2e 1990 emissions 2016 emissions 2018 2019 Change 2018 2019 Change inventory inventory inventory inventory Energy supply 277.9 277.9 ~0.0 120.2 121.8 1.6 Transport 128.1 128.1 ~0.0 125.8 125.9 0.2 Business 114.7 114.0 -0.7 81.5 81.4 -0.2 Residential 80.2 80.1 -0.1 69.8 69.8 ~0.0 Agriculture 55.3 54.0 -1.3 46.5 45.2 -1.3 Waste management 66.7 66.6 -0.1 19.9 20.0 0.1 Industrial processes 59.9 59.9 ~0.0 10.5 10.6 ~0.0 Public 13.5 13.5 ~0.0 8.2 8.2 ~0.0 LULUCF -2.1 0.3 2.4 -14.6 -9.8 4.8 Total 794.2 794.4 0.2 467.9 473.1 5.2 ~0.0 indicates where a value is non-zero but is less than either 0.05 MtCO2 in magnitude. Source: Table 3, Final UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2017 Data tables Table 3, Final UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2016 Data tables Details of the changes made to emissions estimates are given below. Change in fossil-carbon factors used for Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Previously, a UK-specific set of emission factors for MSW were used. These were derived using a limited set of UK-specific waste composition data. However, the factors were very uncertain as UK data only covered the period 1990-2011. Factors for later years were assumed to be equal to the figure for 2011. Given the increasing uncertainty associated with the UK-specific data, the emissions factors have been updated to use the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2006 inventory guidelines' default values. This has resulted in more conservative estimates and ensures consistency with the inventory's methodology for estimating the biogenic carbon content of MSW. This is because the old approach applied emission factors to the sum of biodegradable and non-biodegradable wastes in the UK energy statistics whereas the new approach applies factors to just the non-biodegradable wastes. The ratio of non-biodegradable to biodegradable waste in the energy statistics is quite different in different years so the impact of the new methodology also changes from year to year. Adjustments to Forest Land inventory processes As part of the process of generating the greenhouse gas emissions inventory for Forest Land, a program called "Reconcile" is used to take information from the forest inventories for the private sector forest and the public forest estate and assigns the forest areas to either afforestation or restocking. Parameters are optimised to achieve a volume production forecast from CARBINE, a land use model, that matches as closely as possible the published wood production statistics. In previous greenhouse gas inventory forecasts this was done manually. The process has now been automated and some adjustments made to the parameters used in the model as a result. Landfill methane corrections A correction was applied to misreported methane flaring data for England and Wales for the years 2008 to 2016 inclusive, provided by the Environment Agency. The misreport involved presenting data in incorrect units for 2015, and misallocating gas between flaring and combustion in engines. This impacted the volume of methane calculated as being emitted from landfill in England and Wales between 2008 and 2016. Additionally, in 2016 the quantity of waste landfilled in Northern Ireland was estimated as data were not available from the Northern Ireland Environment Agency (NIEA) in time for the compilation of the National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory (NAEI). During compilation of the 2017 inventory, 2016 data was obtained from NIEA and consequently waste estimates and CH4 emissions were recalculated. Implementation of biofuels carbon factors research Biofuel carbon factors have been reviewed, including reassessing the fossil content of mixed fossil/biogenic fuels. This includes: - Fossil carbon factors for FAME (Fatty Acid Methyl Ester, which comprises most biodiesels), which was previously assumed to be 100% biogenic; - Fossil carbon factors for bio-MTBE, which is a minor road fuel not previously included in the NAEI; and, - Revised fossil carbon factors for natural gas to account for the increasing contribution of biogas injected into the national grid. These changes to fossil carbon factors affect most emissions sectors. Biogenic carbon emissions are accounted for via LULUCF carbon stock balances rather than at the point of emission, so revisions to the biogenic carbon factors will not impact the national total. Updated agriculture data There have been no specific changes to the methodology this year. There were some revisions to activity data, including decreasing the 2016 value for urea fertiliser use. Minor error corrections throughout the inventory have resulted in a small decrease to the estimate of total GHG emission from UK agriculture across the time series by 1.7% and 1.9% for 1990 and 2016 respectively. Update to EMEP/EEA Guidebook N2O emission factors The N2O emissions factor for inland waterways using gas oil and diesel has been changed to align with the latest version of the European Monitoring and Evaluation Programme/European Environment Agency (EMEP/EEA) Guidebook. The factors for diesel-fuelled machinery were reduced by a factor of 10 in the latest 2016 Guidebook, compared with the 2005 version. In addition, the factor used for shipping was increased by a factor of 1.9 to bring it in line with the N2O factors currently used for coastal shipping engines using gas oil, and the factors for diesel-fuelled machinery were reduced by a factor of 10. This brings the factors more in line with factors used for other types of diesel machinery (e.g. rail). Correction of error in recording of deadwood in forests A double-counting of carbon in litter due to turnover and harvest was identified. Deadwood had previously been counted in both felled and restocked stands; e.g. carbon for deciduous foliage could enter the litter pool as both turnover at senescence and as residue from harvest. This had exaggerated the size of the sink provided by LULUCF and has since been corrected. As a result, the estimate of the size of the LULUCF sink has reduced by 3.5 Mt in 2016. Other model upgrades There have been a range of other minor changes made to the estimates, predominantly to the LULUCF models. A large range of minor improvements have been made including updates to the average living biomass densities for cropland and grassland, updates to the average forest biomass densities used in estimating wildfire and controlled burning emissions and changes to the way land is modelled in overseas territories and crown dependencies. Estimates of the amount of nitrous oxide used for recreational purposes have also now been included in the NAEI for the first time. Overall impact on emissions In total, the changes made to the methods and data for the 2019 inventory submission increase estimates of emissions in 1990 and 2016 by around 0.2 MtCo2e and 3.8 MtCO2e respectively. This is not an indication of the 2019 inventory submission as a whole as it does not include annual variations in the UK's emitting activities, for example national fuel use. ## Estimating Emissions On A Temperature Adjusted Basis BEIS publish provisional estimates of temperature adjusted emissions29, which give an idea of overall trends in emissions without fluctuations due to changes in external temperatures. The provisional emissions series is estimated based on UK provisional energy consumption data published by BEIS and is not as accurate as the estimates in this statistical release, which are derived from our annual greenhouse gas inventory. We can compare the latest provisional unadjusted and temperature adjusted emissions with the final estimates now available. On a temperature adjusted basis, net carbon dioxide emissions in 2016 and 2017 were estimated to be 384.6 Mt and 374.8 Mt respectively. The decrease in carbon dioxide emissions between 2016 and 2017 in the temperature adjusted figures is therefore 9.9 Mt, which is slightly less than the decrease seen in the non-temperature adjusted figures (as can be seen in the table below). This suggests that the underlying change between 2016 and 2017 when adjusted for temperature would be less than the 3.3 per cent shown. MtCO2e 2016 CO2 emissions (Mt) 2017 CO2 emissions (Mt) Absolute change (Mt) Percentage change Final estimates  unadjusted emissions 385.8 373.2 -12.6 -3.3% Provisional estimates  unadjusted emissions 378.9 366.9 -12.0 -3.2% Provisional estimates  Temperature adjusted emissions 384.6 374.8 -9.9 -2.6% Source: Table 1, Final UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2017 Data tables Table 3 & 4, Provisional UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 2017 Excel data tables Note: The provisional emissions estimates differ from the emissions estimates in these statistics because they were published before the 2017 figures presented were finalised. ## Background Information Uncertainties Estimates of emissions have an inherent uncertainty due to uncertainty in the underlying data used to calculate the emissions, and due to uncertainty in the applicability, completeness and application of that data. Uncertainty analysis is conducted by modelling the uncertainty in the underlying emission factors, activity data, and other variables within models; or in the overall model output. Uncertainty in greenhouse gas emissions estimates is believed to be within 3 per cent, as shown in Figure 17 (which is based on uncertainty analysis of 2016 emissions, as published in 2018). Estimates of 2017 uncertainties will be published on 28th March 2019. The uncertainty of greenhouse gas emissions estimates varies considerably by sector. LULUCF emissions estimates are the most uncertain, followed by waste management and agriculture. The error bar on this chart represents the uncertainty range (in this case, the 95% confidence interval) around the 2016 total greenhouse gas emissions central estimate. ## Coverage Of Emissions Reporting The emissions reported in this statistical release are defined as by source, meaning emissions are attributed to the sector that emits them directly. 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 (IPCC30), and which are used in international reporting tables that are submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) every year. The basket of greenhouse gases covered by the Kyoto Protocol consists of seven gases: carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, sulphur hexafluoride and nitrogen trifluoride. The last four 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 is reported in terms of net emissions, which means total emissions minus total removals of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere by carbon sinks. Carbon sinks are defined by the UNFCCC as "any process, activity or mechanism which removes a greenhouse gas, an aerosol or a precursor of a greenhouse gas from the atmosphere". The LULUCF sector is a net sink for the UK. Unless otherwise stated, any figures included in this release represent emissions from within the UK (excluding 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 (Bailiwick of Jersey, Bailiwick of Guernsey, Isle of Man), and those Overseas Territories (Cayman Islands, Falkland Islands and Gibraltar) that are provisionally party to the UK ratification of the Kyoto Protocol for the second commitment period. This 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 emissions total. Reporting of greenhouse gas emissions for the UK's Carbon Budgets only includes emissions within the UK, excluding emissions from Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories and emissions from Nitrogen Trifluoride (NF3). References to the 'UK Greenhouse Gas inventory' refer to the consistent time series of emissions from 1990 to the most recent year which is updated annually and reported to the UN and the EU. The figures in these statistics are consistent with the UK's greenhouse gas inventory for 2017, although the inventory reported to the UN includes emissions from certain overseas territories which are excluded from these statistics except where specifically stated. ## Emissions Trading 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). 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. The EU ETS operates as a *cap and trade* system, which means that there is a finite limit of allowances in the System (i.e. the cap). Currently, any installation or aviation operator within the System in the EU (except electricity generators and installations in sectors not considered to be at risk of so-called 'carbon leakage') 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. The System is now in 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 of the net ETS position are currently available for each year of Phase I, which covered the three year period 2005-2007, and also for each year of Phase II, which covered the period 2008-2012. For UK carbon budget reporting purposes, a notional UK cap must be estimated for each year between 2013 and 2020. Note that a negative net value indicates that the reported emissions from UK installations in the EU ETS were below the cap, i.e. there was a net selling or withholding of units by UK installations. This means that emissions are either emitted elsewhere or emitted at a later stage, so they may not be used to offset UK emissions. The opposite occurs when reported emissions from EU ETS installations exceed the cap. In 2012, aviation was included in the EU ETS for the first time, and aircraft operators were required to report their annual emissions and surrender an equivalent number of allowances for all flights within the European Economic Area (EEA). However, UK carbon budgets only cover domestic aviation (that is, aviation within the UK). Taking into account these changes in EU ETS, from 2013 onwards domestic aviation emissions are included in the traded sector for UK carbon budget reporting purposes. To do so requires the calculation of a separate notional cap for UK domestic aviation, covering flights within the UK only. ## Future Updates To Emissions Estimates On Thursday 28th March 2019 BEIS will publish a breakdown of 1990-2017 UK emissions by end-user sector and fuel type, to supplement the source sector breakdown published today. On Thursday 28th March 2019 BEIS will also publish provisional estimates of UK greenhouse gas emissions for 2018. This will coincide with the publication of Energy Trends statistics, which will include estimates of 2018 UK energy consumption. ## Further Information 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/collections/uk-greenhouse-gas-emissions-statistics ## Background Notes 1. A full set of data tables can be accessed via the Final UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics pages of the Gov.uk website. 2. This statistical release and the related data tables are the first release of data from the National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory (NAEI) for 1970-2017, produced for BEIS and the Devolved Administrations by Ricardo Energy & Environment. Additional results will be released as they become available. For further information on the UK Greenhouse Gas Inventory, see the NAEI website. 3. The UK's National Inventory Report (NIR) for 1990-2017 will be submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) on 15th April 2019. The report will contain national greenhouse gas emissions estimates for 1990-2017 and descriptions of the methods used to produce the estimates. Previous reports can be found on the NAEI website. 4. The background quality report provides a summary of quality issues relating to statistics on UK greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. 5. The record of base year emissions table shows how the UK base year for UK Carbon Budgets and the Kyoto Protocol has changed from 2008 to the latest inventory year. 6. Further information about the Kyoto Protocol can be found on the UNFCCC's website. 7. Further details of the European Union Emissions Trading System can be found at the EU ETS section of the Gov.uk website. 8. 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 uncertainties factsheet on the Gov.uk website. 9. Under the Climate Change Act, the Annual Statement of Emissions for 2017 must be laid before Parliament and published no later than 31st March 2019. This will give details of the net UK carbon account for 2017, which is used to determine compliance with the targets and budgets under the Act. 10. The latest UK energy statistics, including revisions to earlier years' data, can be found in the 2018 Digest of UK Energy Statistics. 11. Detailed UK temperature data can be found on both the Met Office website and the Weather Statistics section of the Gov.uk website. 12. 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. 13. Similar results for non-greenhouse gas atmospheric pollutants are published by Defra in its statistics on Emissions of air pollutants in the UK. 14. Some ministers and officials receive pre-release access to these statistics up to 24 hours before release. Details of the arrangements for doing this and a list of the ministers and officials that receive pre-release access to these statistics can be found in the BEIS statement of compliance with the Pre-Release Access to Official Statistics Order 2008. This publication is available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/final-ukgreenhouse-gas-emissions-national-statistics If you need a version of this document in a more accessible format, please email enquiries@beis.gov.uk. Please tell us what format you need. It will help us if you say what assistive technology you use.

en

1642-pdf

## 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 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. 2017 Outstanding cases in the Crown Court have 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. fallen Despite decreasing, violence against the person still had the highest number of 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. outstanding cases The average number of days from first listing to completion in the Crown Court has 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. decreased Total financial impositions have 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. decreased Interpreters: The The success rate for completed service requests was 98% in Q3 2017, the same as the previous quarter. success rate of completed requests remained stable 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. ## 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. ## 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. ## 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). ## 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. ## 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 Tribunals1 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. ## 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%. ## 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. ## 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: o Criminal Courts listings transparency. o Criminal Courts timeliness. o Crown Court receipts, disposals and outstanding cases by offence group. ## National Statistics Status2 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

en

1331-pdf

## Fair Treatment At Work Policy And Procedure Revisions Feb. 2001 Dec. 2003 May 2004 Oct. 2004 May 2005 Sept. 2005 Dec. 2006 June 2008 Sept. 2010 Contents | | PAGE | |-----|-----------------------------------------| | | | | | | | 1 | | | | | | ƒ | | | | Scope | | ƒ | | | | Definitions & Legislation | | | | | | | | 2 | | | | | | ƒ | | | | The Council's commitment | | | | | ƒ | | | | The Council's expectations of employees | | | | | | | | 3 | | | | | | ƒ | | | | Purpose | | ƒ | | | | Stage 1 - Informal Process | | ƒ | | | | Stage 2 - Formal Process | | ƒ | | | | Post employment Process | | ƒ | | | | Monitoring | | | | | | | | 4 | | | ƒ | | | | Informal Process | | ƒ | | | | Formal Process | | | | | | | | | | | 5 | | | | | | | | | 6 | | | | | | | | | | | | 7 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | INTRODUCTION The Council is committed to ensuring that employees are treated with dignity and respect whilst at work and acts of unfair treatment will not be tolerated. It is important to pay attention to the way employees treat each other and how they are managed. If employees are to perform at their best, they not only need to be set challenging targets, but they also need to feel that they are treated with fairness and respect. It is important to recognise that individuals react to how they are treated in different ways and what is acceptable to one person may be regarded as harassment by another. The effect on an individual may be more than temporary hurt feelings - any discrimination could lead to loss of confidence, low morale, stress, poor performance, distress and unhappiness. Scope This policy and procedure applies to all employees. Any employee has the right to complain if they feel they are being treated unfairly however minor their complaint may seem to others. It is important that all complaints are taken seriously. Definitions & Legislation The Council's Fair Treatment at Work Procedure is designed to deal with complaints of harassment, bullying, victimisation and unlawful discrimination including dual discrimination and racism. Because of the wide range of possible scenarios, it is not feasible to provide a comprehensive list of examples of unfair treatment. However, examples are given under the definitions of unfair treatment listed in Appendix 1. The Equality Act 2010 is the main piece of legislation relevant to the Fair Treatment at Work policy although a number of pieces of other UK and European legislation may be relevant. The Equality Act 2010 identifies the types of behaviour that may be unlawful as well as demonstrate the value of a Fair Treatment at Work Policy and Procedure that raises awareness, makes clear the implications of unacceptable behaviour and provides a mechanism for dealing with any complaints that arise. Comprehensive practical guidance on the Equality Act 2010 is available on the Equality and Human Rights Commission and Government Equalities Office websites at these links: Equality and Human Rights Commission and Government Equalities Office. ## Fair Treatment At Work Policy The Council is committed to Valuing Diversity in its workforce and aims to ensure that all employment decisions are fair and objective, employees are treated with respect and understanding and that there is no unlawful discrimination. The Council's commitment: In order to provide the best possible opportunity for employees to contribute to organisation goals and to realise their potential, employees, whilst at work, are entitled to expect the Council to: " Promote mutual respect between all employees and to help to ensure that employees are treated courteously. " Protect them from bullying, harassment, unlawful discrimination and victimisation. " Provide clear rules and standards of behaviour and to seek to ensure that these are fairly and equitably applied through appropriate procedures. " Provide appropriate support to employees who may be unfairly treated. " Take action when breaches of this Policy are brought to its attention. The Council's expectations of employees: In order to do the above, the Council expects employees to: " Treat each other and the Council's customers with respect, fairness and courtesy. " Adhere to the Employee Code of Conduct. " Bring to its attention any breach of this policy. " Support firm action being taken against any individual who breaches this policy. ## Fair Treatment At Work Procedure Purpose The Council is committed to ensuring that employees are treated with dignity and respect whilst at work and acts of unfair treatment will not be tolerated. Most of the time complainants simply want the unfair treatment to stop so that they can resume their normal working life. The Fair Treatment at Work Procedure has been put in place to deal with complaints of unfair treatment and unlawful discrimination to ensure that a clear process is available for staff to raise their concerns. The Fair Treatment at Work Policy and Procedure provide a clear statement of expectations and a framework through which issues of harassment, bullying, victimisation and unlawful discrimination can be raised by individuals and appropriate action taken. To show how seriously the Council takes this matter, breaches of the Policy and Procedure may result in disciplinary action including dismissal. There are two processes for dealing with a concern or complaint. These are: ## " **Stage 1 - Informal** ## " **Stage 2 - Formal** The Informal Process is most effective when employees raise issues early. Many cases have been successfully resolved at an early stage without recourse to the formal process or the matter turning into a more serious disciplinary issue. Employees are encouraged to use the informal procedure rather than immediately choosing the formal route. However, there may be situations where the formal procedure is triggered without prior use of the informal process e.g. where the complaint is considered to be complex or where it is the complainant's choice to proceed in that way. This is entirely acceptable in the interest of ensuring the complaint is properly investigated and appropriate action taken. An employee has the right to choose which procedure they wish to follow. Where, at any point, it becomes apparent that there has been a serious breach of the Council's rules, it will not be right to follow the Fair Treatment at Work Procedure and in these circumstances, the Council's Disciplinary Procedure will be activated instead. If the Disciplinary Procedure is activated, individuals will still have access to confidential support from the Occupational Health Service and trade unions. The Formal Process (explained below) replaces the Council's Grievance Procedure for complaints regarding unfair treatment at work, i.e. harassment, victimisation, bullying and other forms of discrimination e.g. racism, sexism, unfair treatment related to an individual's disability, homophobia, etc either face to face or via text message and/or email. Details of both the Informal and Formal Fair Treatment at Work Processes are set as follows. " **Stage 1 - Informal Process** The informal process enables issues to be resolved quickly and effectively between both parties nearest to the point of origin and to restore positive relationships at work. Employees are encouraged to use the informal process first in an attempt to resolve the situation. However, individuals may resort directly to the formal process (Stage 2) if they wish. The complainant has a choice of options **(see flowchart):** (a) Direct discussion with the person who is the subject of the complaint (with or without support from another person); (b) Indirect approach by requesting someone else to talk to the person who is the subject of the complaint; this may be by: (i) Approach to management who may be able to assist; (ii) Seeking facilitation using employees specially trained by the Council called Facilitators who can act as a 'go-between' to try to resolve the problem. This approach requires co-operation between both parties ; (iii) Approach to a Senior HR Adviser in the HR Service for advice and assistance. (c) Talk through options - approach any of the people listed in b(i) - b(iii) above for advice only i.e. not to inform or discuss the matter with the person who is the subject of the complaint. (d) Alternatively, individuals may wish to seek support from their Trade Union representative. In addition, the **Occupational Health Service** can provide completely confidential emotional support. The Informal process is expected to: 1. foster a safe and constructive environment where both parties can engage in open and honest dialogue. 2. encourage both parties to move away from their initial positions by appreciating each other's point of view, personal interests and underlying needs. 3. provide opportunities for both parties to consider and explore the causes and impact of conflict upon themselves and each other. 4. explore all the issues in full, reach a consensus and agree an action plan for future work relationship If the situation remains unresolved in spite of informal efforts, the employee may then decide to make a complaint under the Formal Process. If it appears that the Council's disciplinary rules have been broken, then the matter should normally be referred to other procedures e.g. the Disciplinary Procedure depending on the circumstances. " **Stage 2 - Formal Process** This stage allows for a formal investigation of the issues and an opportunity to explore a variety of options in order to re-establish working relationships. The Grievance Procedure covers matters which are specific to an individual in relation to their service and/or conditions of service with the Council This process replaces the Council's Grievance Procedure for complaints regarding unfair treatment at work, e.g. harassment, victimisation, bullying and racism. See flowchart. Step One - Lodging a Complaint The complainant must put the details of their complaint in writing using the Formal Notification Form (Appendix 2) and include, where possible, details of the outcome they are seeking. Formal complaints must be lodged within 3 calendar months of the date of the act complained of. Extension of this time limit will only be agreed where management accept that it was not reasonably practicable for the employee to lodge the complaint in time. Step Two - Formal Resolution Process If it is apparent that the Council's rules may have been broken, it may be appropriate to suspend action under the Fair Treatment at Work Process and investigate the matter further under the Council's Disciplinary Procedure. On receiving a formal complaint, the manager should acknowledge receipt of the complaint within 5 working days outlining the timescale for resolving the issue. Investigations will be conducted as quickly as reasonably practicable in the circumstances, commensurate with conducting a fair and thorough investigation and the complainant should be kept informed of progress. A copy of the Formal Notification form should be sent to a Senior HR Adviser. Any information available prior to the meeting should be sent to both parties before the meeting if possible. The manager will invite the complainant and the person who is the subject of the complaint to a meeting to discuss the complaint. The decision to meet both parties in one meeting or two separate meetings will be at the manager's discretion which will take into account the seriousness and sensitivity of the case. The purpose of the meeting is to investigate the complaint as detailed on the Formal Notification Form and to identify ways of resolving the issue/s. Once all the relevant information has been considered, the manager will make a decision as to how the complaint can best be resolved. The outcome will be sent to both parties in writing. The complainant should be notified of their right of appeal (see below). Step Three - Appeal Process If the complainant is not satisfied with the decision of the manager at Step Two, he/she can appeal to Deputy Director level and subsequently to a Member Appeal Panel. The grounds of appeal must be put in writing and lodged within 10 working days of the date of the letter confirming the decision. The decision at the appeal stage is final with no further right of appeal. Right to be accompanied/Support & Advice Both parties have the right to be accompanied by a Trade Union representative or workplace colleague. The companion should not be anyone whose presence would prejudice the hearing or where there is a conflict of interest. If any witnesses are called, they do not have the right to be accompanied. In addition, the Occupational Health Service can provide completely confidential emotional support to both parties. " Post employment Process Complaint lodged by an individual who has left employment The following procedure will apply where: ƒ A complaint had not been made before the employment ended; or ƒ A complaint had been made prior to the employee's last day of service but the process outlined above has not started or has not been completed; and ƒ Both parties agree in writing that it should be used instead of the process above or ƒ It is not reasonably practicable to use the standard process Step one (Statement of complaint) - The individual sets out in writing the nature of the complaint and sends it to the appropriate Deputy Director. Step two (Response) - The Deputy Director sets out the Council's response in writing and sends it to the individual. " Monitoring Records must be kept detailing the nature of the allegation, any agreed actions and the timescales using the Monitoring Form in Appendix 3. Managers and Facilitators involved in the Informal process and the manager hearing the complaint at the Formal process should complete the Monitoring Form and send it to the HR Service for monitoring purposes. The Monitoring Form will be kept confidential and retained in accordance with provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998. ## Fair Treatment At Work Procedure - Informal Process Employee wishes to raise a concern or complaint about unfair treatment Direct Indirect Talk through options Employee requests any of the three listed below to talk to the other party on their behalf (this can be in the presence or absence of the complainant). Employee requests to discus the issue with any of the three listed below but does not want the other party to be informed. Employee discusses the issue/s with other party unaccompanied. Management HR Service Fair Treatment at Work Facilitators Employee contacts a Senior HR Adviser for advice and assistance in resolving the problem. Employee approaches a manager to help resolve the problem as part of their management role. Employee approaches one of the specially trained facilitators who act as 'go between' to assist in resolving the problem. The list of facilitators is available on the HR Service website on Bexweb. Matter resolved Matter unresolved | | | | | | |-------------------|-----|-----|-----|-----| | Formal Procedure | | | | | | No further action | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Employee can decide to make a complaint at Stage One of the Formal Process. ## Fair Treatment At Work Procedure - Formal Process Step One - Lodging a Complaint Employee raises request for matter to be resolved through the Formal Process with the appropriate manager using the Formal Notification Form. Employee must provide full details of the complaint including the desired outcome and any attempts to resolve the matter informally. Step Two - Formal Resolution Process If it is apparent that the Council's rules may have been broken, it may be appropriate to suspend action under the Fair Treatment at Work Process and investigate the matter further under the Council's Disciplinary Procedure. Manager hearing the complaint sets up a meeting with both parties at the same time or two separate meetings at his/her discretion taking into account the seriousness and sensitivity of the allegations. The meeting may include calling witnesses. Both parties should receive the same set of documents before the meeting if possible. Both parties have a right to accompanied by a trade union representative or work colleague where there is no conflict of interest. The manager hearing the complaint may adjourn the meeting to seek further information if necessary. A representative from HR Service will attend the hearing. Decision Once all the information has been considered, the manager will make a decision as to how the complaint can best be resolved. The outcome will be sent to both parties in writing. The complainant should be notified of their right of appeal. Step Three - Appeal Process for complainant If the employee is not satisfied with the decision of the manager, he/she can appeal to Deputy Director level and subsequently to a Member Appeal Panel within 10 working days of the date of the letter setting out the manager's decision at Step Two. The appeal must be set out in writing with the grounds of appeal stated. The decision at the appeal stage is final with no further right of appeal. ## Appendix 1 - Definitions Equality Act 2010 (the Act) sets out the 'protected characteristics' that qualify for protection from discrimination. A person is protected from discrimination on the basis of: - age; - disability; - gender reassignment - marriage and civil partnership; - pregnancy and maternity; - race; - religion or belief; - sex; and - sexual orientation. Direct Discrimination can be described as an act, which has the effect of treating a person less favourably than another and is against the law. This currently includes discrimination on the grounds of a 'protected characteristic' (listed above) although discrimination for other reasons may also be found to be unlawful. For example, it would be against the law not to employ a female employee just because she is female, may become pregnant and take maternity leave. Direct discrimination (associative and perceived) covers discrimination resulting from a person's association with someone having a protected characteristic. It also covers treatment on the grounds of perceived status, for example, where someone is treated less favourably because they are perceived to hold a certain religious belief, even if the perception is wrong. Associative discrimination does not apply on the basis of marital or civil partnership status. It must be the victim, rather than anybody else, who is married or the civil partner. Direct age discrimination can be objectively justified in some circumstances. It is not direct discrimination to treat a disabled person more favourably than a non-disabled person and a man cannot claim discrimination where special treatment is given to a woman in connection with pregnancy or childbirth. Racism is a specific type of unlawful discrimination and can also constitute harassment. The Race Relations Act defines racial discrimination on the grounds of colour, race, nationality (including citizenship), ethnic origin and national origin. The Council will not tolerate any form of racist behaviour; an example would be to refuse training for an employee just because he/she is black. Institutional Racism has been defined by Lord Macpherson as "The collective failure of an organisation to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture or ethnic origin. It can be seen or detected in processes, attitudes and behaviour which amount to discrimination through unwitting prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness and racist stereotyping which disadvantage minority ethnic people." An example of this may be an organisation failing to follow up a complaint of racism with no action taken to deal with the specific complaint or prevent it re-occurring. Harassment - where a person engages in unwanted conduct relating to a protected characteristic (apart from pregnancy, maternity, marriage and civil partnership) which has the purpose or effect of violating a person's dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for that person. It includes harassment based on association or perception. For example, it covers harassment based on a person's association with their disabled child or harassment based on a perception that a person is gay. Harassment may be intentional or unintentional and the perception of the victim is important. It can be described as unwanted or unwelcome words or behaviour that causes offence or makes a person feel humiliated or distressed. This type of treatment may badly affect the recipient's well being, employment prospects or work performance and create an uncomfortable or frightening working environment. It may be related to sex, sexual orientation, race, disability, religion, nationality, age, or any personal characteristic of the individual. For example, repeated and unwelcome comments about an individual being disabled, lesbian, gay, or black would be considered harassment, as would deliberately touching a colleague in a way that was unwelcome. Continually giving a black member of staff the worst tasks in the office because of their colour would also be considered to be harassment. Remember, racial harassment is not only a disciplinary offence it may also constitute a criminal offence. Other types of behaviour such as making rude gestures and initiation ceremonies could also be considered harassment. Sexual Harassment - any form of unwanted verbal, non-verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature with the purpose or effect of violating the dignity of a person, creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment. Sex-based Harassment - unwanted conduct related to the sex of a person with the purpose or effect of violating the dignity of a person, and of creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating, or offensive environment. Bullying is a form of harassment. It is the frequent belittling and undermining of an individual through behaviour that reduces their confidence and self-esteem. For example, a manager regularly shouting at a member of staff in front of colleagues and members of the public would be a clear case of bullying. Other examples include excessive teasing, exclusion, making threats about job security without foundation, spreading malicious rumours and the misuse of power and position. Like harassment and racism, bullying is not necessarily face-to-face, it may be by other methods e.g. written communications, phone calls, texts and electronic mail. Bullying can be hard to recognise and may be subtle. The recipient may be anxious that others consider them weak or that they may be seen as "overreacting", they may also worry that they will not be believed. Sometimes a relatively minor incident hides an underlying pattern, it is important to remember that for the recipient this incident may be the "last straw". Victimisation can be described as subjecting a person to a detriment because they have done or it is believed they have done or may bring proceedings under the Equality Act, give evidence or information in connection with proceeding under the Act, do any other thing for the purposes of or in connection with the Act, make an allegation that another person has contravened the Act. This may include the individual being ill treated or being treated less favourably. For example, if a manager stopped talking to a member of their team because they had given evidence on behalf of another member of staff at a disciplinary hearing, they would be victimising them. ## Confidential Appendix 2 - Formal Notification Form Name: Directorate: Job Title: Section: Supervisor/Manager: Details of alleged unfair treatment: (Please continue on a separate sheet if necessary). Please outline how you think this situation could best be resolved (Please continue on a separate sheet if necessary). Please state action/s taken so far to resolve your complaint. (This may include details of facilitation and/or indirect support already provided under the Informal Process. Please continue on a separate sheet if necessary). When did you first raise the unfair treatment? Please note that only issues raised on this form will be considered as part of this process. Once completed, please send to your line manager as appropriate and/or your Senior HR Adviser. ## Appendix 3 - Monitoring Form 1. DETAILS OF COMPLAINANT Name of complainant Date of discussion/meeting Complainant's Directorate/Section 2. DETAILS OF PERSON AGAINST WHOM COMPLAINT IS MADE Name: …………………………………………… Directorate/Section: ……………………………... …… 3. NATURE OF COMPLAINT/DISPUTE Racial harassment Race discrimination Sexual harassment Sex/Gender discrimination Sex based harassment Victimisation other harassment Bullying Personal issue Dispute with colleague(s) Dispute with manager Unfair treatment by manager Inappropriate behaviour Team conflict Performance related issue Poor attendance Age related Religion/belief Gender Reassignment Disability discrimination Sexual orientation Other, please specify Please give brief details below 5. WAS THIS COMPLAINT DISCUSSED INFORMALLY FIRST? (e.g. with a facilitator) If yes, has a formal complaint been raised? ## 6. Outline Agreed Action/S Taken (Or To Be Taken) By Both Parties Following The Formal/Informal Process On (Date) ............... Both Parties Agreed To Resolve The issue by (please list the agreed actions with timescales): ## 7. Facilitator/Manager'S Assessment My assessment of the process is that both parties: ˆ Freely expressed their feelings and concerns ˆ Agreed on how the issue could best be resolved ˆ Made a commitment to take forward the agreement 8. AT WHAT STAGE WAS THE MATTER CONCLUDED (Informal, formal, Appeal)? Name of facilitator/Manager ....................................................... Date .............................. Please return the completed form to Donna Sexton, HR Policy Adviser, HR & Corporate Support, Room 211, Hill View, Please mark the envelope PRIVATE

en

1489-pdf

## Witness Statement Of Neil Davies Neil Lindsay Davies Of will say as follows:- T am 52 years old and have been working as a producer/researcher in the teievbion and film industry sInce 1986- am Director of my own television production company, Dai Films Limited. I Joined the Parachute Regiment In 1965 and left it in 1969. I sewed in Aden, other parts of the Persian Gulf' and Cyprus in the First BattalIon of the Regiment. I received a campaign medal In con nectlon with my service in Adori where I was part of the Mortar Platoon, i left the Regiment in 1969 with an Honourable Discharge by purchase. After I left the Army, I remained a member of the Army Reserve until my 45th birthday In 1993. 2. In 1988, I met John GoCdard, who ran a television production company called Praxis Films Limited. I began carrying out some work fer Praxis. I suggested to John that it would be a potentially good idea for a documentary to focus on the British withdrawal from Men in the l960s, I felt that I would be well placed to be involved with the making of such a programme because of my personal experiences and contacts. John and I dlsctàsed the pmposecj programme and I began to carry out preliminary background research In 1989. 4. As part of this resea,th, I visited various soldiers with whom i had sewed In Men. In the course of talking to serving and ex-soidlers, I learnt that a number of the soldiers i had served with In Aden had subsequently served in Northern Ireland with the Parachute Regiment and that they had been on duty In Derry when the events known as Bloody Sunday took piace in 1972. 5. t had previously been thinking about the posstbìlfty of making a programme about the events of Bloody Sunday. There had been widespread criticism of the Wldgery Report which had beati set up to look into what had taken place, and I wanted to make a documentary programme focusing on the recollections of soldiers and local people who had been involved, i spoke to Alan Hayllng, who was then working for a television production company. He told me that his partner, Horst had also expressed an interest in working on such a programme. In addition, i had discussed the programme idea with John Goddard. John had told ins that Praxis wöutd be Interested In trying to obtain a commission from Channel Four Television to make the programme. 8. While I was interviewing various soldiers about what had taken place in Aden, it became clear to me that some of them had relevant first-hand knowledge of events on Bloody Sunday and that they would probably be prepared to talk to me about what had taken place on a thicUy unathibutable basis. I made it clear to anyone F spoke to about the proposed programme that I had given assurances to soldiers that I would not disclose their identities and did not Intend to. 7. John Goddard began to try to Interest Channel 4 In the Bloody Sunday programme idea. Noni was also involved on the production side of the proposed programme. At this time, J was the only researcher working on the project. I continued working on the Men project but also began to focus more on Bloody Sunday when talking to soldiers and ax-soldiers. By May 1989, although I was still researching the Aden programme as well, John Goddard had asked me to focus more specifically on the Bloody Sunday programme. B. T had known a number of people who had been active In the republican movement I spoke to some of them about The proposed programme and indicated my desire to be able to lntervlewlocaj residents In Derry and the relatives of those injured and killed on Bloody Sunday. A man named Gerry Fltzpatjjck told me that he knew people who Would be able to put me in touch with relevant local residents in Decry. I also spoke to Eamon Mccann, a journalist who had been one of the organisers of the civil rights peace demonstration which had been centra! to events on Bloody Sunday. Eamon also told rna he would put me In touch with local people in Deny. Over the Summer and early Autumn of 1989, I interviewed various soldiers anti ax-soldiers. Inctuding soldiers I had not servad with, for background information about what had taken piace on Bloody Sunday. My prime purpose at this pôiflt was to obtain background information and also to establish who might be willing to speak to me in connection with the proposed programme. I visited Aldershot on a number of occasions and soclalised with members of the Parachute Regiment. I did not specifically ask them about Bloody Sunday but just generally developed relationships with people. Frequently, I would get talking to groups of soldiers In local pubs whose IdentIties I did not know and the conversation might turn towards when they had served in Northern Ireland. I was also still canying out research to progress the Ader' project at this point. I knew a film maker cafled With Broomfield. I was aware that Nick wanted to make a drama programme about soldiers' lives. I tiied to provide him with general background information. As his project began to develop, I met the wilter he was working with, Danny Boyle. Nick and Danny told me that they were thinking cf focusing on soldiers stationed In Men In the 1960's. However, es they began to develop the project further with the BBC. it became clear that due to the potential costs of location filming, this idea would be to expensive to pursue. Therefore, they then considered focusing on soldiers in Northern Ireland and, In pedicular, on a central character who had been fraumatised by being present during an Incident like Bloody Sunday. Nick and Danny arranged for the BBC to engage me on a short-term contract to carry out research for the proposed drama, in essence, my job was to try to speak to soldiers who had served ¡n Northern Ireland. I was also asked to try to arrange for us to watch the Parachute Regiment training. Because of my service in the Regiment I was considered a good person to liaise with soldiers and The Regiment generally in this regard. 12. 1 had been keeping notes In various notebooks of things soldiers and exsoldiers had told me about Bloody Sunday, Northern Ireland and Men. Some of them also suggested other individuals they thought I should contact In November 1989, I began noting the meetings i was having with soldiers in a standard office diary. In the main, these simply detailed the iridMduals I was meeting with and did not go into what was dIscussed. However, i also continued to keep separate notas of my conversations with soldiers and ex-soldiers. I also taped sorne of the interviews I carried out, with the knowledge of The participants. Again, I made sure that I stressed to ali of the soldiers and -scldIem i Interviewed that I would not disclose their identities to anyone, but that subject to this, I was proposing to make use of what they to'd me. All of the soldiers and ex-soidlers made it clear to rna that they were only prepared to talk ta me on the basis that 1 guaranteed that I did not disclose their identities to anyone, even members of the production team I was working with, without their express permission. in addition, there were a few lndMduals I spoke lo in social situations, such as in pubs, who were not aware of my reasons for doing so. Therefore i did not give them any guarantees of confidentiality. Sometimes, I did not even know their full names.. I also wrote up notes afterwards of such conversations. 1 returned to Alderstiot and arranged with the Parachute Regiment for Danny. Nick and rna to stay with the Regiment for several days to carry out relevant research I travelled to Aidershot for this purpose on 17th January 1990. While we were there, we took particular Interest in npI Company which was the Regiment's training company and which was then enteiing a critical two week phase in which many recruits failed to make the grade. Both during that üip and other trips fo Aldershot, I had also spoken to a number of senioT officers about events in Aden and generally about Northern Ireland. In addition, I had spoken to people who had sewed in the Argyil and Sutherland Highlanders in Men. I spoke to such individuals on an on the recoref basis and their Identities were also recorded in my 1989 diary, as well as those of soldiers and ex-soldiers to whom ¡ was talking about Bloody Sunday. At this point, (was continuing to speak to people in connection with the proposed Praxis documentary about Bloody Sunday but this was taking second place to my work in connection with the proposed BBC drama. I continued working on the BBC drama project into January 1990. However, although a script was written, the BBC subsequently shelved the project. In eaily 1990, John Goddard sent me a 'treatment" (a background document) he had prepared and which he was sending to Channel 4 in support of his efforts to secure funding fnxn them to research the proposed documentary about Bloody Sunday. By this tIme, I had talked In detail to several soldiers and ex-soldiers who had been involved in relevant events. I had also Identified others whom I believed might be prepared to talk to me. I continued using my 1989 dIary to record the research I was canying out In 1990. i had not used up the pages for the first haft of the year In 1989, so I wrote on these pages, alten altering the date on the page by one day so that the date in question fell on the contct day of the week for 1990k Gerry Fitzpatzick had told me that the Relatives CommIttee of those killed or Injured on ßloody Sunday were happy to arrange for me Interview their members. In contrast to the soldiers, I Was told by all of the local residents and relatives of those who had been Injured In Deny whom I Interviewed that they were happy to be interviewed on camera for the programme and for their names to be disclosed. John Goddard and (had had a number of discussions about how best to protect soldiers1 identities while featuring what they told me in the docurnentaty, We decided In principie that we would not show soldiers' faces on camera and that we would also consider using actors to appear in the programme reading out what soldiers had told us. in addition to speaidng to various serving soldiers, I also travelled around the country interviewing ex-soldiers, usually at their homes, at work, or in total pubs. My practice when Interviewing soldiers was generally Io make notes on the spot. However, on several occasions i taped people with an audio tape with their knowledge on the basis that the tapes were for research purposes and would not be disclosed to anyone. At this time, no filming had yet taken place of soldiers. in 1990, Channel 4 gave Praxis a development commission ta research the project in greater depth. i continued on as a researcher, but later John engaged Tony Stark to carry out research as well. Although Tony and i discussed the project, we generally worked separately. He had his own contacts and reported directly to John as did i. Generally speaking, I simply told John In broad terms what particular soldiers had told me. i did not inform him of their identities and unless It became dear that he was likely to include what a soldier had said in the proposed programme, I did not provide him with the notas I had taken whue cìnylng out the interviews or audio-tapes. We were all conscious of the need to maintain confidentiality. Therefore, although I generally told John what I was doIng and what people had told me, i did not tell him the names of my sources, and in turn, i did not know the names of Tony's sources. Frequently, i wrote up my notes and audio tapes of intervIews In transcript form and John would have seen these rather than my original notos. I also assisted John with selecting the most relevant material obtained to date from soldiers and ax-soldiers. John would then report back on the progress of the prog ramme lo Channel 4. John's aim was to try to obtain a commissIon to actually make the programme from Channel 4. On June 27- 28 1990, 1 travelled to Derry and interviewed local residents using audio casseftes. 22- I continued working on the project until about August 1900. Then, I went to Bournemouth and enrolled on a post-graduate media studies course. John and Tony continued workIng on the programme. t am aware that they interviewed additional soldiers and ex-soldiers. They also reinterviewed several individuals I had previously spoken to. In addition, I believe that John and Tony followed up a number of contacts i had supplied thorn with and, as a result, subsequently interviewed a number of soldiers I had not met. John and buy both tord rue that they had given the sOldiers and ex-saldiers the same assurances of confidentiality which i had. I understand that they filmed or tapad a number of the interviews. 2$. i think that some cf my notes and audio material were left with Jahn. However, i kept the majority. Jahn, Tony and I had agreed that it was best if each of us only knew what was necessary In connection with making the programme about each other's contacts and iriteMes rather than pooling details of our sources. 24- In December 1990. John sent me a further reatment" he had prepared in support of his efforts to secure a frill commission to complete the programme from Channel 4. John stated to Channel 4 that we had interviewed over 60 Individuals in Derry. I had interviewed a substantial number of people when I had gone to Deny but naming like 60. i therefore prestúne John was also referring to additional people he and/or Tony had interviewed. John also slated in the Th-eatnienr that we had interviewed a dozen soldiers from the Parachute Regiment including members of the Mortar Platoon. I had interviewed some soldiers from the Mortar Platoon but i think that John may also have been referring to soldiers who had simply passed us on to other individuals who had relevant information, rather than speaking to us themselves about what had taken piace on Bloody Sunday. Also, John may have been referring to soldiers he or Tony had interviewed whom i was unaware of. We feW that we had established that the Widgery Commission had not got to the bottom of what had taken place on Bloody Sunday, and that in particular we had obtained additional Information from soldiers and relatives which had not been supplied previously to the Commission or to the mecHe. By early 1991, Praxis had been commissioned to complete the project. John wanted me to return to work as Assistant Producer cf the programme on a full-time basis. Therefore, I decided to leave my post-graduate course in Bournemouth. John wrote to me in March 1991 outlinIng the work which he wanted me to carly out John's intention was for us to interview various soldiers and local people from Deny. In May 1991, I signed a contract with Praxis to carry out a further tO weeks work on the project between then and November 1991. This was to include research, pre-productiori work and two weeks production and postproduction work. So far as I can recall, i spent most of this time contacting soldiers i had prevIously met and arranging for them to be interviewed by John and other members of the production team. I again assured the soldiers I spoke to that i would not disclose their identities to anyone. John made It clear to me that he and Tony left bound by the same obligation of confidentiality and that he would stress this again when he met with the soldiers. Many of the soldiers we had spoken to had provided Information which was significantly different to the official version of what had taken place on Bloody Sunday. Generally, soldiers I Interviewed had three main concerns about lt becoming known publIcly that they had spoken to me In connection with the programme. First, they were worried about the consequences from the Parachute Regiment Second, They were concernS that they would be breaking the Official Secrets Act and, finally, they were worded about how other soldiers might matt, since much of the information i was given pointed to some soldiers having acted in an WemeIy Inappropriate way on Bloody Sunday. Many of the soldiers I spoke to told nie that they were extremely fearful of the repercussions if their Identifies became public. The soldiers interviewed during this period were a mixture of people I had previously interviewed, and those John and Tony had met, together with a few new soldiers. i was not prescrit when John and Tony interviewed the majority of the soldiers and ex-soldiers although 1 believe that a number cf them were people i had already interviewed. John and Tony generally recorded the interviews on audio tapes. By the time the programme was broadcast. i had a large number of notes from interviews and informal conversafions I had had with soldiers and exsoldiers. i think that in ail i canied out substantial interviews with about a dozen soldIers and ax-soldiers. As i have Indicated above, i think that I had given some of the audio tapes to John, but I had certainly kept others. i think John retained the ones which were used In the programme. i had also continued to keep details of my contacts and meetings In a 1991 diary. After the programme was broadcast, i received a number cf anonous telephone calls threatening violence against me. i concluded that they were likely to have been either from soldiers t had interviewed, or alternatively soldiers who were unhappy with what others had told me and Which had subsequently been included in parts of the programme. The film as broadcast was critical in a number of respects of the role of Parachute Regiment soldiers on the day In question. i had no meaningful editorial input into the way the programme was put together. My main functîorì had been to provide leads and to carry out preliminary Interviews with soldiers and Derry residents. A number of soidiers and local residents had told me that they believed that Initially firing had come from unknown persons on the Deny City wails. There had then been a great deal of confUsion, residents and soldiers alike told me that they had felt threatened by fire from the walis, and that events Then escalated. In contrast, the Widgery inquiry had not referred to any suggestion uf fire initially coming from the City walls. Several soldiers told me That they felt that paratroopers had bean 'set-up" by unknown people thing from the City walls with the effect that paratroopers felt inaccurately that an IRA sniper had opened fire ori them. After the programme was broadcast I kept those of my hand-written notes, transcripts and audio-tapes whi ch had not been kept by John Goddard, as well as ruy 1989 and 1991 diales. i icept them at my flat In which also served as my business premIses. For security reasons, I did not keep all of this materiS together and it was located amongst a large amount of other written documentation and tapes which related ta other projects. in March 1995, i set up a company named Rave Productions United with Steve Newman and John Caudino. The registered office and business premises of the company were also my fiat in . In July 1996, while I was on holiday in Greece, without warning Stave Newman and John Caudino removed a large amount of documentation and tapes from the fiat. They informed me that they had placed this material in secure storaga Given that when I returned from Greece virtually all of the documentation and tapes relating to my media work Which had been at the flat had been taken, I believe that this material included my Bloody Sunday notos, audio tapes and my 1991 diary. Subsequently, I instnicted solicitors to try to obtain the return of this material and they commenced legal proceedings. i believed that the main item of value Which had been taken was footage of the pop group which later became known as The Spice Girls. Steve Newman and John Caudino denIed In correspondence that they had taken this footage. They subsequently also denied this In affidavits. However, in October 1997, my solicitor arranged to inspect documentation which had been referred to in affidavits by Steve Newman and John Caudino at the offices of their then solicitors. I accompanied my solicitor for this purpose. Amongst the documentation, i located footage of the Spice Girls Which Steve Newman !J9 b 10 and John Gaudino had stated that they had not removed from my flat. My solicitor also located sorne of my personal DHSS and tax documentation, Which they had also denied removing. He showed the documentation to me. lt was agreed that my solicitor could remove the footage of the Spice Girls from Steve Newman's and John Gaudino's solicitors' offices and that lt would be kept at the offices of his finn. However, Steve Newman's and John Gaudlno's solicitors did not consent to the removal of my DHSS/tax documentation. Steve Newman and John Gaudino claimed in the proceedings that they had been in partnership with me during the period 1901 - 1995, operating under the name Rave Productions. They claimed that the documentation and material they had removed from my flat consisted uf either partnership property or company property. They subsequently continued to deny that they had removed any of my LDHSS/tax documentation from my flat, even though both I and my solicitor had seen auth documents at the offices of their former solicitors. Since October 1997, despIte a number of requests, Steve Newman and John Gaudino have declined to provide me with access to the totality of the documentation which they removed from my flat. I have only been allowed access to the limited documentation which they disclosed In connection with the proceedings. The solicitors acting for Steve Newman at that time acknowledged that this was only a part of (he total documentation which was held at his finn's offices. I ant, aware that solicitors acting on behalf of Channel 4 TV have also unsuccessfully requested Steve Newman's and John daudino's solicitors to aflow them and me access to the totality of documentation remaved in order for me to see whether I can locate any of my material relating to the Bloody Sunday programme. To date, however, Steve Newman and John Caudino have refused to do so. Even if I was now allowed to Inspect the documentation, t am concerned that particularly given their Inaccurate statements about the Spice Girl's footage and my [*188/tax documentation, there may be documentation Which they have not provided to their solicitors. If they have located any Bloody Sunday documentation amongst this, i believe they might remove lt. 37. The trial of my proceedings against Steve Newman and John Guadino took placa eaiiler this year. Mr Justice Pumfrey gave judgment in my favour ori 7 July and concluded that i had not been in partnership with Steve Newman and John Guadino. They were ordered to deliver up the property which formed the subject matter of the action. Hvever, their solicitors have retained other property removed from my flat in 1996. Despite numerous requests, Steve Newman and John Guadino and their solicitors have declined to allow rna access, accompanied by my solicitor, to inspect the documentation held at the solicitors offices. I am not clear whether there Is additional documentation which is still retained elsewhere, I still have possession of ruy 1989 diary. I also have copies of variOus production documents and other material given to me by John Goddard at the time. i have provided Channel 4 wIth a copy of my dIary, reducted to remove any references which might identify my sourves, and also copies of all of these documents. I do not have possessions of any of my notes or audio tapes of interviews with soldiers. I have examined 3 fIles of transcripts of IntervIews canled out during the making of the Bloody Sunday programme which the Bloody Sunday Inquiry have sent to my solicitor. I understand that these transcripts were provided by John Goddard to the Bloody Sunday Inquiry. The second and third files consist of transcripts of inteMews carried out while the programme was being made with soldiers or ax-soldiers. ¡ have recently read these transcripts and would advise as follows;- ## File 2 1. I have no recollection of carrying out this Interview. lt is possible that I Introduced this soldier to either John Goddard or Tony Stark. 2- This Is the transcript of an interview i carried out at the individual's home on audio tape. I did not carry out this interview but may have introduced the soldier to Tony Stark. 1 cariled out this interview late at night at the person's home. I believe it is likely that the person would also have been interviewed subsequently by Tony Start i did not carry out this Interview. 6- I did not carry out this Interview. i cannot recall whether i did this Interview or not. ¡ did not carry out this inteMew. i cannot recall whether I carried out this interview. 40. I interviewed this soldier In a pub. The transcript consists of notes I wrote up after talking to the soldier. i interviewed this soldier in a room at a pub. I canied outthIs interview although I cannot recall where. I Interviewed this soldier but i cannot recall the location. I did not carry out this interview. This transcript is based on notes I took of conversations with the persan irr question. I do not recati where or when we met. I did not carry out this Interview. ## Flit 3 I did not carry out any of the 4 intervIews In question. 40. I have also recently watched a video of the Bloody Sunday documentary. The video was time-coded. In the programme we used actors' voice in place of those of the soldters and ex-soldiers we had interviewed, t have noted several instances in the programme wt'iere the words of the soldiers we interviewed were utilised:- 00-07-14-22 This was ari interview with Tony Stark 00-11-55-00 SS 00-28-37-09 00-30-34-00 I think this may have been an interview which I cerned out Interview with Tony Stark 00-44-53-00 00-42-12-12 I think this may have been an Interview i carried out. 7. 00-42-42-11 intervIew with Tony Stark So tr as I cari recall. I was present at most of the interviews t have referred to which were cartied out by Tony Stark, but probably riot all of them. I think it may also be the case the Tony Starke who had the wiiting credit for the documentary, had written composite interviews taken from several interviews which either he, I or John Goddard carded out. 1 believe that the facts contained In this statement are true, Signed; Name: Dated: ## Witness Statement Of Neil Davies NEIL LINDSAY DAVIES care of will say as follows:- I am 54 years old and have been working as a producer/researcher in the television and film industry since 1986. I am Director of my own television production company, Dai Films Limited. I joined the Parachute Regiment in 1965 and left it in 1969. I served in Aden, other parts of the Persian Gulf and Cyprus in the First Battalion of the Regiment. I received a campaign medal in connection with my service in Aden where I was part of the Mortar Platoon. I left the Regiment in 1969 with an Honourable Discharge by purchase. After I left the Army, I remained a member of the Army Reserve until my 45th birthday in 1993. In 1988, I met John Goddard, who ran a television production company called Praxis Films Limited. I began carrying out some work for Praxis. I suggested to John that it would be a potentially good idea for a documentary to focus on the British withdrawal from Aden in the 1960's. I felt that I would be well placed to be involved with the making of such a programme because of my personal experiences and contacts. John and I discussed the proposed programme and I began to carry out preliminary background research in 1989. As part of this research, I visited various soldiers with whom I had served in Aden. In the course of talking to serving and ex-soldiers, I learnt that a number of the soldiers I had served with in Aden had subsequently served in Northern Ireland with the Parachute Regiment and that they had been on duty in Derry when the events known as Bloody Sunday took place in 1972. I had previously been thinking about the possibility of making a programme about the events of Bloody Sunday. There had been widespread criticism of the Widgery Report which had been set up to look into what had taken place, and I wanted to make a documentary programme focusing on the recollections of soldiers and local people who had been involved. I spoke to Alan Hayling, who was then working for a television production company. He told me that his partner, Noni had also expressed an interest in working on such a programme. I do not recall Norii's surname. In addition, I had discussed the programme idea with John Goddard. John had told me that Praxis would be interested in trying to obtain a commission from Channel Four Television to make the programme. While I was interviewing various soldiers about what had taken place in Aden, it became clear to me that some of them had relevant first-hand knowledge of events on Bloody Sunday and that they would probably be prepared to talk to me about what had taken place on a strictly unattributable basis. I made it clear to anyone I spoke to about the proposed programme that I had given assurances to soldiers that I would not disclose their identities and did not intend to. John Goddard began to try to interest Channel 4 in the Bloody Sunday programme idea. Noni was also involved on the production side of the proposed programme. At this time, I was the only researcher working on the project. I continued working on the Aden project but also began to focus more on Bloody Sunday when talking to soldiers and ex-soldiers. By May 1989, although I was still researching the Aden programme as well, John Goddard had asked me to focus more specifically on the Bloody Sunday programme. I had known a number of people who had been active in the republican movement. I spoke to some of them about the proposed programme and indicated my desire to be able to interview local residents in Derry and the relatives of those injured and killed on Bloody Sunday. A man named Gerry Fitzpatrick told me that he knew people who would be able to put me in touch with relevant local residents in Derry. I also spoke to Eamon McCann, a journalist who had been one of the organisers of the civil rights peace demonstration which had been central to events on Bloody Sunday. Eamon also told me he would put me in touch with local people in Derry. Gerry and Eamon were not at any time researchers for Praxis, they were just people I spoke to. Over the Summer and early Autumn of 1989, I interviewed various soldiers and ex-soldiers, including soldiers I had not served with, for background information about what had taken place on Bloody Sunday. My prime purpose at this point was to obtain background information and also to establish who might be willing to speak to me in connection with the proposed programme. I visited Aldershot on a number of occasions and socialised with members of the Parachute Regiment. I did not specifically ask them about Bloody Sunday but just generally developed relationships with people. Frequently, I would get talking to groups of soldiers in local pubs whose identities I did know and the conversation might turn towards when they had served in Northern Ireland. I was also still carrying out research to progress the Aden project at this point. I knew a film maker called Nick Broomfield. I was aware that Nick wanted to make a drama programme about soldiers' lives. I tried to provide him with general background information. As his project began to develop, I met the writer he was working with, Danny Boyle. Nick and Danny told me that they were thinking of focusing on soldiers stationed in Aden in the 1960's. However, as they began to develop the project further with the BBC, it became clear that due to the potential costs of location filming, this idea would be to expensive to pursue. Therefore, they then considered focusing on soldiers in Northern Ireland and, in particular, on a central character who had been traumatised by being present during an incident like Bloody Sunday. Nick and Danny arranged for the BBC to engage me on a short-term contract to carry out research for the proposed drama. In essence, my job was to try to speak to soldiers who had served in Northern Ireland. I was also asked to try to arrange for us to watch the Parachute Regiment training. Because of my service in the Regiment, I was considered a good person to liaise with soldiers and the Regiment generally in this regard. I had been keeping notes in various notebooks of things soldiers and ex-soldiers had told me about Bloody Sunday, Northern Ireland and Aden. I no longer have possession of these notebooks. Some of them also suggested other individuals they thought I should contact. In November 1989, I began noting the meetings I was having with soldiers in a standard office diary. This diary has been disclosed to the Inquiry. In the main, these simply detailed the individuals I was meeting with and did not go into what was discussed. However, I also continued to keep separate notes of my conversations with soldiers and ex-soldiers. I also taped some of the interviews I carried out, with the knowledge of the participants. Again, I made sure that I stressed to all of the soldiers and ex-soldiers I interviewed that I would not disclose their identities to anyone, but that subject to this, I was proposing to make use of what they told me. All of the soldiers and ex-soldiers made it clear to me that they were only prepared to talk to me on the basis that I guaranteed that I did not disclose their identities to anyone, even members of the production team I was working with, without their express permission. In addition, there were a few individuals, some of whom were soldiers and some ex-soldiers, I spoke to in social situations, such as in pubs, who were not aware of my reasons for doing so. Therefore I did not give them any guarantees of confidentiality. Most of the time, I did not even know their full names. I also wrote up notes afterwards of such conversations. I did not tape any of these conversations. I returned to Aldershot and arranged with the Parachute Regiment for Danny, Nick and me to stay with the Regiment for several days to carry out relevant research. I travelled to Aldershot for this purpose on 17th January 1990. While we were there, we took particular interest in "P" Company" which was the Regiment's training company and which was then entering a critical two week phase in which many recruits failed to make the grade. Both during that trip and other trips to Aldershot, I had also spoken to a number of senior officers about events in Aden and generally about Northern Ireland. In addition, I had spoken to people who had served in the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders in Aden. I spoke to such individuals on an "on the record" basis and their identities were also recorded in my 1989 diary, as well as those of soldiers and ex-soldiers to whom I was talking about Bloody Sunday. At this point, I was continuing to speak to people in connection with the proposed Praxis documentary about Bloody Sunday but this was taking second place to my work in connection with the proposed BBC drama. I continued working on the BBC drama project into January 1990. However, although a script was written, the BBC subsequently shelved the project. In early 1990, John Goddard sent me a "treatment" (a background document) he had prepared and which he was sending to Channel 4 in support of his efforts to secure funding from them to research the proposed documentary about Bloody Sunday. By this time, I had talked in detail to several soldiers and ex-soldiers who had been involved in relevant events. I had also identified others whom I believed might be prepared to talk to me. I continued using my 1989 diary to record the research I was carrying out in 1990. I had not used up the pages for the first half of the year in 1989, so I wrote on these pages, often altering the date on the page by one day so that the date in question fell on the correct day of the week for 1990. I was also still researching the proposed Aden programme idea and continued to speak to soldiers and ex-soldiers in that connection. Gerry Fitzpatrick had told me that the Relatives Committee of those killed or injured on Bloody Sunday were happy to arrange for me interview their members. In contrast to the soldiers, I was told by all of the local residents and relatives of those who had been injured in Derry whom I interviewed that they were happy to be interviewed on camera for the programme and for their names to be disclosed. John Goddard and I had had a number of discussions about how best to protect soldiers' identities while featuring what they told me in the documentary. We decided in principle that we would not show soldiers' faces on camera and that we would also consider using actors to appear in the programme reading out what soldiers had told us. In addition to speaking to various serving soldiers, I also travelled around the country interviewing ex-soldiers, usually at their homes, at work, or in local pubs. I spoke to some of them about Aden as well. Some of the people I contacted told me they did not wish to discuss Bloody Sunday with me. My practice when interviewing soldiers was generally to make notes on the spot. However, on several occasions I taped people with an audio tape with their knowledge on the basis that the tapes were for research purposes and that the tapes and the indentities of the soldiers would not be disclosed to anyone without their agreement. I told the soldiers I would just pass on to the programme makers notes and relevant extracts from transcripts of the tapes which I would write up from what they had told me. At this time, no filming had yet taken place of soldiers. In 1990, Channel 4 gave Praxis a development commission to research the project in greater depth. I continued on as a researcher, but later John engaged Tony Cook to carry out research as well. Although Tony and I discussed the project, we generally worked separately. He had his own contacts and reported directly to John as did I. Generally speaking, I simply told John in broad terms what particular soldiers had told me. I did not inform him of their identities and unless it became clear that he was likely to include what a soldier had said in the proposed programme, I did not provide him with the notes I had taken while carrying out the interviews or audio-tapes. We were all conscious of the need to maintain confidentiality. Therefore, although I generally told John what I was doing and what people had told me, I did not tell him the names of my sources, and in turn, I did not know the names of Tony's sources. Frequently, I wrote up my notes and audio tapes of interviews in transcript form and John would have seen these rather than my original notes. I also assisted John with selecting the most relevant material obtained to date from soldiers and ex-soldiers. John would then report back on the progress of the programme to Channel 4. John's aim was to try to obtain a commission to actually make the programme from Channel 4. On June 27-28 1990, I travelled to Derry and interviewed local residents using audio cassettes. I continued working on the project until about August 1990. Then, I went to Bournemouth and enrolled on a post-graduate media studies course. John and Tony continued working on the programme. I am aware that they interviewed additional soldiers and ex-soldiers. They also reinterviewed several individuals I had previously spoken to. In addition, I believe that John and Tony followed up a number of contacts I had supplied them with and, as a result, subsequently interviewed a number of soldiers I had not met. I did not provide John or Tony with the names of my contacts. Rather, I would either arrange for the contact to meet them at an agreed location or request the contact to telephone John or Tony directly. John and Tony both told me that they had given the soldiers and ex-soldiers the same assurances of confidentiality which I had. I understand that they filmed or taped a number of the interviews. I think that some of my notes and audio material were left with John. However, I kept the majority. John, Tony and I had agreed that it was best if each of us only knew what was necessary in connection with making the programme about each other's contacts and interviews rather than pooling details of our sources. In December 1990, John sent me a further "treatment" he had prepared in support of hisefforts to secure a full commission to complete the programme from Channel 4. John stated to Channel 4 that we had interviewed over 60 individuals in Derry. I had interviewed a substantial number of people when I had gone to Derry but nothing like 60. I therefore presume John was also referring to additional people he and/or Tony had interviewed. John also stated in the "treatment" that we had interviewed a dozen soldiers from the Parachute Regiment including members of the Mortar Platoon. I had interviewed some soldiers from the Mortar Platoon but I think that John may also have been referring to soldiers who had simply passed us on to other individuals who had relevant information, rather than speaking to us themselves about what had taken place on Bloody Sunday. Also, John may have been referring to soldiers he or Tony had interviewed whom I was unaware of. We felt that we had established that the Widgery Commission had not got to the bottom of what had taken place on Bloody Sunday, and that in particular we had obtained additional information from soldiers and relatives which had not been supplied previously to the Commission or to the media. By early 1991, Praxis had been commissioned to complete the project. John wanted me to return to work as Assistant Producer of the programme on a full-time basis. Therefore, I decided to leave my post-graduate course in Bournemouth. John wrote to me in March 1991 outlining the work which he wanted me to carry out. John's intention was for us to interview various soldiers and local people from Derry. In May 1991, I signed a contract with Praxis to carry out a further 10 weeks work on the project between then and November 1991. This was to include research, pre-production work and two weeks production and post-production work. So far as I can recall, I spent most of this time contacting soldiers I had previously met and arranging for them to be interviewed by John and other members of the production team. I again assured the soldiers I spoke to that I would not disclose their identities to anyone. John made it clear to me that he and Tony Stark (who was the Director of the programme) felt bound by the same obligation of confidentiality and that he would stress this again when he met with the soldiers. Many of the soldiers we had spoken to had provided information which was significantly different to the official version of what had taken place on Bloody Sunday. Generally, soldiers I interviewed had three main concerns about it becoming known publicly that they had spoken to me in connection with the programme. First, they were worried about the consequences from the Parachute Regiment. Second, they were concerned that they would be breaking the Official Secrets Act and, finally, they were worried about how other soldiers might react, since much of the information I was given pointed to some soldiers having acted in an extremely inappropriate way on Bloody Sunday. Many of the soldiers I spoke to told me that they were extremely fearful of the repercussions if their identities became public. The soldiers interviewed during this period were a mixture of people I had previously interviewed, and those John and Tony had met, together with a few new soldiers. I was not present when John and Tony Stark interviewed the majority of the soldiers and ex-soldiers although I believe that a number of them were people I had already interviewed. John and Tony generally recorded the interviews on audio tapes. By the time the programme was broadcast, I had a large number of notes from interviews and informal conversations I had had with soldiers and ex-soldiers. I think that in all I carried out substantial interviews with about a dozen soldiers and ex-soldiers. As I have indicated above, I think that I had given some of the audio tapes to John, but I had certainly kept others. I think John retained the ones which were used in the programme. I had also continued to keep details of my contacts and meetings in a 1991 diary. I no longer have this diary. After the programme was broadcast, I received a number of anonymous telephone calls threatening violence against me. I concluded that they were likely to have been either from soldiers I had interviewed, or alternatively soldiers who were unhappy with what others had told me and which had subsequently been included in parts of the programme. The film as broadcast was critical in a number of respects of the role of Parachute Regiment soldiers on the day in question. I had no meaningful editorial input into the way the programme was put together. My main function had been to provide leads and to carry out preliminary interviews with soldiers and Derry residents. I could understand why some soldiers might have been upset with the way the paratroopers had been portrayed in the programme. I think that they may have felt that I had misled them, since I had always stressed to them that one of my aims was to try to get the soldiers' point of view across. Then, when they had seen the broadcast programme, they could well have been unhappy that it was critical of them. The soldiers may have therefore concluded that this was my fault and that I had let them down. For example, a number of soldiers and local residents had told me that they believed that initially firing had come from unknown persons on the Derry City walls. There had then been a great deal of confusion, residents and soldiers alike told me that they had felt threatened by fire from the walls, and that events then escalated. In contrast, the Widgery Inquiry had not referred to any suggestion of fire initially coming from the City walls. Several soldiers told me that they felt that paratroopers had been "set-up" by unknown people firing from the City walls with the effect that paratroopers felt inaccurately that an IRA sniper had opened fire on them. Originally, I understood that the programme would address this issue using the words of the soldiers I had interviewed. However, I was subsequently told that Tony Stark, who had written and directed the programme, had decided against this because he felt that there was not enough evidence to back this up. When I received threats of violence after the programme was broadcast, I was frightened and angry. I was angry because I felt that I always stayed true to what I had told the soldiers I had interviewed. I thought it very likely that the threats, which were made in anonymous phone calls, were from soldiers or ex-soldiers I had spoken to. Although I could understand why they had been upset by the programme, I felt I had not been responsible for this. After the programme was broadcast, I kept those of my hand-written notes, transcripts and audio-tapes which had not been kept by John Goddard, as well as my 1989 and 1991 diaries. I kept them at my flat in London which also served as my business premises. For security reasons, I did not keep all of this material together and it was located amongst a large amount of other written documentation and tapes which related to other projects. In March 1995, I set up a company named Rave Productions Limited with Steve Newman and John Gaudino. The registered office and business premises of the company were also my flat in . In July 1996, while I was on holiday in Greece, without warning Steve Newman and John Gaudino removed a large amount of documentation and tapes from the flat. They informed me that they had placed this material in secure storage. Given that when I returned from Greece virtually all of the documentation and tapes relating to my media work which had been at the flat had been taken, I believe that this material included my Bloody Sunday notes, audio tapes and my 1991 diary. Subsequently, I instructed solicitors to try to obtain the return of this material and they commenced legal proceedings. I believed that the main item of value which had been taken was footage of the pop group which later became known as The Spice Girls. Steve Newman and John Gaudino denied in correspondence that they had taken this footage. They subsequently also denied this in affidavits. However, in October 1997, my solicitor arranged to inspect documentation which had been referred to in affidavits by Steve Newman and John Gaudino at the offices of their then solicitors. I accompanied my solicitor for this purpose. Amongst the documentation, I located footage of the Spice Girls which Steve Newman and John Gaudino had stated that they had not removed from my flat. My solicitor also located some of my personal DHSS and tax documentation, which they had also denied removing. He showed the documentation to me. lt was agreed that my solicitor could remove the footage of the Spice Girls from Steve Newman's and John Gaudino's solicitors' offices and that it would be kept at the offices of his firm. However, Steve Newman's and John Gaudino's solicitors did not consent to the removal of my DHSS/tax documentation. Steve Newman and John Gaudino claimed in the proceedings that they had been in partnership with me during the period 1991 - 1995, operating under the name Rave Productions. They claimed that the documentation and material they had removed from my flat consisted of either partnership property or company property. They subsequently continued to deny that they had removed any of my DHSS/tax documentation from my flat, even though both I and my solicitor had seen such documents at the offices of their former solicitors. Since October 1997, despite a number of requests, Steve Newman and John Gaudino have declined to provide me and my solicitor with access to the totality of the documentation which they removed from my flat. They have only allowed me access to the limited documentation which they disclosed in connection with the proceedings. Steve Newman's solicitors acknowledged that this was only a part of the total documentation which was held at his firm's offices. Because of my desire to protect sources, I did not keep my Bloody Sunday material in one place and I believe at least some of it must have been amongst the material removed from my home in 1996 by Steve Newman and John Guadino. The trial of my proceedings against Steve Newman and John Guadino took place in February/March 2000. Mr Justice Pumfrey gave judgment in my favour on 7 July 2000 and concluded that I had not been in partnership with Steve Newman or John Guadino. They were ordered to deliver up the property which formed the subject matter of the action. None of this related to Bloody Sunday. However, their solicitors retained other property removed from my home in 1996. Despite numerous requests, Steve Newman and John Guadino and their solicitors refused to allow me access accompanied by my solicitor, to inspect the remaining documentation held at the solicitors' offices. I am not clear whether there is additional documentation which is retained elsewhere. I am aware that solicitors acting on behalf of Channel 4 TV unsuccessfully requested Steve Newman's and John Gaudino's solicitors to allow them and me access to the totality of documentation removed in order for me to see whether I could locate any of my material relating to the Bloody Sunday programme. Subsequently in 2002, my solicitor told me that the Inquiry had obtained documentation held by Steve Newman's and John Guadino's solicitors, and earlier this summer I went with my solicitor to the Inquiry's offices in London on three occasions to view this material. I could not find any documents amongst it relating to Bloody Sunday, although I did locate part of an editing deck which had formed part of the order for delivery up made nearly two years earlier. However, it was clear to me that the documentation obtained by the Inquiry was far from the whole of that taken from my home in 1996 by Steve Newman and John Guadino. The documentation I inspected at the Inquiry's office did not include the DHSS/tax documentation I have referred to above. I still have possession of my 1989 diary. I also have copies of various production documents and other material given to me by John Goddard at the time. I have provided Channel 4 with copies of all of these documents. I do not have possessions of any of my notes or audio tapes of interviews with soldiers. I have examined 3 files of transcripts of interviews carried out during the making of the Bloody Sunday programme which the Bloody Sunday Inquiry have sent to my solicitor, labelled "Bundle O" (Volumes 1-3), as well as an additional file of documents which the Inquiry told my solicitor had been provided to it by solicitors acting for Channel 4 (Volume 4). I understand that the transcripts were provided by John Goddard to the Bloody Sunday Inquiry. The second and third Volumes appear to consist of transcripts of interviews carried out while the programme was being made with soldiers or ex-soldiers. I have tried to identify whether I was the interviewer in each particular case, but there is usually nothing in the transcript to identify who the interviewer is and I have had to rely on my memory. I should point out, both in relation to the transcripts and generally regarding the progamme, that it is now 11-13 years since events took place and I have been involved with a large number of programmes since. Therefore, my recollection of the precise work I carried out, interviews I conducted, exactly what took place and who said what, is not clear. As I have stated in paragraph 6 above, I gave assurances of confidentiality to all of the soldiers and ex-soldiers I interviewed and I am therefore not willing to disclose their identities. In any event, in a number of cases I do not now recall their identities, and in others I do not recall what particular soldiers told me. I would not know now how to make contact with any of these people now to ask if they would be willing to release me from my duty of confidentiality because I have not had dealings with any of them since 1991. Whenever I used a tape recorder during an interview, it was always in the open and with permission. There were no circumstances where surreptitious recording took place. Where an interview was taped, I would not have taken notes at the same time. In the interviews that were not conducted by me, I do not recall, nor would I necessarily ever have known, who the soldier was. As I have stated above, we were not aware of what each other was doing. Sometimes we did interviews together, but in general there would be sole interviews or a mix between John Goddard, Tony Stark, Tony Cook and myself. During that period, as I have stated in paragraphs 10,11 and 12 I talked to soldiers in connection with three different projects and sometimes an interview would cover more than one project. After all the time that has passed, it is at times difficult for me to recollect what the subject matter of a particular interview was, and whether it even concerned the Bloody Sunday project. I cannot recall where in time the particular interviews in Bundle O came. Some may be notes I would have written down after the interviews, especially where I met someone in a pub. Where this was the case, the accuracy of the note would rely on my memory of the conversation. If the interview had been taped, the transcript would have been done straight from the tape. I have recently re-read the transcripts and would set out my comments. In each case, I refer to the page number as referenced in Bundle O to identify which transcript I am referring to. During the course of the interview, some names were put to me and unredacted documents shown to me and I understand that these are to be kept confidential between me and my solicitor and barrister. ## Volume I I went to Northern Ireland and quite openly interviewed a number of people who had been on the march and a number of journalists. It seemed that every one wanted to talk at that stage. All of my interviews were on audio cassette. The production team later went over and interviewed the same people plus others. I think I would have spoken to a lot of the people whose statements are in this volume but I am not sure I can say that these transcripts are from my notes. Some of the questions and answers seem familiar but that would not necessarily be surprising as you would expect people to give the same answers to the production team as they had originally given me. As all the documents in this Volume seem to be transcripts from film, I think it very unlikely they are taken from my audio taped interviews. The film would have been cut up to make a master and the offcuts swept up and binned so a lot of this stuff may not exist any more. Audio tapes may have been stored but I doubt it because I do not think Praxis had room. I do not know for sure but they may have reused audio tapes. I list below some of the names I recall. I spoke to the following:- M Bradley B Cashinella I Cooker M Coyle P Coyle B Curran Bishop Daley - I did not interview him ## Volume 2 When I attended with my solicitor to be interviewed by two representatives of the Inquiry in London in October 2000, both I and my solicitor made it clear at the commencement of the interview that I was not prepared to answer any question which might tend to identify sources to whom I had an obligation of confidentiality. However, the Inquiry's representatives still proceeded to ask me such questions in relation to each document I was shown at the interview. On the first few occasions this took place, I or my solicitor reiterated that I was not prepared to answer such questions in order to protect the identities of sources to whom I owed an obligation of confidentiality. But, after this, I or my solicitor simply gave the response, "standard answer" when asked such questions, in order to denote that I was not prepared to answer questions which might tend to identify sources I had an obligation of confidentiality towards. I do not recall the identity of the person who is being interviewed. The Inquiry have advised me that the unredacted version of this interview begins:" Notes from Neil's interviei,V'. lt may therefore be that I carried out this interview, but I have no recollection of having done so. I do not recall the identity of the person who is being interviewed, but even if I did I would not be willing to reveal their identity because I have a duty of confidentiality to the soldiers I spoke to or introduced to the programme. The original unredacted transcript states "met with 1NQ1413" but, as I have said above, I cannot recall doing this interview. Two names were put to me SVLDIER. or SaLrtg oo ) but I cannot assist. Even negative assistance could still identify a source. However, I do not believe that I have any records which would indicate who this person is. I do not recall the precise identity of this interviewee, but in any case I would not be willing to reveal their identity because I have a duty of confidentiality to the soldiers I spoke to or introduced to the programme. I have no clear recollection of either carrying out this interview or being present at it. I have looked at an unredacted copy of the first page of this transcript which also has " ....1NQ1413" at the top. I was asked to comment on whether "...1NQ1413" was this interviewee but for reasons of confidentiality I cannot answer this question. I have been asked if this interviewee is ir . I am not willing to answer that question because of my duty of confidentiality. I was asked if it is possible to indicate the statements at 018 and 019 would have been made by two different people. I cannot answer that question because of confidentiality since it may assist in the identification of a source. In any event, as I have mentioned above, I do not recall this interview. If I had carried out this interview, I would have told the person I interviewed that he would be recorded because that was my standard procedure when taping an interview. Because I was working on 3 projects at this time, I cannot now say for sure how I would have described the purpose of this particular interview. But I would have made clear that any discussion about Bloody Sunday was for the purpose of a television documentary and I would have given an assurance of confidentiality. The tape recorder would not have been hidden. I have no idea whether this script transcribes the entire interview but, in any interview I carried out, I can say that there would generally have been times during the interview when I turned the tape off. I would not have transcribed the tape myself. lt would have been someone organised through Praxis who did it. I did remember this interview, but may have introduced the soldier to Tony Stark. As I have indicated above, I would not know how to now contact any of the soldiers I interviewed not least because I have not had any contact with any of them since 1991. I do not recollect the name of this person. I have seen a copy of the unredacted transcript but this did not assist me. The name i'i pi was put to me but I am not willing to answer that question because of my duty of confidentiality. This transcript appears to start right in middle of sentence and therefore seems not to be complete. However, it is possible they it just reflects the way the interviewee spoke. lt is also possible that the tape recorder was switched on in the middle of a sentence. I believe I carried out this interview late at night at the person's home. I am not sure whether Tony Stark was present when I interviewed this soldier. I do not recall John Goddard being present. I believe it is likely that the person would also have been interviewed subsequently by Tony Stark. I cannot remember the soldier's name but I would not be willing to identify the person in any event because of my duty of confidentiality. Every person I interviewed was told the purpose and given an assurance of confidentiality by me, and if it was to be recorded, it would have been open. To the best of my recollection, I think this is an accurate record of what I was told but I do not recall how it was recorded. Although I do not recollect how this interview was recorded, I do know that there was no covert recording at all. I can definitely say I did not do any covert recording. In the period I was talking to soldiers I was always up front about the purpose of the interviews. But as I have explained in my statement, I was working on a number of programmes at that time so I cannot be certain exactly how I described the purpose of this particular interview, but I would have made clear that any discussion about Bloody Sunday was in connection with the television programme and I would have given an assurance of confidentiality. The name "SoLDIE o " was put to me. I am not willing to comment on that because of my duty of confidentiality. I do not believe I know the identity of the interviewee, but even if I did I would not be willing to comment on that because of my duty of confidentiality. I do not recall who the interviewer was but it would probably have been either Tony Stark, Tony Cook or John Goddard. The name SoLtpER o was put to me but I am not willing to comment on that because of my duty of confidentiality. This transcript begins mid-sentence and so appears not to be complete. I have indicated above two possible explanations why this may be the case. I cannot recall this interview and I do not believe I know who did ¡t. I do not believe I know the identity of the interviewee. The names SOLDIER I2. and SOLDIER OI. were put to me but I am not willing to comment on that because of my duty of confidentiality. This transcript begins mid-sentence and therefore appears not to be complete. I think I may have carried out this interview but I cannot recall when. The Inquiry have advised me that the unredacted text of the interview states:" Neil's first interview". I do not recall the precise identity of the interviewee. The name SLD 1ER I2 was put to me but I am not willing to comment on that because of my duty of confidentiality. I do not recall carrying out this interview. Nor do I recall the identity of the soldier. The name INQ lS1- was put to me but I am not willing to comment on that because of my duty of confidentiality. I cannot recall doing this interview and I do not think that I did, nor can I remember who interviewed this person. I do not believe that I know the identity of this soldier, but even if I did I would not be willing to give those details because of my duty of confidentiality. The name IN was put to me but I am not willing to comment because of my duty of confidentiality. I interviewed this soldier in a pub, but I do not recalt if anyone else was present. I am not willing to identify him because of my duty of confidentiality. This is not a transcript, but consists of notes I wrote up after talking to the soldier. To the best of my recollection, I interviewed this soldier in a room at a pub although I cannot be certain if I carried out this interview. I cannot recall if anyone else was present, although it is possible John Goddard may have been. I am not willing to identify this person because of my duty of confidentiality. This interview was not taped recorded as far as I can recall. I do not recall how I would have described the purpose of the interview, but it would have been about a broad number of things including Aden. However, I would have referred to the Praxis programme in the context of discussing Bloody Sunday and I would have given the soldier an assurance of confidentiality. This transcript probably came from notes which I made but I cannot remember whether I wrote up the notes at the time or after. In some situations I did write notes at the time of interview but if it was a pub situation, I probably wrote the notes later which would have been as accurate as I could remember from the conversation. The name SOLDIER. OI was put to me but I am not willing to comment because of my duty of confidentiality. An extract from St'LDIER 9 's statement was put to me but I am not willing to make any comments on it because of my duty of confidentiality. I carried out this interview, although I cannot recall where and I do not recall if there was anyone else present. I am not willing to identify the interviewee because of my duty of confidentiality. From looking at this transcript, I am unable to say whether it was taped or whether I took notes. I cannot say how I described the purpose of the interview because I cannot really recall when this interview was done. But, again, I would definitely have indicated it was in connection with the Praxis programme and given an assurance of confidentiality. I may have carried out this interview. This transcript begins with what seems to be a question following an earlier reply and so does not appear to be complete and I do not recall if there was anyone else present. I do not recall the precise identity of this person and in any event I am not willing to identify the interviewee because of my duty of confidentiality. I do not recall whether the interview was taped, but this document seems to be a transcript which indicates it was probably taped. I would not have typed it up. I would have referred to the Praxis programme and given an assurance of confidentiality. I did not carry out this interview. I am quite sure about this because it is quite obvious to me from the transcript and in any event I do not recall doing it. I do not know who the interviewer was. I do not know who the interviewee is, but in any event I would not be willing to identify him because of my duty of confidentiality. The name i K J 'i L' was put to me but I am not willing to comment because of my duty of confidentiality. To the best of my recollection, this transcript is based on notes I took of conversations with the person in question. But, in addition to the time which has elapsed, it should be appreciated that it is also difficult to be sure because a number of the transcripts cover similar ground. I do not recall where or when we met, nor if anyone else was present. I do not know who the interviewee is but I would not be willing to identify him because of my duty of confidentiality. This transcript is not completely legible, but it seems to be the sort of notes I would have made. I was shown a copy of the unredacted statement but it does not assist in reminding me of the circumstances of the interview. The name '/N K was put to me. I am not willing to comment because of my duty of confidentiality. I believe I would have referred to the Praxis programme and given an assurance of confidentiality. I do not think this interview would have been taped, but I do not remember. I did not carry out this interview and I have no knowledge about it or who the interviewer was. I do not know the identity of this soldier, but even if I did I would not be willing to identify him because of my duty of confidentiality. ## Volume 3 I do not think I carried out any of these interviews, and in any case they seem to be production material, so I was not working at Praxis by that stage. I think that the first time I had ever seen these transcripts was when the Bloody Sunday Inquiry sent them to my solicitor. I looked through the transcripts but I do not know the identity of the interviewees and even if I did I would not be willing to reveal them because of my duty of confidentiality. The names of 034, 035, 037 and .iN K q5 were put to me. I do not know if they were the interviewees but even if I did I would not be willing to comment because of my duty of confidentiality. I was asked if I could recall or knew anything about the interview at page 036. I have no recollection of this at all. I do not recall ever meeting anyone from the SAS for the purpose of the programme about Bloody Sunday. ## Volume 4 I have divided the documents in this Volume into the 20 categories specified in the letter from D.J. Freeman contained at the front of the volume. (1)and (2) I had not seen these before the Inquiry sent them to my solicitors. (3) 75. I had not seen these before the documents were sent to my solicitors. I was not present when these were done. (4) 76. I do not recall seeing these before they were sent to my solicitors by the Inquiry. I believe I had earlier spoken to a couple of the people. (5) 77. I do not recall seeing these before the Inquiry sent them to my solicitors. I may have spoken to Coyle earlier. (6) 78. I do not recall seeing these documents or being aware of the names of these individuals before the Inquiry sent the documents to my solicitors. (7) 79. I do not recall previously seeing these documents or being aware of the names of these individuals. (8) 80. I do not recall seeing this document before, but I think I had spoken earlier to this person. (9) 81. I do not recall seeing this document before, but I may have spoken to Nash earlier. (10) and (11) I do not recall seeing these documents before. (12) I do not recall seeing these documents before. I never interviewed Bernadette Devlin. I do not recall having seen the names of the other individuals before. (13) -(18) 84. I do not recall ever either interviewing, or being present for interviews with, any of these individuals. (19) 85. I do not recall seeing this document before. I did not carry out any interviews in Belfast. (20) 86. Because these quotes appear to have been listed taken out of context from the broader original interviews, I have no idea where the individual quotes come from. lt is possible that some may come from interviews I carried out or was present at, but I cannot tell. I do not recall seeing this document before. The date at the bottom of the document is December 1990. As I have indicated above, I ceased being involved with the making of the programme in November 1990. ## My 1989 Diary 87. As I have indicated above, I began using this diary in November to record details of people I was meeting or hoping to meet in connection with the Bloody Sunday programme, the Northern Ireland drama project and the Aden project. In the vast majority of instances, the diary just contains details of individuals and their contact details rather than noting information actually given to me by people. These were generally recorded in notebooks or on tape and, as I have explained above, they are no longer in my possession. In some instances, the diary gives names of people I hoped to interview, but never actually did. In other cases, the diary gives the identities of people I contacted purely to try and get their help to locate other people. They would not even have necessarily known that I was trying to contact people to speak to them about Aden or Bloody Sunday. There were also people whose names appear in the diary who I contacted about Bloody Sunday but who told me they were not prepared to discuss it with me. In addition, there are people I approached for general background information. The diary also contains many names of people I was meeting socially or in connection with other projects, who had no connection at all with the Bloody Sunday project. 88. At the end of 1989,1 continued using the diary in connection with the three particular projects I have specified above until July 1990. I carried on recording details of contacts in the section of the diary from January-July, but marked each page to show the correct date in 1990 for the day of the week in question rather than the date printed in the diary (le January 9th rather than January 10th) 89. I now produce, as an Appendix to this statement, a copy of my redacted diary. The Inquiry has asked me for my reasons for making these redactions. I confirm that the diary has been redacted to the extent, and only to the extent, that I consider is necessary to protect the identities of my confidential sources (as advised by my legal representatives), and that no redaction has been made for any other reason. ## The Programme 90. I have also recently watched a video of the Bloody Sunday documentary. The video was timecoded. In the programme we used actors' voice in place of those of the soldiers and ex-soldiers we had interviewed. I have noted several instances in the programme where the words of the soldiers we interviewed were utilised:- 00-07-14-22 This was an interview with Tony Stark 00-11-55-00 00-28-37-09 00-30-34-00 I think this may have been an interview which I carried out 00-44-53-00 Interview with Tony Stark 00-42-12-12 I think this may have been an interview I carried out. 7. 00-42-42-11 Interview with Tony Stark 91. So far as I can recall, I was present at most of the interviews I have referred to which were carried out by Tony Stark, but probably not all of them. I think it may also be the case the Tony Stark, who had the writing credit for the documentary, had written composite interviews taken from several interviews which either he, I or John Goddard carried out. 92. I believe that the facts contained in this statement are true. Signed: Undy -W!thss $tanj ## S 1989 November &Tnday (N Weak 48 ## 'Sirr.1......... M T W T P S SiM T-W I.E S SIM T W TE S tIN TWT F-s SIM 7W T F S SIM T 12314S8 7$ Sloni 1213 1415 flt7i1S1O20tfl2334I2527-3S21 30311 Dscntr M 1W T Urti1 T ## November 1989 Veterans Day (USA3 srl 12 n 1617 ## 11 November 'T4. Monday 13 *17-45 Wak 4$ O Futi Mdcn '4zdz41 ¿i& Sa4t titi: T.4Lt--rzt F*coN/ Wednesday 319-48 Week 4* ## Noyenìbet 1989 November ( Novembep" A9Çw3Iøn 19Á$ M19, 39 ## Wednesday 333-22 Week As November 29 MIVJT FI SIM 7W Tp S SIM 1W 1F $ SIM TW TP $ $1M III t F $ SIM T 1 2 3 £ 51 5 7 8 9 IC lt S2l13 141516 171* f120 21 22232425261V 2*2*30 ## T(9Ss9 December T 340-25 ) First Quarter S" 3G3 -6 2Aasm ?Utc A2.Ti #&Ftg +/Ú4/ 41K/I Decembe, M TYM T F5 SjM TW t F S SiM TW T F S SiM TW T FS SIM TW T F S SIM T 2 314 5 6 7 8 910111 12 13 14 15 16 lilie 19 2Q21 222324125 26 27 28 29 30 311 - M T W t t S SiM T W T F I SIM t W T F S SIM T W t F S SiM T W T F S SIM T ## .Iaqwaaoø 1989 December Mpnday 352-13' Week 51 Tuesday December MTWT F5 SM 1W T FE 5-M 1W T F S SM 1W T F S SM TW T F S SM T 1989 December Thursday 355-10 Week 51 PAYE week 38 Shortest Day December - - MTWT rs SrM TW IFS SM 1W t F S SM 1W t S S-M TW T F S SM t 1 2 3:4 5 6 7 8 91011 1114151617:1&19202122fl242526272829303j: 19' 62 - iSt slier Chrlsunss rt Monday l-354 Webt New Vaata Day Pnfld.jK. Rep. of Ir.., USA, Caned a arid Cash Account May ## S. I Cash Account July fi Cash Account Debit tredit Total Total September ## Anna Al Cash Summary 1989 tarin Lits & Coud London Ed1nbuØ. Now York Th,onto SydnniPeigrc W Md. Moto MS ?S$ ta In Grit Bib ## 1989 Year Planner 1989 ¼Ù Plañner S 'Itt April May Jun. is 1M UT 2II 2 1 3M 3W 3 S 41 4T 5W 5F 5M e T. 6s ST - 1F 7t1 1W 85 8M ST Sj3 91 9F 12W 12F 12M 10 M 10W 10E . 111 13T 13E 31 14F 141$] lES 161$] 15M 15-T 161 - 1ßF 17M 17.w ii S 18T IST 19w 19F 201 205 21F 211$! 25T 25T 24M 24W 28W 26F 26M 271 275 VT 28F 28W 295 29M 291 n 301 30F 31w ## 1989 Year Planner 14 W 181$! 19 M 20 T 21 w 221 23F 245 -fl ## 1989 Year Planner Fn Ututty Used Telephone Numbers Sritlsh Summer nm.: At time of going to press, the I-lame Office was unable to confirm th9S9 starting end finishing dates for British Summer Time, but expressed the view that 26 March and 29 October were the likeliest dates to be adopted. Accordingly all sunrise and sunset times have been expressed as 6Ml. When dates are confirmed add one hour to give these time, as liST, Scottish Bank Holiday. The term 'Bank Holiday' has a restricted meaning in Scotland, where il does not necessarily signify a naCional public holiday, For this reason, Scottish bank holidays are differentiated In this diary from public holidays In the rest of the United Kingdom, with the exception of Christina. Day and New Years Day. which are generally accepted as national holidays in Scotland. Week Numbering The system of week numbering followed in this diary Is that recommended by the International Organization for Standardlaation liSO), according to which Week lis the first week containing four or more days of the new year. Monday is taken as the first day of the week. The Astronomical Information in this diary is reproduced, with permission, from data supplied by the Science Research Council. Sunrise and Sunset times are based on London. The information given is conan at the time of going te press, The calendar notes refer to Great Britain. E & 0E Sunday 1-364 Week 52 Ist after Chriatmas New Year s D.y ## 1989 January 1, Monday Friday 1989 $ß4day 1435t Wk2 1620 2nd afIn Epiphany ## /6*January Ç C- January 25-437 Week4 CT 7.45. as 16.43 1989 (t-' 77 January 1989 Thursday n-an WakS Canclemes tscothh Quartet Day) February / Shrovi Tuasd.y 'fltI, 'A TW T P S SIM f W 5'FiSStM 1W T F S SIM 1W T F S SiM '1W T P $ SIM t 4234 5jm.7 S2flßfl12 1131415 let? 1$ 1912021flfl24fla1V2$fl3031 ## I989 February 1989 Surday ¿2- Waft Ian Moe St Valentine '1989 (?Februanr Séturday 49-ttt Walt? , im. a liz n # £0.S1C. Wnk 7 2Nd In Tait ## 1989 February /Cf20R Monday 51-3i4 Week S WnhinçtoW. Birthday (USA) O Eon Mton ## S S : March M T WY P S S'M T W T r S S;M T W T P S ZjM T W T F S SiM T W T P S 53M T Passion Sunds 1989 f/March * Sunday # 1989 ¡(J- March' Thirsdav 75? Week 1? ## ¡Q March flst---w.ù 12 Verrat Equinox ## Oio-2&T-'-Í- 1989 March y F;iday ## 4"April 1989'\ Smai3Lfli Week lb PAVE week 2 - Saturday ios-zo Wen 15 sr LOS... ISST May M TWT ES SIM TW t ES SIM tVJ T F S SIM TW TES 51M TW T FS SIM T 1 2 34 56 718 91011 121314I15161718192021I222324252627281293031 ## 2Iap&Ii Uday ,is-asô Week 17 - Anac Day (Austaflel i Friday Ti 8-247 Weel 17 - S Last Quarter ## E E E E West 15 ## 131-234 Week Is Pave Wnk S W%WT Ft SiM 1W T F S SIM 1W T F S SIM 1W 7F S SIM 7W 1 PS SIM T ## ¿L May j47-218 Week 21 it 3.54, ii 20.02 July M 1W 1 F8 SuM T W T F S ¶ 21 3 4 5 8 1 8 Saturday 158-197 week 24 sr 3.43, as 2OE20 ## 1989 1? June Wednesday ia-its Week fl W..kn ## W-Jm1T July Thursday lei-175 Week ti rAU week 14 * 'TW ì vs SIM TI! T P $ SIM TI! T P S SIM TW T P 5 SIM T W T PS SIM T 1 2134.5S7 $Bj1Cflnl214jb1611715g2ø21flflI242$2I772Sfl3ß131 Friday 1SS-4fl Week27 August M TW T PS SIM 1W T F S StM 1W T F S S;M 1W T F S SJM TW T F S S 1 2 3 4 5 617 8 910111213114151617181920121 222324252627i28293031 190-175 W.fl 27 7th stier Trinity Ft SIM T%tt Ft SiM flY T'PS SIM tn-rc siju i-w r 1 23 is 117* 1oI1Iz13I14-ss7st71e1so121;nnn2JaenIaa3os1 P S July M'TWT ES 81M YW tVS SIM TW T F SlIM TWT PS SIM Tif TE S SIM t tz1345S7Saltø1it2331415ISI171lw2u2tfla,I2425flfl282S3oI31 w,kfl PAYEwnk1S Tueçsday In-166 We.kfl Thursday 301-154 Week 29 PAYE wnk 16 ## 0% I V un :w T T S SIM T W T F $ SIM TYS T F S SIM T W T F S $1M TW T F S SIM T i 23 45 617 t S1O.111213(14151617151924J21fln24252527125n3031 i I j I I j j j I I I t 1989 August Thursday 215-150 'Week 31 PAYE week II 3 ## T. J. T S. S. S. S. # E 1989 - Tuèsday 269-16 Wak S September 26 ## 1989 September Thursday VI-44 Wn& 39 PAYE wale 2G ## October Bloody Sunday Inquiry I, Neil Davies. C/O 50 Broadwick. Street London WI make this statjment further to my statement forwarded to the Inquiry by e-mail ort 5th September 2002: I. in a letter dated II September the Inquhy Informed me, through my solicitor, that a firm of solicitors, Bowling & Co had discovered In their archives one further box of material that had not been provided to the Inquiry pursuant to its subpoena on that firm, in the saite letter, I was iisked to attend the Inquiry's offices to view the material io see if it contained anything of relevance to the Inquiry. I did so on Thursday 26 September, accompanIed by my solicitor. 2. The box relerred to above contained the following: 2 files of documents; It computer discs; and o. 4 vIdeo tapes. 3, I viewed all the materia) in 2 above. lt contains nothing that has any connection with the events of Bloody Sunday. 4. As i have said In my earlier statement, I do not believe that the material I have viewed at the Inquiry Office represents the totality cf material taken from myflatln 1996. Signed: ...1¼/441t Dateth tf - Os 1. q - - BBCVIEWINGLIST - J LIB DAIt r LIB NO. DUR COL. SUB$tCF DEFI!Lß I >. -. BBC 30/1/72 Dm0/72/OS 422FF U'17 COL? BLOODY SUNDAY ORIGINALFOOTAGEOF DEMO/RIOT -r BBC 1/2/72 D 032/72/18 35FF 56 COL? FUNERALS MEMORIAL PROCESSION BBC 2/2/72 033 07 109FF COL? FUNERALS THE 13 ARE BURIED C . . »4t BBC 1(2172 D / fJ/ 46FF I'Ii COL t DEMOS OXFORD 1/2/72 J) 032/72/22 136Fr 3'38 B k W DEMOS DUBLIN BBC 2/2/fl D 033/72/06 68FF l'49 COL? DEMOS BURNING OF BRITISH EMBASSY Di DUBi BBC 5/2/72 D)/fl/(Jt445 COL? DEMOS BIRMINGHAM DEMOS COL? BBC 5/2/72 D 36/72/7 2'2r . ., .- . VIOLENT ONE iN LONDON \:.M .. .*.rjD+r. 1 - ' '. V'.,-, BBC 3111m D 31/72/4 Vi7 COL COMMENT BLOODY SUNDAY- MILITARY PRESSER BBC 31/i/72 D 31/72/i i'26 COL COKQvIENF DEVI,IN PUNCH-UP BBC 2/2/72 D 33172/5 1 '4E COL COMMENT iRISH FOREIGN MIN DçrERvmw BBC 1/2/72 D 32172/1 40 COL COMMENT IRISH AMSASSADOR FER VIEW BBC 14/2/72 D 045/72/Il 2'24" COL WTDOERY TRIBUNAL W1DGERY IMAGES a TRIBUNAL. IMAGES BBC 20/2(72 D 51/72/5 ir COL WIDGERY TRIBUNAL. WIDGERY BOARDS PLANE BBC 21(2/72 D 052/72/06 2'30 COL WIDGERY TRIBUNAL WIDGERY IMAGES BBC 22/2/72 D 053/72/09 i'36' COL WIDGERY TRIBUNAL BOOSIDE MODEL & WIDGERY IMAGES BBC 24/2/72 D 55/72111 1'SS COL WIDGERY TRIBUNAL JAMES CHAPMAN FATHER DALY FATHER MACWEt ## \1Lc? BBC VIEWING LIST L im DATE LIB NO -- DUR. CflL flaw SUBJECT BBC 25/2/72 D 056172116 I 48' COL WIDGERY TRIBUNAL LESLIE BEDELL BBC 2/3/72 D 062/72/13 28' COL WII)GERY TRIBUNAL SoLDIERS IN DARK GLA$SES - BBC 3(3/72 o4)63172/13 I '08' COL D 063/72/15 24' COL WIDGERY TRIBUNAL GENERAL FORD BBC 6/3/72 D 066/72/10 1'04' COL D 066/72(11 I'34 COL WIDGERY TRIBUNAL BRIG MACLELLAN COL WILFORD BBC 7/3/72 D 067/72/13 I'47' COL WIDGERY TRiBUNAL SOLDIERS BBC 8/3/72 D 068/72/22 l'lO' COL WIDGERY TRIBUNAL SOT BBC 9/3/72 D 069/72/15 I'12' COL WIDGERY TRIBUNAL PROTESTANT DEMO & WIDGERY IMAGES BBC 14/3/72 D 74/72/11 ¡'26' COL W1DGERY TRIBUNAL LACAN 4 yÇ' BBC 19/4/72 D II0/72/13 2' II' COL D 140/72(03 COL I'52' BBC 1914172 24 HOURS 30'OO' COL WIDGERY REPORT TRIBUNAL CHAMBER SIMON WINCHESTER FuIR DALY GENERAL FORD MARC. MCCARThEY GERALDiNE RICHMOND JOHN CARR ISABELLA DUFFY Vtt». >r'V) .° tr '1 BBC 2511/87 025/87/COMP i'or COL ECl (6'459 (ENG) N) BBC 3111/82 031/82/VT6 52' COL ANNIV. 10TH BBC 29/1(78 29/78 l'03' COL (VT?) ANNW. 6TH 4 v WIDGERY REPORT IVAN COOPER EDDIE MCATEER JOHN HUME FFHR. DALY LORD CARRINGTON fl>C. . a4) t.4Çt 4.+:frtt)t i4t'.. 15TH ANNIV. ## Bbc Viewing List LW DMt US KO. DUR CÇ*. B&W SUBJECt DrAILs BBC 3c 1712/SI 3'SO COL (VT) MAGILLIGAN SANDS DEMO WITh JOHN HUME IRELAND ATV HISTORY LOE DS9OP BUT COULD :13339 L01158 17/Il/SI BBC Il/Il/SI t IRELAND ATV HISTORY 4Y COL (VT) CIVIL RIGHTS MARCHES MARCHERS WrrH PLACARDS ON 0Cl' 68 BBC 18111/68 NP 70983 3'W COL CIVIL RIGHTS MARCHES DEnY MARCH- INCLUDES HUME SYNC BBC 10/12/68 NP 71181 T08 COL CIVIL RIGHTS MARCHES PLACARDS/PETTFION CAX4AVA}1 tNT. BBC 9112/68 PLO3 1908 PL 96102 I'09 B & W CIVIL RIGHTS MARCHES LARGE CIVIL RIGHTS CROWD SINGING WE SHALL OVERCOME BBC 11/2/81 Z'OO' TO 3'OO IRELAND A TV HISTORY WE DS9OP BUT ÇOULD BE B & W CIVIL RIGHTS MARCHES JOHN HUME COMPLAINING BrITERLY ABOUT POUCE BRUTALITY IN 1969 + IVAN COOPER ON SAME t CAThOLIC WOMAN + nat IMAGES 17/Il/SI 11133390g Ißt 158 .....t. .4 .A:.. .:... .:. BBC 15/8/69 NP 73478 l'OS' COL RIOTS BATtLE OF BOOSIDE BBC 12-14/8/ 69 BELFAST 13769)6098 fl? COL RIOTS BATtLE OF THE BOOSIDE 4'OO' COL RIOTS BATtLE OP THE BOGSIDE BBC 21/8/69 PANORAMA: THE VIOLENT DAYS OF ULSTER BBC lS/8fl1 NP 81619 ¡'04' -I ## )11Ksmr P.O&W«. 14V?)tS7M%t 3o COL RIOTS BARRICADES IN DEnY - TROOPS L PROTEST AT THEIR REMOVAL ## Bbc Viiewjng List LIB DATE liB KO DUR.. COLT SURIECE DflAIL BBC 20/2/72 D 051/72/08 A vr V, ' ) flhJ.% 54" r COL VIOLENCE BOMB DAMAGE ARMY BBC 15/7/72 D 197/72/09 r fi L3j1 '-Ç--- 49" COL VIOLENCE BOMB DAMAGE ARMY BBC 20(9/72 MIDWEEK 18341 1752" COL? VIOLENCE BOMB DAMAGE ARMY BBC t 16/8/71 PANORAMA 40'ß( COL VIOLENCE BOMB DAMAGE ARMY BBC 4/I IP! 24 HOURS: ARMY IN IRELAND 7"4r ??? VIOLENCE BOMB DAMAGE ARMY BBC 30(7/72 D 212/72/09 nr COL VIOLENCE BOMB DAMAGE ARMY BBC 24/4/68 24 HOURS 1440" ??? CATHOLIC GRIEVANCE HOUSING COMMENTS & GENERAL DIVISION BETWEEN CATHOLICS & PROTESTANTS BBC 7/10/63 NP 70572 412" COI.. CATHOLIC GRIEVANCE DERRY RESIDENTSDALLEGING POUCE BRUTALKY AFTER CIVIL RIGHTS MARCH & COMPLAINTS ABOUT PROTESTANT PREJUDiCE BBC 9/12/68 PANORAMA 21" tU CATHOLIC GRIEVANCE PVC OP CATHOLIC GHETTOS IN DERRY 3" B & W CATHOLIC GRIEVANCE DERRY RESIDENTS TALKING ABOUT INEQUALITIES & PIX OF bERRY GHETTOS BBC 14f 10(68 BRENTFORD NEWS FILM - NO NUMBER BBC Ø1J 11/8/10 NP77190 i1 l'SI" COL 35a BBC 9/5/74 1) 129/74/12 4"! I COL bERRY GWS DERRY STREET SCENES - SOME IN THE RAIN 30051DB GUN RATItE AS TROOPS DISPERSE RIOTERS & COME UNDER FIRE. WRECKED HOUSE- BOMB EXPLODES - TROOPS FIRING GUNS - MAN CAUGHT IN CROSS FIRE MARCH DEGENERATING INTO VIOLENCE & SOLDIERS SHOT. ALSO SHOTS OF ARMY & SHOTS OF MEN IN PARAMU.rrARY UNIFORM SPECIAL REPORT MADE WITH 2 PARA IN BELFAST. INCLUDES INTERVIEWS Wif14 PRODS/CATHOLICS ABOUT THE ARMY SPECIAL REPORT ON THE ARMY IN NORTHERN IRELAND. MADE WITH GREEN HOWARDS TROOPS IN DERRY LS MS VARIOUS INCLUDINOBOOSIDE bERRY CV'S'tra UB DATE UBJ4O. DOL '1I'i .8ttkßlflp . : lEu: VARIOUS SHOTS 0F TROOPS ARRIVINO BBC 22/4/69 NP 72404 i '4V COL TROOPS INTO N. IRELAND TROOPS MARCHING THROUGH TIlE STREETS IN ANTI RIOT FORMATION 16'OS flOØPS INTO N. IRELAND BBC 29/9/69 TWENTIETH CEWFURY FOCUS; NORTHERN 21'ZO' 7?? IRA IRA INTERVIEWS & FREE DERRY IMAGES BBC 1714m 24 HOURS: FREE DERRY BBC 23/8182 240182/VT6 35'al_ IN 44' COL IRA MASKED IRA ESCORT FOR COFFIN r Notes on a conversation between. and Tony cook on Friday 26th July 1991. - Brian had been covering Northern Ireland for the Times since 1964 when lerry O'Neill took over as Prtra M$niàter. When the troubits began in 69/70 he was sent there sn a turn and turn about basis with Robert Fisk for the Times. Se knew the area and the people very well àit had contacts o euny zide of the fence. When Free Decry was esralished he believes the Army had, nc policy to%Q4rds it....they thought it. would quickly fall apart. One of the figures 'ne remembers well. WUS 'a lunatic called V*ncent Coyla who csll«d himself the mayor of Free berry.. .he used to hand out passports t Free-flerry". this was the calibre of person the Army believed it was dealing with... they thought the .'hole thing would just sjwjaer down. lt dtdnt...end Lt was clear that there was a ,nat .4.e1OE sru&&ling and gun running going on in Erse Derry.,..cfl one corner you would have the Army armed to the hilL t 1ZX17. Vïttiedress..and on the other there wourd bt a pratt!1iLiry G?*it In full uniform and clearly armed..and thace w49 not!.ing tRe Army could do about it. Rê remembers that to get hold of MartIn McGuiflneSSYC. rh&UC8 Londonderry 6 which was the gaswork's...asked for thc' b' lodge...asked for Martict and they'd ¿o over the road itt him out of his house. Cashineila does flot believe thai. the Army's .:tt; st ticCilligan Point was the turning point. . Ate cnìcs the had been hardening their attitude for sme tlme.,."snarlir.rrather than acting." Just before Bloody Sunday the regular correspondents had been flU by the Army at a regular informal briefing et Lisburn that. ie Army was going to go in strong..."that's why there ware so ny Press there...we all knew the Army was going to give them a good hiding." The idea was that a huge arrest operation was tibe mounted,..with the Army getting tough. These briefings vère just chats in the bar. The agu1ar ZEk'espoudants would get a call to cóme up (or a drink and It *bLd be made ojear to them or. a non attributable basis what Was going to happen. he remembers one Army guy telling him it IMs going to bea so" them out day. . So why did they send the Paras...rethat than E'hi Giaen Rards'or anydne else? The Army had a psychological theory that the locals vere TFtgluened, to death of the Fares. One Para was the reserve unit ¡a50 it seemed sense to use them. r He witnesseda lot of the arrest vide of the operatioti...he saw the Paras bashing hell out of the prisoners with their rifle butts.."there was no sir or madam about it." The language was very ripe. He started the day at barrier 14...the water cannon with dye. in, CSgas arid rubber bullets were h'-ing used by the troops...and therioters had bottles and bricks. The usual thing. But then after 45 to 60 minutes tif riot suddenly the barricade opened and the pigs came through. He was stood beside General Ford at the time who. yelled "Go on tb Patasï 8Cawd jïrthem."ne was waving them through, telling them to hurry tdnding up the soldiers. -- Çashinella believes the Paras had been wound up for a couple of Zaya befcre...hyped iao a fever sb that they'd rush in and arrqt s huge load. 5ashinetla followed the Paras in...h* d±dn6t see the first shofi7Tie stopped beside the first pig'uKt5en Placa... Tollowed a squaddie up Eden Place and saw him fire directly up Chamberlain St.. Re then came back to Rossville St....tried tó get into Glenfada Flats car park but couldn't gt through...then saw the prisoners being marched bac.k to a chicken wire compound besides Keils WaIk...attd saw them get a real bashing. H. says the whole shoottr.g by the Army lasted ust e very few minutes.... five, at the.- most. ue.never_saranr4re-ntuitnd did not see or hear any nailmombrto äFf.' Otte the Army veEt Thhe saw none throw anything at thm..7p6ple vtre"just ttyfng to run away in any direction they could. He beleives there was another bArricade...at the top of Chamberlain $t...half across the top-cf it at an angle to protect the Roasville Flats; Cashinella spoke to colonel Wilford at the chicken wire encloure where the prisoners were being kept. This was immediately after the action. The colonel looked very flustered1 ha was bright red in the face...ha had to talk to the media who surrounded him. He said there had been sonic impronpte fiting and there had been some cLvilian casualties. the Colcnei then disappeared to report to his superiors and wasn't seen Cor the rest of the day. Some colour n the day: Brigadier Sherrif Thornpson...the one legged Daily Telegraph ;orThern IrelaWd corresponden... sot there late. Arrived at .:tt city Botet and had just ordered tea and cucumber sandwiches when the whole place vn taken over by a horde of media people trying to grab phonas...ha'd missed the whole thing. . -. Max Hastings also th.ze. ..then of the Evening $tandard...sptnt the whole thing sitting on his shooting stick st Waterloo Place watching it all from affarI Martin Lewis1 then cf ItN was a3.most lynched by Derry people in the cxty Ratel after hi; early evenins newt broadct as they belie'ìed !zed got it alt wrong. Cashitelle Js * bleívac LChaa up theory ¿f 1oy $av. he thtnks the soldiers just totally over reacted. He believes itrnay. have aen a dry run for MOtoflnan...afld.he says it'$ interesting to note that there was G opposItIon to Motorman when U happaned...just as there hadn't been any opposition to the arrests operation of Bloody sunday. He sayo it'a hard co izsagine the real depth of feelIng in Derry th, next rnorning..."everyone we; shaken oloody rigid...the only thing I cm compare it with is Hancheater on the ee;Ic of the Münich air disaster. lt was a city numb withpain.' F - - lie believes that Widgery na "a bloody shab1es from begiüning to end.' j; 4 Ca*hiaella is a catholic but he S.s also efl ex solider tcho 3ught with Z Corps crith the Chuckas in Malaya. He bac seen a lot of miiLtary actions and he says of the Paras n' Bloody Sunday "those guys did not mess about. It was a .ery f-trocLous actLon. if yc like to see it that way Lt '.as brilliat'tly exercised in that they had complete control v*ry quickly ont it Was conpietely over the top. They didn't set cet to nur5er civilians but that's exactly what they did." J' ¡te sug;ests trying to ftnd the nursing sister in casualty at ## - - _Ff_Athafl2..U.In.R0Spita}_A4 The.Cturittesweds'Tfl1Cie - T Ris cofleague from the times who was aise there that day suffered a nervous breakdown in che middle of ft all! Us was at Stevenson's bakery and witnasied the shootings from theta. Bis name is John Chacteris.. .he can be contacted through rtafl Ropa or Jjgpy css at the Manchester Evenin& $e.cs. .;mention Cashthella ¿md they .iitb« helpful. OCCUPATION PUPIL OF ST JOBPHtS DLRY - AGE 14 Years DATE» 1/2/72 This is a statement taken on behalf of lit I4alahy Ooyle - by .ueonara Frisai, Derry City. I was at the front of. the march on Sunday 30th January J-972. The steward went forward and. was arguing with the :: soldiers. The officer in charge paid little attentton to his words. He turned his back on the steward and the sol- diera moved forwards. The crowd ran when they saw this, and the soldiers started firing gas and. epraying dye. People ## Pwere running everywhere caught by the gas and dye. I went towards Colmeine Court to get some fresh air. When. I reaoh... ed Colmoifle Court I heard that a man and a boy had been shot. stood around for about five minutes when everyone started running. I ran into Gienfada Park and stood behind. a row of garages knew 'at this time that the army had fired live buflets at the crowd. I could hear the gunflre coming closer and I ran for an opening in Glentada Park. Before I reached the opening X man pulled, me into a backyard; . We hid behind a dustbin and lookedout ta see it we could see the army. I could see three unarmed men lying on the ground, in Qlenfad,a Park. One of the men had his left eyebrow shot away. lie was lying face down ozi the ground. I made a move towards this mari but the man in the yard with. me pulled me back. We then tried to get into this house, but the tian said we should not as the door of the back yard was open and the army would be able to see us. W i. We looked towards the wounded men on the ground and the man.. with the eye wound looked up at us and exchanged a few ## Pwords with the man in the yard with me. I heard another shot coming from the direction of the soldiers and I then knew that the man had been shot again in tite back cf the left-hand shoulder. He gave a gran and I could then see that the man was dea.fr 'fl1 looked across the oourt, and saw about eight soldiers running across from my left to right. , . The first soldier looked around the corner and saw a 'group of Women taking shelter from the army gunfire. He shouted that he was going to shoot them. He also called them bastards.. The ma in the yard with me said that ti we shcwzt our- Le1 aolveahe army would shoot as if they had seen us in the ' yard. I followed the izan out. with my hands on top of my head. Vie stoo4 loking at the soldiers who were still threatening 'the wojnen. I saw a. youth wearing a dark blue SUiS panic, and start running. One of the soldiers shot him in the etomsoli before he had even made a step. The sol- diez' had shot him from almost poi.t blank range. On Seeing tuis, I pani3kèd and ran towards the opening ort my right hand side. I heard more shooting but I kept running until Iriwas well away from the gunfire eand danger. This is niy statement. Me3.aohy Qoyle. o/e Leonard Priai 1/2/72 (aid 30's, schoolteacher, very sobar ana ## Story Trouble on day - sign in that Faras surroundad the cathedral in the matting and trained guns on congregation coming out. On day, when soldiers cam in, I was running through G. Park diagonally from R. Street bottoni entrance to Abby Park alley, shooting started. Pulled into backyard and down behind wooden fence (still there) by man in his 40's, who is probably Gerry McKinney who is shot minutes Later. Tried to get in flat but not let theta in. "Can t get in the dustbin?" shooting going on. -2- BLOODY SUNDAY UP DATE 2/9./fl From there they can see: - Man laid on karb ## P. Body says" t can't iuoy" e shouted "Don't speak, lia stiLl." but he had spoken, revealed he wag alive, shot in back and chest exploded by so].djers at bottom end of G. Park,. (Wray) Soldiers ran up, Agitated, "Don't move, shoot you bastarde" to Crowd at gable end, iac.luding girls. Man (Heflaid from his descrjptjø and he is only one flot Accounted for) stood slightly further back with hands on his head, OPposite gable end. We came out with our hands on head because thought if w ware seen then be shot. Thought we might be shot anyway. McDajcJ Sort of dropped his arras, Perhaps turned to tun, Soldier who was watching crowd being marched away turned and shot him in chest almost in reflex actilcon, point blank. We ran. Other man Stopped and took cover In Abbey Park (just where Gerry McKjnney was shot minutes later.) 26 people shot and 20,000 people related to or knew them. Everyone was affected in soma way or other. WITNESS : MCDAtD; WRAY; SOLDEERS' STkTE; EFFECTS AFTERWARDS. Mime , w th 'ahy. Works as glass and window engraver. Never in any trouble hut need to check as Paul could carry a lot. Very affected by it alL, marked him for life, Whether he moved on to para military is questíon. Everyone says not, as does he. WITNESS ¡ DONAGItY, JOHNSON BARRICADE 1)EATHS z Mcllhinney GLENFADA flEATHS NOT WIDGER? ## Story Stoning soLdiers in Stephenson's bakery, when two rühber bullets and two real, shots. Doriaghy went down by rna, another man want to help him and he was shot. Within four Ecet of both of them. Standing almost in the middle of the waste ground. 20 to 30 tjere. We carried them into a house nearby. No guns, bombs, just stoneing by 20 tb 30 peopLe and that was virtually over when the firing started; Far toc far away to reach them anyway. t was panic stricken, and sat Cor good white - 10/15 minutes on fenca nearby in middle of Keils Walk, Somebody shouted the army were coming in, and I had a quick look round the corner in middle of Keils Walk, snracens coming up and saracen already on pavement there. Soldiers getting out. Ran up through flats and took cover at gable end at end of ## Vclenfada. Only 15 seconds to there. Firing started, clear view of barricade. People were still walking past, and few fellows went out and began jeering at the sotdiecs who were firing up Roasvilie street. I woùld not have done it. May have thought it was just rubber bullets. Two went down, in centre just in front of barnicade, A third, Nash although I did not realise it was him at the time, and his father went to help him with white hankie and was shot. Bullets still pinging off that barricade and ati over. Bedlam. Two fe1,.ows across the other siclo of the street, by the flats, crawling. One hit, seemed to be in the back, was Metihinney who me and ny friends were supposed to meet and walk with. Other, who was crawling, I don't know what happened to him. Not know where the soldiers are, ftrin.g coming from everywhere. Scared, slight lull, and three/four of us ran frS the gable end out across Glenfada heading for Abbey Court. Somebody shouted that the Brits were at the far end. ## Paul Coyle Cont. Looking back r caught out of the corner of (fly eye two Brits coming through bottom left hand corner of Glanfada opening. No point in stopping, turning, ran on. Soldiers had weapons at hip, just pumping bullets out. Shots came, feLlow in front of me went down. Jumped over him, kept saying Hail Mary, and got through. Two girls, first aid went past cue and out to the guy who had been shot. Cuy, bleeding from chast came towards me in Abbey Park, two took him away, carried him. Saw another man with mass of blood on his head. (Joe Ft-Let). ## People Not know what t did, how t did it, but went a mile and a half into Creggan before t knew where I was. Wrong direction for my home. Saw no gunman, bombers at any point. ## Ends S.S. Summary Of Irtsh Eye Witnesses Stories L then) Ordinary working bloke, more amazed and exasperated by the thole thing than anything else. WZTNESS: His own shooting. NOT IJLDGFRY. SHOT - through upper right leg, from front. STORY Main march had gone Been down to bottom of the street, watched rioting, then came back up. On 'waste ground in Witliarn Street, opposite Presbyterian Church. With 2/3 friends (John NlcGhee one of them) , threw handful o stones at soldiers who were on church roof, beside bakery, on that roof and inside. Roaring1 shouting crowd cf perhaps 20. NO BOMBS AND NO GUNS. Turned and walking away, not behind corner but near it. Shot in right leg, went in front and out. the back. Shot straight on as he turned to walk hack. Shots from both buildings opposite. Johnson went to lift me, he was shot too. Taken to house in Calumbe-lila Court, then to hospital within 20 minutes. 6 army pigs at the hospital then beEore anyone arrived. He was the first wounded to arrive, saw everyone else arriving as if in a dream. 6 months in hospital with a broken leg, could not walk for a year, still cannot bend that leg or really walk properly 20 years later. EM D S 50) Priri3.palof Large Derry High School. Very calm, personable, impressive witness. WITNESSED Bridge shooting t Gunman in courtyard .I-IhOWI. ftöu McCuigan without scarf when Lying dead WtDGERY WITNESS and 2 of STORY In courtyard, jammed with many people between blocks i. RossvLlle Etats. Pig was by back entrance of block 1. shouting in leg. SS - Mickey Bridge advancin on that pig, unarmed, "C'mon, shoot me, shoot me' and going down, shot Soldier facing him from behind pig shot him. Sees gunman advancing along gable end at the end of Chamberlain Street, as though moving to firet Gunman has white hair, distinguished looking, with black overcoat almost down to his knees on. Snapshot look at the man, then attention elsewhere. Thenruns to gap between blocks Z and 3, goes through. McGuigan is here and tells him they are live rounds. Whistling effects throughout all thi all around him live bullets. Gets round to gable end of block I. a few minutes later by the back route, sees MoGuigan dead, and boettes on the barricade. McGuigan had no scarf on, and had not had one when he saw him a few minutes before. HIS thoughts:. - Paras were keyed up, as though knew had carte bianche. - The Paras fired first in the courtyard because The heavy thumping sounds of their rifles were the Eirst shots he heard and he was directly in the courtyard. At no stage did they adopt prone firing positions, and take any cover as they would have done, should have done, if they were being fired upon or thought they were being fired upon. The soldiers had no fear of being shot apparently. The one by the pig was in the open, Firing from the hip. e) The gunman, whom he only saw fleetingly, was moving to fire (although he could have fired previously but then why were the soldiers not taking cover?). d) The soldier by the pig and the gunman were barely 20 yards apart, and he has often wondered how the soldier missed seeing him. Possibly he says because the angle of the Chamberlain street wall was just that much as to make the soldier not able to see him, arid vice versa, though the gunman could see the pig and was edging to get the angle to fire at the soldiers who would he near it. - Taught John Young, good job, "last parson in world to riot." jJi9 fl7 Young boy then, never talked about it s$ne and. very affected by memories as told me. Naver beu 5ttvolvtd in anything beE or or since.. WITNESS : KEVIN HcILIjtNNEY NOT WIDGERY WITNESS ## Story Five rows from the front of the massed rioters at bottom of WilLiat Street, Shots were fLred. somewhere behind us or up William Street, could have been rubber bullets or live. Wetall raü - me, up Chautberlain Street. Panic. Boy feti over and his father Literally yanked hirn up by his hair and on they went. Lu Eront of me. Army was coming ac.ioss wasteground along Rossville street, on foot and saracens behind. As I got to the courtyard the army were fitting. Firing bfore the Saracen stopped. Definitely. Body Lying in middle of car park, people around hirn. Stopped, could do nothIng for him, ran on. Trying to get between blocks t and 2 of Rossvilla Street flats. door locked, suiashd part of it, people crawled through. Thought it was all over so came out and stood on barricade În Rossville street.. No stone throwing. Shooting started again. Seven of Us there at the barricades, down we went and began to try to crawl back to the Rossville street flats doorway. t was, think, number four. Stood urging next one on. Ed to crawl and then Last few feet had to stand up and run. Kevin Mc.tlhiuney crawling along to me. Getting up to run.. Not actually see him f att, but pulled him in, and h. says he was shot, t had to stand up to putt him in and two ahQts went above my head, No guns, bombs, not even stoneing. Only on that barr&cada a few seconds before the firing started. In shock as crack, crack just went on and on. NB Remembers no bodies ou barricade when he went to it 50 presumably the shooting was the round that hit Uash, Thung, Kelly atc.. But tinta discrepancy with Geraldine RLCh.%nOfl4 etc. relating to Cilmore who say the shooting happeaed as the any came in and prior to the courtyard shootings' FIRST INTERVIEW TO ANYONE ABOUT IT by Gerard. M 19' (lwtt 1&QAUW r I-t.a1ong with mother, two sisters at various points, and if they could have got in the room another 37 Kiveihans.) MLchael is a taxi. driver, around early 40's. Never been itt any bother or involved. His brother, and brother in law, were on the bar±icade when the shooting started there, and ha is endeavouring to get them to talk to me. Niehael is believable up to point, but all the contentious which is off tape his two sisters and mother backed up immediately with more detail. So ... ? Excellent talker ## Rstuff Witness : Glendfada Park Events T0T WIDGERY and not talked before to anyone. STORY Saw two men who had been shot be soldiers early that day. One called Robinson. About io am. Whole family (four brothers, seven sisters, children etci.) been to aunt's funeral that morning, and on-march in best c].othes etc. Watching riot at bottom Qf William Street when Paras came out. Began to run up RossvUle street. Saracens parked across Keils Walk, Pilots Row, men carne out off them.Over barricade, they had started shooting - impression was from the men by Keils tialk, boy got stuck on barbed wire on top of barricade. Not sure if shot or imt. Been no shooting, bombing, even stoneing at that po.nt. Me into Glenfda Park, and to my Grannie's flat, top right corner of top quadrangle. Soldiers coniin into C. Park from Keils Walk. In flat it was pandemonium - women on floor praying, shooting outside, picking targets by sound of it. Looking through Letter box into Gienfada saw: - Young Iella running G. Park towards alley by us, and soldier leaning down the far conter, shot hirn. - Young felta arrested by soldier, against wall, rifle neat or against his right cheek, shot him. Went to other side cf house, wLndow looking out on to Abbey Park, Saw: - two bodies laid on ground out there. Not republican minded, political. M19- 389 Of the record: - Man with short arm 5i their flat, disarmtd and got rid of. - Two nail bombs duMped in street outside his flat. Know hacause dra2-ed the two boys in who had them. ENDS ## New Witnesses - 3, former English serviceman who saw riot serv ce n at ast - Suez, Cyprus, Borneo, English with no time for pramilitaries. Would back Eritish army and their action normally.) EPLAQEMENT FOR OLIVE BONNER (Rugh Gilmore's sister also) who despite a persona] visit st.11 refuses to be interviewed. Like Oliva he was at Widgery. Position t Block I of Rossville Flats, in his back bedroom overlooking the courtyard and then i-n his living room overlooking the barricade. wìten army's first shots came. ou;t pistol, idiot, fired at le. thrown against wall and or even starting pistol. WITNESS TO ; buddy / gunmen / bodieS being lifted into the pigs from the barricade. STORY Saracens still travelling forward People shot, Duddy carried away. Gunman ran along wall, pulled troops, stopped by three peop "admonished". Could have been .22 No shooting at army apart from that. Helicopters overhead made noise like machine gun but sure there was none from the flats and had good view out at them. Knofl difference between Thomson machina gun, and 102, which paramititaries had, and the SU the Paras had - only army firing apart from man he saw, Flats not been used for ambushes before - too: few escape routes. out front then and ran tohis living room to look out barricade. Z bodies, dyi, other men trying to get barricade. Army letting rip. Elderly Nash came out to his son and was shot by the army in fusillade of Shooting onto the over the protect bullets. Army in Glenfada Park, firing from low points two thirds along far side at area behind R. flats, block 2. Soldiers arrested people at Gable end of Glenf ada, up along R. $treetsiee and frisked them. lined them Saracen came up behind barricade, 4 or 5 soldiers threw the bodies itt to it 31 TAKING A WRIST AND A LEG EACH AND THROWING THEM IN, LIKE PIECES OF MEAT. NO guns on the barricade. Nobody ùear those bodies to take any guns away until army reached them.: Paras panicked, and anything that moved they shot. NOT TAKING ANY COVER SO MOT BEING SHOT AT, Widgery - really thinks it was a whitewash, not interested. -1- b tM unity ot thcugln nd action". t8TCd Oflcc Kiagtlsher Studios. g ktekigtt$in Sfrvet, Sheftield si 480 acgtstemd th EttM2d sad - rt %a1.T Ì5fl.nadst Party councillor till 1989, and somewhat tainted. Qn other hand, an accountant, clearly middle cLass, edup.ated, well off, not bitter or para military etc.. WITNESS ticoitligan Three shot in Glenfada (McKiney, Wray, 7) Arrested i Mood of Paras NOT WIDGERY STORY At McGiltigan, where Paras were brutal with no excuse as there was nothing to throw at them at all eKoept for sheep shit. B.S Main march in some panic as arrived opposite nste ground in William St as front of the march was turning back frein the bottom where rioting had begun. No trouble expected at all. Carnival. Went through waste ground, Keils Walk, to the Cable Wall by. barricade at end of Glenfada,opposite Rossvtlle flats entrance. No rioting insight. No shooting till reached there, when whiplashes of bullets being fired began. Brother Eammon 16 was there, who he had gone off looking for. Looked around the end of the gable into Roasville street and the army were there in force. One Paca on his knee, far side, and number spread across the road, all on one knee, levelling rifles and f iring. Jumped back quickly without really seetng any bodies on barricade or not. Little boy f 8 behind me, holding my trenchcoat. Wondering whether to fly or not. Three people dashed out from gable enti, ran f uU belt to other side of Glenfada, then all three dropped vertically. Realised been shot from Clenfada. Not move after the burst of gunfire. Para came round cornet, then number of others. Very supriseci to see crowd of us, surrounded, and then rough arrests, cursing, kicking. Paras were hyped up, psyched out, very odd. The people there were all in fear of being shot. What saved us was that there were so many of us, including children. Taken running style down through Clenf ada, hands on head after being searched against a gall. Into lorry, threats, ran gauntlet of police and paras into holding room, where indiscriminately charged. Corporal charged him. Paras gradually out of scene. Released at 11. pm, with Police officer who took hirn out conratulating him on his recent pamphlet on future oI province, Won't you please sit down?" No gunst bombs anywhere in Glenfada. The three were no threat to anyone when shot. Thought saw man with rifle in Keils walk as went through, going other way to hUn. EtIDS Ç early 4'v; Wiagery %fltneo - is videttce In the late.st. hatch. Greggan Priest at time - very clòsa to what was happening, knew who wag in and who not etc.. Now electoral officer for azea. WITNESS t Agreentents by the paramilitaries; soldiers; affects; general injustice of the time and the feel of the Creggan. Was there but not really see much actually happen STOWI Many parishoners asked "Is it safe to go?" so we got assurances from PIBA and CIRA that it was and told people it was safe. We ar sure there were no gunmen there that day. SVery, very big issue the march and the paramilitaries keeping their word. Pariah turned out because we had got the promise. * tn Q. Park, and at Cable end - saw bodies but not actually sea people shot. Afraid f er his life despite his priest's clothes when hands on head in G. Park. Thought paras were quiet, deLiberate, callous. Let go and moving out of the area - met 2 IRA men, who were weeping and going for weapons to hidden s tore. Well known IkA (Ren on march and not armed - could not be, be lifted and get long sentence. Convjncaa they kept their word and that their Organisations did. Army - had very lo4 level cE ifltQlljge and were expectjnz to be fired on, but they got it wrong - no weapons, no grand plan, no great trap. If had had weapon5 people wou]4 have used them as thought you were going to be killed. I woul4 have used one - so afrai4 After - funerj8 Very emotional, and people queuing tip to join the IRA. Young men with careers, Prospects, from all over the north tFtre it ajj «wy and joined Up, Derty especially, and agenda for 20 years was sat. ## Up Date 2/9/91 Bloody Sunday I Íl'Ltbr" Now qualified psychiatric nurse, wOrked alt over the world Peru, Middle East. The trainee nurse. WITNESS : GILMORE / MeGUICAN I KELLY deaths PLUS there are a series of stills in Derry of he and Cilmore running, and basically of Cilmore's Last few minutes alive. ## Story At R. flats end in R. Street, Hugh Cilmore ran past hirn, G. had been stoneing and waiting forsoldiers to charge - the normal tactic, engines gunned behind him,: and 2 shots, Gilmore hit, staggered on, tried to get into the doors to fiats but they shut in panic, then dow-n. Frankie and Seau McDermott dragged him half around the corner of the flats at-rd tended him. Soldiers at Kells Walk, and then in Oient ada Park who fired at us. Gilmore went blue, Geraldene Richmond and Frankie gave Last rite8. Shooting still going on around them. alus, gave artificial respiration, but stomach shot away and began gurgling blood. Got màuthful of blood and vomit as gave mouth to mouth, Richmond began screaming hysterically at this and backed against the watt with others at thQ end of R. St f i-ate block 1.. McGuigaj-t looking out at G. Park, Frankie thinks he was looking to stop the shooting so that they could get Hugh away. He was shot looking towards G. Park. 2 shots at me, by Cilmore's body. Could see Kelly huddled, hit by bullet which went straight through him. Wino came down the street towards us trota Free Derry Corner, .4t1 tin box on his head during a lull. Ne SM Dy wate vero standing at the corner of flats opposite Glenfada Park.' John Giimoro jupod into the air shouting "I've been bit" and. be started -- running towards the cover of the flats where we were standing. Z' friend - God I grabbed Gilmoro by each arm and diagged him around the oorner Just beside the telephone boa Gijmot'e collapsed to the ground. Z got down beside: Gilmora, WY friend stood. by to ward people off. I commenced to opon his jerkin to find where ho had been hit. The bullet liad gone in on the ri4it sida just under the lung, I think. I took oft my jumper and tried to stops the bleeding. I toit around. the rest of his body to see it he bad. been hit anywhere sise and found that ou his left nids the bullet had come ont taking. moat of his intostìten with it. There won't much bleeding at this point. It seemed, that ho must bave boon bleeding intornajlT. flood started. to cows up his mouth. I wiped the blood away Sud tried to give artificial respiration.-' oh time I did this I heard a sound indicating that his lung had bean wfl otured. All during thin period there nu shooting around us. Nr. floèzigau stood up with his hands in the air trying to taU the aruo to shoot. }b. NoGiigan fell to the ground blood pouring frow his head.. We know immediately that he was dead, due to the amount of btQOd he lout. This wan was unarmed. Die to the fiero, shooting ve were forced to leave Gitter. knowing that he was about to gis. the flve of un pinned ourselves against n wall beside the phone boa. cl:. At the steps loading up to Yahan Street, Z noticed that another man bad. ,! been out down. This man, I found ont later had also tied. People began to wave white hankies in the Sir. There was stili shooting, then a lull during which we managed to gat out and Luto a flat. BY now a fleet of axbutanoen had, arrived and were stten&thg to dead end. in- jured people. Priests Md. also arrived at this point. Abulanoo wet and priests were carrying the people to the ambulances when shooting again broke out. Eventually it began to lull and finally died out, It was the most .1 territying experience I have ever encountered, especially knowing that au these peaoetul demonstrators vere without doubt unarmed. The army st time came under any tire from Jtossvile flats or any other area. a_Ja 'mt atatowont. Siguedi Prank Z4eilau - ## Martin Mcgijinness We're cut to really get an idea of whether there were any bombs or rifles or anything. Mainly cos we've got 4 or 5 blocks of not startling new evidence, but new to the British public which is what its aimed, but jE wehave those bloc1cs and then we go down any sort of route where we're actually saying that there really wasn't anything there on the day, there was no possibility and the army get one chink of evidence against it. me good things that we've got ? thats why I mean we've taken the line that who fired first is almost irelevant in many ways, even if there was some out of control Maverick republican in the flats who did fire and that sparked off this and sparked off this and everything. It really wouldn't justify or explain many of the bther killing fields that went on. You know people shot in the back of the head waving white hankies and so on. But I mean you're obviously hopefully the man who, if you give us. an inkling to give us än atmosphere and feel of the plac at that time and as Gerry had done beforé ? came in. We can probably just identify a bit more what might or might not have been going on and so on you know. So its not that we're trying to catch anybody out. I mean I dont think I'm obsessed with it. I'd really like to know, probably talked to about 7 people now, I'd really like to, if anybody ever can I'd like to be sort of certain in my own mind I'\re got a real grip on potentially what did happen. It does seem the psychology of the Parachute Regiment, not just the Parachute Regiment but the army in general at the time is quite important to understand. To get to grips with what's happening. mats right. And thats quita central ta what wetre doing. But we do need to know fairly accurately as best we cart you know sequence of events and what actually happened, even if this question who fired first, which is a big utter cornplext he4re, even if that is iresolvable on any side. What is the conflict from the British Army side, what are they esaying? Well if, surely you know that at Widgery just about every single soldier stood up and said I saw a gunman, he pointed a gun at me and I fired at him. Or I saw a nailboxnber and I fired at him. And then of course you've got the fatality reports which show that many of the people were shot in the back or the side and many of the injured were as wll it seems so 9'ou have, something doesn't add up somewhere. To try to get to the bottom of that, one also needs to know as accurately as one can what actually bloody well happened on that day and if one can what the IRA were doing who went there basically. feeling. ? but basically the evidence is that the first shOoting was here. Now as this pig comes in.. ## Sthinking At the back of the flats? Yeh at the back of the Market Flats. As this pig comes in.. The first shooting? The first shooting. Well forget that, forget that. ? shooting. Yeh forget that basically Widgety discourts that these soldiers were fired on. In a legalistic way, but he basically dIscounts it. Yes he does, he says both Johnson and Donaghee were the.. The two men who were injured. Surely that gives you a good insight into the psychology of the soldiers. lt begins to. Well, well noft raises questions, it doesn't give you any insight into their psychology. lt raises questions about their psychology. Which one has to answer. Yeh but if there's an acceptance that British soldiers fired onto ? innocent people and shot them right, then that clearly gives an indication of the attitude of these other soldiers who later massacred the people in this area here. You know. It goes a long way towards discounting the theory that they were fired on. By anyone. Doesn't it? It indicates, yes it does indicate but it doesnt explain and what we're trying to do is explain. Yes it does certainly indicate, and its highly suspicious but it raises many questions of why. But I dont know how 7 discount this in the story. We're not discounting it. You've asked me. You see I think that the reason that they shot these two people here was to draw the IRA into a gunfight. Thats why these shootings I think are the most important shootings. ## Those Two, Donaghee And There had to be a reason why these people were shot. If everybody accepts that at that stage, I mean there might be doubts, I say there was no shooting. Some people say there was shooting British Army. Here? No. Through the thing. Throughout the thing they're saying that people were shooting at them and they fired back. The most important shootings of all for me is the shooting of John Johnson and that fellow Donaghee who was beside him because to try and get to grips with what happened that day, you have to work out the reason why two people who were clearly unarmed were shot by a British Soldier. Right. And I have always been of the opinion that this was a military operation as opposed to political sanction and that the reason it was done was to draw the IRA into a gunfight. Where IRA people inevitably, because they were in a gunfight, one or two of them would be killed. And then if civilians were killed the British Army tould justify it to the world that they had been fired on, because here's Mark McGuilless lying dead 7 with a rifle by his side. Right. So t mean they're the most important shootings of them all. The shooting of John Johnson. In my opinion. Obviously what happened next then is did the IRA respond to the shooting of John Johnson and the f elloti Donaghee? Yes thats the next logical question? And its quite clear that the IRA did not respond to that shooting. And why do you say its quite clear? Because there obviously was a decision taken by the IRA at that time, I mean I'm not speaking on behalf of the IRA, I must make that clear. But as someone who would be quite knowledgable about the events and attitudes of different people at that time, it has become quite clear to me that there was a decision taken by the IRA in Derry at that time that because of the importance of the demonstration and the huge turnout of people, that there would be no military conflict whatsoever on that occasion. That was an occasion which had to be kept completely free oE military activity and the impression has always been, i; has to be accepted that because it was a Free Derry situation there were, its wrong to say a considerable amount of guns. There certainly was weaponry in the Free Derry area of rifle, shortarm, machinegun, explosive nature which it has always been quite clear to anyone who's been involved -in Republican politics or the Republican movement at that time, was on that day left at home. Which meant it was deliberately kept out of this immediate area where the march was to take place. And that is a fact. ## Why Was It Left At Home? Simply because people felt that if you had Republicans on the march who had arms with them and -the situation did develop where soldiers would fire on either with rubber bullets or snatch bullets or things like that, that there was always a risk that somebody who was hot headed. You know cos at that tizne you're talking very young, the average age of volunteers would have been quite young. And you always ran a serious risk that there would be flare-up situation and that someone would open fire on a snatch squad or on like an armoured vehicle or something like that which would have been qttite useless when you consider the defences that the British had at that time. To be honest I think that the IRA in Derry at that tinte had much more 7 than the British Army. You know and the opposite should have been the case. ## Volunteers Would Be What 17-22 Years? I think the average age at that tinte would have been around, 20/21/22/23. Very young. ## 40/50 Strong Provisionals? I would say they were much stronger than that. mats another fable which has resulted as a result of 7 the British and the peopl! and the British media always make this mistake that there was a massive mf lux of young Derry people and other people in other parts of 7 into the ranks of the IRA because of what happened on Bloody Sunday, and that is total and absolute nonsense. ## Internment Being The Biggest Thing Six Months Earlier? More important than that again in this. The most important shootings in this city in the past 20 years was the shooting of Shamus Cusey(?) and Dessie BeeO) by the Royal Anglian Regiment. They were the most significant shootings and they were the shootings which more than anything else, they happened before internment was introduced. Which opened the ranks of the IRA to many many more people in the city. Do you think if the Provjsionals arid the Officials, strong order had gone out an that fingers had been wagged that there was to be no military activity on this day. Well I mean I dont know what the officials done on the day. No no sorry. The sort of currents that you were aware of. But if we take that they had the same line, would there have bean any possibility of you know like a Maverick or one or two Mavericks. No. The discipline was under control at that time. In my àpinion there was absolutely no possibility whatsoever of a Maverick IRA volunteer Provisional for want of a better term to distinguish between the two groups at that time, going off on his own and doing his own thing in relation to attacking the Britih Arthy or anything like that. I mean that just didnt happen. I mean if a brother had had somebody injured or had a grievance, there couldn't be the scenario that they would sort of amble down with their rifle, could pull the sort of clear the streets thing and people would obey them. No way. I mean the àtreets were athrong with people, it was the largest march I ever seen in the city. It was absolutely huge: And I mean it would have been totally out of the question that someone would have contemplated doing such a thing. And our friend painted the picture of the set routine that after a march there'd be a riot and then a build up to a situation. The explosivas or guns for that build up to some sort of operation would have been way out of, the area until after the march had cleared? Absolutely. I'm not saying that there wasnt guns in the bogside area or the 7 area or in close vicinity to the march, .there probably was, but I would say they were in houses, a few like dumps and things like that there, but there was no way you had units of the IRA marching through the crowd you know armed to the teeth to attack the British army. That just didnt happen. But I mean I dont understand what the sense would have been it on such an occasion. I mean there may have been other occasions when it did happen, you know when you're talking about smaller you know type groupings of people and obviously young people at that tinie and the activities of the ERA were very much ? because people supported the IRA totally and they were told to clear a street, they'd clear the street and that wa it And that happened constantly right through, specially from the introduction of internment and 7 '71. It was a very tense period from the introduction of internment right through to Bloody Sunday in terms of you know Free Derry had been establishes, barricades were 7 perimeter of the area. It was very difficult for the Brits and the RUC to come in. There was total and absolute control here. People done what they were told and it was all very you know, in terms of you know, a lot of very youthful inexperience, there wasn't an awful lot of experience about. People ov&r a pe±iod of time knew exactly what to do in a particular situation. That all led to Republicans and the lead up to Bloody Sunday accepting that that march and a huge turnout of people was more important than any military result which could be affected on that day. So after the Paras went in and the shooting started, did the IRA get involved? I think the feeling of most IRA volunteers was one of helplessness at that time because most Republicans that I knew attended the march, marched-on the march and I was on the march with many others and our feeling was just one of total exasperation and frustration and disbelief that this could be happening. I think its true to say that everybody was in a state of shock, that people were dropping all around you, you kno4, thoughts weren't of running, people running to get guns. Thoughts were of lifting bodies beside you, and Peggy Deane was shot beside me. And in the Chamberlain Street area at the back of the flats and there was just people dropping like flies all around and I think that the whole community including IRA men who were there were in a state of shock. For that you know half hour period, or 20 minute period after the shooting had started, people just didnt know how to respond to what was happening, afld I think that most people were tied up and lifting bodies and getting people out of the road. And saving themselves as well because I mean you were talking about a massive onslaught here of you know lots, of shooting, quite clear who was doing the shooting because of you know the calibre of the weapons and things like that. I mean people knew that the IRA wasn't firing, they knew that the people who were doing the shooting was people with SLR rifles and things like that, and it was a very intense, very you know fearsome time for everybody, including Republicans. Many Republicans who had themselves been involved in combat against the British army were in a state of shock arid didut know how to respond, and I think that one of the last thoughts that came into their heads was of running to get guns because they were looking at a situation where people were being shot dead 7 and hundreds of soldiers had come into the Bogside. It was obviously a major if you like attack for want of a better word, on the Bogside area which up until this had been Free Derry, and I think that anybody with any 7 would have looked at it and said well I mean pull a rifle out here and its not 13 people who are gonna be dead, its gonna be 33 people or 300 people, because they're just gonna keep firing and firing and_firing. And in between times people;were waving white flags, looking for medical aid for people who had been shot. And the shooting still continued and I think that people were traumatised. I know I certainly was. by the events of that day. I really didnt know how to respond. ## Was There Any Response At All? In my opinion there was no response from the IRA Provisionals right. Over the years there has been this story about a man some half hour after the shooting had taken place appearing with a shortarm somewhere, and quite pathetically firing in the direction of the Paratroopers. I dont know if thats true or not but that is a story which has sort of 7 in the time, if thaT happened it certainly happened it certainly happened well a&sr the 13, well the 20/30 people I think had been shot by the Paratroopers. But certainly during the period of the initial gunfire by the Paras which killed the civilian population, there was absolutely no, not one ? of evidence that guns had been fired. I mean the other issue, the issue of the British issuing the statements saying that they believed that there was nailbombs and weapons in the area, if that had have been the case because soldiers had encroached onto the Bogside and had come under the if the you like our territory, it would have been quite easy for an IRA volunteer at that time to have lit a nailbomb and have thrown it at them right, yet there wasntt one explosion. 1f all these nailbombs were about, and if they were in the hands of io many people, why was there not one single .nailbomb thrown? Because at that stage it would have been easy to do because the soldiers hd actually come into the area. With vehicles and with large snatch squads, and other units of the British Army opening fire. Do you understand what I mean? riot one single nailbomb was thrown because no-one heard an explosion of any description. So I think that gives a lie to this story that there was nailbombs in the area. tif there had have been, because of the psychicO) of the people, you know although there would have been shock and trauma and everything else, some one person was bound to have reacted with a nailbomb or an explosive device and thrown it, even if it was pathetic response, or an act of frustration or an act of madness in the context of what was happening. You would have expected people to have been injured as well? Well t mean not one pressman who was present that day said that he heard any explosion whatsoever. t dont even think the British Army alleged. They aLleged that there was nailbombs but they never alleged that there was an explosion. As afar as I've been reading, quite a lot of the tribunal, t havent yet read a soldier who said he heard one explode. What about a couple çf other points. One is this, the witness who said he saw a carload of people with guns draw up after the shooting had begun, 7 get out, fire some shots, get in, went off again. I knew nothing about that at all. Were the volunteers very accurate. I mean if there had been some volunteers firing, would they have hit any soldiers? No soldier was hit, scratched or anything. Well I mean in the months prior to Bloody Sunday quite a number oE British soldiers lost their lives here as a result of some very effective I&A attacks on them and I mean there could be not doubt that, the way in which the British army came into the P area on that day, if the IRA had have been expecting the British army to do that, a number of soldiers would have been shot. But I cant say, how can you say if a man would be killed, but certainly they would have been shot. There was a degree of confidence. Because there was so many, well there's no doubt about that, I mean there were soldiers killed here and single shot 7 you know for months prior to that in different parts of the city and there's no way that you could compare the degree of accuracy of a British soldier to an IRA volunteer, but because of the num%ers of soldiers which encroached on the Bogside on that day, there could be absolutely no doubt whatsoever that somebody would have struck lucky somewhere and would have had a British soldier. And the other thing the Army's said was that people fired and guns and so on were spirited away. Is that a likely scenario? The British army and their propagandas have said that about area volunteers for the past 20' years. - He was seen to fall and was spirited away. And I mean if ali. IRA volunteers who the British army said were killed were killed, there would be hundreds of dead IRA volunteers lying in unmarked graves and cemetaries all around Ireland. And thats a total and absolute lie, its a total nonsense. And is it the same about the weapons? I can oniy speak, I cant speak for the attitude taken by members of the official Republican movement at that time, I can only speak f roit the position of knowledge of what the attitude of the provisional Republican movement was on that day, and it was quite clear that under no circumstances was the Republican moveMent to become involved in any military activity whatsoever with the British army. You see hindsight's a wonderful thing. Put yourself in the mind of a Republican at 12 o'clock on that day. Nobody expected this to happen. Nobody for one minute that day expected that by 4 hours later, S hours later that such a thing would have happened. lt just was not contemplated that the British army would have done such a thing. It was always. contemplated that they were capable of shooting Catholics, Nationalists, Republicans you know in a 2 type scenario or a 7 type scenario or at some sort of a riot situation. That was always contemplated that someone could be shot. But nobody expected that mass murder was gonna take place on the streets of Derry on that day, so no provision was triade for working out a response to what the British army would do if you understand what I mean. I mean you would expect that you know maybe the IRA sitting down in the morning and working out you know this is Plan A, this is Plan B and this is Plan B. This is something that nobody expected to happen. I certainly never for one minute expected that the British army would have done what they done in Derry on that day. Definitely not. I mean it was just the whole situation and what happened, it was just so unbelievable, t couldnt b!lieve it what had hapened. And I think most people of Deny couldnt believe it either. I remember about 7 o'clock that night being in the Craigen Estate. And people were getting on buses to go to bingo at Balcara çounty Donaghue. And I remember getting on a bus and shaming thea and they come off the bus. It was only years afterwards that, those people didnt know, they were in a state of shock, total disbelief. They were trautnatised, they didnt know how to respond or handle the events of that day because t mean if they had -4-ìave had a day or two to think about it, they wouldn't have contemplated going to bingo at 7 yet here they were 3 hours later on a bus at 7 and I seen the bus and it was justan act of fury on my part that I got on the bus and started giving off, you should be ashamed of yourselves, all the rest of it. And people were like lambs 7 the bus. But that was, but I didnt realise it at the time, what it was that made those people do that. Will you take us through you know what you did that day and.. I was on the march, I was with the main body. What you actually saw and went through. Well I was an the march which ended up at William Street which was blocked. So you came down to William Street, and the main march had gone off, followed up there. The main march. No the main march, a lot of the people at the front, the Street wasnt blocked here the intention was to march into the town as you know, right. So most people marched.. This is Rosfield Street. Airight. The march, the march went right after the march had been blocked. Ah right sci there was ? ranks came down here. Aye at Rosfield Street. Most people felt that it was possible that they would have got through at the bottom or if they didnt that they woutd go down and make a token protest, and turn and come back and go to.. So most people on the march actually thought they'd get through to.. I'm not saying that they thought that they would get through. They probably thought that they wouldnt get through, but that if they were down in the crowd maybe the ranks would open and you know there was a lot of. .at that time that wouldat be there now. And a lot of people, hundreds of people went down to where the British army was, and there was a state of if you like confrontation, you know verbal abuse and things like that going on. And t would have been there with that group, but I mean it quickly became clear to people that nobody was gonna get through. The snatch squad started to conte out of the lower end of William Street and I ended up in Chamberlain Street over here, right, and this is where Peggy, right just here where Peggie Deane was shot. You ran down there, all the way down. We didnt run we walked originally because the soldiers were coming so far.. Somebody had shouted they're coming out. There was all sorts of shouting, state of confusion at that stage. Did you see Deane shot? I didnt see her bing shot but I seen her shortly after she was shot. As she was being carried into the house. She tzas bleeding profusely from a thight wound. And there were some people carrying her. She was carried, there were all sorts of people around her. And then where did you go then? I ended up ovar here towards the front of the flats where, it was just a state of chaos at this stage because they were firing right 1.ef t and centre and it was a matter of people surviving. Feeling that they were gonna be shot because this woman had been shot. And there was reports from all round this immediate area and this area here that the people were shot and were seriously wounded. Nobody at that stage knew that anybody was dead and at that stage it was just a mass of confusion. We ended up walking aimlessly round the place lifting peopLe who'd been wounded and getting people out of the toad who were frightened and scared. There was women crying and old men. Any shots over your head when you were running down? No I dont remember shots over my head no. There was all sorts of shouting, state of confusion at that stage. - ## Did You See Deane Shot? I didnt See her bing shot but I seen her shortly after she was shot. As she was being carried into the house. She was bleeding profusely from a thight wound. And there Were some people carrying her. She was carried, there were all sorts of peoplearound her. And then Where did you go then? I ended up over here towards the front of the flats where, lt was a state of chaos at this stage because they were firing right left and centre and it was a matter of people surviving. Feeling that they were gonna be shot because this woman had been shot. And there was reports from all round this immediate area and this area here that the people were shot and were seriously wounded. Nobody at that stage knew that anybody was dead and at that stage it was just a mass of confusion. We ended up walking aimlessly round the place lifting people whotd been wounded and getting people out of the road who were frightened and scared. There was women crying and old men. Any shots over your head when you were running down? No I dont remember shots over my head no. ## Alec Nasji - I 75/i AND THEN WE WERE GOING HOME, YOU KNOW, ME AND wrLLIE. AND I SAYS "COME ON «. AND WE WERE GOtNG TO GO H°ME THEN. JE WERE GOING HOME . . .AND TÍIERE WERE TWO YOUNGSTERS ALONG WITH OUR WILLIE, YOU KNOW AND I WAS MAYBE ABOUT TEN YARDS IN FRONT OF THEM AND THERE WAS A WEE BARRICADE - I'M TELLING YOU WHAT I REMEMBER - THERE WERE A WEE BARRICADE JUST AT IRE HIGH FLATS AND WE WERE WALKING ACROSS AND I WAS IN FRONT AND THE NEXT THING I HEARD WAS A PUTT VAS THE SHOOTING, THE SHOOTING THEN.STARTED. AND I LOOKED ROUND AND I SEEN THE THREE ON THE GROUND - THE TWO YOUNGSTERS LIKE THAT THERE AND ONE WAS IN THE MEDDLE. AND I WENT OVER AND I PUT MY HAND UP JuST (UNCLEAR) AND i GOT BANG. BANG IN THERE. AND I WENT DOWN TO SAVE MESELF COS l'BERE WAS STILL SHOOTIÑG YOU SEE ## Q: What Are You Feelings Now. 20 Years On 7 OH - VERY BAD. .THEY WERE MURDERED WEREN'T THEY. LIKE EVERYONE KNOWS IT: AND I WOULD SAY THE MEN THAT GAVE THE ORDERS FOR TO SHOOT THEY WERE NEVER BROUGHT UP OR CHARGED OR NOTHING LIKE TEAT .NOTHING AT ALL.NO GUILT, NOT GUILTY AND THEY WAS FOUND GUILTY (?). NONE WAS EVER BROUGHT UP. BUT WHO GAVE THE ORDERS FOR TO SHOOT THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW. I NEVER KNEW THAT.... .THEY WERE ALL MURDERED THEM BOYS.... . .1 SWEAR TO YOU, I SWEAR TO YOU, GRAVE UP THERE, NUFFIN (?). THEY NEVER HAD GUNS (WORD UNCLEAR). THEY SAID I WAS A GUNMAN Toe, SURE. YOU KNOW. I WOULDN'T KNOW HOW TO HANDLE ONE.... .VERY QUIET, NICE PELLA, VERY GOOD NATURE. HE ALWAYS LET DOWN FLAYING THE GUITAR... - .HE HAD A BIG GUITAR AND HE JUST SIT OUT AND THAT'S ALL HE DONE, JUST PLAY A GUITAR... THERE WERE NO WEAPONS THAI DAY. NO WEAPONS.... .THERE WEREN'T A SOLDIER SHOT OR NOTHING LIKE THAT WERE TEERE ? YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN. IF THERE HAD OF BEEN WEAPONS THAT DAY, YOU KNOW RIGHTLY AND I KNOW AND EVERYONE KNOWS THAT THERE'D HAVE BEEN SOLDIERS DEAD WOULDN'T THERE ? YOU KNOW THEY WERE WIDE OPEN. WHAT I HEARD WHAT THEY WAS DOING WAS STONE THROWING. OK. BUT TRAT' S ALL I KNOW ABOUT. BUT FOR GUNS - THERE WERE NO GUNS TkT DAY. NO WAY. I SWEAR TO YOU. t SWEAR TO GOD. NO GUNS. NOTHING LIKE THAT. I DIDNT, I NEVER EVEN SEEN THEM. NO THERE WERE NO GUNS... HE WAS GOING HOME TO GET HIS DINNER »(19. 412 ## Alec Nash 175/1 AND THEN WE WERE GOING HOME, YOU KNOW, ME AND WILLIE. AND I SAYS "COME ON". AND WE WERE GOiNG TO GO HOME THEN. WE WERE GOING HOME . .AND THERE WERE TWO YOUNGSTERS ALONG WITH OUR WILLIE. YOU KNOW AND I WAS MAYBE ABOUT TEN YARDS IN FRONT OF THEM AND THERE WAS A WEE BARRICADE - I'M TELLING YOU WHAT I REMEMBER - THERE WERE A WEE BARRICADE JUST AT THE HIGH PLATS AND WE WERE WALKING ACROSS AND I WAS IN FRONT AND THE NEXT THING I HEARD WAS A FUTT - WAS THE SHOOTING, THE SHOOTINÓ THEN STARTED. AND I LOOKED ROUND AND I SEEN THE THREE ON THE GROUND - TRE TWO YOUNGSTERS LIKE THAT THERE AND ONE WAS IN THE MIDDLE. AND I WENT OVER AND I PUT MY HAND UP JUST (UNCLEAR) AND I GOT BANG. BANG IN THERE. AND I WENT DOWN TO SAVE MESELF COS THERE WAS STILL SHOOTING YOU SEE ## S Q: What Are You Feelings Now. 20 Years On 7 OH - VERY BAD. . .THEY WERE MURDERED WEREN'T THEY. LIKE EVERYONE KNOWS IT. AND I WOULD SAY THE MEN THAT GAVE THE ORDERS FOR TO SHOOT THEY WERE NEVER BROUGHT UP OR CHARGED OR NOTHING LIKE THAT .NOTHING AT ALL.NO GUILT, NOT GUILTY AND THEY WAS FOUND GUILTY (7). NONE WAS EVER BROUGHT UP. BUT WHO GAVE THE ORDERS FOR TO SHOOT THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW. I NEVER KNEW THAT.... . .1 SWEAR TO YOU, i SWEAR TO YOU, GRAVE UP THERE, NUFFIN (7). THEY NEVER HAD GUNS (WORD UNCLEAR). THEY SAID I WAS A GUNMAN TOO, SURE. YOU KNOW. I WOULDN'T KNOW HOW TO HANDLE ONE.. .THEY WERE ALL MURDERED THEM BOYS.... S. .VERY QUIET, NICE FELLA. VERY GOOD NATURE. HE ALWAYS LET DOWN PLAYING THE GUITAR... .HE HAD A BIG GUITAR AND HE JUST SIT OUT AND THAT'S ALL HE DONE, JUST PLAY A GUITAR... THERE WERE NO WEAPONS THAT DAY. NO WEAPONS .... .THERE WEREN'T A SOLDIER SHOT OR NOTHING LIKE TRAT WERE THERE ? YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN.. IF ThERE RAD 0F BEEN WEAPONS THAT DAY, YOU KNOW RIGHTLY AND I KNOW AND EVERYONE KNOWS THAT THERE D HAVE BEEN SOLDIERS DEAD WOULDN'T THERE? YOU KNOW THEY WERE WIDE OPEN. WHAT I HEARD WHAT THEY WAS DOING WAS STONE THROWING. OK. BUT THAT'S ALL I KNOW ABOUT. BUT FOR GUNS - THERE WERE NO GUNS TIPST DAY. NO WAY. I SWEAR TO YOU. I SWEAR TO GOD. NO GUNS. NOTHING LIKE THAT. I DIDNT, I NEVER EVEN SEEN THEM. NO THERE WERE NO GUNS... RE WAS GOING HOME TO GET HIS DINNER . . I WAS IN FRONT AND THE OTHER TWO YOUNG FELLAS THEY WERE THE SAME. THEY WERE GOING HOME FOR THEIR DINNER, TOßET THEIR DINNER AND THAT WAS IT.... * - . . I WAS IN FRONT OF THEM WHEN I HEARD THE SHOOTING AND THAT WAS IT. AND THEY WENT DOWN AND I WENT OVER.... 176/I VERY BITTER... .1 BLAME THE SOLDIERS, YOU KNO\tWH&T U MEAN. NOT THE ENGLISH PEOPLE. ITS MEN WHO GAVE DIE ORDERS FOR THAT DAY. FOR TO DO THE SHOOTING. YOU KNOW WHAT I -MEAN. Q: WHY DO YOU THINK HE WAS SHOT NO REASON AT ALL THAT'S THE WAY I FEEL. HE WAS JUST MURDERED. THAT'S WHAT I WOULD SAY. HE NEVER GOT A CHANCE. 19 ONLY. HE NEVER GOTACHANCETOLIVE I: -- THERE WAS NO SHOOTING THAT DAY. THE ONLY SHOOTING WAS THE ARMY. 177/I WHEN I HEARD THE SHOOTING I TURNED ROUND, 1 WAS QUICK. AND THEN I SEEN THE THREE BODIES AND I WENT OVER AND THAT'S WHEN IT.. .1 PUT ME ARM UP FOR THEM TO STOP SHOOTING. THEY WERE STILL SHOOTING, YOU SEE. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY BULLETS PASSED ME. BUT I PUT ME ARM UP (UNCLEAR) STOP SHOOTING (UNCLEAR). I KNEW WILLIE MAYBE WAS STILL ALIVE. MAYBE DEAD. BECAUSE WHEN I PUT ME ARM UP THAT'S WHEN TO STOP THE SHOOTING AND THAT'S WHEN I GOT IT THEN. Q: YOU GOT SHOT 7 YES. I GOT IT BANG - BANG - BANG. AND THEN I TOOK A DIVE DOWN TO THE WEE BARRICADE FOR TO SAVE MESELF COS THEY WERE STILL SHOOTING AT US.... YOU MEAN TO TELL ME IF I HADN'T A GUN IN MY HAND I WOULDN'T HAVE USED IT 7 PRETTY DODGY. WHAT WOULD YOU DO. ...:HEWAS IN THE MIDDLE OF TWO BODIES LIKE THAT THERE. THAT'S THE WAY HE WERE... Q: ARE YOU STILL BITTER 7 OH AYE. ITS NO GOOD SAYING I'M NOT COS4 ARE. NOT AGAINST ENGLISH PEOPLE OR NOTHING LIKE THAT. JUST SOLDIERS OR TETE BOYS THAT GAVE THE ORDERS TO DO THE SHOOTING. YOU KNOW. ## Wildtracic YOU KNOW. THEM BOYS WAS ALL INNOCENT.... . .THEY'D NO GUNS OR NOTHING. THERE WAS NO SHOOTING THAT DAY. THE ONLY SHOOTING THAT WAS GOING ON WAS ARMY - EVERYQNE KNEW THAT.... .THEY WERE GOING HOME WHEN THIS HAPPENED. THEYWERE GOING HOME. DEFINITE - GOD MAY STRIKE ME DEAD. THEY WERE GOING HOME AND I WOULDN'T SAY THAT IN FRONT OF THE CEMETARY. ME AND THE OTHER TWO YOUNGSTERS ALONG WITH HIM, THEY WERE GOING HOME. THEY WERE GOING RIGHT HOME THAT DAY WHAT HAPPENED ? _THE SROOTING STARTED AND TRE WAY I TURNED ROUND LIKE THAT THERE. I WASN'T FROM HERE TO THAT MAN THERE. AND I RUN OVER CROSS THE STREEt AND THEY WERE JUST ON THE WEE BARRICADE LYING OUT. AND I PUT ME HAND UP (UNCLEAR) TO STOP THE SHOOTING AND TO SEE F THERE WAS ANYTHING WE COULD DO FOR THEM. AND THAT'S WHEN I GOT IT TOO. THAT'S IT -. MAY GOD StRIKE ME DEAD. I CAN'T5P-IGURE IT OUT WHY THEY STARTED SHOOTING THKT LAY TOO. IT WOULD RAVE BEEN DIFFERENT IF IT HAD BEEN GUNS OR GUNMEN OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, SHOOTING. ITS ALRIGRT. BUT THEY DIDN'T GUNS THAT DAY. NOTHING.... .THAT DAY I FEEL TERRIBLE BITTER, TERRIBLE BITTER. -. YOU KNOW WHEN IT GETS MENTIONED TO ME THEN IT. COMES BACK IN MY BRAIN AGAIN YOU KNOW. ABOUT TRAT DAY. IT WAS (UNCLEAR) ABOUT THE SHOOTING.... .WELL I DIDN'T SEE HIM GO DOWN BUT WHEN I LOOKED OVER THE SHOOTING THAT WAS GOING ON WAS sTILL GOING ON AND I RUN OVER THEN... .ME WAS MURDERED SURE TO GOD. ...OH ITS DESPERATE WASTED. HE WAS WASTED. HE WAS DESPERATE. HE'D . HAVE BEEN RUNNING ABOUT NOW WOULDN'T HE ? HE WAS DOING GRAND WASN'T HE. IT WAS WASTED HIS LIFE, DEFINITE. AYE- IT WAS WASTED, MURDERED, JUST WASTED. (175/1)WE WERE GOING HOME, YOU KNOW, ME AND WILLIE (175/i)HE WAS GOING HOME TO GET HIS DiNNER (175/1) AND THERE WERE TWO YOUNGSTERS ALONG WITH OUR WILLIE. YOU KNOW AND I WAS MAYBE ABOUT TEN YARDS iN FRONT OF THEM (175/i). - .1 WAS IN FRONT AND THE OTHER TWO YOUNG PELLAS THEY WERE THE SAME. THEY WERE GOING HOME FOR THEIR DINNER, TO GET THEIR DINNER AND THAT WAS LT.... (115/1)AND I WAS IN FRONT AND THE NEXT THING I HEARD WAS A FUfl - WAS THE SHOOTING, THE SHOOTING THEN STARTED. AND r LOOKED ROUND AND I SEEN THE THREE ON THE GROUND - THE TWO YOUNGSTERS LIKE THAT THERE AND ONE WAS IN THE MiDDLE (177fl)... -HE WAS IN THE MIDDLE OF TWO BODIES LIKE THAT THERE. THAT'S THE WAY HE WERE. (175/I).. .THEY WERE MURDERED WEREN'T THEY, LIKE EVERYONE KNOWS Fr.... (175/1) THEY WERE ALL MURDERED TEEM BOYS.... (175/i) THERE WEREN'T A SOLDIER SHOT OR NOTHING LIKE THAT WERE THERE 7 YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN. IF THERE HAD OF BEEN WEAPONS THAT DAY. YOU KNOW RIGHTLY AND I KNOW AND EVERYONE KNOWS THAT THERE'D HAVE BEEN SOLDIERS DEAD WOULDN'T THERE 7 YOU KNOW THEY WERE WIDE OPEN. WHAT I HEARD WHAT THEY WAS DOING WAS STONE THROWING, OK. BUT TRAT'S ALL I KNOW ABOUT. BUT FOR GUNS... (176/1)Q: WRY DO YOU THINK HE WAS SHOT ? NO REASON AT ALL. TRAT'S TRE WAY i. FEEL. HE WAS JUST MURDERED. THAT'S WHAT I WOULD SAY. HE NEVER GOT A CHANCE. 19 ONLY. HE NEVER GOT A CHANCE TO LIVE (WIT) YOU KNOW THEM BOYS WAS ALL INNOCENT. (WiT).. .THEY'D NO GUNS OR NOTHING. (W/T). . .THEY WERE GOING HOME WHEN THIS HAPPENED. THEY WERE GOING HOME. DEFINITE - GOD MAY STRIKE ME DEAD. THEY WERE GOING HOME (WIT)I CAN'T FIGURE IT OUT WHY THEY STARTED SHOOTING THAT DAY TOO. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN DIFFERENT IF IT HAD BEEN GUNS OR GUNMEN OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, SHOOTING. ITS ALRIGHT. BUT THEY DIDN'T GUNS THAT DAY. NOTHING. (W/T).. TRAT DAY I FEEL TERRIBLE BITTER, TERRIBLE BITTER... (WIT)... .11E WAS MURDERED SURE TO GOD.... (WIT). . .0E ITS DESPERATE WASTED. HE WAS WASTED. HE WAS DESPERATE. HE'D HAVE BEEN RUNNING ABOUT NOW WOULDN'T HE? RE WAS DOING GRAND WASN'T HE.... (WIT)... .IT WAS WASTED HIS LIFE, DEFINITE. AYE IT WAS WASTED. MURDERED, JUST WASTED. - ## Out Of Vtsion (175/i)HE WAS GOING HOME TO GET HIS DINNER (17571) AND THERE WERE TWO YOUNGSTERS ALONG WITH OUR WILLIE. YOU KNOW... ## In Vision (175/i)AND I WAS IN FRONT AND THE NEXT THING I BEARD WAS A FUTT - WAS THE SHOOTING. THE SHOOTING THEN STARTED. AND I LOOKED ROUND AND I SEEN THE ThREE ON THE GROUND - THE Two YOUNGSTERS LIKE THAT THERE AND ONE WAS IN THE MIDDLE ## Out 0F Vision LIKE EVERYONE KNOWS .(W/T) YOU KNOW THEM GOING HOME WHEN THIS - GOD MAY STRIKE ME (175/i).. .THEY WERE MURDERED WEREN'T THEY. IT... .(W/T). ..THEY'D NO GUNSOR NOTHING.. BOYS WAS ALL INNOCENT... .(W/T). . .THEY WERE HAPPENED. THEY WERE GOING HOME. DEFINITE DEAD. THEY WERE GOING HOME.:. ## S ) In Vision (176/1)0: \HY DO YOU THINK HE WAS SHOT t NO REASON AT ALL. THAT'S THE WAY I FEEL. HE WAS JUST MURDERED. THAT'S WHAT I WOULD SAY. HE NEVER GOT A CHANCE. 19 ONLY. HE NEVER GOT A CHANCE TO LIVE ## Out Of Vision (WIT).. .THAT DAY I FEEL TERRIBLE BITTER, TERRIBLE BITTER..jW/T)....IT WAS WASTED HIS LIFE. DEFINITE. AYE IT WAS WASTED. MURDERED, JUST WASTED. ## S 73) Father of Willie Nash, boy shot next to him, and of Charlie Nash, World Championship contender boxer. Family is non political and non violent, with only one ever having been in prison, and that the eldest brother who was lifted after B.S. because his brother had been killed on S.S., although checking actu&L charge with him. (Rave you seen him - Paddy Mash?) ElderLy man, much affected by remembering and telling it again. UITNESS : Willie Nash sThirdfl Own shooting NUT tJIDGERY ## Story -J Walking by the barricade with Willie on way home for dinner. Everyt1-tin was over they thought, been Little hit. of trouble at bottom end of William Street, but fizzling out. Suddenly people were running towards them, the looked up Roasville Street, shots rang out and Willie and two other boys behind hirn, fell to the ground. No guns, no bombs, not even stoné throwing. He turned and half bent over Willie) half waving to say stop "My boy is hit", shooting went on. He was hit in left forearm and Left stomach. Slumped against the barricade, noise and firing. ## Pshooting Large Para officer arrived, large revolver thrust in his face. ttThree more dead here". His age saved him from being shot, he thinks. Saw soldiers carry/drag the three bodies to the pig which had drawn up and throw them in. Two Soldiers held them one on each side by the leg and hand/wrist when carrying. Soldier told Alec. there was first aid over in Joseph Place, and left him Lying bleeding. - - He was taken up to hospital by car. Watch and ring missing when got Willie's things hack. EN O S 1eV'e. Q now) ** QOT TRANSCRIPT Q? HÏ.M FOR. W) the Faculty of Philosophy at Colerain University, and time a Catholic Priest. Very, very effective. witness. Deaz of at that WITNESS BARRICADE CLZ1S?&D& P&RK events Mctthtttney State of mind of Paras Ring arrested and ill-treated WITNESS WIDC SR? STOV( With Dennis Barker at gable end of GLnfada Park by what he describes as smaLl, foot high, barrîe.ad. Not dressed as priest. Saracens etc. came in, swung round into position. Small group of youths stoneing them from just. behind the barricada, perhaps 50 people stood around there altogether. Stones couLd not possibly have avett reached the soLdiers who came out and aiming. Firing basan, thouflt it cisc rubbor bullota. No gunman, or bombers on that barricade and had clear view of Lt. Convinced that soldier came out of pig, dotrn, fired, hit KalLy.Snapshot in my mind. One youth (probably Kelly) want down clutching his stottach, and he and Bradley fetched him, in to the gable end, reaLised it was not rubber -bullets but been shot. Dennis gave him the last tites. I looked round the gable end and saw soldiers aiming . Two, porhipq thvo bod.ic.o oa siuu4 ,1.1.-%' .iva. them with his hand up as though sayiúg döntt fire &ny mote. &ash I think. He was hit then. Soldiers aiming and firing, bullet hit above me s t pulled back in. TWO othar bodies there and not get out so Dennis shouted the last rites to them. Calmed crowd of 20/30 people but all terrified as firing went on. Three people broke f roca crowd and ran across Glenf ada, shot as they were running, first title knew soldiers were in the G.Park area. too. Not been firing round cornee (as SOLDIER CLktttTED to Widgety), in fact the only one fo ducked around to look was we. ## O'Keefe Cont. P&Ge Two Boy crawling for R. flats entrance and safety from the barricade. Shot. t4ctihinney. Soldiers came round and surrounded and arrested us. Soldiers in a very exc.ited state, arrested and put against wall. Very worried, if people had run then, been shot, no doubt about it. &rrest ; rough, very. Run gauntlet. Kicked and beaten by ScttttF for not being dressed as priest. Arbitrary charging, and beating and threats went on for .hours. Had to stand with hands holding barbs ort barbed wire. Çharge& with throwing stones. pecial Branch obviously expected to have ¿ number of IRA inert, and found they had none. NO GUNS ETC. BEItG USED OR ON ANY OF THE PEOPLE t SAW BEtNO SHOT, OR SAW S00L1 AFTER. TOT EAVE BEEN REMOVED, SHOOTING WAS TOO FIERCE. Saw soLdier on his knee by Keils Walk aim and fire the first sito t. ## End S MtCKEY E?2TGLISE (early 5O's) tephanit's f athec, Sinn Fein supporter although not meaiber at present. Two sous killed - ene in accident with army vehicle, the other while on active service. WITNESS Me.Guigatt ior WIDGERY ## Story Ran across R. St waste ground, with saraceas coining up behthd them, went through arch between blocks 2. and 3 into top end of Joseph Place. - Stood behind the fiats by phone box at E.. Street encI.Shoottng had started as we went through the arch. krmy dismounted by Gienfada Park in a line.Shootittg went on, and Mickey Bridge was brought through to flat in Joseph Place. We in by sable end now back of block i of R. flats. Carried Bridge in to flat in Joseph Plaça and we went in too, rushed in, and down for cover because firing stilt going ou.tooking out of the window, see MeGuigan come out with white hankfe, head caved in f ro back. Girl behind him seemed likely to follow but he stopped her just beEcre he stepped out and got shot. Girl began to do war dance. Got her in to Etat too. Fear. ENDS TERRY O'I(EEFE (50 ish now) ** GOT TRANSCRIPT OF HIM FOR YOU Dean of the Faculty of Philosophy at Coleraine University, and at that time a Catholic Priest. Very, very effettive witness. WITNESS BARRICADE GLENFADA PARK events Mct ihinney State cE mind of Paras Being arrested and ill-treated WIDGERY WITNESS STORY With Dennis Barker at gable end of G].enfada Park by what he describes as smalL, foot highs barricade. Not dressed as priest. Saracens etc. came in, swung round into position. Small group of youths stoneing them frOr just behind the barricade, perhaps 50 people stood around there altogether. Stones could not possibly have even reached the soldiers, who came out and aiming. Firing began, thought it was rubber bullets. No gunmen, or bombers on that barricade and had clear view of it. Convinced that soLdier came out of pig, down, fired, hit Kelly.Snapshot in my mind. One youth (probably Kelly) went down clutching his stomach, and he and Bradley fetched him in to the gable end, realised it was not rubber bullets but been shot. Dennis gave him the last rites. t looked round the gable end and saw soldiers aiming . Two, perhaps thcee bodies on barricade, and older man over one of them with his hand up as though saying don't fire any more. Nash I think. He was hit then. Soldiers aiming and firing, bullet hit above me as I pulled hack in. TWO other bodies there and not get out so Dennis shouted the last rites to theni. Calmed crowd of 20/30 people but all terrified as firing went on. Three people broke from crowd and ran across Glenfada, shot as they were running, first time icnew soldiers were in the G.Park area too, Not been firing round corner (as SOLDIER CLAIMED to Widgery), in fact the only one who ducked around to look was tue. ## O'Keefe Cont. Page Two hoy crawling for R. Fiats entrance and safety from the barricade. Shot. McI].hinney. Soldiers came round and surrounded and arrested us. Soldiers in a very excited state, arrested and put against wall. Very worried, if people had run then, been shot, no doubt about it. arrest rough, very. Run gauntlet. Kicked and beaten by Sowig&F for not being dressed as priest. &rbitrary charging, and beating and threats went on for hours. Had to stand with hands holding barbs on barbed wire.T Charged with throwing stones. Special Branch obviously expected to have a number of IRA men, and found they had none. NO GUNS ETC. BEING USE!) OR ON ANY OF THE PEOPLE L SAW BEING SHOT, OR SAR SOON AFTER. NOT HAVE BEEN REMOVED, SHOOTING WAS TOO FIERCE. Saw soldier on his knee by Keils Walk aim and fire the first shot. ## Ends MICKEY ENGLtSII (early 50's) Stephanie's father, Sinn Fein supporter although not member at present. Two sons killed --one in accident with army vehicle, the other while on active service. WITNESS McGuigan NOT WIDGERY ## Story - Ran across R. St waste ground, with saracens coming up behind them, went through arch between blocks 2 and 3 into top end of Joseph Place. Stood behind the flats by phone box at R. Street end.Shooting had started as we wont through the arch. Army dismounted by Clenfada Park in a line.Shooting went on, and Mickey Bridge was brought through to flat in Joseph Place. We in by gable end now back ai block i of R. flats. Carried Bridge in to flat in Joseph Place and we went in too, rushed in, and down for cover because firing still going on.Looking out of the window, see McGuigan come out with white hankie, head caved in from back. Girl behind him seamed likely to follow but he stopped her just before he stepped out and got shot. Girl began to do war dance. Got her in to flat too. Fear. ENDS fr119 422 Terry Terry O'Keef e. Today is June 6th. I joined the Staff of the University of Ulster3 the Mew University ot Ulsterr. in , when it opened in 196S. Prior to that I had been a Post_graduate in Peris. So I r-jved in October to take a post in Philosophy. By the tirite of Bloody Sunday I was a lecturer in Philosophy and Dean othe facu1ty or the School of Humanjtjez.1 was alsoat that time a Roman Catholic Priest so I there. - .1973 hut et that time I would have been a Priest. It is obviously hard to reconstruct the build up of the anti- internment movernent Eut certainly the calling of that anti-internment march brought out a number of people, including a group ct students from the. Un5versitY Civil Rghta group who he'l declared their intentior at coing over to Derry to participate in the march. Several staff went over with them , et that time the feeling about nternmet, well, let me not do into thc polItics. of internment at the time, just stick to the tact&. A number of us founc oUrSel\'es towards the bottom of William Street moving up towards t. corner where e meeting had been callecL So you are coming down William Street, here? Sorry, R. street Sc the large crowd was moving slowly up towards the platform e corner and there was or there seemed to be behind Y.OLrí- the tisuel stone throwing at the toot of William Street, t..rhich was every common occurence with crowds, Two of us went hack to make sure the students were also moving up towerda the thing end weren't going to be taucht at the foot of William Street and em Two lecturers? Yes, myself end - another- person - not particularly, to to just to make sure everybody had , had, cos we had been had er tos 'e had been you know in a group. Were you dressed es a Priest? ## No, no t had em black. - . - not have been really recognised. At that stage it was clear that there was going to be troubled at the toot et William Street, md that the army berrcade there was being stoned by twenty, thirty, youths in e relatively Standard procedure for I3erry et the time.. And that was here or-? No.. Little j.. - Street. So you turned up there you could see that going? ## P 'ich, and there was a smell rubble, barricade, Woodgery described a a barricade, and it really wasn't a barricade, maybe e smell, toot high, stones across. My. memdy, the one I was partioulerl-, ,.,.v-jeW of is that one there, number six. As I reached, the crowd maybe forty, fifty people, just eround between the flats and the erit would be this bui1din , the 81 actualLy saw the arm\- personnel carriers arrive, and Soldiers sPilling out. And they? They were driving , drove through here end I. think they came, certainly they were swinging in here and stoppir end people getting out and aiming. And there were a small crowd of youths around about here, most people Were treating up Roswell Street, small crowd cf youths stoning them,.. far away so Would have been extremely difficult tar them to have hit anybody, but it was just the usual. 1119 424 Where would you have been? Just about there. Just behind the barricade? er just about there Just behind the barricade. You must have been behind the youths? Yes, yes, I meen they were just in front cf us. Myself end '1-Priest Dennis Sradley. And there were flats and I must confess I thought it was rubber bullets,, and one youth went down just there clutching his stomach and a number of us went over end brought him back to the gable end cf the wall and to my horror I realised he had been shot coz when we turned him over the, he was dying. So Dents gave hirn the last rights end these are the numbers of peopLe that died? Yes. And I looked across and there was another body lying there, an older man, I think it was Nash! I can't rementbqr the name, an uncle came out. We were in behind the gable end of the wall and I began to realize whet was happening, end looked round and looked down that way and there was soldiers interspersed everywhere. w(th and they were obviously aiming and f iring and in tact a bullet chipped very high up on the gable end. They were firing at you? May be t don't know. Dennis and I tried to calm the crowd behind that gable end there on the grounds there was a big panic, number at young people, some women, great panic and P'ecfl e 'ere tr>-tng, 19' 425 saying we should run across, SL. - . .don't move, nothing will happen if you Just remain cairn, and the soldiers come and you Just Dut your hands up and so . -And my memory is three peopLe broke and started te run and was shot end Gi Perk in there. Yeb, they were shot es they were running. Now I couLdntt see what was happening round here but I could see somebody dying at the foot of Roswell Street flats here. Crawling for the entrance and he-was shot. I would have to Look back at my evidence to remember how many people I saw.., em, we persuaded the rest cf the crowd not to move, so eventually the soldìers cerne round that way and that way. And er in a highly excIted state and er surrounded us, put us up against the wail. - ## - Excited In What? Weil, adrennalin. Well usually with adrennalin running high. That's the moment which I was very worried i-r people started to run or panic they would actually be shot. Like the three tellers. And these were Faras? Veh, full carnet lege. We were all herded first of all up against the wall, sort. -physical brutality. We were marched down, end lined up. .1 think it might have been one of these buildings here. .8 femous photograph of ¡ne up against the wall of me which peered in Paris Match - my wjte to he spotted it - . - . - and we were eventually herded into a lorry at somewhere down here. Fair amount of physical brutality and taken to Fort George. Where we were trapped, irwited to run down a line, double line at paratr-opers as large as sticks in and then I was held for You were beaten as you went down that? Twenty or thirty of you - 1419' 428. I suppose in the lorry there was one women end about twentytjv, thirty peooLc. jncludjn_Fe.rcus Macateir, Ernie's son, he was. . another young boy about eleven or twelve. Everybody got the seme. t'et ment - Veh, I don't know about the woman. One's emotions at these times are very strange. She kept abusing the Daretroopers, shrieking about her and so cn, end the paratrooper who had herded us in and beaten us into the corner of the, up against the, one piled on top of the other, in the lorry, said, told her to shut up, and he'd kick, her teeth in. So I don't think he hit her so everytjryie she said anything he hit us , would she not shut up. These unworthy feljngs. That blOQQdY woman. She's gonne get killeth Because he was obviously3 he had to take it cut or- someone. So we were held, r suppose I was released at 11 o'cLock., half east eleven at night. We were held in - I mean, I witnessed a great deal ol' brutality in Fort George about which I did make abt of complaints and I was officiaily charged, the - . by I can't name the man, I'm not sure, he was a Lance Corporal, Liverpodi. Irish, Styles? No, his name was Lance Corporal Sot.rna,,F I don't know if you've traced him? We'll tell you about him when we've finished. Is that so? We11 Lance Corporal 5o&oiF, what happened was after a long period in which we'd been interviewed by the RUG Special Branch in which they felt that they had, they were bound to have picked up knoun IRA men, and. so they were sorting them out, and because when J was interviewed they said what's your name, and I said O'Keete, and he said, oh yeh, Gerry OQkeefe from Anderson's Town , I said Nc Terry O'Keefe - t-419427. I said, Ports George is. e quite and residential bourgoise - - SO he said have you always lived in Forts George? I said no. East Belfast. Bloomfield which is not the t'in from protestent East Belfast. So he said what's your name. I said Terrence, me. .1 haven't . got an Irish spelling tom)' second name. So he told me that we weren't speaking Irish in this place , I speak English, . ,.Micheel.. So he said what's your occupation, so I said Roman Catholic Priest. and Lecturer in Philosophy, .on the f orm So it became fairly clear' to the RUC that ## Fr noone, that, I don't think they'd picked anyone up, in that group, but obviously the . - movement were supposed tp get what they would have thought of us es activists. The pincer movement. Weli I mean they came up and around and around and mean some of the deaths in there were causzd by the soldiers driving in at the back of cur, round the sides of us , not sure how they came through, 003 I couldn't see, that's where Eddie Davey would have been. And the and people cQming straight through. fly memory is of., not on the spot, but my memory is the soldiers started to coirte round the_other side o the flats;. And eventually em I mean the charging was fairly crudely done in that soldiers were ordered by their officers .to take five people and charge them you know. With stone throwing. Eventually there was myseit_, eddie Macateir, and this younQ feller left. And I susoect that somebody had, sorne WC n'an, had identifisd us and seid that, look, for Sod's sake, don't charge them. Macatejr? Fetgus.. Sorry. So, eventually en officer . . came in and said who's taking those men? nd, better shift. .saying.. well, said to Sotsi F, ohargr thert. So Sowa F came over to me - and said, you were throwing 3tones weren't you? t said, t sai.d, M19 '428 I mean that was after a number of hours, you don' t say, too much. .so he kicked me in thegroin, nd said, you were throwing stenes. Started to kick me in the grotn. I seid don't do that. I don't throw stones.. Priests. And that Stopped him for a bit &ifld that seemed to_annoy him because he said you should be wearing your t'o collar, you know, you be here if you were wearing your collar. So he eventually charged me with stone throwing. ## Wouldn'T Were you forensically tsted? No no. t don't think anybody was forensically - well nobody I saw being processed during the 12 hours had any forensic tests, Maybe some people were taken away.. So once I was released at about 11 - 12 o'al.ock at night, so I went to my colleagues, who lived in Derry, i wasn't all that--badly bruised very badly, I had to go to the doctor the next day, so the medical evidence if you like got they - . ill treatment, which I used, then subsequently. Em the RUC were extraordinarily scared. I wa talking to a sergeant who I think, I becan to get picked Iut as a Priest, so people.. .they were very worried about: t-he.t had happened. You know they said- these guys will go and we have to police the place-. As the news kept filtering back with more deaths, ab that seage may be five or six people thought dead, people saying more, numbers were building up, the names were beginning to get through. So the pollee certainly were very Is this when you were asked to stay in....? Yeh, >'eh. And eventually the poljce,once . . .out. cos the police actually stopped the soldiers hitting guys, you know, so police actuafly intervened, saying excuse me, he's in Police custody, don't Lay a hand on him so Well the police were beginning to get I think very, tension, they were certainly thinking of the future end al&o I think doing their duty. ## Were The Paras Still Running C'N Eleat Ion Or Was Lt. There was another unit rny. i think they were nGreen berets, certainly weren't pares. They were sharing the guard duties more or less there. They would have been the people who had us sort at lined up against the barbed wire and soçt at holding the barbed wire. Cold, delincuents,Tdeliberate. So but the paras would come in and out end just. - abusive of people and go out again. Sofl at haggle abuse. - So that's ## Whet Of Prisoners And Cf Othr Soldiers? No of prisoners. I mean, just particularly young 12-13 year olds sort cf battered them about cas they were very cheeky you know the young hard wee Derry brought up for the last five years to . ## And This Is All In What A very large room, we were the room was, in some pieces it had barbed wire I think, we were supposed to çrp anta these, hit on the knuckles if you weren't holding the barbed wire.. ## Mold Betwee& The Barbs Supposed to hold it on The tarbs . Certain-tmount cf I assume that was both casuel 5rutaiity and also... psycho trgica1, I don' t believe People do thr& act those things up casually - .1 think they got designed arid ttucceeds in scaring the - rrakirtg them much more susceptibla to talk- .-nd of course from 2-3 a' clock we didn't have t.- drInk or eat except one cup of tee right through tc' 12 w jt'. a jong per tod of cold ond. eventually rount in ±Laters V' 19 430 one of the,.. if it was a green jacket, one of the green jackets had sorne beaters brought in but er sort of tilted overhead, these tilted overhead, these young fellers standing very close just used it as e . That's all in my statement SO I suppose what Widgery took o-f that, ignored all that stuff about brutality, quite rightly I think it wasn't e matter for the original enquiry what happened after the shootings, about how we were held. Lt you .;carefully, yo will find my evidence is used to disprove what was I think a sort of Sn account, which certainly that a - . - photographer end others, namely that as crowds scrambled over a barricade and were running back to safety up tç- F. - - Corner, they were being shot down. That was . - that was nne story about Bloody Sunday, which you know gained a certain creedance in Gerry at the time. You really don't think that happened? No, I mean that wasn't what t I said what I saw, under oath, and what I sew was people, certainly unarmed people being shot in the front. Unarmed in the sense that some C'I them shot when they had the 3tcnes, in the act of throwing stones and others were shot when on the ground. And others were shot when running away. But Wjdgery used çy evidence to discount the story of f leeig crowds being shot down from the back of the barricade. Sut I think it you. . .declined to take my evidence that there t.as oertainly no guns in of those people theretLthat I saw killed none of those were armed. Neither with guns, there were no guns being picked up from the ground, as I saw certainly that who got there killed and I was certainly very clear in my own mind that they were unarmed. r think that comes out, my evidence doesn't come out as strongly in Widgery on that point as on the.. if you read my status as Dean of the faculty was used by Wtdgery to say there is On! QOod witness nere, who clearly discounts thi.I don't know it you remember that? fr119 431 No, there' s yourself and two scottish policemen, who were up here. Senior policemen who were observIng, ar!d you were used to knock down a chap called Chaplin, and Grmoldi.. Grimoldi, yeh. It's interesting. The mediceI reports all of these boys - were shot in the front, I th nk was the key thing; But the forensic did actually 1mn three of them that they were either, had been In contact 4th firearms or had been within twelve yards.. There were two stories c'ne. wS they were cent eineted by the soldiers. I ha'e no $ea lt that is f orensioliy possible. mean all I will say i -don't know if Dennts Bradley will say the same, I certninly fron that point there, looking at young fallar White H-tat was killed first and others, I did not see anybody with anything remotely resembling a weapon. Nor in the crowd that were there and later broke did I see anybody carrying anything that looked like e weapon, Not, I mean, that's all I can say, and Cari we just take you through n a bit more. . As you were about here, when you turned and sew the pigs. I suppose as I sew the pigs I began to quicken my pace. Because, it had actually become quite serious, and also it became clear that the trouble was building up, At that time trouble built up gradually. Did you see three and fcur lorries and pig? Now my memory now, 1 ''1 i'ieed to cc' back to my statement. My memory is certainly two if not three dris'inc in tst and Swinging and people s-iltjng out nd could easily. get into their knee, The first shot i heard was hit. 1119' 432 So you were actually looking back and watching. Veh - And where did they go? - = ## Well one, ¡ny memory is that one, it you're looking down the Street, mv memory is one stopped around here and there was one moved out, I'm not sure whether it didn't move out of my. - .and I thought one around here. So my memory around three, not in a line, but in e slightl" irregular formation. One went to p. - Row, crie went into the rrdddle of the court yard entrance and one. Yeh, I wouldn't have bee-n -t,je to see that My memory is certainly tuo and perhaps three round there, soldiers down on one knee And as the soldiers came out they definitely went straight down? That, certainly, es I ay I thought the lirst shot which hít_ the White, assumed ç;es a rubber bullet. I wouldn't never having been . - I woultin' t know the difference between e rubber bullet anti. .1 gather that the sounds are different, so I 'd assumed thè feller dbeen hit n the 1:oach with a rubber bullet. And that detinitel» fr-nm thc'-3oldjers. -- Soldiers, kneeling ori kra -lawn there. - At the end of each Ad t this point -you yare just behind the barricade? - p119' 433 I was just on that corner there really, there was Qennis, myself, twenty, thjrty ji wasn't a zort of gathered group at that stage. There were p-t-ople who; it was clear there was trouble brewing and indeed you heard the pics revving end so so people were sort of beginning to moVe you know and get out cit the 48Y. A group of youths there throwing stones No nail bombs. Nc guns. I didn;'t see any nail bombs nor did I hear any explosions which might have been other t.han shots. And i-to one could have got over to there to have picked a gun up or neil bomb, because Dennis Br-edley end _I looked over and certainly two people dying or maybe death The older man wns Prom this first fusi Lage '(eh, Dennis arid I thought our f tnt thought ''zs to go out and give last rights and it became oler, that, that's when I looked round you know 1nd again you just get a little picture of soldiers, kneel ing pc's1t4on tiring. So you're on this corner) 1:r,e pigs arrive, yc', tf-ten you'r vision goes to the two as they ea down. No, one teller went down and was carried over by a couple of tellers but Dennis and T went to him it was clear, clear he was death Saping. - the stomach. You don't know who that: s? No, idea. It must. h-as bean at that aree the F rst ta have been shot. A young boy? r119 434 Looked about 17, lB. 16 White teeshirt, and probably jeans. He was carried just in behind the wall. We realid he was deed we looked across end we s.aw another tellar down and an older man who had I think must have run across on. .and he was actually down behind this little group crí thinc, halt lying on the young fallar- and iwth one hand in the airs end there were certainly bullets striking him - that was the moment at which you couldn't actually go out. Dennis Bredly gave absolution from a distance. He said a prayer towards him. One here.... An older man. The father There was one teller- crawling or dragging himself along the bottom of the flats there. LooMed as if t'e was trying to get into the entrence. He was crawling away? yeh he would have been tryingto crawl intothe1,,I think it was a door... And anyone here? I didn't.., my attention 'es_acrr)ss iustthere and really then Dennis and I saw this some sort t a duty to... try to keep people from either running out that way or running away because it became clear thot this was a mior. verY dangerous - And that barricade, liter1ly beincj hit by a fusiltge Wo I mean again I think it ws you could hear 5hots. OiflQ in, it wasn't sort of repeated fjríng, but I, there as a crackle of firing, which gave tre impression of reLátively continuos tiring. So you were behind here, there's 20 or 30 peonle, eventually cairn but three break and you watch es they Ych, they were actual1y just -tell. I don't know who shot them I think they ntey have been shot by scLdiersoming around this way. Or coming through here, I don't know hou they were got and the soldiers may have corne in through there. . But they were certainly they went down TNey broke from our.. - - group you know Runninc. .satety thêre, presumably. ALI three? As ter as t know. At that: %ta' you uddsnlv hegen to se' soldiers appearing i-ounct here nd here. After that you didnT t see anything. - So you didn' t whet happened to The bodies? No. But again memory fleeting memo'-- isthat they didn't seem to he carrying anything They had been in your group anywey. They certainly hadn't been. - . f irinc or anything? No in tact the only person who ducked at was me I could certainly, on oath I did say, I I mean there was -certainly noone firing from that corner or from what was described as the barricade. Nobody. Your evidence was bestc1y distoun.ted then bus& these three if not tour were not labelled .... one was ).abelled and three probable. And then the acidiers arrived and you were really tearful that it anybody moved the wrong way. .? At that stage they símply cerne round, guns on port and they ## Pwere, the sergeant shriekin you know against th wall, so at that stage you really didn' t see anything vert' much very coherent after that beoeuse they would sort of rush you down to the gable well, Hands on your heads....? - Yet-c, vein.. And like swearing and ebus&. Kicking anci. - .-did. you. .was it a mixture Of tear and adrenrialjr? I presume that soldiers çt, fl it' s the S'nday Times people who talked to me. aft e.r;«!%rda, they said that. whet" s hIs name who ordered the paras irv' -- - - Er, Ford Wilt orth For-d WtEts. Ford was in behind the barricade? He was jumping up and down shaking, get them paras t them.. Sunday Times down there were very frightened. - Were they there? No no they were in hhind thc srrny, barrtoadc- in-îde at least I think that's what they to)d tne. So they sai everybody Was very hopped up YOU know, I preurn; the o3d5ers move thto a sort of killing mood, thet you sort of got oet beyond Something. I presume I presume that the intelligence suQgested that the anti-internment march would be- used as a cover for- an attack on the soldiers, end the pLan was to have e pincer movement, centre and two sides which would net sorne locel IRA Leaders, hence the speed with which they had to get around and the sort of I think shooting of anyone between 15 end 40 who might be ## K .assumed to be, I think they shot anybody who looketi about that age assumed they were an activist and they assumed that in the crowd trapped then there wouLd he IRA activists and that's my assumption and hence the Links the attempts to sort out who was who in the crowing realization that I think at Fort George that they the RUC special branch they hadn't got anybody. My memory was that nobody was the IRA were not supposed to be there.. And cetecorically, you didn't see anyone No no With gun rIfle anything... Just the pares - My evidence covers from Rosville Street frozn-Rosvijle flats, down there that's all and certsinly at no stage did t see anybody with cuns but whether. I had no idea wht was happening inside the. - But to sort of press you on. -is it actual vision or impression that the soldiers got out and immediateLy got down? I Saw, t mean, snap shots, mnemories I saw a pig swingingin, a soldier out and on to one knee, now I think he was the one that actually killed the first cuy- I-le 's onto one knee and t i red straifl away. Nc' messing about. M19438 Impression of the boy dropPiflV. Then crowds - across. Gos there were maybe e dozen young tellers who t suspect were treatinQ firing stones and so on. All in e split second. In out, banc That's my vision, Yeti. Bad day Yes, yes.. - in terms ot how long it actually took-. seemed to he minutesl've no certainly it doesn't seam to That's very herd.. I mean i idee how long , it probably rae Looking back after twenty odd years to he moro then five or six minutes, you know. We ctaj' had time onlY to check that that young feller was dying and Dennis gave him last rights.. Look across and se those three people, dying, Dennis who wasn't e collar at the time, that's why he wasn't held, he was released fr-cm that crowd and He shouted the last rights Yes across. - across to the father end son? And the minute, t'in not but . .and we then tried sure, maybe another person lying down. to calm people, three fellers broke seemed very short period before we saw five or six, I don't know, I woùldn't e time frame on that VOLE !cnoL'. and shot, after that it troops around so maybe be able to sort cf get The majority of the crowd actually before the fl.rst shot was fired dispersed. The majority of the crowd up here. In tact we'd I remember we was comjn up. - we were actusl.ìy walked up towerds. - - coz Colin was speaking, from Lorry ## Brockley the Lecture that said I a bit end that's Brockley wondered - And er. I certainly Sew where the, we walked beck when. - - .The vasti there were, maybe e hundred people, sort O?, not a big crowd, ctjspers-scf ao1-oss -: Along this patch? Yes, maybe from there to there. That's one's memory. People sort of, relatively, nobody. - st'flt Of And you were there pur-cl; a&Ya ivil rihts..2 Yes, Protestant? No no I was Cathoji Priest et. - Right, you said you came from. Prom East Belfast. No in fact my father was the editor cf the national Irish NeWs. Oled ten years ago.. Lived ali, our lives in East Belfast. How far is that , established? This is the Sunday Times. 3his is the Widgery tribuna]-, which according to everybody isut of.-. it's just got a bit more Yes, it steJ-,ds out.. I think there iz en official IRA man who admits that he was so overwhelmed that he ran to his flat and got a revolver and tired to.. That was always a rumour coing round that there may have been one , after. PThere seems to be no evidence at all here apart from this forensic which is very, well. ;cou know ## Well Forensic Evidence S.. There is forensic impLlcetíc'ns for sort_Cf i"-ree o hose and three of the five but s I say we haven't really o And flo'J of course the whole atatus of forensic evidence. Certainly nobody in my group was swabbed. But I would have had assumed that fairly early on the WC had established that they hadn't got anybody. There may have been, there were on occasions people taken out cf that goom and some of them came back and said, well7 I don't know what happened to them. - t think a large number of them weri charged. And eher. as I say I wroté to the commanding otticet- saying wh :'.'er happened during the shooting which Fiad obviously happ'med for a quite different sort of thjn, I wanted to protest st the behaviour of the troops. Sc, eventually twç' military r-c'lioe arrived to take n statementS. And tocked at photographs, because abt of the photographs of soldiers now. I was particularly anxious{ not indeed Lance Corporei ¶nottttF , I felt that there Was a certain grim Irony in it. No doubt he was, presumably a Liverpool catholic, Irish you know, in a certain, I had got into trouble with my own bishop for not wearing my collars so the fact that Lance Corporal &cntn.F doing the seme as my own bishop, kicking rna for not wearing collar, a certain grim humour to it, t never btemed him toc much. But there was e haired, very haIred Daretrooper was a sadIst I reafly dj went to neil hirn. 449 441 He sDent long periods, you know, idly torturing people, hitting, stamping on teat> .ust to pass time; so really did want bring a point, I don't know, Almost haIred. He wasn't a Geordie? Didn't appear to have e you know sort cf outstanding. - Did you feel, while in custody banana republic ttme? I was frightened,. The fact of being both an academic and priest gives you a certain er , I'c have been much more frightened if I'd been seventeen year- old b... YOU tçnow. I mean even yourstand5nc, di'n't protect you,.. Certainly didn't protect me from heng charged with stone throwing which I thought ironic. But at that stage, F'ergus Macateir was charged also and this wee twelve yer old and the Lieutenant simply came in and he was clearly wanting everybody charged, and also he said who's got those people, StI.DIEF - take those. You saw them throwing stones? Fairly You saw the. Yes, fairly crude - theu' tr of the thin J protested to the Commanding otfl ocr- tht!t there was no ettemnt 1to charge people With real crimes. Just simply setting up What happened to... Just ignor,. They were all dropped, nd m' mnc-ry is that i got e letter from whoever investigated, J t was n army investjg0 Ott ice, or sornthing, I can' t. remember /419e 442 They wrote saying that in light of the fact that no charges were being pressed against soldiers or civil3ens they felt it better not to continue on the investigation. I didn't bother. How did you cope with it. Did you put it out your mind? F ern, used to wake up with grim nightmares at the b'ginning. It still stai-cs me to tL-dnk of how close one gett, to , certainly that's, I've never seen øeole killed that way before or since, and ein my one bic worry at the time was we could -- actually have restrained those three f eì,lars from running away and they were to be kiilecL you know. Now it seerus after all it's happened a long while ego. I've disliked the way in which they, celebrations the commenorat ions have been hijacked so I've never gone to any of the Bloody Sunday commemorations. I'm profoundjy anti- ntvtolence_ I've never wished to associate myself with any of the subsequent commemorations. I suppose one dey I shall take my children to see the monument. You've never been back there- No I meen I teach regularly in and. .nc. T wlkd through - .side, never made a pilgr4 mage it you like* Do your family and children know? Oh yes. Well thanks very much, I think of the three g; now, 18 then) Married woman, never talked about it, not even told teenage children she was there. Very ordinary, personable, believable witness. She knew many of the young men who were shot, lived near many of them. Will only speak to what she saw, and sticks very concisely to that. WITNESS TO ¡ GUmour :shot in back/side? MeGuigan: shot in back of head, and leg? WIDGERY WLTPZESS STORY Young, about to get married, and Civil Rights meant future suddenLy looked brighter for us all. Never been political before or since. .Standizig on corner of Rossville flats and William Street as aritty came in on foot and then with pigs through LittLe James Street. Ran towards barricade along Rossv-ille Street, side nearest the tower blocks. Running either side of her were two young mart. One on right (Gitmour) staggered, and said "I'm hit". They were almost level with the end of the block.of flats, and he suddenly seemed to take on new life and ran faster and over the barricade, with G. close behind. She has the impression there was at least one body on barricades at this point that she noticed but really only concerned with herself. Over the barricade, Gitmour staggered and went down in the open near the phone box, at the back of Rosaville flats block 1. She cradled his head in her arms, asked for his Mum, they said a prayer together and he died. Wounded in right hand stde, shot in back and caine out left hand side front as she remembers. (Is Tilts RIGHT? WITHOUT FORETSIC NOTES I could not press her.) She was then dragged in to sheLter, as bullets were flying around her. About a dozen people huddled in there as shooting went on. They heard Paddy Doherty shouting and moaning "I don't want to die alone" over and over again. ticGuigan against everyone's advice went out to see to Paddy, waving a white cloth or hankie. He was turned towards the soldiers who were firing from Glenfada park area, and was hit in the Leg, which spuñ him round, then in the back of the head. Geraldine then went into hysterics and had to be held from rushing out herse 1.1. SIGI1IFICANCE - Geraldine's story that these were the first shots, and before the pigs arrived, is backed up by klee Nash, O'Keef e, Wallach, means the whole courtyard scenario, followed a minute or so later. - Widgery thus got first shots wrong, and begs the question of what were they shooting at, provided the forensic evidence is doubtful. ENDS MIA' 444 ## Derry Intervtews Bernadette Devlin Was A 'No Violace- Underta1Ung Wifr Tue Ira Saw Tre Crowd Besieging Civil Itai'S Oecanisat Dbtlanding Weapons Tflflt The Shootings 1] BLOODY SUNDAY WAS EFFECTIVE IN CLEARING TRE STREETS OF PROTEST MARCHERS -PEOPLE WERE VERY SCARED OP PROTESTING PUBLICLY AFrER TRAT. ## 21 She Says There B No Doubt That There Was Firing From The Derry Walls. THERE WAS AN UNDERTAN DING BETWEEN TRIE PRO VOS ANO TRE CIVIL RIGHTS PEOPLE THAT THERE WOULD BE NO GUNS IN TRE CITY THAT DAY - NOT lusT NO GUNS ON TRE MARCH. THE REASON FOR THIS WAS TO Avow RAIDS ON HOMES IN DERRY IN WiHCH THE POLICE/ARMY FOUND WEAPONS AND THEN USED THEM AS PROPOG ANDA TOOLS TO JU5T Dfl i?flVÇENT AJO) THE BAN ON MARCRFS. IF THERE HAD BEEN A SHOT FIRED FROM A GUNMAN IN TRE CROWD - THAT PERSON WOULD HAVE BEEN TRAMPLED BY TRE CROWD BECAUSETHE MAIN ATMOSPHERE AT THAT TIME WAS OPPOSED TO ARMED STRUGGLE. iN FACt WHEN THE PWJ4c3 BEGAN - (WHO RAD NEGOTIATED THE 'NO ARMS' AGREEMENT WTTH THE PROVOS . WASSURROUNDED BY AN ANGRY CROWD, INCLKIJD ING 60 YEAR OLD WOMEN. WHO WERE DEMAND ING TO 1010w W1S THE WEAPONS WERE SÒ THEY COULD DEFEND THEMSELVES. W TRE OFFICIAL IRA MAN HAD PUtEO FIRST, EVERYONE IN DERRY WOULD HAVE KNOWN ABOUT IT BY THAT EVENING AND RE WOULD EITHER HAVE BEEN LYNCHED OR AT BEST WOULD HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO LIVE Ri THE CitY AGAIN. 5) SHE SAYS SHE CAN FORGIVE THE pARAS THEMSELVES BECAUSETHEY ARE ONLY DOING WHAT THEY HAVE BEEN TRAINED FOR -THAT IF'S NOT THE PARS'S FAULT IF SOCIETY HAS DECIDED TO END HIM BERE. WHAT SHE CANNOT FORGIVE IS THE STATE FOR BEHAVING AS W ITS A PARA BY SENDING THEM BERE. ## Maroarer P Ij Hutton 1] ONLY MARGAREt WAS ON TRE MARCH - AND SHE WAS TOO FAR FROM THE ACTION (UP AT DERRY CORNER) TO SEE ANYTHING OF CONSEQUENC. THE ONLY POINT OF INTEREST IS HER CONVICFION THAT THERE WAS FIRING FROM THE DERRY WALLS - BUT SHE DIDN'T SEE ANYONE FIRING FROM THE WALLS, SHE JUST HEARD BULLETS WHIZZING OVER HER AND IS SURE THEY CAME FROM THE WALLS. SHE ALSO TALKS ABOUT THE TERRIBLE FEAR SHE FELT THAT DAY. 21 MARAGREI' SAYS THE EVENT TRANSFORMED HER LUt - SHE WENT ON THE MARCH AGED 15 BECAUSE IT WAS A DAY OUT - SHE DIDN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT POLITICS AND EVEN HAD TO ASK BER MOTHER WHAT THEY WERE MARCHING FOR. AFTER BLOODY SUNDAY SHE (AND THE FRIENDS WHO WENT ON THE MARCH WIT HER) TRIED TO JOIN THE IRA. 1 PUT MY NAME DOWN BECAUSE PEOPLE WERE MURDERED, SHE SAYS. rr LEFt ME VERY VERY Bit t Ht, NO JUSTICE WAS DONE. I ROPE PEOPLE NEVER FORGET BLOODY SUNDAY. IF TRIS COULD HAPPEN ONCE - lT COULD EASILY HAPPEN AGAIN. SUE DIDN'T JOIN UP IN THE END. 3111ER MOTHER, ELLEN, WAS LOOKING OUT OF HER FWI'R FLOOR WINDOW IN THE ROSSVILLE FLATS AT TRE TIME. 511E SAW DALY WAflING ALONG WITH HIS HANDKERCHIEF RAISED IN THE AIR THROUGH HEIL FRONT WINDOW. TREN SHE MOVED TO THE WINDOW OVERLOOKING THE COURTYARD AND SAW A GROUP 0F PEOPLE RUN INTO A HOUSE AT THE TOP OF CHAMBER LLAr; STREET - FOLLOWED BY SOME SOLDIERS ON FOOT WHO BROKE DOWN THE FRONT POOR AND PULLED THEM ALL 0Lit. THEY GAVE ONE MAN A SERiOUS BEATING. ELLEN SHOUTED AT TRE SOLDIERS TO LEAVE HIM ALONE. SHE DIDN'TSEE THE GUNMAN EDGING ALONG THE GABLE END WALL - NOR DII) SHE SEE ANY SOLDIERS SHOOTING THOUGH SHE MIGHT HAVE SEEN DUDDY LYING ON THE GROUND. THEN SHE STOPPED LOOKING. ## Derry Inter'Siews Pr Raymond Acclean HE SPOEE TO PEOPLE etosEto THE ¡RA A) WAS SO amin THERE WASWT GOING TO BE TROUBLE BE LET HIS MEDICAL KIT fl THE CAZ. 1) HE WAS IN CHARGE OF A MEDICAL POST SET 113F IN WESTLAND TERRACE IN A SWEET SHOP WHENEVER THERE WAS A DEMONSTRATION. BUT 11E DIDN;T PO SO AT BLOODY SUNDAY BECAUSE HE WAS CERTAIN THERE WASN'T GOING TO BE ANY ThOU ELE. 11E HAD GONE - Willi TWO OR 'flTh Qflj - TO SPEAK TO PEOPLE CLOSE To THE PROVISIONAL ItA WHO .4$SU1.ED Thfl4 THAT THERE WASN'T GOING TO BE ANY TROUBLE THATDAY. HE SAYS HE RAD NO DOUBT TRAT THESE PEOPLE WERE SPEAKING AUTHORITATIVELY BECAUSE AT THAT TIME HERE WERE CONTACTS ESTABLISHED BETWEEN THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT AND THE nOV05. RE WAS SO CERTAIN THERE WAS NOT 006ING TO BE ANY TROUELE THAT HE LEFT HIS MEDICAL GEAR IN 0X5 CAR. 21 HE SAYS THE OFFICIAL IRA WEREN'T A SIGNIFICANT FORCE AT THAT TIME. l RETREATED DONAGHY AND JOHNSON AFTER THEY WERE SHOT. 4] HE ALSO TRIED TO HELP WILLIAM MCKINNEY BEFORE HE DIED. S] HE DIDN'T GIVE EVIDENCE AT W1DGERY. ## Eusen Dorent - P4Doy Doïwitiw'S W 11 PADDY WAS A PLUMBER'S MATE AND A STEWARt) ON ThE MARCH. HE'D ONLY BEEN IN TRE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT POR A SHORT WHILE. 21 THERE WAS A VERY HAPPY ATMOSPHERE ON THE MARCH - THEY WERE SINGING "WE SHALL OVERCOMr ETC. HER HUSBAND LEFT HER AT THE CREGGAN AND SHP. DIDN'T SEE HIM ALIVE AGAIN. SHE WENT UP ROSSViLLE STREET TOWARDS DERRY CORNER - AND DID NOT SEE THE RIOT IN WILLIAM STREET. 31 WHEN TRE FIRING FItST STARTED SHE THOUGHT TV WAS COMING FROM THE DERRY WALLS - ALTHOUGH SHE CANNOT BE SURE OF Tills. SHE DIDN T STOP TO THINK ABOUT fi'. INSTEAD SHE CLIMBED OVER A 6 FEEl' HIGH BARRICADE BY FREE DERRY CORNER (A CONSIDERABLE FEAT FOR SOMEONE WHO TRENWEIGHED 16 STONE). SHE CROUCHED DOWN BEH iN!) TRE BARRICADE AND TEEN BECAME MORE CERTAIN THAT THE FIRING WAS COMING FROM TORE DERRY WALLS. 43 SHE'D BEEN MABJUE!) II YEARS AND HAD SIX CHILDREN WHEN PADDY DIED. 51 SHE SAYS SHE SURVIVED THE DEATH OF HER HUSBAND AND THE FAMILY BREADWINNER WITH ¡tER WIDOWS PENSION AND THROUGH TIlE GE4EROSffY 0f HER FRIENDS AND OTHER WELL-WISHERS. 63 POLITICALLY SHESAYS THEYE WEREN 'T REALLY VERY ACTIVE AT THAT TIME. SHEUSEDTO COLLECT AND RAISE MONEY FOR INTERNEES AND THEIR FAiM' ¡rs. SHE WAS HOEEVER VERY FRUSTRATED BY THE DISCRIMINATION CATHOLICS EXPERiENCED AT WORK AND ELSEWHERE.. 73 SHE SAYS PADDY WAS NOT POLITICALLY ACTIVE APART FROM, ¡US WORK WITH THECIVIL RIGIfl'SMOVEMENTS, HE WAS A VERY "STAY-AT-HOME" SORT OF PERSON AND DEFIN1TELYV WAS NOT INVOLVED IN ANY BOMBING OR SHOOTING ON TRAT DAY Oft AT A.NY OTHER TIME. 0E HARDLY EVER WENT OUT, SHE SAYS, AND COULD NOT HAVE BEEN A MEMBER OF THE IRA. 83 Fif N LOOKED UPON THE IRA AS THEIR PROTECTORS BECAUSE OF THE PROTESTANT/RUC ATTACKS ON CATHOLIC HOMES. BLOODY SUNDAY DID NOT ALTER HER OPINIONS ON THIS SCORE. SHE ALSO SUPPORTS THE ARMED STRUGGLE AGAINST BRITISH RULE - SAYING THAT VIOLENCE IS TRE ONLYLANGUAGE BRITAIN HAS EVER UNDERSTOOD IN ITS LONG HISTORY OF COLONIAL CONQUESTS. THAT TRIS LS THE ONLY WAY THEY HAVE EVER LEFT COUNTRIES THEY BAVE INVADED. ## Berry Interviews Daisy Mules MIDDLE CLASS LANDED GEJCRY CONVERT TO SINN FEØ'l MEMBER - VERY ARTICULATK GOOD ON THE LFLtCT BLOODY SUNDAY HAD ON HER. - SAW TWO PEOPLE SHOT (Mn NASH WAS ONE) ON BAJtRIC ADE Bff SHE WAS NOT VERY NEAR THEM. ## Address: 1] SHE WAS IN THE CROWD AT FREE DEflY COR}iER WHEN TIlE SHOOrD4O BEGAJ4 SHE RUSHED FOR COVER AND ENDED UP LYING DOWN BEHIND A WALL NEXT TO THE ABBEY PARK BLOCK THAT FRONTS ROSSVILLE STREEt SHE SAYS SHE WAS PETRIFIED - THAT THERE WERE BURSTS OF SHOOTING IN WHICH IT SOUNDED AS IF VARiOUS SOLDIERS WERE FIRING - THEN GAPS IN WHICH THERE'D BE ONE Oit TWO ISOLATED SHOTS FOLLOWED BY MORE SIMULTANEOUS SHOOTING. 21 SHE SAW ONE MAN WHO WAS BY THE BARRICADE BUT RUNNINGTOWARDS GLENFADA FALL. SHE CAN;T BE SURE WHETHER HE WAS HOLDING ANYTHING AT THE TIME. TREN SHE SAW ANOTHER MAN CRAWLING (?) TOWARDS HIM WiTH IllS HANDS OUTSTRETCHED WHO WAS ALSO SHOT. SHE SAYS HE OBVIOUSLY WASN'T MOWING ANYTHING AND EQUALLY OBVIOUSLY WAS TRYING TO HELP TEE FIRST MAN. SHE'S NOT SURE WHERE THEY WERE Erl'. 3] SHE WAS PROM A VERY UPPER MIDDLE-CLASS BACKGROUND - WENT TO A CONVENT SCHOOL- RODE HORSES ETC AND AT THE TIME OF BLOODY SUNDAY WAS A STUDENT IN DUBLIN. SHE WASN'T PARTICULARLY POLiTICALLY MINDED THEN - BUT RAI) COME ON THE MARCH BECAUSE SOME FRIENDS OF HERS WHO WERE MUCH MORE POLITICALLY AWARE, WERE GOING. SHE SAYS THAT BLOODY SUNDAY DESTROYED HER DEVOUT RELIGIOUS VIEWS AND POLITICISED HER TO A GREAT EXTENT. fi' WAS HER FIRST TASTE OF THE REAL WORLD OUTSIDE HER SHELTERED EXISTENCE.SHE JOINED A MARXIST GROUP AT UNIVERSrrY - LATER BECAME A SWP MEMBER - THEN JOINED TIlE LABOUR PAJtfl AND FINALLY IN 1982 JOINED SINN FEIN. ## Eugene Roddy - John Youncys Best Friend RODDY IS INVOLVED AND DOESN'TSUPPORT VIOLENT SOUIflONSTOTHE CONFIJCr. IN 1972 NB DID THROW STONES AT TEE SOLDIH1S - BUT SO DID EVERYONE USE OF TEAT AGE LUE WAS 16] Il HE WENT ON THE MARCH WITH SOHN - BUT THEY GOT SEPARATED AFTER TRE RiOTING BEGAN AT TRE WILLIAM STREET BARRa. EUGENE MADE HIS WAY HOME AND DLDN'T SEE ANY OF THE SHOOTING. 2] HE SAYS THEY BOTH WENT TO THE MARCH IN THEIR SUNDAY BEST - THREE PIECE SUITS - AND THAT JOHN JUST WASN T THE TYPE TO BE INVOLVED IN A PARAMilITARY GROUP. HE WAS CRAZY ABOUT MUSIC. AND USED TO BE A FIRM FOLLOWER OF EUGENE'S BAND. HE WAS INTERESTED IN WOMEN BUT HE HAD NO PRONOUNCED POLITICAL VIEWS AT ALL - OTHER THAN TO SUPPORT THE CIVIL IUGHTSD MOVEMENT. THEY RARELY TALKED POLITICS AT ALL. JOHN WAS A REGUlAR CHURCH 00ER (EUGENE WAS?F - HE FOUND MASS BORING) AND WAS ALSO TEETOTAL BECAUSE HE DIDN'T LU DRINKING. 31 AS FAR AS EUGENE KNOWS JOHN HAD NEVER HANDLED A GUN. HE JUST WASN'T THE TYPE OP GUY TO HAVE FIRED A GUN. AND ANYWAY HE WAS WEARING A THREE PW'F SUIF AND JUST COULDN'T }{KJE HIDDEN ONE QN TI DAY' 4] AT THE TIME EUGENE DESCRIBES HIS POLITICAL VIEWS AS NAIVE - HE SAYS lUS LIFE REVOLVED AROUND MUSIC (HE PLAYS DRUMS AND SINGS). RE HAS NO CONNECTIONS WITH THE IRA AND SAYS HE HAS NO CONVICTIONS FOR VIOLENCE-RELATED CRIMES. ## Derry Interviews Maura Dufvy - John Younoes Sister I) SHE DIDN"I' WITNESS HIS DEATR.THEY WERE BOTH ON ThE MARCH BUT LEFT HOME SEPARATELY & MAtiRA GOT SCARED WHEN SHE HEARD GUN FIRE AND RETURNED ROME. 21 SHE SAYS RE HAD NO PRONOUNCED POLITICAL VIEWS AND WAS NOT A MEMBER OF A POLrUCAL PARTY. HE WAS ALSO NOT FROM A FAMILY WITH STRONG POLITICAL OPINIONS. JOHN WAS WORKING FOR A MEN'S OLJTFTfl'ERS CALLED JOHN TEMPLE AT TITE TIME OF EUS DEATH, iLE HAD BEEN A SHOP ASSISTANTTHERE SINCE RE WAS IS (RE WAS 17 WREN HE WAS 5H01). TifE pIRJ4 WA$ vay PLEASED WITH HIS PROGRESS - TRE FAMILY HAS LEITERS SAYING THEY THOUGHT RE HAD A IflT OF POTENTIAL. THEY WERE EVEN ABOUT TOSEND HUY! TO A BRANCH 114 ENGLAND TO TR.MN AS AN ASSISTENT MANAGER. RE LOVED CLOTHES AND HAD SEVEN SUITS.HE WAS ALSO TRE ROADY FOR A LOCAL BAND. 3) MAURA SAYS JOHN DZ) GO RIOTING - BUT THEN TEAT WAS TEE NORM FOR YOUNG MEN AT THAT TIME. YOU WEREN7 ONE OF TUE LADS UNLESS YOU DID. BUT SHE'S CONVINCED HE WASN'T INVOLVED IN ANY PABAMILrVARY ACT1VITIES.HE WAS TOO INTERESTED IN HIS WORK AND HIS MUSIC SHE SAYS. 41 11E WAS RIGHT HANDED (THE FORENSIC DEPOSITS WERE ON 1(15 LEFT HAND- BUT IF HE'D FIRED A RIFLE HE COULD HAVE SUCH DEPOSITS ON HIS LEFT HAND) AND MAtiRA SAYS THAT WHEN SHE SAW HIM IN HIS COFFIN FUS WRISTS LOOKED AS IF THEY HAI) BEEN TIED TOG EntER (THERE WERE ROPE MARKS ON THEM -POSSIBLY INDICATING TRAT SOLDIERS HAD TOUCHED HIS HANDS AND THEREFORE TRANSFERRED LEAD DEPOSITSONTO IllS HAND.) ## Danny Gulespts - SUtONG ACCENT, IN BIS Fu' lu's. NOT A VERY CLEAR THINKER - RATHER SLOW. ## Shot In Heal) P4 Giflwada: $Ligrtly 110Lire) 8E D1Dnt Give Evidence At Widgery Saw Rubber Bullet Spiked Wiib Glass I) HE WAS UNEMPLOYED - WEN!' ON MARCHES TO SUPPORT CIVIL RIGHTS, NOT A MEMBER OF A POLITICAL PARTY. SAYS HE WOULD THEN HAVE SYMPATHISED WITH TUE IRA BUT HAS NO CONNECTIONS WITH THEM AND NETTHER DOES HIS FAMILY. RE ALSO SAYS HE'S GOT NO RECORD. 2) WENT ON THE MARCH WITH A FRIEND. THEY WENT UPTO THE WILLIAM STREET BARRICADEAND WREN RUBBER BULLETS WERE FIRED HE WENT BACK TO WILLIAM STREET'S JUNCTION wrni ROSSVILLE STREET.THERE HE SAW A MAN WHOSE MOUTH HAD BEEN CUT OPEN BY A RUBBER BULLET. A FRiEND OF THE MAN GAVE RIM THE BULLET AND HE SAW if HAD BEEN DELIBERATELY CUT OPEN AND A BlADE OP GLASS INSERTED INTO THE CITI', THATS WHAT CUT THE MA.WS MOUTH. HE'S QUITECERTAIN TRE BUllET HAI) BEEN DELIBERATELY DOCTORED AND HE SAYS 'flits IS NOT THE ONLY WAY HE'S SEEN RUBBER BULLETS BASTARDISED: HE'S SEEN ONES THAT HAVE BEEN CUT AND HOLLOWED (t) TO PERMIT THE INSERTION OF A BATTERY TO MAKE THEM HEAVIER. 3] THEN THEY WENT UP ROSS VILLE STREET AND WATCHED FROM A BUILDING DIRECTLY OPPOSITE THE GABI. END OFTRE GLENFADA PLATS BLOCK NEAREST TO ROSSVILE STREET. 11E SAW THE PICS ROAR UP THE STREET a ONTO EDEN PLACE. HE DID NOT SEE ANY GUNFIRE DIRECTED AT TRE PIGS - BITT WATCHED AS THE SOLDIER GOT OUT OF THE VEHICLES AND TOOK UP POSITIONS WITH THEIR RIFLES RAISED IN THE AIR. HUMOVED AWAY BEFORE TEE FIRING BEGAN. 4) HIS MATE PADDY (WHO BAD A BAD CHEST & HEART) DECIDED TO LEAVE TRE SCENE AND GO HOME. DANNY MOVED PASt GLENFADA PARK INTO ABBEY PARK. TEERE RE MET THREE OIlIER MEN WHO WERE ALL THROWING STONES AT THE SOLDIERS. OUT OF CURIOSITY THEY RAN BACK DOWN TO GLEN FADAPARK TO SEE WHAT WAS HAPPENING. THEY RAN IN . THE THREE MEN HE WAS WITH WERE READY TO THROW STONES - HE WAS WT RUNNING - WREN A SOLDIER AT THE OTHER END OF THE GLENPADA COURTYARD 50(1V HIM.HE SAYS TUE BULLET HIT A WALL AND THEN HIT HIM IN THE HEAD. HE WAS KNOCICED DOWN UNCONSCIOUS AND WREN RE AWOKE ANOTHER MAN WAS LYING ACROSS HIM. 14E WAS VERY GIDDY AND DISORIENTED- BUT ISED HIMSELF AND STOOD AGAINST A WALL FOR SUPPORT. RE NOTICED TWO PEOPLE WHO RAD BEEN SOOT: ONE LYING TO TRE RIG WI' OF WHERE 11E HAD BEEN ON TITE GROUND - THE OTHER SOME DISTANCE AWAY WHO WAS TRYING TO GET UP. THEN TWO MEN CAME TO HIM AND HELPED RIM HOME. THERE WAS A LOT OF BLOOD ON HIM BUT HE WASN'T BADLY INJURED AND DIDN7 GO TO HOSPITAL. ## Derry Interviews Eamonn Mccp.N$ .0E Waswt Wrruin Clear Eyesbot Of Tue Shooting Talks Of Tue Large Number Op Armed Men In The Bogside In 'Frase Days Saw A Number Of Flavos Desating Wuti Ufs. To Retajjath »Tat Tee Shootings I) RE SAYS TRAT BESIDES THE WOVOS Ai4D OFPICLAJS, THERE WAS ONE OTHER ARMED GROUP IN TRE BOGSIDE IN 1972 - SIERERA (FREE IRELAND) - BWrEAICAWAY GROUP FROM THE REPUBLICANS WHO RAD A FEW AMED MEN IN THE BOOSIDE. 2) IN 1971 THE OFnCiAj WERE AS ACTIVE Aß TRE PROVC)S - ALTHOUOHTHE PROVOS WERE ON TRE WAY UP THEM. 33 THERE USED TO BE LOTS OF ARMED MEN IN TRE 80051DB IN THOSE DAYS - THERE WAS EVEN A PERMANENT SANDBAGGED MACHINE GUN EMPLACEMENT NCF TO A PU (TITE SOGSIDE INN fl). HE DOESNTT KNOW IF THE WERE PRESENT ON THAT DAY (OFFICIALLY; THAT IS) BUT ET IS QUITE POSSIBLE THAT TEERE WERE ARMED PROVOS IN THE AREA WHO COULD HAVE DECIDED oN ThEa OWN TO FIRE AT TRE ARMY. ## Spitovos I h 4j AFTER THE SHOOTING, HE SAW A NUMBER. OF ARMED PROVOS DEBATING WHETHEIt TO RETURN FIRE. THEY DECIDED NOT TO RECAUSE OP THE POTENTIAL PROPAGANDA VALUE TO THE REPU RUCAN CAUSE OF AN UNPROVOKED ATTACK ON THE NATIONALISTS BY THE ARMY. S). WAS THE LEADER OF TRE OFFICIALS AT THE TiME. ## O$Al Mcfeelx Saw Soldier Jump Out Op Pfl Good On Gfleral E&-F*Al1 B 0F Bloody Sunday I) 11E WAS FROM AN APOLITICAL EAMU.Y . HIS PARENTS WERE DEVOUT CATHOLICS & WERE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF LAW & ORDER. RE WAS Nor A MEMBER OF ANY POLITICAL PARTY THEN OR NOW BUT AFTER BLOODY SUNDAY RE BECAME ACTIVE IN TRADE UNION POLItiCS. HE WAS AN APPRENTICE ENGINEER/FITTER AT A FIRM CALLED DUPONT'S 21 HE WENT TO THE MARCI! Wrçg }i BROTRER DENNIS; HIS PARENTS; GERRY DONAGHY (WHO WAS KILLED) AND A FEW Oflt FRNDS. THEY ALL GOT SEPARATED ONCE TRE SHOOTING BEGAN. 330E WAS THROWING STONES AT TRE BARRICADE IN WILLIAM STREET AND THEN WENT UP CHAMBERLAIN STREET AND DOWN EDEN STREET. WHEN RE WAS IN PILOT ROW ON RIS WAY TOWARDS THE ROSSVILLE FLATS HE SAW A PIC) DRIVER UP AND STOP IN EDEN PLACE AND A SOLDIER JUMPED OIfl' WITH OTO ER SOLDIERS FROM THE BACK OF THE VEHICLE. HE SAYS HE'S CERJA1N THERE WERE NO SHOTS FIRED AT THE PIO AS it DROVE UP OR WHEN TE HAD STOPPED. WOULD HAVE BEEN MADNESS' 11E SAYS RECAUSE THERE WERE SO MANY PEOPLE DT THE AREA BETWEEN EDEN PLACE A14D THE ROSSVILLE FLATS COURTYUARD -THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN BOUND TO RAVE BEEN BR' BY ANY IRA GUNFIRE. RE DOESM7T}jflJjflHE SOLDIERS WERE FIRED ON BITT HE CANI' BE SURE. RE'S VERY GOOD ON GENERAL BLOODY SUNDAY P011415 - LIKE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO JOINED 111E IRA AFTERWARDS AND WHO MIGHT OTHERWISE NOT HAVE OPTED FOR VIOLENCE. MANY OP THOSE HE WAS WITH TRAT DAY JOINED THE IRA - INCLUDING RIS BROTHER DENNIS. HE LATER GOT A 20 YEAR JAB- SENTENCE FOR ATTEMPTED MURDER OF A POLICEMAN (t SERVED 15 OF THESE). PEOPLE REALISED HOW VICIOUS THE STATE APPARATUS COULD BE, RE EXPLADTS. ## Dents Bradley FORMER PRIEST - NOW FILM PRODUCER. (H63SS1çvQ)2676 L6.N0T A BRILLIANT TAL - CONVOLUFED&MUMBLED. HE GAVE EVIDENCE AT WIDGFRY TOLD BY A HIGH RANKING PROVO TRAT THERE WAS All OFFICIAL GUNMAN IN GLENFADA TOLD BY A FRIEND 'ItERE WAS ANOTHER IN BlOCK 30F ROSSVILLE FLATS fl HE WAS HANGING OUT TALKING WITH PEOPLE IN THE KEIfl WALK AREA. GUNMAN - AND TAREN HIS GUN AWAY. THIS WAS BEFORE THE MAIN SHOOTING STARTED. HE WAS ALSO TOLD BY A COLLEAGUE THAT THERE WAS ANOTHER OFFICIAL GUNMAN BEHIND BLOCKS OF THE ROSSVILLE PLATS. TRIS MAN MAY RAVE FIRED BUT HE DOESNTT KNOW. HE SAYS HIS FRIEND SAW TRE GUNMAN. HE SAYS HE WAS TOLD BY TWO HIGH RANKING PROVOS THAT THERE WAS A GUNMAN IN A FLAT (POSSIBLY GLENFADA) AND THAT THEY WERE GOING TO GEl' RB) OF HIM BECAUSE ri' WAS FAR TOO DANGEROUS TO SHOOT AT TIlER ARMY WITH THE NUMBER OF MARCHERS IN THE AREA. THE PROVOS SAID THEY THOUGHT TRE GUNMAN (AN OFFICIAL IRA MAN) WANTED TO GET A SHOT AT THE SOLDflS QN ROOF TOPS NEAR STEVENSONS BAKERY. AT THIS TiME THE PROVOS SAW THEMSELVES AS THE POLICEMEN OF THE AREA AND THERE WAS L1TItE LOVE LOST BETWEEN THEM AND THE OFFICIALS. BRADLEY SAYS THE WDVOS LATER SAID THEY HAD aGI' RID 0F TRE 2] WHEN TRE SHOOTING STARTED 11E WAS STANDING AT THE GABLE END OF THE GLENFADA PARK BLOCK NEAREST ROSSVIT i P STREET. HE HAD A VIEW OF THE BAiUUCADE THE NO I BLOCK OF ROSSV USE FLATS AND GLEN FADA PARK SEI.F. RE SAYS HE'S CERTAIN THAT TREREC WERE NO GUNMEN IN THE AREA RE WAS OBSERVING. EVEN IF HE HAD MISSED SOMEONE FIRING - THAT THERE WAS TOO MUCH PANIC AND FEAR FOR ANYONE TO RAVE RUN UP AND PICKED UP A GUN FROM ANY GUNMAN SHOT DEAD. RE SAYS HE WAS PETRIFIED - THAT THERE WAS A CONCENTRATED FUSILADE OF SHOTS AND HE SAW BULLETS HrrnNG THE PAVEMENT. HE WAS SURPRISED AND SHOCKED. HE THINKS ALI.. THOSE SHOT IN THE AREA OF THE BARRICADE AND THE FRONT OF NO. I BLOCK 'NERE SHOT IN A VERY SHORT SPACE OF T1ME. 31 HE DIDN'T SEE ANYONE SRO- EXCEPT A FLEETING GLANCE OF A MAN RUNNING IN GLENPADA PARK WHO THEN FELL OVER AS IF RE HAD BEEN SHOT. BUT IT WAS ONLY A FLEETING GLANCE. HE MINISTERED TO THIS MAN. HE SAW TWO MEN LYING ON THE BARRICADE IN ROSSVILLE STREET (WHICH HE SAYS WASN'T REALLY A BARRICADE - MORE A PILE OF RUBBLe - ONE WAS ELDERLY AND WAS SHOUTING «iAS IFS FATHER) AND THE ORfl?. (NASH) WAS LYING STILL). HE HAD TO BE RESTRAiNED WHEN RE TRIED TO GO AND MINISTER TO THEM. HE SAYS HE WAS PROBABLY GLAD THAT HE WAS HELD BACK BECAUSE IT WAS SO FRIGHT- ENING. RE ALSO SAW A MAN LYING ON THE GROUND BY THE FRONT OF BLOCK I. 4] A PARA CAME ROUND TO THE GABLE END WHERE HE AND SOME OTHERS WERE SHELTERING AND ORDERED THEM TO MARCH OFF DOWN TOWARDS KEILS WALK. THE PARAS ARRESTED SOME OF THESE PEROPLE BUT LET HIM GO. HE WENT BACK TO MINISTER TO THE WOUNDED. SI AFTER A FEW DAYS OF SILENCE AND GRIEF, THE EVE'flS AT BLOODY SUN DAY COMPLETELY UNDERMINEDTHE AUTHORITY OF THE CLERGY - PEOPLE FLOCKED TO THE PROVOS. ## Gerry Dotiry NO PHONE - CONTACF VIA STEPHANIE. HE'S VERY ARtICULATE & BELIEVABLE WmJESSEI) IbUCKEY BRIDGE SHOT WITH RIS BANDS Thi TRE AIR SAW A SOLDIER SHOOT FROM TRE WV SAW THE OFFICIAI. GUNMAN EDGING ALONG THE WALL SAW PATRICE MCDAID 5110F & mOURn) - ## Saw Mcguigan & Gamour'S Bodies Il HE WAS Il AHI) WENT TO TIlE MARCH WITH SOME FRIENDS INCLUDING HUGH GILMORE WHO WAS LATER SHOT. HEGOT SEPARATED FROM HIS MATES DURING THE PANIC. HE WAS THEN AND POSSIBLY STILL IS ACTIVE 114 THE IRA. HE DIDNT GIVE EVIDENCE AT WIDGERY. 21 RE BEGAN TRE MAACK NEAR Tuffi LORRY AT THE FRONT AND MADE HIS WAY DOWN TO THE WILLIAM STREET BARRIER AND JOINED IN THE STONING OF TITER ARMY. THEN HE WENT TO LITTLE JAMES STREET AND THREW STONES THERE AS WELL. THEN HE WENT UP TO -ICELLS WAUCANI) INTO COLUMECILLE COURT. 3] Im ENT DOWN CHAMBERLAIN ST AND LOOKED DOWN EDEN PLACE AND SAW PIGS GOING 1W ROSS VILLE STREET. HE ALSO SAW SOLDIERS COMING UP CHAMBERLAIN STREEt' BEHIND HIM. 41 THEN HE WENT TO THE BACK OF THE ROSSVILLE FLATS AND SAW MICKEY BRIDGE STANDING IN THE COURTYARD FACING PIG. HE WAS SHOUTING YOU BASTARDr WITH HIS HANDS RAISED WHEN HE WAS SHOT IN THE TOP OF HIS THIGH. HE HAD NOTHING IN HIS HANDS- NO BOMB AND NO GUN. BRIDGE WAS 20 OR 30 Ittr AWAY FROM HIM WHEN HE WAS SHOT. AS HE WATCHED HIM BEING CAflIED AWAY DUDDY MUST HAVE BEEN SHOT BECAUSE WHEN HE TURNED HIS ATtENTION BACK TO THE COURTYARD WHERE BRIDGE HAD BEEN HE SAW DUDDY LYING ON THE GROUND. HE ALSO SAW A SOLDIER SHOOT FROM THE HIP (Bn CERTAIN ABOUT THIS) - HE WOULD RAVE BEEN ON OF LOF. 51 THEN HE SAW A GUNMAN - A MAN WITH A REVOLVER - EDGING HIMSELF ALONG THE GABLE END WALL OF CHAMBERLAIN flRtEflOWa$S PIG. HE WAS SLIDING ALONG THE WALL AND PROBABLY DIDNTREALISE THAT THERE WERE A LOAD OP PAtAS JUST ROUND floe CORNER. HE SAW SOME OTHER PEOPLE GRAB HIM. GIVE HIM A SMACK IN THE MOUTH AND PULL HIM AWAY BEFORE HE FIRED. HE THINKS HE WAS AN OFFICIAL litA MAN (& SAYS CATEGORICALLY TRAT THE PROVOS WEREN'T THERE THAT DAY). HE WAS THEN STANDING WITH A LARGE GROUP BY A WALL TO THE LEFT OF THE GABLE END OF CHAMBERLAINE STREET. HE TALKS OF THE PANIC THEY ALL FELT THAT DAY - OF THE CONTINUOUS BARRAGE OF FIRE FROM THE PARAS - AND ROW THEY DECIDED TO WALIC WITH THEIR HANDS ON THEIR HEADS DOWN TOWARDS THE GAP BETWEEN BLOCKS TWO AND THREE. THEY GOT HALF WAY LIKE THAT TITEN PANIC TOOK OVER AND THEY ALL STARTED RUNNING - JUMPING OVER A LOW WALL TO GET TO THE GAP. HE RThIEMBERS SOMEONE SHOITI'ING AAFFERWARDS THAT SOMEONE lIAD GOT SHOT AS HE WAS COMING TOWARDS THE WALL 'ATIUCK MCDAID) THEN ROUND THE FRONT OF BLOCK TWO HE SAW A BODY LYING ON ITS BACK AND, NEARER IFS CORNER WITH ROSSVILLE ST, TWO MORE BODIES (HUGH GILMORE & BERNARD MCGUIGAN). GILMORE WAS His FRIEND. S HE ALSO SAW A SOLDIER LYING THE OTHER SIDE OP THE BARRICADE ON TOP OF A GARDEN WALL OF ONE OF THE GLENPADA FLAIrS. HE COULDN'T SE WHEI'HER THERE WERE ANY BODIES ON THE BARRICADE. ## 9) He Didn'T Hear Any Nail Bombs Go Off That Day 103 Slight Occupational Problems With This Man Ii Patrick Mcd Aid Suar In Back T Inbjp As Be Was Running Acrdss Tue Ross Ville Courtyard ¡J RE WAS A PLUMBER wira THE DERRY WATER BOARD AT THETIME. HES NOT A MEMBER OP A POLrnCAL PARTY BUT LS A SINN FEiN SUPPORTER AND ALSO SUPPORTS THE IRA STRUGGLE. 2] RE BEGAN THE MARCH IN WILLIAM STREET - STAÑDING BY ITS JUNCflON WITH CHAMBERLAIN STREET WiTH A COUPLE OF FRIENDS. HE WATCHED THE MARCHERSD COME UP TO THE BARRR IN WIllIAM STREET AED BEGIN TO THROW STONES. HE SAYS THERE WASNT'T A LOT 0F RIOTOUS BEHAVIOUR. OF CHAMBERLAIN ST. THEN HE LEFT AND WAS ABOUT TO RUN ACROSS THE COURTYARD WREN HE SAW DUDDY SHOT. HE DIDN'T SEETHE SOLDn WHO SHOT HIM - BUT HE DID SEE DUDDY FALL AND SAYS HE WASN'T ROWING ANYTHING IN HIS HANDS. i THEY STARTED WALKING UP CHAMBERLAIN ST TOWARDS FREE DERRY CORNER WHEN A CROWD 0F PEOPLE BECAN RUSHING PAST THEM FROM WILLIAM STREET SHOUTING THAT THE A.RMY WERE COMING IN. THEY WERE FORCED 1JPTO THE ROSSVILLE END OF CHAMBERLAIN ST. AS HE PASSED EDEN STREET HE SAW SOLDIERS RUNNING UP TOWARDS THE ROSSVILLE FLATS. AND AS RE CAME OUT INTO THE COURTYARD - HE SAW SOME PEOPLE CARRYING AN INI tiRED WOMAN. HE HELPED CARRY HER (Ir WAS MARGARET DEER?) INTO A HOUSE AT THE TOP 1 HE DIDN'T HANG AROUND. IN A PANiC HE JOINED SEVERAL OTHER PEOPLE HUDDLING AGAINST A WALL AT TRE JUNCTION OF CHQAMBERj,&Dq ST WITH TItE ROSSV lUI COURTYARD. HE STAYED THERE A WHILE AND HEARD SHOOTING COMING FROM THE AREA WHERE WE KNOW PIG HAD STOPPED. THERE WAS LITTLE SHELTER WHERE EJE WAS HUDDLED- SO ONE BY ONETHOSE writ RIM BEGAN TO RUN DOWN THE WALL TOWARDS THE GAP BETWEEN BLOCKS TWO AND THREE OF THE FLATS. fl'O OR THREE GUYS MADE ri' SAFELY BUT AS PATSY RAN HE WAS Sitar AS HE DIVED FOR COVER OVER A SMALL WALL. HE DIDN'T REALISE HE'D BEEN SHOT UNTil. ANOfla RUNNER LANDED ON TOP OF HIM AND TOLD HIM HE'D BEEN SHOT IN THE BACK. 51 HE CRAWLED INTO THE GRAP BETWEEN THE TWO BLOCKS OF FLATS AND THEN WAS LED TO A HOUSE BEHIND BLOCK 2 IN JOSEPH PLACE. AN AMBULANCE WAS CALLED AND RE WENT TO HOSPITAL WHERE RE WAS FOUND TO HAVE A WIDE BUT SUPERFICIAL. WOUND IN HiS BACK. IF HE HAD BEEN STANDING ERECT AT TEE TIME HE WOULD PROBABLY HAVE BEEN ni fl, AS ri' WAS THE BULLET DIDN'T ENTER HIS CHEST CAVITY AND INSTEADIUST SLICED THE SKIN AT TRE TOP OF HIS BACK OPEN. 6!THERE LS A STILL PICTURE OF HIM LYING ON THE FLOOR IN TRE HOUSE IN JOSEPH PLACE. ASK THE MEMORIAL COMMITTEE. ## ?Atrick Mckeever HE WILL THINK ABOlII DOING A FORMAL INTERVIEW - BUT taoirr REPUSE OUF OF PEAR OP BEING IDENTIFIED BY LOYALLnS SAW PARAS KN1NG IN FIRING POS mou IN EDEN SF SAW BERNARD MCGUIOAN SHOT & FIT -I fl) (BUT FACING "IU WAY TOP CYTUH'. WITNESSES) IJ AT THE TIME HE WAS A CHARGEHAND AT TRE BRITISH OXYGEN COMPANY. HE WAS NOT IN A POLiTICAL PARTY BEFORE BLOODY SUNDAY - DESCRIBING HIMSELF AS A SOCIALIST AT THE TIME, HE WAS ALSO POLITICALLY CLOSE TO SEIM FEIN (HE SUPFORTEb TItE IRA) BEFORE BLOODY SUNDAY. AI j FKWARDS HE JOINED SEIN FEIN. HE WAS AGED 45 TREN. NOW HE'S 65 BUT LOOKS TEN YEARS OLDER. HE'S GOT A VERY STRONG ACCENT AND WOULD BE HARD TO UNDERSTAND ON TV. 21 HE WAS WALKING UP CHAMBERLAIN STREET WREN HE HEARD SHOTS BEING FIRED. HE TRINES, FROM BEHIND HIM IN WILLIAM STREET. HE SAW PARAS KNEELING IN FIRING POSITION AS HE PASSED EDEN ST. TRE SHOTS MADE A CROWD OF PEOPLE RUN UP TOWARDS HIM IN A PANIC AND HE WAS FORCED TO RUN UP TO TRE TOP OF CHAM BERLAIN STREET AND SAYS 11E WAS PUS RED 01FF INTO THE ROSS VU I E COURTYARD WHERE HE HEARD MORE FIRING AND SAW MOPS PARAS IN A FIRING POSITION (BUT RE AGAIN DID NOT SEE ANY FIRE). HE HEARD NO SHOTS COMING FROM TRE ROSSVILLE FLATS. ## Derry Interviews Patrick Mcveever Cozt. RE HID BEHIND TRE CENTRE BLOCK 0F TRE FLATS - WHERE HE MET BERNARD MCGUIGAN AND SOME OTHER PEOPLE. AfltR A WHILE SOMEONE ELSE JOINED THEM AND SAID SOME PEOPLE HAD BEEN SHOT AT THE BARRICADE IN ROSSVP I STREET AND NEEDED HELP. MCOIJIGAN SAID HE WOUW GO AND HELP THEM. MCKEEVER TRIED TO DISSUADE }{Th4 BECAUSE TRE SHOOTING WAS S'IlLL GOING ON. BUT HE U4SIS L hO. MCKEEVER THEN GAVE IHM A PIECE OF WHITE SHEET (WHICH BE KEPT ON HIM SOAKED IN VINEGAR IN CASE HE GOT CAUGHT UP IN A RIOT. THE VINEGAR HELPS cOUNTERACr THE EFFECTS OP CS GAS)- MCGUIGAN WALKED 0171 BEHThJD THE CENTRE BLOCK OF TRE FLATS . AND WAS SHOT 111 THE BACK OFTUE READ. MCKEEVEIt SAYS RE WAS FACING TUE BARRICADE IN ROSSVU TP STREET, WITH RIS BACK TO THE PERRY WALLS WHICH MUST HAVE BEEN TRE LOCATION OF THE GUNMAN WHO U T wn HIM. QuEgrION:DOES'IBISTALI.YWEIT TUE PATBOI.DGLWS RnOItF OF THE ANGLE OF ENTRY OP THE BULLEL?7) 4J HE DID KNOW MCGU1GAN TO SPEAIC TO - 11E SAYS 11E KNEW HIS BROTHER WELL AND HAl) STOPPED TO SPEAK WITH BERN AR» IN TRE STREET A NUMBER OF TIMES . mir RE WASN'T CLOSE TO HIM. HE ALSO SAYS RE RAD NO WEAPON ON 111M WREN HE SAW 111M. ## Ben'Y & William Curr4 C'Reggan No P00Mb Hilt Daughteit Nervy Mccoui« Is On SAW DONAGNY & JOENSON SHOT & INJURED - DIDN'T GiVE EVIDENCE AT WIDGERY Il NOT POlITICALLY ACTIVE AT TITE TIME - BUT DID SUPPORT THE AIMS OF NiCHA AND WENT ON MANY MARCHES. ALSO SAY THEY SUPPORTED THE AlMS OF TUE IRA THEN. HE WAS UNEMPLOYED AT THE TIME - BErry HAD A PART TIME JOB IN A SHOP. 2] THEY SAW FIVE IS TO Il YEAR OLI» ON SOME wASTELAND THROWING STONES AT SOME SOLDIERS VIRO WERE posrrlONED ON ROOFtOPS NEAR THE PRESBYtERIAN CHURCH. FOUR OF THEM CROSSED TO TITE OTHER SIDE OF THE ROAD LEAVING ONE - BUBBLES DON ACHY - BENIND. RE FINIS RED TUROWING STONES.TURNE» AND WALKED ACROSS THE ROAD WHEN HE WAS SHOT IN THE RIGHT THIGH. HE WASWAL}UNG AWASY FROM TRE SOLDIERS ON THE ROOFtOPS AT THE TIME. 11E WAS SHOT BY A SOLDIER STANDING ZN A WINDOW OF A DERELICT BAKERY BUILDING. BEtTY SAW DON AC}V( FJ TO IHE GROUND AND THEN SITE STARTED SWEARING AT THE SOLDIER. WILLIAM SAW TRE SOLDIER FIRING AFTER 11115. HE SAYS THREE OR FOUR SHOTS WERE FIRED IN ALL - AND HE SAW TRE BULLETS LIFTING BTZS OF CONCRETE OFF TITE ROAD. JOHNSON WAS WALlUNG DOWN THE ROAD TOWARDS DONAGHY TO REI)' HIM WHEN HE WAS ALSO SHOT - BY TWO BULLEtS. ONE IN TITE SHOULDER AND ONE IN TITE LOWER LEG 31 DON ACHY WAS NOT THROWING NAiL BOMBS AND DID NOT RAVE A GUN. THEY DID NOT REAR ANY EXPLOSIONS EU'HER. BEtTY SAYS THE SOLDIERS HAD A CLEAR VIEW OF HIM AND It MUST RAVE BEEN OBVIOUS THAT 14E WAS ONLY THROWING STONES - AS RE WAS PiCKING THEM UP FROM THE WASTELAND. DON ACHY'S FOUR FRIENDS CARRIED 1111,4 UP ABBEY ST (I) ACCOMPANIED BY A PRIEST (FATTIER CARLIN). THEY FOLLOWED DON AGHY AND WAIVED UNTILTHEY HEAR]) THERE WEAS AN AMBULANCE ON rrs WAY. WHILE THEY WEItE WArrING TITE MAIN FIRING STARTED. TREY DIDN'T GIVE EVIDENCE AT WIDGERY BUT DU) GIVE A STATEMENT TO NICR.A AFTERWARDS. ## Mcuael Brady .RE'S ARTICULAIt LOST HIS JOB AS A PADCER-DECORATORS BEC4USEOP HIS INJURIES. ## Shot & Umjrw In Tossvn.Is C0Ijicvyard As He Was Asoijt To Throw A Stone Il WENT ON MARCH WTit FOUR OF HIS BROTHERS AND A CLOSE FRIEND. HEWAS A CIVIL RIG HI'S sUPPoRTER ONLY - HE WASNT INVOLVED POLITIC ALLY AT THE TIME. HE TALICS OF THE EXCELLENT CARNIVAL-LIKE ATMOSPHERE AT THE START 0F THE MARCH AND OF THE EFFORTS THE STEWARDS WERE MAKING TO KEEP TROUBLE OFF THE MARCH BY KICKING OUT ANYONE FOUND WIlli SliCKS ETC. ## Derry Interviews Afl Braey Colt HE WAS AJ(ONG THOSE STONING THE TROOPS AT THE Will TAM S'ERREr BABRmR. 'VF WAS LIKE A GAME OF COWBOYS AND INDIANS' Ht SAYS. BUT HE RAN OFF UP ROSSVILLE STREET TO TRE FLATS WHEN TRE ARMY BROUGHT OUTTHE WATPJt CANON, HE SAYS THERE WERE NO P105 IN EDEN PLAcE/PILOT Row WREN RE RAN PAST TRAT AREA, HE GOT 5H01' WHEN HE HEARD (OR SOMEONE TOLl) HIM ABOUT) TRE SHOOTING AND 8$ LOOKED INTO TIlE COURTYARD AND SAW HIS P4E,R NEIGHBOUR JOHN DUDDY LYING ON THE GROUND BEING HELPED BY TWO OR THREE PEOPLE. RE SAW RED, PICKED UP TWO STONES LYING NEAR TIlt SMALL WALL WHICH HE WAS STANDING BY AT TRE BACK OF BLOCK TWO, AND WAS ABOUT TO THROW THEM AT THE SOLDIERS WHEN HE WAS SHOT BRADLEY THINKS REMUST RAVE BEEN RIT BY TWO BULLETS: ONE BROKE RIS LEFT FOREARM, THE 0111ER GRAZED ifis STOMACH AND WENT THROUGH S RImEr ARM WHICH RAS NEVER COMPLETELY RECOVERED. DIDN'T NOTICE A GUNMAN EDONO 1115 WAY AWNO THE GARLE END OF ONE OP TifER CHAMBERLAIN STREET ROUSES. 14E DIDN'T REAR ANY snOanno TOWARDS TUE ARMY. l THE NEXT THING HE REMEMBERS ¡5 BEING ZN MR O'CONNELJ..S HOUSE IN HE DOESNI'ItEMEMBBR 110W RE GOT THERE. FROM THERE RE WAS EVENTUALLY TAREN TO HOSPrrAL. SRE ## Eeconfltj Ctei) Cotwersauon With Two Official Ira Mfl On 1416/91 A: 'YOU RAVE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT fi' WAS LIKE AT THE TIME. THE WHOLE OF TUIS DISTRICT WAS A NO GO AREA. THERE WERE CONTiNUAI. PATROLS OF ARMED MEN IN CARS- THEY DROVE AROUND AT WILL. IT WAS VERY CASUAL, SO CASUAj THEY WOULD OFTEN LEAVE THEW. CARS - WEAPONS IN THEM - WHILE THEY WENT IN SOMEONE'S HOUSE FOR A CUP OF TEA OB, DOWN TOTHE PUB FOR A DRINK. &TF WREN ET CAME TO MARCHES OR PROSECCIONS fi' WAS UNDERSTOOD THAT MILrTAIY ORGANISATIONS KEPT CLEAR. Q: WIlY WAS TRAT t A: 'LOOK - EVERYONE KNOWS EVERYONE ELSE HERE ANt) WHILE WE DID HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT 0F CONTROL, WE ALWAYS WORflD UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT W WE WENT TOO PAR WE'D BE 01FF, YOUR BROTHERS OR MOTHERS OR SISTERS WOULD BE INVOLVED IN MARCHES AND NOCHE WANTED TO CAUSE THEIR DEATRS.TRE RISK WAS 3tJsflOo DANOflOUS. SO YOUR NEfl DOOR NEIGHBOURS RAD A SORT OP VETO ON WHAT YOU DID BECAUSE, AFTER ALL, WE LIVED IN THE AREA AS WFLI ## Q: But You Did Often Use Riots As A Cover For Attacke? A: 'WE DID TARE ADVANTAGE QE Riais - BUT ITS NOT THE WAY THE BRiTISH MEDIA PORTRAY if. WE DIDWT ORCHESTRATE THEM, SURE, W SOME 1(105 WERE RiOTING IN AN AREA IN WEICH RE RAD ALREADY PLANNED AN ATTACK, WE MiGHT ASK THEM TO LEAVE. BUT WE DIDN'T SEI' UP RIOTS. Q: SO YOU MADE AN AGREfl.Wy WITH THE CIVIL RIGHTS ORGANISERS NOT TO USE THE MARCH AS AN ECCUSE TO LAUNCH AN ATTACK ON TUE ARMY t A: WELL, - IT WASN'T AJ4YFIIU4G LIKE AS FORMAL AS THAT. LOOKE 'EVERYBODY HERE KNEW EVERYBODY ELSE. THE CIVIL RIGHTS OROANISERS lC$E THE IRA PEOPLE AND THEY MET AND TAUCED AND INFORMALLY THEY WOULD HAVE UNDERSTOOD THAT THERE WAS GOING TO BE NO MILITARY ACTION THAT DAY- TRE CIVIL RIGHTS PEOPLE WANTED ri To BE A NON'POLTflCALMARCH AND TRE IRA SUPPORTED THAT WISH. SO WE TOLD ALL OUR. ARMED VEHICLE PATROLS TO STAY 017F OP THE BOGSIDE. THE CARS AND WEAPONS WERE LEFT IN THE CREGGAN. ANYWAY, n' WOULD HAVE BEEN ILLOGICAL TO RAVE RAD OUR CABS IN THE MIDDLE OP THE MARCH. ROW WOULD WE HAVE USED THEM 7 THEY WOULD RAVE BEEN STUCK IN THE MIDDLE OF TRE CROWD. IF TRE BRaS HAD HAD ANY INTELLIGENCE AT ALL THEY WOULD HAVE REALISED THAT TIlE IRA WOUlDN'T HAVE BEEN OUF THAT DAY, Q: HOW MANY WEAPONS Dli) YOU HAVE ThI THE Cfl'Y At THAT TIME? A: OR, NOT MORE THAN TWO DOZEN AT TRE MOST. Q: YOU SAY YOU ORDERED YOUR MEN TO LEAVE THEIR WEAPONS AT HOME BUT WHAT $QTJ Ø$GjJNMJ.14 WHO WAS FiLMED ATTREGARLE END OPTE CHAMBERLAIN STREET ROUSES? A: HE DEPINrItLy WASN'T AN OFFICIAL IRA MEMBER. ECONflUCTED CONVERSATION WITH TWO OFFICIAL IRA MEN 0H 14/6/91 coifl. Q: COULD n' RAVE BEEN A COWBOY MEMBa SOMEONE WITH p. GRIEVANCE OR SOMEONE WHO WANTED TO BE A HERO AND TAKE A POT SHOT AT TRE SOLDIERS? A: THERE IS ALWAYS TRAT POSSIBIlITY, IT cotiui HAVE BEEN ANYTHING i SUPPOSE - SOMEONE WHO JUST HAD A WEAPON Tht THEIR HOUSE SAW WHAT WAS HAPPENING, CLAPPED IT AND RAN OUT. Q: WHAT HAPPENED AFTER THE SHOOTING ENDED? WERE YOU TEMPTED TO RESPOND? A: WELl, THE MOST DAMEDIATE TASK OF EVERYONE THERE WAS TO CHECK TRAT YOUR OWN FAMILY WAS INTACT AND THAT EVERYONE YOU KNEW WAS ALRIGHT. ri WASN'T UNTIL LATER THAT NIGHT THAT WE TOOK STOCK OF THE SITUATION AND THOUGHT ABOLiT THE POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS AND TALKED ABOUT WHAT WE SHOULD DO. WE DIDN'T RESPOND THAT DAY AT ALL Q: WHAT ABC)I.Tr TRE CAR LOAD OF ARMFx MEN SEEN DRIVING INTO GLEN FADA PARK, GEtTING OUT, SHOOTING THEIR WEAONS AND DRIVING OFF AGAIN? WEREN'T OUT PEOPLE. DEFINiTELY NOT. ## Pa:Trey Faddy Walsh GOOD STORY - HA UP UEIJTEÌ'IANT FIRQJGOYEa-BEADS TALE BUT DENIES THERE WAS A BUGE CROWD THREATENING HIM. ALSO SAW PADDY DOHERTY FALL. NOTA VERY AZflCU- LATE MAN - STRONG ACCENT WO. NO CONVIerIONS (BUT FA1fl IN litA). SAW SOLDIER FIRE INTO BRICKWORK ABOVE 000aWAY IN CHAMBERLAIN ST SAW PADDY DOHERTY FALL ## Not At Widgsty 1] WAS A SUPPORTER OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT, NOT AN AcnVISt. HE WAS ABOUT 35 AT THE TIME AND SAYS 11E WAS TRYING TO CAfl4 THE YOUNGER E( )()Vfl4 (I'M NOT SURE THAT i EWEVE THE). HE WAS STAND- ING AT THE JUNCTION OF ROSSVffJE STR r_Er »«) WTfljU4 STREET WHEN SOMEONE SHOUTED THAT SOLDIERS WERE COMING IN TO THE BOGS IDE. EVERYONE p. 11E w up CILASMBERLAIN STREET AND INSTEAD OF CONTINUING WifR THE CROWD ON UPTO TIlE ROSSVILLE FLATS, HE STOOD IN TRE DOORWAY OF A BOOKIES SHOP SiTUATED ON THE CORNER OF EDEN STREET AND CHAMBERLAIN STREET. II HE SAYS TRAT THE USE OF CS Gè PLUS THE FRUSTRATION OF NOT BEING ABLE TO GO ONTO THE GUILD BALL RAD BY THEN PROVOKE!) 111M INTO THROWING STONES AT THE APJ4Y. RE SAW AN OLD LADY COME OUT OF A HOUSE IN CI4fl4BERLAD4 ST, (ON THE OTREIt SIDE OF THE ROAD TO EDEN ST.) HE WENT TO WARN HER TO GO BACK IN BECAUSE THERE WERE SOLDIERS IN THE BOGSIDE WHEN A BULLET RiT THE BRICKWORK ABOVE TRE FANLIGHT ABOVE HER DOORWAY. HE SAYS THERE WAS NO LARGE CROWD IN THE AREA AT THIS MOMENT - MOST PEOPLE HAD ALREADY GONE UP To THE COURTYARD. THE ONLY PEOPLE 11E REMEMBERS WHEN THIS SHOT WAS FIRED WERE TRE OLD WOMAJq AND A CAMERAMAN COMING DOWN HARVEY STREET. RE RAN BACK INTO THE DOORWAY AFTER THIS SHOT WAR FIRED - SAW TWO BOYS RUNNING ACROSS EDEN PLACE, SHOUTED OVER HERB, QUICIC' BUT TRE BOYS RAN ON OUT OP SIGHT. THEN RE HEARD ANOTRER SHOT (BITT HE DOESN'T IG'IOW WHO FIRED iT OR WHERE IT WENT). THEN HE SAW A SOLDIER ON ONE KNEE WITH A RIFLE LINED lip ON His SHOULDER READY TO SHOOT. n' WAß POINTED TOWARDS THE ROSS VILLE FLATS. HE DIDN'T SEE TRE SOLDIER SHOOT, XflE 'WAS ¡p,E!flY flfl l'RE S(flNfl SHOT HE'D HEARD SO irs A FAIR BEE THAT THIS SOlDIER RAD FIRE) ONE SHOT UP TOWARDS THE ROSSVILLE FLATS- POSS1RLE rl' WAS FIRING AT MARAGRET Dar?) 3J INSTEAD PADDY WALSH THREW A BRICK AT THE SOLDIER AND RAN OFF UP CHAMBERLAIN STREET. ACROSS THE COURTYARD AND HEADED STRAIGHT FOR TIlE CENTRE BLOCK. HE SAYS HE HEARD SR DOTING AS HE RAN ACROSS, GOT THROUGH THE GAP BETWEEN BLOCKS ONE AND TWO AND WENT ROUND TO THE FRONT OP THE CENTRE BLOACK BY JOSEPH PLACE. HE HEARD FEET RUNNING BEHIND RIM SOMEONE SHOUTED 'GET DOWN - THEY'RE SHOOTING' AN!) AS HE HiTTRE DECK HESAW SOMEONE PALL. Ti WAS PADDY DOREWTY. lIE HADN'T SEEN HIM SHOT - ONLY GLIMPSE!) THE END OF HIS FALL TO THE GROUND. HE CRAWLED OUT TO HELP HIM BUT SAW THAT HE WAS DEAD. HE SAYS HE'S CERTAIN THERE WAS NOTHING IN RIS HANDS AS HE FELL HE ALSO DIDN'T HAVE ANY WEAPONS/BOMBS ON 111M BECAUSE RE LOOKED IN HIS POCKETS. (WHEN I ASKED HIM wEt' - AT FIRST 0E SAID HE WAS LOOF3NG TO SEE IF HE HAI) A (JUN. WHEN I ASKED HIM WHAT BE MEANT HE SUGUThY CHANCE) THIS AND SAW HE TROUGET HE MIGHT BE ARMED. THEN HE SAID HE WAS LOORDiG POR HIS ROSARY READS ANDFOUND NOTHEJO BUT MONEY. ALL OF WRICR MA ME A LYTTLE SUSPICIOUS! flxnczjt,*jn.j.y GIVEN His FATHER'S WA t&cmtowm. SEE 6) AFrER THAT HE SAW A COUPLE OP FIRST All) PEOPLE ArqI) POINTED THEM IN DOHERTY'S DIRECTION. 4J WALSH TEEN WALKED TOWARDS TITE GABLE END 0F BLOCK ONE - THE SHOOTING HAD ENDED - ON THE WAY HE SAW BARNEY MCGmGA.N LYING NEAR THE GAP BETWEEN BLOCKS ONEAND TWO. HE'D ALREADY BEEN COVERED UP BY AN AMBULANCEMAN 11E CAN'T REMEMBER CLEARLY WHAT HE DID NEfl. RE TALKS VAGUELY OP HELPING TO CARRY PADDY DOHERTY AT SOME POINT -AND OF GOING INTO A HOUSE TO WASH HIMSELF. 5] RE DIDN'T SUPPORT THE IRA BEFORE BLOODY SUNDAY- HE SAYS THE IRA WERE A LAUGH IN THE TOWN THEN BUT AFTERWARDS 'IF I RAD BEEN YOUNG ENOLJGRI WOULD HAVE IOINEDTHE PROVOS. I WAS VERY Bu ihM. TEERE WEREN'T EVEN ANY APOLOGIES FOR WHAT THEY DiD. EVERYONE itisr TOOK TRE ARMY'S SLOE.' 6J HE SAYS THE ONLY CONVICTION RE'S oar 15 FOR BEING DRUNK BUT RIS FATHER WAS IN THE IRA MANY YEARS AGO. 711 HE WASNI' AT THE WIDGERY TRIBUNAL. ## Rtm00Re Wflwessed The Shooting 0F Michaa Bridge, Bernard Mcguigan SAW THE BODIES 0F PADDY D0fl & 11116E GILMOUR. ## Check Whether Re Was At Widgery Is Nor 1] WENT ON THE MARCH WiTH A COUPLE OF FRIENDS. HE WAS 39 THEN AND A PROCESS MECHANIC WITH DUPONT. HE DIDN'T GO AS EAR AS WILLIAM STREET - HE GOT TO THE WILLIAM STREET BAKERY AND TURNED OFF TOWARDS THE KOSSVU.LE FLATS. HE GOT TO THE COURTYARD AND SAW TWO pids COMING FROM LITTLE JAMES STREET UP ROSSVILLE STREET. PEOPLE WERE RUNNING IN FRONT OF THEM TOWARDS TIlE FLATS. RE ALSO SAW SOLDIERS ON FOCI' COMING UP CHAMBERLAIN STREET. HE DISTINCTLY REMEMBERS THE FUNNY HATS 'fIE PARAS BAD ON AND WHAT lIE CALLS THEIR FUNNY TAILED COATS (7) 2J HE HEARD RUBBER B BEING FIRED - AND THEN SAW A PARA POTh(TUJG A RIFLE AS IF ABOUT TO FIRE. THEN HE LOOKED AT MICHAEL BRIDGE WHO WAS WAVING HIS ARMS IN TEE AIR. BRIDGE DEFINITELY DU) NOT HAVE A GUN BUT HE CAN'T REMEMBER WHETHER HE WAS THROWING STONES AT THE TIME. THEN HE SAW BRIDGE SHOT IN TRE LEG 'I) TO CHECK WE THE SOLDIER WAS AND CONFIRM TRAT HE SAW BRIDGE FALL,) 3J MOORE RAN IN FEAR AND TRIED TO 6FF OUT BETWEEN THE GAP IN BLOCKS ONE AND TWO. BUT THERE WERE LOADS OF OTHER PEOPLE PANICING AND TRYING TO DO THE SAME, THERE WAS A LOT OF SHOOTING THEN AND IN HE PANIC RE LOST HIS TWO FRIENDS (THEY'D RUN A DIFFERENT WAY). HE MADE Ti THROUGH THE GAP AND STOOD 617 OTHERS, HIDING BEHIND THE PHONE BOX FOR SHELTER. THE SHOOTING INTENSIFIED. THERE WERE LOTS OF PEOPLE LYING DOWN - INCLUDING A MAN (HUGH GILMOUR) WHO HAD BEEN SHOT. HE RAN OUI' TO LOOK AT HIM 'SAYS RE LOOKED A TERRIBLE COLOUR BUT THERE WAS A FiRST AID MAN wrni HIM So HE RAN BACK TO TIlE PHONE BOX. 4J ONE OF THOSE SHELTERING WITH RIM (BERNARD MCGUIGAN) RAN OUT FROM THE PRONE BOX. SOMEONE SHOUTED 'DONT GO' AND AS THEY DID SO MCOUIGAN WAS SHOT. MOORE SAW HIM FALL DOWN WITH HALF HIS FACE BLOWN AWAY. 'HE DEFINITELY HAD NO GUNS - NO STONES - NOTHING. HE WAS FRIGHTENED, JUST LIKE I WAS.' SAYS MOORE. MCGUIGAN WAS 511CM' AS RE WAS RUNNING TOWARDS JOSEPH PLACE - IEEE WAS FACING THE DERRY WALLS. MOORE SAYS HE WAS NOW TOO FRIGHTENED TO HELP RIM. HE JUST WATCHED RIM BLEED TO DEATH AND WAITED FOR THE SHOOTING TO STOP, AFTER TUE SHOOTING HAD DEED DOWN HE SAW PADDY DOHERTY LYING DEAD ON THE GROUND. THEN RE WENT ROME FEELING SICK AND Bfl. RE DIDN'T WITNESS ANY SHOOTINGS ON THE BARRICADE - NETRER DID HE SEE ANY BODIES BEING PICKED UP. ALTHOUGH HE DOES REMEMBER SEEING SOME INJURED BEING CARRIED. 'I COULDN'T FORGIVE THE PARAS THEN AND FOR A LONG TIME I COULDN'T EVEN LOOK AT A BRITISH SOLDIER. BUT NOW VM NOT Bit-z hit. TIME'S A GREAT HEALER.' HE SAYS ## Ernie Moore Cad. 7] RE VOTES SDLP NOW AND SAYS HE'S AGAINST VIOLENCE (AND WAS THEN AS WELL) AND WANTS A PEACEFUL REUNIFICATION OF IRELAND. AT THE TIME SUCH THOUGHTS WERE FAR FROM HIS MINDHIS MAIN CONCERN THEN WAS OBTAINiNG CIVIL RIGHTS AND FAIR PLAY FOrRE CATHOLIC COMMUNITY. IlE SAYS BLOODY SUNDAYDIDN7 TEMP HIM TO JOIN THE IRA. 'BUT IF I HAD BEEN YOUNGER AND UNMARRIED THEN I DON'T KNOW WHAT I MIGRI' RAVE DORt« SI RE SAYS RE'S car NO CRIMINAL RECORD. ## Charlie Morrison Civil Rights Acflvt Involved In The Orgaj4Ising 0F The March SAW SOLDIERS FIRING TOWARDS THE BARRICADE FROM GABLE END OF BLOCK 0NE ROSSVIILE FIATS. Ii THEY WERE GOOD DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISTS TOTALLY OPPOSED TO VIOLENCE. YES. THERE WERE SOME PEOPLE FROM THE REPUBLICAN CLUBS INVOLVED SliT THEY KNEW THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENt WAS A PEACEFUL ORG ANIS AT1ON DEDICATEDTO PEACEFULPItOTEST. AND IT WAS COMMON KNOWLEDGE THAT THE IRA HAD ACREED NOT TO USE TRE MARCH AS AN EXCUSE FOR VIOLENcE." 2I RE DIDN'T WItNESS MflTh ING OF GREAT CONSEQUENCE - HE DEFINITELY SAW SOLDIERS SHOOTING AS RE RAN TO GEl' THROUGH TRE GAY BETWEEN THE ROS SVILLE FIATS, ¡JE REMEM BERS SEEING TRE GUNS JERK UPWAWS AS TRE SOLDIERS FIRED. ONE SOLDIER WAS STANDING AT THE GABLE END OF BLOCK ONE AND WAS FIRING ON ONE KNEE TOWARDS THE BARRICADE RE ALSO SAW SOMEONE (11E DOESN'T KNOW WHO) FALL AS IP HE HAD BEEN SHOT BUT DOESN'T KNOW WHERE HE WAS HIT. RESAYS HE FELT "SHOCKED AND cutir AFTER THE SHOOTINGS ANDTHAT W HE HADKNOWN THAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN HE WOULD NEVER RAVE fliT PEOPLE ON TUE STREEtS THAT DAY. ## Frank Curtan AUTROt 'DEnY - COUNTDOWN TO DISASTER". SAYS Ntantha LAGAN Molt MACLflLAND KNEW PARAS WERE GOING IN. I] CURRAN SAYS RE'S A FRIEND OF LAGAN'S WHO RAS TOLD HIM THAT NEITHER HE (LACAN) NOR MACCLELLAND KNEW THE PARAS RAD BEEN ORDERED IN. HE ALSO SAYS THAT WILE ORI) DENIES GIVING THE ORDER TO SEND THEM IN (LI THIS RIGHT 1) WHICH LEAVE FORD AS TRE CULPRiT AS FORi) WAS IN TRE AREA AS AN OBSERVER. CURRAN IS A CONSPIRACY THEORY MAN AND THINKS TRE PARAS WERE BROUGHT IN DELIBERATELY TO KILL. "BLOODY SUNDAY WAS A CATALYST AND THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR SENDING 114 THE PARAS WERE ALSO RESPONSIBLE FOR HUNDREDS OF DEATHS OVER TRE NEXT FEW YEARS." SAYS CURRAN. ## Pr 780M As Mcc Ab HE SAW lfl BODIES IN TRE MORGUE & SAW SOLDIERS UNLßAD MORE BODIES FROM A HG. ## Dii) Not Give Evidence At Tre Widgs(Y Theunal I] HE WENT TO KELP THE WOUNDED. SAYS THE PARAS LOOKED VERY BELLIGERENT WREN HE SAW THEM 'LIKE GHoULS". HE TOOK A SLIGHTLY INJURED MAN BACK TO HIS SURGERY - GAVE HIM FIRST AID- AND THEN DROVE TO ALTNAGAVIN HOSPITAL. 2) HE SAW 7 DEAD MEN - SOME LYING ON THE FLOOR, SOME IN THE COOLER. RE SAW BARNEY MCGUIGAN WHO RE REMEMB ERS TO HAVE BEEN 111 AN AWFUL STATE. 3] A PIG WAS BROUGHT TO THE MORGUE AND HE SAW SOLDIERS UN WADING 6 MORE BODIES. RE SAYS THEY WERE ROWING THEM BY THE I-i AND ARMS BUT CANNOT REMEMBER WHETHER THEY WERE BEING HELD BY THEIR RANDS. ## ¡Orn O'Eane Witnessed Shooting 0F James Wray; Gerry Doflflr; Gerry Mcktnney Saw Soldiers Uffl]46 The Dead And Throwing 14 'Like Catfir Into Tue Pigs DID NOT APPEAR AT WIDGERY. I] HE WAS AGED 31 ThEN AND WENT 014 MARCH wrrn HIS BROTHER-IN-LAW GERRY MCICINNEY, FIE SAYS HE DIDNT REALISE THE MARCH WAS GOING TO BE REROUTED AND ENDED UP BY T}j WILUA}4 STREET BARRIER. HE SAYS HE WAS NOT TAKING PART IN WE RIOT AND DIDNT THROW STONES HE DIDN"r WANT to GEl' SOAKED BY THE WATER CANNON AND SO THE TWO 0F THEM IzFr.WEN-r UP BACK UP WILLIAM STREEF AND TURNED INTO COLUMBCLLE COURT çro AVOn) THE CROWD IN ROS SVILLE STREET AND GEl' TO FREE DERRY CORNER). 2 HE SAW A SOLDIER ON THE ROOF OF STEVENSON'S BAKERY AND AS FIE WALKED AWAY HE HEARD A SHOT - ABOUT TEN MINUTES BEFORE TIlE MAIN SHOOTING. HE DOESN'T IQ'JOW WHICH DIRECTION [F CAME FROM. BUT HE DIDN'T HEAR ANY EXPLOSIONS AT THAT 11MB. 31 HE WAUCED BACK ONTO ROSSVTT T P STREET FROM KEILS WALK - AT WHICH POINT THE SHOOTING STARTED. EVERYONE WAS RUNNING AWAY - SCATTERING AND THEY HEADED FOR GLENPADA PAI1K VIA THE BARRICADE IN ROSSVILLE STREET (BUT HE DON'T SEE ANYONE BEING SHOT ON THE BARRICADE BUT REMEMBERS SEEING SOME WHO HAD BEEN SHOT THERE BEING PULLED ROUND AWAY FROM TRE BARRICADE TOWARDS THE END OF THE GLENFADA BLOCK). THEY RAN PAST THE GABLE END OF THE GLENFADA PARK BLOCK NEAREST ROSSVILLE STREET. HE STOOD AT THE GABLE END FOR A WHILE. 1 WHILE STANDING AT THE GABLE END HE SAW SOLDIERS LIFTING THE DEAS INTO A PIG STANDING BY 'filE BARRICADE. BE SAYS THEY PICKED UP THE BODIES 'LUCE CATItE' AND THREW THEM INTO THE PIG - ROWING THEM BY THE LEGS, ARMS, HAIR OR HANDS). THE SOLDIERS DOING THIS WERE CARRYING RIFLES IN THEIR RANDS. HE CANT REMEMBER HOW MANY BODIES THEY THREW IN - THINKS IT WAS FOUR OR EWE. 5] TREN HE RAN FROM THE GABLE END fl'TTO CLANFADA PARK WITH BETWEEN IO AND 15 OTHERS. AS THEY RAN THROUGH THE COURTYARD THEY WERE 5H01' AT BY A SOLDIER IN THE FAR CORNER. HE WAS STANDING WITH A RIFLE TO HIS SHOULDER. HE SAYS HE DIDN'T SEE ANYONE THROWING STONES OR NAIL BOMBS OR CARRYING A WEAPON. 'THERE WASN'T ANYONETO THROW STONES AT,' HE SAYS. 'AND I COULDN'T IMAGINE TRItOWING STONES AT A SOLDIER IN THE CORNER POINTING A RIFLE At US'. HE SAW THE SOLDIER SHOOT - AND HE SAW ¡AMES WRAY FALL (HE WAS LOOKING BACK AS HE RAD JUST GOT BEHIND THE GABLE END OF THE BLOCK NEAREST THE BULLET HOLES IN GLANFADA PARK AND WAS OUT OF THE LINE OF FIRE). 6j BETWEEN SUC AND TEN PEOPLE WERE LEFT HUDDLING BEHIND THIS BUILDING. HE SAW WRAY REACH OUT HIS HAND FOR HELP - AND AS HE DOSO ANOTHER SHOT RANG OUT AND WRAY'S BODY JUMPED. fl' WAS MERCILESS'. HE SAYS. 'WE KNEW THEN HE HAD TO BE DEAD.' 71 GERRY DON AGHY THEN SUGGESTED THEY COULD GET OUT BY RUNNING ACROSS TO ABBEY PARK. HE TRIED TO DO THIS - AND AS HE RAN HE WAS SHOT IN THE LEFT HAND SIDE. HE SPUN ROUND LU A JUMPING JENNY, GRABBED HIMSELF IN TRE STOMACH AND FELL OVER.' HE HAD MarKING IN HIS HANDS AT ALL AND HFS PRzrrY CERTAIN HE HAD NOTHING IN HIS POCKETh Efl'HER. ('I WOULDN'T BAVE EVEN THOUGRTTO LOOK TO SEE IP HE RAD ANYTHING IN HIS POCKETS EVEN IF HE HAD, HOW WAS Z TO KNOW WHAT THEY WEItE W HE DID HAVE THEM ? ASKS O'KANE. 83 SHORTLY AFTER THIS RIS BROTHER-IN-LAW GERRY MCICINNEY WALKED CAUTIOUSLY OUTTOWARDS ABBEY PARK. HE DECIDED TO MOVE BECAUSE THEY WERE PRESENTiNG AN OPEN TARGET WHERE THEY WERE AND WERE WORRIED ABOUT OTHER. SOLDIERS COMING NEAR THEM. HE SAYS PANIC AND PEAR MADE RIM MOVE. HE WANTED GERRY 70 WAlT. GERRY SAID HE RAD TO GET OUF OF THERE. AS HE WALKED SLOWLY ACROSS THE opts AREA., JOHN BEGAN TO FOLLOW HIM AT WHICH POINT GERRY SAW THE SOLDIER STILL BY THE BULLET HOLES- RAISED HIS HANDS IN THE AIR. SHOUTED DON'T SHOOT. DON'T SHOOT.' AND WAS SHOT THROUGH THE LEFT SIDE. GERRY WAS STAN DINO ON SOME STEPS A LITTLE ABOVE THE SOLDIER. JOHN FROZE. HIS BROTHER-IN-LAW FELL ON HIS BACK. BLESSED HIMSELF AND SAID 'JESUS. ¡ESUr AND JOINED HIS HANDSTOGEFHER IN PRAYER, HE THEN SAW TRE SOLDIER WHO WAS DOING TIlE SHOOTING- STANDING NEAR THE BULLET HOLES IN GLENFADA PARK. THEY WERE DETERMINED TO GO IN AND KILL. THAT WAS CERTAIN FROM THE VICIOUSNESS AND COLD-BLOODEDNESS OF THEIR APPROACH. PEOPLE WERE SHOT IN THE BACK? HE SAYS. AFTER THAT JOHN MANAGED TO GET INTO A HOUSE BY CLIMBING IN A BEDROOM WINDOW AND HE STAYED THERE UNTIl. THE SHOOTING STOPPED. SOMEONE (MRS RUDD OR HUDD) LATER TOLD HIM TRAT A SOLDIER STANDING BEHIND HIM AT THE OTHER END OP THE BLOCK WAS ABOUT TO SHOOT HIM AT ONE POINT BUT RAD HIS GUN PULLED DOWN BY AN OFFICER. ## John Otane Coul 93 BLOODY SUNDAY'HA]) A tRRIBLE EFFECr ON HIM. 13E SAYS HE WENT CT THE MORGUE TO flND RIS BRanlER- IN-LAW AND FOUND TRE POLICE THERE SNIGGERING TRERE WERE LOTS OF BODIES ON THE FLOOR COVERED IN BLOOD-SPATTERED SWEETS, I'LL NEVER FORGET THAT SCENE.' 103 HE SAYS THE ONLY RECORD lIE'S GOT iSA MOTORING OFFENCE AND LIERAS NOTHING TO DC) WITH THE IRA OR WrrH SINN FEIN. ## Netlmccaffezty SAW TWO PROVO GUNMEN NEAR FREE DEPRY CORNER BEFORE SHOOTING STARTED. SAW 3 AMES WRAY SHOT & ONE UIML&( 1Jt4NA)JØ) PERSON SHOT. SAW A SOLDIER PIRE AT THE FEET OF A REI) CROSS WOMAN. ## Says Paddy Doherty Was In The Ira. Il WENT ON MARCH WITH TWO PRIEN DS.THEY WERE WALKING ON DERRY WALLS EARLIER ON THAT DAY, PASSING SOME SOLDIERS WHEN ONE OP THEM SAmt Er'S A NICE DAY FOR A LULLING? ## 0 21 BEFORE THE MEETING STARTED AT FREE DERRY CORNER - SHE WENT RfIt THE COURTYARD 0E A COMPLEX OF FLAT NEXT TO FDC AND OPPOSrT THE BOGS IDE INtl. SHE SAW TWO TEENAGERS WITH RWLES AND WENT OVER TO THEM WITH A FEW OTHER PEOPLE. 513E TOLD flIÑt TO GET RID OF THEM OR SHE'D CALL MARTIN MCOUINNESS. SHE DID IN FAa SPEAK TO HIM AFTER THIS AND SAYS HE WAS FURIOUS. WHEN SUE RETURNED A LItTLE LATER TRETWO MEN RAD GONE. 33 sHE THEN MADE HER WAY tACK DOWN PQSSVUSE STREET TO filE BARRICADE AND SAT ON A WALL NEXT XO GLENFADA PARK (NEAR TRE BARRICADE) JUST BEFORE BERN ADElTE SPOKE UP A FREE DERRY CORNER. AS SHE STARTED SPEAKING 511E SAW TRE SOLDIERS COMING INTO THE BOOSIDE IN PIGS AND ON FOOT. . SHE HEARD SOUNDS THAT SHETHOUGUT WERE RUBBER BULLETS BEING FIRED- AND TH EN SAW FOUR GUYS ON THE BARRICADE FAIL DOWN. ALL POUR WERE STANDING AT THE BARRICADE WATH -CHINO THE SOLDIERS - THEY WERE NOT THROWING STONES NOR DID THEY RAVE ANY WEAPONS ON THEM. 43 SHE GOT SCARED - AND flN (WITH HER FRIENDS) UflO GLENFADA PARK AND POLJNDEDON A WOMAN'S FRONT DOOR IN THE BLOCK AT TIlE END OF WHICH TODAY ARE THE BULLET HOLES. AN ELDERLY WOMAN LEt THEM IN AND OPFERE) TO MIXE THEM TEA. THRJ TI3EY I{flRD RIPLE SHOTS. SHE LOOKED OUT OF TRE WINDOW AND SAW A MAil RUNNING UP TRE PATH TOW A,PJZ TIlE DOOR SHOrtING TO THEM TO OPEN THE DOOR. SHE SAW A SOLDIER IN TRE FAR CORNER OF GLENFADA PARK TAKE AIM AND FIRE AT TRE MAN (JAMES WRAY). WRAY CONTD4UEDTO ASK HER TO LET HIM IN - SHE COULDN'T BECAUSE SHE WAS TOO SCARED. A SECOND MAN WAS SHOT BEHIND WPAY. MCCAFFERTY 'THEN PAY ON TIlE FLOOR AND REMEMBERS HEARING THE BATHROOM WINDOW SHATTERING 1t3 A SHOT WAS FIRE) AT THE HOUSE. SHE AlSO SAW A RED CROSS WOMAN RUNNING TO HELP WRAY BEING MADE TO DANCV AS A SOLDIER FIRED AT HER Itti. 53 SHE SAYS IT WAS GENERAL KNOWLEDGE THEN THAT PADDY DOHERTY WAS IN THE IRA. 63 BEFORE BLOODY SUNDAY SHE WAS OPPOS ED TO THE IRA. AFTERWARDS BECAME CONVINCED SHE NEEDED THEIR PROTECTION. i THOUGHT: JESUS CHRIST - ALL THE CUCHES ABOUT BRITISH HISTORY ARE TRUE - THEY'LL SHOOT YOU TO HAVE THEIR WAY- ri' HAD A PROFOUND EFFECT ON MY POLITICS. NOW I SUPPORT THE ARMED STRUGGLE? 71 SHE RAS ONLY GOT A CIVIL RIGHTS CONVICTION FOR OCCUPYING A BUILDING BUT pijflY ANNOUNCED HER SUPPORT FOR filE IRA AND WAS PROMPTLY BANNED BY RTE (ON TUE DAY OF TRE ENISKILLEN BOMBING) ## Huata Ni Dhombnajil & Patsy Murphy - 13 THEY BOTH HEARD NELL'S SOLDIER SAYING 'LOVELY DAY FOR A ICDLING' 23THEY BOTh CONFIRM NEWS GUNMEN STORY - BUT THEIR MEMORIES AREN'T AS GOOD AS NELL'S NUALA THINKS THEY WERE CARRYING REVOLVERS NOT RIFLES. BUT THEY AGREE THEY WERE BOTH YOUNG MEN. 31 PATSY SAYS SHE REMEMBERS PEOPLE IN THE CROWD SAYING THAT SOMEONE HAD OPENED UP ON THE SOLDIERS FIRST. ## Nuala Nl Dhomhn Ailla Pauy Murphy Cod. 1 NEITHER OP THEM REMEMBERS SEEING THE MEN ON THE BARRiCADE FALLING AS THEY WERE SHOT BUT THEY DO REMEMBER SEEING THEM LYING ON THE GROUND AFTERWARDS 53 NUALA Q) REMEMBERS SEEING A SOLDIER. FIID4G IN GLENFADA PARK - liE WASSTANDThIG 114 THE FAR CORNER (WHERE THE IRA CAR IS MARKED ON THE MAPS.) ## Tpx Marfln Convu4Ced Op No Vioiflcr Agreement Wifr Ira Convinced Trat Firing Was Coming From Derily Walls WAS FIRED ON AS HE PICKS) UP ItUURED JOSEPH MABON 11 WAS NICRAS PRO AND ONE 0F TRE MARCH COORDINATORS. 2] SAYS THERE IS NO DOUBT TRAT BOTH WINGS OF THE IRA HAI) AGREED TO KEEP OUT OF ThE MARCH - BECAUSE NICRA OFFICIALS (FRED BOND WAS ONE OF THEM) HAD S?OKEI4 TO IRA REPRESENTATIVES AND RECEIVED ASSURANCES THAT THEY WOULD KEEP out. HE SAYS THEY WERE DErERMINED TO AVOID ANY CONFRONTATION OF THIS NATURE - AND EVEN POSTED LOOKOUTS AHEAD ON TRE MARCH ROUTE TO WARN THEM (BY WALKIE TAUGE) IF THEY SAW ANY SNU'ERS SFIlINO UP SO TRAT TRE ORGANISERS COULD REROUTE THE MARCHERS AWAY FROM THAT AREA. RE IS CONVICNEDTBE ARMY FIRED FiRST & TRAT THEY DID SO DELIBERATELY (IB IT WAS ORDERED FROM A HIGH LEVEL WITHIN TRE ARMY) TO TEACH THE CATHOLICS A LESSON AT A TIME WHEN TUE PRESTIGE OF THE BRIFISB ARMY WAS BEING DENTED BY THE NO GO AREAS IN bERRY. 41 RE HEARD THE SHOTSTHAT INJURED JOHNSON AND DONAGLEY (HE WAS STANDING AT THE NORTH END OF TRE KEILS WALK BLOCK. IN COLUMCILLE COUVI) BUT DIDN'T SEE THE SHOOTING. 51 HE HEARD TRE BEGINNING OF THE MAiN BULK OF TRE FIRING (HE WAS TREN IN ROSSVIT T P STREET NEAR TRE SOUTHERN END OF KEILS WALIQ BUT SAYS THE SROOTINGBEGAN BEFORE TRE LT IWO PIGS ARRIVED ## S.S. Witnesses- List Q&E From Those Interviewed By Us (21/6/91) 1f wtnesss gave evidence at Widger, shown r (W) aEter naue the first time they are Ltad but not thareafter. KREA OtTE WILLIAli STREET WASTE GRODIW - DO&AGF[Y, JOENSON WOUNDE ## Witnesses Dnahv - aiself t Currant: Gov1. Johnson - Donaghy; Currs; Covie. ## P AflA TWO COU1TYkRD (BACi OF RQSSVZLLE STREET FLATS) - DUDDY KILLED - BRIDGE, BRÀDLt, McDkIi. DEER? WOUNDED. Witnesses / To Gunman - Daly (it); McGowan; Donne (w); Gerry Doherty. Not J seen by Bonner, Tucke,- QoLLins f athily who watched lL the NJ initial events in the courtyard until aftetthe shootings. All of them think the army tad fi±st. - To no shots until array opensd_fire; 4LLL OTHEt4 LISTED UNDER TELLS SECTION. - - - Duddy - NcDaid, .Bonner (W),Tucker (w), Daly (W). ridge - stlf but refusing to sea us; E. :'1ooe tucker; Doherty; Donne (t); Daly. - Bradley - self; Tucker; Bonner; McGowan J?. MCDaLC - self: G. Doherty. JDaary - flonei rt .E e' AREA. TEREE BARRI CADE - tOU1Q, RASE (Willie), GILNOUk, McEILEEENfl; KXLLY tILLED. - POSSiBLY MICHAEl. Ì4cDAID - ALEC NASE WOUNDED - J j J Witnesses GLimaur - EamoMá.u1ah; Gara1diùRchond; KathLeen Crbssan. J - J JKesrin Mc. - Gerard Gri&ve; Terry O'ECeafe (tO; X. J J /1ichae1 Kelly - McCaffety (?);Otk/efe; Coyre; klec Nash; possibly Dennis BraLey butno. clear from_his i/vito us. J John Young - ?IcCattarty? Co4e, O'Keef e, flac Nsh, McCu"Ycer p&rginaìly. / I ¡ JWillie Nash - ALec Nash; OTWaefs,-Cole, NcGfferty. S.S. WITNESSES - LIST ONE. ?AGE TWO JMICHAEL McDALD - none. Alec Nash - himself; Coyle;Qtkeefa; Mocafferty. AflA FOUR - AREA IN FRONT OP ROSSYILLE FLATS. St JOSEPH PLACE - DOHERTY7 McGUtCAN DEED. - Mc.GOWA.N, PATRICK CAThOEBELL WOUNDED - Witme.sses JPaddy Doherty - Paddy Walsh; Olive Sonoer.- -- - a / J -J Barey McGuigan - F. 4çZeevet; E. Noora; Bonner; Dicker; En$ish; ?4cCusicer; RichSond; Macowen. (ALmost anyone and everyone will testify to ht peaceLuì character.) (rqs Conflict on this death as to caethar the was eacing barricada, and hence shoe from the walls, or facing the tls and shot from G. Par'. tatter fits tore with rnost of the witnesses and also the foreñstc. & number of the witnessss also had the impression he was tirse shot i± the Leg whe facin the barricade and that spun him round to face the alls. and then shot in back cf head from G. Park area.) JDanial McGowan - seLf. J Patrick Cambell - nonas AREA flVE - GLEgFADA PARK - WItLEAM MclCTh'NEY. jANES akt KiLLED - TCS3?E MAHON, NICEAfl QUINN, JOSEPH FRXEL WOUNDED ituesses William Mcflnney - &Iichgei. Kivelhan 7; O'Keefa;Fergus McAteer; Covle; Cars's (Mrat) - - - Sons c.cnfusion here beaust your witness John O"cZane appears co be describing the way this victim was killed but then tdentifies the man as soneftte elsa Mk' just have ?iLs McKínneys confused - hopefully., sfs; Jainfts Wray - John '4ne; r&eLl MCaff arty; Kiveihan; Co(Le; Mc&jeer; O1Rejílys (JAr at w) Joseph -lahon - McAteer; Coyle. JMichael Quinn - McAtear. Joseph Friel - none. He has refused to SeE us so far. ## Ara Stx - Abbey Pair - - Ceràld Mcxinnbx, Gerald Donaghy Kilt.Ed. Witnesses ,/cerald McKinuey - John J j ivelhan; 0'ReiLly's; Carr's. Gerald Donaghy - John OtKane, OtReLllyts. ## Other Mkflers Wttesses Rb PEE WERE tiNDER ARflST PIFFER O-Len (but does not want to be. ATTLTUD,E 0E' TEE 1'AMAS WHILE P - OtEe; M4%'ear; ChacLje interviewed as Things staud)Y 7 McGILLIGAN / - Canavan; Vaujiagh; NcJeer;,CitizenY. (1ffy;FrancIj Donne; 1./o -Young. ,'JOHN Y0O?G'S CEABACTE& / - Eugene dy; Maria' J &O VL0INCE BY JARA MILrÇ(RZES ON fl DAY .P4EEMEUT J J - DeiZin; Mc.Gu,Aess: McO.4an; Flc.Catferty; Tony'$artin. Of fc.ia1s - beM unaerstood, no expltc.it order.. / V - ive1han (oQi record); Bradley - hearsay. GUNMAE IN KFJ 1.5 WALK BEFORE T TROON-? - 'argus McAteer (only gllmvse cf mañ with rifle waLking down to William Street). -- CROWD REACTION AFTER - DevLin; Breslin; 4cCann Conan Mc.Feely; Gerry Doherty; MoGuiness - EFFECtS OF ES j - VirtualLy take your pick, but DevLin, Doherty, perhaps even Hutton auongst irtost interestía. - MCafferty ssems to be desribin where supposedly shot into window. - / DiRTY TACTICS! DOCTORED RUBBER BULLETS EÎC. TEAT DAY - D. i11espie ## / Guth1Ar In - Gerry Doherty; Daly; Donne; Mcgowan. 6Ldzers May Have Put Forensic Marks On People Whether /Tel]Bertely Or By Acqident Hy Way They Lifted The Bodies - -J - Nash (Alec); Or Mccabe; John O'Kane Officials Were In Ûecline At The Tule - Mclean; Mcguiness, Deviln. But - McCann - no, officials were on the un1 provos catching up but not dOEninant then. May be wishfuL thinking on his - part! Politically he would certainly prefer his atm version. - ALEC McFADDEN No poiLtical aWiatton then or now. WETNESS : Courtyard generally. ## Story Ran up Chamberlain street, and into courtyard. Was in the middle of the area when the shooting started. No firing at the troops, they fired as they carne. Pig stopped, soldier got out. and stood f&rtng. SHe ran into corner between blocks 2 and 3, then went through to hack. Doherty, Mcauigan already dead, and another body laid by Moøuigan. Ran up into the flats and to top of block 1.ENDS O'REILLY'S - Bridle and her husband. (60's) Ordinary couple, tive at Still Live in that same Etat. WITNESSED Wray Donaghy and second MeKinney MR O'RflLLY WITNESS AT WIDGERY. ## Story their lives. Shooting started, lots of peopLe ran into their houses in fear for James Wray brought into their kitchen, shot. William McKinney died in their house with father Mulvey and Dr Mcclean present. Looking out of their kitchen window, some to to 15 yards to the spot, Mr O'Reilly and at times Mrs O'Reilly watched as Mckinney and Donaghy were shot together (12, 13 ort Sunday times map). No guns, bombs at all that day and certainly not while they were watching. Saw Wray go down as he ran towards their opening into Gletifada. Donaghy made run out of shadow of back of Glenfada Park, opposite their f lat window. Older man, HoKinney moved out to pull him back - he was shot in side and front as he did so. Donaghy shot from the side. Soldier cama from top corner qudrangle of Glenfada and went back there after the shooting. ENDS ## S.S, Sljmniary Of Irish Eye Witnesses Stoiubs DANNY McGOWAN (now 56) His shooting has wrecked his life. Never worked since, and can only walk with difficulty. Speech also affected but undernandable. Confused on much of the detail of exactly where he was when1 but clear on what he saw and the shootings. Very emotional, about it all. IiITNESS Uts own shooting Mickey Bradley and NioGuigan Gunman in courtyard ## Not Wtdgery SHOT - in the back of the right side of his lower leg, and comes out the left side front. ## Sto R Y Ran up Chamberlain $reet and across to gap between blocks 3 and 2. Goes through, shots ramina through the flats doorway from Chamberlain Street direction, Sees Bradley shot near him. Looks back as he is going through. Sees gunman with revolver edging along able end and loosing off "few shots" around the gable end. 'lt slowed the paras advane, meant tots ¡nora people ot to safety, probably saved even more deaths, The Paras were already shooting heavily by now." Edges down back of block 2 trying to get home, to gable end of block 1. Gilmour is laid by phone box, says a prayer ovet him. Huddled in crowd by gable end of Block 1. Mc.Guigan also bean shot. Shooting eases after good five minutes at least, He crawls up to top of area behind back of block 2 of Rossvtlle street flats, near Block 3, and is bent over, pulling injured man (Patsy Campbell) to cover when Danny is shot from behind. ka &lLs sees soldier laid on wall, by Glenfada Park top, and his impression as they locked eyes is that he is the one who had shot him. Pulled behind Joseph Place watt by two men, saved my life. Bullets raining down on us. tie is laid oft by Dupont while he is in hospital, never worked since. Walks with a stick, thinks about it all the time. Family man, with kids (many with good jobs), grand-kids. ## Ss.S. Summary Of Irtsi-1 Eye W[Tnessfs Stories Bernadette Devlln Witness To Very Ltttle Cave No Evidence To 1Idcery Insights - kf terwards, saw crowd of 60 year old women demanding guns front PrOVO Leader) pressing him against wall and shouting S*iWhere were you?" "Give us guns, we'll do it fer ye". - IRA was raw then and everyone knew who was in, and their business. Crack about it then, flot now. So lt would lmve come out if they had started it, and they would have been blexted and lynched. Ostracised and not able to Live here tiny more at the very laast. - Rows aEter about Why were there no guns in the city? Was anyone responsible for starting It? and everyone knew it was not the IRA. - Famous Hospital call from Hell t'Ie.Caferty's house. - Her conclusion is that the action was a clear politically directed move to end the civil rights demos, and the mass mohïlination, and warn the No Go areas what could happen. Political machinery afterwards moved to blame the Paras to a certain extent, but not their fault, the Paras were the state, the state as the Paras. - Much else depending on how and where we want to use her perhap:. ENDS ## S.S. Summary Of Irish Eye Ritt4Esses Stories NOT WILLING TO BE tN'FERVIEWED ON CAMERA - LEO YOUNG (26 then) John Young's brother. Lorry driver. WITNESS : Donaghy not having nail bombs on him Own and Donaghy's treatment ## Evidence To Widgery John, wearing a floppy hat, is by the Lorry leading the march in some photos and perhaps film early on in the march. ## Story Leo found and toaI Donaghy into ti-te Rogan's house in Abbey Park. Stomach hanging out, LittLe hope, woman and man, who was doctor, said. Only chance was if we took him to hospital immediately. Leo in hack, Rogan driving, stopped. Donaghy alive, hut unconscious at that point. Leo .grabbed by the throat by the army, arrested. Leo held until the Wednesday evening. No one told where he was; parents thought they had Lost two sons Never been in jail before or since, and never in any trouble. and held naked for first few hours then underpants back. Swabbed hands, took dirt from under fingernaiLs. Clothes taken Paway, Questioning off and on for three days. Not know 13 shot etc. No call, solitor, charges. As being released detective told him, "Got one brother lese now,'. MIS CONCLUSIONS - Donaähy had no naiL bombs. Nowhere to put them, and he would not have got in car with them if had had - be suicide, - John worked in tailors, and coll.ected money for Local coal man. Interested in girls and clothes. Good job, with &ood ¡none for Derry. Not march minded, in fact problably the first marc John had ever been on and lt killed him. John would not have had bomb or gun; deserved shooting if had had, but no way. ## Ends Tnforfttx0N Erom Officials - Impflcit agreement and knowledge that big march there was to be no military activity. - Could not remember if there had been explicit agreement or order, hut "no real, need for one, it would he understood". - Reasons why no weapons be there; a) Big march, if weapon found be propaganda against Civil Rights which they supported. P b) Posaible danger to crowds if military activity and not gt mass mobilisation again. í)ti. cr.-PkLJ.1 c,.. c)Few weapons and men anyway and flot want to cisk getting Lifted at heavily policed march à) Leave in cars and dumps in Creggan in orderS to protect the weaponn e) Also in case Army tried to get in back way to Creggan. ALL VERY LOGICAL reasons they said. - Strength Officials down slightly, about 50 each, perhaps 24 weapons each wing. - Very tight discipline in those days. - No Official gunmen on march or involved in anything. - Maverick official unlikely. - Cars Came down to Bogside afterwards, argument with grannies about "What should do, be dotng7" - It would have corne out if anyone had been active on that day. _ - Question of people supporting you. Therefore have to be honest claim your people, your Successes and your failures, however bad they ate. Have to he honest because dirty war - army plants etc, plus possible fueds between wings so need to trust each other. - Clenfada gunmen, flot have angle. - Been gun battles over the past six nionths, often 3 hours. One army shot at itself for 3 hours. ## Ends NOT WILLING TO 8E ON CAMERA - CHARLIE GLEN (early 40's) Knights of Malta, now the Captain of them, plus a primary schooL teacher. The hippy with tong hair, and Large specs. Seen in famous picture with Daly and white hankie taking body down Chamberlain street. WITNESS Attitude of army Situation in courtyard, even though he flot see any shooting directly Arrested, witnessed brutality afterwards ## No'R Wedcery Story P In middle of waste ground along RossyillE street, in uniform, suddenly Paras around him ort foot as people ran past him. Soldier clubbing old man, tried to stop soldier, clubbed himself. Not know when tiring started. Next memory ig he was Laid beside wounded Duddy, bullets pinging all around him. Thing to stop the flow of blood but clear to hirn that Duddy was dying. Noise was terrifying, echoing. Firing coming from real close, about 15 yards. Bishop decided they wouLd get up and move Duddy. Not Want to. But went with them, no alternative. Down Chamberlain Street and up High Street to ambulance. Then not allowed back in. 't- Arrested while crying to get back in, taking down by lorry, ran gauntlet of soldiers and police. Senior officer and Scottish Sgt. came and looked into his eyes when attested. Eventually released. Mentioned Simpson paperback, with footnote to 2.5., called 20 (7) Years of Murder". Still searching for Lt. He is checking with other Knights who were there who might talk to us. ## End S BETTY 1ATSON Not present on BS, hut is family spokesperson for Michael McDai.d family re S and moat other things. Five things They have photograph showing Michael still walking around the barricade while priest and crowd are tending two bodies behind the barricade, one of whom they all say is MichaeL Kelly. QUESTiON : WHEW, WHERE, HOW DID MICHAEL McDAED DIE? Sister saw Michael on tv being arrested and taken along SRosaviLle flats side itt Rossvtlle street. Glenfada Park flat witness saw arrested man just shot whiLe stood against wall? No corroboration. MicaaeL Moflaid was left handed, hut forensics say WH&T ROUT HIM FilING OR HOLDING A GUN? S) One of the priests tried to get to Michael according to Widgery evidence, when he was in the pig - which? when? where was the pig? how many bodies in it at that point? PETER CkRR (early Go's) No 8 &hbey Park, in corner house, directly looking through Ginfada towards the barricade in RossviLle street, without quite being able to see it. 1 His son, Sean, Èhen 15 saw first NoKinney shot, white with his hands up, and Peter also half saw it while pulLing Sean down from the bedroom window. WtTNESS MoKINNEY ## Sha1Jn Was Youngest Witness At Widgery S Story Shooting, and people running. Cot his family in who were pLaying on the street outside. As getting them laid down upstairs, saw soldier turn body over with his foot in Glenfada, could have been Kelly. Trying to get son Sean down from looking out of the upstairs window, and we both saw Mc3tinney stop, hands on his head and he turned away from us sort of. Soldier stepped out from top of Clenfada and McKinney went down shot. Two people brought in, and doctor attended them, died in my living room. Kelly and Wray. Ran to get ambuljc. when it drew up at the barricade. Saw one body lying there. People in here screaming for their lives, expecting army to come in and shoot them. No guns, no bombs, no picking guns up with that firing gotng on. EN D S KAThLEEN CROSSAH tristi co11eeu of 35, v-sty beLievabLe if Little imprecise Ott the datati. Married to man who has cone time for being provo, however. W&tness to Cilmour death, beside him when shoe. Confirms ht was running away and had no &un or bomb and had not even bean stoneing. Shot by two soLdiers identified by Eamttcon MeulLa.ch, who wet-s down on one knee and she remewbers Looking back, seeing theo aim and fire and instantaneously turning to Giltuour and him staggedng and saying $II hit'1. Se-ratabled ovar batrie.ade and into a flat where everyone was screaming and tnoanìtg. CITIZEN X DERRT Para miLitary after ßloody Sunday. Propelled into it by the events of S.S. Served two years on continuous renand for possessing firearms and explQsives, but after five. triaIs acquitted, then iithdraw from para. military activity. Would do interview and be good but need to be in silhouette and voice chac«geci aS Ite now wotks la m.iíniy L'rut. iusliLution, tÎVc! in matuly Prat area, and wants to keep his jobs his house and his life. Very good ont how many joined provos after 3.5.. WITNESS t MICKEY BRADLEY YOUTH OF THE TINE, MW THE MOVE TO JOZN ZIA. AFTER NOT TO WIDGERY STORY McGitLigan brutaL, and no reason. Big cultural significance Qf beine allowed to hoLd meeting in Gutidhall s4uare in Derry. Me just. rioter, stónss and bottles against the army and police. &ot invoLced in anything else then. Went on march and knew Lt WOULd end in riot, always did at bottom of W. Street after the main mare-h had gone past. I was at W. Street, behind the corrugated tin, throwing stones, shout that the army were waving in. Immediately ran along C. Street. MaU way down Chambartain street, heard shooting. ha reached ter parked at the end the aty ttere already there. figs there soldiers were Out. Mûre shootln, body Lying. Jumped over wall at far corner of caurtyard, man shot as we jtzwpad ovar. Mickey Bradley. Put tocurniquet Ort. «119g ## X Continues No stage saw anyone with any wupori, barth ot even a stone in the c.ourtyard Through iuta house in Joseph Place, and then came out again to help man lying in open injured. Shot at, could riot reac.h hita. Died down a little arid cams out and threw stones from barricade. Priest thtervenad. Young and Nash certainly not stone throwers at all. tot see them at all. Next day began moves to join the IRA, and took a number of us 10/14 days to get sworn in. People queusing up to join. CITIZEN Y Served 16 years of 20 for attemptins to blow up soldiers with Land mine etc. WITÑESS z COURTYARD BARRICADE - Ncllhinney and others but chronology flot clear. NOT TO WIDGERY Not put his detailed story as a) Need to see him again b) Ris credentials would seem to rule him out as a witnass. MITCHELL MCCUSKER Mid 40's now. Fa.ri1y man, steady Job, never involved in before or since save a little. stone throtzing. anything WITNESS t JOHN YOUNG marginalLy BARNEY MoGUICAÑ NOT WtDGERY ## Story Aggro corner, still on main march, at back when army came in, crowd scattered and I ran to barricade by R. flats. John Young came and told me Mickey Bradley, 'uy best friend, was hit so I went around the back at the flats towards the o.ourtyard to see if I could help him. r was just behind the flats end, when with that shooting started and young Gitniore arrived, went down and died in girl's arms.Soldiers over in G. Park and IC. Walk shooting. Up against the wall. Man ran out from the gable sud, and he was shot, think in the leg, and then his head was blown out. Shooting stopped, went back to the barricade and John Young an two others laid there. John Young had no gun, no bombs, flot even stones in his hands and I left him gcìconds hetforM he must hava been shot. ENDS EAMMON MEULLACH (501$) Pacifist, ivir Rights activíst htghly respected enn if considered, vary verbose and a littte eccantrí. &mateur photographer. Excellent spee,ker, if a, little full of himself. WITNESS : aUG11 GILMORE NOT WItERY STOW? McGilLigan - brutal violence by Paras, when no threat, nothing to throw Pri sandy beach. triad to wipe out memory of ES, änd it is impossible. Stnnd just by end of Rossv-jlLe flats block one when army rMflffi i.n. StoneLng from just beyond the barricade but 'not reaching the army. ## S First vehicle pulled round, two SLRs pokeing out and fired Up R. St as stewed into the. courtyard. FIRST SHOTS t HEARD. Hugh Filmour beside qe hatE running away. Z soldiers at bottom of Glenfa,d,a. Park, hardly any distance. One firing rubber, firing Live. Gilmour "I'm hit'. No, ruber, but expression on his f ace told me he was hit. t-te ran to and over the barricade, I followed. Staggered, went down, massive hala in his right hand side when va looked at him and he diecI sao-ti after. Crowd around hirn. Want round corner, Mcßuigan laid there. Bullets been flying all the time. rights activist. Very directly relevant WILLIR ERESLIN 'Local school teacher, non violent civil believable. Good on the day in general, saw nothing hitaseif. - People would not have gone unless th&y wen conv'inc-ed no para mílitaty activity. Kids etc. wars there, and any trouble the pravos would have been blamed and lynched. Guarantees by pravos and they kept their word then, end of them if broken their word. - M. McGuiness story. That grOUp of aten wanting to go down into the bogsid and do something when the shooting had stopped, as Breslin was up by Free Berry ÇQrIIer. McG argued against that, and in any event they had no weapons to hand there, all in Creggan. bOG nonpiussad, lost, been outwitted type of f.eling to hita then. Sinn Fain councillor, early 40's. Not really served any tjma st aLl, WITÑESS COIJRTflRD EVENTS : BARRICADE NOT WIDGERY ## B STORY Ran across waste ground it R. Street ahead o pigs. At bac-k doorway to R. Flats block 1, as soldier got out he threw a bottle at him. Man went dow-n and. fired two rounds into the doorway straight away. Rid down and saw soldiirs cote out. f iring and hit Duddy and. then Bridge. Mo shooting or bombs. Army definitely fired first. Went up to i st floor flat, looked out onto Rossville streat. Saw paople shot (unclear fra tape - batteries running out at time of recording ) who they are. Good on normal routine of riot and how and. what happened. !4ICRAEL CANAVAN Eum&s side kick, Businessman i 60's, Not really see anything at all, but good on mood and significante and cowmitmeuts to non violence from the para militaries. ## P Not Tqtoc-Zn SIAN COLtLNS (ten at time) plus his whole family it seems of f ive or six saw events in the courtyard1 corresponds with Bonner and Tucker accounts. NOT WIDGERY NÒiIJ REti.? (40, self employed electrical DÜsiness, 4arn Protestant area So not want to draw attention to hjmsrVThut Swilling to do in profile - slip into the hotel.) WITNESS : Donaghy, Johnson - places them on tef t hand side of William Street as crowd came down, which is actually the. nly thing that makes sense on that. State of mind of the soldiers In G. Park- John flflf.Ls character STO&Y : kf ter seing Donaghy and Johnson shot he ran through to Abbey Park, and saw 2 McKínñeys laid side by sida (been carried there and then dropped) and looking into Gtenfada Park -saw Mahon crawling towards him, "help tue, help me." Wray dead by wall, which was covered in his blood. Moving to help Nahen when Para appeared by gable end, eith black or wearing gas mask, 40 ft away, and I was waving . hankia, he swung rifle round instantly, and I went to movt away, he fired 3 shots and t fell, on floor. Lafferty went between me and soLdier. Referee's whistle sounded and that man had gone, they ali had. Got up, ILE ted William MeKinney into maisonette. - 3 - Kelly very good On human side - he had his brothn in 1.aw'ø raincoat on without perrnisaion to tmpress the girls, and went back with it covered i dye from ths water cannon and also flesh from the wounded, Abbey Park, andsaw2 MoKinneys laici a - there and thsrt dropped) and looking into Glenfada Parc Hahon crawling towards hirn, "help tve, help me." Wray dead by waLl, which as covered In hi blood. Moving to help Mahon when Pare appeared by gable end, either black or wearing gas mas', 40 ft away, and i as waving hankie, he swung rifle round instautly, and i went to move away, he fired 3 shots nd I feil, on floot. Lafferty went between me and soldíer. Refere&s whistle soundedT: and that an had gone, they ali had. Got up, lifted Wi1liam McKinney into matsonette. - 3 BLOODY SUNDAY UP DATE 2/9/91 Kelly very good on human side - ha had his brother in law's raincoat on without permission to impress the girls, and went bac'k with it covered in dye from the water cannon and also flash from the wounded, o'trn'p Carra and their neighboursall back up these C. park incidents which they watched through their kitchen windows. ## 0/C Of Gira At Time Officials did give undertaking not to be there with arms, and stuck to it. Given both to organisers <Bonds) and to priests. Not break it - because community would disown them. Would hava clatned any of dead - always did and have. No Officials killed or wounded, Not know of any official there with weapon who fired, because would have claimed him been a propaganda coup to have one of your members take retaliatory or defensive action at time. If get pic of the man to him he wtLirLdctttifY it if knows him, (NB Moping to see the man this week, end have got second ha accoun.) - - rE2. OLIVE SOLÇNER (]ate 4Os now) 1arrIed lady, lives in Bogside, very bellevable and non politic-al., WITNESS Duddy, Derty, ticGuigan = Courtyerd - nô f Lrtng befbre atm>' f fred. WIDGERY WITNESS stoay Middle flat of middle bloc-k of fiats at RossvjLte Street. Looked down on courtyard incidents, then went through to the bedroom window and jooked down on the Joseph Place incidants. Saw - Jack Duddy running, looked back, shot. She called down 6 Fther Daly that Duddy ws hit and he went back to him. f - Paddy Doherty crawLing, then shot. Barney Mc.Guigaa om out and shot. i f - - No gunfire, bombs, even stoning going on bf ors army startftd shooting. Saw no gunman on g,a.ble end in courtyard. r Notes of eieuhon cton;ersatton bcween -tony Cc' ok and Kevin 11cCorrle elfst soitcitor4n, worked for Ì'1CRA or. bloody Sundey. Was tr Free Derry corner at the raeetin' whea tht shooting - start'-i. .Spe.ater5 wete. upend. .and Ms nan priOCit5 8StO see that t-entier Brocktay wasOK. Te ot S&.t, flesh.. ;t,ut already have tht - - .;-ioci t.-i-ksd of his dcc 2'p.nt. He also ;ut btit a pamin1ei e't1ti eaST 1ass-r at Derrv of 'thith he has z- copy.. .bur. y &Ireadv hvt- ga hc r Says- Sa. )ash1 s ;oket koccs down the rc,r atyS itt s a cs oc Kctth cur.e eat vz>tr heat Ut Says ttt Fony snythe s-nd sack Urony orgen±sed the Satt Dash inqtfit. Smjthe rhc: the time artd F:roe7 wcr1ce fer chei. He v- hs booklet ¿ives t hack:roun- T z:oint of view. tidety says tha t t:.t.- .:J '-:t :; marcn tnen there wn Id have been no dea th '-.i&:. the iOCRI NICP.A oratticer, W1-ìdget Bond, .-C' zeal tcith Frtnk Lan end that Ligan had ¿ dee. L th . . Army whIch 'as stoinpd on from n hir;. He ¶t.: :c differences between the Polite and the .. en4 -- wtth.r. the Aç;t.. This is all in WidQerv but ."-: s r«;. - - .nktet has r-,r.jc:: itivnteot it. - - nI-s a'ph1e.t ¿so hn the detad o the Army red- os with words iie « - bas.ar&- .anrì ,E a letter rorn "sorne stuc conrattLatu-tg cne }tr&s orn a oamn tine xt was the StLOot to tìl to end all shoot t% fl- stiLl remains a t.nem in lrjth life that no resttu::cn has be.en made by the BrItish governm-nt. The relatives 20t thet blood oney but there's been no real recompense med. Lve.n a.n Easter. Euro?e the ?ouish goverrutent bull t a mónunent to the shipyard workers whaer.- klLle.j bUfn Derv there's r,othin The so1ider had i:elr day of fun.. ..bu ybu inustu' t stop the fi-1m there. That it when the Paras were betn brought out Derry.... it. was trost cuesoe....thye drove lorries snth no lights on through the City Centre1..past the Cuildhall and the City Hotel where all the journalists were...t-here was at eerie silence -over the town,,..It was a black inood....people were silent with rage....ancl the final insult to the whole day was tile way the soldiers left. The whole town was shocked." Talked about the demo at McGilLigan the sieek before when the Army attacked women and children on-the beac.h...and says that was the start of the change ífl polie-y from thent. Sinon Winchester was at that iemo TC's notet he was very- lpful and an excellent ta1ic uses some gooá pht-ases thicb would godown weil on t JSS thr and was one of tha wain organtser&- will see way to flerry on the 19th, will photi'eopy :.s t1ßszacre a. cry bookLet, and then corae on Ris phone number is Notes on Conversation bstween former Army Press Officer and Tony Cook. T ## Contact For Re dId not arrive n Northethn ireland until. a973J. he says that ut-1K £73 (correct spelling), a retired Major. who now Lives in , was the thief Presa Officer at the time with Colin Wallace as his assistant. Thats as much as he knows of LINK whereabouts.Lbut hesay that Colin Wai!te will. know exactly where he is. He says t.he problem when he arrived was In cuttn through the fiction to get to the. reality. Qn his arrival he was told by the Upsychothgìcaiwarfare or*-' that iood Sunday was a "put up job' The evidence they forward for this was the surprising number of tori;- teievtsion crews and reporters and the number oír reporters who suddenly turned up for this part2c.uisr s that "these marches" had become a Sunday a t ernoon boté by tztefl ... sp why all the sudden terest in this one. That s e problem he stll& cannot resc4ve. Ka also points to the. suddr exceptional quality cf the ph' ournelisu of the :c De.; ':ìr teiate1y after ßOçv undey. 7 cams ..a eve that Bloody Suuay as 't a ; th. source of the firt shnrs is c ion. Wherever they came tror' they He im ÒflL li the - touch paper". A bunch of cooks and cìerk (his desript1on et buggerec ft up, lost their headst" It was a He nys th. i. any rcQlution... and this books like «voiutionary's Gookbo k whi. available at the tIme.,, it is neces:-..ry for totiitn agaanst the torces of law and order. i t is therFr - to believe that it was any of the paríi1iter. 3ran1sttrns who bagan it, but he ta a man who is swayed by evidence and tie has seen no evidence to suggest that it was any paramilitary grot± who did so. -fl He says tLÌie Army fell hook, Line and '.'Lner n gVit11 'he IRA the most amazing pr3paganda victory. The -- :-tth the gun is God...on both sides in Northern Ireland. t' a workIng class war...t'ne middle class couldn't_give a stuff. The errand boy is given a gun and calls himself a company cornmander. The problem is how to persuade that rna to going back to be the errand boy." He believes that Bloody Sunday was the turning point for Northern Ireland. When the soldiers first went into "Londonderry" they were greeted like heroes.., but after three years of inaction by the British government then the people were ripe for change. Send in the "Kit karno Army of clerks etc." and they go crazy...and the whole situation changed. "From then on it was all downhill." is a man who loathes Colin Wallace. "A man who ruined my career. I believed him for three years and than he took me Pdown with him." attended Wallace's wedding...one of only two people on the groom's side of the church...and saw him married as gallant Captain of the Irish Guards." According to Wallace was not allowed to join the Army because of "flat feet or something!' and only had a "piddlìng Territorial Army commjsjon". He had never been a Captain in the Irish Guards. Re also is a tpains to point out that despite the impression that Wallace gives of being someone important at the Widgery Tribunal he was in fact just the Army's note taker. he was meant to pick out the stories that would make the next day's headlines and warn the top brass what the media would focus on. "14e sat at a little bench at the back and took notes, that's all he was," He describes Wallace as "a nutcase and very dIsloyal." points out that the ROC between 69 and 73 had pretty well abdicated responsibility for law and order and that had brought about "damn near martial law, complete military law". He says it wasn't until late 73 that the RUG began to take responsibility again. He says Bloody Sunda' was "a hell of a trap and the Army fell g into it. On the Army s part there was no malice, just pattl.c. In support of his cooks and clerks theory he points out that the Army has rarely paniced in Northern Ireland. 0k, the occasional individual soldier has paniced, but. ßloody Sunday is the only -c.asion on which they have paniced wholesale. He says the Army went into Northérn Irleand determined tito play a straight bat"...and 99.9% of soldiers have done so. Ile accept - that the SAS and the Special Forces, "trained killers who are -'at up to destabjlise" have not played fair and he believes t is little short of criminal to have allowed them to go to Noru;arn Ireland at all. He is convinced that the arrest force were not "front2Y- Paras". t He says that if the first shot had been fired by a malicious -ç paramilitary operation titen the Army would be very happy,..but as he hes never come across any evidence that thLs is the case he is not prepared to believe i . Still he harks back on the one thing that he cannot understand, thouph, why were so nany Press there that day? Tony Cook's comments on the conversation; This bloke drops his guaro every now and then...notably on Wallace. He attempts to sell me the line that is moat believable now, the cock up heory. He tries to seem very reasonable. Ne was unavailable to for seven hours after my fjrt call, despite lits secretary saying he "was in the building" but then he sudden1y was "at the hospital waiting for an appointment and you know how long that can take." I suspect he was getting guidance from the MOD and then tries to take me along a line of highest cobabiiity. He was keen to stress to me that he Was a Cathojic wr.ose -parents cette from "Southern Ireland"...hardly a description of Irelend you hear from many republican sympethisecs, He stressed his a:pport for the Civil Rights movement. . . then does a hatchet job on Wallace. His phrasing was peculiar too... ltke ceiling Bloody sunday & "held of a trap" after saying u was an Army coc& up. Quite honest].y he made rua suspect the offcta1 line aven more and if anyone is going to makme ne a conspiracy theorist then he's the onel This entire conversation was, of course, off the reord. ## Belfast Soldiers - Best Quotes Sjde1 Effect Of Being Abused/Spat At Etc "IN THE EARLY DAYS, YOU KNOW, YOU USED TO - THE OLD CUPS OF TEA JOB, YOU KNOW ON BOTH SIDES OF THE COMMUNITY. AND THEN CATHOUCS, YOU KNOW, THE REPUBLICAN SIDE, YOU KNOW, BECAME LESS ANT) LESS AN]) BOYS STARTED COMING OUT IN BLOTCHES - REMEMBER THEY STARTED MAKING THE TEA OUT OF URINE. BOYS STARTED COMING OUT IN BLOTCHES AND WONDERED WHAT IT WAS, YOU KNOW. THEY'D BEEN GWEN A DIRECTIVE, YOU KNOW - GIVE 'EM P155." "TO BE QUITE HONEST THEW FEMALE POPULATION WERE BY FAR THE WORST OFFENDERS BECAUSE THEY KJ'4EW THERE WAS VERY LflTLE WE COULD DO ABOUT IT. WE VERY RARELY GOT ANY REAL ABUSE FROM THE MALE POPULATION BECAUSE WE OULD DEAL WITH THOSE ON A ONE-TO-ONE SIUTATION. WITH THE FEMALES - THEY KNEW THEY WERE A PROTECTED SPECIES, AND, WELL AT LEAST 50% OF INCIDENTS - I WOULD SAY THE FEMALES WERE THE ONES THAT CAUSED THE TENSION, THE AGGRAVATION AND THE RIOTING. CERTAINLY A LOT OF TEE TIME WE WOULD SAY: BRING OUT YOUR MEN THE MEN DIDN'T PLAY - THEY DIDN'T WANT TO KNOW. THE FEMALES WERE THh ONES THAT WERE FORCED OUT TO INITIATE A SITUATION AND GET THINGS STIRRED UP AND GO IN - AN]) THEY WERE BLOODY GOOD AT lT." "IN MANY WAYS IT WAS A GAME - BUT THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE GAME WERE SERIOUS." "YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS GOING BACK TO THEM YEARS. IN THE END YOU TOOK NO MESSING OFF THE WOMEN NEITHER. t MEAN I'VE SEEN THEM COMING AT ME WITH HURLING STICKS. YOU CAN STILL GET HURT WITH A HURLING STICK. I'M AFRAID THERE WAS NO MESSING." ## 455 "I CAN CERTAINLY SEE THAT TYPE OF THING HAPPEN THROUGH SHEER FRUSTRATION. BUT I CAN'T REMEMBER EVER SUFFERING FROM FRUSTRATION. CERTAINLY THE SOLDIER, IF HE'S BADLY LED, MORAL WAS BAD, THEN - YES, THEY'D HAVE TO DO SOMETHING TO RELEASE TENSION. ## Belfast Soldiers - Best Quotes AND THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT IT AFTERWARDS - AND WHAT THEY'RE TELLING OTHER PEOPLE, PEOPLE TELLING STORIES TO THEM - WHAT THEY ARE HEARING BECOMES TRUTH AND FACTUAL." "THERE' S NO QUESTION ABOUT IT THERE }4Y WF T HAVE BEEN PEOPLE (SHOD THAT DOESN'T S OUNI) LIKE PROFESSIONALKILLINGS - BUT HOW MANY PEOPLE CAN PUT THEIR HAND ON THEIR HEART AND SAY THEY ACTUALLY SAW SOMEBODY BEING SHOT ON THAT DAY. I WOULD SAY lT WOULD BE VERY, VERY FEW. VERY FEW INDEED BUT AS TIME GOES ON THE STORIES GET MORE AND MORE EXAGGERATED - PEOPLE ACTUALLY CONVINCE THEMSELVES THAT THEY SAW A PARTICULAR THING" ## Trie Soldiers' Views Of What Happened Thatday I «WE ALL LIVED THROUGH IT. WE TOOK ALL THE CRiTICISM. WE'VE LISTENED AND READ EVERYTHING THAT WAS EVER PUBLISHED ABOUT THAT DAY I'M AFRAID THE VAST MAJORITY OF THAT WAS UNTRUE. WE WERE NOT UNDiSCiPLINED. WE WERE ALL VEIfl' EXPERiENCED BY THAT STAGE. WE'D ALL BEEN IN NORTHERN IRELAND FOR AUvIOST TWO YEARS, SOME OF US EVEN LONGER THAN THAT, WE'D BEEN IN MORE SHOOTING INCIDENTS THAN ANY OTHER UNIT IN THE PROVINCE AND FOR A MASS, ilL-DISCIPLINED RETURN OF FIRE ON BLOODY SUNDAY IS TOTALLY INCORRECT. AHI) 1F I WASN'T TELLING THE TRUTH I WOULDN'T BE HERE NOW. i'M HERE BECAUSE I WANT TP PUT MY SIDE OF THE STORY ova - THE TRUTH AND THE PACTS OF IT." ## Coming Under Ube -1 350 RE WAS AN ESCORT IN AN AJvIBULANCE PIG THROUGH TUE WILLIAM ST BARBIER AND UP ROSS VILLE STREET & PARKED NEAR 'lilt COURTYMm OF TUE FLATS. WHAT HIE'S DESCRIBThTG HIERE HAPPENED ABOUT FIVE OR MORE MINUTES AFTER 'flit FIRST PIGS WENT IN. "AS SOON AS i JtJMPED (JUT WiTH THE ESCORT THAT WAS WITH ME, TWO ROUNDS WERE FIRED. ONE ROUND - I'M NOT SURE WHERE IT WENT - BUT CERTAINLY ANOTHER ROUND HIT THE TOP OF 'flj JyjBTJLA1'tCE PIG. THAT FIRE CAME FROM ABOVE, TO THE RIGHT OF wmEPs WE WERE AT THE TIME. I'M SURE lT MUST HAVE BEEN THE FLATS ON TRE RIGHT HAND SIDE... dT MiJST HAVE COME FROM ABOVE. lT COULDN'T HAVE COME FROM ANY OTHER DIREenON OUR FIRST REACTION WAS TO LOOK UPWARDS. WHEN I LOOKED UP THERE WAS A PERSON RUNMNG ALONG THE TOP OF THE ROOF OF THE FLAT ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF BLOCK ONE. I BELIEVED HIM TO BE ARMED1 OR HER TO BE ARMED - I'M NOT SURE WI[FHER if WAS MALE OR FEMALE. WHAT I SAW WAS A PASSING GLANCE OF A PERSON RUNNNING ALONG THE TOP OF THE FLATS WHICH I ASSUMED TO BE THE PERSON THAT HAD FIRED DOWNWARDS TOWARDS US.. ..WITH A RIFLE THE FIRST THING I DID WAS COCK MY WEAPON &?]) POINT UPWARDS. BY THE TIME I HAD COME UP INTO THE AIM THE TARGETJIAD GONE. AND THAT WAS IT... .WHAT I CAJ4 SAY 151 DEFINiTELY SAW A PERSON WITH AN OBJECT IN THEIR HAND RUNNING ACROSS THE TOP OF THE FLAT...." BUT YOU'RE NOT CERTAIN WHAT THE OBJECT WAS IN THE HANDS? 'TM NOT CERTAIN WHAT THE OBJECT WAS mi 'raEm HAND BUT, HAVING SAID STHAT, WHO WAS ON THE ROOF AT THAT TIME WHEN MOST OF THE PEOPLE WERE ON THE GROUND ? TIlE FIRE HAD DEFINITELY COME FROM ABOVE BECAUSE IT HAD HiT THE TOP OF THE PIG. SO WHAT I SAW I BELIEVE WAS A GUNMAN. ADMiTtEDLY - IT WAS A FLEETING GLANCE BUT IT CAME FROM THE RIGHT DIRECTION. THE PERSON WHO FIRED THE SHOT I ASSUMED WAS THE SAME PERSON THAT I'D SEEN RUNNING ACROSS THE ROOF... .WHAT I CAN CONFIRM IS THAT FIRE WAS COMING TOWARDS US - THERE'S NO DOUBT ABOUT THAT. (440 OIYI)" ## An Ambush Or A Spontaneous Reactioñ Auhianst The Army T. 476 P "I THINK INiTIALLY MY REACTION WAS THAT WE HAD MOVED INTO AN AREA WHERE THEY HADN'T EXPECTED TO FIND US IN. I CERTAiNLY, AS FAR AS I CAN REMEMBER, THE IMPRESSION I GOT WAS - SEEING THIS PERSON RUNNING ACROSS THE ROOF, I DIDN'T ACTUALLY SRP. ANYBODY AT THE TIME OTHER THAN THAT PERSON WHAT I BELIEVED TO BE ARMED, I DIDN'T ACTUALLY SEE ANYBODY ELSE IN THE AREA - BUT THEN AGAIN L WAS CONCENTRATING ON ONE PARTICtJLAJt ROOF WHERE I BEI JFVED THE FiRE TO HAVE COME FROM. I WOULD SAY THAT WHAT I FELT WAS - WE HAD GONE INTO AN AREA THAT HADN'T BEEN ENCROACHED FOR TWO YEAR AND THAT PEOPLE WERE IN THEIR - AND THEY WERE ARMED.. .WHOEVER THAT PERSON WAS ON THE ROOF, HE CERTAINLY WASN'T ANY OF OUR PEOPLE BECAUSE OUR PEOPLE WEREN'T UP ON THE ROOFS AT THAT TIME....(496) I COULN'T HONESTLY SAY IT WAS A SET AMBUSH FOR US. MY REACTION TO IT WAS IT WAS A PANIC, INSTINCTWE SHOOT BECAUSE PEOPLE HAD COME INTO THE ASEA AND THAT THEY WERE JUST SHOOTING AT ANY TARGET THAT PRODUCED 1TSPJP TO THEM.. SM TALKING ABOUT THE IRA THEY SAW THE PEOPLE COME INTO THE AREA AND THEY FIRED ON WHAT THEY SAW. AND CERTAINLY THE AMBULANCE PIG WAS CLEARLY MARKED AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED AND ANYBODY ELSE WOULD BE CONCERNED, AS AN AMBULANCE PIG. YET IT WAS DEFINITELY FIRE ON (5 18)1 WOULD SAY THE FEELING WAS AFTERWARDS THAT THEY HAD BEEN TAKEN BY SURPRISE, THEY WEREN'T EXPECTING, CERTAINLY, THE ARMY TO COME INTO THE AREA. "AND ONCE THEY SAW THAT THEY HAI) COME THROUGH THE BARRICADES AND WERE APPROACHING INTO THE FLATS THEMSELVES, THEY JUST PULLED OUT ANYTHING THEY HAD AND THEY STARTED TO FIRE ON OURSELVES THAT WERE MOVING INTO THE AREA.. .THAT' S MV REACTION. THAT' S WHAT I FEEL HAPPENED IT WASN'T A SET AMBUSH BECAUSE I THINK THEY WERE TAKEN TOTALLY BY SURPRISE - AS WE WERE. ONCE WE MOVED INTOTHE AREA QWE CERTAINLY DIDN'T EXPECT A SHOOTING BAnLE. WE WAS NEVER BRIEFED THAT THERE WOULD BE ANYTHING LIKE IT. WE WERE BRIEFED THAT IF ANflH1NG WAS GOING TO HAPPEN THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE A CIVIL DISORDER SITUATION AND NOBODY WAS GEARED UP FOR A SHOOTING INCIDENT OF THE TYPE THAT WE FACED AT THE 'liME. (538 OUT)" S536 "THEY FIRMLY BELIEVED THAT THEY WERE DEFENDING THEIR HOMELAND, THEIR PIECE OF TURF - AND HERE WERE THESE PARAS THAT HAD INTRUDED RIGHT INTO THE AREA, AND THEY WERE GOING TO BLOODY WELL DFEEND THEMSELVES. BUT THAT WAS WHY IT WAS SO ILL-ORGANISED. I MEAN IF THAT HAD OF BEEN A SET AMBUSH, I lvffiAN THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN DEAD SOLDIERS AND THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN A MASSIVE GUN-BATTLE. I MEAN YOU'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT MAYBE 26 PEOPLE WOUNDED. OUR LADS COULD HAVE KILLED 26 PEOPLE 114 TWO SECONDS. THEY COULD HAVE KILLED 36 PEOPLE JUST LIKE THAT (SNAPS FINGERS)... .THEY WERE TAKEN BY SURPRISE. SUDDENLY, IN THIS AREA, YOU HAI) ALL THESE BOYS WITH RED BERRIES AND RIFLES IN THEIR HANDS, CHARGING THROUGH BOYS WERE GOING IN, DIGGING OUT WEAPONS WHEREVER THEY COULD IN A TOTALLY TI T -DISCIPLINED FASHION AND THEY WERE. FIRING POT-SHOTS... ## 570 "I THINX IT WEAS A TOTAL PANIC SITUATION. THEIR AREA WAS ACTUALLY BEING INVADED AN!) THEY GRABBED WHATEVER WAS AVAILABLE TO THEM AND THEY RETURNED FIRE. AND A LOT OF TITLE PEOPLE, I'M SURE, THAT WERE FIRING OÑ US AT THE TIME WERE INEXPERIENCED. THERE WERE CERTAINLY PLENTY OF TARGETS THERE TO FIRE AT. AND THERE WAS A LOT OF US ABOUT. "lT CERTAINLY WOULD HAVE BEEN THE BIGGEST INSULT THAT THEY HAD EVER HAD - THAT THIS AREA WHICH THEY HAD ESTABLISHED AS FREE DERRY WAS SUDDENLY INVADED AND TOTALLY COMPROMISED. YEAH - YOU CAN CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THEIR POINT OF VIEW - THERE BUT FOR FORTUNE GO ALL OF US. YOU KNOW, WE COULD EASILY HAVE BEEN BORN IN THOSE AREAS, YOU FEEL EXACTLY THE SAME.". ## Side 3 Coming Under Fjre -2 "IT WAS THE GUNFIRE THAT WAS COMING IN - OR THE ROUNDS THAT WERE STIRRING ABOUT. I'M TRYING TO DISTINGUISHNOW BETWEEÑ OUR FIRE AND THEIR FIRE AND CERTAINLY THERE WAS THOMSON SUB-MACHINE GUN ROUNDS WEICH ARE DISTINCT TOTALLY FROM SIS ROUNDS, YOU KNOW, WHICH ARE SINGLE ACtiON. AND ITS NOT WHAT YOU SAW - ITS WHAT YOU HEARD. ALL WE WERE BASICALLY IN THEN AT THAT STAGE WAS A CONTAINMENT SITUATION. WE WERE TOLD TO HOLD TITE GROUND THAT WE HAD GAINED 155 "ONE OF THE REASONS THAT I CAME HERE TONIGHT IS BASICALLY TO PUT THE RECORD STRAIGHT ON WHAT I HEARD" 208 "AS WE GOT INTO ACTUALLY WHERE THE ROSSVLLLE FLATS ARE - THE GUNFIRE STARTED ITS NOT THERE NOW, BUT THERE WAS A BURNT OUT CAR IN THE. MIDDLE OF ROSS VILLE FLATS. NOW WHEN I GOT ROUND THERE MY PLATOON SERGEANT SAYS - FOR CHRISTS' SAKE, EVERYONE STARTED TAKING COVER. AND THERE WAS ME IN THE OPEN WITH ALL THIS SKIT COMING DOWN. ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT B ULLETS NOW? OH - YEAH, YEAH. NOW I WASN'T ARMED BECAUSE I WAS WITH THE RADIO AND THERE WAS A BURNT OUT CAR THERE AND I WAS TOLD: GET BEHIND THERE AND STAY THERE. AND THERE WAS ONE GUY LET TO COVER ME AND HE WAS STANDING JUST ROUND THE CORNER - THERE WAS A WEE CORNER THERE - WHERE HE COULD SEE ME. AND HE COULD HEAR ALL THIS GOING DOWN WHEN THE PLATOON SERGEANT SAYS WE'VE GOT TWO DEAD UP THE ROAD.. .AND 114 ACTUALLY FACT THEY WERE PUT IN THE BACK OF THE PIG, THE SARACEN.. ..THE FIRING WAS QUITE HEAVY AND THERE WAS NO WAY -I MEAN I WASN'T ARMED AND THERE WAS NO WAY I WEAS GOING TO MOVE FROM BEHIND THAT CAR. WHERE DID YOU THINK THE FIRS WAS COMING FROM? "OH - WE KNEW WHERE IT WAS COMiNG FROM. IT WAS COMING FROM THE BLOODY FLATS. IS THERE ANY DOUBT ABOUT 2TL4T? "NO TWO WAYS ABOUT IT.. ,BECAUSE I WAS STUCK IN THE MEDDLE OF THE AREA ON MY OWN....IF YOU'VE EVER BEEN STUCK ON YOUR OWN WHEN THERE'S LOADS OF FIRE - I HAD THE CAR BETWEEN MIE ANT) THE FLATSD AND I ACTUALLY SAT WITH MY CJFß Ijp VflTH THE RADIO ON AND II ALWAYSD REMEMBER LIGHTING A FAG AND COUGHING LIKE. MAD THERE'S NOT MUCH YOU CAN DO WHEN YOU'RE NOT ARMED." ## 312 "THERE ARE ABSOLUTELY NO CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH ANY OF OUR LADS WOULD HAVE OPENED PIRE THAT DAY FIRST. THE ONLY CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH THEY WOULD HAVE OPENED FIRE BEFORE THEY'D BEEN FIRED UPON WAS IF THEY HAD POSITIVELY IDENTIFIED A GUNMAN OR GUNMEN WHOM THEY THOUGHT WERE ABOUT TO OPEN FIRE." OR - IF YOU HAD HEARD GUNFiRE AND WANTED To GET THE GUY'S HEAD DOWN ## S "NO BUT I'M ANSWERING THE QUESTION OF WHO FIRED FIRST THERE'S NO WAY OUR LADS WOULD HAVE OPENED FIRE FIRST UNLESS - THE ONLY ONE CIRCUMSTANCE THAT I CAN THINK OF... .15 IF A GUNMAN OR GUNMEN POPPED UP WITH SOME WEAPONS, THE BOYS WOULD NOT HAVE TURNED ROUND AND ASKED FOR PERMISSION TO OPEN FIRE. THEY WOULD HAVE IMMEDIATELY DIRECTED FIRE AT THE THREAT. THE WHOLE HISTORY OF THE BATALLION UP UNTIL THAT TIME IN NORTHERN IRELAND... SHOWED THAT PEOPLE DID NOT OPEN FIRE WILLY-NTLLY - THEY ONLY OPENED FIRE WHEN THERE WERE GUNMEN AGAINST THEM BECAUSE IF THAT HAD OF BEEN THE CASE YOU'D HAVE BEEN OPENING FIRE EVERY DAY OF THE WEEK AND THE RECORDS WOULD SHOW THAT IN ACTUAL FACT THE BOYS MAYBE ONLY OPENED FIRE MAYBE ONCE A FORTNIGHT OR SOMETHING I lICE THAT. IT WAS ONLY WHEN GUNFIRE WAS DIRECTED AT THEM.... ## Ww The Eye-W S In The Tir .Ard Were Wr Qed Fire Firfl P 390 "THERE IS A LOT OF CREDIBLE WITNESSES THAT SAY: YES - THE PARAS DI]) GET OUT OF THEIR VEHICLES ANMD START FIRING BECAUSE THEY WERE LOOKING TOWARDS THE PARAS. THEY WEREN'T LOOKING ON THE ROOFS BEHIND THEM. ALL THEY HEARD WAS FIRING. MOST OF THEM WERE RUNNING FOR COVER. YOU CAN'T TELL ME THAT ANY OF THEM STOOD THERE AND ACTUALLY SCANNED AROUND WHAT WAS TAXING PLACE AT THE TIME. I WOULD SAY - YES, THEY PROBABLY DID SEE PARAS JUMPING OUT OF THEIR VEHICLES AND FIRING - SIMPLY BECAUSE THE PARAS WERE UNDER FIRE. THE FIRE THAT THEY SAW WAS COMING FROM THE PARAS BECAUSE THAT WAS THE DIRECTION THEY WERE LOOKING. THEY DIDN'T SEE THE FIRE THAT WAS COMING FROM BEHIND THEM, OVER THEIR HEADS TOWARDS THE PARAS THE MAJORITY OF CIVILIANS THAT I SAW THAT DAY WERE LYING DOWN TAKING COVER. THEY WEREN'T STANDING UP LOOKING AROUND THEM. ## Why So Many Apparently Innocent People Wer Shot 457 'TM SURE THERE'S TERRIBLE MISTAKES IN EVERY CONFLICT - RIGHT OR WRONG. 13M. I- I - ITS VERY DIFFICULT - I COULDN'T EVEN BEGIN TO - TO - GIVE YOU A REASON WHY PEOPLE SAY THEY HAD WHITE FLAGS, PEOPLE SAY THEY HAD THEIR HANDS UP AND THEY WERE INDISCRIMINATELY SHOT. I CERTAINLY COULDN'T SAY THAT I SAW ANYTHING LIKE THAT HAPPENiNG AT ALL AND AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN THE MILiTARY FOR 20 YEARS AND I'VE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THAT HAPPENING YET." ## Scovering Up A}Uer A Mistake 580 AO taLQQ, tKNGk' TAKE ANQflJEhLDELJBERATE YTRYThTG J- O AUARDS. EVaRYC5DXS.. .CAP LE.OFD.OINÇs t;tSHGt. SOMEB0YÁNÏjrÑ4t.:GWTh ORCHIST-FTHOUGWrIrnA14&ÌGINQaZAIL BOMB BUT IT WAS ONLY kBIG STONE. OH 5H11 ,)VLL. IDjBM:itISAY1It.. AèAm BOMB -. THAT COULD..HAVE HAPPENED NONE OF-ifS RE'DENXfl.C. IAT--fl CO - HAVEHAPPENED... Q: WET L, TO WHAT EXTENT DOES THAT SORT OF THING HAPPEN iN REAL Lilt IN A COMMUNITY OF SOLDIERS WHO ARE BONDED VERY STRONGLY TOGETHER LIKE YOU ARE IN THE PARACHUTE REGIMENT 7 TO WHAT EXTENT TO YOU BACK EACH OTHER UP 7 "Z EtASa*fl}ffiPkRAC ' -aEGm4ENTTaANrrt& SAN e-. REGIMENT BECAUSE PEOPLE WOULI) BAer ThEMSELVE&LIJP; THERE'S NO Gir fiNG AWAY FROM THAT BUT THE FACT IS THAT I ONLY SEVRED IN THE MOTORMAN TOUR AND ON THAT TOUR WE WERE INVOLVED IN QUITE A LOT OF INCIDENTS AND-NEVER ONCE, NEVER ONCE IN FOUR AND A HALF MONTHS DII) ViE COMB BACK INTO THE BARRACKS AND SAY RIGHT LADS, LETS SIT DOWN HERE AND GET THIS STORY RIGHT. NEVER ONCE DID THAT HAPPEN IF ANYBODY WAS TRYING TO ALLUDE TO THE FACT THAT THERE WAS SOME SORT OF ETHOS IN THERE, IN THESE PARAS WHO WENT IN - AS SOON AS THEY GOT AN OPPORTUNITY, AN EXCUSE, THEY WOULD GO BESERK WITH THEIR SLR RIFLES - IT JUST WASN'T TRUE." ## Whether Soldiers Wod Fire At A Target If Civilians Were In Tue Way 678 (ANSWERING A QUESTION FROM JOHN ABOUT WHETHER SOLDIERS WOULD FIRE ATA TARGET EVEN IF fIERE WERE OTHER PEOPLE RUNNING A CROSS THEIR LINE OF F1RE) "I WOULD SAY 114 MY EXJ'ERJENrF. OVER 20 YEARS OF THE TROUBJ ES IN NORTHERN IRELAND, GENERALLY SPEAKING 99% OF SOLDIERS IN BRITAIN WOULD NOT FIRE IF THEY THOUGHT THAT THEY WERE GOING TO HIT SOMEBODY WHO WAS UNARMED. ONE OR TWO GUYS MIGHT, YES.. .BECAUSE WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IS, I WOULD IMAGINE, YOU SEE A GUNMAN ANT) YOU DON'T SEE ANYTHfl'G ELSE. YOU JUST SEE THE GUNMAN ON YOUR OWN TODD AND YOU'RE TRYING TO GO FOR THE GUNMAN. BUT MOST PEOPLE WOULD IMMEDIATELY PERCEIVE: MY GOD - YOU JUST CAN'T DO THAT... .YES IT COULD HAPPEN. ONE OR TWO INDIVIDUALS WOULD OPEN FIRE EVEN THOUGH THERE WERE CIVILIANS WHO WERE NOT ARMED RUNNiNG ABOUT THE PLACE BUT I WOULD SAY THE GENERAL RULE WOULD BE: NO THEY WOUDN'T DO IT? ## Side 4 Difficulty Of Identifying The Gunman - Z Lo "LOOKING AT lT FROM MY POINT OF VIEW, YES - I COULD SEE n] HAPPENING COS THE BLOKES WOULD BE HYPED UP - THEY' RE EXPECTING A GUNMAN TO COME. SUDDENLY 4 PEOPLE DASH OUT: BANG - BANG - BANG. I MEAN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A SPLIT SECOND. HE COULD HAVE THOUGHT: OH! MAYBE THE FIRST ONE HAD HIS HAND IN HIS JACKET OR HIS ARM DOWN CSOMEWHERE AND HE THOUGHT: OH - HE'S GOING TO BRING A RIFLE UP OR A PISTOL UP OR SOMETHING AND - BANG - BANG. I MEAN - YOU DON'T KNOW...(30) YOU'VE GOT YOUR ADRENALIN UP, RIGHT, AND YOUR TOLD, RIGHT, THERE' S A GUNMAN IN THERE SO YOU 'VE GOT TO GO IN AND HOUSE- CLEAR - RIGHT. SO, I MEAN, LETS BE HONEST. IF SOMEBODY COME BURSTING IN THAT DOOR ACROSS THERE AND THEY HAD THEIR HAND LIKE THAT IN FRONT OF THEM - MAYBE THEY'D BE RUNNING - ftJ(j) THEIR HAND JUST WENT IN FRONT OF THEM. YOU'RE EXPECTING A GUNMAN. if COULD HAPPEN. SOMEBODY COULD OPEN UP....(38)...FEASIBLYrFtOULD HAPPEN. THE FELLA COULD BE THAT HYPED 13? WITH HIS ADRENALIN, HE SEES SOMEONE RUNNING ACROSS - IF THEIR ARM'S DOWN, HE THINKS IT'S A PISTOL, HE'S GONNA PULL. ri' MIGHT JUST BE THE WAY HE RUNS. AND HE'S FIRED FIRSt" ## Why So Many Were Killed That Day "WITH MODERN HIGH-POWERED WEAPONS, PARTICULARLY WiTH SLR'S, IT'S FEASIBLE FOR A BULLET TO TRAVEL THROUGH ONE, TWO OR THREE BODIES WHICH WOULD ACCOUNT FOR PEOPLE BEING INJURED AS WELL AS KILLED. SO PERHAPS SOME OF THE PEOPLE WHO WERE WOUNDED WERE HIT BY THE SAME BULLET THAT KILLED ANOTHER PERSON. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT RICCOCHETS IN A BUILT-UP AREA.... SO THE ROUND HAS GOT TO GO SOMEWHERE. IF lT DOESNT'T GO INTO A BUILDING IT'S GOING TO RICCOCHET BACK IT DOESN'T ACCOUNT FOR ALL OF THE PEOPLE WOUNDED OR EVEN KILLED - BUT I THINK IT'S PART OF THE EVIDENCE THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN LOOKED INTO AND WASN'T. ## Is It Possible That A High Proportion Of Those_Shot Wer Oce37 People T "I THINK IT IS TECHNICALLY FEASIBI F THAT A SMALL PROPORTION OF THOSE PEOPLE WERE INNOCENT PEOPLE IN AS MUCH AS MAYBE THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN THERE BUT THEY CERTAINLY I$IDN'T DESERVE TO DIE, EVEN IF THEY WERE ONLY THROWING STONES, THEY DIDN'T DESERVE TO DIE AND NONE OF US ARE SAYING THEY WOULD BECAUSE OTHERWISE WE WOULD HAVE SHOT PEOPLE OUT OF HAND DOZENS OF TIMES. MY OWN OPINIONIS - YES - IT IS CERTAINLY POSSIBLE THAT A SMALL NUMBER OF PEOPLE WERE INNOCENT IN AS MUCH AS THEY WERE NOT CARRYING GUNS AT THE TIME, BUT NOT 13. WE COULD HAVE SLAUGHTERED 13 EVERY NIGHT OF THE WEEK. "lT IS SURPRISING THAT THERE WERE ONLY 13 KILLED. FOR THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THAT WERE ON THE STREET AT THE 11MB, if IS AMAZING THAT THERE WAS SO LInLE KILLED....IF YOU LOOK AT OTHER INCIDENTS WHERE HUGE DEMONSTRATIONS WERE TAKING PLACE AND SHOOTINGS OCCURRED, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT MASSIVE LOSS OF LIFE. I DON'T THINK THAT 1315 CONSIDERED A MASSIVE LOSS OF LIFE COMPARED TO THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THAT WERE THERE. I'M CONFIDENT THAT MOST TARGETS WERE MARKED BEFORE THEY WERE SHOT. lE THAT THEY WERE IDENTIFIED" AND THAT THEY WERE GUNMEN OR BOMBERS? "THEY WERE ONE OR THE OTHER, YEAR." ## (Cflr. 22A3, Thet3Estiui Fr'Mi 'Old BUT NOT IN SIGHT OF THE SHOOtING. ?ORAL. AT BLOODY SUNDAY SUNDAY. RE'S MII) 40'S. ROYAL GREENJACKETS. AT BLOODY (NUItS 01ML 1 ricuivi A LtJi'i IRA. Th4EXPERIENCED CORPORAL TAPE BUT WONF SEE M tflj NEIL. HE'LL PROBABLY GO ON PLATOON, i PARA. AT BLOODY SUNDAY - Ç1'RANSCRJLPT OF TAPED CONVERSATION WiTH NEIL HE WONT SEE JOHN OR TONY) RS. HE WAS IN THER GREENJACKETS WHEN RE SERVED IN NORTHERN IRELAND FROM 1970-74. FROM THE BORDERS TACHE. HE WAS INTHE SAS AT BLOODY SUNDAY.Hrsntcvw UN I'flJlÇlflflLc.fl nLAÌ4D FROM 1971 FOR 18 MONTHS. HE'S ALSO SERVED IN THE MiDDLE EAST. ## Tjie Iwst Qiloths From Pur S9Ldej 711E Paras Reputation Training Tribalism Familyath1Ospi1Epe Wife! T liS LIKE 7X1 BE UNDER FIRE mm bi «J * I DPI YPJJflW CARD r &VWA AMMTJN1TION ## 271E 41W)' Invesztga Lyon Branch - 713E Sib Dirty Tricks WHAT HA PPENED AT BLOODY SUP/DA Y ATB WiDER :CKI TYlER "n «I $OLDIEThV AS POLICEMEN ## 711E Paras Reputation (25) "V VE HEARD IT TIME AND TIME AGAIN: HERE COMES A PARA, DONT FLICK WITH HIM. AND THEY GET OFF THE STREETS BEFORE YOU STARTED MOVING - THEY'D GET OFF THE STREEtS AND THAT'S NO BUILLSHIT. ? APPEAR IN THE STREETS IN CATHOUC AND PROTESTAN]) AREAS, AND TEE CRIES WENT UP: HERE COMES THE PARAS AND THEY START LFGGING IT. COS THEY KNOW IF THEY HANG AROUND THEY'LL GET LIFTED. ## Q: So - What'S The Basis Of That Reputation? ,A: THE FACT THAT THEY KNOW THAT WHT WE COME INTO ANY AREA WE WOULD STOP ANY TROUBLE IN THAT AREA. . WE WOULD NOT ALLOW PEOPLE TO HANG AROUND IN THE STREETS, BUILD INTO CROWDS AND CAUSE TROUBLE... .THEY KNOW W}LkT;S GONNA HAPPEN TO THEY GET THE HEIL OFF THE STREETS ## Q: (27) Which Is An Aggressive Technique - Its (30 And Get Them, Is That Right? A: YES.. .WE WERE USED AS A FIRE BRIGADE. WHENEVER THE RIOT GOT TO A CERTAIN LEVEL AND THEY WANTED lT QUELLED, YOU WERE CALLED IN A BROUGHT IT. ## Training, Trib.4J.Sism, Family Atmosphere TOUGHEST TRAINING IN OF ANY IN THE ARMY.. .ONLY TAXE THE TOUGHEST IN THE PARAS. GOT TO BE A PSYCHO TO GET IN. AGGR.O BOUND. ASSAULT TROOPS. MAXIMUM VIOLENCE IN MINIMUM TIME. NEAREST THING TO A KAMIKAZI IN TIlE BRITISH ARMY. GO - GO - GO. IN NORTHERN IRELAND, SEEN AS THE HARDEST, TOUGHEST, BADDEST. GWE 'EM STICK THEY KNOW AND WE KNOW. SEE THE BERET AND THEY KNOW WHAT'S COMING, WHAT LT'S AIL ABOUT. LIKE TYSON IN THE RING: DOMINATE, SORT OUT, UNPREDICTABLE, KICK SHIT OUT OF 'E4 WHY SEND US IN IF THEY WANTED SOCIAL WORKERS? r SENSE OF PRIDE - HAVING A PRICE ON YOU READ. MADE US FEEL TOUGHER. RECKON SOME OF THEM WANTED TO LIVE UP TO THAT REPUTATION. HAD TO BE SEEN TO BE HARD MEN. (31)"I CAN REMEMBER BEING TAKEN OUT OF? BARRACKS, YOU KNOW 60 ODD BLOKES IN DENIMS ANDBOOTS AND PT VESTS AND DOUBLED ACROSS TO THE ASSAULT COURSE.. .AND YOU WERE JUST SENT ROUND IT AND ROUND n' FOR A 45 MINUTE PERIOD... YOU MAY HAVE RUN ROUND THAT ASSAULT COURSE 120 TIMES. YOU WERE COMPLETELY SHAnERED. YOU WERE DEAD. ROUND ABOUT THE TEWH lIME YOU WERE CLAWING UP THE WALLS AND FALLING OFF THE TOP AND CRAWLING THROUGH THE MUD AND?. lT WAS JUST MIND BOGGLING: OUT TO KILL YOU PHYSICALLY. YOU GEl' BACK TO BARRACKS.. YOU GET CLEANED Ii? AND THEN YOU' RE ONTO SOMETHING ELSE." Q: SO Al- ItR YOU'VE BEEN THROUGH THAT PRETI'Y ROUGH TRAINING, HOW DO YOU REGARD YOURSELVES? A: FIT. FIT.... Q: DO YOU SEE YOURSELVES AS AN ELITE FORCE? A: OH YES, DERNITELY, DEFINITELY. WHEN YOU FIRST PASS-OUT...YOUFFPJ. IT, YOU FPP.T SUPER-TROOPER. COMPRENDEZ9 ## Training, Tribalism, Family Atmosphere (12) Q: A TOUGHER FORCE? A: VERY MUCH SO. Q: DOES THAT LEAD YOU TO BE ARROGANT? A: YES. ## Q: Aggressive? A: WELL YOU WOULDN'T LAST IN THE PARAS OR GREENJACKETS IF YOU WEREN'T BASICALLY AGGRESSIVE.. :.(13)INTHE ELITE FORCRS YOU . . ..HAVE ) A TENDENCY NOT TO GIVE UP WHERE AN ORDINARY DOLDIER WOULD. YOU HAVE A TENDENCY TO GO ON UNTIL YOU CAN'T GO ANY FURTHER.. * .(14) YOU'RE THINKING. YOU WILL TAKE RISKS. YOU'RE ARROGANT. YOUR FF." (S) A: IT ST TAKES THE BASIC MILITARY TRAINING TO ITS EXTREME TO MAKE A BEtTER SOLDIER. ## Q: They'Re Tough? A: VERY TOUGH. YOU HAVE AN ASSESSMENT I THINK WHICH LASTS ABOUT A YEAR IN ALL. YOU CAN GET 300 ON AN ASSESSMENT ANDYQU MIGHT ONLY GET FIVE AT THE END OF THAT THAT ARE ACTUALLY CHOSEN. ## Q: The Res Are Rejected For What Reason? -- A; UNFiT, CAN'T COPE, CANT HANDLE n OR mST NOT GOOD ENOPUGH AT THE TIME.... (7) Q: ARE YOU BEING TAUGHT TO SURVIVE? A ABSOLUTELY. THAT'S THE NAME OF THE GAME. IT'SLIFE. IT'S SURVWAL. ## What Ils Like To Be Under Fire 16) A: IT'S AN ADRENALIN SURGE THE EXCITMENT TAKES OVER. Q: SO YOUR FIRSTC INSTINCT IF YOU'RE SHOT AT IS FEAR. BUT lT QUICKLY DISAPPEARS BY EXCITEMENT A: AN ADRENALIN SURGE - WHICH YOU CONTROL. YOU'VE GOT TO CONTROL, BUT YOU WANT TO GO. Q: BECAUSE OF YOUR TRAINING? A: YES. Q: AND WHAT DOES THAT MAKE YOU DO THEN. WHAT DOES TRE ADRENALIN SURGE TURN YOU INTO? A: I'M A TRAINED KrLLER. Q: TRAINED KILLER? A: YES. OH YES. DEFINiTELY. ## The Diffictiliy Of Ideniyfying 271E Gunmen (8) A: DISCRIMINATION IN AN URBAN SITUATION BETWEEN A CIVILIAN AND THE PERSON WHO POTENTIALLY COULD KILL YOU - THAT'S THE REAL PROBLEM. WHEREAS IN WAR, IP IT MOVES YOU SHOOT.... BUT THA.T WAS YOUR TRAINING... .THE LINES WERE CAREFULLY DRAWN THERE. WELL THEY'RE NOT IN NORTHERN IRELAND. ThIRE AREN'T LINES- YOU KNOW, YOU COULD HAVE A FRIEND ON ONE SIDE AND THE ENEMY ON THE NEXT SIDE AND NOT KNOW WHICH IS WHICH UNTIL THEy STRIKE AT YOU.... (22)50 ACTUALLY LOCATING HIM IS VERY DIFFICULT, VERY VERY DIFFICULT.... (26) .BUT ONCE YOU'VE IDENTIFIED WHAT IS THE TARGET THE DECISION WHAT YOU THEN DO IS: DO I FIRE BACK AT THE TARGET 7.. .THE AMOUNT OF TIME , YOU1VE GOT TO MAKE THAT DECISION.. .THAT MUST BE IvIILUONTHS OF A SECOND.. .(27)ANDTHAT DECISION, YOUR LIFE COULD DEPEND ON IT, SO YOU AINT GONNA TAKE A FORTNIGHT TO DECIDE WHETHER IT IS OR if ISN'T, ARE YOU 750 YOU'RE GONNA SAY: IT IS OR IT ISN'T. BANG.. ..(8) I DON'T THINK BLOKES WERE UNDER ANY ILLUSIONS ABOUT THAT (9)INA WAR SITUATION YOU DON'T THINK, YOU DO IT. IN NORTHERN IRELAND, BECAUSE OF mb SITUATION OUT THERE AND BEING...SUBJECI' TO ALL THE LAWS, YOU THINK TWICE. THAT MAY WELL PUT YOU AT RISK. WHEN YOU THINK TWICE... .A.ND AT THE END OF THE DAY WE ALL LIVE IN THEM SITUATIONS IN FEAR OF DYING. NOBODY WANTS TO DIE...SOITHINK I'D THINK ONCE AND HOPE THAT I MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION. Q: SO WOULD YOU SAY THERES'S A GREAT POTENTIAL FOR ERRORS TO BE MADE BECAUSE OF THAT TENSION BETWEEN WANTING TO SAVE YOUR LIFE AND WANTING TO RESPECT THE LAW AND MAKE SURE YOU'RE SHOOTING AT THE RIGHT TARGET? A: I THINK THERE ALWAYS IS. I THINK THERE ALWAYS IS... .END OF DAY ITS ALWAYS AT BACK OF HIS MIND AND IF A SITUATION ARISES WHERE HE SEES HE'S AT RISK, HE MAY REACT IN A WAY THAT WOULD BE DII±ICULT FOR ANYBODY OIJTSIDE OF BEING A SOLDIER TO UNDERSTAND. HOW DOES HE COPE WITH IT, YOU KNOW? I TELL YOU WHAT - HE WiLL COPE WITh LT PROVIDING HE'S ALIVE AT THE END OF 1T.YOU KNOW. ...(18) I THANK IF I WERE EVER IN THAT SITUATION WHERE IT WERE ME OR THEM, AND I DiDN'T KNOW WHETHER HE WERE GOOD OR BAD, I'D DO MY BEST TO MAKE SURE I WERE ALIVE AT THE NED OF IT AND IF IT MEANT THAT I GOrrA FACE SOME COURT ON SOME CRIMINAL CHARGE AT THE END OF THE DAY, WELL SO BE IT. SO LONG AS I WERE ALIVE I WOULDN'T CARE. (11) A: IN THE OTHER PLACES WHERE YOU SERVE YOU KNOW EXACT ## (23) Q: What Was The General View Of Your Mates At The Time About The Yellow Card Instructions? A: YOU THINK - BLOODY HELL, YOU KNOW, GOD ALMIGHTY HAVE I GOITA THINK ABOUT THAT WHEN i GET OUT THERE. YOU KNOW THERE'S A LOT TO THINK ABOUT AS A SOLDIER, DOING THIS, DOING THAT, DOING THE OTHER, KEEPING YOURSELF ALWE AND THEN SOMEBODY INTRODUCES A RULE THAT SAYS YOU CAN ONLY ENGAGE A TARGET PROVIDED THESE POINTS, YOU KNOW, EXIST. AND THAT'S NOT EASY FOR ANY SOLDIER TO COME TO TERMS WITH. SliT AT THE SAME TiME HE'S TAUGHT WITH A DISCIPLINE THAT HE OWS THAT THAT'S THEC WAY ITS GOT TO BE. . YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT INEVITABLY PEOPLE WIT J GET THROUGH THE ARMY THAT AREN'T GONNA ADHERE TO THAT SORT OF SITUATION, BUT I THINK THEY'RE WEEDED OUT FAIRLY QUICKLY AND ON YOUR WAY, YOU KNOW. (60) A:YOU'VE GOTTA COME DOWN THEN TO THE SOLDIER OR TEE INDIVIDUAL'S INTERPRETATION OF lT AND WHETHER HE FELT AT RISK OR NOT. I'M AFRAID IF I FELT AT RISK AND I THOUGHT THAT WAS THE BEST WAY TO LESSEN OR RELIEVE IT ENTIRELY, THEN YES... .IMIGHT BREACH THE YELLOW CARD RULES AND SOMEBODY MIGHT HAVE ME UP FOR BREACHING THE YELLOW CARD. BUT SO LONG AS I HAVEN'T KILLED ANYBODY IRRESPONSIBLY, THEN I WOULDN'T BE TOO WORRIED ABOUT THAT. YOU KNOW, I MEAN, ITS SOSMETHING I WOULD HAVE TO WEIGH UP AT THE TIME, PROBABLY IN A SPLIT SECOND AND YOU MAKE THAT DEC1DSION, YOU DO iT, RIGHTLY OR WRONGLY, YOU DO IT.... PA; BUT YOU'RE SAYING THEREFORE UNDER PRESSURE, THE YFJ TOW CARD RULES ARE OPEN TO ON THE GROUND INTERPRETATION? A: ISN'T ANY LAW? I DON'T TRINK THERE'S ANY LAW IN THIS LAND THAT IS 100%... AND QUITE OFTEN I WOULD THINK PEOPLE DO THINGS WHW1CH THEY REGRET AND ARE AGAINST THE LAW BUT THE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE SUCH THAT PEOPLE UNDERSTAND WHY THEY DID AND THEY'RE NOT FOUND GUILTY YOU KNOW. (20) A: NORTHERN IRELAND - YOU'VE GOT TO HOLD BACK A LOT MORE THAN YOU WOULD DO IN ADEN. DIFFERENT RACE. NORTHERN IRELAND'S HOME, Y'KEN. Q: FT'S YOUR OWN PEOPLE YOU MEAN? A: YOUR OWN PEOPLE, YES YOU-GOT TO GO WITH THE LAW. Thou SHALT NOT KILL ETC. YOU'VE GOT TO WATCHWHAT YOU'RE DOiNG AN BE POLiTE, COURTEOUS WHERE YOU DON'T REALLY WANT TO BE COURTEOUS. YOU'RE RESTRICTED IN THAT OF SOMEBODY SHOOTS AT AND STARTS RUNNING AWAY, YOU'VE GOT TO SHOUT AJFER Wflt "HALT. HALT OR IC WILL FIRE" INSTEAD OF JUST BLOWING HIS HEAD OFF. AND IF SOMEBODY HILTS YOU ROUM) THE HEAD WITH A FUCKING BRICK - EXCUSE ME MAN WHILE I KIT YOU BACK, SORT OF THING. THAT'S THE BERST WAY I CAN EXPLAIN IT. Q: DOES THAT MAKE YOUR T IVE MORE DIFFICULT? A: VERY. Q:WHY? A: .iT CAUSES FRUSTRATION BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT TRAINED TO POUCE PEOPLE. THAT'S A POLICEMAN'S JOB NOT AN ARMY JOB.... (47) Q: WHAT WAS THE GENERAL VIEW OF THE (YELLOW CARD) RULES ' A: THEY WERE RUBBISH. Q: WHY 7 A: BECAUSE WE GOT THE ORDERS - IF YOU WERE FIRED AT, JUST PUT TWO SNAP SHOTS, BUT IN ANY DIRECTION. Q: WHETHER YOU SAW THE TARGET OR NOT 7 A: YES. (53) Q: THE REASON FOR THAT, AM I RIGHT IN ThiNKING, WOULD BE AS A DETERRENT 7 A: A DETERRENT YES...(54) IT DOES WORK AS A DETERRENT. THE SOUND ITSELF WAS A DETERRENT.. .(47) PUT THEIR HEADS (BACK) INSTEAD OF BLOWING YOUR HEAD OFF. I'LL DENY THAT MIND IF rr EVER COMES OUT. I'LL TELL YOU THAT NOW BECAUSE THAT WAS A BATFALJON ORDER, THAT WAS THE GENERAL RULES FOR NORTHERN IRELAND. Q: WHAT - THAT YOU SHOULD PUT TWO SHOTS BACK IN THE GENERAL DIRECTION. FROM WHAT LEVEL DiD THAT COME? 7 December 1991 ## Yflww Card A: OH, I WOULD SAY A COLONEL.. .(50) THE YELLOW CARD WAS MADE BY POLITICIANS WHO WEREN'T ON THE STRtETS HAVE YOU EVER TRIED TO PUT THE YELLOW CARD INTO OPERATION ACTUALLY ON GROUND LEVEL 2 11 DOESN'T WORK. IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO WORK WITH THE MENTALITY OF THE IRISH PEOPLE WHO ARE NATURAL FIGHITERS ANYWAY. if IS IMPOSSIBLE TO WORK.....(51) A LOAD OF RUBBISH MADE BY poLmcIANs WHO DON'T KNOW THE FIRST THING ABOUT ACTUAL COMBAT OR STREET WORK. LOAD OF RUBBISH. ## (56) Q: So You'Re Saying In Those Situations When You Are Under Fire Or Tna Riot, It Was Ignored Q: GENERALLY" A: YES. Q: IN FACT NOT JUST IGNORED - YOU WERE ORDERED AT ONE POINT TO IGNORE THE RULES OF FIRING, OF FIRiNG AT AN AINMED TARGET? A: UNOFFICIALLY Q:IS THAT BECAUSE THE NAME OF THE GAME ON THE STREETS IS BASICALLY SURVIVAL? A: IT'S STILL THE SAME TODAY. ## Q: So What Was The General View Of The Yellow Card Regulations A: RUBBISH. IT'S A PoLITICIAN'S CARD. A POLITICIAN DOESN'T FIGHT WARS A SOLDIER FIGHTS WARS, POLITICIANS JUST MAKE THE RULES IF YOU OWE A POLITICIAN A RIFLE, A FLAK JACKET AND THAT YELLOW CARD AND PUT HIM IN BALLYMURPHY, im WOULD LAST A WHOLE 30 SECONDS. YOU KNOW - IT'S NOT TIff. Nj&Jffi OF THE GAME. THE NAME OF THE GAME IS LOOKING AFI'ER YOUR MATES. Q: WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT THEY ARE THEORETICAL RULES, MADE BY POLITICIANS WHO DON'T KNOW WHAT THE REALITIES OF SOLDIERING ARE AND THAT IT IS JUST NOT POSSIBLE TO STICK TO THOSE RULES IN NORTHERN iRELAND 7 YELLOW Ct/to A: YES. IT ISN'T POSSIBLE. Q: AND THAT SOLDIERS DIDN'T STICK TO THEM, GENERALLY? A: YES. Q: NOW DOES THAT MEAN THAT IP YOU HEARD A SHOT YOUR INSTINCT WOULD BE TO FIRE BACK TWO OR THREE SHOTS IN THE DiRECTION OF WHERE THE FIRE CAME FROM? A:YES. AS A DbibRPENT7 A: YES. ## Q: Even If You Couldn'T See The Target 7 A: YES. OF COURSE YOU WOULD. ITS WHAT YOU ARE TRAINED FOR, YOU KNOW. YOU KNOW THE GENERAL AREA WHERE ITS COME FROM SO YOU PUT A COUPLE OF SHOTS INTO LIKELY PLACES OF COVER. IF YOU GOT THE RIGHT ONE, HE'S GONNA MOVE ISN'T HE? AND YOU MIGHT HAVE YOURSFTF A TARGET, SO YOU WOULD DO IT. IT'S GOOD SOLDIERING. iT'S WHAT YOU'RE TAUGHT, YOU KNOW. I MEAN IF ANY OF MY MEN DIDN'T DO LT I WOULD BE SHOUTING AT THEM, I WOULD WANT TO KNOW WHY: WHY HAVEN'T YOU RETURNED FIRE 7 NO TARGET 7 YOU'VE GOT LIKELY PLACES OF COVER - TWO ROUNDS INTO EACH ONE - FIRE - AND I WOULD TELL HiM TO DO lT.... I'VE SEEN US NOT ONLY DO THAT BUT MOVING INTO AN AREA AÌD MAKING SURE THAT YOU GET IN WITH A MINIMUM POSSIBLE CASUALTIES, AS WE WERE GOING PAST A STREET, EACH FORWARD MAN HiT THE DECK AND PUT TWO ROUNDS DOWN THE STREET THEN EVERYBODY WENT ACROSS. RIGHT? AND THEY DID THAT IN EVERY STREET GOING DOWN THIS AREA WE WERE MOVING INTO. WE WEREN'T BEING FIRED AT OR NOTHING. ## Q: Just In Case? A: JUST IN CASE... .I'M NOT SAYING EVERYBODY LIKE THAT WAS IN THE REGIMENT. THERE WAS PEOPLE IN THERE WHO WOULD ABIDE BY THE YELLOW CARD. BUT HE WAS A LIABILITY TO HIS MATES, TO HIS SECTION AND, YOU KNOW, YOU'D WATCH HIM. ## Yellow Card IT'S THE WAY THINGS WERE WITHIN THE REGIMENT. Q: SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT WHEN YOU APP. TJNDER FIRE THERE IS NO TIME TO CONSIDER WHETHER THE GUY WHO HAS JUST MOVED WHO YOU THINK MIGHT HAVE A WEAPON OR A BOMB, REALLY HAS OR HASN'T? YOU JUST SHOOT 2 A: YES. YOU KNOW, iTS INSTINCT - ALL INSTINCT. ITS THE TRAINING, ITS EMBEDDED INTO YOU: ITS JUST A TARGET. rr MOVED. CRUMPH. SHOOT. RE DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO HAVE A GUN. YOU MAY THINIC RE'S GOT ONE AND - BANG. YOU JUST SHOT HIM BECAUSE RB WAS IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA FROM WHERE SHOTS WERE FIRED YOU'VE ALSO GOT TO BEAR IN MIND THE FEW TIMES WE'VE BEEN CAUGHT OUT, WHERE WE'VE HAD A PROTEST OR A DEMONSTRATION... AND ITS ALL BEEN SET UP. CROWDS ARE JUST PUSHED OVER TO ONE SIDE AND THEN YOU'VE GOT A COUPLE OF GUNMEN FIRING DOWN ON YOU...: YOU KNOW, TROOPS 114 NORTHERN IRELAND LEARNT AND MADE SURE FT DIDN'THAflENTO YOU AGAIN. AND THAT COULD HAVE BEEN THE CAUSE OF THESE INNOCENT PEOPLE OR DEMONSTRATORS GETING SHOT, YOU KNOW... .IT COMES DOWN TO SURVIVAL - LOOKING AFTER YOUR MATES, LOOKING AFTER YOUR BLOKES. THAT'S WHAT ITS ALL ABOUT. THE COLOUR SUMS IT UP. THE IRA DON'T HAVE A YELLOW CARD. WHY WE LOSE MEN BECAUSE OF A FUCKING YELLOW CARD. TRE OFFICERS KNOW IT - IF THEY LOSE A MAN THEY LOSE AUTHORITY. SO THEY UNDERSTAND US, THEY LET US GET ON WITH THE JOB. ...rr's THE WAY THINGS WERE DONE. ## Should A: (11) WET i I GOT AN ORDER ONE TIME ANT) THE COMPANY COMMANDER SAID TO ME, IF YOU COME UNDER FIRE PUT TWO OR THREE BACK IN THE GENERAL DIRECTION. HE SAYS YOU MIGHT NOT ACHIEVE (2) ANYTHING, BUT YOU MIGHT FRIGHTEN THEM. AND THAT'S WHAT WE USED TO DO Q: (49) WHAT MADE AN OFFICER TELL YOU TO BREAK ARMY REGULATIONS? ## Yellow Card A: WFT T WE HAD A LAD SHOT IN THE NECK, PARALYSED FOR LIFE. WE HAD A COUPLE MORE SERIOUSLY INJURED IN RIOTING. WE HAD ANOTHER LAD SHOT IN THE LEGS AND BASICALLY EVERY TIME WE WERE OUT ON PATROL AT TRAIT TIME THERE WAS SOMEBODY COME BACK WITH CUTS AND BRUISES AND THAT TYPE OF THING. SO I THINK IT WAS A CASE OF GO GET 'EM BOYS.. .WE'VE HAD ENOUGH TAXING THE SHIT. WE'RE GONNA HAND A BiT OUT. SO THAT'S WHAT I PUT lT DOWN TO. ## Q: Frustration? WITH A GUN.. .AND IF A SHOT GOES OFF, IT TENDS TO SEND YOU ON A HIGH PITCH TYPE OF THING, YOU KNOW. YOUR ADRENALIN'S GONE UP. YOURB WATCHING FOR ANYTHING YOU KNOW. I MEAN YOU CAN HAVE A WOMAN OPEN A BROLLEY AND YOU THINK: AYE, AYE, SHE'S GOT A GUN... ## A: Yes. Being Held Back.....(40)1 Mean If There'S Four Or Fwe People P Q: And You Fire One Off 7 A: WELL, ITS VERY EASY.... YOUR FINGER THERE IS READY. I MEAN IT'S ONLY A MArrER OF A SIXTEENTH OF AN INCH THAT YOU'VE GOT TO MOVE THE TRIGGER... Q: BUT WHAT ABOUT THE YELLOW CARD - YOU (SHOULD) IDENTiFY YOUR TARGET AND BE SURE? A: YOU FORGOT ABOUT THAT. YOU KNOW - YOU'VE GOT A OlIN THERE! YELLOW CARD? ITS NOT FOOTBALL. YEAH, I MEAN THAT WENT BY THE WAY IN MY COMPANY. THE YELLOW CARD SYSTEM - WFJ.T, WE LAUGHED AT THAT.... ## Extra Amm7Jnritqn A: THERE'S ALWAYS SPARE AMMUNITION ABOUT MAN. QTELL ME ABOUT THAT. A: WELL YOU HAVE TO GO ON THE RANGES DON'T YOU. YOU GO ON TIlER RANGES TO ZERO YOUR WEAPON. ## Q: You Mean To Check It? A: WELL EVERY WEAPON YOU GET IS DIFFERENT TO EVERYBODY'S EYES. THE WEAPON I flRE MIGHT NOT BE ACCURATE TO YOU SO YOU HAVE TO ZERO if AGAIN - SEE HOW THE BACK SIGHTS AND THE FRONT SIGHTS IS SO THAT lT FIRES STRAIGHT AND LOW. ## Q: So You Have To Practice Till You Get It Straight? A: YES. SO WHEN YOU ARE ON THE RANGES YOU ALWAYS BROUGHT EXTRA AMMUNITION WITH YOU. Q: AND YOU DON'T FIRE AS MANY SHOTS AS YOU THINK YOU'RE GOING TO FIRE AND POCKET THE REST? A: YES, YES. Q: HOW COMMON WAS THAT? A: QUITE COMMON. QUitt COMMON. Q: WOULD MANY SOLDIERS TAKE EXTRA AMMUNITION OUT WITH THEM? A: OH YES. ## Q:Why? A: TO ACCOUNT FOR THE ROUNDS YOU HAD O FIRE IF THINGS WENT WRONG.. .QUITE STANDARD PROCEDURE, YOU KNOW. I WOULD SAY THE BOSSES KNEW WHAT WAS GOING ON, THEY WERE QUITE WELL AWARE OF IT YOU KNOW. ## Extra Ammunition (50) A: WET J ANYBODY WHO DIDN'T HAVE BUCKSHEE ROUNDS WASN'T A PROFRSSIQNAL SOLDIER... .A PROFESSIONAL. SOLDIER IS ALWAYS PREPARED A: AND HOW DID YOU GET THEM? A: FROM THE RANGES WHEN YOU'RE ZEROING. Q: YOU MEAN %VHN y(»j'p TAXING YOW WEAPON TO CHECK IT FOR YOUR EYESIGHT? A: FOR LINE. YES. ## Q: How Easy Was It To Get Stuff Off The Ranges. Weren'T They Pretfy Strict 7 A: OH YES, PRETFY STRICT, BUT EVERYBODY HAS ROUNDS. PM NOT GOING TO EXPAND ON TRAT FACT.... Q: BUT DON'T THEY SEARCH YOU? A: NO. THEY WOK IN POUCHES AND THAT BUT THEY DON'T SEARCH YOU, NOT REALLY NO THAT'S DEGRADING FOR A SOLDIER Q: WAS THAT COMMON? A: YES. Q: I MEAN, EVERYBODY DID IT? A: YES. Q:WHY? A: PROTECTION. Q; EXPLAIN THAT? A: SOMETIMES [T WAS EASIER TO FiRE ROUNDS THAN USE ISSUE ROUNDS. Q: WHY. WHY SHOULD IT BE EASER? ## Jije Bestoijotes From Our Soldiers Extra Ammunition A: 20 ROUNDS 15 NOT MANY IN k GUNFIGHT, GUN BAI ILE. YOU MIGHT RUN OUT OF 20 ROUNDS. YOU KNOW, iTS BEflER HAYING EXTRA SO YOU DON'T RUN OUT. YOU RUN OUT - SOMEBODY CAN WALK OVER AND PUT A ROUND IN YOUR HEAD, CAN'T THEY? (80) Q: WHEN YOU CAME UNDER FIRE. .WAS IT THE GENERAL VIEW OF YOU AND YOUR MATES THAT 20 ROUNDS JUST WASN'T ENOUGH? A: THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S lt ## For You To Have It? A: YES. (66) Q: OK. THAT'S ONE WAY OF USING IT. BUT DID IT EVER COME IN HANDY V. ## Q: In What Way? A: DERRY. EVERY TIME YOU FIRED YOU HAD TO GO IN FRONT OF AN SIB. IF YOU HAVE BUCKSHEE ROUNDS YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO INFRONT OF SIB DO YOU, BECAUSE YOU NEVfl FIRED, DID YOU. Q: SO YOU DIDN'T HAVE TO ACCOUNT POR WHAT YOU DID, THAT'S WHAT YOU MEAN? - A: EXACTLY. Q: SO WAS THERE A SITUATION WHICH YOU FELT YOU HAD TO FIRE AN]) YOU DIDN'T WANT TO ACCOUNT FOR IT. ## (He Motioned To Me To Turn Off The Tape) Q: YOU WANT ME TO SWITCH THE TAPE OFF. OK I'LL TAKE NOTES. A: I PUT 20 ROUNDS OF TRACER THROUGH ONE GUY WHO WAS FIRING AT ME WITH A MACHINE GUN. HE WASN'T A VERY GOOD SHOT, YOU SEE. I AM. HE DIDN'T MOVE VERY MUCH AFTER THE FIRST SHOT. ## Q: Then You Fl1D 20 Rounds Of Tracer 11Ffo Him? A: I7ITHINIÇ IT WAS. ## Q: Out Of Frustration? A: I'LL SAY THAT.... (66) FUN. GE1TING RID OF FRUSTRATION. 7 December 1991 ## Extra Ammijnfi7On Q: (NOTES) BUT THAT WASN'T THE REAL REASON WAS IT? A: WELL I SHOT HIM COS HE WAS FIRING AT ME. THEN I JUST WANTED TO SEE HOW GOOD A GROUPING I GOT - AND IT WAS QUITE A GOOD GROUPING. ## Q: How Good? A: About That Big (HE PUTS THE THUMB AND FOREFINGER TIPS ON FACH HAM) TOGETHER To MAKE A CIRCLE & INDICATE THE 5127? OF THE HOLE THAT THE TRA CER B ULLETS kL-IDE). YOU DO YOUR JOB AND DON'T WORRY ABOUT THE RULES. IF YOU DON'T HAVE YOUR OWN AMMO YOU'RE JUST NOT A PROFESSIONAL SOLDIER IN N. IRELAND. EVERYBODY, EVERYBODY HAD THEIR OWN EXTRA AMMO.WE WEREN'T PAID ENOUGH TO OBEY RULES OF PEOPLE WHO WERE NEVER GOING TO BE THERE. A: (19) . .WHENEVER YOU WENT TO THE RANGE, INSTEAD OF FIRING ALL THE AQMMUNITION ON THE RANGE, YOU WOULD KEEP A FEW CARTRIDGES .NOW IF I WENT OUT WITH 20 ROUNDS, THEM 20 ROUNDS WERE IN ME .OCMBAT JACKET COS I WASN'TC3OING TO LOSE THEM. TRE AMMUNITION I HAD IN ME POUCH WOULD HAVE ALL BEEN ILLEGAL AMMUNiTION OFF THE RANGE AND I WOULD HAVE BEEN CARRYING MAYBE 40/50 ROUNDS OF AMMUNITION PLUS THE 201 HAD BEEN ISSUED. ## Q: Wouldn'T You Have Been Court-Marshalled If You Had Been Caught? A: WET J, I WAS AN NCO, I WERE DOING lT. ME LADS WERE DOING IT BECAUSE WE THOUGHT IF WE WERE GONNA COME UNDER FIRE BY ANYTHING HEAVIER. THAN AN ORDINARY RIFLE SHOT, WE'RE GONNA NEED THE AMMUNITION TO FIRE BACK. OW IF YOU'VE GOT 4 ORS PEOPLE DROPPED OFF IN A CHOPPER IN TIlE MIDDLE OF NOWEHERE AND YOU'VE ONLY GOT 80 ROUNDS BETWEEN YOU AND SOMEBODY OPENS UP ON YOU, YOU NEED A BIT OF AMMUNITION TO FIRE BACK AND YOU NEED SOME THAT IS NOT GOING TO BE COUNTED. SO IP YOU'VE GOT AN EXTRA 40 OR 50 ROUNDS A PIECE, YOU CAN LET FLY BACK, DO YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? ## Ekira I4Mmijivition AND THEN YOU'VE STIl T. GOT YOUR AMMUNITION HERE AND YOU CANSAY, WELL I ONLY FI THREE ROUNDS. ...WHTILE IT WAS IL! FOAL, PEOPLE TURNED A BUND EYE TO IT. (69) A: I MEAR n-Is NOT IMPOSSIBLE THAT A SOLDIER COULD GET SPARE TÀMMUNITION AND HE COULD DO THAT EASILY BY GOING ON A RANGE WHEN - DURING NORMAL TRAINING - INSTEAD OF FIRING 20 ROUNDS AT A PARTICULAR TARGET THAT rflmyIRE SUPPOSED TO, IF HE FIRES TWO LESS HIDES THEM SOMEWHERE, THEN THERE'S NO WAY OF KNOWING WHETHER HE'S FIRED 20 OR 18... .IF THE INDIVIDUAL HAD A MIND TO GET SOME AMMUNITION, THEN HE COULD GET IT. ## 711E Army Investigation Branch -71/E Sib A: (52) I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE. I OPENED FIRE ON SOMEONE A WHILE AFTER BLOODY SUNDAY AND HE WENT DOWN AND I THiNK I HiT HIM 3 TIMES.. .NOW WHEN SIB (SPECIAL INVESTIGATION BRANCH) COME TO ME THEY SAID WHAT HAPPENED I SAJD WELL I'M HERE ON THIS OBSERVATION POST HERE, A CAR PULLS UP, GUNMAN GETS OUT AND HE'S CARRYING A RIFLE. SO - WHAT DID YOU OPEN UP FOR (tHEY ASKED)? AND I THOUGHT: WELL, I OPENED UP BECAUSE HE HAD A GUN.. .HESAID: RiGHT. WHAT YOU'LL ## Øay IS THAT YOU AND YOUR MATE WEE ON THIS OBSERVATION POST, HE EEN THE GUNMAN, YOU SEEN HIM POINTING HIS RIFLE IN THIS DIRECTION AND YOU OPENED UP. HE (YOUR MATE) BACKS YOU UP ALE THE WAY.. .AND THAT'S WHAT THEY DO. THEY CONDiTION you IN WHAT TO SAY. Q: SO IN REAL LIFE, THE GUY YOU SHOT HAD A GUN, BUT HE HADN'T POINTED IT AT YOU AND THAT WAS THE CHANGE IN THE STORY? A:...WELL, THAT WAS THE CHANGE IN THE STORY. (82) A: THE SIB, THEY'RE GUYS I HAD DEALINGS WITH, WERE DECENT GUYS. I DON'T WANT TO EXPAND ON THAT FACT. THEY WERE DECENT GUYS. COMPRENDEZ? ## K Q: Can'T You Be Slightly More Explicit For Me...? A: THEY DIDN'T ASK VERY MANY QUESTIONS. COMPRENDEZ? Q: SO YOU ARE TELLING ME THAT THEY KNEW AS WELL AS YOU THAT TO STICK BY THE YPT Tow CARD RULES WAS IMPOSSIBLE? A: I WOULD THINK SO. Q: BUT IS IT RIGHT TO SAY THEY ALSO KNEW THAT AS FAR AS INVESTIGATING A SHOOTING INCIDENTY, SAY, YOU HAD TO OR YOU'D END UP IN THE DOCK? A: YES. Q: SO DiD YOUSEE THEM ON YOURSIDE? A: YES. Q: WELL if SOUNDS... ALMOST LUCE A CONSPIRACY? A: NO. I WOULDN'T SAY IT WAS A CONSPIRACY.. .BASICALLY THE SIB DU) THEIR JOB BUT.. .THEY UNDERSTAND SOLDIERS. THEY'RE SOLDIERS THEMSELVES.. THEY WENT THROUGH RIOTS AND THE BRICK AND SHiT AND EVERYTHING THROWN AT THEM AND SHOTAT, YOU UNDERSTAND? ## Dir7T Tricks A: YOU WERE GEYFING ABUSE -CALLED BRITISH BASTARDS, HUMAN SHIT THROWN AT YOU. DOC) SHIT THROWN AT YOU THEN OLD PEOPLE THAT USED TO COOK FOR YOU, STARTED PUTrING POWDERED GLASS IN THE CAKES - OH YES, CYAMDE OR POWDERED GLASS.... Q: SO HOW DID THAT AFFECT YOU AND YOUR. MATES? A: I PUT IT THIS WAY: HOW WOULD YOU FEEL IF YOU'D BEEN GETTING SHiT ALL DAY, ABUSE - VERBAL ABUSE - SHIT THROWN AT YOU, SPAT UPON, THINGS THROWN AT YOU, ROCKS THROWN AT YOU, SEEING ONE OR TWO OF YOTJ1 MATES WITH A BRICK IN HIS FACE AND BLOOD STREAMING DOWN:.. ONE PARTICULAR, WE WERE STANDING IN THE STRAND, WAS IT, LT WAS THE OLD CHECKPOINT DOWN NEAR THE SEOPPING CENTRE, AND A LAS SIE ABOUT 18 YEAR OLD WALK UP TO unc4.vt. AND SHE HAD A PAPER. INJ{ER HAND, LIKE THAT (HE DE&ÍONSTh!ATES) AND THERE'S AN AWFUL BIG DIRtY DOG TURD IN lT AND SHE JUST WALKED UP AND STUCK IT IN HIS FACE. BRiTISH BASTARD.... (34) AND THEN YOU HAVE TO STAND THERE AND TAKE IT BECAUSE YOU'RE UNDER ORDERS NOT TO RETALIATE. HOW WOULD YOU FFET 7 FRUSTRATION I WOULD SAY. THAT'S THE BEST WAY OF PUTI'ING IT... FRUSTRATING.... (43)ANY MAN IS GOING TO RETALIATE. (44) Q: TELL ME SOME OF THE WAYS IN WHICH YOU REPLIED TO THAT SORT OF THING? A: SWITCH IT OFF A MINUTE. (HE IS FINGERING HIS A.R.MY KNIFE ThIROUGHOUTTHIS ARS WER - PARILYTURWING lT IN HIS ¡L4Nj)5 AND PARTLY CLEANING HIS NAiLS WITH JIS TIP, IT LEATHER THONG IS ON HIS LAP.) A: I WAS SECOND ]N COMMAND OF A SECTION. MY OWN BOSS WAS UtaK 42'I: HE'D TAKE GUYS OUT ON ONE PATROL AN]) I'D DO THE NEXT. THAT MORNING THERE WAS SOME GUY WHO'D BEEN CALLING US BRiTISH BASTARDS, LMEY BASTARDS AND THROWING BRICKS AT US HE'D HiT US TWICE WITH THEM. MY FACE WAS CUT AND A LOT OF THE ABUSE SEEMED TO BE DIRECTED AT ME. HE'D COME UP AN]) SAIDTO ME: "WHO'S YOUR WIFE WITH THEN?" AND "I'LL BET SHE'S WITH A BLACK MAN." I'M NOT RACIST, UNDERSTAND. DiRTY TRICKS BUT THAT'S WHAT HE SAID. WELL, AT 2AM I WENT OUT AND WALKED INTO THE SAME GUY AGAIN. AND HE'S SHOUTING, YOU KNOW, BRITISH BASTARDS. SO I TOOK OUT ME KMPE - NOT THIS ONE, BUT ITS BROTHER, AND STUCK IT IN HIS GUTS, WIPED if ON HIS COLLAR AND PUT IT BACK ON MY LEG. THEN I CALLED THE RUC AND TOW THEM THERE WAS ABODY LYING IN THE STREET ETC ETC.".... ## Q: Was He Dead 7 A: OH I THINK 50. YOU NORMALLY ARE WHEN YOU'VE NO HEART LEFT. TAPE WAS NOW SWITCHED BA (X ON) Q: WAS THAT SORT OF BEHAVIOUR COMMONPLACE OR NOT? ## P(711E A: LATER, YES. Q: OTHER SOLDIERS WERE DOING THAT? A: LATER, YES.... ## (41) D: Because Of The Pressure And The Frustration? A: YES. PLUS YOU WERE GETrING SHOT AT NEARLY EVERY DAY. A LOT OF THE BOYS WERE GEt fiNG BLOWN UP. YOU WERE CEnINO STONE]) REGULARLY TO ME, I2 WAS VENGEANCE.. ..(68) SOMETIMES IF YOU CARRIED A GREENER. YOU KNOW WHAT A GREENER IS? Q: NO. A: THATS THE WEAPON THAT FIRES RUBBER BULLETS SOME i IMES YOU TOOK THE RUBBER 0131] AND PUT A COUPLE OF BAl FERIES EN IT. BAflERIES FIT, BY THE WAY... ## Q: Why Would You Do That? A: WELL, IT GOES BEITER ThAN A RUBBER BULLET. WHEN IT HITS, IT HURTS. A: (101) IT WASN'T AN EASY UPE FOR SOLDIERS OUT THERE, YOU KNOW, WHAT THEY HAD TO PUT UP WITH... FIRING A RIFLE INTO A CROWD WHEN YOU THINK YOU'RE BEING FIRED AT'S ONE THING. ## 7 December 1991 Dirty Tricks TO PUT A BOMB IN A PUBLIC T011 ET OR A PUB TO GET INNOCENT PEOPLE IS ANOTHER A: (91)1 THINK WE INTIMIDATED THEM MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE IN SOME WAYS (95)ITS PROFESSIONALISM. YOU DOMINATED THE GROUND, YOU LET THE PEOPLE KNOW you wn mn TO DOMINATE THEM AND AS LONG AS THEY'RE DOMINATE]) THE CHANrES ARE VERY SLIM THAT THEY WOULD RETALIATE BECAUSE THEY'RE FRIGHTENED OF YOU. WHETHER YOU DOMINATED THEM BY NUMBERS OR YOU DOMINATED THEM BY FEAR, YOU DOMINATED THE GROUND AND TO ME THAT'S PROFESSIONALISM. S: (96) SO YOU DOMINATED THEM BY BEING MORE PROFESSIONAL, BY BEING TOUGHER - BUT ALSO BY BEING DIRTIER? A: YES. YOU'VE GOT TO PLAY AS DIRTY AS THEY ARE. I MEAN, LETS FACE IT - THE IRA PLAY DIRTY, SO YOU'VE GOT TO PLAY AS DIRTY AS THEY DO... (32)1 MEAN WE DID LOTS OF TRICKS ON 'EM, YOU KNOW.. .WE KNEW A FAMILY WHO WAS VERY SYMPATHETIC TO THE [RA, IF NOT PART OF IT. SO WHEN YOU FOUND A CACHE OF ARMS, RIGHT, YOU WOULD ALWAYS TAKE SOME OF THE ARMS FROM THERE.. .AND WHEN YOU'D GO AN SEARCH THEIR HOUSE, RIGHT, FROM TOP TO BOTTOM, WE MAKE A GOOD JOB OF IT. YOU'D KNOW YOU WEEREN'T GOING TO FIND ANYTHING, BUT YOU USED TO LEAVE THE AMMUNITION, RIGHT, YOU USED TO HIDE THE AMMUNITION WHICH YOU'D.. ## Q: While You Were Searching The House? -- : Yes. Then A Few Weeks Laths Another Patrol Would Go In, They -W- Would Search Ti House, Find The Ammunition And Turned Him Over, Got Him Put Away. That'S What You Used To Do. J Q: So There Was No Playing By Tele Rules? A: OH NO. I MEAN THE ONLY RULE IS SURVIVAL. ## Q: (47) Do You Thilik The Catholics Feared You More Than The Other (Soldiers) Because They Knew You Would Play Dirty? A: YES. OF COURSE, I MEAN THEY KNEW. THAT'S WHY THEY HATED US SO MUCH. Q:IT SOUNDS ALMOST A BIT LUCE TRIBAL WARFARE? ## Dirty Tricks A: IT IS REALLY I MEAN WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT if, IT'S ABOUT RIGHT YOU KNOW. . . dT WAS ALL INBRED INTO YOU DURING YOUR TRAINING, FROM BEING TAKEN AS A RECRUIT WHEN YOU VOLUNTEERED, lT WAS ThIBRED INTO YOU STRAIGHT AWAY YOU KNOW. YOU'VE GOT TO BEAR IN MIND THAT WHEN YOU GO TO THE DEPOT AS A RECRUIT, YOU'RE SORT OF 18,19,20 YOU'VE GOT AN INSTRUCTOR WHO HAS MAYBE HAD ABOUT 7 OR 8 YEARS IN THE REGIMENT... .11E CAN OUTRINK YOU; HE CAN OUTRUN YOU; HIE CAN OUTFIGHT YOU; HE CAN OIJTBIIt YOU; HE CAN OUTDRINK YOU; HE CAN OUTSWEAR YOU. HE'S YOUR MAM; HE'S YOUR DAD. HE'S YOUR WORST ENEMY. RIGHT? AND HE TAKES YOU AND MOULDS YOU TO WHAT HE WANTS TO BE. .YOU IF YOU'VE GOT A MEMBER OF AN ILLEGAL ORGANTSATION - 1F HE'S GOT A RIFLE YOU SHOOT HIM. iF ..11E HAS A HIDDEN RIFLE, THEN YOU FIND A METHOD OF Chi. IING RID OF HIM. YOU MAY FIN]) A CACHE OF ARMS . .AN) YOU'D TAKE A PISTOL, AMMUNITION - RIGHT? ONE NICE DARK NICHT RE'S COMING BACK FROM THE PUB, YOU SHOOT HIM, FIRE TWO OR THREE SHOTS FROM THE PISTOL, PIJT THE PISTOL IN HIS HANDS. AS FAR AS ANYBODY'S CONCERNED HE FIRED AT YOU, YOU RETURNED FIRE AND SHOT HIM AND RE'S DEA]), HE'S OUT OF THE WAY. ## Q: Did That Happen? A: YES. AND NOT ON ONE OCCASION. IT HAPPENED ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS. IT WAS A METHOD OF GETTiNG RB) OF HIM.... Q: HOW MANY PEOPLE WOULD YOU SAY WERE ORDERED TO BE KNOCKED OFF? A: I HONESTLY COULDN;T REALLY SAY. I MEAN ITS GOT TO GO INTO A FEW. ITS GOT TO GO INTO 6,7, 8,9 MAYBE MORE, MAYBE MORE. ## Q: How Do You Know These Things - Did You Take Part? A: NO...WE KNEW WHAT WAS GOING ON, WE WERE AWARE OF IT GOING ON BECAUSE... YOU KNOW YOU JUST PUT TWO AND TWO TOGETHER.... ## Q: So Nobody Tells You Explicrily? A: NOBODY EVER WILL COUGH TO if. .J MEAN THE IRA WOULDN'T THINK TWICE ABOUT PUTtING A BULLET THROUGH MY KNEECAP WOULD HE' HE WOULDN'T THINK TWICE ABOUT SENDING ME TO THE DOG FACTORY AND MAKING US INTO DOGMEAT. SO WHY SHOULD I CARE WHAT I DU) TO THEM? ## Dirty Tricks Q: (97) DID NONE OF YOU GUYS THINK - HANG ON A MINUTE WE'RE BREAKING THE LAW lIEBE? A: YES. YOU'RE WELL AWARE OF WHAT YOUR DOING...BTJT THE THING IS, IT CAME DOWN TO BEING WITHIN THE FAMILY. YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY KNEW WHAT YOU WERE DOING BUT YOU WERE ALLtOGETHER. YOU NEVER SPLIT ON EACH OTHER - YOU NEVER TALKED ABOUTIT. IT WAS JUST ONE OF THOSE THINGS. YOU DID IT. YOU GOT ON WITH IT. OUR TRAINING IS BEST. YOU DON'T SHARPEN A KNIFE AND THEN BLUNT IT WiTH A SPONGE. WE TOOK THE SPONGE OFF. WE TERRORISED THE TERRORiSTS: WE KNEW WHO THEY WERE, WHAT THEY DONE SO ThBY TAKE THE PUCKERS OUT. KILLING EACH OTHER. WE DUMPED THE BODIF-S IN ANOTHER AREA. FUCKJING OBVIOUS ISN'T lT. THE PRESS 7 WHAT DO THEY KNOW ABOliT ANYTHING, WHAT ARE THEY TOLD' QUARTERMASTEIt SEARCH HOUSE. NEXT NIGHT GO TO WHERE WE DUMPED STUFF OFF NIGHT BEFORE. ARREST. EVEN SAY HE GOT GUN OUT - YELLOW CARD, PROBLEM OVER. TRUST EAVCH OTHfl, SURVIVE SEARCH, TAKE CASHFRO DRThTKING MONEY. lT WAS THE ACCEPTED THING. WE GOT AWAY WITH MURDER - I MEAN MURDER. PEOPLE GOT BEATEN UP - HOUSES SMASHED AND A FEW WERE DROPPED (KILLED) THEY (tHE OFFICERS) GAVE THE TOMS (SOLDIERS) LOADS OF ARMY & NATIONS (PROPAGANDA) ABOUYT FÇHE MICK TERRORIST - DIRTY TACTICS, RULE BY FEAR. SO THE TOMS THOUGHT, ALRIGHT WE'LL GIVE THEM A TASTE OF THEIR OWN... .T}IE BOYS WOULD ROLL A FEW DRUNKS, FUCK ABOUT WITH THEM, KNOCK THEM AGAINST A WALL, TAUNT THEM WEITH BEING IN THE IRA.. .DIDN'T ENDEAR YOU TO THE POPULATION... .1 WOULD SAY WE HAI) BULLY BOYS AND SHOULD HAVE JUMPED ON THEM, THINGS GOT OUT OF HAND. ## Dirty Tricks A: (14) WE HAD BEEN GETTING A HELL OF A LOT OF HASSLE - WHETHER lT BE FROM KIDS CHUCKING BRICKS AND BOTTLES AND THIS AND THAT AND THE OTHER. IF YOU'RE TEERE AND ITS GOING ON 24 HOURS A DAY, DIFFERENT TEMES, AND YOURE WALKiNG DOWN THE ROAD AND WOMEN ARE SPUTINO ON YOU, YOU DON'T FEflI IN A VERY PLEASANT MOOD TOE SAY GOOD MORNINOE.,.I MEAN 1F THEY SAY: YOU DIRTY RCYITEN BRITISH BASTARD, YOU UMEY BASTARD AND THEY HAPPENED WERE NE&Jt THE RIVER YOU WOULD JUST BOOT AND - OH, SHE'S FELL IN THE RIVER. AND THAT'S WHAT SHAPPENED I MEAN I SEEN ONE GIRL GO OFF THE DFK OF A SHIP. .11' WAS ___:j4pp HATRED AND if GOT TO YOU THAT WAY BECAUSE PEOPLE WERE rrnT.G YOU: WATCH YOUR BACK, WTACH YOUR BACK - THEM BASTARDS WANT TO KILL YOU. IF THEY CAN THEY'LL BLOW YOUR HEAD OFF.. ..(16) I THINK AT FIRST I TRIED TO TREAT EVERYBOD? EQUAL. .BUT I MEAN Afl'ER A WHILE IT GOT TO THE POINT WHERE I ALWAYS SEEMED TO BE GETTING THE HASSLE, THE PETROL & NAIL BOMBS, THE BLAST BOMBS. WHATEVER THEY WERE GONNA THROW THEY WERE GONNA THROW AT ME AND IT GOT TO A POINT WHERE A FRIEND OF MINE CAME BACK (FROM LEAVE) WITH ABOUT 15 OF THESE BLACK WIDOW CATAPAULTS, WHICH ACTUALLY STRAP ON YOUR ARM. AND YOU WERE PASSING THEM OUT AMONG THE LADS AND WREN THEY WERE DRIVING AROUND.. .THE DIAMOND AREA OF LONDONDERItY. ...WE WOULD BE USING tHESE CATAPAULTS. . . - ## Q: Who Would You Fire Them At 2 A WELL IT WOUL]) BE ANYBODY WHO WAS ON THE WRONG SIDE OF TRE TRACK, YOU KNOW. ## J Q: Anybody Who Was On The Street ' A: ANYTHING THAT MOVED I MEAN..J'VE WALKED DOWN A STREET WHERE I HAD A RIFLE TN ONE HAND, I'VE HAD THE BATON1N THE OTHER HAND AND AS I'VE WALKED DOWN THE STREET i SHOULD iMAGINE EVERY WiNDOW WITHIN ABOUT 800 YARDS WAS BEING BROKEN. . .YOU GET THAT FRUSTRATED WITH PEOPLE EFFINCi AND BLINDING AT YOU AND CHUCKING AT YOU AND YOU'RE EXPECTED TO HOW BACK, HOLD BACK. IN RETALIATION YOU TEND TO DO THESE THINGS WHAT YOU WOULDN'T NORMALLY DO.... - Q: (19) HOW COMMONPLACE WAS THE THINGS THAT YOU'RE SAYING AT THAT TIME 7 ## Dirty Tricks A: VERY VERY COMMON. IF YOU REMEMBER YOU HAD RUBBER BULLETS AND THEY CHANGED THEM INTO PLASTIC BULLE'ITS. WELL ONE F THE MAIN REASONS WHY THEY CHANGED THEM. .15 THAT PEOPLE WERE TAKING THE RUBBER BULLET OUT, BANGING A NAIL THROUGH IT AND THEN PUTI'ING IT BACK IN. ## Wil4T Happened At Bloody Sunday? (58) A: I ARRESTED ONE BLOKE, PASSE]) HIM ONTO ANOTHER BLOKE TO PUT HIM IN THE BACK OF THE PIG AND AS I TURNED ROUND THE FIRiNG STARTED. AND YOU KNOW, NOBODY'LL EVER TELL ME THAT I WAS NOT UNDER FLRE. YOU KNOW - I'VE BEARD ALL SORTS OF STORIES, BUT NOBODY WILL TELL ME THAT I WAS NOT UNDER FIR. .fl WAS flUTiNG THE WALL BESIDE ME.. iT WAS THE HEAVIEST I'D HEARD IN NORTHERN rEELAND... .THAT DOESN'T MEAN TO SAY IT WAS, YOU KNOW, 5,000 ROUNDS. YOU KNOW - A lo ROUND BURST WOULD HAVE BFFN HEAVY. AND THAT WAS ENOUGH. THERE WAS A EAVY BURST AS FAR AS I WAS CONCERNED... ## Q: And Did You See The Gunman? A: NOW WE'RE INTO AN AREA WHERE TM NOT TALKING. ## Q; What? Sorry? A: NOW WE'RE (3h ri. ING INTO AN AREA WHERE I'M NOT TALKING. ## Q:! Don'T Understand Why? A: WHY ? BECAUSE I'VE GOT A LIFE TO LEAD. I DON'T WANT TO SPEND THE NEXT 20 YEARS LOOKING OVER MY SHOULDER....!' VE TAKEN YOU FURTHER THAN I'M WWNG TO GO ON WiTHOUT A DOUBT. s (34) Q: CAN YOU TAKE ME THROUGH WHAT HAPPENED ON THAT DAY? A: I COULD DO, BUT i'M NOT GOING TO. AND I'LL TELL YOU WHY. I MEAN LONDONDERRY WAS A VERY IMPORTANT PART OP THE SITUATION LIN NORTHERN IRELAND AN]) THERE'S PEOPLE THAT WONT LIKE ME VERY MUCH FOR WHAT HAPPENED IN LONDONDERRY AND THEY RESENT THE FACT.. .ALL tWILL SAY IS IWAS INVOLVED ON THAT DAY. IDON'T THINK WE DID ANYTHING WRONG AT ALL. END OF THE DAY PEOPLE WERE MAKING THE DECISIONS THEY SAW Ffl]. YOU KNOW, ITS NOT EASY TO DO. I DON'T THINK WE DID ANYTHING WRONG...! DON'T REALLY WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT.. .TRAUMATIC TEME, IT WERE A TRAUMATIC TIME FORSOLDIERS.. .THEY MADE DECISIONS AND LIVES WERE AT RISK AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THERE'S THIS BIG TRIBUNAL FOR SOLDiERS. YOU KNOW, HAVING flC) JUSÏThY WHAT YOU DID...! DO KNOW L DIDWT DO ANYTHING WRONG AND I DIDN'T SEE JqyflTJNG GO WRONG.... ## What Happened At Bloody Sunda Y? (35) Q: WERE YOU SHOT AT THAT DAY A: OH YETI. WITHOUT A DOUBT. YETI (49)1 SAW WHAT I THOUGHT WERE BULLETS LANDING IN FRONT OF THE VEHICLE IN WHICH I WAS GETTING OUT OF. AND FROM THAT MOMENT ON MY EYES WERE EVERYWHERE FOR THE ONE THAT WAS GONNA BE SHOOTING AT ME. OR TO FIND THAT TARGET AND IF NEED BE, EUMINATE IT... AND I WERE AFRAID. .1 WERE AFRAID THAT ME OR MY MATES COULD BE INJURED OR KILLED. AND YEH, I WAS FRIGHTENED, I'M NOT ASHAMED TO ADMIT THAT. THAT' S THE SITUATION CERTAINLY WE WERE FIRED ON AND I THINK I'D KNOW. ## Why So Mary Were Jut.Tfj) Atbloodysupjday BUT THAT' S ALMOST SAYING THATJ1'HE GUYS (SOLDIERS) SHOT WILDLY AT ANYTHING 7 A: (71) BECAUSE THEY WERE TARGETS. THEY WERE TEERE. IT'S AS SIMPLE AS THAT. THEY WERE IRISH, THEY WERE IN LONDONDERRY, THEY LIVED IN A CATHOUC COMMUNITY, THEY WERE ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE PARACHUTE REGIMENT. THEY WERE TARGETS. THEY WERE SHOT 'rimy DB) NOT NECESSARILY HAVE RIFLES THEY MAY NOT HAVE BEEN THROWiNG Ph u(OL BOMBS - THAT'S NOT TRE POINT. THEY WERE IN THE AREA. THEY WERE QN THE END OF A RIFLE. THEY WERE DEAD. Q: A: IF lT MOVED YES. IF IT MOVED YOU SHOT lt. .ALL HE SEES IS SOME MOVEMENT, RIGHT? AND HE'S GONNA GET THE FIRST SHOT OFF, HE'S GONNA HAVE A REACTION SHOT STRAIGHT AWAY AT THAT MOVEMENT COS 11E KNOWS THAT'S FROM APPROXIMATELY WHERE THE FIRING IS COMING FROM, YOU KNOW. SO HE'S GONNA HAVE A REAC LiON SHOT ISN'T HE .. .HE'S NOT GOING TO LET THAT SHOT COME AT HIM, HE'S GOING TO GET THE FIRST ONE THERE TO MAKE SURE THE SHOT DOESN'T COME AT HIM AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENS. IT'S PURELY REACTION. ## Q: Instinct? A: LT IS, IT'S INSTINCT. dT'S LONG HOURS OF TRAINING AND YOU KNOW ITS JUST BUILT IN ALL THE TIME. iTS THROWN AT YOU FROM THE FIRST WEEK OF TRAINING RIGHT THE WAY THROUGH.. .THE WHOLE IDEA IS TRAINING FOR THE ULTIMATE AND THE ULTIMATE IS WARFARE.. .EVERYTHING IS INSTINCT. IT'S LOOKING AFTER THE MAN WHO'S NEXT TO YOU ALL THE TIME AND THAT'S THE WAY THE REGIMENT IS... .211E REGIMENT STOOD FOR EVERYTHING. EVERYTHING OUTSIDETHE REGIMENT JUST DJDN'TCOUNT AND THAT'S THE WAY THEY WERE TAUGHT THEY WERE TAUGHT THAT FROM DAY ONE. THEY WERE MOULDED INTO THAT. - THERE WAS CHEERING AS WE RACED OFF THROUGH THE BARRICADES. LADS WERE SHOUTING "GET THE PUCKERS, GET THE ADRENALIN GOING SNATCH SQUAD". ..WASTE GROUND BELOW FLATS. JUMP OUT - RUNNING AWAY, THOUSANDS OF THEM SCREAMING, SHOUTING. ME WiTH OFFICER LOADS OF FUCKERS CAME AROUND THE CORNER AT US. OFFICER P1111MG FIRST, RIGHT BY HIM, CARTRIDGES WHISTLING PAST MY HEAD. HE HAD LOST IT, HADN'T HE. RAN BACK TO PIGS TO GET OUR WEAPONS. ## Wily So Many Were Killed At Bloody Sunda Y SHOOTING STARTED, NOT SEE ANYTHING, NO TARGETS, NOTHING... .WOULD HAVE SHOT IF SEEN. SMOKE EVERYWHERE. LADS UTIN" GET HIM, OVER THERE. DON'T KNOW. DON'T KNOW WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED. YOUR ,IRAINED THAT AS SOON AS YOU HEAR A. SHOT, NO MATrER WHERE lT COMES FROM YOUR TRAINING TAKES OVER. PUT THE PARAS IN THAT SITUATION AND EXPECT THEM NOT TO HOLD THEIR FIRE. WHEN WE Got THE WORD TO GO IN - LISTEN TO THE NOISE - RUBBER flICKS GOING OFF (RUBBER BULLETS), CS GAS, WATER (CANON), PETROL BOMBS EXPLODING. VERY TENSE SITUATION. RUMOURS OF RADIO REPORTS OF GUNFIRE, COUPLE OF PEOPLE H]T. ADRENALIN WAS UP - ROARED IN GUNG- HO, SCREAMING LETS GET 'EM..EVERYBODY SHOUTING GET IN AMONGST THEM, SMOKE DRIFTING.. .PIGS WENT TOO FAR RIGHT INTO THE FLATS, CAN'T RETREAT. FUCK - I THOUGHT WE'D GET DONE HERE. HPI) OUT RIGHT UNDER THE LFATS. SrrnNG FUCKING DUCKS. PEOPLE RUNNING EVERYWHERE. CROWD POURING ROUND A CORNER - WE, ALL LOOKING UP AT THE FLATS - BOMBERS, SNIPERS, ANYTHING....TI{ELADS STARTED FIRING, LETTING LOOSE. PEOPLE WERE RUNNING, SCREAMING, OUR GUNS GOING OFF. SHADOWS BECAME TARGETS. AT FIRST LT WAS POSSIBLY TO PUT SOME FIRE INTO THE FLATS, SCARE ANYBODY WITH A GUN. THEN THERY STARTED SHOOTING AT THE BARRICADES... .THE PLATOON CRACKED REALLY - ATMOSPHERE WAS ELECTRIC - SOME OF THEM WERE SEEING TARGETS EVERYWHERE. ## Covering Up At Widgery & Backing .E4Ch 0773Er Up Q: SO ON TUB GROUND. AP SOMETHING WENT WRONG YOU'D BACK EACH OTHER UP? A: OH YES. RIGHT THE WAY DOWN THE LINE, YOU KNOW. YOU'RE BACKING EACH OTHER.. .EVERYBODY STUCK UP FOR EVERYBODY - YOU COVERED UP FOR EACH OTHER. ## Q: Even If That Meant Lying? .A: Yes. Oli Yes. If You Had To Go And Stand In Court And Do Lt On The Bible, You Would Do Ri' To Seni) A Paddy Down. Yes, Sure I'D Do If... .(48) You See, The Regiivient Has Always Been A Very Close-Knit Family You Know All Paras, They'Ve All Gone Through The Same Neck Of The Qwoods As You Have, They'Ve All Had The Same Brutal Treatment.. .30 They'Re All The Same. Q: (5O)SO THERE'S A LOT OF BONDING? A: YES, THAT'S RiGHT. ## Qt So You'Ve All Got A Lot Of Respevct For Each Other Because You'Ve All Been Through The Tough Trining? A: YES. THAT'S RIGHT. YES. THAT'S WHERE if COMES DOWN TO LT. Q: IT'S LIKE BEil«) A FAMILY.? A: YES AND IT IS....ASTHLE MOnO SAYS: "ALL TO ONE PURPOSE YOU KNOW." 0F COURSE WE GOT OUR STORIES TOGETHER - DIDN'T TALK ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE. GOT TO GET IT SORTED BEFORE THE 511E GET TO YOU. ..IT WAS A MA'ITER OF KEEPING OUR REPUTATION.. JESUS, WE GOT AWAY WITH MURDER, CRACKED UP YOU KNOW. NOBODY WILL TALK ABOUT IT, NOT EVEN TO OTHER SOLDIERS JR THE BArrAU0N. WE WERE TOLD BY THE OFFICERS AND SENIOR NCO'S: JUST BUTtON YOUR UP ON THIS ONE. BLOODY HELL MAN, SOME OF THOSE GUYS EVEN FIRED FROM THE HIP. BLOODY COWBOY AflÏI1JDE. CRAPHATS (OTHER REGIMENTS) ONLY DO THAT. LOST OUR DIGNITY OVER THAT. . . .WE WERE LUCKY WITH WIDGERY. SHOW JOB, WASN'T LT. ARMY HAI) TO COVER UP. ## Covering Up At Wjdgery & Backing Each 0771Er Up (132) A: A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT WAS ON THE WIDGERY TRIBUNAL WEREN'T THE GUYS THAT WERE DOiNG THE FIRING IN THE STREETS Q: BUT WERE SAYING THAT THEY WERE 7 HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT 2 A: THERE WAS A LOT OF YOUNGSTERS ON THE STREETS. MOST OF THE ONES ON THE WIDGERY TRIBUNAL WERE OLDER. - - Q: YOU'RE SAYING THAT TIlE MEN WERE SWAPPED. THAT A YOUNG MAN WHO FIRED DIDN'T GIVE EVIDENCE. SOMEBODY WHO WAS OLDER, MORE EXPERIENCED, WAS TOLD TO SAY THAT HE'D FIRED WHEN THE OTHER CUY HAD FIRED, RIGHT? A: THAT'S RIGHT. COACHED. Q; HE WAS COACHED? A: EVERYBODY'S COACHED. Q: TELL ME ABOUT THAT. IN WHAT WAY 2 HOW ARE THEY COACHED 2 A: WELL YOU GET TALKING TOGETHER DON'T YOU AND CLEAR EACH OTHER. THAT'S WHAT BUDDY BUDDIES IS FOR. Q: YOU MEAN EVERYBODY WILL BACK EVERYBODY PISE UP? A: THE ARMY'S A FAMILY.... Q: IN WHAT WAY WERE.. .STORIES ALTERED FOR THE WIDGERY TRIBUNAL? A: Q: IN WHAT WAY? A: ## Using Soldiers As Policetiiew A: (104/5) YOU CAN'T PUT A SOLDIER AS A POLICEMAN. NO WAYCAN THEY DO A POLICEMAN'S ROLE. TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. I MEAN A POLICEMAN IS THERE TO KEEP THE PEACE - THAT'S THE VOEWS HE TAKES, YOU KNOW. TO PROTECT LIFE, TO PROTECT PROPERTY, TO KEEP THE PEACE. WHAT'S A SOLDIER'S 7 lT'S THE COMPLEtE OPPOSiTE, ISN'T IT. YOU KNOW, HE'S NOT THERE TO PROTECT PROPERTY, HE'S NOT THERE TO SAVE LIFE. HE'S THERE TO DESTROY PROPERTY, TAKE LIFE, SOD THE PEACE. YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT HE'S TRAINiNG FOR, ISN'T IT? YOU'RE NOT TRAINING FOR PEACE - HE'S TRAINING FOR WAR.. .TRE TWO JOBS, THEY'RE THE COMPLETE OPPOSiTE YOU KNOW.. .ITS A BAD MOVE MAKING A SOLDIER DOPOLICEMEN'S WORK. (15) A: THE POUCE ARE DEDICATED TO LAW AND ORDER, RIGHT?. THAT IS THEIR ROLE.. .THE ARMY IS NOT DEDICATED TO LAW AND ORDER. NORMALLY WHEN THE ARMY GOES INTO A RIOT SITUATION, THEIR JOB IS TO GET ORDER AND LAW BACK ON lf}{E STREET THERE'S A SUBTLE DIFFERENCE.....THE POUCE W)IJ TRY TO DO THINGS 10(1% LAWFUL WAY, OK, AND WILL PUT THEIR HANDS UPON THE MAN AND DRAG HIM AWAY AND SAY YOU'RE UNDER ARREST.... 9.:'HE ARMY WilL LEAP ON HIM, TEEN DRAG HTh! AWAY THEN SAY YOU'RE UNDER ARREST. OK. THEY GET ORDER -THEN LAW. THE POUCE MAINTAIN LAW AND ORDER.... Q: DO YOU THINK THAT WHEN SOLDIERS ARE PUT INTO CIVIL DISORDER r SITUATIONS THAT THEY'RE GOSNG TO BE DRAWN INTO AREAS OF CONTROVERSY BECAUSE OF THAT DIFFERENCE? A: OF COURSE THEY ARE. BECAUSE IT IS THE LAST RESORT WHEN YOU START TO BRING SOSLDIERS ONTO THE STREETS. YOU KNOW IT MEANS THAT THE POUCE HAVE FAILED IN THEIR JOB.... (34) YOU KNOW THAT TO MY MIND, THAT'S WHAT INTERNAL SECURiTY IS. GE! FING ORDER, GE! FING THINGS SORTED OUT SO THAT PEOPLE CAN OBEY THE LAW.. .THEY CAN'T DO THAT IN THE MIDDLE OF A RIOT SITUATION, YOU KNOW. THEY HAVE TO GET ORDER BACK ON THE STREETS, ORDER IN THE AREA THEY ARE CONTROWNG. .,THEY'RE NOT TRYING TO GET LAW, BECAUSE ITS NOT THEIR JOB TO BRING THE LAW INTO IT. THEY'RE TRYING TO GET ORDER. ## Using Soldiers As Policemen (4) A: WHEN I WENT OUT IN 69 IT WAS A CASE OF PLAY HEARTS AN]) M[NDS. AND HOW DO YOU SUDDENLY SAY TO PARATROOPERS WHO'VE BEEN LEARNING ALL THE SKILLS OF SOLDIERS, YOU GO OUT THERE AND PLAY HEARTS AND MINDS 7 THAT'S NOT EASY FOR ANYBODY (5) WHEN YOU JOIN THE ARMY YOU THENIC THAT Y0U'ÑE GON&ABE A SOLDIER. WE WENT OUT TO IRELAND TO DO A POUCIIG JOB - BASÏCALLY TO KEEP TWO FACTIONS APART...SO ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU'RE TffltQWN TINTO A DIFFERENT ROLE....ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU'RE FIGIrn.G YOUR OWN...WITHIN TITER RESTAINTS OF THE POLITICS OF RUNNING nIE COUNTRY. TAKE THE POUCE FORCE OUT AND PUT THE ARMY IN. HOW IX) YOU COPE WiTH THAT? WELL, YOU CAN'T. 1F YOU JUST SAiD TO A SOLDIER - RIGHT, YOU'RE GOING IN, AND YOU'RE GONNA BE A SOLDIER AND YOU'RE GONNA SHOOT EVERYBODY, YOU KNOW, AS YOU WOULD NORMALLY IN WASR. ...THAT WONT BE TOO DW1ïCULT FOR EM (6)BIJT IF YOU SAID TO EM RIGHT NOW YOU'RE GONNA ACT AS POLICEMEN.. .AS THEY ASKED IN NORTHERN ffiflj1J KEEOP THE FACTIONS APART, TRY AND KEEP PEOPLE HAPPY WHILE WE SAOLVE THE POLITICAL ASPECTS OF ¡T THE SOLDIER WILL FiND THAT DIFFICULT TO DEAL WITH... .YOU CAN'T JUST FIRE AS- YOU QWOULD IN WAR. YOU'VE GOTTA THINK WHAT YOU'RE DOING. AND YOU ARE OF COURSE GOVERNED BY THE LAW OF THE LAND. YOU KNOW IF YOU FIRE YOU'VE GOT TO EXPLAIN WHY YOU DID IT AND YOU'VE GOT TO USE MINIMUM FORCE. BUT ALL THE TIME PRIOR TO THAT A SOLDIER HAI) BEEN TAUGHT: YOU GET IN,M WIN THE F1REFIGHT AND SORT IT OUT AFTERWARDS.... YOU'RE SUDDENLY IN A PLACE WHICH IS . . . .ALWAYS CONSIDERED PART OF YOUR COUNTRY AND YOU'RE THERE TRYING TO CONTROL YOUR OWN COUNTRYMEN. AND THAT'S DIFFICULT TO COPE WITH. YOU KNOW, IF YOU COULD SAY; WELL, THEY WERE ENEMY AND WE WERE AT- WAR WITH THEM, THEN YOU WOULDN'T REALLY HAVE TO THINK ABOUT (IT)? ## The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Schedule Of Redacted Entries In Neil Davies'Diary 1989 1990 Key: A: Refers to solclier identity (I) Interviewed specifically about Bloody Sunday Interviewed about Bloody Sunday generally and Aden interviewed about Aden only Spoken to about potential contacts Don't recall if spoken to or what about Did not speak to Not to do with Bloody Sunday *: Refers to soldiers who have waived duty of confidentiality B Refers to locality, which may enable soldier to be identified C: Refers to miscellaneous information ## Diary Note: Some pages have more than one redaction. The schedule lists such redaction in order from top to bottom on the page. 1989 NOVEMBER DECEMBER i. A(3/4) 2. A(2) i. A(3/4) 2. A (3/4) /'{i9531 B 1. B 2. B/A(l) B/A(3) B/A(1) A(1/2) A(1/2) A(2)* A(3) A (l/2)* (same person as 3 above) A(l/2) A(6) A (1/2) A (1/2) 12, B/A(1) B/A(1) B/A(3) lB 2. B 3. A(1/2) 4. A(112) Mia '532 5. A (1/2) (same person as i above) 12th i. A(3/4) A(l/2) A(l/2) A(3) A(l/2) B B/A(1) B/A(1) I. A(1/2) 18th B/A(1/2) 20th I. B A(S) A(1/2) A(1/2) A(1/2) 21st i. A(1/2) A(i/2) A(S) 29th i A(1/2) A(1/2) A(1/2) A (112)* A(5) 1990 JANUARY 7th 1, A(1/2) A(5) A(1/2) A(7) A(l/2) 8th A(2)* A(314) A(3/4) A(5) "Forward Plannmer" (near end of diary) 1. B/A(1/2) B/A (1/2) B/A(1/2)* B/A(2)* "Annua' Cash Summary 1989" (near end of diary) i A(5) 2. A(5) 3 A(5) 4 A(5) 5 A(5) 6 A(5) 7. A(5) 8 A(S) 9 A(7) "Exchange Pubs (near end of diary, next to Anminal Cash Summary 1989 page) i A(3) 2. A(2)* 3 A(3) 4 A(5) 5. A(S) 6 A(S) 7 A(6) 8 A(6) 9. A(S) iO.A(5) il A(5) 12 A(S) 13 A(3) 14 A(5) 15.A(6) 16.A(6) A (2) A(6) A(6) A (6) A(5) 22.A(6) 23. A(6) 24 A(6) Letter attached to diary 1. A (2)* 1989 Year Planner (at end of diary, left hand page) A(l/2) A(1/2) A(1I2) A(2)* A(2) A(1/2) A(5) A(3/4) A(7) A (3) A (2) * A (2) * 13.A(i) * "1989 Year Planner" (right hand page at end of diary) i C/A(1)F A(1)* A(5) "Frequently used Telephone Numbers" (near front of diary) 1. B 2. A(3) 3. A(3/4) 4. A(5) 5. A(3) 6. A(3) 7. A(1/2) * 8. A(2)* 9. A(1/2) A (1/2) Il. A (1/2) 12.A(7) 1990 JANUARY 8th B/A(l/2) B/A(1) B/A(5) B/A(5) 9th A(1/2) A(1/2) 10th B/A(1/2) B/A (1/2) (same person as i above) B/A(1/2) B/A (1/2) B B 11th B/A (1/2) 12th i. A(2)* A (1/2) * 15th A(3/4) A (3/4) A(5) 16th 1. A(5) FEBRUARY 7th A(1/2)* A(2)* A(1/2) A(S) 22nd 1. A(3) 27th 1. A(314) ## March ist A(3/4) A (3/4) 12th 1. B/A(2)* 13th A(1) A(2)* A(2) A(1/2) A(2) A(3) A(1/2) A(3/4) 9 A(5) 14th A(2) A(3) ## 19Th 1. A(1/2) 2. A(1/2) 3. A(3) ## 20Th A(1/2) A(2) 3 A (1/2) (same person as i above) 4. A(3/4) 5. A(5) 6. A(3/4) 7. A (2) (same person as 2 above) 8. A (3/4) (same person as 4 above) 9. A (2) (same person as 2 and 7 above) 10 A (3/4) (same person as 4 and 8 above) ## 21St L A(2) 2. A(3/4) 3. A(5) ## 22Nd 1, A(2) A(3/4) A(S) ## April 11th A(2) A(1/2)* 12th 1. B/A(1/2) 2 B/A(1/2)* 3 A(l/2) 4 C/A(l/2)* 17th 1. A(2) 2. A(1/2) 3. A(2)* 4 A (1/2) (same person as 2 above) 5 A(2)* 18th 1 A(1/2) 2. A(2) 3 A (2) (refers to same person as 2 above 4. A(2)* 19th 1. A(2)* 2 A(112) 3 A (2) * (refers to same person as i above 4. B/A(1)* 20th A(2)* A(1)* 23rd i. A(2) 2. A(5) A(1/2) 24th i. A(2) 2. A(5) 25th 1. A(1) 26th 1. B/A(1)* 27th 1. A(1) 28th 1. A(1) MAY 3rd A (1/2) A(2) A(2)* 8th A (1/2) 2. A(2)* 10th i. A(1/2) 16th i. A(1/2) 30th 1. A(2)* 2. A(5) 3. A(2)* 4, A(1/2) JUNE Ist A(5) A(2)* 3, A(7) 4. A(1/2) 4th 1. A(2)* JULY 6th 1. A(2) 7th B!A(2) C A(2)* 4, A(1)* 5, A(1/2)* 6. A(2)* 23rd i. A(7) 2. A(5/7) ## Outline Of Legal Principles On Behalf Of Mr Davies S. I O of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 provides as follows: "No person may requre a person to disclose nor is any person guilty ofcontempt of courtfor refusing to disclose the source of information contained in a publication for which he is responsible unlessit be established to the satisfaction of the court that disclosure is necessary in the interests ofjustice or national security orfor the prevention of disorder or crime. ## The Importance Of Protection Of Sources 2 . The protection of sources ís of itself a matter of high public importance. Protection ofjournalistic sources is one ofthe basic conditionsfor pressfreedom as is reflected in the laws and the professional codes ofconduct in a number ofcontractsng states and is affirmed in several international instruments on journalisticfreedoms Without such protection sources may be deterredfrom assisting the press in informing the public on matters of public interest As a result the vital public watchdog role of the press may be undermined and the ability of the press to provide accurate and reliable information may be adversely affected Having regard to the im partance and protection ofjournalistic sourcesfor pressfreedom in a democratic society and the potentially chilling effect an order of source disclosure has on the exercise of thatfreedom such a measure cannot be compatible with article 10 of the Convention unless it is justified by an overriding requirement in the public interest (Goodwin y United Kingdom (1996) 22 EHRR ¡23, at 143, approved by Lord Woolf CJ recently in Ash worth Hospital Authority y MGN Ltd [2002] ¡ WLR 2033 (HL(E) @para 61 where he stated that "any disclosure of a journalist s sources does have a chilling effect on thefreedom of the press") This principle, which Schiemann U described in Camelot Group Picy Centaur Communications Ltd [1998] 2 WLR 379 as the "most important consideration" of the "chilling effict", is so fundamental that nothing less than necessity will suffice to override it In addition, by virtue of section 12(4) of the HRA, the Tnbunal is now required to pay "particular regard" to the importance of freedom of expression, a right which is plainly engaged in this case. ## The Requirement To Override The Absolute Ban Before making any Order requiring the disclosure of journalistic sources, the Court must undertake a two-stage process. First, it must decide as a question of fact whether it has jurisdiction to order disclosure. See, Sec of Statefor Defencev Guardian Newspapers [1984] Ch 156, where the effect of the statute was described in thefollowing words by Sir John Donaldson MR l 64A-B Section 10 of the 1981 Act within the scope of its application varied this direction or practice to the extent that unless exceptional circs were established to its satisfaction the court was bound to refuse to require any person to disclose the source of information contained in a publication lt is clear from the wording of the statute that the onus of showing necessity falls upon the party seeking disclosure. Although it is a form of 'balancing exercise', the scales by no means atji even. Far from i There is a very weighty presumption in favour of refusal As Lord Bridge stated in X Ltd y Morgan-Gram pian (Publishers) Ltd [1991] AC 1, @44: In this balancing exercise it is only if the judge is satisfied that disclosure in the interests ofjustice is of such preponderating importance as to override the statutory privilege against disd asure that the threshold of necessity will be reached." See also the approach of the ECHR to arride 10 in balancing the public interest in freedom of expression and the public interest in the due administration of justice For example Sunday Times y UK [1979] 2 EHRR 245, 281 [the European Court] isfaced not with a choice between two conflicting principles but with a principle of freed am of expression that is subject to a number of exceptions which must be narrowly interpreed the court has to be satisfied that the interference was necessary having regard to the acts and circumstances prevailing in the specific case before it (approved by Lord Woolf CJ recently in Ash worth Hospital Authority MGN Ltd @para 48B) Parliament intended that disclosure should be ordered only if a "compelling case" for doingso was established (seeJohn y Express [2000] 1 WLR 1931, 1938, CA) As a matter of principle and European jurisnrudence, the necessity for any restriction on freedom of expression (which an order for chsclosure of sources necessarily entails) must be convincingly established (see Goodwin y United Kingdom @para 40). ## Necessity 6. The nearest synonym to the term "necessary" is perhaps to be found in In Re an Inquiry under the Company Securities (Insider Dealing) Act 1985 [1988] AC 660 where Lord Griffiths defined it as meaning "really needed", as opposed to "very useful" or "expedient". 7. However, the court has to be satisfied not only that disclosure is needed for the purpose of the proceedings but also that the need is so great that it ought to overnde the absolute ban on disclosing the identity of sources. Lord Oliver summarised the test in X Ltd y Morgan-Gram pian @53: as follows: the true question in my opinion is not is the information needed in order to serve the interests ofjustxce? but "are the interests ofjustice in this case so pressing as to require the absolute ban on disclosure to be overridden?'' 8. As part of the exercise of determining whether disclosure is necessary, there are a number of factors which are relevant and which, m this case, weigh against disclosure the significant public interest in the information provided by the sources, Per Lord Bridge in X Ltd y Morgan Gram pian @44 The greater the legitimate public Interest in the information which the source has given to the publisher or intended publisher, the greater will be the importance of protecting the source." the fact that the information was not obtained unlawfully Per Lord Bridge in X Ltd @44 If it appears to the Court that the information was obtained legitimately this willenhance the importance of protecting the source" the fact that permitting the journalist to maintain the anonymity of the source would not pose a threat to someone's livelihood. ## Proportionality 9. It is now fundamentally important, in line with the introduction of the Human Rights Act and the Strasbourg Jurisprudence which this Tribunal is obliged to take into account (s.2 HRA), that the Court must carefully consider the question of«proportìonality". It must be satisfied that there is a sufficient relationship between "the legitimate aim pursued by the disclosure order and the means deployed to achieve that aim (see for example, Goodwin y United Kingdom @para46) The content and purpose of any disclosure sought is vital to the assessment of necessity and proportionality (which is the same as considerations under article 10) As the ECHR stated in Goodwin y United Kingdom, and as was approved by Lord Woolf CJ in Ash worth Hospital Authority y MGN Ltd @61, limitations on the confidentiality ofjournalistic sources cailfor the most careful scrutiny of the court It must be satisfied that the restriction should be proportionate to a legitimate aun which is being pursued Furtherin ore, it is dear from the Strasbourg jurisprudence that any analysis of proportionality is always a question of fact which cannot be determined in the abstract but only on the concrete facts of each particular case This approach has been adopted now in domestic courts. See, for example: Venables & Thompson y News Group Newspapers Ltd where Dame Butler Sloss engaged in a careful assessment of the requirements of necessity and proportionality by reference to the general legal framework and specific evidence in the case Also Douglas y Hello Ltd ## All Necessary Steps The Tribunal must also be satisfied first that available steps have been taken to obtain the mformation by other means There is no question of necessity being established before all avenues have been explored and found fruitless "Before the courts require journalists to break what a journalist regards as a most important professional obligation to protect a source the minimum requirement is that other avenues should be explored It cannot be assumed that it will not be possible either tofind the culprit or at least to narrow down the number of persons who could have been responsible When weighing the conflicting public interests involved it is to be remembered that there is no certainty that ordering a journalist to reveal her sources will be any more successful ¡fit is not successful damage will be caused to the public interest in protecting confidential sources without any compensating benefit to the competing public interest of protecting professional privilege (per Lord Woolf MR in John y Express para 27) ## Residual Discretion 13. If the Tribunal is satisfied that the overriding necessity for an order for disclosure has been established, then the second stage in the process is for it to decide as a matter of discretion whether to exercise this junschction or not As Lord Griffiths stated in In Re an Inquiry under the Company Securities (Insider Dealing) Act 1985 [1988] AC 660, 703G-H section 10 is notframed in language that compels a judge to order a journalist to reveal ¡us sources The factors will again depend on the particular circumstances of the case. i 4 . There is one peculiar and sighificant feature of this case which distinguishes it from other media organisations or witnesses who have appeared before the Tribunal Unlike any other journalists , Mr Davies is a former member of the Parachute Regiment and therefore a colleague of some of those who were serving at the time of Bloody Sunday (although he not present himself) As explained in the witness statement wffich he voluntarily provicied to the Inquiry, it was for this reason that Fe was able to secure the assistance of a number of soldiers for the making of the Praxis programme (on the basis, though, of strict confidentiality) However, by his involvement m the programme, Mr Davies also became the subject of death threats after it had been broadcast from individuals presumably unhappy with the direction of the programme In the circumstances, the prospect of him being required to reveal the identities of those whose names he agreed not to disclose is a matter of some concern to him, similar, it is submitted, to the pressing need of the soldiers to maintain their anonymity, both then and now Any requirement to disdose his sources undoubtedly engages Ins Article 2 rights, as well as the Article 10 rights which apply to all journalists David Sherborne 5 Raymond Buildings Gray's Inn London WC1R 5BP

en

3387-pdf

## Raising Participation In Learning Iag Toolkit For Post-16 Learning Providers Contents: - Section One 2 The Raising of the Participation Age and the Derby City Trial Project - Section Two 4 Information, Advice and Guidance - Section Three 7 The Learner Journey - good practice from application to transition - Pre-Entry IAG and Application 7 - Information Sharing 8 - Admission and induction 9 - Delivering Flexible Provision 10 - On programme CEIAG 11 - Retention 12 - Integrated Youth Support Services 13 - IYSS Referral Pathway 14 - Managed Learning Transfer 16 - Planning for Transition 16 - Section Four 18 Summary and Checklist - Section Five 19 Useful documents and resources An electronic version of this document is available to download from the practitioners' section of the Connexions Derbyshire website: www.connexions-derbyshire.org (practitioners section - curriculum support - RPA). We recommend reading it in electronic format as this will enable access to website links throughout the document. The purpose of this toolkit is to share some of the information, processes and good practice that have been identified and developed so far as part of Derby City's RPA trial project and to signpost learning providers and others to the range of supporting information, training and resources which will help them develop their own IAG practice. We hope that you find it a useful resource. What do young people in Derby say about the RPA? - "What's good about staying in learning is that you will be able to expand your learning as well as have the best opportunities in life" (Yr 6 learner). - "You get better grades and a better job as well as you get more money from your job" (Yr 7 learner). Thoughts of current learners on their experiences of leaving school: - "I just decided to leave. I thought I would get work until September but I've not managed it" (16 year old after dropping out of college). - "We don't just want to be left alone after leaving school" (16 year old in training on receiving ongoing advice about options). Section One The Raising of the Participation Age "The Raising of the Participation Age… is one of the most fundamental changes to our education system… Our preparations for this historic change need to start now." Iain Wright MP, 2010 What is the Raising of the Participation Age (RPA)? The Education and Skills Act 2008 increased the age to which young people must remain in learning to 18. This will be phased in with the participation age rising to **17 in 2013 and to 18 in 2015**. Young people will have a range of learning options including full time and part time education, apprenticeships, diplomas, foundation learning and volunteering or employment with training. The rationale behind this change is to equip the UK with a more highly skilled workforce whilst increasing the opportunities for all young people to fully realise their potential. The Raising of the Participation Age (RPA) is supported by other national strategies. The 14-19 reforms should ensure that appropriate, flexible and quality provision is available for all young people, and the national Information, Advice and Guidance (IAG) Strategy; Quality, Choice and Aspiration, is designed to ensure that all young people receive the quality IAG they require to make the right choices for them to remain engaged and successful in learning. The Department for Education, formerly DCSF, has funded Connexions Derbyshire on behalf of Derby City Local Authority since November 2009 to run an RPA trial project. The purpose of this project has been to look at developing IAG and other processes to help prepare for the implementation of RPA. This has included work with children, young people and their families and partner agencies. What strategies inform the RPA? NB - Like many other areas of government policy, the approach to and implementation of the RPA is currently under review. However, at the time of writing, RPA remains in statute and whatever future decisions may be made about its implementation, there is little doubt that there will continue to be an emphasis on increasing participation in learning and improving quality of Information Advice and Guidance. Analysis of young people leaving learning early - what did we find? - 93% of 2009 Year 11 leavers went into learning by November - Only 44 young people from the 2009 leaver cohort were not in any form of learning or work by January 2010. From an 18 month study of the 2008 leaver cohort, we found: - Less than 80% stayed continually in learning until they were 18, however - The majority of those who did leave learning subsequently re-engaged in a different form of learning - Slightly more females (19.3%) than males (17.9%) left learning early - The majority of those leaving within the first term were from level 1 courses, whereas the majority leaving learning over the longer term were from level 3 courses - Where a reason was given, the most common reason for a learner leaving learning was 'asked to leave by provider' Other common reasons were: o Unhappy with course o Change of career choice o Moved to preferred choice o Struggled academically o Pregnancy o Family breakdown o Moved out of area o Custodial sentence o Illness - Learning providers reported the most common issues for learners leaving early were: o Family pressures / responsibilities o Financial pressures and the need to find or juggle part time work o Difficulties coping with academic demands of course o Difficulties adjusting to structure of learning o Lack of motivation or direction o Other personal issues - See full report on the practitioners section of the Connexions Derbyshire website: www.connexions-derbyshire.org As part of the project, we carried out an initial analysis of those young people leaving learning early. This was completed in order to better understand the reasons for young people leaving early and to identify areas for potential development and targeting of support services. Section Two Information, Advice and Guidance (IAG) Extract from IAG Quality Standards User Guide, DCSF 2007: "IAG covers a range of activities that equip young people to manage their personal and career development, including learning, and to become more selfreliant. CEIAG - Careers Education Information Advice and Guidance is the umbrella term within which IAG operates and includes curriculum development within Careers Education at schools and learning providers. IAG includes: - information - accurate, up-to-date and objective information about personal and lifestyle issues, learning and career opportunities, progression routes, choices, where to find help and advice and how to access it - advice - activities that help young people to gather, understand and interpret information and apply it to their own situation - guidance - impartial guidance and specialist support to help young people understand themselves and their needs, confront barriers, resolve conflicts, develop new perspectives and make progress Why is good quality IAG important? Good quality IAG supports young people's personal development, achievement and career progression. It helps them to make successful transitions through learning and into work. There is strong evidence that young people who receive good quality IAG achieve more and are less likely to drop out or change courses than those who do not. Young people say they want and need more help when making lifestyle decisions and choices about their next and future steps. Good quality IAG - contributes directly to the achievement of the five Every Child Matters outcomes and cross-cuts national and local targets, such as Public Service Agreement targets, and targets in the Local Area Agreement and Derby City Children and Young People's Plan - facilitates the implementation of the 14-19 reform programme, which places great emphasis on the delivery of high quality, comprehensive, impartial and learner-led IAG, and contributes to 14-19 progress checks - raises aspirations and increases achievement and participation 14-19 - features in Ofsted inspections, which look at how well IAG contributes to achieving good outcomes for young people, supporting individual progression and achievement by tackling misunderstandings, challenging stereotypical and traditional thinking, and helping to ensure that young people see all options as real." The Derby City Post 16 IAG Entitlement All young people (16-19*) are entitled to… - Help to raise their aspirations, overcome barriers and to reach their full potential. - Impartial information, advice and guidance about learning and work options (including about Apprenticeships, Diplomas, Foundation Learning, GCSEs/A levels, Employment with training, Volunteering and Higher Education) - One to one guidance and support from a Connexions adviser if needed. - The opportunity to create and review an individual career action plan based on assessment of their individual needs. - An opportunity to learn about the world of work through labour market information or work related activities. - Impartial information, advice and guidance around personal, health and social issues and, where needed, one to one support from local integrated and specialist youth support services. - Information, advice and guidance to be delivered by appropriately trained and knowledgeable staff. In addition, young people in learning (16-19*) are also entitled to… - Support from a Personal Tutor who knows them well and who can help them to access specialist advice and ensure any learning needs or issues are quickly addressed. - Access to high quality programmes of careers and personal education which help young people to plan and manage their own careers and lives. - The opportunity to create and review an individual learning plan based on assessment of their individual needs - Access to a supportive process of managed learning transfer for learners at risk of disengagement, exclusion or non-progression. …to help them engage with, access and remain in learning and make successful transitions * or up to 25 in the case of learners with LDD What are we doing to ensure young people are able to access good quality IAG? As part of the RPA Trial project, we consulted with a range of learning providers, IAG and youth support services to draw up an IAG entitlement for all young people post 16 which could be used as a framework to review and develop our practice. This document has been endorsed by the Derby City 14-19 Partnership. Section Three The Learner Journey - good practice from application to transition and beyond: Post 16 IAG - A learner journey This flowchart summarises some of the good practice processes that have been identified in discussion with Derby City learning providers and others. See section 3 of the toolkit for further detail on each of the boxes. Connexions, schools and providers work together to ensure that all young people receive impartial CEIAG and make the best post 16 choices: •Supported by the Area Prospectus Routes Ahead - www.routes-ahead.org additional support. e.g. academic / learning, behavioural, health etc. These should be offered personalised support recorded in their individual learning / support plan. Case Study: Ensuring Impartial Pre-Entry IAG - NACRO NACRO, an foundation learning provider, receives a number of self-referrals for their courses, often through word of mouth. However, to ensure that all learners joining have received impartial IAG and are joining a course that will meet their needs, NACRO refer all self-referrals to their link Connexions Personal Adviser (PA) before signing them up. The link PA is familiar with NACRO and their provision, so is able to ascertain the young person's suitability for joining their programmes, but is also able to offer a broader picture about the full range of provision available. On a number of occasions, young people referred from NACRO have eventually ended up starting courses with different providers which were better suited to their needs. This process also means that NACRO can be confident that those learners who do join them are doing so as the result of a well-informed decision and are likely to be more suitable and committed to the course, and having already made links with the link PA. ## Section 3 The Learner Journey - Good Practice From Application To Transition The Following Information And Case Studies Are Based Partly On Feedback From Derby City Learning Providers On Their Existing Good Practice. Impartial Pre-Entry Iag And Application Connexions, Schools, Colleges And Providers Work Together To Ensure That All Young People Receive Impartial Ceiag Throughout Their Education To Enable Them To Make Well-Informed, Realistic Decisions About Their 14-19 Options. It Is Important That They Receive Impartial And Comprehensive Iag So As To Maximise Their Chances Of Progressing Into A Suitable And Sustainable Outcome. All Young People Will Be Supported To Apply For Their Choice Of Post-16 Learning Option - Broadly Available Via The Following Routes: - Gcse And A/S Levels - Vocational Qualifications - Foundation Learning - Diplomas - Apprenticeships And Work Based Learning This Process Supported By Routes Ahead, The Online Area Prospectus For Derby And Derbyshire At Www.Routes-Ahead.Org This Prospectus Provides Full Course Details For All 14-19 Learning Courses. It Also Provides Information On Out Of County Provision, Independent And Special Schools. What type of information might I be sharing, receiving or making use of? - Safeguarding - Common Assessment Framework - CAF - Statements of Special Educational Needs - SEN - Assessments of Learning Needs (Section 139a Assessment) - Individual Education Plans - IEP - Multi-Element Plans - MEP - Behaviour Management Strategies - Pen Profiles - Any other information that will aid understanding of their potential, learning style and support needs Case Study - Information Sharing Kingsmead School Kingsmead School is working with Derby College to make more effective use of 'pen portraits'. Pen portraits provide background information on young people with whom Kingsmead has been working with intensively. This helps support young people's transition into college. This information will give tutors an insight into what the support needs of the young person are and what learning strategies have been effective when working with them in the past. We are looking to develop facilities on the Routes Ahead online application system to facilitate this kind of information exchange more widely. All learning providers should ensure that their course details on Routes Ahead are up to date, as this ensures that young people have access to the best and most accurate information on which to make their choices. Links are also provided to the national apprenticeships vacancy website www.apprenticeships.org.uk for young people looking for apprenticeship and work based learning options. From September 2011, Routes Ahead will provide online applications to all courses at all learning providers in Derby and Derbyshire. All young people will be supported to use this system when it is fully in operation. All organisations need to check that they are ready to fully use this system to send and receive applications. Information Sharing The sharing and effective use of information about learners' support needs and progress is vital to the ability to offer provision and support that meets their needs and builds on existing assessments and achievements rather than repeating them. Derby and Derbyshire local authorities have a joint information sharing agreement for all staff working with children and young people, available at: www.derbyshirescb.org.uk In addition, it is important that details of all learners starting and leaving any provision is shared with Connexions - **this will be a statutory duty from 2013** - as this enables Connexions to ensure that all young people are accessing learning and that they can be followed up and engaged where they are not doing so. Foundation Learning Providers can use Provision Tracker, an on-line facility to report this information. Other schools, colleges and training providers will need to follow the procedures set out in their partnership agreements with Connexions. Admission and Induction All young people should be admitted to a programme which is suitable for their needs and have the opportunity to complete or update an individual plan that sets out their aims and targets for the programme as well as any learning or other support that they require - this should be based on the type of assessment information outlined above. The effective completion of such a plan will contribute to retention and successful progression by setting out the learner's support needs from the outset. Eventually, the intention is that all young people will have an electronic Individual Learning Plan (ILP), which will follow them through school and into post 16 learning. All young people should attend a structured and supportive induction at their learning provider on admission, setting out expectations, ground rules and covering issues such as health and safety, equality and diversity and the providers policies and procedures. This should also give learners the chance to get to know each other and their tutors in a supportive environment. Case Study - Admission and Induction Landau Forte College When a young person then decides to apply to Landau Forte College, Tutors are able to mix and match pathways to ensure learners get the most appropriate timetable for them. Personalised learning and detailed timetabling ensures around 98% of learners receive the subjects that they wish to study at level three. The college also work with other providers where they are not able to offer a given subject. As an example of this, a young person who is a talented pianist is linked with nearby St Benedict's Catholic School and Performing Arts College in order to undertake A/S level Music, which is not offered by the college. Taster days for all students who hold a conditional offer at Landau Forte are offered. Named *'Life at Landau'* , these days offer the chance to meet with both subject tutors and personal tutors. Young people are also able to have a taste of what a given subject will be like at A/S level by attending a lesson in a subject during the day. Following the day, around 70% of students who hold a conditional offer attend the college for their Post-16 provision. The college also runs a two day induction session for all Year 12 students. As part of this induction, young people are given the opportunity to meet with their personal tutor for the first time. Young people also take part in orientation and team building exercises. Some of these exercises are facilitated by the University of Birmingham in order to raise aspirations and give young people a flavour of where their studies could lead them. ## Case Study Flexible provision - Derby College (Connected) K's story K had previously been excluded from school due to serious behaviour incidents. K was due to attend a Pupil Referral Unit (PRU) within Derby City but did not attend this provision and struggled to re-engage with education in any format. An able student, K was allowed back into school to undertake GCSE's and obtained level two qualifications including English. After leaving school, K was determined to eventually obtain a business administration apprenticeship but found it difficult to obtain employment. Following interventions by Connexions Derbyshire K was referred to the ESF funded 'Connected' provision which provided targeted learning in small groups via **Derby College**. This provision offered a variety of start dates year round and also provided work experience to all participants. K thrived on this course which provided greater learning flexibility in start dates, targeted support to bring her numeracy up to level two and worked to build up her self-esteem. K has now applied to the Royal Navy to work within business administration. Delivering flexible provision If all young people are to be encouraged to remain in learning until 18, it is important that suitable and flexible provision is available to meet a range of needs as described below. Case Study Working in partnership - Rathbone Rathbone work with a range of partner organisations in the delivery of their programme. For example, they have partnership agreements with Training Services 2000 and **Kieran Mullin**, both of whom offer one day a week placements as part of their Foundation Learning programme, and Derby College, who offer short work tasters in different vocational areas and have also agreed to contact Rathbone regarding learners who are (at risk of) dropping out of college who may benefit from joining Rathbone instead. These partnership links not only enhance the content of the programme by offering learners hands on experience of different vocational areas in a different learning environment, they also support learners' transition from one provider to another. For example, some learners who have done a one day a week placement with Training Services 2000 as part of their Rathbone Foundation Learning course have subsequently progressed onto a full apprenticeship through Training Services 2000 itself. Conversely, some learners who have applied to TS2000 but were not ready to go straight into an apprenticeship have been referred to Rathbone for a period on Foundation Learning to develop their skills further before re-applying. ## Where Can I Get Help And Resources With Ceiag? - The Connexions Derbyshire website www.connexions-derbyshire.org On Programme Delivery of CEIAG An ongoing programme of Careers Education, Information, Advice and Guidance (CEIAG) is required to enable learners to continue to develop their career plans, develop their work and life skills and equip them for the future. The provision of an effective, well planned and timely programme of CEIAG will give learners the best opportunity to make a positive progression from learning into work. Careers Education works alongside Personal, Social, Health and Employability Education (PSHEe) / Personal and Social Development (PSD), work related learning and cross-curricular links to provide a holistic approach suitable for all young people. Career Mark The quality of CEIAG is evaluated and developed through **Career Mark**. This is the East Midlands Consortium careers education, information and guidance quality award. See www.careermark.co.uk for further information. It is the expectation of the Derby City 14-19 Partnership that all learning providers will be working towards Career Mark in order to achieve and evidence high quality and consistent CEIAG across the city. Career Mark is both a development tool and a portfolio and observation based award that looks at the five standards of Information, Guidance, Management, Curriculum and Outcomes. It is cross referenced against Ofsted, Matrix and the National IAG Standards. Support is available from Connexions Derbyshire to help providers work towards this award. practitioners section provides detailed information on: - Career Mark support and resources - -Information resources including useful websites, books, posters and leaflets to use with learners on careers and options Post 16, guidance on information networks within learning providers and labour market information. - -Post 16 Resource Pack including lesson plans and guidance around CEIAG for Post 16 learners. - -Continuing Professional Development (CPD) for staff including workshops run by Connexions Derbyshire, accredited CEIAG courses, web links to organisations offering CPD and staff resources for CPD. - The CEGNET website www.cegnet.co.uk provides information on teaching and learning, leading and managing within CEIAG. - Derbyshire Education Business Partnership, (DEBP) www.debp.co.uk provides information on work related learning and links with employers. ## Retention Within The Context Of The Raising Of The Participation Age, Retention Of Young People In Learning Is Obviously A Key Issue. See The Box On Page 3 For Some Of Our Findings About Why Some Young People In Derby Left Learning Early. There Is A Range Of Good Practice Around Retention, But We Still Need To Do More. One Key To Successful Retention Is Early Identification Of Learners At Risk Of Leaving By Making Use Of The Information Sharing As Discussed Above, And Looking Out For Characteristics Or Indicators That Might Suggest A Learner Could Leave Early. For Example, Griffiths (2003) Identified Possible Risk Indicators For Early Leavers From Fe: - Learners Who Applied For Or Started The Course Late - Learners Who Work Part Time In Addition To The Programme - Learners Needing Extra Support With Childcare, Housing, Finance Etc. - Learners Who Only Just Meet Entry Requirements - Learners With Past Attendance / Commitment Issues - Learners With No Clear Goal/Aim. - Learners On An Unsuitable Level Of Course Or Subject Choice. - Learners Who Refuse Learning Support - 'Soft' Indicators Including Character Change, Behaviour And Motivation Having Identified 'At Risk' Learners, Support And Monitoring Should Be Put In Place, Including Adaptations Or Changes To Provision Where Necessary. Learning Providers In The City Identified A Range Of Internal Support Mechanisms That They Have In Place Including Mentors, Counsellors And Systems For Flagging Up Concerns And Offering Flexibility And Support. Case Study - Attendance issues and retention R's story On leaving compulsory education at 16, R had very low literacy and numeracy levels (at entry level two). R was extremely withdrawn, displaying very poor social skills as well as communication skills. R tried out two foundation learning courses at training providers after leaving school, but failed to make significant progress. Both training providers placed him in a classroom environment but R found it hard to settle and occasionally failed to attend. R met with Connexions Derbyshire weekly to discuss his options and his progress on his course. In the long term he had a career goal of working with animals or working outside. With support from his existing provision and Connexions Derbyshire, R was able to access an interview at Derby Skillbuild, a training provider which could offer vocational work options outside. Information on R, including Section 139a assessment were passed from one training provider to another. R has made a huge amount of progress since starting at his new training provider His attendance levels have greatly improved as well as his overall confidence. R now has the potential to move forward with his future plans. Case Study - Retention in learning N's story N started at **Juniper Training** on their foundation learning programme. N appeared to be enjoying the course but tutors began to notice a trend in his attendance in that he was attending training in the morning but did not return for the afternoon session. N initially gave no explanation for this but during his review told his tutor that he had to accompany his family to the hospital most afternoons. This was due to the fact that his brother had mental health issues and his families' limited English meant that he was needed to translate for them with hospital staff. Juniper Training arranged for N to complete his foundation learning hours each day in the morning only so he could gain his qualification and still take his brother to the hospital. N now attends every day and is looking to gain an apprenticeship in motor mechanics. 13 Integrated Youth Support Services ## Some young people whose needs cannot be met through internal support systems may benefit from referral to external support through Integrated Youth Support Services (IYSS) for issues such as housing, health and career options. A referral pathway is available on page 14 with details on how to refer into IYSS - see below. Case Study - Integrated Youth Support - The Space D's story D had been asked to leave the family home at 16. D was at college and was keen to continue his education. D was living at various friends' addresses and as a result was often late for college. D was finding it tough, adapting to different household routines and walking from different locations to college. The college were unaware of his situation and his poor attendance caused by his difficulties was beginning to cause problems. D was supported by a worker from **The Space** who was able to assist D to present as homeless with the Housing Options centre. D was also supported to apply for relevant benefits at Connexions and Job Centre Plus. D was supported with food parcels and contact was made with social care to support D. With D's agreement, college were contacted to ensure support was in place to continue his education. The college were able to support with recognising the impact that housing issues was having on D's education and learning in terms of attendance. They were also able to support D by providing a hot meal each day. D was then assisted to move into supported housing where a support worker was available to assist D with any issues that may arise in the future. ## Youth Support Services Referral Pathway - Derby City Information For Post-16 Learning Providers Young person in post-16 learning with issues affecting their participation, achievement or progression requiring external support or referral. Safeguarding In the case of safeguarding concerns, providers should follow the Derby and Derbyshire Safeguarding Children Board procedures. Opening Times Monday to Friday 9.30am to 4.30pm Except Wednesday 9.30am to 1pm Telephone: 01332 200 033 Email: helpline@connexions-derbyshire.org Website: www.connexions-derbyshire.org Free helpline: 0800 269 468 Connexions Personal Advisers are independent and give impartial IAG. They can offer: - in-depth careers guidance - information about options and occupations - help finding and applying for jobs, courses or training, and - liaison with and referral to other agencies as required. Referral and support to access other services as required based on assessment of young person's needs. Supported where appropriate by Common Assessment Framework (CAF). employment and volunteering pregnancy testing accompanying young people to appointments. | | The Space | |------------------------------------------------|---------------------------| | | | | 12 The Spot, Osmaston Road | | | | | | | | | Derby DE1 2JA | | | | Telephone: | | 01332 364 445 | | | | | | | Email: | | thespace@dcys.org.uk | | | | | | | www.derby.gov.uk/thespace | | | | | Opening Times | | | Monday to Thursday | 12 noon to 5pm | | Friday | 11am to 4pm | | Saturday | 11am to 2pm | | | | | Support, advice and information | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Specialist support services based at The SPACE | | | - | | | | | | Counselling service | | | - 12 to 19 years - | | | Wednesday and Friday | | | - | | | | | | Contraception and Sexual Health | | | - Monday, | | | Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday | | | - | | | | | | Young person's specialist service | | | - 16 to 17 | | | years - for anyone experiencing mental health | | | difficulties. Wednesday. | | | - | | | | | | Addaction - drugs and alcohol | | | - Drop-in | | | Tuesday | | | - | | | | | | Spaceman - sexual health | | | - male only session | | | Friday | | ## Advice And Support - www.childline.org.uk - www.samaritans.org.uk - www.thesite.org.uk Careers, learning and employment - www.connexions-derbyshire.org - www.routes-ahead.org - www.apprenticeships.org.uk - www.ucas.ac.uk - www.jobseekers.direct.gov.uk - www.vinspired.org Bullying - www.kidscape.org.uk Contraception, sexual health and general health - www.brook.org.uk - www.ruthinking.co.uk - www.nhsdirect.nhs.uk ## The Law - www.communitylegaladvice.org.uk - www.citizensadviceandlawcentre.org ## Housing And Homelessness - www.housingaid.org.uk - www.shelter.org.uk Mental health - www.mind.org.uk - www.rethink.org - www.sane.org.uk Money, Finance and Benefits - www.nationaldebtline.co.uk - www.dwp.gov.uk Sexuality - www.gayderbyshire.co.uk - www.lgf.org.uk Drugs and Alcohol - www.addaction.org.uk - www.laurenslink.org.uk - www.talktofrank.com General Information - www.derby.gov.uk/YoungDerby What is Managed Learning Transfer? The intention of the Managed Learning Transfer protocol is to provide a mechanism for learners at risk of disengagement, exclusion or nonprogression from post 16 learning to be offered the opportunity of a smooth transition to other appropriate learning opportunities that may better meet their needs. This should, however, be seen as a last resort once other avenues of support for retention or progression within the learning provider have been exhausted. Key Principles: - Robust information sharing to support learners - High quality, impartial IAG - Internal and external support for retention - Ownership of process from YP (and family) and providers - Process should support impartiality - Continuity of support - Flexible provision to be commissioned Process: - Learners to be engaged in process - Support and guidance from Connexions PA as required - Alternative provision identified - Transfer and support package agreed including named individuals to support transfer and other agency support - Information on learning support needs to be transferred from one provider to the other on Managed Learning Transfer form - Additional assessments or meetings to support learners with more complex needs or whom it is more difficult to place. - Provision issues to be referred back to Local Authority 14-19 team - Process and IAG support to be evaluated by learners online Final consultation with providers and others will take place during summer 2010, and full details and supporting materials will be made available as an appendix to the electronic copy of this document by September 2010. ## Managed Learning Transfer Where There Continue To Be Issues With Retention Or Progression Despite A Range Of Support Being Put In Place, We Are Hoping To Put In Place From September 2010 A Managed Learning Transfer (Mlt) Process. This Has Been Discussed With Learning Providers In Derby City And Endorsed By The 14-19 Partnership. Planning For Transition Having Successful Progressed Through Their Course, Learners Will Need Iag - Supported If Necessary By Connexions Personal Advisers - To Help Them Make A Successful Transition Into: - Further Education; Sixth Form, Vocational Sixth Form, Further Education College, Foundation Learning Provider Case Study Helping learners plan their next steps - Derby College Derby College holds an Annual Careers Roadshow offering young people the opportunity to look at apprenticeships, higher education, employment, selfemployment and volunteering. This event is held at lunchtime over a week at five college sites with the aim of helping students have a clearer understanding of their career aspirations and the steps they need to take to get where they want to be.     As part of the event, young people are able to complete a questionnaire in advance named 'My Career Plan' about their career planning and aspirations. This allows young people to target both the type of information they would need to take from the event and plan who they would need to talk to in order to gather further information. - Employment with training - Higher Education - Apprenticeships - Learning Difficulties and Disabilities provision and supported employment The majority of young people will make a successful transition into their preferred next step. For those who do not do so, support continues to be available from Connexions and other organisations to re-engage the learner and help them to progress. It is useful to evaluate the experience of all learners, so in addition to providers own evaluation or exit interview procedures, there is a Derby-wide learner survey which we would encourage all leavers from learning to complete. When a young person has made a successful transition, Connexions Derbyshire should be informed via email. This will be a **statutory requirement from 2013**, and it enables Connexions on behalf of the local authority to ensure that all young people are engaged in learning and to contact and support those who aren't. Please refer to your partnership agreement with Connexions Derbyshire for the agreed method of communicating this information. We hope that you have found this toolkit useful. We will continue to: - update it online as practice develops - Illustrate a range of best practice across the city. We also will be continuing to meet regularly with providers and partners to carry on discussing and sharing good practice so that as a partnership we can work towards delivering a comprehensive offer of quality IAG coupled with quality provision for all young people to the age of 18 and beyond. Summary - The **Participation Age** is rising to **17 in 2013 and to 18 in 2015**. - Young people will have a **range of learning options**; full time and part time education, apprenticeships, diplomas, foundation learning and volunteering or employment with training. - Applications –online application via Routes Ahead from September 2011. - Information Sharing is vital to ensure young people are in learning and supported. - Help with CEIAG - for learning providers is available. - External support for learners from Integrated Youth Support Services and others is available to support retention. - Managed Learning Transfers –will be available to support all young people to remain in learning. RPA Checklist - What does my organisation need to do to prepare for RPA? Have you: CEIAG - Adopted the Post-16 IAG entitlement and shared it with your learners? - Committed your organisation to the achievement of Career Mark? - Developed effective programmes of CEIAG for all learners? - Involved your learners in the evaluation of your CEIAG provision? Retention and Managed Learning Transfers - Established a system for early identification, support and referral of learners who may be at risk of disengagement, exclusion or non-progression? - Identified a named person in your organisation to support the Managed Learning Transfer process? Routes Ahead - Ensured that your provision is up to date on Routes Ahead and the Connexions Derbyshire Provision Tracker (foundation learning providers only)? - Attended training and identified a named person to support the Online application process via Routes Ahead? Information Sharing - Put in place systems to: -Exchange and make effective use of assessment and other background information on learners to support their learning and support plans? -Share information with Connexions on behalf of the Local Authority on applications, offers, starters and leavers? 18 Section Four - Summary and Checklist Section Five Useful Documents and Resources Raising of the Participation Age (RPA) - Raising of the Participation Age, Supporting Local Areas to Deliver: available at: http://publications.dcsf.gov.uk/ 14-19 Reform - 14-19 Reform Toolkit available at: http://www.14-19reforms.co.uk/ Impartial Careers Education - Available from: http://publications.dcsf.gov.uk/ - Statutory guidance on impartial careers education - Quality, Choice and Aspiration - Better Practice: A Guide to Delivering Effective Career Learning 11-19 - Ways and Choices Lesson Plans and Guides - Available from: www.connexions-derbyshire.org practitioners section: - CEIAG a Good Practice Guide - Post 16 Resource Pack - Directory of programmes of Professional Development for staff - Information and curriculum advice and resources - Further information on Derby City's trial RPA project - Available from: www.cegnet.co.uk - Careers education and IAG support and guidance Career Mark - Career Mark information available at the Connexions Derbyshire website: www.connexions-derbyshire.org practitioners section - Career Mark website: www.careermark.co.uk

en

2578-pdf

## Background Information About Service Request Data For Environmental Health What Is Included In The Data?  The numbers of service request received by the Environmental Health Service by financial year in the different categories.  Service request may also be referred to as complaints.  The data has been gathered from the SRU data base in the service computer system APP.  These service requests may have been received from members of the public (residents, visitors) and businesses; this includes reopened service requests .  A reopened service request is a request that has been made about a particular issue, that has been closed, and a further service request has been made within 3 months of the original receipt. ## What Is Not Included In The Data?  Work of the Environmental Health Service which is recorded in other databases such as notices, prosecutions, pre programmed visits.  Pre programmed visits are undertaken in relation to food safety, food sampling, health and safety, accident investigation, animal welfare, Pollution Prevention and Control, private water, planning consultations, air quality monitoring, Houses in Multiple Occupation etc. ## Points To Assist In Interpreting The Data  The 'additional comments' column below may explain changes in how the data is recorded, or further explanation of the category CatCode All Category Additional comments AAA Complaint about EH Service AAB FOI Request Only started recording on APP in 14/15, prior to this it was recorded corporately AAC FOI/EIR Request M15 Search Enquiry Refers to additiopnal land searches Service Requests including re-opened CatCode Animal Welfare Category L04 Animal Boarding Establishment From 2011/12 Licensing function moved to Licensing section therefore service request dealt with by them. N06 Animal By-products N05 Animal Disease L08 Dangerous Wild Animals N02 Dead Animals L05 Dog Breeding Establishment From 2011/12 Licensing function moved to Licensing section therefore service request dealt with by them. N01 Movement Records L07 Pet Shops From 2011/12 Licensing function moved to Licensing section therefore service request dealt with by them. L06 Riding Establishment N03 Transportation of Animals N04 Welfare Issues Service Requests including re-opened CatCode Dog Category G06 Dangerous Dogs GA4 Dog - officer told owner to put dog on lead (DCO) Started using code when Dog Control Orders introduced 3rd Sept 2012 G05 Dog Fouling Ceased using code 3rd Sept 2012 when Dog Control Orders introduced | GA1 | Dog Fouling - Public land (DCO) | Started using code | |--------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------| | when Dog Control | | | | Orders introduced 3rd | | | | Sept 2012 | | | | G07 | Dog Found | | | G09 | Dog Neutering Voucher Requested | | | GA3 | Dog not on a lead (DCO) | Started using code | | when Dog Control | | | | Orders introduced 3rd | | | | Sept 2012 | | | | GA5 | Dog sighted in Dog Exclusion area | | | (DCO) | | | | Started using code | | | | when Dog Control | | | | Orders introduced 3rd | | | | Sept 2012 | | | | G08 | Dog to be chipped | | | G10 | Dogs - General Enquiry | | | GA6 | Dogs - person walking six or more | | | dogs (DCO) | | | | Started using code | | | | when Dog Control | | | | Orders introduced 3rd | | | | Sept 2012 | | | | G03 | Dogs Reported Lost | | | G01 | Stray Dog Reported | | | Service Requests including re-opened | | | | | | | | CatCode | Drainage Category | | | Some drainage | | | | functions transfered to | | | | Yorkshire Water on | | | | 1st October 2011 | | | | B06 | Cesspool | | | B12 | Defective Soil/Waste Pipe | | | B03 | Drain Problem | From 1st Oct 2011 | | figures likely to be | | | | affected by above | | | | transfer | | | | B14 | Drainage Advice | | | B02 | Dye Test | | | B13 | Effluent in Property | | | B08 | Land Drainage | | | B11 | Road Gully | | | B05 | Septic Tank | | | B04 | Sewer Problem | From 1st Oct 2011 | | figures likely to be | | | | affected by above | | | | transfer | | | | B01 | Smoke/Essence Test | | | B10 | Troughing etc Disrepair | | | B09 | Water In Cellar | | | Service Requests including re-opened | | | | | | | | Environmental Protection | | | | CatCode | Category | | | | | | | M06 | Abandoned Vehicles | | | M09 | Animal Nuisance | | | L02 | Caravan Sites | | | M22 | Community Clean Up | | | GA2 | Dog Fouling - Private land | Up to 2011/12 all dog | |---------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------| | fouling complaints on | | | | private land logged | | | | under G05 | | | | M24 | Duty of Care - Commercial | Waste storage issues | | on Commercial | | | | premsies | | | | M25 | Duty of Care - Domestic | Waste storage issues | | on Domestic premsies | | | | L21 | Entertainment | | | L12 | Exhumations | | | M04 | Eyesore on Land (S215) | Dealt with by Planning | | Services | | | | M02 | Filthy & Verminous Premises | | | M03 | Flytipping | | | M19 | General Enquiry | Generic code used | | when someone may | | | | be just seeking advice | | | | as opposed to making | | | | a specific complaint | | | | M13 | General Nuisance | May include several | | nuisance issues, or be | | | | non specific in nature. | | | | E04 | Grit/Dust | | | M20 | High Hedges | Dealt with by Planning | | Services | | | | B07 | | | | Internal Domestic Odour | | | | E07 | | | | Light Pollution | | | | M18 | | | | Litter | | | | M21 | | | | Nuisance Vehicle | Vehicles that may | | | cause problems but | | | | not anbandoned | | | | B15 | | | | Odour | | | | E03 | | | | Odour/Fumes | | | | E02 | | | | Open Burning | | | | L25 | | | | Operator's Licence Consultation | Refers to | | | consultations. | | | | L28 | | | | Pavement Cafe Licence | Refers to | | | consultations. | | | | M07 | | | | Pigeon Nuisance | | | | M08 | | | | Rats in the Area | | | | M01 | | | | Refuse Accummulations | Includes dirty gardens, | | | excessive | | | | accumulations on | | | | domestic & comercial | | | | premises . | | | | M05 | | | | Sharps Disposal | | | | E01 | | | | Smoke From Chimneys | | | Received by EH but mainly about issue with municipal collection of waste/recycling. Waste Management predomianetly deal with collection issues. L27 Waste Management Licence Consultation Service Requests including re-opened CatCode Food Category F09 Complaint re: FHRS Rating F04 Export Certificate F01 Food Advice F00 Food Complaint F05 Food Hazard Warning Only enquires from members of the public about warnings, not the actual number of Food hazard warnings. F26 Food Premises Regn. Enquiry Enquires about food registration issues. L13 Game F56 Illegal Slaughter F08 Request for FH Reassessment F07 SFBB Mentoring F52 Structural Disrepair F40 Surrender/Condemnation of Food F51 Unhygienic Practices F50 Unhygienic Premises/Vehicle Service Requests including re-opened CatCode Health & Safety Category S02 Accidents Only refers to enquires from members of the public about accidents, not the actual number of accident notifications. L17 Acupuncture L20 Children's Act L18 Cosmetic Piercing L16 Electrolysis S01 H & S Legislation Enquiry S04 HASAWA L14 Late Night Refreshment House L19 Marriage Act F55 No/Inadequate Public Fac. S05 Smoke Free Legislation L15 Tattooing Service Requests including re-opened CatCode Housing Category | H24 | Clearance | Category code used | |-----------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------| | upto 2013/14 then | | | | from 2014/15 HA 1 or | | | | HA2 used | | | | H16 | Condensation | Category code used | | upto 2013/14 then | | | | from 2014/15 HA 1 or | | | | HA2 used | | | | H17 | Dampness | Category code used | | upto 2013/14 then | | | | from 2014/15 HA 1 or | | | | HA2 used | | | | H23 | Defective Premises Nuisance | Category code used | | upto 2013/14 then | | | | from 2014/15 HA 1 or | | | | HA2 used | | | | H07 | Disconnection of Services | Category code used | | upto 2013/14 then | | | | from 2014/15 HA 1 or | | | | HA2 used | | | | H01 | Disrepair | Category code used | | upto 2013/14 then | | | | from 2014/15 HA 1 or | | | | HA2 used | | | | H28 | Electrical Wiring Defects | Category code used | | upto 2013/14 then | | | | from 2014/15 HA 1 or | | | | HA2 used | | | | H15 | Flue Defects | Category code used | | upto 2013/14 then | | | | from 2014/15 HA 1 or | | | | HA2 used | | | | H22 | Gas Appliance Defect | Category code used | | upto 2013/14 then | | | | from 2014/15 HA 1 or | | | | HA2 used | | | | HA2 | HMO conditions/disrepair | From 2014/15 all | | HMO | | | | conditions/disrepair | | | | logged against this | | | | category code | | | | H14 | HMO Enquiry | Category code used | | upto 2013/14 then | | | | from 2014/15 HA4 | | | | category code used | | | | HA4 | HMO Information/Advice | From 2014/15 all | | HMO information/ | | | | advice logged against | | | | this category code | | | | H29 | HMO Licence | Not used | | H21 & HA8 | Immigration Inspection | From 2014/15 all | | Immingration | | | | inspections logged | | | | under HA8 | | | | H10 | Insecure Property | From 2014/15 all | |--------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------| | insecure property | | | | logged against | | | | category codes HA1 | | | | or HA2 | | | | H05 | Lack of Baths/WCs (HMO) | Category code used | | upto 2013/14 then | | | | from 2014/15 HA 1 or | | | | HA2 used | | | | H06 | Lack of Cooking Fac. (HMO) | Category code used | | upto 2013/14 then | | | | from 2014/15 HA 1 or | | | | HA2 used | | | | H03 | Means of Escape (HMO) | Category code used | | upto 2013/14 then | | | | from 2014/15 HA2 | | | | HMO | | | | conditions/disrepair | | | | category code used | | | | H18 | Overcrowding | Category code used | | upto 2013/14 then | | | | from 2014/15 HA 1 or | | | | HA2 used | | | | H04 | Overcrowding (HMO) | Category code used | | upto 2013/14 then | | | | from 2014/15 HA2 | | | | HMO | | | | conditions/disrepair | | | | category code used | | | | H02 | Poor Management (HMO) | Category code used | | upto 2013/14 then | | | | from 2014/15 HA2 | | | | HMO | | | | conditions/disrepair | | | | category code used | | | | H13 | Request for Housing Info/Advice | From 2014/15 all | | housing advice logged | | | | against category | | | | codes HA3 or HA4 | | | | HA1 | Single Let conditions/disrepair | From 2014/15 all | | single let houisng | | | | conditions /disrepair | | | | logged against this | | | | category code | | | | HA3 | Single Let Information/Advice | From 2014/15 all | | single let | | | | information/advice | | | | logged against this | | | | category code | | | | H27 & HA9 | Traveller Sites | From 2014/15 all | | Traveller sites logged | | | | under HA9 | | | | H09 & HA6 | Void Property | From 2014/15 all Void | | property logged under | | | | HA6 | | | | Service Requests including re-opened | | | | | | | | CatCode | Infectious Disease Category | | | | | | | I01 | Communicable Disease General | Only refers to | |--------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------| | enquires from | | | | members of the public | | | | about infectious | | | | disease issues, not | | | | the actual number of | | | | notifications. | | | | I10 | E-Coli 0157 | Only refers to | | enquires from | | | | members of the public | | | | about infectious | | | | disease issues, not | | | | the actual number of | | | | notifications. | | | | I11 | Food Poisoning | Only refers to | | enquires from | | | | members of the public | | | | about infectious | | | | disease issues, not | | | | the actual number of | | | | notifications. | | | | I02 | Health Certificates | Only refers to | | enquires from | | | | members of the public | | | | about infectious | | | | disease issues, not | | | | the actual number of | | | | notifications. | | | | I24 | Other Disease | Only refers to | | enquires from | | | | members of the public | | | | about infectious | | | | disease issues, not | | | | the actual number of | | | | notifications. | | | | Service Requests including re-opened | | | | | | | | CatCode | | | | Noise Category | | | | | | | | OAA | General Noise Enquiry | | | L26 | Licencing Act 2003 Consultation | Licensing Act | | Consultation from | | | | licensing Services | | | | ONA | Noise - Alarm | | | ONC | Noise - Animals/Birds (not dogs) | | | ONB | Noise - Barking Dog | | | OND | Noise - Bells (church/phone) | | | ONO | Noise - Boats | | | ONV | Noise - DIY | | | ONM | Noise - Fireworks | | | ONW | Noise - Low Frequency | | | ONF | Noise - Machinery (fixed) | | | ONI | Noise - Music | | | ONK | Noise - Party | | | ONH | Noise - People | | | ONG | Noise - Plant/Machinery (mobile) | | | ONE | Noise - Public Address systems | | | ONN | Noise - Shooting | | | ONL | Noise - TV/Radio | | |--------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------| | ONX | Noise - Unidentified/Other | | | ONQ | Noise - Vehicle Repairs | | | ONP | Noise - Vehicles | | | L29 | Temporary Event Notice | Temporay Event | | Notice consultation | | | | from licensing | | | | Services | | | | Service Requests including re-opened | | | | | | | | CatCode | | | | Pollution Category | | | | | | | | E09 | Air Quality Management | | | E05 | Authorised Installations | | | L23 | Building Regulations Consultation | | | M11 | Closed Landfill Sites | | | M10 | Contaminated Land | | | L24 | Development Control Consultation | Planning application | | consulations | | | | T01 | Mains Supplies | | | | M12 | Operative Waste Management | | Licence | | | | EPC | PPC Process Complaint | | | | EPE | PPC Process Enquiry (NOT | | Complaint) | | | | T02 | Private Supplies | | | E06 | Radiation | | | T03 | Recreational Waters | | | E08 | Vehicle Emissions | | | T04 | Water Courses | |

en

2400-pdf

NO. Contains Confidential or Exempt Information Title Pay Policy Statement. Responsible Officer(s) Jacqueline Wiltshire, Director of Human Resources and Organisational Development. Author(s) Andrew Scully, Head of Recruitment, Retention and Reward. Portfolio(s) Councillor Yvonne Johnson, Finance and Performance. For Consideration By Council. Date to be Considered Tuesday 3rd April 2012. Not applicable. Implementation Date if Not Called In Affected Wards None. Keywords/Index Localism Act 2011, Pay Policy Statement, Policy Statement. ## Purpose Of Report: Chapter 8 Of The Localism Act 2011 (The "Act") Contains The Requirement For An Annual Pay Policy Statement To Be Approved By Full Council And Then Published. Publication Must Include Publication On The Council'S Website. 1. Recommendations | 1. | That Full Council approve the attached Pay Policy Statement (appendix "1") | |-----------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | and note the supporting appendices "2", "3", "4" and "5"; | | | 2. | That Full Council approve a policy, for 2012/13, that no employee is paid | | less than the London Living Wage (LLW); and | | 3. That Full Council note that decisions on proposed remuneration packages of £100,000 and above will be determined by Chief Officer Panel, in accordance with their existing terms of reference. 2. Reason for Decision and Options Considered 2.1. The Act requires Full Council to approve a Pay Policy Statement for the financial year 2012-13. It will also require a Pay Policy Statement to be approved for each future year. 2.2. The Pay Policy Statement (appendix "1") and supporting appendices "2", "3", "4" and "5" meets the requirements of the Act and takes into account the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) guidance on the "Openness and accountability in local pay: guidance under section 40 of the Localism Act" issued on 17th February 2012, "The Code of Recommended Practice for Local Authorities on Data Transparency" and the Accounts and Audit (England) Regulations 2011. 2.3. The Act requires that authorities include in their Pay Policy Statement, their approach to the publication of and access to information relating to the remuneration of chief officers. The council already publishes information on its public website. This is set out in the Pay Policy Statement. 2.4. London has had a Living Wage campaign since 2001. Since March 2005 it has been independently calculated and published by the Greater London Authority (GLA). The London Living Wage (LLW) is currently £8.30 per hour which is higher than the National Minimum Wage (NMW) and represents the minimum reasonable rate of pay in the Capital. Full Council is asked to approve a policy, for 2012/13, that no employee is paid less than the London Living Wage (LLW). . 3. Key Implications Localism Act and Pay Policy Statement. 3.1. The Act requires Full Council to approve a Pay Policy Statement for the financial year 2012-13. 3.2. Full Council should note that the provisions of the Act do not apply to staff in the local authority's schools. 3.3. The Act states that: "A pay policy statement for a financial year must set out the authority's policies for the financial year relating to: - the remuneration of its chief officers the remuneration of its lowest-paid employees, and the relationship of its employees who are not chief officers." 3.4. Furthermore the Act specifies that: - "the Statement must include the authority's policies relating to: (a) the level and elements of remuneration for each chief officer; (b) remuneration of chief officers on recruitment; (c) increases and additions to remuneration for each chief officer; (d) the use of performance related pay for chief officers; (e) the use of bonuses for chief officers; (f) the approach to the payment of chief officers on their ceasing to hold office under or to be employed by the authority; and (g) the publication of and access to information relating to remuneration of chief officers. 3.5. In addition the Act states that: - "A senior pay policy statement for a financial year may also set out the authority's policies for the financial year relating to the other terms and conditions applying to the authority's chief officers" 3.6. Furthermore Full Council is asked to note that "The Code of Recommended Practice for Local Authorities on Data Transparency" recommends the publication of a pay multiple defined as: - "the ratio between the highest paid salary and the median salary of the whole of the authority's workforce". The pay multiple as at 20/12/2011 is 7.213, which is well within what is regarded as good practice. Ealing's ratio will compare favourably with other Council data collected by Will Hutton for his 2011 Fair Pay Review in the Public Sector which identified multiples at or around 8.00. 3.7. The Act and Guidance make reference to remuneration packages of £100,000 and above and Full Council are asked to note that decisions on proposed remuneration packages of £100,000 and above will be determined by Chief Officer Panel, in accordance with their existing terms of reference. London Living Wage (LLW). 3.8. London has had a Living Wage campaign since 2001. Since March 2005 it has been independently calculated and published by the Greater London Authority (GLA). The London Living Wage (LLW) is currently £8.30 per hour which is higher that the National Minimum Wage (NMW) and represents the minimum reasonable rate of pay in the Capital. 3.9. As a direct employer of staff the Council currently meets the requirements of paying the LLW with no employee paid on the Greater London Provincial Council (GLPC) pay spines currently falling below the LLW. 3.10. If the LLW continues to increase on an annual basis and there continues to be pay freezes in local government then the Council will in future years be in the position where the LLW is more than the lowest spinal column point (scp) on the pay spine. If the Council adopts a policy that no employee is paid less then the LLW this will have a minor effect on staffing budgets in future years. 3.11. Full Council is asked to approve a policy, for 2012/13, that no employee is paid less than the London Living Wage (LLW). This would be the policy for 12/13. The policy for future years must be set each year by full council. 3.12. For schools based employees it will be up to each school to decide whether to adopt the LLW. 3.13. At the meeting on Tuesday 23rd January 2007 Full Council agreed the following motion: "This Council notes that all employees subject to the pay and conditions of Ealing Council are paid at or above the level of the London Living Wage. This Council believes that all members of our community have the right to earn a living wage. As community leaders this Council will work with partners in seeking to deliver a living wage across Ealing" 4. Financial 4.1. The Pay Policy Statement will have no impact on current budgets. Payment of the London Living Wage will have no impact on current budgets, since all employees are currently paid more than the LLW. Payment of the London Living Wage may have a minor effect on staffing budgets in future years. ## 5. Legal 5.1. Full Council has to comply with the requirements contained in the Act which require Full Council to approve a Pay Policy Statement for the financial year 2012- 2013 and in future years and must have regard to any guidance issued or approved by the Secretary of State. 5.2. The Act contains a definition of "chief officer" which is set out in the proposed policy. 5.3. The Act also contains a requirement that the Council must decide upon a definition of "lowest paid employees" and must set out the reasons for that decision. 5.4. The proposed statement complies with the statutory requirements for pay policy statements as set out in the Localism Act 2011. 5.5. As per s112 of the Local Government Act 1972, the remuneration of employees may be such reasonable remuneration as the Council thinks fit. 5.6. The Council does not have an unfettered discretion to pay any amount of remuneration whatsoever. It must not pay a salary which is unreasonably high. It must ensure that it does not make payments to employees which could be seen as "gifts" (subject to certain specific, narrow exceptions). 5.7. The remuneration for most posts is determined by the use of a job evaluation scheme. It is not unlawful for the council to pay a higher salary than that which is determined by the job evaluation scheme. The salary determined by the use of a job evaluation scheme is not the highest reasonable salary which can be paid for the work in question; it is simply a salary which is not unreasonably high or unreasonably low. 5.8. Thus it is not unlawful for the Council to approve a policy of always paying at least the LLW to any employee, even where that salary exceeds the recommended salary arrived at by the use of a job evaluation scheme. This is subject to the proviso that the LLW must not be a salary which is unreasonably high for the post in question. 5.9. The method used to arrive at the LLW was described in the report "GLA Economics Living Wage Unit - A Fairer London: The 2011 Living Wage in London - Mayor of London" as follows: 5.9.1. Two approaches to calculating a Living Wage were considered … The first, developed by the Family Budget Unit (FBU),1 estimates the costs of a 'Low Cost but Acceptable' (LCA) budget for a selection of households and calculates the wage required to meet these costs. This is termed the "Basic Living Costs" approach. The second - the "Income Distribution" approach - takes the figure as 60 per cent of the median income for London. 5.9.2. In London the Basic Living Costs approach gives a figure of £6.85 per hour and the Income Distribution approach gives a figure of £7.65 per hour. 5.9.3. The average of these two figures gives us the "poverty threshold wage". Hence the poverty threshold wage used in the report is £7.25 per hour (when rounded to the nearest five pence). 5.9.4. In order to protect against unforeseen events a margin of 15 per cent is added to the (unrounded) poverty threshold wage. This gives a figure of £8.30 per hour (when rounded to the nearest five pence) as a Living Wage for London. 5.10. If the Council considered that approach, and considered any other factors which might appear relevant, and decided that it was reasonable to ensure, for the year 12/13, that no employee received a lower rate of pay, then that would not be an irrationally generous approach to determining the salary of its lowest paid employees for 12/13. 5.11. Where the salary for the post which is determined by the use of a job evaluation scheme is lower than the LLW, then the proposal is that, for 12/13, the difference be paid as a discretionary supplement. Employees will not receive a contractual guarantee that the supplement will continue indefinitely. Prior to 1 April in each subsequent financial year, the Council should make a decision as to whether the supplement will be paid in that forthcoming year or not. The supplement can also be withdrawn by the Council during a financial year. 6. Value For Money 6.1. None. ## 7. Sustainability Impact Appraisal 7.1. None. 8. Risk Management 8.1. None. 8. Community Safety 9.1. None. ## 10. Links To The 5 Priorities For The Borough 10.1. None. ## 11. Equalities, Human Rights And Community Cohesion 11.1. An Equality Analysis Assessment has been undertaken and is attached as appendix "5". 12. Staffing/Workforce and Accommodation implications: 12.1. Throughout. ## 13. Property And Assets 13.1. No property implications. 14. Any other implications: 14.1. None. 15. Consultation 15.1. None. ## 16. Timetable For Implementation 16.1. After Full Council approval publication of Pay Policy Statement for the financial year 1st April 2012 to 31st March 2012 on the Council's website. 17. Appendices 17.1. Appendix "1" - "Ealing Council - Pay Policy Statement for the year 1st April 2012 to 31st March 2013"; 17.2. Appendix "2" - "Ealing Council - Pay Policy Statement for the financial year 1st April 2012 to 31st March 2013 - Appendix "2" Salary Rates from 1st April 2012"; 17.3. Appendix "3" - "Ealing Council - Policy Statement - A. Local Government (Early Termination of Employment) (Discretionary Compensation) (England and Wales) Regulations 2006 - B. Local Government Pension Scheme - Discretionary Decisions"; 17.4. Appendix "4" - Ealing Council - Pay Policy Statement for the financial year 1st April 2012 to 31st March 2013 - Pay Protection"; and 17.5. Appendix "5" - Ealing Council - Pay Policy Statement for the year 1st April 2012 to 31st March 2013 - Equality Analysis Assessment (EAA)". 18. Background Information Localism Act 2011; Department for Communities and Local Government - Openness and accountability in local pay: Draft guidance under section 40 of the Localism Act; Department for Communities and Local Government - The Code of Recommended Practice for Local Authorities on Data Transparency; Hutton Review of Fair Pay in the Public Sector: Final report (March 2011); Local Government (Early Termination of Employment) (Discretionary Compensation) (England and Wales) Regulations 2006; and London Borough of Ealing - Part 2 - Core Conditions - Local Agreement On Terms And Conditions Of Service - 1st September 2001 -Paragraph 13.3.2.3. Pay Protection in Cases of Assimilation Or Redeployment To A Lower Graded Post". | Post held | Date | Name of | |--------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------|-----------------| | consultee | | | | Date | | | | response | | | | received | | | | Comments | | | | appear in | | | | paragraph: | | | | sent to | | | | consultee | | | | Internal | | | | | | | | Throughout | Martin Smith | Chief Executive | | & | | | | 15032012 | | | | 13022012 | 14022012 Throughout | Ian O'Donnell | | Corporate Resources | | | | Throughout | Jacqueline | | | Wiltshire | | | | 13022012 & | | | | 08032012 | | | | 15022012 | | | | & | | | | 13032012 | | | | Director of Human | | | | Resources & | | | | Organisational | | | | Development | | | | 08032012 | 12032012 Throughout | David Veale | | (Designate) of Human | | | | Resources & | | | | Organisational | | | | Development | | | | 13022012 | | | | Democratic Services | | | | 13022012 | 14022012 Throughout | Simon George | | Finance and Audit | | | | 13022012 | | | | Corporate Finance & Audit | | | | Throughout | Paddy Quill | Lawyer | | 08032012 | | | | 20022012, | | | | 07032012 | | | | &12032012 | | | | Julian Bell | Leader | 20032012 | | 20032012 | | | | Finance and Performance | | | | | | | | | | | | Report History | | | | | | | | Decision type: | Urgency item? | | | No | Key decision | | | | | | | Report no.: | Andrew Scully, Head of Recruitment, Retention and Reward. | | | 020-8825-6930. ScullyA@ealing.gov.uk | | | | | | | ## Appendix "1" Ealing Council. Pay Policy Statement For The Financial Year 1St April 2012 To 31St March 2013. ______________________________________________________________ Organisational context and principles for pay policy High quality public services require high calibre staff to deliver them. Maintaining and improving local public services during a period of radical public service reform and unprecedented budgetary constraint is a major challenge for the council. To succeed it is vital to ensure that our staff are fairly rewarded for their contributions, and that the shared commitment to public services - that motivates so many Council staff - is maintained. In this context, remuneration at all levels needs to be adequate to secure and retain a talented workforce but at the same time must not be excessive. Key elements of the Council's pay policy ƒ The Council participates in national pay bargaining and adopts staff terms and conditions agreed by national and regional negotiating bodies. ƒ For schools based employees, the Council provides advice to the school relating to the appropriate grade for the post, but ultimately the Governing Body makes the decision. ƒ Pay grades for all other employees are determined by the use of externally developed job evaluation schemes. ƒ No employee is currently paid less than the London Living Wage. ƒ All staffing appointments are made on merit. ƒ A published severance policy applies to all employees. For chief officers: - ƒ A member body oversees employment matters, including pay, appointment and severance. ƒ Incremental progression is dependent upon a performance appraisal outcome of at least 'successful.' ƒ There will be no performance related pay for the year 12/13. Performance related pay was last paid in respect of the year 09/10. The Council's Workforce Strategy - Valued; Flexible; Productive Last year the Council agreed its Workforce Strategy for the next three years - 2011 to 2014 and a complementary action plan. The strategy sets out Ealing's vision for its workforce - a workforce that is **valued** for what is does by those we work with and for; **flexible** in its approach to adapt rapidly to changing residents' needs and reduced budgets; and **productive** so that we continuously improve public services and value for money. That vision is underpinned by an action plan for each of the following themes: ƒ Improved performance and productivity ƒ Flexible organisation and workforce ƒ Workforce planning and development ƒ Effective engagement ƒ Recruitment and retention Each theme is sponsored by a member of corporate board reflecting the fundamental importance of this work in enabling the Council to meet its corporate objectives and priorities set out in the Corporate Plan. Pay Policy Statement Policies on pay and reward are intended to support and reinforce the organisational context, principles for pay policy and objectives of the workforce strategy as set out in the preceding paragraphs. This pay policy statement also satisfies the specific requirements of the Localism Act 2011 particularly in relation to chief officers. Definition of "chief officer" The Localism Act 2011 defines "chief officer" (for the purposes of pay statements) as anyone within any of the following categories: (a) the head of paid service designated under section 4(1) of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989; (b) the monitoring officer designated under section 5(1) of that Act; (c) a statutory chief officer mentioned in section 2(6) of that Act; (d) a non-statutory chief officer mentioned in section 2(7) of that Act; (e) a deputy chief officer mentioned in section 2(8) of that Act. Thus, where the expression "chief officer" is used within this document, it refers to an officer within the above-mentioned definition unless otherwise stated. Determining grades and pay levels National and regional agreements The Council supports the system of collective bargaining. It applies the terms and conditions agreed by the Joint Negotiating Committee for Chief Officers of Local Authorities ("JNC") to those within the scope of that agreement, which includes all employees who are chief officers. It applies the terms and conditions of service agreed by: the National Joint Council ("NJC") for Local Government Services and the Greater London Provincial Council ("GLPC"); the Soulbury Committee; and the JNC for Youth and Community Workers to other employees. National agreements are a significant determinant of staff remuneration, notably through national negotiation of annual pay awards. London Weighting Allowance. National and regional agreements are also a determinant of staff remuneration, notably London Weighting Allowance. This Allowance is consolidated into Chief Officer grades but shown as a separate payment for GLPC evaluated grades (grades 1 - 18), Soulbury Committee and JNC for Youth and Community Workers employees. Ealing Supplement. A local "Ealing" Supplement is paid to employees. This Supplement is consolidated into Chief Officer grades but shown as a separate payment for GLPC evaluated grades (grades 1-18). This Ealing Supplement is not paid to Soulbury Committee and JNC for Youth and Community Workers employees. Job evaluation The pay grades of employees within the scope of the JNC are determined by the application of the HayGroup Job Evaluation Scheme (Hay Scheme). The Hay Scheme is a market leading and widely-used systematic process for ranking jobs logically and fairly by comparing job against job or against a predetermined scale to determine the relative importance of jobs to an organisation. The conceptual framework underpinning the Hay Scheme is that all jobs need Know-How in order to undertake Problem Solving and discharge Accountability. For other employees, pay grades are determined by the application of the National Soulbury Committee arrangements, the Joint Negotiating Committee for Youth and Community Workers and the Greater London Provincial Council Job Evaluation Scheme (GLPCJES) designed specifically for use by London boroughs. The objective of the GLPCJES is to operate grading arrangements based on principles of fairness, transparency, and consistency and to operate free of gender bias and discrimination. Progression through pay grades Currently chief officers employees move through the pay scale via annual increments and this is dependent upon a performance appraisal outcome of at least 'successful.' For other posts, employees currently move through the pay scales via annual increments but these may be withheld in the event of poor performance. Performance related pay, allowances and benefits in kind The Council does not pay performance related pay or bonuses to chief officers. Until 31st March 2010 the Council had a performance related pay scheme (LIPS) for its most senior chief officer posts. The Council's Chief Officers Panel (COP) decided to end LIPS from 1st April 2010. The effect of that decision has been to reduce the pay of the affected staff by a total of approximately 10% in the current financial year (2011/12). A number of chief officers are paid a travel allowance but other than this no chief officer receives any allowances or benefits-in-kind. Payment of election fees In some years, when general, local or European elections occur, the Chief Executive is entitled to receive election fees for organising and overseeing the election in the role of Returning Officer/Acting Returning Officer. The fee level for each election is determined by national or local scales for each type of election. Market supplements and scarcity payments The Council has a scheme that provides for market scarcity supplement payments to be paid for recruitment and retention purposes. Reports with internal and external evidence from the market are prepared for approval by the Assistant Director of Human Resources and Organisational Development who has delegated authority to approve such payments. Such payments are reported to Pay Board and reviewed on an annual basis. Market scarcity supplements are kept to a minimum and periodically reviewed. Transparency Senior officer pay grades For chief officers the following pay grades with minimum and maximum salary levels are derived from the application of the HayGroup Job Evaluation Scheme. | Pay Grade | Minimum Salary | Maximum Salary | |--------------------|-------------------|-------------------| | £ | £ | | | Chief Executive | 167,532 | 178,341 | | Executive Director | 120,444 | 133,011 | | Director - CB1 | 89,007 | 109,950 | | Director - CB2 | 83,193 | 87,984 | | CB3 | 78,210 | 82,488 | | CB4 | 67,797 | 71,490 | | CB5 | 62,538 | 66,441 | | CB6 | 57,354 | 61,260 | Information on the senior management structure is published on the Council's website here: http://www.ealing.gov.uk/downloads/download/672/senior_management_structure_chart Information on the pay of the Council's most senior staff is published on the Council's website here: http://www.ealing.gov.uk/downloads/download/481/executive_pay More detailed information is published annually in the Statement of Accounts here: http://www.ealing.gov.uk/info/200687/council_budgets_and_spending/338/statement_of_acco unts Under the Government's Code - "The Code of Recommended Practice for Local Authorities on Data Transparency" - public data on senior employees (with the option for individuals to refuse to consent for their names to be published) salaries should be released. "Senior employee salaries" is defined as all salaries which are above £58,200 and above (irrespective of post), which is the Senior Civil Service minimum pay band. The intention is, from April 2012, to publish for all staff earning more than £58,200. Comparison with other London Boroughs The Council participates in a regular benchmarking exercise of senior management costs and structures (defined as the Chief Executive and the next two layers) coordinated by London Councils. The latest results, based on 2010 data, are shown below. | | CE (Layer | |---------------------|--------------| | 1) | | | Executive Directors | | | (Layer 2) | | | Layer 3 | Aggregate | | Salaries for | | | Layer 3 | | | | | | Salary | | | Ealing | £170,722 | | £185,584 | 6.7 | | average | | | London median | £185,397 | This shows that the size and cost of Ealing's senior management structure is one of the lowest in London and around 25% below the average. This is before any adjustment to take account of relative borough size. Ealing is London's third largest borough. Accountability Chief Officer and Chief Officers Appointments Panel The Council has established member bodies, the Chief Officer and Chief Officers Appointment Panels, to oversee employment matters, including pay, relating to its chief officers. The responsibilities of these Panels include: - ƒ Reviewing current salaries and contractual arrangements and considering and agreeing the changes necessary to ensure Ealing is able to recruit and retain chief officers it needs now and in the future. ƒ Agreeing recruitment arrangements, shortlisting & interviewing candidates and making appointments, if appropriate, to chief officer posts. ƒ Re-appointment of existing Chief Officers into new posts and selection for redundancy. ƒ Disciplinary, grievance, capability and termination arrangements in respect of chief officer posts. ## Council Role. Full Council are asked to note that decisions on proposed remuneration packages for new appointments, including market supplements and scarcity payments and fees, in excess of £100,000 and above will be determined by Chief Officer Panel, in accordance with their existing terms of reference. ## Pay Board The Council has a Pay Board comprising senior managers and Staff Side representatives which meets on a quarterly basis. The primary role of the Board is to review matters of pay for groups of staff particularly where recruitment and retention difficulties are identified. Fairness Pay multiples The median earnings figure for all employees is £25,488 per annum, equivalent to a grade Scale 6. As at 20/12/2011 the ratio between the taxable earnings for the highest paid employee - the Chief Executive - and the median earnings figure for all employees in the Council is 7.213, which is well within what is regarded as good practice. Ealing's ratio compares favourably with other Council data collected by Will Hutton for his 2011 Review of Fair Pay in the Public Sector which identified multiples at or around 8.00. The Council does not have a policy towards maintaining or reaching specific pay multiples. It will, however, explain the reasons for changes from year to year, and undertake comparisons within the local government sector and with other sectors. Remuneration of "lowest paid employees". Lowest paid employees" refers to those employees employed on grades 1, 2 and 3 of the Council's current pay grading structure, other than apprenticeships and traineeships. This includes SCP's 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13. 14, 15, 16 and 17 - see attached appendix "2" - "Ealing Council - Pay Policy Statement for the financial year 1st April 2012 to 31st March 2013 - Appendix "2" - Salary Rates from 1st April 2012. The definition for the expression "lowest paid employees" has been adopted because the Council has traditionally treated grades 1, 2 and 3 differently for the purposes of the Ealing Supplement. Because those 3 grades were recognised as the lowest paid, employees on those grades receive the additional Ealing Supplement at the financial value of £282 per annum. Employees on grades 4 to 18 receive the additional Ealing Supplement at a financial value of £141 per annum instead. The Ealing Supplement is consolidated into Chief Officer grades but shown as a separate payment for grades 1 to 18." Low pay Currently no employee is paid less than the London Living Wage (LLW). For 12/13, the Council's policy is that no employee is paid less than the LLW. The Council currently pays employees above the LLW. If, as a result of an increase to LLW during 12/13, an employee is paid less that the LLW then a temporary discretionary supplement will be paid during 12/13 to that employee to ensure they receive an amount equivalent to the LLW. For schools based employees it will be up to each school to decide whether to adopt the LLW. At the meeting on Tuesday 23rd January 2007 Full Council agreed the following motion: "This Council notes that all employees subject to the pay and conditions of Ealing Council are paid at or above the level of the London Living Wage. This Council believes that all members of our community have the right to earn a living wage. As community leaders this Council will work with partners in seeking to deliver a living wage across Ealing" Severance payments and re-employment Severance payments The Council's policy on severance payments applies to all employees including chief officers. It is published on the Council's website here: http://www2.ealing.gov.uk/services/council/committees/agendas_minutes_reports/council/15 may2007-19may2008.html This policy is attached as appendix "3" to this Pay Policy Statement. Payments under this policy to a chief officer are also subject to authorisation by the Chief Officer Panel. At times of reorganisation if a chief officer is redeployed to a lower graded post as suitable alternative employment to avoid a redundancy situation the Council's arrangements in respect of pay protection for all staff apply. The current arrangements are set out in the attached appendix "4" to this Pay Policy Statement. Chief officers previously employed by other public sector bodies All staff appointments, including chief officers, are made on merit. Pay and grading associated with each appointment is determined by the policies set out in this statement and is not varied to take account of salaries or other payments made under previous employments. Where chief officers are employed who are also in receipt of a pension under the Local Government Pension Scheme the Council's policy is to abate pensions for re-employed pensions in all cases except where flexible retirement has been granted. Re-employment The Council has a policy that it will not re engage anyone made redundant within 6 months of his or her termination date, either directly or through an agency or on a consultancy basis. Value for money. The Council's policy in respect of remuneration for senior appointments to ensure value for money Conclusion The Council's Pay Policy Statement must be approved by a meeting of the full Council. Any variation to the content of this Pay Policy Statement for the duration of the remainder of the financial year to which it currently applies will have to be submitted to a future meeting of the Council for approval. The Statement will be published and shown on the Council's website. 21st March 2012 New Spinal Salary London Ealing Salary Annual Salary Weekly Hourly Basic Hrly Grade Column Exc. LW Weight Supp Inc LW inclusive Salary Rate Rate 1 7 13,455.00 1,761.00 282.00 15,216.00 15,498.00 297.22 8.4921 7.3726 1 8 13,854.00 1,761.00 282.00 15,615.00 15,897.00 304.87 8.7107 7.5912 1 9 14,244.00 1,761.00 282.00 16,005.00 16,287.00 312.35 8.9244 7.8049 1 10 14,529.00 1,761.00 282.00 16,290.00 16,572.00 317.82 9.0805 7.9611 1 11 14,721.00 1,761.00 282.00 16,482.00 16,764.00 321.50 9.1858 8.0663 2 10 14,529.00 1,761.00 282.00 16,290.00 16,572.00 317.82 9.0805 7.9611 2 11 14,721.00 1,761.00 282.00 16,482.00 16,764.00 321.50 9.1858 8.0663 2 12 15,033.00 1,761.00 282.00 16,794.00 17,076.00 327.48 9.3567 8.2373 2 13 15,435.00 1,761.00 282.00 17,196.00 17,478.00 335.19 9.5770 8.4575 3 14 15,723.00 1,761.00 282.00 17,484.00 17,766.00 340.72 9.7348 8.6153 3 15 16,047.00 1,761.00 282.00 17,808.00 18,090.00 346.93 9.9123 8.7929 3 16 16,434.00 1,761.00 282.00 18,195.00 18,477.00 354.35 10.1244 9.0049 3 17 16,821.00 1,761.00 282.00 18,582.00 18,864.00 361.78 10.3364 9.2170 4 18 17,154.00 1,761.00 141.00 18,915.00 19,056.00 365.46 10.4416 9.3995 4 19 17,802.00 1,761.00 141.00 19,563.00 19,704.00 377.88 10.7967 9.7545 4 20 18,444.00 1,761.00 141.00 20,205.00 20,346.00 390.20 11.1485 10.1063 4 21 19,116.00 1,761.00 141.00 20,877.00 21,018.00 403.08 11.5167 10.4745 5 22 19,614.00 1,761.00 141.00 21,375.00 21,516.00 412.64 11.7896 10.7474 5 23 20,190.00 1,761.00 141.00 21,951.00 22,092.00 423.68 12.1052 11.0630 5 24 20,847.00 1,761.00 141.00 22,608.00 22,749.00 436.28 12.4652 11.4230 5 25 21,516.00 1,761.00 141.00 23,277.00 23,418.00 449.11 12.8318 11.7896 6 26 22,209.00 1,761.00 141.00 23,970.00 24,111.00 462.40 13.2115 12.1693 6 27 22,950.00 1,761.00 141.00 24,711.00 24,852.00 476.61 13.6175 12.5753 6 28 23,694.00 1,761.00 141.00 25,455.00 25,596.00 490.88 14.0252 12.9830 7 29 24,639.00 1,761.00 141.00 26,400.00 26,541.00 509.01 14.5430 13.5008 7 30 25,464.00 1,761.00 141.00 27,225.00 27,366.00 524.83 14.9951 13.9529 7 31 26,271.00 1,761.00 141.00 28,032.00 28,173.00 540.30 15.4373 14.3951 8 32 27,039.00 1,761.00 141.00 28,800.00 28,941.00 555.03 15.8581 14.8159 8 33 27,840.00 1,761.00 141.00 29,601.00 29,742.00 570.39 16.2970 15.2548 8 34 28,629.00 1,761.00 141.00 30,390.00 30,531.00 585.53 16.7293 15.6871 9 34 28,629.00 1,761.00 141.00 30,390.00 30,531.00 585.53 16.7293 15.6871 9 35 29,226.00 1,761.00 141.00 30,987.00 31,128.00 596.98 17.0564 16.0142 9 36 30,000.00 1,761.00 141.00 31,761.00 31,902.00 611.82 17.4805 16.4384 10 37 30,846.00 1,761.00 141.00 32,607.00 32,748.00 628.04 17.9441 16.9019 10 38 31,749.00 1,761.00 141.00 33,510.00 33,651.00 645.36 18.4389 17.3967 10 39 32,781.00 1,761.00 141.00 34,542.00 34,683.00 665.15 19.0044 17.9622 10 40 33,657.00 1,761.00 141.00 35,418.00 35,559.00 681.95 19.4844 18.4422 New Spinal Salary London Ealing Salary Annual Salary Weekly Hourly Basic Hrly Grade Column Exc. LW Weight Supp Inc LW inclusive Salary Rate Rate 11 41 34,545.00 1,761.00 141.00 36,306.00 36,447.00 698.98 19.9710 18.9288 11 42 35,418.00 1,761.00 141.00 37,179.00 37,320.00 715.73 20.4493 19.4071 11 43 36,309.00 1,761.00 141.00 38,070.00 38,211.00 732.81 20.9375 19.8953 12 44 37,200.00 1,761.00 141.00 38,961.00 39,102.00 749.90 21.4258 20.3836 12 45 38,028.00 1,761.00 141.00 39,789.00 39,930.00 765.78 21.8795 20.8373 12 46 38,955.00 1,761.00 141.00 40,716.00 40,857.00 783.56 22.3874 21.3452 13 47 39,849.00 1,761.00 141.00 41,610.00 41,751.00 800.70 22.8773 21.8351 13 48 40,737.00 1,761.00 141.00 42,498.00 42,639.00 817.73 23.3638 22.3216 13 49 41,607.00 1,761.00 141.00 43,368.00 43,509.00 834.42 23.8405 22.7984 14 50 42,501.00 1,761.00 141.00 44,262.00 44,403.00 851.56 24.3304 23.2882 14 51 43,392.00 1,761.00 141.00 45,153.00 45,294.00 868.65 24.8186 23.7764 14 52 44,289.00 1,761.00 141.00 46,050.00 46,191.00 885.85 25.3101 24.2679 15 53 45,201.00 1,761.00 141.00 46,962.00 47,103.00 903.35 25.8099 24.7677 15 54 46,146.00 1,761.00 141.00 47,907.00 48,048.00 921.47 26.3277 25.2855 15 55 47,115.00 1,761.00 141.00 48,876.00 49,017.00 940.05 26.8586 25.8164 15 56 48,075.00 1,761.00 141.00 49,836.00 49,977.00 958.46 27.3847 26.3425 16 57 49,029.00 1,761.00 141.00 50,790.00 50,931.00 976.76 27.9074 26.8652 16 58 49,980.00 1,761.00 141.00 51,741.00 51,882.00 995.00 28.4285 27.3863 16 59 50,943.00 1,761.00 141.00 52,704.00 52,845.00 1,013.47 28.9562 27.9140 16 60 51,894.00 1,761.00 141.00 53,655.00 53,796.00 1,031.70 29.4773 28.4351 17 61 52,848.00 1,761.00 141.00 54,609.00 54,750.00 1,050.00 30.0000 28.9578 17 62 53,811.00 1,761.00 141.00 55,572.00 55,713.00 1,068.47 30.5277 29.4855 17 63 54,768.00 1,761.00 141.00 56,529.00 56,670.00 1,086.82 31.0521 30.0099 17 64 55,716.00 1,761.00 141.00 57,477.00 57,618.00 1,105.00 31.5715 30.5293 18 65 56,679.00 1,761.00 141.00 58,440.00 58,581.00 1,123.47 32.0992 31.0570 18 66 57,906.00 1,761.00 141.00 59,667.00 59,808.00 1,147.00 32.7715 31.7293 18 67 59,154.00 1,761.00 141.00 60,915.00 61,056.00 1,170.94 33.4553 32.4132 18 68 60,426.00 1,761.00 141.00 62,187.00 62,328.00 1,195.33 34.1523 33.1101 Overtime Rate 7.4301 7.6488 7.8625 8.0186 8.1238 8.0186 8.1238 8.2948 8.5151 8.6729 8.8504 9.0625 9.2745 9.4570 9.8121 10.1638 10.5321 10.8049 11.1205 11.4805 11.8471 12.2268 12.6329 13.0405 19.1800 19.1800 19.1800 19.1800 19.1800 19.1800 20.5400 20.5400 20.5400 20.5400 20.5400 20.5400 20.5400 Overtime Rate 22.2900 22.2900 22.2900 22.2900 22.2900 22.2900 22.2900 22.2900 22.2900 23.5800 23.5800 23.5800 23.5800 23.5800 23.5800 23.5800 27.6500 27.6500 27.6500 27.6500 27.6500 27.6500 27.6500 27.6500 27.6500 27.6500 27.6500 27.6500 ## Appendix "3" Ealing Council Pay Policy Statement For The Financial Year 1St April 2012 To 31St March 2013 Ealing Council Policy Statement A. Local Government (Early Termination Of Employment) (Discretionary Compensation) (England And Wales) Regulations 2006 B. Local Government Pension Scheme - Discretionary Decisions A. Local Government (Early Termination of Employment) (Discretionary Compensation) (England and Wales) Regulations 2006 1. Introduction & Scope The regulations quoted above require each local authority to formulate, publish and keep under review their policies on compensation. This part of the policy statement will apply to all Ealing Council employees eligible for membership of the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) other than schools based staff. 2. Rate of Redundancy Pay The Council will calculate redundancy pay using the Government statutory entitlement table (see Appendix 1) to assess the number of weeks of redundancy pay. The payment will be then calculated using the actual weekly rate of pay for the individual as opposed to the statutory maximum weekly rate. For employees at or below spinal column point 17, a payment based on: a) the rate at spinal column point 17 or the employee's actual remuneration whichever is higher; or; b) the maximum allowed by the regulations if lower than the amount in (a). ## 3. Eligibility Criteria For Compensation To Be Eligible For Compensation Under This Policy, Employment Must Be Terminated- (i) By reason of redundancy (ii) In the interests of the efficient exercise of the authority's functions, or (iii) In the case of a joint appointment, because the other holder of the appointment has left it An employee who has received additional pension scheme membership under regulation 52 (augmentation) is not entitled to discretionary compensation under the regulations. The maximum payment that can be awarded under the regulations is 104 weeks pay. Any payment authorised includes (and is not in addition to) any entitlement to a redundancy payment. At its sole discretion, the Council may decide that a payment is conditional upon the employee's entering into a compromise agreement on the Councils standard terms. 3.1 Exceptional Circumstances The Council will not normally make any payment of discretionary compensation. At its sole discretion, and subject to the eligibility criteria set out above, it may authorise a payment provided the circumstances are truly exceptional and that a robust business case has been made demonstrating that the proposal is in the Council's best financial interests. Where an employee is not entitled to a redundancy payment, then any discretionary compensation awarded will not usually exceed 50% of the amount of redundancy payment that they would have received had they been entitled. Where an employee is entitled to a redundancy payment, then any discretionary compensation awarded will not usually exceed 150% of the amount of redundancy payment that they would have received but for the award of discretionary compensation. 4. Augmentation of Membership There is no longer a facility to grant compensatory added years to members accessing their pension benefits. There remains a facility to award additional pension scheme membership under regulation 52 of the LGPS The Council will not award augmentation save in exceptional circumstances (see part B below) In addition, before termination of employment and in circumstances where the employee would otherwise be eligible for consideration for discretionary compensation under 3 above, the Council may agree to award augmentation instead, provided that the cost to the Council of augmentation is no greater than the cost of any discretionary payment which would be permitted by 3 (as the case may be). This discretion can only be exercised prior to the termination of employment, and so long as the employee meets the statutory eligibility criteria. 5. Decision Maker Any decision to award a payment made under this policy will be authorised by: 1. For the Head of Paid Service, Chief Officers and Deputy Chief Officers (as defined in the Local Government and Housing Act 1989), the Chief Officer Panel (to make decisions in accordance with its normal voting arrangements). The power to make an award can only be exercised after consideration of a report prepared for this purpose by the Director of Human Resources and the Chief Finance Officer. In all cases for Chief Officers, the views of the Council's appointed auditors will be sought in advance of any decision and their reply will be reported to the Chief Officer panel. 2. For officers below Deputy Chief Officer level, the Director of Human Resources in consultation with the Chief Finance Officer and the relevant service Director. Before reaching a decision, the decision maker must be satisfied that the employee has had a reasonable opportunity to supply written representations and relevant documents. The decision maker must also consider any relevant contractual or statutory provisions. Where consideration is given to exercise this power the decision maker will seek legal advice prior to entering into any commitment on behalf of the Council. To calculate the number of weeks redundancy pay, cross reference the person's age and years of service and then multiply that number by the weekly salary (maximum weekly salary is £310 ). E.g. a person with a salary of £200 aged 22 with 4 years of service will be entitled to two weeks salary e.g. a total redundancy of £400. 17* - The table starts at age 17, as it is possible for a 17 year old to have 2 years service. Compulsory school leaving age can be 153/4 or 154/5 where a child is 16 before 1 September. Particular care should be taken when calculating an individual's redundancy pay when they joined as an employee below the age of 16. 61* - The table stops at age 61 because for employees age 61 and over, the payment remains the same as for age 61. The table has been changed to reflect the Employment Equality (Age Regulations) October 2006. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Service (Years) | |-------|-------------------|----------------|----------|---------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|---------------------------------|-------------------------|-----------------|--------|--------|--------|--------|--------|--------|--------|--------|--------------------| | Age 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | | 17* 1 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 18 | 1 | 1½ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 19 | 1 | 1½ 2 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 20 | 1 | 1½ 2 | 2½ - | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 21 | 1 | 1½ 2 | 2½ 3 | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 22 | 1 | 1½ 2 | 2½ 3 | 3½ | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 23 | 1½ 2 | 2½ 3 | 3½ 4 | 4½ | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 24 | 2 | 2½ 3 | 3½ 4 | 4½ | 5 | 5½ | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | 25 | 2 | 3 | 3½ 4 | 4½ 5 | 5½ | 6 | 6½ | - | | | | | | | | | | | | 26 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 4½ 5 | 5½ | 6 | 6½ | 7 | 7½ | - | | | | | | | | | | 27 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 5½ 6 | 6½ | 7 | 7½ | 8 | 8½ | - | | | | | | | | | 28 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 6½ | 7 | 7½ | 8 | 8½ | 9 | 9½ | - | | | | | | | 29 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 7½ | 8 | 8½ | 9 | 9½ | 10 | 10½ - | | | | | | | 30 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 8½ | 9 | 9½ | 10 | 10½ 11 | 11½ - | | | | | | | 31 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 9½ | 10 | 10½ 11 | 11½ 12 | 12½ - | | | | | | | 32 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 10½ 11 | 11½ 12 | 12½ 13 | 13½ - | | | | | | | 33 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 11½ 12 | 12½ 13 | 13½ 14 | 14½ - | | | | | | 34 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 12½ 13 | 13½ 14 | 14½ 15 | 15½ - | | | | | 35 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 13½ 14 | 14½ 15 | 15½ 16 | 16½ | | | | 36 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 14½ 15 | 15½ 16 | 16½ 17 | | | | 37 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 15½ 16 | 16½ 17 | 17½ | | | 38 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 16½ 17 | 17½ 18 | | | 39 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 17½ 18 | 18½ | | 40 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 18½ 19 | | 41 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | | 42 | 2½ 3½ 4½ 5½ 6½ 7½ | 8½ | 9½ | 10½ 11½ 12½ 13½ 14½ 15½ 16½ 17½ 18½ 19½ 20½ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 43 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | | 44 | 3 | 4½ 5½ 6½ 7½ 8½ | 9½ | 10½ 11½ 12½ 13½ 14½ 15½ 16½ 17½ 18½ 19½ 20½ 21½ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 45 | 3 | 4½ 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | | 46 | 3 | 4½ 6 | 7½ 8½ 9½ | 10½ 11½ 12½ 13½ 14½ 15½ 16½ 17½ 18½ 19½ 20½ 21½ 22½ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 47 | 3 | 4½ 6 | 7½ 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | | | 48 | 3 | 4½ 6 | 7½ 9 | 10½ 11½ 12½ 13½ 14½ 15½ 16½ 17½ 18½ 19½ 20½ 21½ 22½ 23½ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 49 | 3 | 4½ 6 | 7½ 9 | 10½ 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | | | | 50 | 3 | 4½ 6 | 7½ 9 | 10½ 12 | 13½ 14½ 15½ 16½ 17½ 18½ 19½ 20½ 21½ 22½ 23½ 24½ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 51 | 3 | 4½ 6 | 7½ 9 | 10½ 12 | 13½ 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | | | | | 52 | 3 | 4½ 6 | 7½ 9 | 10½ 12 | 13½ 15 | 16½ 17½ 18½ 19½ 20½ 21½ 22½ 23½ 24½ 25½ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 53 | 3 | 4½ 6 | 7½ 9 | 10½ 12 | 13½ 15 | 16½ 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | | | | | | 54 | 3 | 4½ 6 | 7½ 9 | 10½ 12 | 13½ 15 | 16½ 18 | 19½ 20½ 21½ 22½ 23½ 24½ 25½ 26½ | | | | | | | | | | | | | 55 | 3 | 4½ 6 | 7½ 9 | 10½ 12 | 13½ 15 | 16½ 18 | 19½ 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | | | | | | | 56 | 3 | 4½ 6 | 7½ 9 | 10½ 12 | 13½ 15 | 16½ 18 | 19½ 21 | 22½ 23½ 24½ 25½ 26½ 27½ | | | | | | | | | | | | 57 | 3 | 4½ 6 | 7½ 9 | 10½ 12 | 13½ 15 | 16½ 18 | 19½ 21 | 22½ 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | | | | | | | | 58 | 3 | 4½ 6 | 7½ 9 | 10½ 12 | 13½ 15 | 16½ 18 | 19½ 21 | 22½ 24 | 25½ 26½ 27½ 28½ | | | | | | | | | | 59 3 4½ 6 7½ 9 10½ 12 13½ 15 16½ 18 19½ 21 22½ 24 25½ 27 28 29 60 3 4½ 6 7½ 9 10½ 12 13½ 15 16½ 18 19½ 21 22½ 24 25½ 27 28½ 29½ 61+ 3 4½ 6 7½ 9 10½ 12 13½ 15 16½ 18 19½ 21 22½ 24 25½ 27 28½ 30 B. Local Government Pension Scheme - Discretionary Payments 1. Introduction and Scope This part of the policy statement will apply to all Ealing Council employees with Local Government Pension Scheme membership, other than schools based staff. The Local Government Pension Scheme Regulations provide for various discretionary powers, which Ealing Council, as an administering and employing authority, can decide how to apply. 2. Eligibility Criteria At the time of any decision made under this part of the policy statement, the decision maker must be satisfied that the following criteria are met: - That the employee meets the minimum age and service criteria within the LGPS Regulations as in force at that time - That a robust business case, demonstrating that the proposal is in the Council's best business and financial interests has been made ## 3. Early Access To Pension Benefits Redundancy/Efficiency If an employee who is aged 50 (from 1st April 2010 substitute age 55 for age 50) or more retires from employment and the reason for retirement is redundancy, the employee is entitled to a pension and retirement grant which are payable immediately (unless the employee waives this in accordance with regulation 15 of the Local Government (Compensation for Redundancy) Regulations 1994 about compensation due because regulation 9 of those Regulations applies to the retirement). For these purposes "redundancy" includes retirement in the interests of efficiency, or because the member held a joint appointment which has been ended because the other holder has left it. In these circumstances the pension and retirement grant are paid without reduction. ## Ill Health Where an employee leaves employment by reason of being permanently incapable of discharging efficiently the duties of their employment or any other comparable employment with Ealing because of ill-health or infirmity of mind or body, they are entitled to an ill-health pension and grant. The pension and grant are payable immediately. In these circumstances the pension and retirement grant are paid in accordance with regulation 28. ## Other Early Leavers The regulations (regulation 31) also provide for a current pensionable employee aged 50 (from 1st April 2010 substitute age 55 for age 50) and over with at least three months membership of the Local Government Pension Scheme who wishes to leave employment the opportunity to apply to their employer for voluntary early retirement and for the immediate payment of their pension benefits. It is at the discretion of the employer to decide whether or not to give consent to the retirement and the early release of pension benefits. If the request for early payment of the benefits is not granted the members benefits would be deferred on leaving and the earliest payment date would be the members 60th birthday. Once the employee reaches age 60 the consent of the employer is not required for the benefits to be paid. Where the employee is permitted to retire early and agreement to the immediate payment of benefits on leaving is received under the Council's discretionary powers the resulting cost to the authority would be dependant on the overall age and membership of the member as detailed below: - Where an employee joins the Local Government Pension Scheme after 30th September 2006 their normal retirement age is 65 therefore their pension benefits will always be subject to an early payment reduction. In these cases the total cost of the early payment of benefits would be covered by the actuarial reduction suffered by the employee and there would be no cost to the Council. - Where the employee's combined years of service in the scheme and age (in whole years only) total 85 or more at the date of leaving the benefit payable would be paid in full and not subject to any early payment reduction. In these cases the total cost of paying the pension entitlement early would fall on the Council. All pension scheme members who joined before 1st October 2006 have some protection under the rule of 85. Those who wish to retire when they have satisfied the rule of 85 will have no reduction to their pension benefits if they reach the age of 60 by March 2016. - An active member prior 1st October 2006 who will be age 60 after 31 March 2016, but before 1 April 2020 and can satisfy the 85 year rule (Where the employee's combined whole years of service in the scheme and age in whole years only total 85 or over at the date when their employment ends) before 1 April 2020 will have a tapered reduction to benefits earned from 1 April 2008 instead of the full reduction. - For all other active members who were born after 31 March 1960 and who joined the scheme prior to 1 October 2006 the 85 year rule applies to all service up to 31 March 2008 with a full reduction to later service. The amount of reduction to the pension and lump sum is determined by an actuarial calculation based on a formula determined by the Government Actuary's Department. Where agreement to immediate payment of the member's benefits is approved the Council also has the discretion to waive the potential actuarial reduction. In all but exceptional cases this discretion will not be exercised Early Payment of Deferred Benefits on Compassionate Grounds Pre 1st April 1998 pension scheme leavers Prior to the regulation changes in 1998 the employer had the discretion to allow early payment of benefits on compassionate grounds, in all cases if the deferred member left prior to 1st April 1998 and the release of benefits is agreed the benefits are paid on an "unreduced "basis. Post 31st March 1998 pension scheme leavers For members who left the pension scheme after the 31st March 1998 the LGPS allows the employer who agrees to make premature payment upon compassionate grounds, to be paid actuarially reduced if applicable. In these cases the following criteria will be taken into account in determining the entitlement and value of the payment. ## (A) Full Payment Of The Accrued Preserved Benefits Where: i. The former employee is not otherwise eligible to receive their accrued LGPS benefits, and ii. The former employee is now prevented from following any employment as a consequence of being able to personally deliver full-time home care to a dependant, and iii. The Council's Medical Advisor has confirmed both a current need for full-time care and that there is no reasonable prospects of the need materially diminishing before the employee's 65th birthday iv. There is no reasonable prospect that the required level of home care can be provided other than by the former employee and before that employee obtains 65 years, or ## (B) Payment Of Accrued Preserved Benefits On Actuarial Reduced Grounds i. The employee left LGPS employment on or after 31st March 1998 and apart from compassionate considerations, the member's benefits would, if paid still be actuarially reduced, and ii. The former employee is not otherwise eligible to receive their accrued LGPS benefits, and iii. The former employee is now prevented from following any employment as a consequence of being able to personally deliver full-time home care to a dependant, and iv. The Council's Medical Advisor has confirmed the need for full time home care for at least the next 5 years, and v. There is no reasonable prospect that the necessary level of care can be provided other than by the former employee for the next 5 years. For the purposes of items a and b above the assumptions are as follows: - "Dependant " means the spouse, partner, offspring or parent of the former member or any other person that Ealing Council may accept of similar status in this context. - "Full time" means usually for at least 35 hours per week excluding weekends - " Home care" means the relevant care is provided in the former employee's or dependant's home If discretion to release benefits is exercised, payment of the benefit will be effected from the date of the member's application. Early Payment of Deferred Benefits for members leaving employment since 31st March 1998 A request from a former member aged between 50 (from 1st April 2010 substitute age 55 for age 50) and 59 for the early payment of their deferred benefits other than on the compassionate grounds or by the reason of permanent ill health, will only be accepted where there is no cost or other financial disadvantage to the Council If discretion to release benefits is exercised, payment of the benefit will be effected from the date of the member's application. 4. Augmentation (Reg 52) The Council has discretion to augment scheme membership. The discretion to increase scheme membership under this regulation can be used at any time during an active member's employment but is not permissible following a member's termination of employment. The amount of augmented membership must not exceed - - 10 years (incl additional membership in respect of different employments) or - the period by which the member's total membership falls short of the total membership the member will have if they continue as an active member until age 65 whichever is the shortest Augmentation will not be considered by the Council save in the following exceptional circumstances: - As a measure to recruit/retain key staff where a robust business case demonstrates that it would be beneficial to the organization - On loss of service following a TUPE transfer - As described in paragraph 4 of Section A of this policy. Decision Maker Any decision to award a payment made under this policy will be authorised by: (a) For the Head of Paid Service, Chief Officers and Deputy Chief Officers (as defined in the Local Government and Housing Act 1989), the Chief Officer Panel (to make decisions in accordance with its normal voting arrangements). The power to make an award can only be exercised after consideration of a report prepared for this purpose by the Director of Human Resources and the Chief Finance Officer. In all cases for Chief Officers, the views of the Council's appointed auditors will be sought in advance of any decision and their reply will be reported to the Chief Officer panel. (b) For officers below Deputy Chief Officer level, the Director of Human Resources in consultation with the Chief Finance Officer and the relevant service Director. Before reaching a decision, the decision maker must be satisfied that the employee has had a reasonable opportunity to supply written representations and relevant documents. The decision maker must also consider any relevant contractual or statutory provisions. Where consideration is given to exercise this power the decision maker will seek legal advice prior to entering into any commitment on behalf of the Council. 5. Other Discretions Ealing Council will apply its discretion in relation to other areas as follows: Flexible Retirement (Reg 35) The Council will consider applications for flexible retirement on an individual basis taking account of all relevant considerations including the likely costs and benefits. Actuarial reductions will be made to pensions in line with the relevant regulation. Applications will be made in accordance with the process established for this purpose. Shared Cost AVC (Reg 67) The Council does not provide a shared cost additional voluntary contribution scheme Rejoining Scheme after Opting Out More than Once (Reg 7(9)) The Council will permit a member who has opted out more than once to rejoin the scheme except where the member is being considered for redundancy, ill health or other early retirement Reduction in Pay Certificates (Reg 23 (4)) The Council will automatically issue certificates of protection in all relevant cases (e.g in cases where the employer permanently reduces, freezes or restricts increases on pay) Abating Pensions for Re-employed Pensioners (Reg 109) The Council will continue to abate pensions in all cases*, on the basis of the 1995 LGPS regulations. * Except those employees who are granted flexible retirement Selection of Final pay period for Deceased Members (Reg 22 (7)) The Council will take appropriate action to maximize benefits Payment of Death Grants (Reg 38) The member's nominated beneficiary shall in all but exceptional cases be the recipient of the death grant Child Continuing Education (Reg 44(3)) The Council will not regard a break of less than 12 complete months as a break in the period of education nor training Split of Children's Pension (Reg 47) Payment to be made in accordance with the LGPS regulations. Were there are more than 2 eligible children payment to be made to the 2 eldest beneficiaries. As a beneficiary ceases to be entitled to payment, pension entitlement to revert to next eligible child, to maximize the period of payment. Payment to be made to an account set up for the sole benefit of the child. Commutation of Small Pensions (Reg 49) Small pensions to be commuted in all but exceptional cases, subject to any limits specified in the regulations and in accordance with HMRC restrictions Commutation: Exceptional Ill Health (Reg 50) The Council will respond sensitively and positively to any wishes of an employee who meets the requirements of this regulation and wishes to receive a lump sum payment in accordance with its provisions. Where an election cannot be made, commutation will be made if it is likely to be to the members overall advantage Medical Requirement for Added Years Purchase (Reg 55) The Council will reserve its right to require, when it deems necessary, an employee to undergo a medical examination (at the employees expense) to establish that the employee is in good health Elections to Pay AVC (Reg 60) The Council will require the minimum rate of AVCs to be at least the specified minimum set out in the regulations Interest from other Employers (Reg 82) The Council will require interest to be charged on amounts overdue in accordance with the regulations Administration Charges for provision of Statements (Reg 86) The Council will make charges in circumstances permitted by the relevant regulation 6. Decision Maker Discretionary pension decisions will be authorised by: a. For the Head of Paid Service, Chief Officers and Deputy Chief Officers (as defined in the Local Government and Housing Act 1989), the Chief Officer Panel (to make decisions in accordance with its normal voting arrangements). The power to make an award can only be exercised after consideration of a report prepared for this purpose by the Director of Human Resources and the Chief Finance Officer. In all cases for Chief Officers, the views of the Council's appointed auditors will be sought in advance of any decision and their reply will be reported to the Chief Officer panel. b. For officers below Chief Officers level, the Director of Human Resources in consultation with the Chief Finance Officer and the relevant service Director. Before reaching a decision, the decision maker must be satisfied that the employee has had a reasonable opportunity to supply written representations and relevant documents. The decision maker must also consider any relevant contractual or statutory provisions. ## Ealing Council Pay Policy Statement For The Financial Year 1St April 2012 To 31St March 2013 Appendix "4" - Pay Protection. 13.3.2.3 Pay Protection In Cases Of Assimilation Or Redeployment To A Lower Graded Post i) Every effort will be made to assimilate or redeploy staff into posts at the same or a higher grade where this is possible. a) Where this is not possible, an employee may be assimilated or accept redeployment to a post at a lower grade than that of his/her existing post. In such cases the Council would wish to assist the affected employee by allowing a period of time in which to adjust to the reduced salary/wage, or obtain work at the original grade level. b) Where the possibility exists, the manager and the employee will share responsibility to attempt to develop the lower graded post by adding duties of a similar nature and level to the original grade and commensurate with the skills and abilities of the redeployed employee. The employee may also be encouraged to apply for vacant jobs at an appropriately grade level. c) The following scheme will apply. ii) An employee who: a) as a result of the **deletion of his/her substantive post**, is assimilated or redeployed to a post at a lower grade will have his/her full contractual pay protected for a period of two years from the start date in the lower graded post; OR; b) as a result of reorganisation retains the same post but suffers a reduction in pay due to a **change in her/his established pattern of work** will have the value of appropriate enhancements to her/his pay calculated according to the principles set out for the protection of Saturday enhancements in part 1, paragraph 4.3. iii) If the working hours of the new post vary from the original then the appropriate rate of pay protection will apply pro rata. During the first two years the employee will benefit from any national pay award, annual increments etc. in accordance with the conditions of service. iv) On the second anniversary of the start date in the lower graded post (or in a trial period to assess suitability for that post) the employee's salary/wage will be frozen for the next six months. v) At the end of this six-month period the employee's salary/wage will be reduced by 25% of the difference between the frozen rate and the rate for the job at the appropriate grade and spinal column point for the new post. The employee's salary/wage will then be reduced by 75% and 50% (respectively) of the remaining difference at further intervals of six months. On the fourth anniversary of the start date in the new post (or trial period) it will finally be reduced to the rate for the job at the appropriate grade and spinal column point for the post which is applicable at that date (i.e. taking account of any incremental progression which would have occurred had the employee been in that post for the four year period of pay protection). vi) From the date of the commencement of the duties of the new post all other conditions of service will be those appropriate for the grade and designation of the new post. Any enhancements and/or overtime payments will be based on the appropriate grade and spinal column point for the new post. vii) All payments in excess of the appropriate grade and spinal column point for the new post will be met by the service unit/department in which the employee's original post was located (i.e. prior to assimilation/redeployment). viii) The pay protection scheme described above will apply only to permanent staff who have been assimilated or redeployed into a lower graded post. ix) In the case of employees who are assimilated or redeployed from a post on a fixed term or other type of temporary contract to either: another post on a fixed term or temporary contract or; a permanent position; the terms (including salary/wage) will be those appropriate to the new post (i.e. there will be no pay protection). x) An employee who is made redundant within two years of being assimilated or redeployed to a post at a lower grade will have his/her redundancy entitlement calculated on the basis of the salary spinal column point and hours at the time of the deletion of his/her previous post xi) Pay protection will cease immediately if the employee voluntarily moves to another new post during the protected period. ## Appendix "5" - Ealing Council - Pay Policy Statement For The Year 1St April 2012 To 31St March 2013 - Equality Analysis Assessment Legal Obligations Under Section 149 Of The Equality Act 2010: The Public Sector Equality Duty ¾ As a public authority we must have due regard to the need to: | a) | Eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited by or under this Act; | |-------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | b) | Advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it; | | c) | Foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it. | ¾ The protected characteristics are: AGE, DISABILITY, GENDER REASSIGNMENT, RACE, RELIGION & BELIEF, SEX, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, PREGNANCY & MATERNITY, MARRIAGE & CIVIL PARTNERSHIP ¾ Having due regard to advancing equality of opportunity between those who share a protected characteristic and those who do not, involves considering the need to: | a) | Remove or minimising disadvantages suffered by persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are connected to that characteristic | |-------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | b) | Take steps to meet the needs of persons who share a relevant characteristic that are different from the needs of the persons who do not share it. | | c) | Encourage persons who share a relevant protected characteristic to participate in public life or in any other activity in which participation by such persons is disproportionately low. | ¾ Having due regard to fostering good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not, involves showing that you are tackling prejudice and promoting understanding. ¾ Complying with the duties may involve treating some people more favourably than others; but this should not be taken as permitting conduct that would be otherwise prohibited under the Act. Policy Title: London Living Wage Is it HR Related? Choose from: Author Andrew Scully Service Core HR and OD Directorate CRG Corporate Cabinet Report Decision EIA relates to Adapted policy/strategy/service/function If other please specify: Purpose ## 1. What Are The Aims, Objectives And Desired Outcomes Of The Initiative : | Yes | |-----------------------------------------------| | | | | | | | 2. What is the Initiative looking to achieve? | | - | | As in section 1 | ## 3. Which Protected Groups Who Will Be Affected1: - To pay the London Minimum Wage (LLW) (currently £8.30 per hour) to all employees. - All - To make a specific payment to all employees who earn, through their job evaluated roles, less than the equivalent of the LLW a supplement to bring their hourly earnings to the LLW - The policy will be reviewed on an annual basis as part of the Pay Policy - At present, there are no employees who are paid below the LLW. ## For Question 4 Below, Please Analyse The Impact Of The Policy On The Protected Characteristics With Due Regard To The Public Sector Equality Duties. Use Your Reasoning In Order To Determine Whether The Impact Will Be High, Medium Or Low: High Medium ¾ The initiative is relevant to all or most parts of the ¾ The initiative is relevant to most parts of the general general duty, and/or to human/children's rights duty, and/or to human/children's rights ¾ There is substantial or a fair amount of evidence that ¾ There is some evidence that some groups are (or could some groups are (or could be) differently be) differently affected by it ¾ affected by it ¾ There is some public concern about it ¾ There is substantial or a fair amount of public concern about it ## For Question 4 Below, Please Use Your Reasoning To Determine Whether The Impact Will Be Positive, Neutral, Or Negative. There Are Three Possible Outcomes: | Positive | Neutral | |---------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------| | ¾ | | | Your initiative is not likely to result in adverse impact for | | | ¾ | | | Your initiative is not likely to result in adverse impact for | | | any protected characteristic and does advance equality | any protected characteristic and does not advance | | of opportunity, and/or fulfils the duties in another way | equality of opportunity, and/or fulfils the duties in | | another way | | ## 4. Effect On The Equalities Characteristics: Duty: Eliminate discrimination, harassment, Duty: Advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected victimisation and any other conduct that is characteristic and persons who do not share it; prohibited by or under this Act; Equality Relevance to Positive Effect Neutral Effect Negative Effect Describe the effect that your Policy may have on the listed Characteristics* the Characteristic Age Low Yes No Yes No Yes No The proposed policy will apply to all existing and future employees regardless of protected characteristic Disability Low Yes No Yes No Yes No The proposed policy will apply to all existing and future employees regardless of protected characteristic Low ¾ The initiative is not generally relevant to most parts of the general duty, and/or to human/children's rights ¾ There is little evidence that some groups are (or could be) differently affected by it ¾ There is little public concern about it Negative ¾ Your initiative is likely to have an adverse impact on a particular protected characteristic(s) and potentially does not fulfill the duties, or the negative impact will be mitigated through another means. Duty: Foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it. equalities characteristics. Please include the impact on Human Rights & Children's Rights under the UNCRC if relevant.2 Sex Low Yes No Yes No Yes No The proposed policy will apply to all existing and future employees regardless of protected characteristic Race3 Low Yes No Yes No Yes No The proposed policy will apply to all existing and future employees regardless of protected characteristic Religion/ Belief4 Low Yes No Yes No Yes No The proposed policy will apply to all existing and future employees regardless of protected characteristic Sexual Low Yes No Yes No Yes No The proposed policy will apply to all existing and future employees regardless of protected characteristic Orientation Gender Low Yes No Yes No Yes No The proposed policy will apply to all existing and future employees regardless of protected characteristic Reassignment Pregnancy/ Low Yes No Yes No Yes No The proposed policy will apply to all existing and future employees regardless of protected characteristic Maternity Marriage & Civil Low Yes No Yes No Yes No The proposed policy will apply to all existing and future employees regardless of protected characteristic Partnership 3 A group of people defined by their colour, nationality (including citizenship), ethnic or national origins or race 4 Religion means any religion. Belief includes religious and philosophical beliefs including lack of belief (for example, Atheism). Generally, a belief should affect a person's life choices or the way a person lives - If the answer to question 4 is yes for either positive or negative impacts then it is necessary to go ahead with a full equality impact assessment. - If the answer to question 4 is neutral then this form should be forwarded to your Service Director for QA and sign off, as a full EIA will not be required. - If the form relates to HR related activities/projects/reviews it should then be forwarded to Amin Ladha in the Human Resources Department for final sign off. - All other signed off forms which relate to proposed Cabinet decisions, should be forwarded to. * Completion of this section indicates due regard being taken in relation to the following acts & legislation: 9 Equality Act 2010 9 The Human Rights Act 1998

en

1251-pdf

## Flexi-Time Working Arrangements | 1. Introduction | 2 | |---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------| | | | | 2. Eligibility | 3 | | | | | 3. Responsibility for the operation of flexi-time | 3 | | | | | 4. Operation of the Scheme | | | | | | 4 | | | | | | | | | - Standard Hours | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Accounting Period | | | | | | | | | 5. Additional hours/overtime working 4 | | | | | | 6. Medical appointments, special Leave and training 5 | | | | | | 7. Other conditions 5 | | | | | | - Services excluded from flexi-time working | | | | | | | | | | | - Agreeing flexi-time arrangements - Flexi-time recording - Staff leaving the Council 8. Monitoring 6 9. Advice 6 ## Appendix 1: Flexi Hours Record Sheet 7 1. Introduction The Council recognises the value of providing more flexible working arrangements, with the benefits that these bring to the Organisation and has adopted a flexi-time scheme. Flexi-time should benefit employees and the Council. It can help employees in managing their work life balance and gives them more freedom to arrange their working hours to suit their personal circumstances whilst allowing the Council greater flexibility in the way it delivers services and manages workloads, as well as deals with urgent matters. This Policy applies to all employees directly employed by the Council and is recommended to schools as best practice. 2. Eligibility The introduction and operation of flexi-time is at the discretion of management and will be available to employees up to and including PO6 only. There are some services where for practical reasons e.g. the operating hours or the provision of services to the public, employees cannot work flexi-time. Departments will decide which services are excluded from flexi-time or where the level of flexibility will need to be restricted according to the needs of the service, following consultation with employees at the departmental consultative committee and after carrying out an impact assessment; this will be reviewed annually. Note: The statutory right of employees with 26 weeks continuous service to apply for flexible working is not affected i.e. for employees who are: i) parents of children aged under 17 or of a disabled child aged under 18; or ii) a carer or expects to care for adult who is a dependant * * See definition of "carer" on Intranet at: http://lbbd/search/c.htm 3. Responsibility for the operation of flexitime The success of the Scheme is dependent on all employees accepting responsibility to ensure that the work of the Council and the provision of services to the public do not suffer. Managers are responsible for the successful operation of flexi-time arrangements i.e. managing employee attendance and the application of the Scheme. Managers must ensure that offices and workplaces are covered at all times during the Council's standard hours. There may be exceptional circumstances e.g. employee shortages where the needs of the service must take priority and it may be necessary to restrict or withdraw flexi-time working, having first considered other alternatives with employees. In these cases, the situation will be kept under review with employees. Employees who fail to follow the flexi-time arrangements and/or to keep accurate up to date record sheets will have the facility withdrawn and may be subject to disciplinary action. 4. **Operation of the Scheme** Standard Hours The Council's standard working day is 8 hours, (with a 1 hour unpaid lunch break), to be worked between 8am to 6pm. The core office opening hours are: 8:45am - 4:45pm and services must be provided to the community within these hours. For employees working flexi-time, the working day is divided into 3 parts: - "Core time", fixed periods when all employees must be at work. - Lunch break 1 hour (minimum 30 minutes) to be taken between 11.30am - 2:30pm, (or up to 2 hours with the manager's approval). - Flexible periods when the individual has some discretion in start/finishing times. The standard band for flexible working hours is between 8am and 6pm, as detailed: Flexible Time Core Time Flexible Time Core Time Flexible Time 8 - 10am 10 -11.30am 11.30am - 2.30pm 2.30 - 3.30pm 3.30- 6pm Departments may vary the standard band to ensure that services are accessible to the community; where shift arrangements are in operation, it may be possible to allow some flexibility i.e. 1-8 pm shift, flexible period from 12 noon- 9:30 pm. Council offices are normally accessible between 7:30am & 7pm but time may only be accrued for flexi-time purposes between 8am & 6pm. Accounting Period The accounting period is 4 weeks. A standard working day or half-day is 7 hours or 3 hours 30 minutes respectively. Flexi-time will be recorded in blocks of 15 minutes to the nearest 15 minute interval e.g. arrival at 9:05/13 is recorded at 9:00/15am. Flexi-days leave must be approved in advance by the manager, (via the Oracle HR selfservice where employees have access to this); employees may only take 1 flexi day leave in any 4 week accounting period. Up to 7 hours credit/debit may be carried forward into the next accounting period. Any credit in excess of 7 hours will be lost unless authorised by the manager. Any debit carried over must be made up by the end of the next four-week period. Departments may vary the limit of credit to be carried forward at "peak" periods e.g. the end of the financial year, during "inspections" or to ensure services to the public are not disrupted. This must be agreed in advance with the Corporate Director. 5. Additional hours/overtime working All additional/overtime working outside of the standard band for flexible working hours e.g. to attend evening/weekend meetings, must be agreed in advance with the Corporate Director, Divisional Director or Group Manager in accordance with the existing arrangements. Authorised additional/overtime working outside of the standard band for flexi-time, must be recorded separately on the Flexible Hours Record Sheet (FHRS). The additional hours worked will be credited to be taken later as Time Off In Lieu (TOIL), or paid as overtime in accordance with the normal arrangements; this is separate to the arrangements for taking flexi-time. In exceptional circumstances, Corporate Directors may agree to overtime paid at the standard overtime rates; this only applies when taking accrued hours will affect service delivery. Employees cannot work overtime during the standard band for flexi-time. 6. Medical appointments, special leave and training Medical appointments Employees are expected to arrange medical and domestic appointments e.g. "check ups", home deliveries or repairs etc in their own time. The arrangements for urgent medical, dental and optical appointments etc are detailed in the "Arrangements for Special Leave and Time-Off from Work" available on Intranet at: http://lbbd/hr/employee-leave/employee-leave-home.htm Pregnant employees have the right to paid time off for ante-natal care and must produce evidence of such appointments if requested; these appointments are outside of the flexi-time arrangements and time off will be credited. Training Absence to attend a full day training course or seminar will be credited as 7 hours or the normal working day. Part time employees who would normally work less than 7 hours that day will be credited the additional hours worked to be taken later as TOIL or flexi-time as agreed with the manager beforehand. 7. Other conditions Services Excluded from Flexi-time Working Departments must keep a list of the services excluded from flexi-time working and/or working non standard band widths using the pro-forma at Appendix 1. A copy of the list should be forwarded to the Human Resources Service Centre for monitoring purposes and to be included with recruitment packs and contracts of employment. Agreeing Flexi-time Arrangements Managers and employees must be clear from the outset as to the arrangements for ensuring that the workplace is covered during the standard hours, as well as to deal with emergencies and for attendance at evening/weekend meetings etc. The arrangements must ensure that service needs are met and that services to the public, (or other customers and departments), do not suffer e.g. standard start/finish times and the minimum number of staff to be on duty at any one time etc. Where employees are required to attend evening meetings etc, some flexibility should be allowed to enable them to work outside the standard band e.g. to start and finish later that day, providing the office/workplace is covered. Flexi-time Recording Employees must keep an accurate and up to date record of their starting, finishing and break times on a daily basis using the standard Flexible Hours Record Sheet (FHRS). At the end of the 4-week accounting period, the FHRS must be forwarded to the manager for approval. The standard FHRS is available on Intranet at: http://lbbd/staffinfo/index.htm http://lbbd/hr/benefits/flexible-working.htm The success of the Scheme is dependant on everyone following the arrangements detailed in this Policy and employees that do not will have the facilities withdrawn. Employees who abuse or undermine the integrity of the system or falsify flexible working hours records etc will be subject to disciplinary action. Employees Leaving the Council All employees on leaving the employment of the Authority will be expected to reduce their "credit/debit" to zero by their last day of service. Employees will not be paid for any credit balance but any debit must be reported to Payroll Section to make the necessary adjustments to pay. 8. Monitoring The Policy will be impact assessed and reviewed annually. Departments will be responsible for impact assessing the operation of the flexi-time arrangements across their service areas. 9. Advice If an employee has any queries about the scheme they should speak to their line manager in the first instance. Any unresolved issues should be referred to the Divisional Director/Corporate Director. Any queries or disputes as to the interpretation of the procedures that cannot be resolved at departmental level, should be referred to the Head of Human Resources or his/her nominated officers for consideration. Human Resources will automatically update the Procedure to comply with any changes to legislation or ACAS guidance and notify employees of the amendments. ## Services Excluded From Flexi-Time Working Services Working Non-Standard Band Widths London Borough of Barking and Dagenham Call direct on 020 8215 3000 Out of hours emergencies only Phone: 020 8594 8356 Fax: 020 8227 3470 Email: 3000direct@lbbd.gov.uk Web: www.barking-dagenham.gov.uk We have tried to make sure that this information is correct at the time of going to print. However, information may change from time to time. You must not copy this document without our permission © 2011 London Borough of Barking and Dagenham. Date: March 2012

en

0988-pdf

## London Plan Annual Monitoring Report 8, 2010-11 MARCH 2012 LONDON PLAN IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK COPYRIGHT Greater London Authority March 2012 Published by Greater London Authority City Hall The Queen's Walk More London London SE1 2AA www.london.gov.uk enquiries 020 7983 4100 minicom 020 7983 4458 Copies of this report are available from http://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/planning Comments on the new coverage and format of the Annual Monitoring Report are welcome and should be sent to: Jörn Peters Senior Strategic Planner Development & Environment GREATER LONDON AUTHORITY City Hall The Queens Walk London SE1 2AA E-mail: jorn.peters@london.gov.uk ## London Plan Annual Monitoring Report 2010-11 London Plan Monitoring Report 8 London Plan Implementation Framework Contents Chapter One Executive Summary KPI performance overview 6 Progress against new London Plan objectives 9 Conclusion 16 ## Chapter Two Introduction Scope and purpose of the AMR 18 The London Development Database 19 The new London Plan and its Implementation Framework 20 Changes to KPIs 22 ## Chapter Three Performance Against Kpi Targets KPI 1 Maximise the proportion of development taking place on previously developed land 26 KPI 2 Optimise the density of residential development 29 KPI 3 Minimise the loss of open space 31 KPI 4 Increase the supply of new homes 36 KPI 5 An increased supply of affordable homes 39 KPI 6 Reducing health inequalities 42 KPI 7 Sustaining economic activity 43 KPI 8 Ensure that there is sufficient development capacity in the office market 44 KPI 9 Ensure that there is sufficient employment land available 47 KPI 10 Employment in outer London 48 KPI 11 Increased employment opportunities for those suffering from disadvantage in the employment market 50 KPI 12 Improving the provision of social infrastructure and related services 52 KPI 13 Achieve a reduced reliance on the private car and a more sustainable modal split for journeys (public /private transport modal split) 54 KPI 14 Achieve a reduced reliance on the private car and a more sustainable modal split for journeys (zero traffic growth) 55 KPI 15 Achieve a reduced reliance on the private car and a more sustainable modal split for journeys (increased bicycle modal share) 57 KPI 16 Achieve a reduced reliance on the private car and a more sustainable modal split for journeys (increased passenger and freight transport on the Blue Ribbon Network) 58 KPI 17 Increase in the number of jobs located in areas of high PTAL values 60 KPI 18 Protection of biodiversity habitat 61 KPI 19 Increase in municipal waste recycled or composted and elimination of waste to landfill by 2031 63 KPI 20 Reduce carbon dioxide emissions through new development 64 KPI 21 Increase in energy generated from renewable sources 66 KPI 22 Increase in urban greening 67 KPI 23 Improve London's Blue Ribbon Network 68 KPI 24 Protecting and improving London's heritage and public realm 70 CHAPTER FOUR OTHER RELEVANT PERFORMANCE MEASURES AND STATISTICS Planning 72 Progress with SPGs, Opportunity Areas, Areas of Intensification, the Olympics and its Legacy 72 Responses to Major Applications and Development Plan consultation 76 London Planning Awards 84 Housing and Design 88 Housing provision annual monitor 88 Achieving an inclusive environment 127 Transport & Environment 132 PTAL Map 132 Crossrail Funding - Planning Obligations 133 Progress on Regional Flood Risk Appraisal recommendations 134 CHAPTER FIVE OTHER CONTEXTUAL DATA SOURCES 139 CHAPTER SIX CONCLUSION AND LOOKING AHEAD 143 ## Chapter 1 Executive Summary CHAPTER ONE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 This Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) provides information about progress made in implementing the objectives and policies in the London Plan published in July 2011. It does this by showing how London is doing against 24 indicators identified in the Plan. Although it is the eighth AMR published by the Mayor, it is the first supporting the new London Plan. KPI performance overview Table 1.1 - KPI performance overview KPI target 1 Maintain at least 96 per cent of new residential development to be on previously developed land + 2 Over 95 per cent of development to comply with the housing density location and the density matrix (Table 3.2) - 3 No net loss of open space designated for protection in LDFs due to new development + 4 Average completion of a minimum of 32,210 net additional homes per year + 5 Completion of 13,200 net additional affordable homes per year - 6 Reduction in the difference in life expectancy between those living in the most and least deprived areas of London (shown separately for men and women) 7 Increase in the proportion of working age London residents in employment 2011–2031 1.2 The following Table1.1 summarises the performance against the 24 Key Performance Indictors (KPIs), benchmark targets set out in Chapter 8 of the London Plan. It should be borne in mind that these benchmark targets are not policies; rather they are yardsticks of the desired direction and extent of change to help assess progress. 1.3 Performance is categorized as follows. For further details please see Chapter 3. + Positive trend / target met - Negative trend / target not met | N/A | |------------------------------------| | Data insufficient to determine | | progress / trend | | perform- | | ance | | comment | | Development on previously | | developed land still above | | target, but slight downward | | trend | | Absolute development density | | has declined but the | | percentage not meeting the | | target has risen slightly | | Still some loss, but significantly | | less than in 2010 | | Completions below target, but | | increase in output compared to | | 2010 | | New affordable completions | | fell to 6,900 in 2010/11 but | | HCA reports record level of | | starts (16,300) | | + | | | | Difference in the anticipated | | life expectancy in identified | | regeneration areas has | | improved compared to the | | London average for both | | males and females. | | Fall in proportion, but reduction | | in gap to UK average | 8 Stock of office permissions to be at least three times the average rate of starts over the previous three years + 9 Release of industrial land to be in line with benchmarks in the Industrial capacity SPG + 10 Growth in total Employment in Outer London + 11 Reduce employment rate gap between BAME groups and the white population and reduce gap between lone parents on income support in London vs England & Wales average 12 Reduce the average class size in primary schools - 13 Use of public transport per head grows faster than use of the private car per head + 14 Zero car traffic growth for London as a whole + Car traffic declining 15 Increase the share of all trips by bicycle from 2 per cent in 2009 to 5 per cent by 2026 + 16 A 50% increase in passengers and freight transported on the Blue Ribbon Network from 2011- 2021 - 17 Maintain at least 50 per cent of B1 development in PTAL zones 5-6 + 18 No net loss of SINCs + 19 At least 45 per cent of waste recycled/composted by 2015 and 0 per cent of biodegradable or recyclable waste to landfill by 2031 20 Annual average percentage carbon dioxide emissions savings for strategic developments proposals progressing towards zero carbon in residential development by 2016 and zero carbon in all development by 2019 Ratio of permissions to starts in excess of target and rising Release above target, but 2010/2011 London wide figures closer to benchmarks Slight growth just above pan London average, but rate slightly down compared to 2009 + Gaps in employment rate and lone parents on income support are reducing Increase in average class size, similar to UK wide trend Public transport use continues to grow, private car use continues to fall Cycle mode share on track to 2026 target Decrease in freight and also in passenger transport reflecting wider economic trends Share above target and improvement on previous year Still some loss, but significantly less than in 2009/10 + Recycling/composting rate increasing and waste to landfill declining - but still far to go towards 2031 target 2010 savings above staged targets for 2010 - 2013 + 21 Production of 8550 GWh1 of energy from renewable sources by 2026 + Capacity installed in 2010 contributing towards 2026 target 22 Increase the total area of green roofs in the CAZ N/A New KPI, process of data provision still underway 23 + Good progress towards 2015 target, more uncertainty regarding 2020 target Restore 15km of rivers and streams* 2009 - 2015 and an additional 10km by 2020 (*defined as main river by the Environment Agency - includes larger streams and rivers but can also include smaller watercourses of local significance) 24 + Reduction or no change in the proportion across designated heritage asset categories between 2010 and 2011 Reduction in the proportion of designated heritage assets at risk as a percentage of the total number of designated heritage assets in London Progress against new London Plan objectives 1.4 The London Plan sets six strategic objectives to be delivered by its detailed policies. These are that London should be:  A city that meets the challenges of economic and population growth  An internationally competitive and successful city  A city of diverse, strong, secure and accessible neighbourhoods ## Table 1.2 London Plan Objectives And Kpis | Objective | Relevant KPIs | |---------------------------------------------|------------------------------| | Objective 1 - meet the challenges of growth | 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 12, 14 | | Objective 2 - support a competitive economy | 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 17, 24 | | Objective 3 - support neighbourhoods | 2, 5, 10, 11, 12, 15 | | Objective 4 - delight the senses | 1, 3, 15, 19, 22, 23, 24 | | Objective 5 - improve the environment | 1, 3, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 | | Objective 6 - improve access/transport | 1, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 | 1.6 The following provides a brief summary of the performance of the new suite of KPI targets against the new London Plan objectives. Objective 1 - meet the challenges of growth 1.7 London is a growing city. The latest projections suggest that by 2031, its population may be 9.1 million and employment could grow to 4.7 million. Against this background, ensuring that London accommodates expected growth within its current boundaries without either encroaching on the Green Belt or having unacceptable impacts on the environment or quality of life in the capital requires the most efficient possible use to be made of the available land resource. 1.8 Thus striking the right balance between ensuring efficient use of land on the one hand, and respecting the character of  A city that delights the senses  A city that becomes a world leader in improving the environment  A city where it is easy, safe and convenient for everyone to access jobs, opportunities and facilities. 1.5 A variety of KPIs contribute to the performance measurement of each of the London Plan's six objectives. These are shown in Table 1.2. neighbourhood and improving quality of life on the other is a key concern of London Plan policy. Looking at the density of new housing development in 2010/11, a complex picture emerges. The density of residential approvals (140 dwellings per hectare (dph)), was well below its 151 dph peak in 2007/8, but the density of new completions (136 dph), though lower than in 2009/10, was still above the 117 dwellings per hectare reported in 2007/8. The relatively high density of completions may reflect the relationship between a substantial pipeline of historic, high density approvals and a housing market which has been relatively slow moving in clearing them. 1.9 When compared to the densities suggested in the London Plan sustainable residential quality density matrix (see the Plan's Policy 3.4 and table 3.2), 2010/11 saw 58% of units in schemes that exceeded the suggested maximum density level. As in previous years, this meant that less than half of approvals (rather than the 95% benchmark target) were within the appropriate density range for particular locations. 1.10 The Mayor's 2011 London Plan and its associated draft Housing Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) were published in the second half of 2011, so their impact on density has not been reflected in the current monitor. The new Plan puts greater emphasis on optimising rather than maximising output and, when finalised, the SPG will take account of advice from the Outer London Commission and independent research on the most effective ways of implementing this policy to achieve the Plan's overall objectives. 1.11 London has tended to lag the rest of the country in feeling the effects of the recession on housing output. Though these effects were anticipated in AMR 6 it was only in 2009/10 that completions of conventional dwellings began to fall from their peak in 2008/9 (from 29,400 to 24,500). Output subsequently declined more rapidly - by a further 27% to 18,000 in 2010/11. This is well below the new 29,800 dwellings per annum long term monitoring target for this type of accommodation. 1.12 However, a substantial increase in new construction activity reported through the London Development Database (LDD) suggests that housing development here may already be recovering from the effects of the national recession. This is confirmed by independent analysis of private sector development which reports2 that "London construction starts in 2011 were 37% ahead of starts in 2010. This construction surge is expected to continue throughout 2012". 1.13 As noted in AMR 7, the decline in approvals appears to be abating to a level (46,500) close to the long-term average over the last decade (48,000), and above that recorded for 2009/10 (43,800). London's planning pipeline remains substantial with capacity for over 170,000 homes, approximating to almost five years' housing need and approaching six years' supply based on the new, higher provision target. The London planning system will have adequate capacity to address the requirements of a recovering housing market, and as, Berkeley Homes has noted, strategic land supply is no longer the main challenge facing housing development in London. 1.14 Resource constraints and more limited scope during the recession for partnership working with the private sector has meant that the national trend in affordable housing output began to bear heavily on London in 2010/11. Completions of conventional affordable homes peaked in 2008/9, falling back from 10,800 to 9,000 in 2009/10. This decline has continued, with output falling to 6,900 units in 2010/11. This represented 38% of all completions, slightly more than half of which were for social renting and the balance for 'intermediate' housing. 1.15 However, as with market housing, borough reports to LDD suggest considerable construction activity in the affordable housing sector during 2010/11. This is confirmed by Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) statistics on the homes it funds, showing that in 2010/11 16,300 affordable homes were started in London, the highest figure since monitoring began in 2004/05. Nearly 70% of these were social housing. Looking at the affordable housing investment as a whole (not just the new build part recorded through the planning process), 14,250 new homes were delivered in 2010/11. This is backed for the longer term by the forthcoming London Housing Strategy's £1.8 billion / 55,000 unit investment programme over the four years 2011/12 to 2014/15. 1.16 Carefully targeted and coordinated investment among the most deprived communities living in the Plan's areas for regeneration, and development of its designated opportunity and intensification areas provide particular scope to improve health and reduce health inequalities among Londoners, in particular the existing difference in life expectancy between those living in the most and least deprived areas of London. To build on this success and tackle spatial concentration of deprivation, the Mayor will work with strategic and local partners to co-ordinate the sustained renewal of areas of regeneration by prioritising them for neighbourhood-based action and investment. Objective 2 - support a competitive economy 1.17 London fared similarly to the UK overall during 2008-09, with both enduring a deep and long recession. London began to emerge from this in 2009-10, with the process continuing into the first half of 2011. Now the recovery is well in train but it is likely to be bumpy, with households feeling squeezed due to job insecurity and relatively stagnant wages although price rises are likely to ease in 2012. These pressures have borne on the indicators measuring progress against the London Plan's social and economic objectives in 2010/11. 1.18 Economic output fell by 6.5% from its mid-2008 peak to the third quarter of 2009. By the second quarter of 2011 it had recovered by 3.5% but it still remains over 3% below its prerecession peak. On an annual basis, a positive outturn may be expected for 2012 and 2013 with GLA Economics' latest forecast (dated November 2011) projecting output growth of 2.0 per cent in 2012 and 2.4 per cent in 2013. Employment is forecast to grow by 0.4 per cent in 2012 and by 0.4 per cent in 2013. 1.19 While the stubborn weakness of growth is of serious concern to policymakers, the impact on job losses has been remarkably small. The peak-to-trough fall in employment was 4.2% (209,000) from December 2008 to December 2009, but since then London has recovered most of this loss (+174,000). Compared with previous recessions (see Figure 1.1) the fall in employment in London was relatively small and not on the same scale as that recorded during the recession of the early 1990s when almost half a million jobs were lost. 1.20 London's claimant count unemployment rate (4.8%) has remained below that for the UK since the start of the recession (see Figure 1.2). However it is 0.4 percentage points up on a year ago. The internationally defined unemployment rate in London increased by 0.4 percentage points in the three months to December 2011 to 10% and was up by 1.1 percentage points on a year earlier. 1.21 Between 2008 and 2010 the fall in the numbers employed in London (- 3.8%) was rather more than that for the UK overall (-3.0%). But in London the burden fell disproportionately on part-time employment, down by 2.7% versus 1.0% in the UK overall. The fall in fulltime employment was hardly different in London: down by 4.2% versus a fall of 4.0% in the country as a whole. saw a decline in employment between 2008 and 2010. Croydon lost over 11 per cent of its employment, Wandsworth nearly 9 per cent and Haringey, Richmond and Sutton all suffered declines of between 7 and 8 per cent. But there were a few exceptions to the general decline - Barking, the City and Hammersmith and Fulham saw rises in the range 0.2 per cent to 3.3 per cent. 1.22 The decline in employment between 2008 and 2010 was disproportionately high in the construction sector (-15%), in financial services & insurance (-8%) and in Administrative and Support Service Activities (-8% also). However, employment rose in the Public Administration (+5%) and education (+1%) sectors. Looking at the boroughs (see Figure 1.3), most Source: ONS Objective 3 - support diverse, strong, secure and accessible neighbourhoods 1.23 A key theme of the 2011 London Plan is the development of lifetime neighbourhoods as an essential contribution to Londoners' quality of life. This new objective reflects the London Plan's new policy area. 1.24 The London Plan recognises that while the best use should be made of development opportunities, a range of factors such as residential quality, local character, access to social infrastructure, open space, employment opportunities and public transport should be taken into account to realise high quality neighbourhoods where people want to live at all stages of their life. A wide range of key performance indicators contribute to the performance measurement of this objective. 1.25 The proportion of 'Lifetime' homes approved has fallen from 61% in 2008/9 to 57% in 20010/11. The proportion of approved new 'wheelchair accessible' homes has remained constant at close to 7%. The Mayor has underscored the importance he attaches to encouraging provision of Lifetime and wheelchair accessible homes by including detailed requirements for them in his new housing standards. These standards had not come fully into force during the period of AMR 8. 1.26 London is both getting younger and older. Latest population projections suggest that London's 0-18 population is projected to increase by over 205,000 over the next 10 years. This expansion also coincides with the hardest squeeze on government finances in almost a century. Primary schools in particular are struggling to accommodate the rising demand for primary school places. The average class size in London has been increasing in all of the boroughs since 2005. To help respond to these pressures, the Mayor is encouraging the community to take steps to establish new schools. 1.27 Access to employment opportunities for those suffering from disadvantage in the employment market such as BAME groups and lone parents have increased over the last years. This positive trend can be attributed to increased provision of infrastructure such as training and childcare facilities that have enabled people to go back to work, as well as a greater commitment from employers to recruit and sustain employment of local people in deprived areas of London where disadvantaged groups live. Objective 4 - delight the senses 1.28 It is a key strand of London Plan policies that they seek to make the best of London's heritage whilst welcoming the best of modern architecture, enhancing London's green and open spaces and waterways. It has been an encouraging start for this new objective with most of the individual measures being positive - improving performance in bicycle use, reflecting the on-going investment in cycling initiatives by the Mayor and the second highest level of river restoration recorded (only 2007 was higher). 1.29 There has also been a decline in the number of heritage assets at risk across all 5 categories. For the first time the target includes all designated heritage assets. This now gives recognition to the significance of London's World Heritage Sites recognising the economic benefits they bring as well as their contribution to the iconic images of London. The Mayor has recognised the importance that he attaches to World Heritage Sites by producing supplementary guidance to assist in the identification of their Settings and also identifying in London Plan policy a designated view from Parliament Square to the Palace of Westminster. In terms of the proportion of all designated heritage assets identified as 'at risk' the greatest improvements have been in conservation areas and scheduled monuments; 1.30 The one negative measure is loss of protected open space to new development. However, it should be recognised that the rate of loss has decreased since the previous year recorded in the AMR. It should also be remembered that for open space this is the total amount being lost now but in most cases there will be future re-provision as part of the redevelopment, so this is a gross figure rather than net overall. On a positive note the approvals recorded in the LDD also show a net gain in the amount of open space as a result of planning permissions. To support the protection, enhancement and extension of green and open spaces the Mayor has also produced supplementary guidance on the All London Green Grid. This is the first green infrastructure strategy for London and gives full recognition to the importance of a multifunctional network of green and open spaces across all London, with the vast range of benefits that this can bring both to biodiversity and to all those who live in, work in and visit London. ## Objective 5 - Improve The Environment 1.31 This Objective Aims At London Becoming A World Leader In Improving The Environment Both At A local level and globally. London Plan policies support taking a lead in London in tackling climate change, developing a low carbon economy, reducing pollution, consuming fewer resources and using them more effectively. The Mayor has also published the Climate Change Adaptation Strategy, the Water Strategy and the Climate Change Mitigation and Energy Strategy. The implementation of the policies and proposals in theses strategies taken together with the London Plan policies are all working towards achieving this objective. This is shown in the carbon dioxide emissions savings identified from strategic development proposals in 2010 as well as the identification of the renewable energy capacity installed. 1.32 The London Plan sets out new policy promoting urban greening, particularly in the Central Activities Zone. This will help to address some of the issues of overheating and adverse impacts on quality of life that could affect this area without appropriate action. Supplementary guidance on sustainable design and construction will set out mechanisms to help to address this issue. Green roofs are seen as one of the main ways that developments in central London can make a contribution. The Mayor's Street Tree programme that recently saw its 10,000th street tree planted is also promoting urban greening. Supplementary guidance has been produced with the Forestry Commission to assist boroughs in preparing tree and woodland strategies. These strategies as well as the opportunities identified through partnership work on the All London Green Grid will support the implementation of both urban greening and enhancing green infrastructure. 1.33 The amounts of local authority collected waste have continued to decline, whilst the level of household waste that is recycled has increased to 33% with a resulting continuing decline in landfill. 1.34 The one negative measure is the loss of sites of importance for nature conservation. This does however show a vastly improving trend from the previous year. In 2009/10, 9.5 hectares of loss were recorded. In 2010/11, a loss of approximately 1.3 hectares was identified. It should be remembered that this is the total gross amount being lost now, but in most cases there will be future reprovision as part of the redevelopment. Objective 6 - improve access/ transport 1.35 Key KPIs supporting this objective showed ongoing improvement. The continuing investment in the tube network has contributed to the increasing rate of public transport use. Since 2001, use of public transport per head has grown by almost 30%, and increased by almost 3% in 2010. In contrast, private transport use per head has decreased by 11% since 2001, and is down almost 1% in 2010. Corresponding to that road traffic volumes have continued to fall, down by 0.8% in 2010 and 7% since 2001. 1.36 Bicycle use is increasing with around 0.54 million journey stages made by bicycle in Greater London on an average day, an increase of 70% compared to 2001 and 6% more in the most recent year (2009 to 2010). The new London Plan includes a range of policies to help support further growth, such as support for the Cycle Superhighway network and the London cycle hire scheme and standards for cycle parking and facilities for cyclists in new development. 1.37 Passenger and freight transported on London's waterways have fallen by 1 % and 5 % respectively in 2010/11 over the previous year. This reflects wider economic trends. For passenger transport, there has been specifically a fall in the number of river tours whilst river bus and charters continue to grow (overall still the second highest level recorded). For freight, the decline reflects how the construction industry has been hit by economic conditions. 1.38 The Mayor is confident that these trends can be reversed: In terms of passenger transport facilities are being improved including the expansion of two piers in central London, and in terms of freight it is expected that significant construction projects including Crossrail and the Thames Tunnel will contribute to an increase in waterborne freight. It is on this basis (supported by detailed forecasting) that the Mayor will continue to safeguard a significant number of wharves on the River Thames. Conclusion 1.39 The period covered by this AMR was a challenging one, with continued growth pressures at a time of major economic downturn and constrained public resources. Against this background, these indicators give a generally encouraging picture, London has not suffered as badly from the downturn as it has in earlier ones, and steady progress has been made across many environmental and quality of life indicators. However some longstanding challenges, such as housing and employment for Londoners, remain priorities for action. ## Chapter 2 Introduction Chapter Two Introduction Scope and purpose of the AMR 2.1 This is the eighth London Plan Annual Monitoring Report (AMR 8). Section 346 of the Greater London Authority (GLA) Act 1999 places a duty on the Mayor to monitor the implementation of the Mayor's London Plan (the spatial development strategy for London - for details see later section of this chapter) and collect information about matters relevant to its preparation, review, alteration, replacement or implementation. The AMR is the central document in the monitoring process and assessing the effectiveness of the London Plan. It is important for keeping the London Plan under review and as evidence for plan preparation. 2.2 While this is the eighth AMR published by the Mayor, it is the first that supports the new London Plan published in July 2011. This introduces six new strategic objectives, and a new suite of 24 Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to monitor delivery. These indicators are intended to be a mixture of those carried forward from the previous London Plan (to help ensure some comparability over time) and new/amended ones (reflecting new or changed policies, or changes in the availability of data). What has not changed is the importance the Mayor places in effective monitoring. The London Plan is founded on a "plan-monitor-manage" approach to policy-making, ensuring that strategic planning policies are evidence-based, effective, and changed when necessary. 2.3 The new London Plan introduces a different approach to policy implementation, of which this AMR forms a part. Alongside this document, the Mayor is producing an Implementation Plan giving details of how each of the 121 policies in the London Plan will be delivered, and containing detailed information about London's infrastructure needs to help inform policy development and implementation by the Mayor, boroughs and others. This AMR does not attempt to measure and monitor each Plan policy, as this would not recognize the complexity of planning decisions based on a range of different policies. It could also be resource intensive and would raise considerable challenges in setting meaningful indicators for which reliable data would be available. However, these documents together do give a detailed picture of how London is changing, and of the immense contribution the planning system is making to meeting these changes. 2.4 At the core of this AMR are the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) set out in Policy 8.4 (A) and Table 8.1 of the London Plan (see chapter 3 of this document for detailed analysis of the performance of each KPI). However, it should be recognised that a wide range of factors outside the sphere of influence of the London Plan influence the KPIs. The inclusion of additional relevant performance measures and statistics helps to paint a broader picture of London's performance (see chapter 4). Whilst recognising longer-term trends where available the focus of the monitoring in this AMR is on the year 2010/11. 2.5 Paragraph 8.18 of the London Plan clarifies that the target for each indicator should be regarded as a benchmark, showing the direction and scale of change. These targets contribute to measuring the  The State of the Environment Report: Published in July 2011 'London's Environment Revealed' is the first joint report on the state of London's environment, produced in partnership with the Environment Agency, Natural England and the Forestry Commission. It can be found on the GLA's website at http://data.london.gov.uk/datasto re/package/state-environmentreport-london-june-2011. The report looks at how the environment has changed over the last decade, and uses a series of indicators to illustrate the changes in the state of the environment within eight themes: Climate Change, Flood Risk, Water Quality, Water Resources, Waste, Air Quality, Noise and Transport, Biodiversity, and Landscape and Green Infrastructure. There are some similarities with the London Plan's environmental KPIs and also the London Sustainable Development Commission's report on London's Quality of Life Indicators. Publication of this report was a statutory requirement; the Localism Act 2011 has removed this duty and the future of the State of the Environment Report is currently under review. 2.8 Chapter 5 provides an overview of other contextual data sources. This also demonstrates that the AMR should not be seen as the only monitoring mechanism for the London Plan policies. The London Development Database 2.9 The London Development Database (LDD) is the key data source for monitoring planning approvals and completions in London. Data is entered by each of the 33 local planning authorities and the GLA performance of the objectives set out in Policy 1.1 and paragraph 1.53 of the London Plan but do not represent additional policy in themselves. 2.6 This report draws on a range of data sources, but the GLA's London Development Database (LDD) is of central importance (see further details about LDD in the following section). The LDD is a "live" system monitoring planning permissions and completions. It provides good quality, comprehensive data for the GLA, London boroughs and others involved in planning for London. In addition to the LDD, this report draws on details provided by the GLA's Planning Decisions Unit, the GLA's Demography and Policy Analysis Group (DMAG), the GLA's Transport and Environment Team, Transport for London (TfL), English Heritage, the Environment Agency and Port of London Authority. 2.7 The AMR should not be confused with either:  The Mayor's Annual Report: This is required under the GLA Act 1999. The latest report was published in May 2011 and covers the period 2010/11. It sets out the Mayor's objectives and the action taken to implement them (looking at support for the economy and the 2012 Games, tackling crime, quality of life and investing in young people). It shows progress against the statutory Mayoral Strategies, against corporate performance indicators, financial information and information required by the London Assembly. The report is available on the GLA's website at http://www.london.gov.uk/whorunslondon/mayor/publications/gover nment/mayors-annual-report- 201011. provides a co-ordinating, consistency and quality management role. The Database monitors each planning permission from approval through to completion or expiry. Its strength lies in the ability to manipulate data in order to produce various specific reports. The data can also be exported to GIS systems to give a further level of spatial analysis. The value of the LDD is dependent on work by the boroughs to provide the required data, and the Mayor would take this opportunity to thank all of those concerned in supporting this invaluable resource. 2.10 Minor revisions were made to the LDD during 2010. From 1st April 2010 the following changes came into effect:  Recording changes in the numbers of pitches for gypsies and travellers became a mandatory requirement.  Apart-hotels and serviced apartments were given their own category separate from other non self-contained accommodation.  The new C4 use class was added following the Government's decision to introduce a new use class for Houses in Multiple Occupation of between 3 to 6 bedrooms. However a decision has since been taken that it should not be used except where boroughs remove the permitted development rights to change from C3 to C4. 2.11 2011 has seen the introduction of the following:  A requirement to record the Code for Sustainable Homes level of proposed new residential dwellings  Fields for all parking spaces, including bicycles  A requirement to record whether proposed units are to be built on Greenfield or garden land on a unit by unit basis 2.12 Consultation is currently underway on a number of further additions following the adoption of the London Plan in July 2011. 2.13 It should be noted that some boroughs use the London Development Database as a data source for their AMRs, and all are expected to compare the data they publish with the data they have entered onto LDD. This should ensure a level of consistency between data on housing, open space etc which is published in both the borough and GLA AMRs. However, some differences in the figures do occur. This can in part be attributed to LDD being a live system, which is continually updated and adjusted to reflect the best information available. There are also occasional differences in the way completions are allocated to particular years, which may cause discrepancies between borough and GLA AMR data. The new London Plan and its Implementation Framework 2.14 The new London Plan (http://www.london.gov.uk/publicatio n/londonplan) was published in July 2011 replacing the London Plan (consolidated with alterations since 2004) published in February 2008. The London Plan is the overall strategic plan for London, and it sets out a fully integrated economic, environmental, transport and social framework for the development of the capital to 2031. It forms part of the statutory development plan for Greater London. London boroughs' local plans need to be in general conformity with the London Plan, and its policies guide decisions on planning applications by councils and the Mayor. 2.15 Since the publication of the new London Plan, preparation of the following policy documents altering or supplementing the London Plan have been underway:  Mayoral Community Infrastructure Levy charging schedule http://www.london.gov.uk/publica tion/mayoral-communityinfrastructure-levy As required by the Planning Act 2008 and the Community Infrastructure Regulations 2010 (as amended), the Mayor consulted on a preliminary draft charging schedule (in January/February 2011) and a draft schedule (in June/July 2011) to enable him to introduce a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) to help pay for Crossrail. Following a public examination in November/December of 2011, the remaining formal steps required have been taken in February 2012, with a view to starting to charge in April.  London Plan Early Minor Alternations http://www.london.gov.uk/publica tion/early-minor-alterationslondon-plan The Mayor is consulting on early minor alterations to the new London Plan. These note the Government's introduction to replace existing national planning policy with a National Planning Policy Framework; bring the Government's new affordable rent product into the Plan's affordable housing policies; provide for Mayoral guidance on planning for hazardous installations; and update cycle parking standards. These minor alterations were issued for consultation with the London Assembly and functional bodies in October 2011, and for full public consultation in January 2012. It is anticipated that they will be subject to examination in public in the autumn of 2012 for formal publication early in 2013. 2.16 At its centre of the Mayor's new approach to implementation of the London Plan is a suite of documents that together make up a London Planning Implementation Framework. 2.17 The keystone of this approach is an Implementation Plan, which sets out the overall approach to London Plan policy implementation. A draft of the first edition is available at http://www.london.gov.uk/publication /implementation-plan 2.18 The Implementation Framework also includes:  Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG), with a formal status (see chapter 4 for overview of documents currently under development)  Opportunity Area/Intensification Area Frameworks, with a formal status (see chapter 4 for overview of documents currently under development)  Implementat ion guides  The Annual Monitoring Report, with a formal status 2.19 The key distinction between the emerging Implementation Plan and the AMR is that the latter is looking predominately at past performance to identify trends, whilst the Implementation Plan is focusing on current and future actions to facilitate policy implementation and performance improvements. Linking KPIs and implementation actions directly may not be helpful as they serve different purposes and operate at different levels of detail. Together, however, they provide an important overview of the way London is changing, and of the way planning policies are used, and can be in the future, to influence and respond to these changes. Changes to KPIs 2.20 The KPIs and benchmark targets used in this report differ from those in last year's AMR 7, as it is the first AMR based on the revised KPIs in the new London Plan published in 2011. These changes have also been used as an opportunity to restructure the presentation of the document putting the performance of the KPIs at its centre - rather than into an Annex. Table 2.1 Changes to KPIs since last year's AMR 7 (based on KPI and target changes in the new London Plan) KPI Target Description 1 Maximise the proportion of development taking place on previously developed land Maintain at least 96 per cent of new residential development to be on previously developed land 2 Optimise the density of residential development Over 95 per cent of development to comply with the housing density location and the density matrix (London Plan Table 3.2) 3 Minimise the loss of Open space No net loss of open space designated for protection in LDFs due to new development 4 Increase supply of new homes Average completion of a minimum of 32,210 net additional homes per year 5 An Increased supply of affordable homes Completion of 13,200 net additional affordable homes per year 6 Reducing health inequalities Reduction in the difference in life expectancy between those living in the most and least deprived areas of London (shown separately for men and women) 7 Sustaining economic activity Increase in the proportion of working age London residents in employment 2011–2031 8 Ensure that there is sufficient development capacity in the office market Stock of office planning permissions to be at least three times the average rate of starts over the previous three years Release of industrial land (B2/B8 use over 1,000 sqm) to be in line with 9 Ensure that there is sufficient employment land available 2.21 The importance of retaining a succinct set of indicators and targets to help understand whether the London Plan and its objectives are being implemented successfully, and to understand key trends, is understood. However, the monitoring regime of the previous London Plan was based on 28 KPIs and it has been recognised that some of these were ineffective. The new set comprises 24 KPIs. They are listed Table 8.1 of the London Plan and included in Table 2.1 with the nature of change compared to the previous KPIs highlighted. Differences with AMR 7 KPI None None None Amended (target) Amended (no % target) KPI 5a - amended KPI 6 - amended KPI 7 New KPI benchmarks in the Industrial Capacity SPG 10 Employment in Outer London Growth in total employment in Outer London 11 Increased employment opportunities for those suffering from disadvantage in the employment market Reduce employment rate gap between Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) groups and the white population and reduce the gap between lone parents on income support in London vs England & Wales average 12 Improving provision of social Reduce the average class size in primary schools infrastructure and related services 13 Achieve a reduced reliance Use of public transport per head grows faster than use of the private car per head on the private car and a more sustainable modal split for journeys 14 Same as above Zero car traffic growth for London as a whole 15 Same as above Increase the share of all trips by bicycle from 2 per cent in 2009 to 5 per cent by 2026 16 Same as above A 50 per cent increase in passengers and freight transported on the Blue Ribbon Network from 2011-2021 17 Increase in the number of Maintain at least 50 per cent of B1 development in PTAL zones 5-6 jobs located in areas of high PTAL values 18 Protection of biodiversity habitat No net loss of designated Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation 19 Increase in municipal waste recycled or composted and elimination of waste to landfill by 2031 At least 45 per cent of waste recycled/ composted by 2015 and 0 per cent of biodegradable or recyclable waste to landfill by 2031 20 Reduce CO2 emissions through new development Annual average percentage carbon dioxide emissions savings for strategic development proposals progressing towards zero carbon in residential development by 2016 and zero carbon in all development by 2019 21 Increase in energy generated from renewable sources Production of 8550 GWh3 of energy from renewable sources by 2026 (target will be developed in accordance with a Regional Renewable Energy Assessment) New KPI KPIs 9 & 10 - amended New KPI KPI 12 KPI 13 - amended (simplified) New KPI KPI 14 - amended (higher % target) Amended (B1 only) None KPIs 19 & 20 - amended (% targets) KPI 22 - amended KPI 23 - amended (target) | 22 Increase in urban greening | |-----------------------------------------| | the CAZ | | 23 Improve London's Blue | | Ribbon Network | | Restore 15km of rivers and streams* | | 2009 - 2015 and an additional 10km by | | 2020 (*defined as main river by the | | Environment Agency - includes larger | | streams and rivers but can also include | | smaller watercourses of local | | significance) | | 24 Protecting and improving | | London's heritage and public | | realm | | Reduction in the proportion of | | designated heritage assets at risk as a | | percentage of the total number of | | designated heritage assets in London | New KPI New KPI KPI 25 - amended (heritage assets replacing listed buildings) CHAPTER 3 ## Performance Against Key Performance Indicator Targets Chapter Three Performance Against Key Performance Indicator Targets Key Performance Indicator 1 Maximise The Proportion Of Development Taking Place On Previously Developed Land Target: Maintain At Least 96 Per Cent Of New Residential Development To Be On Previously Developed Land 3.1 Approvals On Brownfield Land Remain Above The 96% Target And Substantially Above The National 60% Target (See Table 3.1). There Has however been a small drop for the second year in a row. 3.2 There are seven boroughs that have failed to meet the Mayor's 96% target (see Table 3.1). The lowest percentage is in Bromley. This is largely due to three reserved matters permissions coming through for the development of the Crown Sports Ground. As the principle for development was approved back in 2007/08, this does not represent a new loss. Approval of 180 units as part of the proposals for the regeneration of Crystal Palace Park will still keep the total for the borough at some 86%. The total of 58% in Merton is due to developments on two playing field sites, both of which include major new public parks within the proposal. Richmond has granted permission for 76 units on the site of a former bowling green, now long derelict and boarded off. Harrow's total of 90% is due to the proposal to redevelop the former home of Edgware Town Football Club. Again this is a permission for a site on which the principle of development has already been established (in a 2007 approval). | Year | % of development approved on | |---------------------------|---------------------------------| | previously developed land | | | by units | by site area | | 2004/05 | 98.1 | | 2005/06 | 97.8 | | 2006/07 | 98.6 | | 2007/08 | 97.3 | | 2008/09 | 98.1 | | 2009/10 | 97.3 | | 2010/11 | 96.8 | Source: London Development Database % of development completed on previously developed land | | 2007/08 | 2008/9 | 2009/10 | 2010/11 | |------------------------|------------|-----------|------------|------------| | Borough | | | | | | % unit | | | | | | appro | | | | | | vals | | | | | | % unit | | | | | | compl | | | | | | etions | | | | | | Barking and Dagenham | 98.5 | 79.8 | 76 | 100 | | Barnet | 86.2 | 95 | 99.3 | 100 | | Bexley | 100 | 74 | 100 | 100 | | Brent | 99.1 | 100 | 96.2 | 98.7 | | Bromley | 63.8 | 100 | 90.6 | 98.1 | | Camden | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | | City of London | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | | Croydon | 100 | 99.1 | 95.6 | 100 | | Ealing | 100 | 100 | 100 | 97.7 | | Enfield | 89.5 | 96.7 | 100 | 100 | | Greenwich | 100 | 100 | 100 | 97.5 | | Hackney | 99.9 | 100 | 100 | 100 | | Hammersmith and Fulham | 100 | 100 | 100 | 97.9 | | Haringey | 100 | 100 | 100 | 99 | | Harrow | 99.2 | 100 | 99.8 | 100 | | Havering | 75.8 | 97.9 | 99 | 100 | | Hillingdon | 94.8 | 100 | 94.6 | 96.7 | | Hounslow | 98.1 | 71.5 | 99.9 | 99.1 | | Islington | 97.2 | 99.2 | 97.5 | 99.5 | | Kensington and Chelsea | 99.8 | 100 | 99.6 | 100 | | Kingston upon Thames | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | | Lambeth | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | | Lewisham | 100 | 95.5 | 100 | 99.1 | | Merton | 92.4 | 100 | 92 | 100 | | Newham | 99.5 | 100 | 100 | 100 | | Redbridge | 100 | 100 | 100 | 73.9 | | Richmond upon Thames | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | | Southwark | 93.9 | 100 | 99 | 100 | | Sutton | 100 | 72.6 | 98.4 | 100 | | Tower Hamlets | 99.6 | 94.5 | 100 | 97.1 | | Waltham Forest | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | | Wandsworth | 100 | 100 | 99.8 | 100 | | Westminster | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | | London | 97.3 | 96.6 | 98.1 | 98.9 | Source: London Development Database % unit appro vals % unit compl etions % unit appro vals % unit compl etions % unit appro vals % unit compl etions  Continued improvements to the reporting system mean that the method of calculating these figures has been improved since the last AMR so the area of a site being retained as open space is now subtracted from the site area calculations. The historic data has been updated to ensure consistency. 3.3 The following should be noted about Table 3.2:  Sites are only included where the site area can be calculated.  Approvals include those permissions that are granted but not superseded during the specified year.  Completions are allocated to the year in which the final part of the scheme is finished. KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR 2 Optimise the density of residential development Target: Over 95 per cent of development to comply with the housing density location and the density matrix (London Plan Table 3.2) 3.4 Tables 3.3 and 3.4 compare the residential density of each scheme against the Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) score (see section 4.3.1 for the 2010 map, although the relevant maps were used for the calculations each year) and the setting (based on the Character Areas map published on page 94 of the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment) for each development to test whether the development is within, above or below the relevant density range. 3.5 The percentage of units approved at a density within the range suggested Table 3.3 Residential approvals compared to the density matrix - all schemes % of units approvals financial year within range above range below range 2004/05 31% 62% 8% 2005/06 28% 65% 7% 2006/07 36% 60% 4% 2007/08 40% 55% 5% 2008/09 41% 53% 7% 2009/10 39% 56% 6% 2010/11 37% 58% 5% Source: London Development Database by the Sustainable Residential Quality Density Matrix in the London Plan has decreased slightly this year (most not within are above the range), despite the fact that the residential density of approvals across London has declined. 3.6 Tables HPM13 and HPM14 in the Housing Monitor section in Chapter 4 show that, in absolute terms, development densities (especially for approvals), fell in 2010-11. However, this KPI is based on the percentage of units approved at a density within the range suggested by the Sustainable Residential Quality Density Matrix in the London Plan. This percentage has decreased this year and the proportion of development taking place above the range has increased. 3.7 It should be borne in mind that these data refer to a period before the new policies on development density set out in the 2011 London Plan came into effect and as such, they provide a baseline for future monitoring. | | % of units approvals schemes 15+ | |----------------|--------------------------------------| | financial year | | | within | | | range | above range below range | | 2006/07 | 30% | | 2007/08 | 36% | | 2008/09 | 36% | | 2009/10 | 35% | | 2010/11 | 31% | Source: London Development Database 3.8 Tables 3.3 and 3.4 are based on all residential approvals for which a site area could be calculated. Density is calculated by dividing the total number of units by the total residential site area. The percentages are based on the number of units rather than the number of schemes. ## Key Performance Indicator 3 Minimise The Loss Of Open Space Target: No Net Loss Of Open Space Designated For Protection In Ldfs Due To New Development | Green Belt | Metropolitan | |------------------------|-----------------| | (ha) | | | Borough | | | Barking and Dagenham | 0 | | Barnet | 0 | | Bexley | 0 | | Brent | 0 | | Bromley | -2.77 | | Camden | 0 | | City of London | 0 | | Croydon | 0 | | Ealing | 0 | | Enfield | 0 | | Greenwich | 0 | | Hackney | 0 | | Hammersmith and Fulham | 0 | | Haringey | 0 | | Harrow | 0 | | Havering | -0.01 | | Hillingdon | 0 | | Hounslow | 0 | | Islington | 0 | | Kensington and Chelsea | 0 | | Kingston upon Thames | -0.163 | | Lambeth | 0 | | Lewisham | 0 | | Merton | 0 | | Newham | 0 | | Redbridge | 0 | | Richmond upon Thames | 0 | | Southwark | 0 | | Sutton | -0.032 | | Tower Hamlets | 0 | | Waltham Forest | 0 | 3.9 Table 3.5 shows that losses of protected open space in planning approvals granted during 2010/11 stand at just over 11 hectares. This is well below the figure of nearly 17 hectares for 2009/10. | | Local Open | grand total | |-----------|---------------|----------------| | Open Land | Spaces and | (ha) | | (ha) | other (ha) | | | Wandsworth | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | |----------------------|---------|---------|----------|---------| | Westminster | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | London Total 2010/11 | | | | | | -2.975 | -4.864 | -3.322 | -11.161 | | Source: London Development Database 3.10 To avoid a misleading impression of the scale of loss, it should be noted that these figures are net of proposed greenfield open space where re-provision is included as part of the planning permission. The types of open space protection recorded on LDD are Green Belt, Metropolitan Open Land (MOL) and Local Open Spaces. These are different from the designations for nature conservation recorded in KPI 18. 3.11 Table 3.6 shows that the largest single permission in the green belt is for the incorporation of agricultural land into an adjacent site for travelling showpeople in Bromley. The inclusion of nearly 3 hectares of agricultural land into an adjacent cemetery in Barnet is shown as no net change on this table as the proposed use is considered to be a greenfield use. 3.12 The largest loss of MOL is in Merton where the redevelopment of the Rowan High School site will include a new 2.6 hectare park, although there will be a net loss of 1.9 hectares to residential use. 3.13 The largest permission on a Local Open Space is in the redevelopment of the Myatts Field North housing estate in Lambeth. The outline permission includes extensive reprovision of the open spaces that will be lost, but is likely to result in a net loss of 0.8 hectares of open space. 3.14 Details of all schemes with existing open space designated for protection of over half a hectare are provided in Table 3.6. schemes borough permission reference area of existing open space description Barking and Dagenham 10/00804/FUL 1.860 Creation of a sports centre within public park designated as MOL Barnet H/04617/08 2.970 Incorporation of agricultural land in green belt into adjacent cemetery Bromley 07/03897/OUT 0.973 Residential development within Crystal Palace Park, designated as MOL, as part of wider redevelopment and improvement scheme Bromley 10/00281/FUL L2 2.400 Transfer of agricultural land in the Green Belt to showmen's pitches. protected open space lost (hectares) -1.860 0.000 -0.973 -2.400 schemes borough permission reference area of existing open space description Greenwich 10/1450 0.805 Redevelopment proposals for a school will include an improvement in overall quality of sports facilities and land available for sport but has a net loss of MOL Harrow P/1941/07UN 0.740 Resubmission of plans for a residential development on former Edgware Town sports ground Lambeth 10/01014/OUT 3.656 Outline application for major estate redevelopment will see considerable environmental improvements but will result in a net loss of Locally protected open space. Merton 07/P1216 4.500 Residential development on school playing fields designated as MOL will include a new public park although will see a net loss of open space Total 17.904 -8.780 Source: London Development Database 3.15 Looking at changes in all open space provides additional perspective on this KPI. Table 3.7 shows the losses and gains of open space recorded on the London Development Database. It is not restricted to open space designated for protection, and includes all open space types. Reserved Matters for phases of previously approved losses are excluded, although protected open space lost (hectares) -0.113 -0.740 -0.794 -1.900 renewals of un-implemented permissions are included. 3.16 The definition of open space used is based on the advice in PPG17, although the LDD excludes all private residential gardens as well as other areas within the curtilage of previously developed sites. The exceptions are outdoor sports facilities which may be within school grounds. | | approvals | completions | |------------------------|--------------|----------------| | proposed | | | | existing | open | | | open | space | | | | | | | space (ha) | (ha)* | | | Barking and Dagenham | 2.078 | 0.167 | | Barnet | 3.293 | 3.25 | | Bexley | 0.000 | 0 | | Brent | 0.987 | 1.535 | | Bromley | 4.434 | 0 | | Camden | 0.092 | 0.077 | | City of London | 0.000 | 0 | | Croydon | 0.315 | 0.048 | | Ealing | 1.385 | 4.911 | | Enfield | 0.106 | 0.077 | | Greenwich | 1.113 | 1 | | Hackney | 0.160 | 0 | | Hammersmith and Fulham | 0.000 | 0 | | Haringey | 0.370 | 0 | | Harrow | 0.740 | 15.03 | | Havering | 0.982 | 2.873 | | Hillingdon | 2.729 | 0.09 | | Hounslow | 0.411 | 0.46 | | Islington | 0.024 | 0.765 | | Kensington and Chelsea | 0.000 | 0.459 | | Kingston upon Thames | 0.661 | 0.38 | | Lambeth | 7.096 | 6.319 | | Lewisham | 0.000 | 0.571 | | Merton | 7.400 | 4.45 | | Newham | 0.349 | 0.68 | | Redbridge | 0.000 | 0 | | Richmond upon Thames | 0.731 | 0.126 | | Southwark | 0.264 | 1.952 | | Sutton | 0.068 | 0 | | Tower Hamlets | 0.017 | 1.548 | | Waltham Forest | 0.000 | 0 | | Wandsworth | 0.414 | 0.392 | | Westminster | 0.150 | 0.471 | | London Total | 36.369 | 47.631 | Source: London Development Database | | | existing | proposed | |----------|-------|-------------|-------------| | net loss | open | open | net loss | | or gain | space | space | or gain | | (ha) | (ha) | | | | | | | | | (ha)* | (ha) | | | 3.17 For the first time approvals are showing a net gain in the amount of open space as a result of planning permissions. This is in large part due to the proposal to redevelop the Bentley Priory site in Harrow. The scheme will deliver 115 new homes and a museum on the site of a former defence establishment, and the grounds will be opened up to provide a major new public park covering 15 hectares. 3.18 The borough with the largest net loss of open space is Bromley. This includes the loss of just under a hectare of MOL in Crystal Palace Park to provide land for 180 new dwellings that will help to finance the extensive redevelopment of the park and its facilities. 3.19 Local Open Space Strategies are - amongst other functions - important means of identifying and addressing open space deficiencies. In future AMRs results of a survey of the boroughs' open space strategies will be included in the environmental section of Chapter 4. KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR 4 Increase supply of new homes Target: Average completion of a minimum of 32,210 net additional homes per year 3.20 This AMR covers a period when the 2008 London Plan (and its associated housing targets) had not been fully superseded by the 2011 Plan, though the latter was a material consideration. AMR 8 therefore includes housing provision targets from both the 2008 Plan (30,500 homes pa, 27,600 conventional homes) and the 2011 Plan (32,210 homes, 29,830 conventional homes). 3.21 CLG is currently reviewing the Housing Strategy Statistical Appendix (HSSA) returns and has proposed to no longer record the number of long term vacant homes in the private sector via this form, with information instead (covering all tenures) coming from Council Tax returns separately published by CLG. This year's AMR uses Council Tax data instead of HSSA data to calculate overall net housing provision and a comparison of both sources can be found within the Housing Monitor appended to this Report. 3.22 Table 3.8 shows a 5% increase in total housing output in 2010/11 (24,710) relative to 2009/10 (23,640). This can be attributed largely to the use of Council Tax data on long term vacant homes which show a net reduction of 4,880 units, compared to the historic HSSA data which suggests a net reduction of only 1,410 units4. Irrespective of these sources, total output for 2010/11 is below the monitoring benchmarks in both the 2008 and 2011 London Plans. However, it should be borne in mind that these are long-term benchmarks representing averages across development cycles. Output at this stage of an economic cycle, characterized by very restricted availability of development and mortgage finance as well as a general economic downturn, would be expected to be below average. 3.23 This significant reduction in output may not be as deep set as some commentators have expected. Table HPM 10 in section 4 (Housing Provision Monitor), showing conventional housing 'starts', suggests considerable construction activity last year, especially relative to that in 2009/10. Boroughs reported work beginning in 2010/11 on schemes with capacity for 41,700 dwellings compared with starts on those with capacity for only 26,700 units in 2009/10. 3.24 The full translation of these starts into completions may take some time although in spring 2011 London Residential Research5 (LRR) anticipated that: "The big story … is construction volumes. Over 100 London schemes have started construction on privatesale units so far in 2011. We've visited every project and interviewed all the project managers to be absolutely sure of our facts. From our interviews, site visits and calculations we feel the following statement stands up to intense scrutiny … Despite a lack of conventional bank debt for residential construction, the market has found a way to build. And not just on a small scale - London is well into a residential 5 Crane T. London Land Report for residential market experts. Molior London Residential Research. May 2011 construction boom. It is completely feasible that some time during summer 2011 there will be more private-sale residential units under construction in London than at any time during the last 20 years including the peak year of 2007". 3.25 In early 2012 LRR felt confirmed in its view, reporting6 that "London construction starts in 2011 were 37% ahead of starts in 2010. This construction surge is expected to continue throughout 2012". 3.26 With capacity for over 170,000 homes in the pipeline, the London planning system can support a major expansion in housing output, making a major contribution not just to meeting housing need, but also to economic regeneration and employment. 3.27 It should be noted that the London Development Database applies a consistent methodology to the recording of completions data across London. As a result the figures in Table 3.8 may differ from those published in boroughs' own AMRs, where local practices on recording partial completions of schemes, completions missed from previous years and losses of existing units will affect figures for each individual year. These differences should become less significant when viewing completion trends over time. 3.28 Non-self contained supply includes bedrooms in student hostels and hostels within the SG use class. Only schemes with 7 proposed bedrooms or more are recorded on the LDD system. non selfconvent containe ional borough Barking and Dagenham 339 0 89 428 36% 40.2% Barnet 679 0 135 814 39.6% 36.1% Bexley 168 0 -109 59 17.1% 17.6% Brent 393 -9 -34 350 31.3% 32.9% Bromley 672 -34 82 720 148.5% 144% Camden 538 138 110 786 132.1% 118.2% City of London 98 54 -22 130 144.4% 118.2% Croydon 1,122 7 155 1,284 116.7% 96.5% Ealing 264 31 282 577 63.1% 64.8% Enfield 455 8 -42 421 106.6% 75.2% Greenwich 1,182 2 -279 905 45% 34.9% Hackney 391 -5 88 474 43.7% 40.9% Hammersmith and Fulham 457 -20 114 551 122.4% 89.6% Haringey 322 -7 93 408 60% 49.8% Harrow 440 0 41 481 120.3% 137.4% Havering 69 0 127 196 36.6% 20.2% Hillingdon 303 -72 116 347 95.1% 81.6% Hounslow 667 0 489 1,156 259.8% 246% Islington 512 752 133 1,397 120.4% 119.4% Kensington and Chelsea 168 246 -3 411 117.4% 70.3% Kingston upon Thames 136 121 328 585 151.9% 156% Lambeth 1,342 0 550 1,892 172% 158.3% Lewisham 728 -12 2 718 73.6% 65% Merton 356 0 -11 345 93.2% 107.8% Newham 787 -17 193 963 27.4% 38.5% Redbridge 350 -600 120 -130 -14.4% -17.1% Richmond upon Thames 320 -18 -52 250 92.6% 102% Southwark 1,444 235 471 2,150 131.9% 107.2% Sutton 327 0 189 516 149.6% 245.7% Tower Hamlets 1,296 1192 684 3,172 100.7% 109.9% Waltham Forest 425 2 105 532 80% 70% Wandsworth 481 -21 108 568 76.2% 49.6% Westminster 746 -122 630 1,254 184.4% 162.9% London 17,977 1,851 4,882 24,710 81% 76.7% Sources: Conventional and non-self contained supply from the London Development Database, Long term vacants from CLG Housing Live Tables 615 which summarise Council Tax records supplied by Local Authorities % of London Plan target vacants 2008 2011 returning London London d Plan Plan to use total KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR 5 An increased supply of affordable homes Target: Completion of 13,200 net additional affordable homes per year 3.29 Table 3.9 shows that in net terms some 6,900 conventional, new affordable homes were completed in London in 2010/11 compared with 9,000 in 2009/10. This represented 38% of total conventional completions, slightly above the trend since 2007/8. 3.30 As noted in previous AMRs, the London Housing Strategy (LHS) investment target for affordable housing should not be confused with the affordable housing target set out in the London Plan. The LHS investment target includes new build and acquisitions, but the London Plan target is measured in terms of net conventional supply: that is, supply from new developments or conversions, adjusted to take account of demolitions and other losses. The LHS/investment figure is therefore generally higher than the planning target. Monitoring achievement of the London Plan target is based on output from the London Development Database while monitoring achievement of the LHS investment targets uses the more broadly based figures provided by CLG (see section 4.2.1 - Housing Provision in London 20010/11 to this AMR) 3.31 The London Plan definition should be used for calculating affordable housing targets for development planning purposes including those for the proportion of total housing supply that is affordable. As with housing provision as a whole, affordable housing returns to the LDD are updated continuously and details in AMR 8 may not match those in previous Reports. 3.32 Because local affordable housing output can vary considerably from year to year, it is more meaningful to test individual borough performance against a longer term average. Table 3.9 shows average affordable housing output as a proportion of overall conventional housing provision over the three years to 2010/11. During this period affordable housing output averaged 37% of total provision. Figure 3.1 shows three-year average performance of individual boroughs relative to this. 3.33 The new 2011 London Plan introduced a strategic target for London of at least 13,200 affordable homes per year. The Mayor is working with boroughs to enable them to set local targets to make their contribution towards achieving this, taking into account local and strategic needs. These new targets may be expressed by boroughs in numeric or percentage terms (or both) as appropriate to local circumstances. 3.34 As with market housing, affordable housing output as measured by the London Plan KPI fell significantly during the economic down turn. However, also like market housing, borough reports to LDD suggest considerable construction activity in the sector during 2010/11. This is confirmed by HCA data showing that starts were then made on 16,331 homes funded by the Agency (see Table AHM3) - the highest level since records began in 2004/5. Nearly 70% of these were social housing. Looking at overall affordable housing investment (not just the new build element recorded by the LDD), 14,250 units were delivered in 2010/11, compared with 13,600 in 2009/10 and 13,100 in 2008/9. Almost two thirds (64%) of delivery in 2010/11 was social housing (see Tables AHM1 and 2). Delivery for the longer term is backed by the London Housing Strategy's £1.8 billion, 55,000 unit investment programme over the four years 2011/12 to 2014/15. Total net conventional affordable 2008/ 2009/ borough 10 09 Barking and Dagenham 157 24 143 324 40% 12% 42% 35% Barnet 314 136 224 674 28% 19% 33% 27% Bexley 51 239 60 350 22% 68% 36% 47% Brent 589 414 184 1,187 52% 51% 47% 51% Bromley 177 224 198 599 35% 40% 29% 35% Camden 402 216 142 760 45% 51% 26% 41% City of London 0 0 2 2 0% 0% 2% 1% Croydon 416 708 385 1,509 27% 51% 34% 37% Ealing 309 229 73 611 37% 53% 28% 40% Enfield 73 30 220 323 20% 11% 48% 29% Greenwich 239 141 775 1,155 31% 26% 66% 46% Hackney 915 611 221 1,747 44% 37% 57% 43% Hammersmith & Fulham 312 441 150 903 69% 50% 33% 51% Haringey 293 281 49 623 37% 51% 15% 38% Harrow 228 209 167 604 30% 40% 38% 35% Havering 301 288 0 589 48% 67% 0% 52% Hillingdon 177 189 175 541 21% 31% 58% 31% Hounslow 332 381 349 1,062 42% 59% 52% 51% Islington 330 472 -43 759 15% 32% -8% 18% Kensington & Chelsea 96 22 61 179 38% 7% 36% 24% Kingston upon Thames 0 30 65 95 0% 21% 48% 19% Lambeth 585 417 744 1,746 51% 36% 55% 48% Lewisham 205 168 339 712 23% 22% 47% 30% Merton 265 49 48 362 34% 15% 13% 25% Newham 590 712 370 1,672 49% 48% 47% 48% Redbridge 97 175 111 383 15% 18% 32% 20% Richmond upon Thames 135 76 45 256 38% 37% 14% 29% Southwark 299 700 587 1,586 29% 52% 41% 42% Sutton 243 -15 222 450 52% -7% 68% 45% Tower Hamlets 1,701 707 292 2,700 56% 27% 23% 39% Waltham Forest 295 -130 248 413 40% -88% 58% 31% Wandsworth 482 479 109 1,070 31% 31% 23% 30% Westminster 231 385 152 768 32% 56% 20% 36% London 10,839 9,008 6,867 26,714 37% 37% 38% 37% Source: London Development Database Affordable as % of total net completions conventional supply 2010/ 2008/ 2009/ 2010/ 11 Total 09 10 11 Total 3.35 Notes: When calculating net figures for phased schemes, LDD allocates unit losses to the year in which the final proposed unit in a scheme is completed. This can lead to negative net figures when large phased redevelopments reach their completion. For example, in Table 3.9 Islington is shown as having a net loss because of the completion of part of the Market Road Estate redevelopment which has been delivering new housing since 2007/08. Source: London Development Database KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR 6 Reducing health inequalities Target: Reduction in the difference in life expectancy between those living in the most and least deprived areas of London (shown separately for men and women) 3.36 Figures on life expectancy at birth are produced at ward level by the London Health Observatory based on mortalities over a five year period. The London Plan's regeneration areas (policy 2.14) are identified as the 20% most deprived Lower Super Output Areas, which are not directly comparable with ward boundaries. As a proxy measure the 20% most deprived wards were identified by calculating the proportion of LSOAs within each ward that are in the 20% most deprived LSOAs nationally. It | | | | 2003-07 | 2005-09 | |--------------------|-------|---------|------------|------------| | | Males | Females | Males | Females | | Regeneration Areas | 74.82 | 80.61 | 75.87 | 82.13 | | London Average | 77.14 | 81.74 | 78.12 | 83.04 | | Gap | 2.32 | 1.13 | 2.25 | 0.91 | Source: 2003-07 London Health Observatory; 2005-09 London Health Programmes was calculated that a ratio of 59% or more brought the closest to 20% of wards. The figures for the Regeneration Areas in this table are actually the simple averages of the published figures for the 20% of wards identified by this method. The figures for 2006-10 are expected to be published before the next AMR is produced. 3.37 When comparing the figures for 2003-07 and 2005-09, the difference in the anticipated life expectancy at birth in the regeneration areas has improved compared to the London average for both males and females. The gap for males stands at 2.25 years, much more than the 0.91 years for females. Due to the methods used to calculate this, a degree of variability would be expected, so a comparison of the figures for the two dates needs to be treated with some caution. KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR 7 Sustaining economic activity Target: Increase in the proportion of working age London residents in employment 2011–2031 3.38 Table 3.11 shows that London saw a steady increase in its employment rate7 between 2005 and 2008. However, the economic downturn led to a sudden drop in the employment rate in 2009 that took it back to 2006 levels, and another slight drop in 2010 which took it below 2005 levels. 3.39 Historically there have been low levels of economic activity among London residents relative to that of the country as a whole. However, when compared with the UK average, the gap in rates has fallen steadily between 2005 and 2010, changing from 4.3 percentage points, to just 2.1 points, meaning the gap has more than halved. Table 3.11 Working age London residents in employment by calendar year Year London residents in employment London residents of working age London employment rate % UK employment rate % 2004 3,448,300 5,050,000 68.3 72.4 2005 3,490,100 5,118,900 68.2 72.5 2006 3,538,000 5,178,900 68.3 72.4 2007 3,600,000 5,224,100 68.9 72.4 2008 3,662,400 5,269,000 69.5 72.1 2009 3,640,000 5,320,000 68.4 70.5 2010 3,702,100 5,436,200 68.1 70.2 Source: Annual Population Survey KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR 8 Ensure that there is sufficient development capacity in the office market Target: Stock of office permissions to be at least three times the average rate of starts over the previous three years 3.40 The Annual Monitoring Report draws on data from both EGi London Offices and the London Development Database (LDD). According to the EGi data (see Table 3.12), the ratio of permissions to average three years starts at end 2011 was 13.5:1. In the most recent set of comparable figures for the two databases, for 2010, the ratio of permissions to starts was 13:1 according to EGi and 11.6:1 according to LDD, both comfortably in excess of the target of 3:1. The variation in the ratio can be accounted for by the different definitions used in the datasets.8 year average starts in central London9 Ratio of planning permissions to three year average starts Year EGi LDD 2004 11.9:1 6.4:1 2005 8.1:1 7.4:1 2006 8.3:1 8.7:1 2007 6.3:1 4.7:1 2008 7.5:1 4.1:1 2009 10:1 7:1 2010 13:1 11.6:1 2011 13.5 N/A Source: Ramidus Consulting, EGi London Offices, London Development Database 3.41 **Starts**: in 2011 the volume of construction starts in central London according to EGi was 331,000 sq metres net, an increase of 7% on the 2010 figure of 308,000 sq m net 8 EGi data for permissions is based on planning committee decisions which are a precursor to discussion on the content of s.106 agreements, whereas LDD waits for a decision letter to be issued which does not happen until the legal agreement has been signed. LDD data has a minimum threshold of 1,000 sq m gross, whereas the threshold in EGi data is 500 sq m gross. LDD data excludes refurbishments where the existing building is already in office use, while these are included by EGI. In addition EGi data for starts is based on observed construction of new or refurbished space, whereas LDD records whether work is started in a legal sense, so can include demolition works as starts where these, in effect, activate the permission. Over the period 2004-2011 the office floorspace permissions recorded by LDD are typically 60-70% of the floorspace recorded by EGi. The LDD figure provides a useful measure of the store of permissions available to facilitate the immediate responsiveness of developers to changes in demand, whereas the EGi figure gives a broader measure of activity by developers in the office market (accepting that some of the permissions in that dataset may never come to fruition) (see Figure 3.2). The long-term average for office development starts in central London was 575,000 sq m over the period 1985-2011 and starts were below average for each of the past four years 2008-2011. Figure 3.2 Office starts and year-end permissions in Central London 1985-2011 Source: Ramidus Consulting, EGi London Offices 3.42 Of the 331,000 sq m net commenced in central London in 2011, 209,000 sq m net (63%) was located in the City market, 98,000 sq m net (28%) in the West End market, 8,000 sq m net (2%) in the Southbank market, 6,000 sq m net in Midtown (2%) and the balance of 17,000 sq m net (5%) spread around other Inner London locations. In the City, as anticipated in last year's AMR 7, there were two significant starts at 20 Fenchurch Street, EC3 ("The Walkie Talkie") of 58,300 sq m net and 122 Leadenhall Street, EC3 ("The Cheesegrater") of 54,600 sq m net. Taken together, these two towers accounted for 34% of all central London starts in 2011. There were two further starts in excess of 10,000 sq m net in the City market at 60 London, 60 Holborn Viaduct, EC1 (19,200 sq m) and Finsbury Circus House, 12-15 Finsbury Circus, EC2 (15,700 sq m). 3.43 Fifteen schemes commenced in the West End, many with a strong mixed use character. The largest was the Regent's Quarter's North East Quadrant, NW1 which includes 94 private apartments, a social housing block of 70 units and 3,600 sq m gross of retail and community uses. Other significant starts in the West End were at 1 Howick Place, SW1, with 12,900 sq m net offices and 33 housing units and St James's Gateway, W1, with 6,300 sq m net offices, 16 housing units and 2,600 sq m gross retail. 3.44 Beyond the City and West End starts were more limited, with only one scheme commencing in Midtown at 280 High Holborn, WC1, (5,900 sq m net) and three in the Southbank, the largest of which was the refurbishment and extension of 65 Southwark Street, SE1 (4,500 sq m net). 3.45 **Pipeline:** the planning pipeline of permissions in central London remained unchanged in 2011 at 3.8 million sq m net, according to EGi. Total permitted development continued to be strongly influenced by very large development schemes. Six schemes were each over 100,000 sq m net and together accounted for 37% of all permitted development, being Wood Wharf, E14 (369,000 sq m net), King's Cross, NW1 (309,000 sq m net), North Quay, E14 (222,000 sq m net), Riverside South, E14 (185,300 sq m net), Battersea Power Station (158,000 sq m net) and Heron Quays West, E14 (155,000 sq metres net). Four of these major permissions at Wood Wharf, North Quay, Riverside South and Heron Quays West are effectively major additions to the Canary Wharf Opportunity Area. Reflecting this LB Tower Hamlets had the highest total permissions by borough at 1.35 million sq m net (35%), which as well as Docklands included major schemes in the eastern City Fringe such as Aldgate Union and News International. 26% of permissions, a total of 989,000 sq m net, were located in the City of London including major schemes such as Walbrook Square, EC4, 5 Broadgate, EC2, 100 Bishopsgate, EC3, Trinity 1,2,3, EC3 and London Wall Place, EC2. 3.46 There was a further 392,000 sq m net in LB Camden accounting for 10% of central London's outstanding consents, predominantly in King's Cross, and 356,000 sq m net in Westminster (9% of the central London total). Camden, City of London, City of Westminster and Tower Hamlets together accounted for 80% of outstanding planning consents in central London at the end of 2011. 3.47 **Demand:** 2011 saw reductions in office availability, weakening office take-up and evidence of stabilising rent levels in most markets in the second half of the year. According to DTZ Research, availability fell by 9% during 2011, but rose by 6% during the 4th Quarter.10 Leasing activity had strengthened in 2010 to 1.44 million sq m, but there was a very significant decline of 35% in 2011 to 0.94 million sq m. Prime rents stabilised in the City and Midtown during 2011 at £55 per sq ft (£592 per sq m), but there was evidence of continued growth in the West End throughout 2011 to reach £95 sq ft (£1,023 per sq m) in the 4th Quarter. The reduction in incentives such as rent-free periods also slowed during the year. Although DTZ sees the prospect of some element of recovery to the central London economy prior to the end of 2012, the firm comments, "Looking forward we expect the current weak leasing market to continue. The UK economy is slowing, and recession seems likely both here and on much of the Continent. And financial sector weakness, which is at the core of the reduced level of demand in central London, shows no sign of recovery." 3.48 Office development is particularly sensitive to economic changes at the macro and micro scales. The Mayor is currently commissioning a new London Office Policy Review to update that published in 2009 to identify future trends; AMR9 will be informed by its findings. ## Key Performance Indicator 9 Ensure That There Is Sufficient Employment Land Available Target: Release Of Industrial Land To Be In Line With Benchmarks In The Industrial Capacity Spg 3.49 Table 3.13 Shows A Total Of 69Ha Of Industrial Land Release In 2010/11. Whilst This Is More Than The | Annual | Annual | |------------|-----------| | average | average | | release | release | | Sub-region | 2001-2006 | | Central | 6 | | East | 57 | | North | 2 | | South | 11 | | West | 10 | | London | 86 | Source: LDD, London Plan and draft Industrial Land Benchmark SPGs 3.51 It should be noted that mixed residential-industrial use sites are not included in the 2010/2011 figure. benchmark of 41ha in the London Plan (paragraph 4.21) it is a reduction on the annual average rate of release between 2001 and 2010. 3.50 Table 3.13 also includes a comparison of actual 2010/2011 release rates with 2001-2010 annual average rates of release for London's sub-regions. The trends vary from sub-region to sub-region. Sub-regional benchmarks are also included in current draft Land for Industry and Transport SPG. | | London Plan | 2012 Draft | |-----------|----------------|---------------| | Actual | annual | SPG annual | | benchmark | benchmark | | | release | | | | 2010/11 | 2006-2026 | 2011-2031 | KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR 10 Employment in Outer London Target: Growth in total Employment in Outer London 3.52 Though there are local exceptions, employment in many outer boroughs has been static or declining over two economic cycles. Over the period 1989-2009 (both years being cycle peaks), employment growth in Outer London fell well short of that in Inner London (3.1per cent vs 15.0 per cent). London overall saw employment growth of 10 per cent. Overall, the changes in employment for individual boroughs have been very diverse - seven outer boroughs achieved employment growth in excess of 10 per cent in the 1989- 2009 period. The Mayor set up the Outer London Commission to investigate how Outer London can best realise its potential to contribute to the London economy and the Commission's recommendations made a major contribution to the London Plan's new policies for Outer London. 3.53 This is a new KPI. It relates to KPI 7, but focusing on employment in Outer London. Table 3.14 shows that though employment declined in some boroughs between 2009 and 2010, it grew overall by 39,000 or 1.8%, slightly above the pan London average (1.6%). Though economic activity rates have declined slightly in the economic downturn, they have been above the London average. | 2009 | 2010 | |----------------|--------------| | residents in | residents of | | Outer London | | | Borough | | | employment | working age | | rate | | | residents in | | | Barking and | | | Dagenham | | | 69,200 | 110,500 | | Barnet | 151,900 | | Bexley | 101,200 | | Brent | 118,000 | | Bromley | 149,000 | | Croydon | 165,200 | | Ealing | 144,000 | | Enfield | 115,300 | | Haringey | 95,600 | | Harrow | 108,300 | | Havering | 107,100 | | Hillingdon | 125,400 | | Hounslow | 116,400 | | Kingston upon | | | Thames | | | 86,600 | 116,200 | | Merton | 105,200 | | Redbridge | 119,300 | | Richmond upon | | | Thames | | | 93,700 | 125,800 | | Sutton | 98,000 | | Waltham Forest | 98,600 | | Outer London | 2,168,000.0 | | London | 3,640,000.0 | Source: Annual Population Survey residents of employment working age rate KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR 11 Increased employment opportunities for those suffering from disadvantage in the employment market Target: Reduce the employment rate gap between BAME groups and the white population and reduce the gap between lone parents on income support in London vs the average for England & Wales 3.54 Table 3.15 shows that the gap between employment rates for White and BAME Londoners has broadly followed a downward trend. In 2004, the gap was 16.6 percentage points, it then fell to 14.2 points in 2007 before rising slightly to 15.5 in 2009. But in 2010 it fell again to 13.3 | All Persons | White Groups | BAME Groups | |----------------|-----------------|----------------| | in | in | | | Year | | | | employment | rate % | employment | | 2004 | 3,448,300 | 68.3 | | 2005 | 3,490,100 | 68.2 | | 2006 | 3,538,000 | 68.3 | | 2007 | 3,600,000 | 68.9 | | 2008 | 3,662,400 | 69.5 | | 2009 | 3,640,000 | 68.4 | | 2010 | 3,702,100 | 68.1 | Source: Annual Population Survey points. Over the six-year period the gap has reduced by 3.3 percentage points. 3.55 London Plan Policy 4.12 supports strategic development proposals which encourage employers to recruit local people and sustain their employment, and the provision of skills development, training opportunities and affordable spaces to start a business. This approach - which builds on earlier Plan policy - has contributed to this positive trend. The GLA has also been encouraging employers to recruit local people, in particular in deprived areas of London where a large number of BAME Londoners live and sustain their employment. Initiatives such as the Construction Employer Accord and the GLA's Supplier Skills project should also be mentioned. The latter supports TfL contractors in promoting employment and skills. Employment rate gap in White/ BAME employment rate % 3.56 Table 3.16 shows that in terms of income support for lone parents over a 10-year period the gap between London and England & Wales has reduced by 7 percentage points. Policy 8.2 prioritises S106 funding for childcare provision (see also Policy 4.12). 3.57 However, it should be noted that since the introduction of the Employment Support Allowance (ESA), lone parents with health issues, who were previously claiming Income Support, now claim ESA. The 2010 and 2011 figures were revised accordingly. This has to be considered when comparing different years. However, this does not affect the comparison of London vs England and Wales' data for each year. | | London | England and Wales | | |-------------|--------------|----------------------|---------| | lone parent | as % of lone | lone parent | | | families on | parent | families on | | | Annual | | | | | Report | | | | | IS | families | | | | 2001 | 168,400 | 64 | 818,700 | | 2002 | 166,840 | 62 | 792,060 | | 2003 | 166,630 | 60 | 779,340 | | 2004 | 165,120 | 59 | 751,050 | | 2005 | 163,620 | 57 | 721,370 | | 2006 | 162,770 | 55 | 709,370 | | 2007 | 160,450 | 53 | 702,580 | | 2008 | 152,520 | 49 | 679,150 | | 2009 | 141,720 | 44 | 662,660 | | 2010 | 129,100 | 39 | 624,330 | | 2011 | 109,200 | 32 | 547,600 | Source: Department for Work and Pensions difference in as % of lone parent percentage IS families points KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR 12 Improving the provision of social infrastructure and related services Target: Reduce the average class sizes in primary schools 3.58 This is a new KPI target replacing the targets 11a and b for which data are no longer available. 3.59 The average class size has increased in all of the London boroughs since 2005 and also when comparing the most recent 2010 to 2011 data (except in Hammersmith and Fulham) - see Table 3.17 overleaf. 3.60 This can be attributed to demographic changes (primarily reduced migration out of London to other parts of the UK) resulting in an increased number of primary school children and the pressure London's primary schools face to reduce costs. These demographic changes are being closely monitored; there are signs that domestic out-migration from London has started to increase. 3.61 The target has therefore not been met. London Plan Policy 3.18 should help to reverse this trend by reinforcing the importance of education provision, supporting the establishment of new schools (new build, expansion of existing or change of use to educational purposes) and steps to enable local people and communities to do the same. | | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |------------------------|--------|--------|--------|--------|---------|---------|--------| | Barking and Dagenham | 26.7 | 26.4 | 26.8 | 26.9 | 27.2 | 27.5 | 27.9 | | Barnet | 27.1 | 27 | 27.2 | 27.5 | 27.6 | 27.9 | 28.1 | | Bexley | 27.1 | 27.6 | 27.6 | 27.3 | 27.8 | 28 | 28.2 | | Brent | 27.3 | 27.5 | 27.4 | 28 | 27.8 | 28.1 | 28.5 | | Bromley | 27.2 | 27.3 | 27.1 | 27.2 | 27.7 | 27.8 | 28.1 | | Camden | 26.7 | 26.7 | 26.9 | 26.9 | 26.6 | 27.1 | 27.1 | | City of London | 24 | 24.4 | 22.2 | 24.8 | 24.7 | 25.9 | 25.9 | | Croydon | 27.4 | 27.3 | 27.5 | 27.6 | 27.7 | 27.9 | 28.1 | | Ealing | 27.1 | 27.1 | 27.5 | 27.5 | 27.2 | 27.7 | 27.8 | | Enfield | 28.1 | 27.9 | 28.3 | 28.3 | 28.6 | 28.2 | 28.7 | | Greenwich | 26 | 26.1 | 26.2 | 26 | 26 | 26.5 | 26.9 | | Hackney | 25.9 | 26 | 26.3 | 25.8 | 25.8 | 26.1 | 26.3 | | Hammersmith and Fulham | 25.6 | 25.7 | 26.2 | 25.8 | 26.2 | 26.4 | 26.1 | | Haringey | 27.4 | 27.4 | 27.5 | 27.5 | 27.5 | 27.6 | 28 | | Harrow | 26.2 | 26.1 | 26.3 | 26.1 | 26.9 | 26.7 | 28 | | Havering | 26.7 | 26.5 | 26.8 | 27 | 27.4 | 27.8 | 28 | | Hillingdon | 26.4 | 26.6 | 26.6 | 26.5 | 27.2 | 27.4 | 27.4 | | Hounslow | 26.5 | 26.8 | 27 | 27.2 | 27.4 | 27.8 | 28.2 | | Islington | 25.8 | 25.7 | 25.7 | 25.5 | 25.5 | 25.3 | 26.2 | | Kensington and Chelsea | 26.4 | 26.1 | 26.2 | 26 | 25.7 | 26.2 | 26.8 | | Kingston upon Thames | 26.7 | 26.8 | 27.1 | 27.1 | 27 | 27.7 | 27.5 | | Lambeth | 25.8 | 26 | 25.9 | 25.9 | 25.7 | 25.7 | 26 | | Lewisham | 26 | 26 | 25.8 | 25.9 | 26.3 | 26.3 | 26.8 | | Merton | 26 | 25.8 | 26.4 | 26.7 | 27 | 27.1 | 27.5 | | Newham | 26.8 | 26.8 | 26.7 | 26.8 | 27 | 27.4 | 27.8 | | Redbridge | 28.2 | 28.6 | 29 | 29.2 | 29.2 | 29.1 | 29.5 | | Richmond upon Thames | 27.1 | 26.9 | 26.8 | 26.5 | 26.9 | 27.4 | 28 | | Southwark | 25.1 | 25.3 | 24.9 | 24.6 | 24.5 | 24.8 | 25.2 | | Sutton | 27.8 | 27.5 | 27.7 | 27.8 | 27.8 | 27.9 | 28.2 | | Tower Hamlets | 26 | 26.1 | 26.3 | 26.3 | 26.3 | 26.9 | 27.3 | | Waltham Forest | 26.3 | 27.4 | 27.4 | 27.9 | 28 | 28.5 | 28 | | Wandsworth | 25.8 | 25.6 | 25.6 | 25.5 | 25.3 | 25.9 | 25.6 | | Westminster | 26 | 25.9 | 25.5 | 25.8 | 25.4 | 26.3 | 26.7 | | London | 26.7 | 26.7 | 26.8 | 26.8 | 27 | 27.2 | 27.6 | | England | 26.2 | 26.3 | 26.2 | 26.2 | 26.2 | 26.4 | 26.6 | Source: Department of Education KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR 13 Achieve a reduced reliance on the private car and a more sustainable modal split for journeys Target: Use of public transport per head grows faster than use of the private car per head 3.62 The indices in Table 3.18 are derived from the time series of journey stages per head compiled for Travel in London Report 4 (TfL Planning December 2011). This includes all travel to, from or within Greater London, including travel by commuters and visitors. For consistency the population estimates include in-commuters and visitors (derived from the Labour Force | Year | Public transport index | Private transport index | |---------|---------------------------|---------------------------| | 2001 | 100 | 100 | | 2002 | 103.2 | 99.3 | | 2003 | 108.7 | 98.3 | | 2004 | 114.3 | 95.2 | | 2005 | 113 | 92.4 | | 2006 | 116.1 | 93.4 | | 2007 | 122.6 | 95.1 | | 2008 | 126.5 | 92 | | 2009 | 126.4 | 89.9 | | 2010 | 129.3 | 89 | Source: Transport for London Survey and the International Passenger Survey respectively, courtesy of ONS). It should be noted that the figures have been revised compared to previous AMRs. 3.63 Total daily journey stages in 2010 were 28.7 million, up from 28.5 million in each of the previous two years, and 3 million higher than in 2001. Of these stages, 36% were by private transport, and 40% by public transport. Since 2001, use of public transport per head has grown by almost 30%, and increased by almost 3% in the latest year. In contrast, private transport use per head has decreased by 11% since 2001, and is down almost 1% in the latest year. In line with the target, public transport use per head continues to grow at a faster rate than private transport, which continues to fall year on year. ## Key Performance Indicator 14 Achieve A Reduced Reliance On The Private Car And A More Sustainable Modal Split For Journeys Target: Zero Car Traffic Growth For London As A Whole 3.64 Table 3.19 Shows That Road Traffic Volumes Continued To Fall In The Latest Year, Down By 0.8% Between 2009 And 2010, And 7% Since 2001. In 2010, Traffic Volumes Fell In Both Inner And Outer London, Down By 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 All roads: Greater London 32.59 32.48 32.48 32.00 31.45 31.79 32.04 31.39 30.58 30.30 Inner London (excl City and Westminster) 9.15 8.95 8.88 8.55 8.52 8.75 8.62 8.38 8.11 8.06 Outer London 22.14 22.28 22.46 22.31 21.81 21.94 22.32 21.94 21.44 21.20 All roads index (2001=100) Greater London 100.0 99.7 99.7 98.2 96.5 97.6 98.3 96.3 93.8 93.0 Inner London (excl City and Westminster) 100.0 97.8 97.1 93.5 93.1 95.6 94.3 91.6 88.6 88.1 Outer London 100.0 100.6 101.4 100.8 98.5 99.1 100.8 99.1 96.8 95.8 Major roads only Greater London 20.8 20.7 20.8 20.6 19.9 20.2 20.5 20.2 19.7 19.7 Inner London (excl City and Westminster) 5.6 5.4 5.4 5.2 5.0 5.2 5.3 5.2 5.0 5.0 Outer London 14.4 14.5 14.6 14.6 14.1 14.2 14.5 14.2 13.9 13.9 Major roads index (2001=100) Greater London 100.0 99.5 99.6 98.7 95.3 96.7 98.4 96.7 94.4 94.3 0.5% and 1.0% respectively. Traffic levels in Inner London are almost 12% lower than in 2001. In Outer London, traffic levels are over 4% lower than 2001. 3.65 For major roads only, traffic levels are more stable, with no growth overall in the latest year. A slight increase on major roads in Inner London was offset by a small decrease on major roads in Outer London. Since 2001, traffic levels on major roads are down by almost 6%. 3.66 With regards to the target, car traffic is declining rather than growing across all sectors of London. 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Inner London (excl City & Westminster) 100.0 96.5 96.3 92.4 89.9 93.5 94.4 92.3 89.5 90.0 Outer London 100.0 100.9 101.5 101.8 97.9 98.5 100.7 99.2 97.1 96.8 Source: TfL Planning, Travel in London Report 4, section 3.1 ## Key Performance Indicator 15 Achieve A Reduced Reliance On The Private Car And A More Sustainable Modal Split For Journeys Target: Increase The Share Of All Trips By Bicycle From 2 Per Cent In 2009 To 5 Per Cent By 2026 3.67 Table 3.20 Shows That In 2010 Almost 2% Of All Journeys In Greater London On An Average Day Were Made By Bicycle, An Increase Of 52% Compared To 2001 And 5% More In The Most Recent Year (2009 To 2010). Around 0.54 Million Journey Stages Were Made By Bicycle In Greater London On An Average Day, An Table 3.20 Cycle journey stages and mode shares, 2000 to 2010 Year Daily Cycle Cycle mode stages share (millions) (percentage) 2001 0.32 1.2 2002 0.32 1.2 2003 0.37 1.4 2004 0.38 1.4 2005 0.41 1.6 2006 0.47 1.7 2007 0.47 1.6 2008 0.49 1.7 2009 0.51 1.8 2010 0.54 1.9 Source: TfL Planning, Travel in London Report 4, table 2.2 increase of 70% compared to 2001 and 6% more in the most recent year (2009 to 2010). 3.68 If growth is sustained at this rate, London will remain on track to meet the Mayor's objective to see a cycling revolution, with a target for a 5% cycle mode share by 2026. The new London Plan includes a range of policies to help support achievement of this objective, such as support for the Cycle Superhighway network and the London cycle hire scheme and standards for cycle parking and facilities for cyclists in new development. Transport for London is carrying out a comprehensive review of cycle parking standards; the first results of this work have informed early alterations to the 2011 London Plan. KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR 16 Achieve a reduced reliance on the private car and a more sustainable modal split for journeys Target: A 50% increase in passengers and freight transported on the Blue Ribbon Network from 2011-2021 3.69 For passenger transport, Table 3.21 includes figures for passenger journeys on boat operators using TfL London River Services piers and the Thames Clipper Savoy (London Eye from November 2007) to Woolwich Arsenal service. These exclude a number of other services working from independent piers. Figures also include passengers on river tours and charter boats. Ticket sales count both single and return tickets as one journey on all services except Thames Clippers 3.70 Table 3.21 shows that the number of passengers on the Thames increased until 2010. Despite the small decline in 2011, the amount of passengers over the baseline situation in 2001 has still increased by 163%. Following the events of 7 July 2005, passenger numbers on leisure services fell significantly, but subsequently recovered to previous levels. Passenger numbers on the riverbus services have shown significant growth since July 2005. In November 2007, Thames Clippers' riverbus service was expanded to run between Waterloo (BA London Eye) and the O2 at a 10-20-minute frequency throughout the day and every 30 minutes in the late evening. Strong growth in riverbus and leisure services continued in 2008/9 due to the relative weakness of the pound attracting visitors to London and a successful programme of events at the O2 boosting Thames Clippers' patronage. 3.71 In October 2011, a new pier was opened at St George Wharf, Vauxhall - and the Thames Clippers service extended further west. Through the Mayor's River Concordat Group, improvements to river services, such as the introduction of Oyster Pay As You Go, enhanced signage to piers and new mapping and customer information, has supported the development of river passenger services. The recent very slight overall fall is due to a decrease in river tours whilst the riverbus and charters continue to grow. The slight dip is linked to the impact of the economic downturn; over the longterm, growth is expected to continue. The provision of improved facilities including new and extended piers and further integration of river services into the wider transport network should facilitate this. In addition, enhanced river services will be offered during the London 2012 Games, and two piers in Central London are earmarked for expansion (Tower Pier and London Eye Pier), which will help relieve the congested central section of the River. 3.72 It should also be noted that the figures do not include the Woolwich Ferry, which accounts annually for an additional two million passenger journeys with a significant 400,000 increase from 2009/10 to 2010/11. Number of Year passengers April 2000 - March 2001 1 573 830 - April 2001 - March 2002 1,739,236 + 10.5 April 2002 - March 2003 2 030 300 + 16.7 April 2003 - March 2004 2,113,800 + 4.1 April 2004 - March 2005 2,343,276 + 10.9 April 2005 - March 2006 2,374,400 + 1.3 April 2006 - March 2007 2,746,692 + 15.7 April 2007 - March 2008 3,078,100 + 12.1 April 2008 - March 2009 3,892,693 + 26.5 April 2009 - March 2010 4,188,530 + 7.6 April 2010 - March 2011 4,142,226 - 1.1 Source: TfL London Rivers Services 3.73 Table 3.22 deals with cargo carried by river. A significant proportion of the freight transported on the River Thames in the capital is aggregates for the construction industry. The demand/opportunities of this industry have over time significantly influenced changes in trade. This industry has been especially hard hit by the economic conditions. However, significant construction projects including, for example, the Thames Tunnel and Crossrail mean that the PLA Greater London Tonnes of Year cargo 2001 10,757,000 - 2002 9,806,000 + 9% 2003 9,236,000 + 6% 2004 8,743,000 - 5% 2005 9,288,000 + 6% 2006 9,337,000 + 0.5% 2007 8,642,000 - 7% 2008 9,312,000 + 8% 2009 8,146,000 - 13% 2010 7,754,000 - 5% Source: Port of London Authority % change on previous year remains optimistic for the medium term prospects of freight on the River Thames in London. This is also reflected in the water freight demand forecast published as part of the current review of Safeguarded Wharves (see following link for further details http://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/ planning/spg/safeguardedwharves-review). Sufficient wharf capacity is essential to allow freight trade on the Thames to grow. % change on previous year KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR 17 Increase in the number of jobs located in areas of high PTAL values Target: Maintain at least 50 per cent of B1 development in PTAL zones 5-6 3.74 This indicator aims to show that high-density employment generators such as offices are mainly located in areas with good access to public transport (defined as having a Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) of 5 or 6 on a scale of 0 to 6, with 0 being the lowest and 6 the highest). The B1 use class includes (a) offices, (b) research & development | | all B1 | offices (B1a) | |------------------|-----------|------------------| | floorspace | | | | PTAL level | (m2) | | | 5 or 6 | 601,916 | 63.1 | | 4 or less | 352,327 | 36.9 | | Total floorspace | 954,243 | | Source: London Development Database - PTAL copyright Transport for London 3.76 It should be noted that only permissions with 1,000m2 or more of proposed B1 floorspace from either new build or changes of use are recorded. The figures are "gross" as they do not exclude existing floorspace lost to demolition. 3.77 The PTAL is measured from the location of the site marker as entered onto the London Development Database system. This will usually be near the centre of the site. On large redevelopment sites the PTAL may vary across the site with the lowest rating being near the centre. and (c) light industrial uses. LDD breaks down proposed B1 floorspace into these three broad categories as far as possible, although the planning system does not restrict changes between the categories within the B1 use class. 3.75 The percentage of B1 floorspace approved within areas with a high PTAL value is 63% (see Table 3.23), well above the 50% target and a marked improvement on last year where a number of large redevelopment schemes were approved in areas awaiting planned improvements in the transport infrastructure. The proportion of office floorspace approved with a high PTAL value is even higher at 72.5%. | % | |------| | (m2) | KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR 18 Protection of biodiversity habitat Target: No net loss of Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs) 3.78 The London Development Database records the following conservation designations:  Statutory Site of Special Scientific Interest,  Site of Metropolitan Importance,  Site of Borough Grade 1 Importance  Site of Borough Grade 2 Importance  Site of Local Importance. borough permission reference protected area affected by dev (ha) comment Bromley 07/03897/O UT 0.973 Residential development on part of Crystal Palace Park designated as a SSSI is part of the wider scheme to improve the park as a whole Lambeth 10/03180/R G3 0.025 Creation of a new playground within Streatham Common. Considered to be ancillary to primary use as a park so no net loss. Islington P092717 0.024 Residential development will include a small area of rough grassland of Borough Grade 1 Importance not currently accessible to the public. Sutton C2011/6388 4 0.008 Provision of a riding school on a site of Borough Grade 1 Importance will require a small permanent structure to be built. Barnet H/03451/10 0.280 Provision of a children's play area on land of Borough Grade 2 importance is considered to be ancillary to primary use as a park so no net loss. 3.79 Table 3.24 records all permissions granted in 2010/11 which include areas with any of these conservation designations. Open space designations such as Green Belt, MOL and Local Open Spaces are addressed in KPI 3. 3.80 There have been ten approvals of planning permissions on protected sites of importance for nature conservation during 2010/11 resulting in a total net loss of approximately 1.3 hectares. This is considerably lower than the 9.5 hectares recorded in 2009/10. The only major loss is to permit a residential scheme in Crystal Palace Park which will help to finance the regeneration of the park and its facilities. net loss of conservation sites (ha) 0.973 0 0.024 0.008 0 borough permission reference protected area affected by dev (ha) comment Enfield TP/09/1706 0.03 Construction of two houses on a former garage site will include a small area on the edge of a green corridor of Borough Grade 2 Importance within the site. Barnet H/04617/08 2.97 This change of use of agricultural land of Local Importance to a cemetery is not considered to affect its conservation status. Kingston upon Thames 10/10154/F UL 0.035 The redevelopment of Ellingham Primary School will result in a small loss of the area of the playing fields of Local Importance Newham 10/00557 0.28 Construction of a "youth hub" and sports building in Plashett Park will see a net loss of open area of Local Importance 4.625 Total Area (Gross hectares): Source: London Development Database net loss of conservation sites (ha) 0.03 0 0.035 0.235 1.305 recycling rate for local authority collected waste has increased steadily over the previous ten years, reaching 28 per cent in 2010/11. The amount of local authority collected waste sent to landfill has been steadily declining, accounting for 4 per cent less of the total waste disposed of by London's local authorities in 2009/10. 3.82 Household waste accounts for the greatest proportion of local authority collected waste. Table 3.25 indicates that London's household recycling rate has also increased to now 33% in 2010/11, although London has a lower household recycling rate than any other region in England. ## Key Performance Indicator 19 Increase In Municipal Waste Recycled Or Composted And Elimination Of Waste To Landfill By 2031 Target: At Least 45 Per Cent Of Waste Recycled/Composted By 2015 And 0 Per Cent Of Biodegradable Or Recyclable Waste To Landfill By 2031 3.81 Table 3.25 Shows That The Total Amount Of Local Authority Collected Waste Has Continued To Decline, Decreasing By 2 Per Cent Since 2009/10. It Also Shows That London'S (Thousands Of Tonnes) treatment method 2000/ 01 2001/ 02 2002/ 03 2003/ 04 2004/ 05 2005/ 06 2006/ 07 2007/ 08 2008/ 09 2009/ 10 2010/ 11 landfill 3,207 3,244 3,163 3,021 2,856 2,692 2,404 2,209 1,946 1,882 1,696 percentage 72 73 71 70 65 64 57 53 49 49 45 energy from waste 886 842 872 826 869 767 929 919 912 803 896 percentage 20 19 20 19 20 18 22 22 23 21 24 recycling/ composting 344 351 410 494 643 763 844 925 994 1,060 1,081 percentage 8 8 9 11 15 18 20 22 25 27 28 other1 0 0 0 0 0 0 59 101 123 117 130 percentage 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 3 3 total2 4,438 4,438 4,446 4,342 4,370 4,223 4,235 4,154 3,975 3,862 3,802 Source: Defra Waste Statistics, 2011, www.defra.gov.uk/evidence/statistics/environment/wastats 1'Other' includes material which is sent for Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT), mixed municipal waste sent for Anaerobic Digestion (AD) and that disposed through other treatment processes 2'Total' may exceed the sum of rows above; this is accounted for by incineration without energy from waste, which does not exceed 500 tonnes of London's local authority collected waste since 2005/06 ## Key Performance Indicator 20 Reduce Carbon Dioxide Emissions Through New Development Target: Annual Average Percentage Carbon Dioxide Emissions Savings For Strategic Developments Proposals Table 3.26 London Plan policy 5.2 carbon dioxide emissions reduction targets for residential buildings Year improvement on 2010 Building Regulations 2010-2013 25 per cent 2013-2016 40 per cent 2016-2031 zero carbon Table 3.27 London Plan policy 5.2 carbon dioxide emissions reduction targets for non-domestic buildings Year improvement on 2010 Building Regulations 2010-2013 25 per cent 2013-2016 40 per cent 2016-2019 as per Building Regulations 2019-2031 zero carbon 3.84 An analysis of the energy assessment evaluations relating to Stage II planning applications determined by the Mayor between 1 January and 31 December 2010 was undertaken by the GLA in 2011 to establish the projected carbon dioxide savings secured from these schemes11. The assessment was made against the 2006 Building Regulations and showed an approximate 50 per cent reduction in regulated12 carbon dioxide 11 See Energy Planning. Monitoring the Impact 2011 - http://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/Mo nitoring%20the%20impact%20of%20the%20L ondon%20Plan%20Policies%20in%202010.pd f 12 The carbon dioxide emissions controlled by Building Regulations such as emissions generated from hot water, space heating, cooling and fans progressing towards zero carbon in residential development by 2016 and zero carbon in all development by 2019. 3.83 Policy 5.2 of the London Plan published in July 2011 sets out a stepped approach to reaching the zero carbon targets - see Tables 3.26 and 3.27. emissions beyond the minimum requirements of 2006 building regulations. However, this Indicator reflects the revised Building Regulations which came into force on 6th April 2010. The 2010 regulations require a 25 per cent reduction in carbon dioxide emissions relative to the 2006 regulations. Therefore the total regulated carbon dioxide savings in 2010 over and above a baseline of a 2010 Building Regulations compliant development are approximately 33 per cent. 3.85 Combined Heat and Power (CHP) produces the biggest carbon dioxide savings of each of the elements of the energy hierarchy13. It accounted for 50 per cent of all the projected carbon dioxide savings secured in 2010. Well over a third of the projected savings were due to energy efficiency. Renewables accounted for 10 per cent of the overall savings14. 3.86 The carbon dioxide savings from developments where CHP is unsuitable are substantially less than those with CHP. As such, developments unable to obtain energy from CHP are more likely to exceed the carbon dioxide reduction targets in the London Plan. KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR 21 Increase in energy generated from renewable sources. Target: Production of 855015 GWh of energy from renewable sources by 2026 (target has been developed in accordance with a Regional Renewable Energy Assessment) 3.87 This renewable energy generation figure has been developed using data in the Decentralised Energy Capacity Study Phase 2: Deployment Potential16. The renewable energy generation figure includes potential energy production from photovoltaics, solar water heating, ground source heat pumps, air source heat pumps and wind, hydro, biomass and energy from waste technologies. The study includes five scenarios that consider a variety of assumptions in relation to energy policy, delivery and prices. Scenario 5 - Coordinated action was used to develop the renewable energy generation figure for this Indicator. The study covers the period up to 2031, with five-year intervals and therefore the figure for 2025 was selected. landfill biomass gas Capacity (MW) 3.0 20.8 0.1 0 5.6 0 56.6 Commercial renewable energy installations London Plan policies 50.3 0 3.0 3.5 2.6 14.7 74.1 0 0 1.7 0 0.008 0 1.7 Schemes registered Under the Feed-in Tariff 0 0 0.1 0.08 0 0.1 0.3 Low Carbon Buildings Programme 0 0 1.0 0 0 0 1.0 Major PV Demonstration Programme 37.8 0 0 0 0 0 37.8 SELCHP and Edmonton EfW (biomass element) Total (MW) 91.1 20.8 5.9 3.6 8.2 14.8 173 Total (GWh) 638 173 4.3 2.3 14.4 17.9 858 Source: Decentralised energy capacity study Phase 1: Technical assessment (pg11)17 solar heat water photo voltaics heating wind pumps total KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR 22 Increase in Urban Greening Target: Increase total area of green roofs in the CAZ 3.89 Green roofs have been identified as a suitable indicator for urban greening. Green roof information is currently not routinely captured through the London Development Database or any other means but data on installations collected from manufacturers are available. They show that the total area of green roofs in London is increasing. Whilst no current data are available, between 2004 and 2008 approximately 50,000m2 of green roofs were added per year across Greater London, with around 10,000m2 per year in the CAZ alone. We will continue to work with manufacturers to obtain data on installations. 3.90 Work is underway to identify robust arrangements for monitoring delivery against this KPI. It may be possible for the London Development Database to monitor green roofs more accurately. However, this depends on the London boroughs agreeing to the provision of relevant data as part of the current information scheme review. Further details will be given in next year's AMR.  Pre and post fixed point photography. 3.93 The time of restoration of a habitat is defined as the point at which the necessary construction works have been carried out on the ground to the extent that the habitat is likely to develop without further construction work. For schemes that are phased over several years, an estimate of the length gained is made for each year ensuring that there is no double counting. In order to verify that habitats have been created and conditions secured, scheme details need to be submitted to the Rivers & Streams HAP Steering Group. Once the outputs have been verified then the scheme can be reported and placed on Biodiversity Action Reporting system. 3.94 The following Table 3.29 shows consistent restoration of 1.5 km p/a and above each year since 2007. 2011 represents the second largest restoration figure recorded. With over 6.8 km p/a since the 2008 base year this represents satisfactory progress towards meeting the 2015 target of 15 km, and this is without for example the restoration of the Lee as part of the Olympic Park. 3.95 There is greater uncertainty associated with the additional 10 km target. However, the All London Green Grid and River Basin Management Plan should facilitate further achievements. KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR 23 Improve London's Blue Ribbon Network Target: Restore 15km of rivers and streams* 2009 - 2015 and an additional 10km by 2020 (*defined as main river by the Environment Agency - includes larger streams and rivers but can also include smaller watercourses of local significance) 3.91 Restoration is defined as a measure that results in a significant increase in diversity of hydromorphological features and or improved floodplain connectivity and the restoration of river function through essential physical or biological processes, including flooding, sediment transport and the facilitation of species movement. 3.92 The Rivers and Streams Habitat Action Plan Steering Group, coordinating the implementation of this aspect of London's Biodiversity Action Plan and managed by the Environment Agency, recommends that projects have post project appraisals. For the steering group to enable a project to be assessed as restoration, the following assessments can be made.  River Habitat Survey (undertaking pre and post project surveys are good practice).  Urban River Survey (undertaking pre and post project surveys are good practice). | Year | restoration (metres) | cumulative restoration (metres) | |---------|-------------------------|-----------------------------------| | 2000 | 680 | 680 | | 2001 | 150 | 830 | | 2002 | 600 | 1430 | | 2003 | 2300 | 3730 | | 2004 | 500 | 4230 | | 2005 | 0 | 4320 | | 2006 | 100 | 4330 | | 2007 | 5100 | 9430 | | 2008 | 2000 | 11430 | | 2009 | 1500 | 12930 | | 2010 | 1808 | 14738 | | 2011 | 3519 | 18257 | Source: Rivers and Streams Habitat Action Plan Steering Group 3.96 It should be noted that the London Biodiversity Action Plan includes, alongside this KPI, a target for restoration targets for maintenance and enhancement18 - reflected in London Plan policy 7.19 (Table 7.3). KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR 24 Protecting and improving London's heritage and public realm Target: Reduction in the proportion of designated heritage assets at risk as a percentage of the total number of designated heritage assets in London 3.97 In last year's AMR the target concentrated on trend data for listed buildings only. The target has now been expanded to include all designated heritage assets, including World Heritage Sites, conservation areas, scheduled monuments, registered parks and gardens and registered battlefields. 3.98 Table 3.30 shows the number and condition of all designated heritage assets. All categories have remained stable except listed buildings and conservation areas which have increased by 127 listed buildings and 12 conservation areas respectively. The only category of designated assets that has reduced in number is scheduled monuments, which has decreased by 1 monument. This is Table 3.30 Number and condition of designated heritage assets 2010 2011 number % at risk number % at risk World Heritage Sites 4 0 4 0 Listed Buildings 18,618 2.65% 18,745 2.53% Conservation Areas 988 8.1% 1000 6.4% Schedule Monuments 155 25.8% 154 22.7% Registered Parks and Gardens 149 5.4% 149 5.4% Registered Battlefield 1 0 1 0 Source: English Heritage 3.101 Please note that LB Greenwich did not take part in the Conservation Area survey. For detail on individual designated assets, please visit http://www.englishdue to the de-scheduling of Harmondsworth Barn as a scheduled monument and its designation as a listed building. 3.99 In terms of designated assets at risk, between 2011 and 2010 the situation has either remained the same or there has been an improvement. For listed buildings, there were 475 at risk in 2011, 19 less than the previous year, representing a reduction of 2.53%. For scheduled monuments, whilst the total number has reduced by 1, there has been a reduction of at risk assets from 25.8% to 22.7%, representing 35 monuments that are now not at risk. For conservation areas, the proportion of areas at risk reduced from 8.1% to 6.4%. However, it should be noted that the London Borough of Greenwich did not take part in English Heritage's Conservation Area Survey, therefore the 6.4% is only representative of 941 conservation areas. 3.100 World Heritage Sites, registered parks and gardens and the one registered battlefield (at Barnet) have all stayed the same in terms of both their number and their condition. heritage.org.uk/caring/heritage-at- risk/. English Heritage also provide a summary document with the number and condition of all designated assets.. ## Additional Performance Measures And Statistics Chapter Four Additional Performance Measures And Statistics The Inclusion Of Additional Relevant Performance Measures And Statistics Helps To Paint A Broader Picture Of London'S Performance PLANNING Progress with SPGs, Opportunity Areas, Areas of Intensification, the Olympics and its Legacy Progress with SPGs 4.1 The Mayor produces Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) documents to provide further detail on particular policies in the London Plan. The Mayor is in the process of revising, updating and reformatting the SPGs produced to underpin the 2008 London Plan. The following SPGs are available in draft on the following website http://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/pl anning/vision/supplementaryplanning-guidance.  Draft Shaping Neighbourhoods: Children and Young People's Play and Informal Recreation (February 2012)  Draft Tree and Woodland Strategies (January 2012)  Draft Housing (December 2011)  Draft Affordable Housing note (November 2011)  Draft All London Green Grid (November 2011)  Draft London's Foundations (November 2011)  Draft London World Heritage Sites - Guidance on Settings (October 2011)  Draft Safeguarded Wharves Review 2011/2012 (October 2011)  Draft Olympic Legacy (September 2011)  Draft London View Management Framework (July 2011) 4.2 The programme of further work on new/updated SPGs is included in Annex 1 of the Implementation Plan http://www.london.gov.uk/publication /implementation-plan. Progress with Opportunity Areas and Areas of Intensification 4.3 In the last year, the GLA has been working on a number of Opportunity Area Planning Frameworks (OAPF). The final Park Royal OAPF was published in January. The following were published for public consultation - Earl's Court and West Kensington (March and November); White City (April); Harrow & Wealdstone (May); Olympic Legacy SPG (September); Upper Lee Valley (November) and London Riverside (December). Work also progressed on the Vauxhall/Nine Elms/ Battersea and Croydon OAPFs. Table 4.1 provides a comprehensive overview. ## Table 4.1 Progress With Opportunity Areas And Areas Of Intensification | Name | Progress | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------| | North London | | | King's Cross | Northern ticket hall open at King's Cross St. Pancras Underground. | | Work on the Boulevard and Goods Way has completed connecting | | | the University of the Arts Central Saint Martins campus directly to the | | | King's Cross transport hub. Western concourse scheduled for | | | completion, Spring 2012 | | | Paddington | Span 4 of Paddington Station refurbishment ongoing. Works to | | implement Crossrail have begun. 33,000 sqm B1 business space | | | completed. | | | Euston | Euston Area Planning Framework adopted by borough April 2009. | | Initial discussions with LB Camden regarding potential work on | | | OAPF relating in particular to HS2. | | | Tottenham Court | | | Road | | | Urban Design Framework has been produced. Opportunity Area | | | Planning Framework not being pursued. | | | Victoria | Ongoing residential and commercial development. | | Upper Lee Valley | | | including Tottenham | | | Hale | | | Opportunity Area Planning Framework currently being produced in | | | house by the GLA working closely with the Boroughs of Enfield, | | | Hackney, Haringey and Waltham Forest and the Lea Valley Park | | | Authority. Public consultation took place in 2011. Anticipated | | | completion, 2012 | | | Cricklewood/Brent | | | Cross | | | Outline Planning Consent was issued by the Local Planning Authority | | | on 28 October 2010. | | | Colindale | Borough Area Action Plan (AAP) for Colindale was adopted in March | | 2010. Outline consent granted for hospital site. Beaufort Park later | | | phases under construction. | | | | No longer an Opportunity Area | | Mill Hill East | Borough Area Action Plan (AAP) adopted. | | Ongoing development | Haringey | | Heartlands/Wood | | | Green | | | West Hampstead | | | interchange | | | No planning Framework in place. Planning application submitted for | | | residential and commercial development | | | Holborn | See Tottenham Court Road | | Farringdon/Smithfield | Crossrail station construction work in progress with connection to | | Thameslink. | | | North East London | | | | | | Isle of Dogs | Ongoing residential and commercial development | | City Fringe | Opportunity Area Planning Framework to be discussed in 2012 with | | partner boroughs. Ongoing residential and commercial development. | | | Lower Lea Valley, inc | | | Stratford | | | Olympic Legacy Supplementary Planning Guidance being produced | | | in house by the GLA working closely with the four host boroughs. | | | Public consultation took place in 2011. Final publication, 2012 | | ## Table 4.1 Progress With Opportunity Areas And Areas Of Intensification | Name | Progress | |----------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------| | Royal Docks | Royal Docks Vision produced by the GLA and Newham Council in | | 2011. | | | London Riverside | Opportunity Area Planning Framework y being produced jointly by | | the GLA and the London Thames Gateway Development | | | Corporation in partnership with the LDA, TfL and the Boroughs of | | | Newham, Barking & Dagenham and Havering. Public consultation | | | took place during 2011/2012. Final publication, 2012 | | | Ilford | Action Area Plan produced in 2006. Ongoing residential and | | commercial development. | | | South East London | | | | | | London Bridge | Ongoing residential and commercial development. Initial discussions | | re neighbourhood plan. | | | Elephant and Castle | Supplementary Planning Document/Opportunity Area Planning | | Framework consulted on during early 2012. | | | Design for London has produced a design framework. . | Deptford Creek/ | | Greenwich Riverside | | | Lewisham- Catford - | | | New Cross | | | LB Lewisham using the North Lewisham Framework as the basis for | | | the AAP. | | | Planning permission granted 2003. Implementation now underway. . | Greenwich Peninsula | | & Charlton Riverside | | | West | | | Woolwich, | | | Thamesmead & | | | Charlton Riverside | | | East | | | Docklands Light Railway extension opened at Woolwich Arsenal in | | | 2009. Up to 1,000 new homes have been developed at the Royal | | | Arsenal. A further 2,000 homes have been built in Gallions Reach | | | Urban Village in Thamesmead. | | | Bexley Riverside | A Framework Plan and Regeneration Strategy has been developed | | for Erith Town Centre and Belvedere and a development brief has | | | been prepared for the Erith Western Gateway sites. | | | Canada Water/Surrey | | | Quays | | | Area Action Plan prepared. Ongoing residential and commercial | | | development | | | Kidbrooke | Greenwich Council approved detailed proposals for Phase 1 of the | | regeneration on the site east of Sutcliffe Park including 449 houses | | | and apartments. Building started in September 2009. Legal | | | agreement signed for mixed use redevelopment proposals. | | | South West London | | | | | | Waterloo | Opportunity Area Planning Framework completed in 2007. Ongoing | | residential and commercial development. Initial discussions re | | | redevelopment of Elizabeth House and Shell Centre | | | Opportunity Area Planning Framework, final publication 2012. | | | Commencement of Tideway Wharf development. | | | Vauxhall/Nine Elms/ | | | Battersea | | | Croydon | Opportunity Area Planning Framework (OAPF) to be consulted on in | | 2012. | | | Initial discussions with Merton Council re production of framework. | South Wimbledon/ | | Colliers Wood | | ## Table 4.1 Progress With Opportunity Areas And Areas Of Intensification | Name | Progress | |------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------| | West London | | | | | | Opportunity Area Planning Framework being considered with | | | potential initiation in 2012, working with local authorities and other | | | stakeholders including BAA and landowners. | | | Heathrow (including | | | Hayes, West Drayton, | | | Southall, Feltham, | | | Bedfont Lakes and | | | Hounslow) | | | Opportunity Area Planning Framework published in 2011. | Park Royal/Willesden | | Junction | | | Wembley | Draft Wembley Area Action Plan consulted on during 2011. Ongoing | | residential and commercial development. | | | White City | Draft Opportunity Area Planning Framework consulted on during | | 2011. 2 | | | nd | | | consultation during 2012. | | Source GLA Planning Decisions Unit Progress with the Olympics and its Legacy 4.4 The development of the Olympic Park and venues continues apace (see the Olympic Delivery Authority website for more details: http://www.london2012.com/makingit-happen). The main venues are being prepared for the Games this summer and the Olympic Park Legacy Company (OPLC) has submitted its planning proposals for the Olympic Park (see link for more detail: http://www.legacycompany.co.uk/leg acy-communities-scheme ). Work is also well advanced to secure operators for the retained venues. Work has also started on the Mayor's Olympic Legacy Supplementary Planning Guidance (for September 2011 draft see www.london.gov.uk/publication/olym pic-legacy-supplementary-planningguidance - see also London Plan policy 2.4), and the Mayor of London is progressing his proposals to reform the OPLC into a Mayoral Development Corporation, as defined in the Government's Localism Act. This will drive forward regeneration and development in the area - for more details: www.london.gov.uk/mdcconsultation 4.5 The Mayor is also working in partnership with government and the boroughs to maximise the wider socio-economic benefits across London from the transport investment associated with the Games, and to capture the volunteering, employment, skills and business development legacies. He remains committed to the range of work being undertaken with the six east London Host Boroughs to achieve 'convergence' between those boroughs and the rest of London identified as a particular priority by Policy 2.4 in the London Plan. Responses to major applications and development plan consultation Strategic planning applications referred to the Mayor 4.6 The Town and Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 came into force on 6 April 2008 and requires local planning authorities to refer strategic planning applications to the Mayor (the Order defines what is strategic). The Order requires the Mayor to provide a statement of whether he considers the application to conform to the London Plan and the reasons for this conclusion within six weeks of receipt of the referral. The Mayor has the power to direct a borough to refuse planning permission but he does not have the power to direct a borough to grant planning permission. On certain applications, which meet criteria set out in the Order, he can however direct a borough that he will become the local planning authority and determine the application himself. 4.7 The Order applies to applications submitted on or after the 6 April 2008. The Town and Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2000 still applies to those applications submitted before the 6 April 2008. 4.8 In spite of the continuing uncertainty brought on from the economic crisis, 2011 has seen an encouraging increase in the number of applications referred to the Mayor (see Table 4.2). The increase from 258 in 2010, to 300 in 2011 represents a rise of 16%. This represents a minor increase of 2.25% in referable applications in 2011 when compared to the average number of referrals across the previous 4 years. However, this increase in activity is not uniform across London, with the Inner London boroughs displaying a 7.5% increase in referable cases (in spite of such boroughs as Hammersmith and Fulham showing a 52% increase in activity to the 4 year average) whilst the Outer London boroughs show a significant increase in referable cases of 20%. The City of London has seen another dramatic increase from 5 referable cases in 2010 to 12 in 2011; however it still remains well below the high of 20 in 2007. 4.9 This year also saw the Mayor use his "call-in" powers in a further three planning applications. The Mayor granted permission for the Saatchi Block application in Fitzrovia following Camden's decision to refuse the application and he granted permission for the SITA Recycling Park in Mitcham following Merton's decision to refuse the application. The Mayor also issued a notice to the London Borough of Southwark stating that he would act as the local planning authority for the purposes of determining the Eileen House application on Newington Causeway, Elephant and Castle. 4.10 Section 42 (c) of the 2008 Planning Act places a requirement on applicants of schemes that will be submitted to the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) to consult with the Greater London Authority (GLA) and Section 49 of the Act requires the applicant to have regard to any response made by the Mayor. In accordance with Section 56 (2) (c) of the Act, once an application has been submitted to and accepted by the IPC the applicant must consult the GLA again, where the Mayor can then make representations to the IPC. The IPC is also required to invite the GLA to submit a local impact report under Section 60 (2) (b) of the Act. 4.11 The Localism Act seeks to abolish the IPC and transfer its functions to a new body to be known as the Major Infrastructure Planning Unit, which will report to the Secretary of State, who will make the final decisions on applications. This is to take effect from April 2012, however, it is understood that the role of the GLA in the process will remain unchanged. 4.12 This year saw the Mayor receive a total of three consultation referrals under the above Act for the Thames Tunnel Phase Two consultation, the North London Reinforcement Project and for the Offshore Wind Farm Extension at Kentish Flats 2000- Borough 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 City of London 72 16 20 5 1 5 12 131 Barking & Dagenham 36 4 11 8 6 6 10 81 Barnet 19 1 8 10 12 6 14 70 Bexley 21 6 8 6 4 9 2 56 Brent 31 3 3 8 9 9 7 70 Bromley 54 6 3 5 5 6 4 83 Camden 15 6 7 3 6 7 7 51 Croydon 49 6 13 9 8 7 8 100 Ealing 51 2 8 7 6 7 8 89 Enfield 32 3 4 1 5 7 7 59 Greenwich 52 12 28 13 5 11 17 138 Hackney 38 10 7 7 13 7 9 91 Hammersmith & Fulham 39 7 8 9 5 7 11 86 Haringey 13 3 4 3 2 3 4 32 Harrow 12 4 5 10 6 5 13 55 Havering 38 7 2 5 13 3 13 81 Hillingdon 72 12 15 23 15 9 10 156 Hounslow 35 7 7 11 7 10 14 91 Islington 21 5 13 5 9 9 6 68 Kensington & Chelsea 10 2 6 10 1 2 2 33 Kingston upon Thames 19 0 4 5 2 1 1 32 Lambeth 44 13 7 13 4 13 7 101 Lewisham 26 4 9 7 3 7 8 64 Merton 32 3 3 13 3 6 1 61 Newham 74 19 28 20 16 30 20 207 Redbridge 10 4 1 1 4 0 9 29 Richmond upon Thames 24 3 4 6 1 1 4 43 Southwark 82 21 13 20 15 12 13 176 Sutton 11 3 7 7 4 5 2 39 Tower Hamlets 129 36 41 47 30 23 33 339 Waltham Forest 15 4 0 3 0 1 6 29 Wandsworth 34 14 11 8 9 6 3 85 Westminster 59 15 33 26 11 18 15 177 Totals 1,269 261 341 334 240 258 300 3,003 Source GLA Planning Decisions Unit total 2000- 2010 Responses to Development Plan consultations 4.13 Following the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 all local authorities are required to produce a local development framework. The local development framework is a portfolio of local development documents, comprising development plan documents and supplementary planning documents. 4.14 Borough local development schemes (LDS) are the local planning authority's work plan for the production of local development documents (LDD) that will collectively form the Local Development Framework for each of the boroughs. Every London borough produced an original LDS by April 2005. These have been revised at different periods since. 4.15 In June 2008 a new power for the Mayor over borough LDSs was introduced. The GLA Act 2007 amended the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act so that the Mayor may direct that amendments be made to the LDS if it is necessary to ensure that key policies of the London Plan are reflected in the LDD work programme. The Mayor may also direct a local planning authority to prepare a revision to their LDS. In 2011, the Mayor approved 10 LDSs and did not direct amendments to any of them. The Mayor's powers over borough LDSs have been abolished by the Localism Act 2011. 4.16 All London borough LDDs are required to be in general conformity with the London Plan in accordance with Section 24(1) (b) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. Boroughs are required to consult the Mayor at each statutory stage in the process of preparation of development plan documents. They are also required to request the Mayor's opinion on general conformity at the same time as the document is submitted to the Secretary of State for examination. 4.17 Boroughs are also required to consult the Mayor on supplementary planning documents (SPD) to the extent that the council thinks he is affected by the document. The Mayor has indicated to boroughs the types of documents he wishes to be consulted on (affordable housing, transport, planning obligations, sustainable development, environmental protection and climate change, waste and planning briefs for sites which could result in referable applications). During 2011 the Mayor responded to sixteen SPD consultations. 4.18 In order to achieve general conformity of LDDs the Mayor has worked proactively with the boroughs, commenting on and holding meetings to discuss informal drafts of documents and meetings to discuss the Mayor's response to consultation. Table 4.3 summarises all the development plan related consultations that the Mayor has responded to in 2011. 4.19 In 2011 the Mayor responded to 58 consultations on development plan documents (DPDs). GLA officers have also responded to informal drafts of documents in a number of instances. The Mayor gave an opinion of general conformity on 37 DPDs at the pre-submission or submission stages. Most of these DPDs were originally found not to be in general conformity with the London Plan. However ongoing negotiations before and during examinations in public (EIPs) resulted in a number of changes to bring the documents into general conformity with the London Plan. Officers attended six Core Strategy EIPs: Haringey, Barnet, Hammersmith and Fulham, Harrow, Bexley and Newham. They also attended two Waste Plan's EIPs for East London and South London. during 2011 | Area | DPDs | |------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------| | Barking Station Master Plan SPD | Barking & | | Dagenham | | | Barnet | Core Strategy, Pre-submission | | Development Management Policies DPD | | | Local Development Scheme | | | Bexley | Erith Western Gateway SPD | | Site Specific Allocations Document post submission changes | | | Brent | Wembley Area Action Plan, Issues and Options | | Bromley | Core Strategy Issues Development Plan Document | | Camden | Site Allocations DPD | | Design, Housing and Sustainability SPD | | | Camden Local Development Scheme | | | City of | | | London | | | Local Development Scheme | | | City of London Protected Views SPD | | | Croydon | Croydon Core Strategy, pre-submission | | Planning Obligations SPD | | | Ealing | Ealing Core Strategy Pre Examination amendments | | Enfield | Draft Section 106 SPD | | Enfield Local Development Scheme | | | Greenwich | Core Strategy Pre submission | | Hackney | Dalston Area Action Plan | | Hackney Central Area Action Plan | | | Manor House Area Action Plan | | | Hammersmith | | | & Fulham | | | Core Strategy Further representations | | | South Fulham Riverside SPD | | | Proposed Submission Development Management DPD | | | Haringey | Sustainable Design and Construction SPD | | Core Strategy Update | | | Haringey Core Strategy (post examination) | | | Harrow | Harrow and Wealdstone AAP | | Harrow Core Strategy pre-submission | | | Havering | Gypsy and Travellers' Sites DPD | | Hillingdon | Core Strategy Pre-Submission | | Core Strategy proposed pre-examination amendments | | | Hounslow | Local Development Scheme | | Core Strategy pre submission | | | Islington | Development Management Policies | | Bunhill and Clerkenwell AAP | | | Site Allocations DPD | | | Site Allocations DPD | | | Finsbury Local Plan | | during 2011 | Area | DPDs | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------| | | Kensington & | | Chelsea | | | Kingston | | | upon Thames | | | Core Strategy, Submission | | | Kingston Core Strategy, Further Consultation | | | Lambeth | | | Lewisham | Lewisham Town Centre AAP Further Options | | Merton | Merton Local Development Scheme | | Newham | Core Strategy Submission | | Local Development Scheme | | | Core Strategy, Post EiP minor amendments | | | Redbridge | Cross rail Corridor AAP (Submission stage ) | | Redbridge Crossrail Corridor AAP, EiP consultation | | | Core Strategy Review | | | Sustainable Design and Construction SPD | | | Richmond | Stag Brewery SPD | | Development Management Plan Document - Proposed Post-Submission | | | changes | | | Twickenham AAP Options Stage | | | Local Development Scheme | | | Southwark | Canada Water Post Submission Changes | | Local Development Scheme | | | Sutton | Site Development Policies | | Site Development Policies DPD (additional Sutton town centre and update | | | climate change policies and proposals). | | | Tower | | | Hamlets | | | Site and Placemaking DPD | | | Fish Island AAP Engagement Document | | | Development Management Plan DPD | | | Bromley-by-Bow Masterplan | | | Waltham | | | Forest | | | Inclusive Design and Accessible Housing SPD | | | North Olympic Fringe AAP Preferred Options | | | Core Strategy proposed submission | | | Development Management Policies preferred options | | | Local Development Scheme | | | Core Strategy Post Publications Changes | | | Walthamstow Town Centre AAP | | | Blackhorse Lane AAP | | | Wandsworth | Site Specific Site Allocations DPD | | Site Specific Allocations Document post submission changes | | | Development Management Policies & Site Specific Allocations DPD | | | Wandsworth Draft Planning Obligations | | | Westminster | Draft Public Realm Credit SPD | | Draft Trees and Public Realm SPD | | | Development Management Plan DPD Options consultation | | | Area | DPDs | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------| | East London | East London Waste Authority Joint Waste DPD | | East London Joint Waste DPD - Consultation on post hearing changes | | | South London South London Waste DPD Submission | | | South London Waste Plan (post EIP Amendments) | | | West London West London Waste Plan | | | North London North London Waste Authority Borough Joint Waste DPD | | ## Source Gla Planning Decisions Unit Progress With Core Strategy Development Plan Documents 4.20 Table 4.4 Provides An Overview Of Progress With Core Strategies In The London Boroughs. Core Strategy stage Core Strategy Issues and Options yet to be published 0 Have published Core Strategy Issues and Options 1 Bromley Have published Core Strategy Preferred Options 1 Hounslow Core Strategy pre submission or Submission to Secretary of State no. of boroughs borough 10 Croydon Hillingdon Kingston upon Thames Haringey Harrow Bexley Ealing Greenwich Barnet Newham Core Strategy stage Core strategy adopted 21 Islington Waltham Forest Hammersmith & Fulham City of London Kensington & Chelsea Southwark Barking and Dagenham Wandsworth Tower Hamlets Camden Enfield Havering Redbridge Richmond Sutton Hackney Westminster Lewisham Lambeth Brent Merton 4.21 Please note that many boroughs are progressing other DPDs at the same time as their Core Strategy or have adopted DPDs or site-specific Area Action Plans in advance of it, for example Kingston Upon Thames's Kingston Town Centre Area Action Plan and Hounslow's Employment DPD. no. of boroughs borough London Planning Awards 4.22 The Mayor, London First, the Royal Town Planning Institute and London Councils jointly organise the privately-sponsored annual London Planning Awards to showcase and Table 4.5 London Planning Awards - winners and commended entries ## Entry Descriptions And Award Citations Taken From The Mayor'S And Sir Edward Lister'S Speeches At The London Planning Awards Ceremony, City Hall 16 January 2012 1: BEST BUILT PROJECT (sponsored by CBRE) WINNER for the unexpected, but totally successful juxtaposition of God and Mammon: **One New Change** submitted by Land Securities, with Jean Nouvel and Sidell Gibson This well designed mixed retail and office development immediately adjacent to St Paul's Cathedral achieves the almost impossible - the creative resolution of two apparently very different aims: delivering three floors of retail and five of office (including the biggest floor plates ever seen in the square mile), whilst respecting the constraints of its uniquely sensitive site. Not only has this highly sustainable complex successfully redefined Cheapside as a retail and dining destination, but the magnificent new views of St Paul's now afforded from its rooftop terraces have significantly expanded the public realm. COMMENDATION for the cool restraint of its sensitive design, and joyful remodelling of public spaces: Sammy Ofer Wing, National Maritime Museum submitted by Nathaniel Lichfield and Partners, with National Maritime Museum, CF Moller Architects, Purcell Miller Tritton, Churchman Landscape Architects and Malcolm Reading Consultants This brilliantly-designed sympathetic intervention to the south west façade of the World Heritage Designated National Maritime Museum creates a magnificent new visitor entrance through joyful water-themed public spaces, successfully reorienting the museum and uniting it with Greenwich Park. Almost as good is what you don't see - the servicing clutter cleared away, rationalised and improved, and the bulk of the new building cleverly located below ground. ## 2: Best Built Project - Community Scale (Sponsored By Land Securities) WINNER For the wholesale transformation it embodies: St Paul's Way Trust School submitted by Astudio, with Bouygues UK and the London Borough of Tower Hamlets This magnificent replacement school building now confidently faces the street - a complete turnaround from its predecessor. It is designed to an exceptionally high standard with dramatic interior spaces, using bold colours and simple materials, and includes a series of independently-accessed community spaces. Since completion last year, results have soared, the roll is full, and Professor Brian Cox has signed up as a school patron! celebrate good planning practice in the capital. The 2011/12 Awards Ceremony was held on 16 January 2012. Full details of the winning and commended entries are given in Table 4.5 below: ## Table 4.5 London Planning Awards - Winners And Commended Entries Entry Descriptions And Award Citations Taken From The Mayor'S And Sir Edward Lister'S Speeches At The London Planning Awards Ceremony, City Hall 16 January 2012 3: Best Conceptual Project (Sponsored By Berwin Leighton Paisner) WINNER For revealing long hidden delights, and the potential for far-reaching community benefit: **Walthamstow Wetlands** submitted by the London Borough of Waltham Forest Revealing one of the capital's best kept secrets - hidden for 150 years, though highlighted by Abercrombie - this multi-agency partnership project aims to open up 180 hectares of reservoirs in the Upper Lee Valley to form the capital's largest wetland nature reserve. Accessible from 13 boroughs within 45 minutes, it will bring opportunities for outdoor learning to London's most deprived communities. Provision for walking, cycling and bird watching will actively address health and wellbeing issues. ## 4: Best New Place To Live (Sponsored By Ardmore Group) WINNER For its compelling approach to elegance and sustainability in inner city living: **Highbury Gardens** submitted by First Base with Homes and Communities Agency This striking neoclassical development of 119 new homes on the Holloway Road provides 31 affordable key worker homes and 57 for intermediate rental. Designed around a substantial internal space with gardens and cycle parking, the scheme includes an impressive array of sustainability elements and is very well connected to public transport and local shops. COMMENDATION For its carefully crafted response to the challenges of later years: **Triscott House** submitted by KKM Architects, with the London Borough of Hillingdon, Homes and Communities Agency and Breyer Group Plc. Triscott House is an extra care scheme comprising 47 units located in Hayes which provides care and support for elderly people who wish to live with a measure of independence. Its design is carefully detailed, with sensitive use of interior colour to aid navigation, and features innovative 'winter garden' balconies. Its sustainability is exemplary, the scheme having achieved Level 5 of the Code for Sustainable Homes - the first extra care scheme to do so. ## 5: Best New Public Space (Sponsored By Hogan Lovells) WINNER For its playfulness and confident place-making: Margaret McMillan Park submitted by BDP, with the London Borough of Lewisham and The Landscape Group Following extensive and inclusive public consultation, this once neglected and underused inner city park - incorporating pedestrian commuter route between New Cross Station and Deptford High Street - has been extensively reworked with new landscaping and planting, reclaimed timber sculptures, and new lighting, seating and signage. By common consent, this transformation has revitalised the neighbourhood, to the extent that the park has now become a destination in its own right. ## Table 4.5 London Planning Awards - Winners And Commended Entries Entry descriptions and award citations taken from the Mayor's and Sir Edward Lister's speeches at the London Planning Awards Ceremony, City Hall 16 January 2012 ## 6: Best Built Project Five Years On (Sponsored By Gva) WINNER for its comprehensive approach to area regeneration, and for its 'Va Va Vroom': **Arsenal on the move** submitted by Savills Planning, with Arsenal Football Club, Anthony Green & Spencer and Populas Architects. Much, much more than the simple relocation of a football club - if there could ever be such a thing - this project has morphed into the comprehensive regeneration of an entire London district. It encompasses the new Emirates Stadium and its extensive public realm; a new recycling centre and railway bridges; the successful residential conversion of the old Highbury ground; the provision of a total of 2,500 new homes, over 2,500 new jobs, and large scale retail, leisure and commercial space - and all carried out with extensive community involvement and intensive partnership working. COMMENDATION For its restrained but colourful impact, and its significant contribution to the wider community: **The Home Office** submitted by Bouygues UK, with Ecovert (EFM), Infrared Capital Partners Ltd and Terry Farrell and Partners. Where the notorious Marsham Street towers once blighted the skyline, this enlightened low rise development, with its generous use of colour, integrated public art, and high quality public realm, has totally transformed the local environment. The mix of uses - office, affordable housing, retail and community - has contributed positively to the local area, as has the high degree of permeability, new public footpaths through the site having restored ancient accessible street patterns. All in all, the fabric of this landmark building has worn extremely well. It looks good today as it did when it was first built. ## 7: Best Historic Building Management (Sponsored By English Heritage) WINNER For its dramatic but sensitive refurbishment, and for restoring a national icon: **St Pancras Chambers** submitted by the London Borough of Camden, with English Heritage and RHWL. The majestic exterior and sumptuous interiors of the former Midland Grand Hotel - George Gilbert Scott's Gothic revival masterpiece - have been brought back to life in this exemplary restoration and re-use of a Grade 1 listed building. To allow for viable hotel use, this sensitive (but no holds barred) refurbishment includes enabling development of residential apartments in the uppermost floors and a sensitive new build addition to the rear. The impressive outcome, seamlessly integrated with the intercontinental railway terminus, is a triumph of creative partnership working by public and private stakeholders alike. ## Table 4.5 London Planning Awards - Winners And Commended Entries Entry descriptions and award citations taken from the Mayor's and Sir Edward Lister's speeches at the London Planning Awards Ceremony, City Hall 16 January 2012 ## 8: Mayor'S Award For Planning Excellence WINNER For a spectacular transformation which echoes the ghosts of the past but embodies the spirit of the future: **The Granary, Kings Cross** submitted by the London Borough of Camden, with Stanton Williams Architects, Argent and English Heritage. The astonishing transformation of the former granary and railway sheds located at the centre of the historic Kings Cross Eastern Goods Yard into a fully functioning arts university sees the part retention and restoration of historic buildings conjoined with dramatic new interventions to provide studio, workshop, teaching, library and administration space. The transition between the old and the new has been handled with great sensitivity, and the provision of a new public canalside square brings an enlightened focus to the wholesale regeneration of the surrounding area. ## 9: Lifetime Award For Planning Excellence In London WINNER On the occasion of his retirement from the GLA, that big fish in a reasonably-sized pond: Giles Dolphin, Assistant Director Planning He has dedicated his career to the successful development of our city and personifies the mixture of high principle and seizing the main chance that is such a feature of our planning system. and a fall of 4,882 in the number of long-term empty homes, total housing provision was 24,710.  New build accounted for 82% of net conventional supply in 2009/10, conversions 8% and changes of use 10%.  Over the last three years net conventional affordable housing supply amounted to 26,714 homes, split almost evenly between social rented and intermediate housing.  Across all tenures, gross conventional housing supply was dominated by one or two bedroom homes, with 20% having three bedrooms or more, a slight increase from 18% in 2009/10.  38% of social housing supply in 2010/11 comprised homes with three or more bedrooms, compared to 18% of market homes and only 5% of intermediate homes.  25% of net approvals and 31% of net starts in 2010/11 were for affordable housing.  As of 31 March 2011, the net housing pipeline consisted of 170,000 homes.  The average density of new housing completions in 2010/11 was 136 dwellings per hectare (dph), and the average density of approvals was 140 dph. Total housing provision 4.29 Total housing provision in the London Plan consists of three elements: conventional housing supply, non self-contained bedspaces, and long-term vacant homes returning to use. KPI 5 in the main body of the report shows housing provision at borough level (see also Maps HPM1 and HPM2). 4.30 Figure 4.1 below shows the separate elements of total housing provision for the last five years. While net conventional supply has fallen HOUSING AND DESIGN Housing Provision Annual Monitor 2010/11 Introduction 4.23 This report provides further detail on housing provision in London in addition to the tables in the main body of the Annual Monitoring Report. It is based largely on data provided by London boroughs to the London Development Database (LDD) maintained by the GLA. The LDD was established with government support and is widely regarded as the most authoritative source of information on housing provision in London. 4.24 The majority of this section deals with housing provision defined for the purpose of monitoring the London Plan: that is, net conventional supply from new build, conversions of existing residential buildings or changes of use. The Mayor's London Housing Strategy sets out a separate and distinctly defined target for affordable housing delivery, comprising the *gross* number of affordable homes delivered through conventional supply or acquisitions of existing properties. The final part of this section covers affordable housing delivery according to this latter definition. 4.25 Borough-level maps and tables can be found at the end of the section. 4.26 Key points  There were 17,977 net conventional housing completions in London in 2010/11.  Taking into account net supply of 1,851 non self-contained units significantly, this was partly offset in 2010/11 by a large fall in the number of homes empty for more than six months. 4.31 The figures for the decrease in longterm empty homes are taken from statistics published by the Department for Communities and Local Government, based on council tax returns from local authorities19. This data source replaces figures taken from local authority Housing Strategy Statistical Appendix (HSSA) returns, as DCLG are proposing to no longer collect data on empty homes when the HSSA is replaced by a revised housing form. HSSA data is however available for 2010/11 and in Table HPM1 is compared with council tax data20. The total decrease in long-term empty homes based on HSSA data is just 1,408, though this figure should be treated with caution as two boroughs did not provide the data21. Gypsy and traveller sites 4.32 Since 1st April 2009 the LDD has been recording the loss and gain of gypsy and traveller pitches. During 2010/11 one permission was granted (in LB Bromley) changing a site from agricultural use to the extension of an existing traveller site, with six additional pitches. Three other permissions were granted (one in Bromley and two in Havering) extending the use of particular parcels of land as traveller sites for temporary periods pending the Government's review of its guidance on Gypsy and Traveller pitches. Conventional supply 4.33 As stated above, conventional housing supply comprises the bulk of 21 Hounslow and Kensington and Chelsea - see http://is.gd/hssa2011 total housing provision in London. Net conventional housing supply in London since 2003/04 is shown in Table 4.6 below. Table 4.6 Net conventional housing supply in London, 2003/04 to 2010/11 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 26,649 25,420 25,091 27,232 28,218 29,439 24,467 17,977 Source: London Development Database 4.34 Net conventional supply takes account of dwellings lost or replaced. In 2010/11 there was a gross conventional supply of 21,611 homes, with 3,634 lost or replaced (see Table HPM2). Areas where large-scale estate redevelopment is taking place can show high gross but low net supply: for example, Islington had a gross supply of 767 homes but 255 homes were lost or replaced, for a net supply of 512. 4.35 The table also compares net conventional supply in each borough with the conventional component of targets from both the 2008 London Plan and the new 2011 London Plan. Net conventional supply in 2010/11 was 60% of the new 2011 London Plan target (as compared to 65% of the slightly lower 2008 target). 4.36 There are three types of conventional housing supply recorded in the LDD: new build (including extensions), conversions (changes to the number of units in properties already in residential use) and changes of use (for example, from industrial or commercial uses). Table HPM3 shows gross and net conventional supply by type for each borough. Across London, new build accounted for 82% of net conventional supply in 2009/10, conversions 8% and changes of use 10%. The mix varied widely between boroughs, however. Nearly all of the supply in the City of London came from changes of use, while conversions accounted for high proportions of supply in Kensington and Chelsea, (33%), Ealing (26%) and Islington (24%). 4.37 The average density of new housing completions in London was 136 dwellings per hectare in 2010/11 (Table HPM14), similar to the level of the previous year but higher than previous years. Average densities varied widely at borough level, from 44 dwellings per hectare in Hillingdon to 389 in Tower Hamlets. Affordable housing supply 4.38 Total net affordable housing supply in 2010/11 was 6,867, which was a fall in absolute terms from 2009/10 but a slightly higher proportion of total supply (38% compared to 37%). Table HPM5 shows total net conventional affordable supply by borough over the last three years, both in absolute terms and as a proportion of total supply. Over the three-year period, the highest proportions of affordable housing supply were found in Havering (52%) Brent, Hounslow and Hammersmith and Fulham (51% each), and the lowest in the City of London (1%) and Islington (18%)22 4.39 Table HPM4 breaks down net conventional affordable supply in the last three years into social rented 22 Islington records a negative share of affordable housing in 2010/11, indicating that fewer affordable were built than were demolished or replaced. The negative figure reflects the loss in 2010/11 of 154 units as part of a large, phased estate regeneration scheme the first phase of which was completed in 2007/08 so is not included in the three year figures. and intermediate supply. Over the three-year period net conventional affordable housing supply amounted to 26,714 homes, split almost evenly between social rented (51%) and intermediate (49%) housing. This split varied widely between boroughs, with social housing accounting for only 11% of affordable supply in Wandsworth but 94% in Kingston upon Thames and 85% in Islington. Map HPM3 shows affordable housing supply between 2008/09 and 2010/11 as a proportion of total net conventional supply in each borough. Size mix of new supply 4.40 Table 4.7 below shows the split of total gross conventional supply across London as a whole by tenure and number of bedrooms (the figures are presented in gross terms as the number of bedrooms is not always readily available for homes lost or replaced). The profile of new social housing supply is quite different from that of intermediate or market supply: 38% of social housing supply comprises homes with three or more bedrooms, compared to 18% of market homes and 5% of intermediate homes. Across all tenures 20% of new supply had three bedrooms or more. Table 4.7 Gross conventional housing supply by tenure and number of bedrooms 2010/11 | dwellings | 1 bed | 2 beds | 3 beds | 4+ beds | Total | |-----------------|----------|----------|----------|------------|---------| | Social | 1,199 | 1,673 | 1,203 | 522 | 4,597 | | Intermediate | 1,651 | 1,565 | 172 | 14 | 3,402 | | Market | 5,543 | 5,654 | 1,489 | 926 | 13,612 | | Total | 8,393 | 8,892 | 2,864 | 1,462 | 21,611 | | | | | | | | | as a % of total | 1 bed | 2 bed | 3 bed | 4+ bed | Total | | Social | 26% | 36% | 26% | 11% | 100% | | Intermediate | 49% | 46% | 5% | 0% | 100% | | Market | 41% | 42% | 11% | 7% | 100% | | Total | 39% | 41% | 13% | 7% | 100% | Source: London Development Database 4.41 Table HMP 6 shows the gross conventional supply of affordable housing (i.e. comprising both social rented and intermediate housing) by borough and number of bedrooms. The highest proportion of homes with three or more bedrooms was found in Kingston upon Thames and Haringey, but in both cases based on low overall totals. The three boroughs with the largest absolute supply of affordable homes with three bedrooms or more were Greenwich, Tower Hamlets and Lambeth. The pipeline of new homes 4.42 The 'pipeline' of anticipated future housing supply comprises homes which have been granted planning permission but not yet completed, and can be broken down into homes under construction and those for which construction has not yet started. It should be noted here that in the LDD a 'start' is strictly speaking the point at which a planning permission can no longer lapse, due to the borough acknowledging a legal start (such as demolition of existing homes), as opposed to the start of physical construction work on site. Thus, the data shows the capacity of schemes on which some work has started but should not be used to infer that work has begun on all the dwellings in those schemes. Table 4.8 Net conventional housing approvals in London, 2003/04 to 2010/11 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 43,516 55,466 52,994 57,832 80,213 47,245 43,824 46,545 Source: London Development Database 4.44 At London level 25% of net approvals in 2010/11 were for affordable housing, of which 15% were social rented and 10% intermediate. It should be noted that the tenure of approved units can change before completion (for example as the result of negotiations between developers and planning authorities), and some approvals may ultimately not be built out. 4.45 The average density of new housing approvals was 140 dwellings per hectare (Table HPM13), similar to the density of completions. In contrast to the completions trend, the average density in 2010/11 was slightly below that of 2009/10. As with completions, average density of approvals in 2010/11 varied widely by borough - from 52 in Harrow and Barking and Dagenham, to 398 in Newham and 457 in the City of London. 4.46 Table HPM9 shows net conventional housing 'starts' by tenure and Table HPM10 by type. 31% of net starts in 2009/10 were affordable housing, compared to 25% of approvals and 38% of completions. New build comprised 91% of both approvals and starts in 2010/11. 4.47 Finally, Table HPM11 and Map HMP4 show the planning pipeline as of 31 March 2011, comprising units approved but not started and those under construction. The net housing pipeline contained approximately 80,000 homes not started and 90,000 under construction, for a total pipeline of 170,000 homes. At borough level, the pipeline was largest in a handful of 'Thames Gateway' boroughs: Greenwich had the largest total (23,083), followed by Tower Hamlets, Barking and Dagenham and Newham. Just three boroughs (Greenwich, Tower Hamlets and Barking and Dagenham) accounted for one third of the London total. At the other end of the scale, three boroughs (the City of London, Kingston upon Thames and Sutton) accounted for a total pipeline of just 3,000 homes between them. Housing provision tables follow, starting on the next page (and including four maps). 4.43 The annual flow of planning approvals for new homes adds to the pipeline. Table 4.8 below shows the trend in net approvals at London level since 2000/01, while Table HPM7 breaks down 2010/11 net approvals by tenure and Table HPM8 by type. HSSA data Council Tax data 2010 2011 decrease 2010 2011 decrease Barking and Dagenham 822 816 6 557 468 89 Barnet 1,618 1,676 -58 1,525 1,390 135 Bexley 685 752 -67 670 779 -109 Brent 1,195 1,095 100 595 629 -34 Bromley 359 629 -270 922 840 82 Camden 562 639 -77 1,163 1,053 110 City of London 21 21 0 23 45 -22 Croydon 1,985 1,639 346 1,476 1,321 155 Ealing 1,346 1,184 162 938 656 282 Enfield 1,139 1,344 -205 1,015 1,057 -42 Greenwich 1,203 1,201 2 1,341 1,620 -279 Hackney 664 606 58 2,111 2,023 88 Hammersmith and Fulham 595 677 -82 871 757 114 Haringey 1,286 956 330 742 649 93 Harrow 498 489 9 251 210 41 Havering 696 718 -22 1,123 996 127 Hillingdon 575 1,191 -616 809 693 116 Hounslow 468 468 0 508 19 489 Islington 313 497 -184 1,077 944 133 Kensington and Chelsea 1,182 1,182 0 1,104 1,107 -3 Kingston upon Thames 151 643 -492 1,125 797 328 Lambeth 1,803 1,450 353 2,226 1,676 550 Lewisham 369 663 -294 942 940 2 Merton 692 1,003 -311 527 538 -11 Newham 738 334 404 1,445 1,252 193 Redbridge 951 961 -10 813 693 120 Richmond upon Thames 401 379 22 335 387 -52 Southwark 891 1,719 -828 1,628 1,157 471 Sutton 538 552 -14 1,006 817 189 Tower Hamlets 3,700 1,286 2,414 1,623 939 684 Waltham Forest 1,321 1,306 15 775 670 105 Wandsworth 724 190 534 657 549 108 Westminster 2,154 1,971 183 2,499 1,869 630 London 31,645 30,237 1,408 34,422 29,540 4,882 Source: London Development Database | | net supply as % of | |------------------------|-----------------------| | conventional target | | | existing | | | gross | | | replaced | | | borough name | conventional | | Barking and Dagenham | 361 | | Barnet | 761 | | Bexley | 202 | | Brent | 680 | | Bromley | 871 | | Camden | 705 | | City of London | 109 | | Croydon | 1,286 | | Ealing | 334 | | Enfield | 628 | | Greenwich | 1,306 | | Hackney | 512 | | Hammersmith and Fulham | 508 | | Haringey | 375 | | Harrow | 577 | | Havering | 79 | | Hillingdon | 345 | | Hounslow | 866 | | Islington | 767 | | Kensington and Chelsea | 240 | | Kingston upon Thames | 178 | | Lambeth | 1,442 | | Lewisham | 824 | | Merton | 422 | | Newham | 870 | | Redbridge | 372 | | Richmond upon Thames | 401 | | Southwark | 1,596 | | Sutton | 367 | | Tower Hamlets | 1,416 | | Waltham Forest | 491 | | Wandsworth | 670 | | Westminster | 1,050 | | London | 21,611 | Source: London Development Database | | net | 2008 | 2011 | |--------|--------------|---------|---------| | homes | conventional | London | London | | supply | Plan | Plan | | | | | | | | new build | conversions | change of use | total | |------------------------|----------------|-------|----------------|-----|----------------|----------------|------------------|----------| | borough name | gross existing | net | gross existing | net | gross existing | net | gross existing | net | | Barking and Dagenham | | | | | | | | | | 326 | 5 | 321 | 26 | 12 | 14 | 9 | 5 | 4 | | Barnet | | | | | | | | | | 617 | 36 | 581 | 117 | 46 | 71 | 27 | 0 | 27 | | Bexley | | | | | | | | | | 165 | 20 | 145 | 27 | 11 | 16 | 10 | 3 | 7 | | Brent | | | | | | | | | | 578 | 241 | 337 | 62 | 43 | 19 | 40 | 3 | 37 | | Bromley | | | | | | | | | | 689 | 100 | 589 | 127 | 92 | 35 | 55 | 7 | 48 | | Camden | | | | | | | | | | 406 | 19 | 387 | 189 | 133 | 56 | 110 | 15 | 95 | | City of London | | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 4 | 5 | 100 | 7 | 93 | | Croydon | | | | | | | | | | 781 | 29 | 752 | 320 | 125 | 195 | 185 | 10 | 175 | | Ealing | | | | | | | | | | 164 | 7 | 157 | 125 | 56 | 69 | 45 | 7 | 38 | | Enfield | | | | | | | | | | 440 | 30 | 410 | 153 | 64 | 89 | 35 | 79 | -44 | | Greenwich | | | | | | | | | | 1,080 | 8 | 1,072 | 57 | 106 | -49 | 169 | 10 | 159 | | Hackney | | | | | | | | | | 296 | 35 | 261 | 144 | 72 | 72 | 72 | 14 | 58 | | Hammersmith & Fulham | | | | | | | | | | 354 | 4 | 350 | 95 | 47 | 48 | 59 | 0 | 59 | | Haringey | | | | | | | | | | 246 | 5 | 241 | 104 | 48 | 56 | 25 | 0 | 25 | | Harrow | | | | | | | | | | 466 | 95 | 371 | 93 | 37 | 56 | 18 | 5 | 13 | | Havering | | | | | | | | | | 64 | 4 | 60 | 14 | 3 | 11 | 1 | 3 | -2 | | Hillingdon | | | | | | | | | | 282 | 19 | 263 | 44 | 18 | 26 | 19 | 5 | 14 | | Hounslow | | | | | | | | | | 812 | 183 | 629 | 29 | 12 | 17 | 25 | 4 | 21 | | Islington | | | | | | | | | | 297 | 172 | 125 | 197 | 75 | 122 | 273 | 8 | 265 | | Kensington and Chelsea | | | | | | | | | | 69 | 25 | 44 | 91 | 35 | 56 | 80 | 12 | 68 | | Kingston upon Thames | | | | | | | | | | 148 | 30 | 118 | 21 | 12 | 9 | 9 | 0 | 9 | Lambeth 1,238 4 1,234 181 91 90 23 5 18 1,442 100 1,342 Lewisham 586 25 561 170 68 102 68 3 65 824 96 728 Merton 339 27 312 64 36 28 19 3 16 422 66 356 Newham 706 24 682 86 51 35 78 8 70 870 83 787 Redbridge 325 12 313 25 8 17 22 2 20 372 22 350 Richmond upon Thames 291 27 264 68 52 16 42 2 40 401 81 320 Southwark 1,423 4 1,419 93 39 54 80 109 -29 1,596 152 1,444 Sutton 302 26 276 44 13 31 21 1 20 367 40 327 Tower Hamlets 1,352 100 1,252 29 12 17 35 8 27 1,416 120 1,296 Waltham Forest 334 11 323 110 53 57 47 2 45 491 66 425 Wandsworth 355 10 345 213 176 37 102 3 99 670 189 481 Westminster 603 90 513 157 142 15 290 72 218 1,050 304 746 17,97 London 16,134 1,427 14,707 3,284 1,792 1,492 2,193 415 1,778 21,611 3,634 7 Source: London Development Database | | 2008/09 | 2009/10 | 2010/11 | 2008/09 to 2010/11 | |------------------------|------------|------------|------------|-----------------------| | social | inter- | social | | | | borough name | rented | mediate | total | rented | | Barking and Dagenham | 56 | 101 | 157 | -2 | | Barnet | 237 | 77 | 314 | 113 | | Bexley | 51 | 0 | 51 | 160 | | Brent | 292 | 297 | 589 | 241 | | Bromley | 125 | 52 | 177 | 121 | | Camden | 148 | 254 | 402 | 111 | | City of London | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | Croydon | 278 | 138 | 416 | 394 | | Ealing | 91 | 218 | 309 | 90 | | Enfield | 63 | 10 | 73 | 24 | | Greenwich | 52 | 187 | 239 | -15 | | Hackney | 423 | 492 | 915 | 334 | | Hammersmith & Fulham | 197 | 115 | 312 | 148 | | Haringey | 97 | 196 | 293 | 154 | | Harrow | 76 | 152 | 228 | 129 | | Havering | 109 | 192 | 301 | 34 | | Hillingdon | 133 | 44 | 177 | 127 | | Hounslow | 171 | 161 | 332 | 215 | | Islington | 275 | 55 | 330 | 410 | | Kensington and Chelsea | 68 | 28 | 96 | 18 | | Kingston upon Thames | 0 | 0 | 0 | 30 | | inter- | social | |----------|-----------| | inter- | inter- | | rented | | | mediate | | | total | rented | | mediate | | | total | | Lambeth 341 244 585 265 152 417 423 321 744 1,029 717 1,746 Lewisham 66 139 205 87 81 168 239 100 339 392 320 712 Merton 200 65 265 30 19 49 20 28 48 250 112 362 Newham 188 402 590 227 485 712 119 251 370 534 1,138 1,672 Redbridge 79 18 97 91 84 175 73 38 111 243 140 383 Richmond upon Thames 87 48 135 65 11 76 37 8 45 189 67 256 Southwark 159 140 299 416 284 700 169 418 587 744 842 1,586 Sutton 146 97 243 -35 20 -15 148 74 222 259 191 450 Tower Hamlets 738 963 1,701 421 286 707 168 124 292 1,327 1,373 2,700 Waltham Forest 263 32 295 -139 9 -130 78 170 248 202 211 413 Wandsworth 88 394 482 25 454 479 6 103 109 119 951 1,070 Westminster 139 92 231 312 73 385 109 43 152 560 208 768 London 5,436 5,403 10,839 4,601 4,407 9,008 3,465 3,402 6,867 13,502 13,212 26,714 Source: London Development Database | | total net conventional affordable | |------------------------|--------------------------------------| | completions | | | borough name | 2008/09 | | Barking and Dagenham | | | 157 | 24 | | Barnet | | | 314 | 136 | | Bexley | | | 51 | 239 | | Brent | | | 589 | 414 | | Bromley | | | 177 | 224 | | Camden | | | 402 | 216 | | City of London | | | 0 | 0 | | Croydon | | | 416 | 708 | | Ealing | | | 309 | 229 | | Enfield | | | 73 | 30 | | Greenwich | | | 239 | 141 | | Hackney | | | 915 | 611 | | Hammersmith and Fulham | | | 312 | 441 | | Haringey | | | 293 | 281 | | Harrow | | | 228 | 209 | | Havering | | | 301 | 288 | | Hillingdon | | | 177 | 189 | | Hounslow | | | 332 | 381 | | Islington | | | 330 | 472 | | Kensington and Chelsea | | | 96 | 22 | | Kingston upon Thames | | | 0 | 30 | affordable as % of total net conventional supply Lambeth 585 417 744 1,746 51% 36% 55% 48% Lewisham 205 168 339 712 23% 22% 47% 30% Merton 265 49 48 362 34% 15% 13% 25% Newham 590 712 370 1,672 49% 48% 47% 48% Redbridge 97 175 111 383 15% 18% 32% 20% Richmond upon Thames 135 76 45 256 38% 37% 14% 29% Southwark 299 700 587 1,586 29% 52% 41% 42% Sutton 243 -15 222 450 52% -7% 68% 45% Tower Hamlets 1,701 707 292 2,700 56% 27% 23% 39% Waltham Forest 295 -130 248 413 40% -88% 58% 31% Wandsworth 482 479 109 1,070 31% 31% 23% 30% Westminster 231 385 152 768 32% 56% 20% 36% London 10,839 9,008 6,867 26,714 37% 37% 38% 37% Source: London Development Database | | | | | | | number of bedrooms | |------------------------|-------|-------|-------|-----|-------|-----------------------| | borough name | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4+ | total | % 3+ | | Barking and Dagenham | 64 | 27 | 17 | 36 | 144 | 37% | | Barnet | 63 | 58 | 87 | 16 | 224 | 46% | | Bexley | 26 | 29 | 5 | 0 | 60 | 8% | | Brent | 148 | 155 | 97 | 12 | 412 | 26% | | Bromley | 119 | 59 | 48 | 12 | 238 | 25% | | Camden | 48 | 54 | 27 | 13 | 142 | 28% | | City | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0% | | Croydon | 105 | 177 | 103 | 9 | 394 | 28% | | Ealing | 21 | 36 | 16 | 0 | 73 | 22% | | Enfield | 61 | 120 | 44 | 14 | 239 | 24% | | Greenwich | 339 | 263 | 171 | 82 | 855 | 30% | | Hackney | 50 | 101 | 42 | 59 | 252 | 40% | | Hammersmith and Fulham | 116 | 27 | 5 | 2 | 150 | 5% | | Haringey | 9 | 16 | 10 | 14 | 49 | 49% | | Harrow | 108 | 47 | 31 | 57 | 243 | 36% | | Havering | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0% | | Hillingdon | 49 | 79 | 45 | 2 | 175 | 27% | | Hounslow | 129 | 276 | 76 | 24 | 505 | 20% | | Islington | 20 | 51 | 21 | 19 | 111 | 36% | | Kensington and Chelsea | 46 | 0 | 12 | 3 | 61 | 25% | | Kingston upon Thames | 6 | 18 | 11 | 30 | 65 | 63% | | Lambeth | 245 | 375 | 110 | 24 | 754 | 18% | | Lewisham | 131 | 188 | 40 | 0 | 359 | 11% | | Merton | 12 | 28 | 8 | 0 | 48 | 17% | | Newham | 141 | 205 | 37 | 16 | 399 | 13% | | Redbridge | 39 | 62 | 13 | 0 | 114 | 11% | | Richmond upon Thames | 39 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 58 | 0% | | Southwark | 290 | 316 | 81 | 5 | 692 | 12% | | Sutton | 57 | 128 | 44 | 7 | 236 | 22% | | Tower Hamlets | 116 | 108 | 95 | 70 | 389 | 42% | | Waltham Forest | 102 | 122 | 26 | 6 | 256 | 13% | | Wandsworth | 81 | 50 | 10 | 2 | 143 | 8% | | Westminster | 68 | 44 | 43 | 2 | 157 | 29% | | London | 2,850 | 3,238 | 1,375 | 536 | 7,999 | 24% | Source: London Development Database | | existing | proposed | net | |------------------------|-------------|-------------|--------| | social | inter- | social | inter- | | borough name | rented | mediate | | | market | | | | | rented | mediate | market | | | Barking and Dagenham | 1 | 0 | 14 | | Barnet | 7 | 0 | 195 | | Bexley | 1 | 0 | 18 | | Brent | 110 | 0 | 130 | | Bromley | 9 | 0 | 124 | | Camden | 51 | 0 | 352 | | City of London | 0 | 0 | 4 | | Croydon | 0 | 0 | 175 | | Ealing | 511 | 0 | 229 | | Enfield | 0 | 0 | 164 | | Greenwich | 1 | 0 | 41 | | Hackney | 57 | 0 | 219 | | Hammersmith & Fulham | 19 | 0 | 76 | | Haringey | 1 | 0 | 116 | | Harrow | 140 | 0 | 134 | | Havering | 45 | 0 | 58 | | Hillingdon | 2 | 0 | 58 | | Hounslow | 34 | 0 | 41 | | Islington | 0 | 0 | 114 | | Kensington and Chelsea | 0 | 0 | 239 | | Kingston upon Thames | 0 | 0 | 62 | | Lambeth | 328 | 0 | 230 | | social | inter- | |-----------|----------| | afford- | | | social | | | rented | mediate | | market | | | total | | | able % | | | % | | | | | Lewisham 35 0 82 248 170 907 213 170 825 1,208 32% 18% Merton 0 0 111 85 88 531 85 88 420 593 29% 14% Newham 113 0 69 308 273 1,862 195 273 1,793 2,261 21% 9% Redbridge 0 0 23 130 20 460 130 20 437 587 26% 22% Richmond upon Thames 4 0 86 163 82 489 159 82 403 644 37% 25% Southwark 77 0 113 694 329 2,268 617 329 2,155 3,101 31% 20% Sutton 22 0 38 95 12 455 73 12 417 502 17% 15% Tower Hamlets 113 0 122 906 366 2,559 793 366 2,437 3,596 32% 22% Waltham Forest 108 0 48 410 168 372 302 168 324 794 59% 38% Wandsworth 3 0 215 180 446 2,521 177 446 2,306 2,929 21% 6% Westminster 48 0 298 137 70 1,037 89 70 739 898 18% 10% London 1,840 0 3,998 8,910 4,469 38,985 7,070 4,469 34,987 46,526 25% 15% Source: London Development Database | | | | | | | | new build | conversions | change of use | total | |------------------------|----------------|-----|-------|----------|-----------|----------|--------------|----------------|------------------|----------| | borough name | gross existing | net | gross | existing | net gross | existing | net | gross | existing | net | | Barking and Dagenham | 79 | 1 | 78 | 19 | 9 | 10 | 13 | 5 | 8 | 111 | | Barnet | 1,806 | 90 | 1,716 | 242 | 105 | 137 | 41 | 7 | 34 | 2,089 | | Bexley | 255 | 6 | 249 | 14 | 8 | 6 | 44 | 5 | 39 | 313 | | Brent | 1,965 | 170 | 1,795 | 76 | 63 | 13 | 36 | 7 | 29 | 2,077 | | Bromley | 1,271 | 84 | 1,187 | 99 | 43 | 56 | 74 | 6 | 68 | 1,444 | | Camden | 699 | 132 | 567 | 247 | 249 | -2 | 264 | 22 | 242 | 1,210 | | City of London | 9 | 0 | 9 | 9 | 4 | 5 | 77 | 0 | 77 | 95 | | Croydon | 2,088 | 52 | 2,036 | 291 | 108 | 183 | 133 | 15 | 118 | 2,512 | | Ealing | 5,043 | 630 | 4,413 | 166 | 99 | 67 | 94 | 10 | 84 | 5,303 | | Enfield | 312 | 26 | 286 | 108 | 48 | 60 | 53 | 90 | -37 | 473 | | Greenwich | 3,895 | 19 | 3,876 | 37 | 14 | 23 | 38 | 9 | 29 | 3,970 | | Hackney | 1,064 | 160 | 904 | 210 | 107 | 103 | 155 | 9 | 146 | 1,429 | | Hammersmith and Fulham | 259 | 4 | 255 | 185 | 89 | 96 | 124 | 2 | 122 | 568 | | Haringey | 410 | 21 | 389 | 168 | 92 | 76 | 186 | 4 | 182 | 764 | | Harrow | 1,051 | 217 | 834 | 122 | 50 | 72 | 77 | 8 | 69 | 1,250 | | Havering | 1,782 | 82 | 1,700 | 46 | 17 | 29 | 10 | 4 | 6 | 1,838 | | Hillingdon | 1,354 | 39 | 1,315 | 45 | 16 | 29 | 10 | 5 | 5 | 1,409 | | Hounslow | 426 | 46 | 380 | 40 | 28 | 12 | 26 | 1 | 25 | 492 | | Islington | 1,826 | 3 | 1,823 | 232 | 104 | 128 | 176 | 7 | 169 | 2,234 | | Kensington and Chelsea | 804 | 46 | 758 | 128 | 185 | -57 | 89 | 8 | 81 | 1,021 | | Kingston upon Thames | 307 | 25 | 282 | 53 | 37 | 16 | 70 | 0 | 70 | 430 | | Lambeth | 2,108 | 405 | 1,703 | 305 | 143 | 162 | 71 | 10 | 61 | 2,484 | Lewisham 966 8 958 208 100 108 151 9 142 1,325 117 1,208 Merton 531 41 490 78 53 25 95 17 78 704 111 593 Newham 2,270 85 2,185 79 51 28 94 46 48 2,443 182 2,261 Redbridge 555 5 550 37 16 21 18 2 16 610 23 587 Richmond upon Thames 598 16 582 78 67 11 58 7 51 734 90 644 Southwark 3,082 124 2,958 128 57 71 81 9 72 3,291 190 3,101 Sutton 470 26 444 46 21 25 46 13 33 562 60 502 Tower Hamlets 3,672 163 3,509 88 45 43 71 27 44 3,831 235 3,596 Waltham Forest 813 114 699 71 42 29 66 0 66 950 156 794 Wandsworth 2,790 60 2,730 174 152 22 183 6 177 3,147 218 2,929 Westminster 627 164 463 145 144 1 472 38 434 1,244 346 898 London 45,187 3,064 42,123 3,974 2,366 1,608 3,196 408 2,788 52,357 5,838 46,519 Source: London Development Database | | existing | proposed | net | | |------------------------|-------------|-------------|--------|--------| | social | interm- | social | | | | borough name | rented | ediate | market | rented | | Barking and Dagenham | 235 | 0 | 39 | 2,303 | | Barnet | 0 | 0 | 27 | 126 | | Bexley | 0 | 0 | 20 | 122 | | Brent | 133 | 0 | 58 | 424 | | Bromley | 227 | 0 | 88 | 233 | | Camden | 70 | 0 | 215 | 151 | | City of London | 0 | 0 | 5 | 23 | | Croydon | 20 | 0 | 93 | 191 | | Ealing | 48 | 0 | 98 | 336 | | Enfield | 0 | 143 | 147 | 188 | | Greenwich | 1 | 0 | 34 | 287 | | Hackney | 126 | 0 | 201 | 395 | | Hammersmith & Fulham | 0 | 0 | 58 | 0 | | Haringey | 1 | 0 | 63 | 86 | | Harrow | 140 | 0 | 73 | 133 | | Havering | 0 | 0 | 15 | 60 | | Hillingdon | 1 | 0 | 33 | 88 | | Hounslow | 88 | 0 | 38 | 261 | | Islington | 134 | 0 | 105 | 445 | | Kensington and Chelsea | 4 | 0 | 133 | 51 | afford intermsocial interm- -able ediate market rented ediate market total % Kingston upon Thames 0 1 31 32 9 98 32 8 67 107 37% Lambeth 44 0 77 232 190 671 188 190 594 972 39% Lewisham 45 0 94 482 223 1,516 437 223 1,422 2,082 32% Merton 0 20 75 69 98 470 69 78 395 542 27% Newham 243 0 43 361 295 1,382 118 295 1,339 1,752 24% Redbridge 0 0 19 3 0 100 3 0 81 84 4% Richmond upon Thames 4 0 66 133 75 323 129 75 257 461 44% Southwark 148 2 58 740 290 1,838 592 288 1,780 2,660 33% Sutton 20 0 20 152 11 506 132 11 486 629 23% Tower Hamlets 23 0 52 453 162 1,320 430 162 1,268 1,860 32% Waltham Forest 115 0 42 309 54 245 194 54 203 451 55% Wandsworth 3 0 156 190 210 1,138 187 210 982 1,379 29% Westminster 39 0 256 96 19 771 57 19 515 591 13% London 1,912 166 2,532 9,155 6,064 31,140 7,243 5,898 28,608 41,749 31% Source: London Development Database | | | | | | | | new build | conversions | change of use | total | |------------------------|----------------|--------|-------|----------|-----------|----------|--------------|----------------|------------------|----------| | borough name | gross existing | net | gross | existing | net gross | existing | net | gross | existing | net | | Barking and Dagenham | | | | | | | | | | | | 11,197 | 257 | 10,940 | 22 | 11 | 11 | 14 | 6 | 8 | 11,233 | 274 | | Barnet | | | | | | | | | | | | 647 | 15 | 632 | 28 | 12 | 16 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 675 | 27 | | Bexley | | | | | | | | | | | | 556 | 9 | 547 | 20 | 8 | 12 | 38 | 3 | 35 | 614 | 20 | | Brent | | | | | | | | | | | | 879 | 167 | 712 | 31 | 22 | 9 | 44 | 2 | 42 | 954 | 191 | | Bromley | | | | | | | | | | | | 751 | 259 | 492 | 95 | 52 | 43 | 74 | 4 | 70 | 920 | 315 | | Camden | | | | | | | | | | | | 398 | 136 | 262 | 167 | 144 | 23 | 149 | 5 | 144 | 714 | 285 | | City of London | | | | | | | | | | | | 77 | 0 | 77 | 18 | 4 | 14 | 30 | 1 | 29 | 125 | 5 | | Croydon | | | | | | | | | | | | 1,281 | 37 | 1,244 | 181 | 67 | 114 | 71 | 9 | 62 | 1,533 | 113 | | Ealing | | | | | | | | | | | | 1,365 | 63 | 1,302 | 135 | 75 | 60 | 104 | 8 | 96 | 1,604 | 146 | | Enfield | | | | | | | | | | | | 621 | 157 | 464 | 101 | 46 | 55 | 127 | 87 | 40 | 849 | 290 | | Greenwich | | | | | | | | | | | | 4,027 | 7 | 4,020 | 54 | 20 | 34 | 34 | 8 | 26 | 4,115 | 35 | | Hackney | | | | | | | | | | | | 763 | 214 | 549 | 187 | 91 | 96 | 90 | 22 | 68 | 1,040 | 327 | | Hammersmith and Fulham | | | | | | | | | | | | 525 | 2 | 523 | 103 | 54 | 49 | 60 | 2 | 58 | 688 | 58 | | Haringey | | | | | | | | | | | | 465 | 11 | 454 | 113 | 53 | 60 | 39 | 0 | 39 | 617 | 64 | | Harrow | | | | | | | | | | | | 473 | 175 | 298 | 83 | 33 | 50 | 39 | 5 | 34 | 595 | 213 | | Havering | | | | | | | | | | | | 173 | 7 | 166 | 15 | 4 | 11 | 2 | 4 | -2 | 190 | 15 | | Hillingdon | | | | | | | | | | | | 466 | 25 | 441 | 20 | 6 | 14 | 20 | 3 | 17 | 506 | 34 | | Hounslow | | | | | | | | | | | | 890 | 83 | 807 | 50 | 40 | 10 | 45 | 3 | 42 | 985 | 126 | | Islington | | | | | | | | | | | | 1,707 | 135 | 1,572 | 232 | 91 | 141 | 280 | 13 | 267 | 2,219 | 239 | | Kensington and Chelsea | | | | | | | | | | | | 727 | 35 | 692 | 83 | 93 | -10 | 107 | 9 | 98 | 917 | 137 | | Kingston upon Thames | | | | | | | | | | | | 88 | 9 | 79 | 28 | 22 | 6 | 23 | 1 | 22 | 139 | 32 | | Lambeth | | | | | | | | | | | | 890 | 37 | 853 | 166 | 81 | 85 | 37 | 3 | 34 | 1,093 | 121 | Lewisham 1,970 83 1,887 169 54 115 82 2 80 2,221 139 2,082 Merton 522 44 478 57 42 15 58 9 49 637 95 542 Newham 1,851 242 1,609 70 39 31 117 5 112 2,038 286 1,752 Redbridge 61 5 56 28 11 17 14 3 11 103 19 84 Richmond upon Thames 449 34 415 52 28 24 30 8 22 531 70 461 Southwark 2,661 160 2,501 117 41 76 90 7 83 2,868 208 2,660 Sutton 431 24 407 51 15 36 187 1 186 669 40 629 Tower Hamlets 1,883 54 1,829 31 10 21 21 11 10 1,935 75 1,860 Waltham Forest 481 114 367 84 43 41 43 0 43 608 157 451 Wandsworth 1,256 26 1,230 179 129 50 103 4 99 1,538 159 1,379 Westminster 286 67 219 179 195 -16 421 33 388 886 295 591 London 40,817 2,693 38,124 2,949 1,636 1,313 2,593 281 2,312 46,359 4,610 41,749 Source: London Development Database | | | | | | | | not started | under construction | pipeline | |------------------------|----------|----------|-------|----------|--------------|--------|----------------|-----------------------|-------------| | borough name | proposed | existing | net | proposed | existing | net | proposed | existing | net | | Barking and Dagenham | 254 | 17 | 237 | 12,752 | 263 12,489 | 13,006 | 280 | 12,726 | | | Barnet | 8,894 | 2,493 | 6,401 | 2,815 | 844 | 1,971 | 11,709 | 3,337 | 8,372 | | Bexley | 794 | 32 | 762 | 897 | 31 | 866 | 1,691 | 63 | 1,628 | | Brent | 6,366 | 346 | 6,020 | 1,661 | 405 | 1,256 | 8,027 | 751 | 7,276 | | Bromley | 1,862 | 203 | 1,659 | 1,507 | 331 | 1,176 | 3,369 | 534 | 2,835 | | Camden | 1,444 | 492 | 952 | 2,761 | 479 | 2,282 | 4,205 | 971 | 3,234 | | City of London | 145 | 7 | 138 | 403 | 14 | 389 | 548 | 21 | 527 | | Croydon | 3,551 | 261 | 3,290 | 2,393 | 84 | 2,309 | 5,944 | 345 | 5,599 | | Ealing | 5,550 | 778 | 4,772 | 2,053 | 535 | 1,518 | 7,603 | 1,313 | 6,290 | | Enfield | 678 | 143 | 535 | 1,400 | 234 | 1,166 | 2,078 | 377 | 1,701 | | Greenwich | 5,295 | 601 | 4,694 | 19,819 | 1,430 18,389 | 25,114 | 2,031 | 23,083 | | | Hackney | 3,401 | 695 | 2,706 | 3,031 | 471 | 2,560 | 6,432 | 1,166 | 5,266 | | Hammersmith and Fulham | 1,112 | 191 | 921 | 526 | 30 | 496 | 1,638 | 221 | 1,417 | | Haringey | 1,045 | 200 | 845 | 1,502 | 67 | 1,435 | 2,547 | 267 | 2,280 | | Harrow | 1,858 | 330 | 1,528 | 1,621 | 515 | 1,106 | 3,479 | 845 | 2,634 | | Havering | 3,091 | 570 | 2,521 | 724 | 129 | 595 | 3,815 | 699 | 3,116 | | Hillingdon | 1,746 | 106 | 1,640 | 2,834 | 83 | 2,751 | 4,580 | 189 | 4,391 | | Hounslow | 693 | 137 | 556 | 1,928 | 159 | 1,769 | 2,621 | 296 | 2,325 | | Islington | 3,515 | 382 | 3,133 | 3,294 | 442 | 2,852 | 6,809 | 824 | 5,985 | | Kensington and Chelsea | 1,769 | 895 | 874 | 1,423 | 144 | 1,279 | 3,192 | 1,039 | 2,153 | | Kingston upon Thames | 710 | 119 | 591 | 689 | 52 | 637 | 1,399 | 171 | 1,228 | | Lambeth | 3,401 | 720 | 2,681 | 3,951 | 1,315 | 2,636 | 7,352 | 2,035 | 5,317 | | Lewisham | 3,990 | 842 | 3,148 | 2,743 | 226 | 2,517 | 6,733 | 1,068 | 5,665 | Merton 1,065 135 930 1,194 99 1,095 2,259 234 2,025 Newham 7,167 168 6,999 5,627 253 5,374 12,794 421 12,373 Redbridge 815 43 772 717 61 656 1,532 104 1,428 Richmond upon Thames 786 127 659 815 104 711 1,601 231 1,370 Southwark 4,470 248 4,222 3,689 213 3,476 8,159 461 7,698 Sutton 397 88 309 1,261 316 945 1,658 404 1,254 Tower Hamlets 10,716 795 9,921 10,164 594 9,570 20,880 1,389 19,491 Waltham Forest 1,064 175 889 671 150 521 1,735 325 1,410 Wandsworth 3,578 248 3,330 2,377 129 2,248 5,955 377 5,578 Westminster 2,070 467 1,603 1,460 281 1,179 3,530 748 2,782 London 93,292 13,054 80,238 100,702 10,483 90,219 193,994 23,537 170,457 Source: London Development Database Table HPM12: Net conventional pipeline by type, 2010/11 new build conversions change of use total borough name gross existing net gross existing net gross existing net gross existing net Barking and Dagenham 12,783 259 12,524 37 17 20 186 4 182 13,006 280 12,726 Barnet 11,001 3,039 7,962 580 272 308 128 26 102 11,709 3,337 8,372 Bexley 1,559 30 1,529 45 21 24 87 12 75 1,691 63 1,628 Brent 7,704 647 7,057 143 95 48 180 9 171 8,027 751 7,276 Bromley 2,913 409 2,504 246 99 147 210 26 184 3,369 534 2,835 Camden 3,053 323 2,730 517 605 -88 635 43 592 4,205 971 3,234 City of London 363 14 349 11 1 10 174 6 168 548 21 527 Croydon 5,216 150 5,066 448 164 284 280 31 249 5,944 345 5,599 Ealing 6,724 1,046 5,678 390 241 149 489 26 463 7,603 1,313 6,290 Enfield 1,637 221 1,416 252 124 128 189 32 157 2,078 377 1,701 Greenwich 24,701 1,990 22,711 82 27 55 331 14 317 25,114 2,031 23,083 Hackney 5,830 918 4,912 393 202 191 209 46 163 6,432 1,166 5,266 Hammersmith and Fulham 1,096 17 1,079 326 198 128 216 6 210 1,638 221 1,417 Haringey 1,884 77 1,807 358 184 174 305 6 299 2,547 267 2,280 Harrow 3,147 733 2,414 223 100 123 109 12 97 3,479 845 2,634 Havering 3,605 639 2,966 116 49 67 94 11 83 3,815 699 3,116 Hillingdon 4,395 133 4,262 125 45 80 60 11 49 4,580 189 4,391 Hounslow 2,351 166 2,185 118 76 42 152 54 98 2,621 296 2,325 Islington 5,713 616 5,097 357 188 169 739 20 719 6,809 824 5,985 Kensington and Chelsea 2,674 616 2,058 275 391 -116 243 32 211 3,192 1,039 2,153 Kingston upon Thames 1,152 81 1,071 145 86 59 102 4 98 1,399 171 1,228 Lambeth 6,650 1,746 4,904 520 272 248 182 17 165 7,352 2,035 5,317 Lewisham 6,095 882 5,213 367 168 199 271 18 253 6,733 1,068 5,665 Merton 1,761 118 1,643 120 96 24 378 20 358 2,259 234 2,025 Newham 12,582 330 12,252 67 43 24 145 48 97 12,794 421 12,373 Redbridge 1,351 16 1,335 138 69 69 43 19 24 1,532 104 1,428 Richmond upon Thames 1,197 105 1,092 197 116 81 207 10 197 1,601 231 1,370 Southwark 7,705 301 7,404 267 143 124 187 17 170 8,159 461 7,698 Sutton 1,318 332 986 102 44 58 238 28 210 1,658 404 1,254 Tower Hamlets 20,382 923 19,459 213 395 -182 285 71 214 20,880 1,389 19,491 Waltham Forest 1,385 240 1,145 160 81 79 190 4 186 1,735 325 1,410 Wandsworth 5,268 139 5,129 361 224 137 326 14 312 5,955 377 5,578 Westminster 2,290 353 1,937 407 317 90 833 78 755 3,530 748 2,782 London 177,485 17,609 159,876 8,106 5,153 2,953 8,403 775 7,628 193,994 23,537 170,457 Source: London Development Database | | | 2005/06 | 2006/07 | 2007/08 | 2008/09 | 2009/10 2010/11 | |------------------------|-----|-----------|-----------|-----------|-----------|-------------------| | Barking and Dagenham | 122 | 165 | 146 | 80 | 116 | 52 | | Barnet | 134 | 78 | 83 | 113 | 100 | 94 | | Bexley | 58 | 94 | 51 | 110 | 83 | 76 | | Brent | 168 | 199 | 149 | 133 | 182 | 185 | | Bromley | 34 | 44 | 49 | 36 | 48 | 55 | | Camden | 115 | 227 | 113 | 136 | 140 | 134 | | City of London | 368 | 525 | 1263 | 330 | 213 | 457 | | Croydon | 90 | 115 | 106 | 131 | 97 | 127 | | Ealing | 180 | 121 | 115 | 162 | 152 | 144 | | Enfield | 84 | 52 | 82 | 65 | 71 | 61 | | Greenwich | 115 | 161 | 248 | 211 | 147 | 337 | | Hackney | 236 | 275 | 238 | 200 | 278 | 206 | | Hammersmith and Fulham | 219 | 160 | 227 | 187 | 301 | 164 | | Haringey | 117 | 136 | 173 | 94 | 107 | 119 | | Harrow | 71 | 101 | 90 | 62 | 82 | 52 | | Havering | 95 | 60 | 41 | 55 | 99 | 115 | | Hillingdon | 41 | 85 | 68 | 91 | 36 | 57 | | Hounslow | 117 | 156 | 95 | 159 | 61 | 111 | | Islington | 224 | 319 | 254 | 244 | 272 | 313 | | Kensington and Chelsea | 209 | 170 | 163 | 137 | 193 | 231 | | Kingston upon Thames | 102 | 45 | 61 | 77 | 64 | 64 | | Lambeth | 185 | 203 | 214 | 130 | 187 | 183 | | Lewisham | 170 | 146 | 172 | 166 | 229 | 123 | | Merton | 101 | 64 | 95 | 80 | 69 | 63 | | Newham | 261 | 269 | 347 | 368 | 312 | 398 | | Redbridge | 138 | 151 | 115 | 87 | 373 | 161 | | Richmond upon Thames | 91 | 83 | 60 | 58 | 47 | 107 | | Southwark | 277 | 285 | 277 | 335 | 230 | 223 | | Sutton | 63 | 70 | 117 | 92 | 58 | 57 | | Tower Hamlets | 416 | 318 | 447 | 310 | 380 | 318 | | Waltham Forest | 123 | 130 | 129 | 132 | 121 | 111 | | Wandsworth | 148 | 156 | 151 | 173 | 143 | 206 | | Westminster | 283 | 158 | 252 | 153 | 200 | 206 | | London | 134 | 129 | 151 | 138 | 148 | 140 | Source: London Development Database | | 2006/07 | 2007/08 | 2008/09 | 2009/10 | 2010/11 | |------------------------|-----------|-----------|-----------|-----------|------------| | Barking and Dagenham | 95 | 123 | 139 | 238 | 111 | | Barnet | 65 | 62 | 99 | 64 | 87 | | Bexley | 44 | 48 | 76 | 81 | 65 | | Brent | 113 | 106 | 144 | 130 | 157 | | Bromley | 54 | 55 | 35 | 36 | 52 | | Camden | 106 | 141 | 232 | 195 | 202 | | City of London | 454 | 558 | 505 | 500 | 316 | | Croydon | 77 | 72 | 98 | 103 | 102 | | Ealing | 195 | 136 | 159 | 109 | 116 | | Enfield | 75 | 92 | 68 | 61 | 87 | | Greenwich | 170 | 138 | 122 | 111 | 239 | | Hackney | 266 | 183 | 234 | 249 | 174 | | Hammersmith and Fulham | 116 | 143 | 200 | 208 | 225 | | Haringey | 175 | 138 | 162 | 106 | 136 | | Harrow | 93 | 79 | 71 | 100 | 78 | | Havering | 55 | 63 | 71 | 95 | 47 | | Hillingdon | 49 | 54 | 60 | 94 | 44 | | Hounslow | 120 | 102 | 120 | 184 | 94 | | Islington | 225 | 236 | 285 | 200 | 183 | | Kensington and Chelsea | 135 | 167 | 173 | 128 | 200 | | Kingston upon Thames | 86 | 115 | 50 | 46 | 55 | | Lambeth | 141 | 163 | 172 | 155 | 290 | | Lewisham | 109 | 124 | 136 | 188 | 164 | | Merton | 92 | 96 | 47 | 67 | 100 | | Newham | 163 | 292 | 267 | 240 | 221 | | Redbridge | 124 | 122 | 110 | 100 | 217 | | Richmond upon Thames | 74 | 58 | 82 | 71 | 53 | | Southwark | 264 | 254 | 220 | 226 | 353 | | Sutton | 60 | 53 | 89 | 66 | 61 | | Tower Hamlets | 248 | 298 | 313 | 363 | 389 | | Waltham Forest | 139 | 125 | 131 | 117 | 170 | | Wandsworth | 169 | 135 | 172 | 182 | 104 | | Westminster | 259 | 206 | 262 | 258 | 139 | | London | 122 | 117 | 128 | 138 | 136 | Source: London Development Database Net Conventional Affordable Housing Supply as a percentage of total net conventional supply, 2008/09 to 2010/11 Map HPM4: Housing Pipeline as at 31/03/2011 Affordable housing delivery monitor 2010/11 4.48 As explained in the introduction to the Housing Provision Monitor, the measure of affordable housing delivery used in the Mayor's London Housing Strategy is very different from the measure of housing provision used in the London Plan. Affordable housing delivery is measured in gross terms and includes acquisitions of existing private sector homes for use as affordable housing. It is therefore typically considerably higher in any given year than the net provision of affordable housing in planning terms reported in the main body of the Annual Monitoring Report and the Housing Provision Monitor. 4.49 The data source for monitoring affordable housing delivery targets is the set of statistics on 'affordable housing supply' published by the Department for Communities and Local Government23. These statistics are compiled from a range of sources, but the vast majority of delivery in recent years has been funded the Homes and Communities Agency. 4.50 Table AHM1 below shows affordable housing delivery in London by type in the three years 2008/09 to 2010/11. Over this period a total of 40,910 homes were delivered, of which 22,520 were social housing and 18,390 were intermediate housing. As DCLG publish their statistics approximately six months after the end of each financial year, performance against the four-year targets in the Mayor's London Housing Strategy will be assessed in late 2012. 4.51 Figure 4.2 below shows the trend in total affordable housing delivery in London since 1991/9224. Delivery peaked at just over 17,000 in 1995/96, fell to 8,270 in 2000/01 and rose again to a recent peak of 15,110 in 2007/08. 24 Data from Housing Live Table 1000 housing, but the Homes and Communities Agency does publish such statistics on the homes it funds, which as stated above constitute the vast majority of affordable housing delivery in London. In 2010/11 there were a total of 16,331 affordable homes started in London, the highest figure since monitoring began in 2004/05. Table AHM3 shows HCA-funded starts of affordable housing in 2010/11 by borough and by tenure. Affordable housing delivery monitor tables follow, starting on the next page (and including one map). 4.52 Table AHM2 shows delivery of social and intermediate housing by London borough in 2010/11. Note that whereas DCLG previously published statistics on the basis of area receiving funding and area where the homes were located, it now only uses the latter definition. The borough with the highest affordable housing delivery in 2010/11 was Tower Hamlets, closely followed by Greenwich. There was again very wide variation between boroughs in terms of both total delivery and the split between social and intermediate housing. 4.53 DCLG does not publish equivalent statistics on starts of affordable | Affordable housing delivery type | 2008/09 | 2009/10 | 2010/11 | Total | |---------------------------------------------|-------------|---------------|--------------|--------------| | Social Rent | , of which: | 6,310 | 7,080 | 9,130 22,520 | | Homes and Communities Agency (new build) | 4,140 | 5,300 | 5,810 15,250 | | | Homes and Communities Agency (acquisitions) | 1,760 | 1,400 | 2,080 | 5,240 | | other Homes and Communities Agency schemes | 170 | 60 | 230 | 460 | | Local authorities | 10 | 20 | 750 | 780 | | of which HCA grant funded (new build) | .. | .. | 260 | 260 | | Section 106 (nil grant) new build: total | | | | | | | | | | | | | 180 | 300 | 150 | 630 | | of which, reported on IMS | 60 | 240 | 90 | 390 | | Private Finance Initiative | 40 | 20 | 120 | 180 | | | | | | | | Intermediate Affordable Housing | | | | | | 6,770 | 6,510 | 5,110 18,390 | | | | | | | | | | Intermediate Rent | , of which: | 470 | 810 | 1,350 | | Homes and Communities Agency (new build) | 460 | 740 | 1,210 | 2,410 | | Homes and Communities Agency (acquisitions) | 10 | 70 | 140 | 220 | | | | | | | | Low Cost Home Ownership | , of which: | 6,300 | 5,700 | 3,760 15,760 | | Homes and Communities Agency (new build) | 3,800 | 3,240 | 2,780 | 9,820 | | Homes and Communities Agency (acquisitions) | 1,280 | 1,460 | 80 | 2,820 | | other Homes and Communities Agency schemes | - | - | - | - | | Section 106 (nil grant) new build: total | 400 | 470 | 300 | 1,170 | | of which, reported on IMS | 260 | 320 | 260 | 840 | | Assisted Purchase Schemes | 820 | 530 | 610 | 1,960 | | | | | | | | All affordable | | | | | | 13,070 | 13,590 | 14,250 40,910 | | | Source DCLG See DCLG Housing Live Table 1000 and statistical release for full notes and definitions Note: The 2010/11 figure was revised by DCLG in January 2012 | borough | social | intermediate | total | |------------------------|----------|-----------------|---------| | Barking and Dagenham | 110 | 150 | 270 | | Barnet | 300 | 80 | 390 | | Bexley | 260 | 50 | 310 | | Brent | 340 | 270 | 620 | | Bromley | 380 | 120 | 500 | | Camden | 180 | 50 | 230 | | City of London | 0 | 0 | 0 | | Croydon | 550 | 200 | 750 | | Ealing | 140 | 120 | 260 | | Enfield | 370 | 180 | 550 | | Greenwich | 810 | 530 | 1,340 | | Hackney | 370 | 320 | 690 | | Hammersmith and Fulham | 10 | 50 | 60 | | Haringey | 220 | 50 | 270 | | Harrow | 230 | 80 | 310 | | Havering | 120 | 50 | 170 | | Hillingdon | 260 | 120 | 380 | | Hounslow | 400 | 280 | 670 | | Islington | 90 | 0 | 90 | | Kensington and Chelsea | 20 | 10 | 30 | | Kingston upon Thames | 70 | 10 | 80 | | Lambeth | 700 | 310 | 1,010 | | Lewisham | 370 | 150 | 520 | | Merton | 50 | 70 | 110 | | Newham | 310 | 260 | 580 | | Redbridge | 170 | 80 | 250 | | Richmond upon Thames | 40 | 0 | 40 | | Southwark | 390 | 420 | 810 | | Sutton | 150 | 80 | 230 | | Tower Hamlets | 990 | 440 | 1,430 | | Waltham Forest | 280 | 170 | 460 | | Wandsworth | 20 | 210 | 230 | | Westminster | 440 | 190 | 620 | | London | 9,130 | 5,110 | 14,250 | Source DCLG boroughs by tenure, 2010/11 | borough | social | intermediate | total | |------------------------|----------|----------------|---------| | Barking and Dagenham | 234 | 128 | 362 | | Barnet | 289 | 69 | 358 | | Bexley | 172 | 47 | 219 | | Brent | 511 | 171 | 682 | | Bromley | 400 | 35 | 435 | | Camden | 398 | 65 | 463 | | City of London | 0 | 0 | 0 | | Croydon | 473 | 79 | 552 | | Ealing | 451 | 212 | 663 | | Enfield | 479 | 75 | 554 | | Greenwich | 342 | 115 | 457 | | Hackney | 585 | 366 | 951 | | Hammersmith and Fulham | 20 | 88 | 108 | | Haringey | 178 | 281 | 459 | | Harrow | 136 | 195 | 331 | | Havering | 505 | 122 | 627 | | Hillingdon | 263 | 220 | 483 | | Hounslow | 289 | 123 | 412 | | Islington | 389 | 395 | 784 | | Kensington and Chelsea | 32 | 0 | 32 | | Kingston upon Thames | 45 | 8 | 53 | | Lambeth | 497 | 226 | 723 | | Lewisham | 677 | 315 | 992 | | Merton | 205 | 195 | 400 | | Newham | 648 | 311 | 959 | | Redbridge | 136 | 65 | 201 | | Richmond upon Thames | 176 | 45 | 221 | | Southwark | 665 | 238 | 903 | | Sutton | 175 | 89 | 264 | | Tower Hamlets | 880 | 271 | 1,151 | | Waltham Forest | 563 | 180 | 743 | | Wandsworth | 262 | 209 | 471 | | Westminster | 257 | 61 | 318 | | Total | 11,332 | 4,999 | 16,331 | Source: HCA London 2008-11 Outturn Statement Note: DCLG no longer publish statistics on the basis of area providing funding Totals may not sum due to rounding Affordability Thresholds 4.54 This section relates to Policy 3.10 of the 2011 London Plan and updates the affordability thresholds as at February 2012. 4.55 The London Plan defines affordable housing as housing provided to specified eligible households whose needs are not met by the market, and which should:  meet the needs of eligible households including availability at a cost low enough for them to afford, determined with regard to local incomes and local house prices  include provisions for the homes to remain at an affordable price for future eligible households, or  if these restrictions are lifted, for the subsidy to be recycled for alternative affordable housing provision. 4.56 The early minor alteration to the London Plan published in November 2011 seeks, inter alia, to modify Policy 3.10 to include the government's new 'affordable rent' product within the definition of affordable housing, alongside the existing categories of social rented and intermediate housing in accordance with revisions made by the Government to PPS3. Intermediate Housing 5.57 Paragraph 3.62 of the 2011 London Plan sets out the income thresholds for intermediate housing and states that these will be updated on an annual basis in the London Plan Annual Monitoring Reports. The thresholds are therefore to be updated as follows. 4.58 Intermediate provision is sub-market housing, where costs, including service charges, are above target rents for social rented housing, but where costs, including service charges, are affordable by households on incomes of less than £64,30025. This figure has been updated from the London Plan (2011) figure of £52,500 on the basis of the latest data (as of February 2012) on lower quartile house prices in London, and is an increase from the figure of £64,000 in AMR 7. 4.59 In his 2011 replacement London Plan, the Mayor sets out a higher intermediate housing income threshold of £74,000 for households with dependents, in order to reflect the higher cost of both developing and buying family-sized homes in London. This figure was derived by uprating the upper income threshold in the Plan (£61,400) by 20%. The upper threshold for intermediate family housing can therefore be updated by adding 20% to the general threshold of £64,300, for a figure of £77,200. 4.60 Intermediate housing can include shared ownership, sub-market rent provision (including the new affordable rent product) and market provision, including key worker provision, where this affordability criterion is met and where provision is appropriate to meeting identified requirements. 4.61 For the criterion that provision is affordable to be met, the purchase price must be no greater than 3.5 times the household income limit specified above (i.e. no greater than £225,000), or (for products where a rent is paid) the annual housing costs, including rent and service charge, should be no greater than 40% of net household income. (This is to reflect a different level of disposable income, relative to lower income households dependent on social housing). In the case of two or multiple income households, lenders will generally lend at lower multipliers in relation to incomes of household members other than the highest income earner, and consequently market access will generally be more restricted for such households. 4.62 Local planning authorities should seek to ensure that intermediate provision provides for households with a range of incomes below the upper limit, and provides a range of dwelling types in terms of a mix of unit sizes (measured by number of bedrooms), and that average housing costs, including service charges, to households for whom intermediate housing is provided are affordable by households on annual incomes of £42,150 pa (i.e. the midpoint of the range between £20,000 (updated from AMR 7 in line with RPI) and £64,300). On this basis, average housing costs, including service charges, would be about £985 a month or £230 a week (housing costs at 40% of net income, net income being assumed to be 70% of gross income). This figure could be used for monitoring purposes. Local Affordable Housing Policies 4.63 PPS3 requires boroughs to set affordable housing targets in their Local Development Frameworks. London Plan Policy 3.11 states that these targets should be consistent with the overall strategic target of at least 13,200 affordable homes in London per annum. While boroughs are free to set targets in absolute or percentage terms, the London Plan sets out a range of issues that boroughs should take into account, including the priority accorded to affordable family housing, the need to promote mixed and balanced communities, capacity to accommodate development and development viability taking, so far as possible, account of future availability of resources. Table 4.9 borough policy target (or practice) as at 2002 adopted borough policy target as at December 2011 (numerical / percentage) borough 25% 50% (August 2010) n/a Barking & Dagenham Barnet 30% 50% 30% (50% in AAP areas) Bexley 25% 35% 50%borough wide with 35% minimum on individual schemes. Brent 30-50% 50% n/a Bromley 20% 35% n/a Camden 50% proposed 50% for >50 dwellings, 10- 50% for <50 dwellings City of London None 30% n/a Croydon 40% 40%-50% 35% borough wide target. Seeking 20% on-sites in year 1 of the plan with a yearly review of this target using a 'Dynamic Viability Model'. Ealing 50% 50% 50% Enfield 25% 40% n/a Greenwich 35% 35% minimum (50% on greenfield/readily developable former employment land) Hackney 25% 50% (60/40 split) n/a. 40% n/a Hammersmith & Fulham 65% proposed Haringey 30% 50% 50%/410 u/pa Harrow 30% London Plan 40% /140u/pa. Havering None 50% (2008) n/a Hillingdon 25% 365 u/pa (50% ) 356 u/pa (50%) Hounslow 50% 445 u/pa (50%) 445u/pa (50%) Islington 25% 50% n/a Kensington & Chelsea 33% Minimum of 200 units per annum from 2011/12 (borough wide target) with a site specific policy of 50% affordable by floor area 50% 50% n/a Kingston upon Thames sets out the affordable housing policies adopted by the boroughs. emerging borough policy target December 2011 (numerical / percentage) - n/a if recently adopted n/a 35% n/a borough borough policy target (or practice) as at 2002 adopted borough policy target as at December 2011 (numerical / percentage) Lambeth 35-50% 40% (50% with grant) n/a Lewisham 30% 35% n/a Merton 30% 40% (with 60:40 split) n/a Newham 25% London Plan 50% overall (35-50% on individual sites) Redbridge 25% 50% (2008) n/a 40% 50% n/a Richmond upon Thames Southwark 25% 8,558 (equates to 35% borough-wide but varies locally) Sutton 25% 50% n/a Tower Hamlets 25-33% 50% overall, 35%-50% on individual sites subject to viability Waltham Forest 40% To provide at least 50% (5,700 homes) of homes as affordable over the plan period. 60/40 split. Wandsworth None Minimum 373 units annum (3,725 borough wide target over 10 years) to be reviewed on adoption of the LP. Site specific policy of the max reasonable amount with a minimum target of 33% on each site Westminster 50% overall, 35%-50% on individual sites subject to viability emerging borough policy target December 2011 (numerical / percentage) - n/a if recently adopted n/a n/a 50% (5,700 homes) n/a n/a Achieving an inclusive environment London Plan Policies 4.64 The London Plan published in July 2011 (see http://www.london.gov.uk/publication /londonplan) contains a number of policies which specifically promote inclusive access to the built environment for disabled and older people. The key policies are:  7.2 An Inclusive Environment which requires all new development in London to achieve the highest standards of accessible and inclusive design  7.1 Lifetime Neighbourhoods which deals with places and spaces designed to met the needs of the community at all stages of people's lives and meet the 'lifetime neighbourhoods' criteria  3.5 Housing Design which requires that all new dwellings have adequately sized rooms, convenient and efficient room layouts and meet the needs of Londoners over their lifetime, and address social inclusion  3.8 Housing Choice which requires that all new housing is built to Lifetime Homes standards and ten per cent of new housing is designed to be wheelchair accessible, or easily adaptable for residents who are wheelchair users; and that account is taken of the changing age structure of London's population and in particular the varied needs of older Londoners  4.5 London's Visitor Infrastructure which requires that at least 10% of new hotel bedrooms are wheelchair accessible  2.15 Town Centres which supports the provision of Shopmobility schemes and other measures to improve access to goods and services for older and disabled Londoners  3.1 Equal Life Chances for All which aims to ensure that the barriers to meeting the needs of and expanding opportunities for particular groups and communities and tackling inequality across London are addressed.  Plus a number of other policies on the design of the public realm, car parking facilities, the walking and pedestrian environment, accessible sports facilities, access to arts and culture, and social infrastructure. Supplementary Planning Guidance 4.65 The GLA publishes Supplementary Planning Guidance to provide detailed advice and guidance on the policies in the London Plan. The SPG 'Accessible London: achieving an inclusive environment' published in 2004 provides advice on implementing the inclusive design policies contained in the previous London Plan. The GLA is now updating this advice and mainstreaming it into the new SPGs being published on particular topics. This should help to ensure a wider readership of the inclusive design advice by developers, designers, planners, and the wider community, as well as by access consultants, local access groups, and organisations of disabled and Deaf people. 4.66 Advice on implementing policies 7.1 Lifetime Neighbourhoods, 7.2 Inclusive Design, 7.5 on the design of the public realm and other relevant access policies will be contained in the forthcoming SPG Shaping Neighbourhoods to be published in 2012. 4.67 Advice on accessible hotel bedrooms will be included in the Town Centres SPG to be published in 2012. 4.68 Advice on implementing policies 3.5 housing design and 3.8 housing choice has been included in the draft Housing SPG, published for 12 weeks public consultation in December 2011 (http://www.london.gov.uk/who-runslondon/mayor/publications/planning/ housing-supplementary-planningguidance). The draft housing SPG includes advice on implementing the Interim London Housing Design Guide (http://www.designforlondon.gov.uk/ uploads/media/Interim_London_Hou sing_Design_Guide.pdf) which incorporates the 16 Lifetime Home standards (www.lifetimehomes.org.uk). It also includes in Annex 2.2 best practice advice on wheelchair accessible housing including a diagram to illustrate the key features of wheelchair accessible housing (see page 84-91). For full technical details see Habinteg Housing Association's Wheelchair Housing Design Guide at http://www.habinteg.org.uk/main.cfm ?type=WCHDG. Monitoring Lifetime Homes and Wheelchair Accessible Housing 4.69 The London Development Database began collecting data on whether new dwellings are designed to meet Lifetime Homes and the Wheelchair Housing Design Guide standards on permissions granted from 01/04/2008 onwards. 4.70 All figures in Table 4.10 and Table 4.11 are 'gross' (i.e. existing units are not subtracted) and calculated at 'scheme level'. This means that some units may be counted twice in cases where a revision to part of a scheme, usually in the form of details or reserved matters, is approved in the same year as the original permission. 4.71 LDD records four development types, new build, extension, change of use and conversion, Table 4.11 only includes new build units and extensions, while Table 4.10 includes all development types. Although developers should seek to construct all new dwellings to meet Lifetime Homes standards, there are often practical difficulties that can arise when seeking to modify existing buildings through conversion or change of use. Lifetime units Homes approved borough approved Barking and Dagenham 111 81 73.0 6 5.4 Barnet 2,089 658 31.5 39 1.9 Bexley 313 260 83.1 132 42.2 Brent 2,077 1,195 57.5 161 7.8 Bromley 1,444 188 18.5 18 1.2 Camden 1,210 639 52.8 122 10.1 City of London 95 27 28.4 27 28.4 Croydon 2,510 1,760 72.3 248 9.9 Ealing 5,464 5,237 96.0 529 9.7 Wheelchair % Wheelchair Accessible % Lifetime homes Accessible homes approved Homes approved Lifetime units Homes borough approved approved Enfield 473 226 47.8 77 16.3 Greenwich 3,970 648 16.3 38 1.0 Hackney 1,429 743 52.0 115 8.0 Hammersmith and Fulham 568 219 38.6 27 4.8 Haringey 764 16 2.1 2 0.3 Harrow 1,247 865 70.2 86 6.9 Havering 1,692 757 42.3 61 3.6 Hillingdon 1,410 1,328 94.2 187 13.3 Hounslow 492 38 7.7 10 2.0 Islington 2,232 1,740 78.0 147 6.6 Kensington and Chelsea 1,021 721 70.5 75 7.3 Kingston upon Thames 430 320 74.4 71 16.5 Lambeth 2,484 1,246 50.2 176 7.1 Lewisham 1,325 803 60.6 83 6.3 Merton 704 223 31.7 80 11.4 Newham 2,714 2,434 89.7 226 8.3 Redbridge 605 154 26.1 62 10.2 Richmond upon Thames 734 437 59.5 36 4.9 Southwark 3,300 2,859 86.9 231 7.0 Sutton 562 403 71.7 84 14.9 Tower Hamlets 3,831 78 2.0 9 0.2 Waltham Forest 950 794 83.6 69 7.3 Wandsworth 3,147 2,108 67.0 237 7.5 Westminster 1,100 442 47.1 80 7.3 Total: 52,497 29,647 56.8 3,551 6.8 Source: London Development Database | New | Lifetime | |----------------------|-------------| | Build | Homes | | units | from New | | borough | | | approved | Build | | Barking and Dagenham | 78 | | Barnet | 1,774 | | Bexley | 254 | Wheelchair % Wheelchair Accessible % Lifetime Accessible homes Homes homes approved approved Wheelchair % Lifetime Accessible % Wheelchair Homes from Accessible Homes from New Build from New Build New Build | New | Lifetime | |------------------------|-------------| | Build | Homes | | units | from New | | borough | | | approved | Build | | Brent | 1,894 | | Bromley | 1,259 | | Camden | 686 | | City of London | 9 | | Croydon | 2,073 | | Ealing | 5,200 | | Enfield | 312 | | Greenwich | 3,878 | | Hackney | 1,058 | | Hammersmith and Fulham | 233 | | Haringey | 400 | | Harrow | 949 | | Havering | 1,648 | | Hillingdon | 1,353 | | Hounslow | 422 | | Islington | 1,811 | | Kensington and Chelsea | 802 | | Kingston upon Thames | 305 | | Lambeth | 2,103 | | Lewisham | 924 | | Merton | 341 | | Newham | 2,522 | | Redbridge | 555 | | Richmond upon Thames | 586 | | Southwark | 3,042 | | Sutton | 470 | | Tower Hamlets | 3,646 | | Waltham Forest | 811 | | Wandsworth | 2,789 | | Westminster | 476 | | London | 44,663 | Source: London Development Database 4.72 The figures from LDD show a decrease in the overall percentage in Lifetime Homes compared to AMR 7. Although this may reflect a real trend, the low figures in some boroughs are thought to relate to ongoing problems in monitoring Wheelchair % Lifetime Accessible % Wheelchair Homes from Accessible Homes from New Build from New Build New Build compliance to a design standard that is rarely specified in the conditions associated with the planning permission. Staffing issues in the monitoring teams of specific boroughs may also have played a part. The small increase in the suggest that the decline in Lifetime Homes recorded is not a real reflection of the quality of design of new housing coming forward. proportion of Wheelchair housing (which is often noted as part of the development description for the scheme so is more easily identified) is a positive development and may ENVIRONMENT AND TRANSPORT PTAL Map 4.73 In several important areas of planning policy (dealing, for example, with housing density and parking provision), the London Plan uses public transport accessibility levels (PTALs). At examination in public of the London Plan (EiP), questions were raised about how developers and others can make sure they are working on the basis of the most recent PTALs, given that they change as public transport services are altered and improved. 4.74 The Mayor's representatives agreed at the EiP that the definitive PTAL map (see Figure 4.3) would be published in the AMR. The 2010 PTAL map has been included here as it is the current version for the time covered by this monitoring report and is the one used to calculate compliance with the density matrix. Extracts are available from TfL Crossrail Funding - planning obligations (S.106 agreements) 4.75 Paragraph 4.32 of the Use of Planning Obligations in the Funding of Crossrail SPG refers to the use of the Annual Monitoring Report to monitor the contribution of planning obligations towards funding Crossrail. 4.76 Funding for Crossrail is being supported through £300m being collected in accordance with the London Plan Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) - Use of planning obligations in the funding of Crossrail, and a further £300m proposed through the introduction of a Mayoral Community Infrastructure Levy. Table 4.12 below sets out the funds raised during 2011 through the application of the Crossrail SPG by boroughs in respect of planning applications, whether referable to the Mayor or not. 4.77 These funds are being applied to the Crossrail project via a dedicated account. Progress on Crossrail has been significant during 2011 with:  The completion of the Royal Oak portal marking the projects first tunnelling milestone accordance with the application of the Crossrail SPG | borough | site | Crossrail contribution | |-------------------------------------|------------------------|---------------------------| | referable | | | | Southwark | 156-172 Tooley St. | £235,000 | | Southwark | 61-63 Gt. Suffolk St. | £136,743 | | Westminster | 210-214 Piccadilly | £285,230 | | non-referable | | | | City | 52-60 Holborn Viaduct. | £33,731 | | City | 12-15 Finsbury Circus. | £180,664 | | City | 8-12 Warwick Lane. | £63,128 | | Southwark | 65 Southwark St. | £209,900 | | Total (referable and non-referable) | £1,144,395 | | Source: Transport for London  Canary Wharf station being the first to near structural completion below ground  The unveiling of the first of eight tunnel boring machines that will be used to construct the 21km of twin-bore (6.2m diameter) tunnels.  Work underway across all central London station sites from Paddington to Whitechapel delivering increased passenger capacity, larger ticket halls, stepfree access and new entrances & escalators. 4.78 As explained earlier, the Mayor has brought forward proposals to use the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) to provide £300 million of the cost of the Crossrail project. The Mayor has agreed that CIL charging will start from 1 April 2012. Future AMRs will provide information about how much CIL is collected. The Mayor has announced his intention that there should be biennial reviews of his CIL, so that its effect (if any) on development can be assessed and any changes required made. The first of these reviews will take place in 2014, and the results will be given in the appropriate AMR. ## Progress On Regional Flood Risk Appraisal Recommendations 4.79 The Regional Flood Risk Appraisal (Rfra) Was Published In October Table 4.13 Progress On Regional Flood Risk Appraisal Recommendations | No. | |--------------------------------------------| | 1 | | All Thames-side planning authorities | | should consider in their Strategic Flood | | Risk Assessments (SFRAs) and put in | | place DPD policies to promote the | | setting back of development from the | | edge of the Thames and tidal tributaries | | to enable sustainable and cost effective | | upgrade of river walls/embankments, in | | line with Policy 5.12, Catchment Flood | | Management Plans (CFMPs) and | | Thames Estuary 2100 | | 2 | | The London boroughs of Richmond, | | Kingston-upon-Thames, Hounslow and | | Wandsworth should put in place policies | | to avoid development that would | | prejudice the implementation of | | increased channel capacity between | | Teddington Lock and Hammersmith | | Bridge in line with TE2100 findings | | 3 | | The London boroughs of Havering and | | Bexley should put in place policies to | | prevent development that would | | prejudice the use of | | Rainham/Wennington Marshes, Erith | | Marshes and Dartford/Crayford Marshes | | for emergency flood storage in line with | | TE2100 findings. Although outside | | London, Thurrock and Dartford should | | also consider this aspect of flood risk | | management | | 4 | | Boroughs at confluences of tributary | | rivers with the River Thames should pay | | particular attention to the interaction of | | fluvial and tidal flood risks. These are | | Havering, Barking & Dagenham, | | Newham, Tower Hamlets, Greenwich, | | Lewisham, Wandsworth, Hounslow, | | Richmond and Kingston | 2009 and contains 19 recommendations that are being followed up over five years. Table 4.13 provides an overview of progress at January 2012. Most boroughs are now making reasonable progress in recognising this in either their SFRAs or DPDs. Relevant flood risk management measures are broadly reflected in Kingston, Richmond and Wandsworth, but there are no specific policies in DPDs. The use of these areas for emergency flood storage is not a preferred option so this requirement is no longer valid. Tidal influences are generally taken into account in the SFRA modelling addressing the interaction of fluvial and tidal flood risk at confluences. ## Table 4.13 Progress On Regional Flood Risk Appraisal Recommendations | No. | |-------------------------------------------| | 5 | | Developments all across London should | | reduce surface water discharge in line | | with the Sustainable Drainage Hierarchy | | set out in Policy 5.13 of the London Plan | | 6 | | Regeneration and redevelopment of | | London's fluvial river corridors offer a | | crucial opportunity to reduce flood risk. | | SFRAs and policies should focus on | | making the most of this opportunity | | through appropriate location, layout and | | design of development as set out in | | PPS25 and the Thames CFMP. | | 7 | | Once funding is confirmed Drain London | | will investigate and plan for long term | | management of London's surface water | | infrastructure in order to reduce surface | | water flood risk. | | 8 | | Organisations responsible for | | development with large roof areas | | should investigate providing additional | | surface water run-off storage | | 9 | | Thames Water to continue the | | programme of addressing foul sewer | | flooding | | 10 | | That groundwater flood risk is kept | | under review | | 11 | | Network Rail should examine the | | London Rail infrastructure for potential | | flooding locations and flood risk | | reduction measures. For large stations, | | solutions should be sought to store or | | disperse rainwater from heavy storms; | | this may involve the need for off site | | storage | Some major developments have achieved a high level of run-off reduction, but significant further efforts are required, particularly in relation to smaller scale developments. The introduction of SUDS Approval Body roles for London boroughs is expected in 2013 and this should mark a step change in the application of SUDS across all developments. SFRAs and DPD policies generally promote the use of location, layout and design of new development, including the use of SUDS, to reduce flood risk. Surface Water Management Plans (SWMPs) have been produced for each Borough in 2011. Project is now funding specific investigations and measures to address flood risk areas, this programme will continue to March 2014. No specific actions yet, but progress underway in relation to surface water at Victoria Station. And the GLA will contact TfL and Network Rail regarding other stations and the NHS regarding their estate. Future funding reduced through Ofwat settlement, but initial work underway in relation to Counters Creek sewer in west London. Drain London has identified areas of Indicative Potential for Elevated Groundwater within each SWMP. The Environment Agency also monitors groundwater levels and reports annually - see link below. Network Rail contacted through Drain London, GLA will follow up in 2012. ## Table 4.13 Progress On Regional Flood Risk Appraisal Recommendations | No. | |--------------------------------------------| | 12 | | London Underground and DLR should | | keep potential flood risks to their | | infrastructure and flood risk reduction | | measures under review and up to date | | 13 | | TfL, Highways Agency and London | | boroughs should continue to monitor the | | flood risk and flood risk reduction | | measures at these locations | | (subterranean river crossings and road | | underpasses - RFRA para 148) and | | any others with a potential flood risk | | 14 | | Bus operators should examine bus | | garages for potential flood risks and put | | in place remedial or mitigation | | measures where there is a significant | | risk | | 15 | | Edgware Hospital should carry out a | | flood risk assessment of its current | | premises and determine any mitigation | | works necessary to ensure that the | | hospital can continue to operate in the | | event of a flood on the Silk Stream | | 16 | | Other hospitals in the RFRA table (para | | 153) should examine how they may | | cope in the event of a major flood | | 17 | | The National Offender Management | | Service (NOMS) should ensure that | | there is an emergency plan for | | Belmarsh Prison in the event of a major | | flood | | 18 | | Operators of London's emergency | | services should ensure that emergency | | plans for flooding incidents are kept up | | to date and suitable cover arrangements | | are in place in the event of a flood | | effecting operational locations | | 19 | | Operators of electricity, gas, water and | | sewerage utility sites should maintain an | | up to date assessment of the flood risk | | to their installations and considering the | | likely impacts of failure, programme any | | necessary protection measures, this | | may include secondary flood defences | Source: GLA and Environment Agency LU & DLR are undertaking a review in 2012. Through Drain London, but needs regular review. No specific actions yet. No specific actions yet. GLA will contact NHS as part of the Drain London project. No specific actions yet, but GLA will contact NHS as part of the Drain London project. No specific actions yet, but GLA will contact NOMS as part of the Drain London project. Drain London outputs are informing new London Resilience Team established at City Hall. No specific actions yet, but GLA will contact utility companies during 2012 and 2013. Future monitoring of SUDS 4.80 The potential benefits and feasibility of monitoring the implementation of SUDS is being considered for inclusion in future AMRs. SUDS Approval Bodies (SABs) should become established as required by the Foods and Water Act and developers will have to provide required drainage information. By then we will also have a new Sustainable Design and Construction SPG. Details about a standard that is based on London Plan policy, is meaningful and can be monitored effectively including underlying methodologies and definitions will be explored in cooperation with the Environment Agency CHAPTER 5 ## Other Data Sources CHAPTER FIVE OTHER DATA SOURCES 5.1 This AMR cannot and does not attempt to be comprehensive. There ## Briefings From The Gla Demography And Policy Analysis Group | Reference | Briefing Name | |--------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------| | 2011 01 | London Crime: A National Picture | | 2011 02 | Claimant Count Model 2011: Technical Note | | 2011 03 | London Crime: A National Picture | | 2011 04 | Alternative Vote Referendum Results for London | | 2011 05 | A Profile of the Part-time Workforce in London | | 2011-06 | English Indices of Deprivation: 2010 A London Perspective | | 2011-07 | London Crime: A National Picture - changes over the twelve months to | | March 2011 | | | 2011-08 | London Crime: A National Picture- changes over the Financial Year | | 2010/11 | | ## Updates From The Gla Demography And Policy Analysis Group | Reference | Title | |--------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 01-2011 | 2010 Round Demographic Projections using the SHLAA | | 02-2011 | Unemployment in London: February 2011 | | 03-2011 | Migration Indicators: February 2011 | | 04-2011 | 2010 Ethnic Group Population Projections using the SHLAA | | 05-2011 | Deprivation in London | | 06-2011 | 2011 Employment Security of Social Housing Tenants | | 07-2011 | Poverty Figures for London: 2009/2010 | | 08-2011 | Migration Indicators: May 2011 | | 09-2011 | Effects of Taxes and Benefits on Household Income 2009/10 - A London | | Summary | | | 10-2011 | Financial Capability - A London Summary | | 11-2011 | 2010 Mid-Year Population Estimates | | 12-2011 | Worklessness in London | | 13-2011 | Projected Demand for Places at Higher Education Institutions in London | | 14-2011 | Children in Poverty | | 15-2011 | Migration Indicators | | 16-2011 | London well-being scores at ward level | | 17-2011 | London happiness scores from the 'Taking Part' survey | | 18-2011 | London happiness and well-being | | 19-2011 | The Demographic implications of changes to state pension age | | | | is also a significant amount of relevant data available from both the GLA and other sources. The list of references and links below should enable anyone researching these subjects access to the most up to date data. 5.2 A full list of publications from the Demography and Policy Analysis Group from previous years is available via the GLA's website at: http://www.london.gov.uk/who-runslondon/mayor/publications/society/fa cts-and-figures London Development Database 5.3 For more information on the London Development database either Email the LDD Team or phone 0207 983 4650. 5.4 The LDD public page is in the process of redevelopment. At present it can be found at http://ldd.london.gov.uk/LDD/LDD/w elcome.do Planning Decisions Unit 5.5 More information on the activities of the Mayor's Planning Decisions Unit can be found at: http://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/pl anning/strategic-planningapplications GLA Economics reports 5.6 These are still available at http://www.london.gov.uk/glaeconomics-publications 5.7 For the latest news the Mayor's Business and Economy section can be found at http://www.london.gov.uk/landingpage/business-economy London Sustainable Development Commission 5.8 http://www.londonsdc.org/ London Energy Partnership 5.9 Full details can be found on the website http://www.lep.org.uk/ Other London data sources Waste 5.10 The Mayor's Municipal Waste Management Strategy can be found at http://www.london.gov.uk/publication /londons-wasted-resource-mayorsmunicipal-waste-managementstrategy 5.11 DEFRA produces statistics on waste and recycling which can be found at: http://www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/en vironment/waste/ 5.12 More up to date London specific data is available on the Capital Waste Facts website http://www.capitalwastefacts.com/ Minerals (Aggregates) 5.13 Information on the London Aggregates Working Party (LAWP), including Annual Monitoring Reports, can be found at: http://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/pl anning/london-aggregates-workingparty Waterways 5.14 The London Rivers Action Plan can be found at: http://www.therrc.co.uk/lrap.php Transport 5.15 The latest information on The Mayor's work on transport can be found at: http://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/tr ansport 5.16 Transport for London performance statistics can be found at http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about -tfl/publications/1482.aspx and at http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about -tfl/investorrelations/1458.aspx http://www.education.gov.uk/, which contains a section on Research and Statistics. 5.23 Links to a number of national reports on education provision can be found at: http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/Ofstedhome/Publications-and-research 5.17 Details on how PTAL scores are calculated can be found in http://data.london.gov.uk/documents/ PTAL-methodology.pdf 5.18 A map based PTAL calculator can be found at http://webpid.elgin.gov.uk/. 5.19 The Department for Transport provides some useful data on transport at http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics ## Department Of Environment, Food And Rural Affairs 5.24 Various Data And Studies On The Environment Can Be Found On The Defra Site http://www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/ Health 5.20 London Health Programmes uses health intelligence to identify health needs of Londoners and to redesign services. http://www.londonhp.nhs.uk/ Department for Communities and Local Government 5.25 CLG publishes a number of statistics relating to planning at 5.21 London Health Observatory monitors health and healthcare in the capital. http://www.lho.org.uk/ http://www.communities.gov.uk/plan ningandbuilding/planning/245410 5.26 Specific information about London can be found on The Places Database. http://www.places.communities.gov. uk/latestnews.aspx Government data sources Department of Education 5.22 Various data and studies on education and skills can be found at the following site: CHAPTER SIX ## Conclusions And Looking Ahead CHAPTER SIX CONCLUSIONS AND LOOKING AHEAD 6.1 This AMR covers a period of significant change. At national level, it saw election of a new Government with wide-ranging proposals to change the planning system, and the first expressions of this in the abolition of regional spatial strategies and introduction of neighbourhood planning together with consultation on a new National Planning Policy Framework. In London it saw the publication of the new London Plan and introduction of a new approach to planning policy implementation, of which this AMR forms an important part. At the same time, London has seen continued population growth at a time of serious economic downturn and constrained public resources. 6.2 It is at times of change and challenge that the importance of robust, evidence-based and effectively monitored strategic planning policy for London is demonstrated. This is vital if the progress shown across many of the indicators in this report is to be sustained, and even more so if the areas where further work is needed are to be addressed. 6.3 Looking forward, next year will see implementation of the Mayor's Community Infrastructure Levy. This is likely to be just the first of innovative new ways to use the planning system to help fund and deliver strategic infrastructure, backed up by a strengthened system of infrastructure planning underpinned by the new London Plan Implementation Plan to help ensure that growth and development can proceed sustainably in the capital. We are also likely to see publication of the Government's National Planning Policy Framework, and the need to respond to the changes it will bring. 6.4 London's history shows that it is precisely when the city faces the greatest challenges that planning has the most to offer (and the consequences when it does not happen). As this AMR makes plain, the planning system has much to contribute to Londoners' quality of life - and there is a huge amount of activity at City Hall, in boroughs and neighbourhoods to make sure these opportunities are maximised. Other formats and languages For a large print, Braille, disc, sign language video or audio-tape version of this document, please contact us at the address below: Public Liaison Unit Greater London Authority Telephone 020 7983 4100 City Hall Minicom 020 7983 4458 The Queen's Walk www.london.gov.uk More London London SE1 2AA You will need to supply your name, your postal address and state the format and title of the publication you require. If you would like a summary of this document in your language, please phone the number or contact us at the address above. | Chinese | Hindi | |------------|----------| | Vietnamese | Bengali | | Greek | Urdu | | Turkish | Arabic | | Punjabi | Gujarati |

en

4572-pdf

| Department family | Entity | Date | |---------------------------------------|---------------------------------------|------------| | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 09/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 14/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 14/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 14/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 14/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 14/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 14/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 14/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 14/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 14/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 14/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 14/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 14/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 14/04/2010 | |-----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|--------------| | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 14/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 14/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 14/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 14/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 14/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 14/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 14/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 19/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 21/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 21/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 21/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 21/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 21/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 26/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 26/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 26/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 26/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 26/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 26/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 26/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 26/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 26/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 26/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 26/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 26/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 26/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | |-----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|--------------| | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | The Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust | 29/04/2010 | | Expense type | Expense area | |-------------------------------|-------------------------------| | Laboratory Reagents | Biochemistry Trustwide | | Ext Contr Laundry | Laundry Ddh | | Laboratory Reagents | Histopathology & Cyctology Tw | | Staff Consultancy & Suppt | Order Communications | | Computer Software/License | Myht Nurse Management | | Computer Software/License | Information Technology | | Medical Equip Additions Purch | Balance Sheet | | Medical Equip Additions Purch | Balance Sheet | | Commercial Bank Account 1 | Balance Sheet | | Fm Computer Contracts | Information Technology | | It Additions | Balance Sheet | | Software Additions Purchased | Balance Sheet | | Medical Equip Additions Purch | Balance Sheet | | Medical Equip Additions Purch | Balance Sheet | | Fp10s | A&E Ddh | | Fp10s | Clinical Haematology Ddh | | Fp10s | Clinical Haematology Pgi | | Fp10s | Ent Pgh | | Fp10s | General Medicine Ddh | | Fp10s | General Medicine Pgh | | Fp10s | General Medicine Pgi | | Fp10s | General Surgery - Trustwide | | Fp10s | Neurology Pgh | | Fp10s | Ophthalmology Clay | | Fp10s | Rheumatology Pgh | | Fp10s | Rheumatology Pgi | | Fp10s | Urology Pgh | | Stocks Finished Goods | Balance Sheet | | Medical Equip Additions Purch | Balance Sheet | | General Materials | Sleep Service | | Stocks Finished Goods | Balance Sheet | | Computer Software/License | Information Technology | | Electricity | Estate Management Ddh | | Electricity | Estate Management Ddh | | Medical Equip Additions Purch | Balance Sheet | | Gas | Estate Management Ddh | | Gas | Estate Management Ddh | | Director | Chief Executive | | External Data Contracts | Edms Project | | Audit Fees: Statutory | Myht Finance Team | | Medical Equip Additions Purch | Balance Sheet | | Blood Products | Blood Service Trustwide | | Blood Products | Blood Service Trustwide | | Blood Products | Blood Service Trustwide | | Blood Products | Blood Service Trustwide | | Insurance Costs | Myht Losses And Comps | | Bank Nurse : Qualified | Nhsp Holding Account | | Bank Nurse : Qualified | Nhsp Holding Account | | Nhs Creditors < 1 Year | Balance Sheet | | Nhs Creditors < 1 Year | Balance Sheet | |-------------------------------|--------------------------------| | Nhs Creditors < 1 Year | Balance Sheet | | Nhs Creditors < 1 Year | Balance Sheet | | Nhs Creditors < 1 Year | Balance Sheet | | Nhs Creditors < 1 Year | Balance Sheet | | Nhs Creditors < 1 Year | Balance Sheet | | Stocks Finished Goods | Balance Sheet | | Healthcare Srv Rec Pcts | Therapies Sla | | Aucc Additions Donated | Balance Sheet | | Insurance Costs | Myht Losses And Comps | | Postage & Carriage | General Office Pgh | | Stocks Finished Goods | Balance Sheet | | Stocks Finished Goods | Balance Sheet | | Rent | Non Clinical Management Pgh | | Ext Contr Laundry | Laundry Ddh | | Laboratory Reagents | Microbiology Trustwide | | Laboratory Reagents | Microbiology Trustwide | | External Consultancy Fees | Myht Nurse Management | | Info Tech Security Costs | Hospital Development Project | | Computer Hardware Purch | Information Technology | | Grade D - Bank | Nhsp Holding Account | | Nhs Creditors < 1 Year | Balance Sheet | | X-Ray Equip Maint/Repair | Trust Medical Physics | | X-Ray Equip Maint/Repair | Trust Medical Physics | | Medical Equip Additions Purch | Balance Sheet | | Software Additions Purchased | Balance Sheet | | Ext Contr Laundry | Linen Services Pgh | | Commercial Sector | Mri Service | | Nonres Bldg Adds Purchased | Balance Sheet | | Stocks Finished Goods | Balance Sheet | | It Additions | Balance Sheet | | Nonres Bldg Adds Purchased | Balance Sheet | | Commercial Sector | Mri Service | | Medical Equip Additions Purch | Balance Sheet | | Medical Equip Additions Purch | Balance Sheet | | Laboratory External Tests | Biochemistry Trustwide | | Laboratory External Tests | Haematology Trustwide | | Laboratory External Tests | Haematology Trustwide | | Laboratory External Tests | Histopathology & Cyctology Tw | | Laboratory External Tests | Histopathology & Cyctology Tw | | Laboratory External Tests | Microbiology Trustwide | | Laboratory External Tests | Pathology Management Trustwide | | Laboratory External Tests | Pathology Management Trustwide | | Senior Lecturer | General Surgery - Trustwide | | Senior Lecturer | General Surgery - Trustwide | | Blood Products | Blood Service Trustwide | | Blood Products | Blood Service Trustwide | | Blood Products | Blood Service Trustwide | | Fp10s | A&E Ddh | | Fp10s | Clinical Haematology Ddh | Fp10s Clinical Haematology Pgi Fp10s Ent Pgh Fp10s General Medicine Ddh Fp10s General Medicine Pgh Fp10s General Medicine Pgi Fp10s General Surgery - Trustwide Fp10s Neurology Pgh Fp10s Obstetrics Ddh Fp10s Ophthalmology Clay Fp10s Rheumatology Pgh Fp10s Rheumatology Pgi Fp10s Urology Pgh Bank Nurse : Qualified Nhsp Holding Account Nhs Creditors < 1 Year Balance Sheet Stocks Finished Goods Balance Sheet | Electricity | Pgh Utilities & Rates | |---------------|-------------------------| | Electricity | Pgi Utilities & Rates | | Gas | Estate Management Ddh | | Gas | Estate Management Ddh | | Gas | Pgh Utilities & Rates | | Gas | Pgi Utilities & Rates | | Water | Pgh Utilities & Rates | | Water | Pgh Utilities & Rates | | Supplier | Transaction Number | Amount | |----------------------------------------------|----------------------|-----------| | Abbott Laboratories Ltd | 346622 | 31436.3 | | Airedale Nhs Trust | 13776 | 25236.5 | | A Menarini Diagnostics | 346731 | 45599.4 | | Calderdale And Huddersfield Foundation Trust | 13777 | 35848 | | Dr Foster Ltd | 345439 | 31500 | | Healthcare Software Systems | 346532 | 39644.5 | | Inspiration Healthcare Ltd | 346164 | 48586.2 | | Inspiration Healthcare Ltd | 346194 | 48586.2 | | Kcom | 347065 | 81906.4 | | Kcom | 336540 | -81906.4 | | Kcom | 346429 | 51997.4 | | Kcom | 346429 | 37152.6 | | Leica Microsystems Uk Ltd | 344728 | 28115.8 | | Med Imaging Limited | 344727 | 39919.5 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 13743 | 94.9 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 13743 | 9437.58 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 13743 | 4216.93 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 13743 | 1313.72 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 13743 | 1206.6 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 13743 | 11.1 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 13743 | 27.5 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 13743 | 1813.95 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 13743 | 192.22 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 13743 | 4785.65 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 13743 | 928.81 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 13743 | 330.69 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 13743 | 3961.3 | | Novartis Pharmaceuticals Uk Ltd | 346967 | 38195.6 | | Philips Medical Systems | 344608 | 650506 | | Philips Respironics | 344317 | 31396 | | Roche Products Ltd | 346953 | 47869.5 | | Scc Specialist Computer Centres | 346463 | 32730 | | Southern Electric | 339135 | 1310.84 | | Southern Electric | 339135 | 49867.9 | | Thermo Shandon Ltd | 345458 | 47470 | | Total Gas & Power | 340404 | 993.3 | | Total Gas & Power | 340404 | 39111.8 | | Department Of Health | 13808 | 37954.5 | | Edm Group Ltd | 347767 | 77862 | | Grant Thornton | 346403 | 51406.2 | | Medtronic Ltd | 348096 | 80487.5 | | Nhs Blood And Transplant | 13884 | 37983.3 | | Nhs Blood And Transplant | 13886 | 111300 | | Nhs Blood And Transplant | 13889 | 46595.2 | | Nhs Blood And Transplant | 13966 | 28283.7 | | Nhs Litigation Authority | 13963 | 795510 | | Nhs Professionals | 13992 | 108731 | | Nhs Professionals | 14017 | 117508 | | Nhs Supply Chain | 13782 | 162233 | | Nhs Supply Chain | 13783 | 62251.09 | |-----------------------------------------------|---------|------------| | Nhs Supply Chain | 13850 | 40496.9 | | Nhs Supply Chain | 13851 | 89906 | | Nhs Supply Chain | 13868 | 120966 | | Nhs Supply Chain | 13878 | 31999.5 | | Nhs Supply Chain | 13900 | 75433.4 | | Novartis Pharmaceuticals Uk Ltd | 348460 | 92137.6 | | Wakefield District Pct | 13860 | 59166 | | Consort Healthcare (Mid Yorkshire) Ltd | 346690 | 162483 | | Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Ltd | 348528 | 60564 | | Neopost Ltd Rcb Credifon A/C | 348854 | 25000 | | Roche Products Ltd | 350850 | 47869.5 | | Roche Products Ltd | 350851 | 51297.6 | | Wakefield Metropolitan District Council | 348039 | 31031.8 | | Airedale Nhs Trust | 14004 | 32354.5 | | Becton Dickinson Uk Ltd | 339569 | 25349.5 | | Becton Dickinson Uk Ltd | 350839 | 25129.4 | | Care Quality Commision | 348613 | 75000 | | Consort Healthcare (Mid Yorkshire) Ltd | 352401 | 165712 | | Dell Corporation Ltd | 350688 | 70135.8 | | Nhs Professionals | 14076 | 117508 | | Nhs Supply Chain | 14049 | 95101.8 | | Nhs Supply Chain | 14116 | 141468 | | Nhs Supply Chain | 14117 | 70531.3 | | Siemens Healthcare*****Invoices Start 101**** | 340507 | 328146 | | Telephonetics Vip | 345383 | 39715 | | The Sunlight Service Group Ltd | 348828 | 63027.8 | | Alliance Medical Ltd | 346483 | 84333 | | Balfour Beatty Construction Ltd | 346350 | 791478 | | Bio Products Laboratory | 14196 | 28015 | | Dell Corporation Ltd | 351636 | 86544.6 | | Grove Building Solutions Ltd | 346185 | 48500 | | Inhealth Ltd | 346300 | 43948.1 | | Karl Storz Endoscopy Uk Ltd | 351750 | 415986 | | Karl Storz Endoscopy Uk Ltd | 351751 | -407135 | | Leeds Teaching Hospitals Nhs Trust | 14156 | 58207 | | Leeds Teaching Hospitals Nhs Trust | 14157 | 35352 | | Leeds Teaching Hospitals Nhs Trust | 14158 | 54251 | | Leeds Teaching Hospitals Nhs Trust | 14158 | 84373 | | Leeds Teaching Hospitals Nhs Trust | 14160 | 29073 | | Leeds Teaching Hospitals Nhs Trust | 14159 | 48312 | | Leeds Teaching Hospitals Nhs Trust | 13742 | 624077 | | Leeds Teaching Hospitals Nhs Trust | 14208 | -624077 | | Leeds Teaching Hospitals Nhs Trust | 13848 | -69081 | | Leeds Teaching Hospitals Nhs Trust | 13898 | -40952 | | Nhs Blood And Transplant | 14070 | 46595.2 | | Nhs Blood And Transplant | 14072 | 111300 | | Nhs Blood And Transplant | 14074 | 37983.3 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 14163 | 32.4 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 14163 | 28109.6 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 14163 | 16584.33 | |-----------------------------------|---------|------------| | Nhs Business Services Authority | 14163 | 1987.09 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 14163 | 950.13 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 14163 | 30.75 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 14163 | 2.31 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 14163 | 1740.17 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 14163 | 120.12 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 14163 | 111.99 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 14163 | 5284.7 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 14163 | 520.61 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 14163 | 784.32 | | Nhs Business Services Authority | 14163 | 3167.23 | | Nhs Professionals | 14090 | 115173 | | Nhs Supply Chain | 14118 | 125921 | | Roche Products Ltd | 353435 | 71804.2 | | Southern Electric | 349362 | 78313.4 | | Southern Electric | 349647 | 38139.3 | | Total Gas & Power | 350212 | 884.52 | | Total Gas & Power | 350212 | 34794.2 | | Total Gas & Power | 350186 | 51068.4 | | Total Gas & Power | 341641 | 28857.6 | | Yorkshire Water Services Ltd | 347050 | 587.5 | | Yorkshire Water Services Ltd | 347050 | 24952.2 |

en

0315-pdf

# 2018 Uk Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Provisional Figures Statistical Release: National Statistics ## ## © Crown Copyright 2019 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk. Where we have identified any third-party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at: ClimateChange.Statistics@beis.gov.uk The responsible statistician for this publication is Amanda Penistone. Contact telephone: 0300 068 8090. ## Contents Executive Summary ___________________________________________________ 2 Introduction __________________________________________________________ 4 2018 annual provisional emissions results __________________________________ 6 Energy Supply _____________________________________________________ 8 Residential and Public sectors _________________________________________ 10 Transport sector ____________________________________________________ 11 Business sector ____________________________________________________ 11 Other sectors ______________________________________________________ 11 Carbon dioxide emissions by fuel type _____________________________________ 12 2018 temperature adjusted provisional emissions results by sector _______________ 14 Additional Information __________________________________________________ 16 Coverage of emissions reporting _______________________________________ 16 Basis of the provisional emissions estimates ______________________________ 16 Methodology change for non-CO2 provisional emissions estimates _____________ 17 Quarterly totals _____________________________________________________ 17 Temperature adjustment ______________________________________________ 17 Revisions to the quarterly provisional emissions estimates ___________________ 18 Future updates to emissions estimates __________________________________ 18 Further information __________________________________________________ 18 National Statistics designation _________________________________________ 19 Background notes ___________________________________________________ 19 ## Executive Summary This publication provides the latest estimates of 1990-2018 UK greenhouse gas emissions which are presented in carbon dioxide equivalent units throughout this statistical release. ## Key Findings The provisional estimates suggest that in 2018, total UK greenhouse gas emissions were 43.5 per cent lower than in 1990 and 2.5 per cent lower than 2017. The provisional emissions figures rely on provisional estimates of carbon dioxide emissions based on UK energy statistics. In 2018, UK net emissions of carbon dioxide were provisionally estimated to be 364.1 million tonnes (Mt), 2.4 per cent lower than the 2017 figure of 373.2 Mt. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the main greenhouse gas, accounting for 81 per cent of total UK greenhouse gas emissions. The decrease in carbon dioxide emissions was driven by the continuing downward trend in emissions from power stations, with a 9.9 per cent decrease between 2017 and 2018. This is mainly as a result of changes in the fuel mix used for electricity generation, away from coal and towards renewables. 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 the households, public sector, businesses, etc. where the electricity is used. ## 2018 UK greenhouse gas emissions are provisionally estimated to be lower than in 2017 Adjusting emissions for external temperature does not change the long term trend Temperature adjusted emissions estimates remove the estimated effect of external temperatures Emissions are calculated for each quarter, with the preceding four quarters summed to create a rolling annual total The energy supply sector experienced the largest reduction in CO2 emissions from 2017-2018 The reduction in power sector emissions has been driven by a shift away from using coal for electricity generation towards gas and renewables For the sectors not included here, provisional CO2 estimates for 2018 cannot be made as they cannot be derived from the energy statistics. Final 2018 estimates for all sectors will be published in February 2020, which will include total emissions by sector. ## Introduction This publication provides provisional annual and quarterly estimates of UK greenhouse gas emissions by source sector for 2018. It also provides an estimate of temperature adjusted emissions, which give an idea of overall trends in emissions without fluctuations due to changes in external temperature. Data for 1990-2017 are consistent with the annual emissions presented in the National Statistics publication 2017 Final UK Greenhouse Gas Emissions statistics. Data for 2018 emissions are provisional and are calculated based on UK energy statistics. The provisional estimates of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are based on provisional inland energy consumption statistics, which are being published at the same time by BEIS in the quarterly Energy Trends publication. Estimates of non-CO2 gases are based on a simple approach which assumes that emissions of non-CO2 gases in 2018 will change from the 2017 total in line with the percentage difference between the estimates for the 2017 and 2018 of non-CO2 emissions in the 2018 Energy and Emissions Projections published by BEIS, and that these emissions will be spread evenly over the year. Quarterly emissions estimates are presented as a moving annual total up to a particular quarter. For example when quarterly emissions are presented as up to quarter 4, 2018, this represents an annual total comprising the latest quarter (quarter 4 2018) and the preceding 3 quarters (quarters 1, 2 and 3 of 2018). Presenting the data in this way has some advantages over presenting data for single quarters, since seasonal fluctuations are smoothed out and long term trends highlighted. Data on emissions in individual quarters are available in the data tables published alongside this publication. 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 2018 estimates are subject to a greater range of uncertainty than the final figures for earlier years. For more information on uncertainties see the annex published alongside the 2017 Final UK Greenhouse Gas Emissions statistics. For the purposes of reporting, greenhouse gas emissions are allocated into sectors as follows: - Energy supply - Business - Transport - Public - Residential - Agriculture - Industrial process - Land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF) - Waste management 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)1 and which are used in international reporting tables which are submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)2 every year. It is important to note that these figures are based on provisional energy data and are subject to change. The sectoral breakdown is given mainly for information, and is included in the publication for completeness, but sectoral estimates are more uncertain than the overall total. The provisional estimates are not used for any formal reporting of how the UK is performing against its emissions reduction targets, as this requires final estimates based on the UK's greenhouse gas inventory. However, these statistics give policy makers and other users an initial steer as to the trend in emissions between 2017 and 2018, which helps them to form an initial assessment of the extent to which the UK is on track to meet targets. For information on UK emissions targets and progress towards them, see the 2017 Final UK Greenhouse Gas Emissions statistics. More information about the underlying methodology for the provisional emissions statistics can be found in the accompanying methodology summary. Note that all 2018 greenhouse gas emissions and energy statistics figures in this statistics release are provisional and subject to change. The annual provisional emissions estimates will be subject to revision when the final estimates are published in February 2020; however, they provide an early indication of emissions for the most recent full calendar year. We recommend that users look at this trend rather than any absolute figures. ## 2018 Annual Provisional Emissions Results In 2018, an estimated 33 per cent of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions were from the transport sector, 27 per cent from energy supply, 18 per cent from business and 18 per cent from the residential sector. Between 2017 and 2018, provisional estimates indicate that carbon dioxide emissions decreased by 2.4 per cent (9.1 million tonnes (Mt)). MtCO2e 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2017 2018 (p) Energy supply 242.1 210.3 204.0 219.1 197.3 137.6 106.0 98.3 from power stations 203.0 163.0 158.7 173.1 157.3 104.1 72.4 65.2 other Energy supply 39.1 47.3 45.3 46.0 40.0 33.4 33.5 33.1 Business 111.9 108.9 108.7 96.9 78.2 69.5 66.1 65.9 Transport 125.4 126.8 131.0 134.3 123.4 122.2 124.6 121.4 Public 13.4 13.2 12.1 11.1 9.4 7.9 7.8 8.1 Residential 78.3 79.6 85.6 82.5 84.5 64.5 64.1 65.9 Agriculture 6.5 6.5 5.5 6.1 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.6 Industrial process 19.4 17.7 16.9 16.3 10.6 12.1 10.2 10.0 Waste management 1.3 1.0 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 LULUCF -2.0 -3.9 -6.0 -8.9 -10.7 -11.2 -11.3 -11.3 Total CO2 596.3 560.1 558.3 557.9 498.3 408.3 373.2 364.1 Other greenhouse gases 198.0 185.4 149.2 125.8 102.5 89.6 87.0 84.4 Total greenhouse gases 794.4 745.6 707.5 683.7 600.9 498.0 460.2 448.5 Notes: 1. (p) 2018 estimates are provisional. 2. Provisional 2018 CO2 emissions for the agriculture, waste and LULUCF sectors are assumed to be the same as 2017 estimates as unlike other CO2 estimates these cannot be estimated from energy statistics. 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 (EU ETS), which was introduced in 2005. 6. Totals for CO2 emissions, energy supply and total greenhouse gases may not sum due to rounding. 7. Estimates of non-CO2 gases are based on a simple approach which assumes that emissions of non-CO2 gases in 2018 will change from the 2017 total in line with the percentage difference between the estimates for the 2017 and 2018 of non-CO2 emissions in the 2018 Energy and Emissions Projections published by BEIS. Carbon dioxide emissions in the energy supply sector decreased by 7.2 per cent (7.7 Mt), between 2017 and 2018 driven by a change in the fuel mix for electricity generation. There was also a fall of 2.6 per cent (3.2 Mt) in transport carbon dioxide emissions. Changes in transport emissions are usually as a result of traffic volumes or improvements in fuel efficiency. These falls in emissions between 2017 and 2018 were partially offset by a 2.8 per cent (1.8 Mt) increase in residential carbon dioxide emissions owing to an increase in the amount of natural gas used for heating. This is likely to be due to a difference in weather conditions between the two years. Adjusting for temperatures suggests there would have been a 1.5 per cent decrease in residential carbon dioxide emissions without the effect of temperature changes. Since 1990, UK carbon dioxide emissions have decreased by 39 per cent. This decrease has resulted mainly from changes in the mix of fuels being used for electricity generation, with a shift away from coal and growth in the use of renewable energy sources. This was combined with lower electricity demand, owing to greater efficiency resulting from improvements in technology and a decline in the relative importance of energy intensive industries. Overall inland energy consumption is provisionally estimated to have decreased by 11 per cent since 1990, and if this figure is adjusted to allow for the effect of temperature, there was a 13 per cent decrease over this period. As shown in Figure 2 above, temperature adjusting greenhouse gas emissions show a similar overall trend to non-temperature adjusted emissions. On a temperature adjusted basis, greenhouse gas emissions decreased by 23 per cent between 2009 and 2018, similar to the fall in actual emissions over this period (24 per cent). ## Energy Supply The energy supply sector was the largest contributor to the decrease in carbon dioxide emissions between 2017 and 2018. Carbon dioxide emissions from this sector were provisionally estimated to be 98.3 Mt in 2018, a decrease of 7.2 per cent (7.7 Mt) compared to 2017. This fall was mainly as a result of a 9.9 per cent (7.2 Mt) fall in carbon dioxide emissions from power stations. In 2018, carbon dioxide emissions from power stations, at 65.2 Mt, accounted for 18 per cent of all carbon dioxide emissions. Overall emissions from power stations were 68 per cent lower in 2018 than in 1990. This is despite consumption of electricity being provisionally estimated to be around 8 per cent higher in 2018 than in 1990 (although it peaked in 2005 and has decreased since then). This decrease has mainly resulted from changes in the mix of fuels being used for electricity generation with a switch from coal to natural gas and growth in the use of renewable energy sources, combined with greater efficiency resulting from improvements in technology and a decline in the relative importance of energy intensive industries. In 2018 coal made up only 7 per cent of fuel used for electricity generation, down from 65 per cent in 1990. Nuclear and renewables, which are low carbon energy sources, accounted for 47 per cent of fuel used for electricity generation in 2018, up from 22 per cent in 1990. ## Figure 3: Fuel Mix For Uk Electricity Generation, 1990-2018 (Million Tonnes Of Oil Equivalent) ## Figure 4: Carbon Dioxide Emissions From Electricity Generation, Uk, 1990-2018 (Mtco2) Note: (p) 2018 estimates are provisional. ## Residential And Public Sectors The main source of emissions in these sectors is the use of natural gas for heating (and for cooking in the case of the residential sector). It should be noted that emissions from these sectors do not include the emissions from the generation of the electricity consumed, as these emissions are included in the energy supply sector. In 2018, the residential sector emitted 65.9 MtCO2, accounting for 18 per cent of all carbon dioxide emissions. Emissions from the public sector were 8.1 MtCO2 accounting for 2 per cent of all carbon dioxide emissions. Between 1990 and 2018 carbon dioxide emissions from the residential sector have fallen by 16 per cent. ## Between 2017 And 2018: - There was a 2.8 per cent (1.8 Mt) increase in residential emissions. - There was 4.5 per cent (0.3 Mt) increase in emissions from the public sector These increases can largely be explained by colder weather in Q1 2018 than the previous year. On a temperature adjusted basis between 2017 and 2018: - There was a 1.5 per cent (1.1 Mt) decrease in residential emissions. - There was a 1.6 per cent (0.1 Mt) increase in emissions from the public sector ## Transport Sector In 2018, carbon dioxide emissions from the transport sector were 121.4 Mt, 2.6 per cent (3.2 Mt) lower than in 2017, and 3.2 per cent lower than in 1990. In 2018 transport accounted for a third (33 per cent) of all carbon dioxide emissions. The large majority of emissions from transport are from road transport. Driven by continual growth in vehicle kilometres travelled on roads3, transport carbon dioxide grew to a peak in 2007, 8.5 per cent higher than in 1990. Since then emissions from this sector have fallen back to around 1990 levels, driven mainly by improvements in new car fuel efficiency4, as well lower traffic growth than in previous years as a result of a dip following the 2008/2009 recession. It should be noted that these estimates do not include emissions from international aviation and shipping. Domestic aviation and shipping, however, are included. ## Business Sector Carbon dioxide emissions from the business sector were estimated to be 65.9 Mt in 2018 and accounted for around 18 per cent of all carbon dioxide emissions. This was similar to the emissions seen in 2017. There has been a 41 per cent decrease in business sector emissions since 1990. Most of this decrease came between 2001 and 2009, with a significant drop in 2009 likely to have been driven by economic factors. ## Other Sectors For the agriculture, *waste management*, and land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF) provisional CO2 emissions cannot be derived based on energy statistics, so the carbon dioxide emissions from these sectors are assumed to be the same as they were in 20175. This is also the case for most of the emissions from the *industrial processes* sector. ## Carbon Dioxide Emissions By Fuel Type The combustion of fuels releases both energy and carbon dioxide. The amount of carbon dioxide released by the production of one unit of power depends on the type of fuel that is burned. For example, since coal has a higher carbon content than gas, more carbon dioxide emissions result from burning one tonne of coal to generate a unit of power than from one tonne of gas. Emissions per unit of electricity supplied from fossil fuels are estimated to have been around 430 tonnes of carbon dioxide per gigawatt hour (GWh) overall in 2018. Within this, emissions from electricity generated from coal (870 tonnes of carbon dioxide per GWh electricity supplied) were almost twice as high as for electricity supplied by gas (340 tonnes of carbon dioxide per GWh). For all sources of electricity (including nuclear, renewables and autogeneration), the average amount of carbon dioxide emitted in 2018 amounted to 180 tonnes per GWh of electricity supplied. In 2018, total carbon dioxide emissions from the use of fossil fuels, including fuel used for generating electricity, were estimated at 350.5 Mt. This was 2.5 per cent lower than the 2017 figure of 359.4 Mt. The biggest change in emissions was from the use of coal, down 5.1 Mt (20.4 per cent) from 25.2 Mt in 2017 to 20.1 Mt in 2018. This largely resulted from the increasing use of renewables for electricity generation. Over the period 1990 to 2018, carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels decreased by 38 per cent. Over the same period, overall primary consumption of fossil fuels dropped by 22 per cent. This relatively high decrease in emissions can be attributed to an increase in the use of gas accompanied by a decrease in the use of coal. Carbon dioxide emissions from gas as a proportion of all carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels has increased from 26 per cent in 1990 to 52 per cent in 2018, whilst emissions from coal as a proportion of all fossil fuel carbon dioxide emissions has decreased from 39 per cent to 6 per cent over the same period. The proportion of carbon dioxide emissions from oil as a proportion of all carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels has increased from 35 per cent in 1990 to 42 per cent in 2018. MtCO2e 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2017 2018 (p) Gas 146.1 188.5 241.5 235.3 228.2 173.1 183.4 183.1 Oil 197.9 187.2 174.6 175.7 155.1 148.5 150.8 147.3 Coal 219.2 152.2 117.0 124.9 100.9 72.6 25.2 20.1 Other fuels 14.9 14.4 12.8 11.7 11.2 11.5 12.1 11.9 Non-fuel 18.3 17.8 12.5 10.2 2.9 2.6 1.7 1.7 Total 596.3 560.1 558.3 557.9 498.3 408.3 373.2 364.1 Source: Table 2, Provisional UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2018 Excel data tables Note: (p) 2018 estimates are provisional. A negative number indicates that this sector was a net sink, with the total removals of carbon dioxide by the land use, land use change and forestry sector larger than the emissions from other non-fuel activities. Source: Table 2, Provisional UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2018 Excel data tables Note: (p) 2018 estimates are provisional. ## 2018 Temperature Adjusted Provisional Emissions Results By Sector A temperature adjustment has been applied to the quarterly CO2 emissions, in order to estimate what the overall trend of emissions would have been without the impact of external temperatures. Table 3 compares temperature adjusted and unadjusted CO2 emissions by sector in 2018. Temperature adjusted emissions Actual emissions 2017 2018 Percentage 2017 2018 Percentage (MtCO2) (MtCO2) change (MtCO2) (MtCO2) change Energy supply 110.7 101.3 -8.5% 106.0 98.3 -7.2% Business 68.5 67.4 -1.6% 66.1 65.9 -0.3% Transport 124.6 121.4 -2.6% 124.6 121.4 -2.6% Public 8.4 8.5 1.6% 7.8 8.1 4.5% Residential 72.0 70.9 -1.5% 64.1 65.9 2.8% Other 4.7 4.5 -3.1% 4.7 4.5 -3.1% Total CO2 388.9 374.1 -3.8% 373.2 364.1 -2.4% Source: Tables 3 & 4, Provisional UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2018 Excel data tables The sectors most affected by external temperatures are the residential sector and energy supply. When temperatures are lower there is greater use of natural gas and electricity for heating households. Residential emissions fluctuate from year to year owing to year on year variation in weather conditions. As shown in Figure 8, after we adjust the residential emissions figures to remove the effect of year on year variation in temperatures, we see a more consistent downward trend. Between 2009 and 2018 residential emissions fell by 12 per cent, but only fell by 9 per cent on a temperature adjusted basis. The overall trend in temperature adjusted energy supply emissions is similar to the unadjusted trend, as the majority of electricity generated is used for other purposes rather than heating. ## Uk, Year Ending Q1 2009 - Year Ending Q4 2018 (Mtco2) Source: Tables 3 & 4, Provisional UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2018 Excel data tables ## Year Ending Q1 2009 - Year Ending Q4 2018 (Mtco2) Source: Tables 3 & 4, Provisional UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2018 Excel data tables ## Additional Information Coverage Of Emissions Reporting The basket of greenhouse gases covered by these statistics is based on that covered by the Kyoto Protocol, and consists of seven gases: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFC), perfluorocarbons (PFC), sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) and nitrogen trifluoride (NF3). The last four 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)7, 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 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 exclude its Crown Dependencies (Jersey, Guernsey, and the Isle of Man) and overseas territories. Figures are expressed in millions of tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO2e). ## Basis Of The Provisional Emissions Estimates The estimates of carbon dioxide emissions have been produced based on provisional inland energy consumption statistics which are published in BEIS's quarterly Energy Trends publication. Carbon dioxide accounts for the majority of UK greenhouse gas emissions (81 per cent in 2017). However, in order to give an indication of what the latest provisional carbon dioxide emissions estimates imply for the total, we need to also produce an estimate of emissions of the remaining non-CO2 gases. Estimates of non-CO2 gases are based on a simple approach which assumes that emissions of non-CO2 gases in 2018 will change from the 2017 total in line with the percentage difference between the estimates for the 2017 and 2018 non-CO2 emissions in the 2018 Energy and Emissions Projections published by BEIS. ## Methodology Change For Non-Co2 Provisional Emissions Estimates In the provisional statistics, estimates of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are produced based on provisional inland energy consumption statistics published in BEIS's quarterly Energy Trends publications, while the smaller non-CO2 emissions (19 per cent of the total in 2017) have previously been estimated based on an assumption that they will be the same as in the most recent year in the final statistics. However, in the 2018 estimates this approach to estimating non-CO2 emissions has been changed. The 2018 non-CO2 emissions have been estimated by adjusting the 2017 non-CO2 emissions total in the 1990-2017 greenhouse gas inventory in proportion to the percentage difference between the estimates for the 2017 and 2018 non-CO2 emissions in the most recent Energy and Emissions Projections published by BEIS. Using the projections means that the provisional statistics will take into account anticipated changes in emissions. In recent years, non-CO2 emissions have steadily fallen year on year in the greenhouse gas inventory, meaning that the provisional statistics have overestimated non- CO2 emissions each year, whereas they were projected to continue to fall. Based on the 1990-2016 inventory, using this new approach would have led to the provisional non-CO2 emissions total having a difference of 2.0 per cent on average from the final figure over the most recent five years compared to a 3.0 per cent average difference under the previous approach. ## Quarterly Totals In order to remove the seasonality in the data so that a trend in emissions over time can be observed, quarterly emissions are reported as annual totals, covering the stated quarter plus the preceding three quarters. When data becomes available for each new quarter, the estimates for the latest quarter are added to the total, while at the same time the estimates for the same quarter from the previous year are removed from the series. This procedure serves to smooth out short-term fluctuations and highlights long term trends, and can be used to show the underlying trend each quarter. Emissions estimates for each individual quarter are reported in the data tables accompanying this publication. ## Temperature Adjustment Carbon dioxide emissions are indirectly influenced by external temperatures. During the winter months, emissions are generally higher than in summer months, due to higher demand for fuel for space heating. During a particularly cold winter for example, it is likely that more fuel will be burnt for domestic or commercial use than during an average winter, and therefore emissions will be higher due to the additional fuel consumption. Temperature adjusted quarterly emissions estimates therefore remove the effect of external temperatures. In a particularly cold winter quarter, for example, this will result in temperature adjusted emissions being lower than actual emissions, reflecting the lower fuel consumption which would have occurred if temperatures had been at average levels (based on the 30 year period 1981-2010). Temperature adjustment is determined by the average number of heating degree days in each quarter. This information can be found in Energy Trends. Further details of how quarterly emissions have been estimated and of the methodology underlying the temperature adjusted estimates can be found alongside this statistical release in a separate methodology summary. ## Revisions To The Quarterly Provisional Emissions Estimates It should be noted that the quarterly emissions time series may be revised annually to reflect any revisions made to either the underlying energy data or to the UK greenhouse gas inventory. Emissions from 2009-2017 are consistent with final UK greenhouse gas emissions statistics from 1990-2017. Emissions estimates for 2018 are provisional and are based on UK energy statistics. More information on the timing of revisions to the underlying data can be found in the methodology summary. ## Future Updates To Emissions Estimates On Thursday 27th June BEIS will publish estimates of carbon dioxide emissions by local authority for 2017. Final estimates of UK greenhouse gas emissions for 2018 will be published as National Statistics on 4th February 2020. These estimates will be based on the UK's Greenhouse Gas Inventory for 2018. On Thursday 27th March 2020 the 1990-2018 UK emissions estimates will be updated to include estimates by end user and by fuel type, and provisional 2019 emissions estimates will be published. ## Further Information 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/collections/uk-greenhouse-gas-emissions-statistics The latest UK energy statistics, including revisions to earlier years' data, can be found in the Energy Trends quarterly bulletin produced by BEIS. Any enquiries about the Energy Trends report should be sent to energyefficiency.stats@beis.gov.uk. ## National Statistics Designation National Statistics status means that our statistics meet the highest standards of trustworthiness, quality and public value, and it is our responsibility to maintain compliance with these standards. The continued designation of these statistics as National Statistics was confirmed in September 2018 following a compliance check by the Office for Statistics Regulation. The statistics last underwent a full assessment against the Code of Practice for Statistics in 2014. Since the latest review by the Office for Statistics Regulation, we have continued to comply with the Code of Practice for Statistics, and have made the following improvements: - Improved the accuracy of the historic emissions estimates by continuing to make methodological changes to the UK's Greenhouse Gas Inventory. - Improved the accuracy of the provisional estimates by reviewing and changing the methodology for making provisional estimates of non-CO2 emissions. ## Background Notes 1. A full set of data tables can be accessed via the provisional UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics pages of the Gov.uk website. 2. The background quality report provides a summary of quality issues relating to statistics on UK greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. 3. The latest UK energy statistics, including revisions to earlier years' data, can be found in the Digest of UK Energy Statistics. 4. Detailed UK temperature data can be found on both the Met Office website and the weather statistics section of the Gov.uk website. 5. 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. 6. Some ministers and officials receive pre-release access to these statistics up to 24 hours before release. Details of the arrangements for doing this and a list of the ministers and officials that receive pre-release access to these statistics can be found in the BEIS statement of compliance with the Pre-Release Access to Official Statistics Order 2008. This publication is available from: www.gov.uk/government/collections/final-ukgreenhouse-gas-emissions-national-statistics If you need a version of this document in a more accessible format, please email enquiries@beis.gov.uk. Please tell us what format you need. It will help us if you say what assistive technology you use.

en

3639-pdf

## Conference Room A The National Archives Kew | 10.15-10.45 | Arrival and coffee | | |---------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------|-----| | | | | | 10.45-11.00 | Introductory remarks and news from TNA | | | Malcolm Todd | | | | | | | | 11.00-11.40 | New dimensions in public task | | | Howard Davies | | | | 11.40-12.20 | Infringement policy | | | Guy Hannaford, UK Hydrographic Office | | | | 12.20-13.00 | Open Data 8000 - So what next? | | | Mike Rose, Defra | | | | 13.00-14.00 | Lunch | | | | | | | 14.00-14.30 | INSPIRE | | | John Dixon, Defra | | | | | | | | 14.30-15.00 | Licensing Data for Research: The case of the | | | UK Data Archive | | | | Louise Corti, UK Data Archive | | | | | | | | 15.00-15.05 | Closing remarks | | | John Williams | | | | | | |

en

1062-pdf

## The Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime And Policing Act 2014 Implementing The Community Trigger Contents | Foreword | 4 | |----------------------------------------------|-----| | Introduction | 5 | | Setting up local review procedures | 6 | | Relevant bodies | 7 | | Defining 'anti-social behaviour' | 8 | | Setting the case review threshold | 8 | | Qualifying complaints | 10 | | Hate incidents | 11 | | Establishing a point of contact | 12 | | Setting timescales | 12 | | Data-sharing | 13 | | Publishing procedures | 14 | | Approaching case reviews | 15 | | Receiving and reviewing case review requests | 15 | | Assessing risk and vulnerability | 16 | | Communicating whether or not to proceed | 17 | | Case reviews | 18 | | Outcomes and escalation | 20 | |------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------| | Review outcomes | 20 | | Escalation and appeal | 20 | | Persistent or vexatious complaints | 21 | | Communication | 22 | | Raising awareness | 22 | | Contact with the victim | 23 | | Reporting on local activity | 24 | | Further information and support | 26 | | Appendix 1: Boston Borough Council pilot online trigger application template | 27 | | Appendix 2: Avon and Somerset online trigger application form | 28 | | Appendix 3: Process map used during the Manchester pilots | 29 | | Appendix 4: Process map used in Avon and Somerset | 30 | ## Foreword Despite major advances in policy and practice over the past 15 years, anti-social behaviour (ASB) continues to be highlighted by residents as one of the key issues blighting the lives of communities. As a result, councils, police forces and police and crime commissioners continue to identify ASB as a priority. A number of areas piloted the community trigger during recent Home Office trials, and many others are well on their way to putting their processes in place ready for implementation in October 2014. This guidance looks to build on their experiences and suggest issues for local areas to consider as they develop and introduce their own procedures. Left untreated, ASB can have a devastating impact on communities and individuals. Tragic cases have demonstrated the need for agencies to share information better and better understand vulnerability when dealing with victims of ASB. It remains to be seen to what extent the trigger will be used by local residents once case reviews become live. However the outcomes from the pilots suggest that they have been a positive experience for those involved whilst helping to ensure that opportunities to support vulnerable victims are not missed. The Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 seeks to place victims at the heart of local responses to ASB and, through the introduction of ASB case reviews (known as the 'community trigger'), provides another mechanism to help deliver a safety net for the most vulnerable. ## Cllr Anita Lower Anti-Social Behaviour Champion, Lga Safer And Stronger Communities Board Local councils and their partners already play a key role in tackling local ASB and work hard to support those affected by it. The community trigger will offer an opportunity to review those responses where problems continue, to make sure they have done all they can to intervene and take further action where needed. What's more, for the first time victims will have the power to scrutinise local bodies' collective responses to ASB, rather than challenging individual agencies in turn. ## Introduction The Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 will mean significant changes to the way local authorities respond to antisocial behaviour (ASB), introducing new tools and powers to replace existing provisions, including the introduction of ASB case reviews, also known as the 'community trigger'. The trigger introduces a right for victims, or victims' representatives, to ask local agencies to review how they have responded to previous ASB complaints and consider what further action might be taken where the behaviour persists. The aim is to offer a 'safety net' for vulnerable victims and to help avoid individuals being passed between agencies without resolution. The community trigger will become fully operational on 20 October 2014. Certain parts of the Act came into force on 13 May 2014, which have enabled agencies to begin putting their local community trigger procedures in place.1 Formal Home Office trialling of the trigger took place from June 2012, initially in Manchester, Brighton and Hove, West Lindsey with Boston, and Richmond upon Thames, with other trials following since. Many other areas have begun to consider how they will introduce the trigger locally. The legislation recognises that anti-social behaviour, and how agencies respond to it, provides different challenges in different areas. While the Act therefore provides a framework for implementing the new arrangements, much of the detail is for the 'relevant bodies' under the Act and other agencies to agree locally. This guidance seeks to set out the statutory requirements for the relevant bodies and explore how local partners might implement the trigger in their own areas. ## Setting Up Local Review Procedures The community trigger should sit alongside existing processes and practices for responding to ASB and managing risk and vulnerability. Experience from the pilots shows that it is easy to make the trigger processes complicated to operate. The new provisions included in the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 are aimed at focussing responses to anti-social behaviour (ASB) on the needs of victims. ASB case reviews, or the 'community trigger', are presented as an opportunity for victims (both individuals and those acting on behalf of a group) to challenge local responses to ASB, giving them the power to demand a review of these responses where certain criteria have been met. Keeping processes clear, simple and easy to use will not only help the relevant bodies to navigate through reviews and follow-up issues more easily, but also help victims to understand the process and likely outcomes. This is intended to encourage a collaborative problem-solving approach amongst bodies dealing with persistent cases of ASB in order to identify whether any further action can be taken. Procedures should be kept flexible to allow thresholds to be reviewed and amended to reflect changing local needs and operational experiences; under Schedule 4 of the Act (Part 1, s4) the trigger procedures must include a process for reviewing the effectiveness of these procedures and how they might be revised. Local areas can therefore be assured that should initial processes present problems, these can be addressed later on. The Act sets out the statutory framework for ASB case reviews, but the 'relevant bodies' (as defined in the Act - see below), will need to work together to agree local processes and procedures and ensure they meet the needs of their communities. Essentially, however, the process will include: - an ASB case review request, received from the victim or someone acting on their behalf In Brighton and Hove the initial trigger threshold was set very low. After reviewing their experiences during the pilots it was agreed that this was too ambitious and the threshold was changed. - a decision taken as to whether or not the request meets local review criteria, including a trigger threshold test - if the threshold is met, information is shared and a review of the case is undertaken, with recommendations for further action where appropriate - outcomes are communicated with the complainant(s) involved - where necessary, the case is escalated, or the complainant appeals. ## Relevant Bodies Under the Act, housing providers are defined as private registered providers of social housing that: - in England, grant tenancies of dwelling houses in that area, or manage a house or property in that area Effective multi-agency working is key to tackling ASB and developing joint local plans for implementing the trigger will be dependent on, and strengthen, those relationships. The Act sets out a number of 'relevant bodies' which must be involved in the trigger process, including: - setting up and operating the local trigger - in Wales, a body registered as a social landlord under section 3 of the Housing Act 1996 that grants tenancies of dwelling houses in that area, or manages a house or property in that area. - agreeing the local threshold - reviewing trigger activations - agreeing review actions where necessary - reporting on the local use of the trigger. Councils, the police and CCGs/LHBs will need to be proactive to ensure that social housing providers are involved. The involvement, or 'co-option', of providers into the relevant bodies is expanded on under Schedule 4 of the Act. Social housing providers will play a central part in the community trigger: they must be consulted when making and revising review procedures; must be consulted about and cooperate with case reviews; and will have an important role to play in sharing information on cases and receiving complaints or trigger requests. It is worth noting that 'relevant bodies' are distinct from the responsible authorities as set out in the Crime and Disorder Act 1998; responsibility for the community trigger therefore does not sit with community safety partnerships (CSPs) per se. Early involvement of all relevant partners in establishing local procedures can help to secure their engagement and assist with developing processes that are both realistic and workable across all organisations. Under s105 of the Act, the relevant bodies which must be involved are defined as: - the relevant district or unitary council in England, or the county or county borough council in Wales - the police - the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) in England, or the Local Health Board (LHB) in Wales The Act does not specify which local housing providers should be co-opted into the procedures; larger housing providers may be able to develop and review the trigger procedures on behalf of the local sector, or there may be an established working group or housing organisation which can carry out this role. Smaller housing providers may need to be involved only in case reviews concerning one of their tenants. However, even housing providers who only have a few properties in an area, and may be involved in very few community triggers, should be fully informed of the local processes and how to activate the trigger when appropriate. - local registered social housing providers who are co-opted onto this group. The role of the police and crime commissioner is referenced under Schedule 4 of the Act (see below). When deciding whether the threshold is met however, agencies should also consider the cumulative effect of the incidents and consider the harm or potential harm caused to the victim (see also Approaching case reviews). ## Manchester Trigger Request Schedule 4, Part 1 s1(1) requires local bodies to consult with their police and crime commissioner (PCC) (or, in London, the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime) when making or revising their review procedures. The extent and nature of this process is not however prescribed in the legislation and may therefore be agreed locally. In many cases, PCCs have already indicated a preference for a consistent threshold to be applied across the force area. The complainant was invited to enact the trigger following another family member contacting the ASB team on their behalf to request a review of action taken by their housing provider. The ASB team spoke to the complainant who enacted the trigger using the online form, alleging three incidents within the last six months relating to loud parties. A review meeting was held at which it was decided that the trigger did not meet the threshold as this was deemed to be behaviour causing nuisance and annoyance rather than likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress. The relevant bodies across city regions, force areas, or the county may alternatively wish to work together to identify a consistent threshold, for example covering the whole of their area. Schedule 4 of the Act (Part 4) allows for different authorities to establish joint review procedures covering two or more areas; in Avon and Somerset consistent processes have been agreed across the entire force area, while West Yorkshire has agreed a common local threshold. The Act also allows for additional flexibility under Schedule 4 s9, so that different procedures, or arrangements with social housing providers, are in place in different parts of an area. Following the review, the complainant was updated regarding the course of action taken by the housing provider and what further action may be taken if the nuisance were to continue. ## Defining 'Anti-Social Behaviour' Setting The Case Review Threshold For the purposes of the community trigger, anti-social behaviour is defined under s105(4) of the Act as "behaviour causing harassment, alarm or distress to members or any member of the public". It is useful to note that this is a higher threshold for ASB than is set out elsewhere in the Act, for example regarding the use of injunctions (s2(1)) and does not therefore necessarily include behaviour which is regarded as a nuisance or annoyance. Each area will be responsible for setting a local review threshold; trigger requests that meet this threshold must qualify for a case review. The threshold must comply with the statutory requirements as set out in the Act, but beyond this, local agencies will be able to agree their own baseline. Partner agencies involved in case reviews will need to be clear about what constitutes ASB in this context; this may need to be addressed specifically in local processes or staff community trigger training as often interpretations can vary across organisations. Similarly, it may be useful to highlight this when raising awareness about the trigger amongst residents. Under section 104(4) of the Act, the community trigger threshold for a case review must be regarded as met where: - an application for an ASB case review is made, and - at least three qualifying complaints (see definition below) have been made about the anti-social behaviour to which the application relates (or, if a different number is specified in local review procedures, at least that number). The purpose of section 104(4) is to set a maximum threshold for the trigger. This is a simple test that a case review has been requested and at least three qualifying complaints (see below) have been made. It is important to note that the adequacy of any response to these complaints cannot be used to determine whether or not this threshold has been reached.2 Where the threshold in s104(4) is not met, section 104(5) of the Act provides the relevant bodies with the flexibility to decide if they want to activate the trigger nonetheless. In making this decision the relevant bodies may take account of: - the persistence of the anti-social behaviour about which the original complaint was made - the harm caused, or the potential for harm to be caused, by that behaviour - the adequacy of the response to that behaviour. The ability to take into account the adequacy of the response to the ASB means that even where there have been fewer than three complaints, relevant bodies can consider whether no, inadequate or incomplete action has been taken, and if this should be a relevant factor in determining whether the case should be reviewed in these circumstances. 2 It should be noted therefore that several of the thresholds used in the original community trigger pilots were different from the legislative requirements as now enacted. Where this is the case, procedures should clarify whether 'no action' applies simply where no or insufficient action was taken by one or more agencies, or refers to the victim's perception of events, where perhaps the more significant issue is around communicating effectively with the victim concerned about what has been done. ## During Trials In Kirklees And Leeds, Examples Of 'No Action' Included: - The reported problems were not acknowledged - ie no-one contacted the complainant to advise what action would be taken. - The reported problems were not appropriately investigated. - The complainant's vulnerability and/ or the potential for harm was not considered and this affected potential service delivery. - Information was not shared between partners and this affected potential service delivery. Although there are statutory requirements for the trigger threshold, relevant bodies may still wish to consider consulting their communities to help determine an appropriate threshold for their area, perhaps through existing community or tenants' groups, or through community safety surveys or consultations. This will also assist with assessing whether or not agencies have a true picture of local ASB victims and help gauge local ASB tolerance levels. ## Qualifying Complaints The victim could be an individual, a business or a community group and the trigger can be used by someone of any age. Relevant bodies may therefore wish to consider how they will handle activations by young people where the behaviour concerned may have occurred in a school context or online. The definition of 'qualifying complaints' is set out in s104(11) of the Act. This sets a default position, but the relevant bodies can vary the timescales in relation to circumstances where there are two or more complaints in their local review procedures, as long they do not lower the standard set out in s104(11) which is that: Complaints, along with the request to use the trigger, may have been made to a single agency, or to several, and there is no requirement that they need to be in writing. - the complaint is made within one month from when the anti-social behaviour is alleged to have occurred - the trigger request is made within six months from the when the complaint is made. Local areas may therefore wish to consider how complaints are documented and shared across agencies concerned in order to link separate reports together (see also Datasharing, below); although there is no statutory requirement to proactively identify when the threshold has been met, once a review request has been received, the relevant bodies will need to establish whether or not the required number of qualifying complaints have been made. Unless the review procedures therefore specify different time periods then the three qualifying complaints that activate the trigger must be made within six months from when the complaint is made (although this could be seven months from when the first incident of anti-social behaviour happens, given the gap of a month allowed between the time the behaviour occurs and reporting it). Outside of the relevant bodies, it is up to local areas to determine whether or not complaints made to other bodies exercising public functions should also count; this might include parish councils, schools and hospitals. It is up to the relevant bodies when establishing their review procedures to specify different time periods in which a trigger request can be made or how long after an incident of anti-social behaviour a complaint has to be made. In the West Lindsey and Boston pilot they extended the time period, requiring the complainant to have made three qualifying complaints in 12 months. Under s104(12), if a person makes two or more complaints about anti-social behaviour within the specified timescales, local areas have the flexibility to decide which complaint is, or which complaints are, qualifying complaints. This is to allow scope for local review procedures to set rules on the approach to take where the complaints essentially relate to the same behaviour and how that situation is to be defined. Relevant bodies will undoubtedly want to consider what would best suit their communities if they choose to set a different period of time in which a request for a review must be made than in the legislation, and balancing that against their own resources to deal with the differing number of complaints they may receive. In this context it should be noted that there is no legislative requirement that qualifying complaints need to be from the same individual, relate to the same specific incident, the same type of behaviour or the same perpetrator(s). ASB case reviews can be requested by an ASB victim, or a third party acting on their behalf (such as a carer, guardian, family member, MP or councillor), but the written consent of the victim(s) should be obtained in all cases and before any information is disclosed to the third party. It is therefore important that when drafting local procedures, the relevant bodies consider which of these factors will need to be consistent when determining whether or not separate complaints can be linked together meaningfully in order to meet the trigger threshold. In the Boston pilot the trigger processes explicitly stated there must be three separate reports of "the same incidence of behaviour". It is recommended that the procedures clarify whether or not anonymous complaints can count towards meeting the threshold requirements. Several pilot areas have not regarded anonymous complaints as valid as they have felt that working with the specific victim(s) involved is an integral part of the trigger process. In West Lindsey, an anonymous trigger request was acted upon due to concerns about the risk of potential harm to the victim. However, it was acknowledged that this made processes difficult because it was impossible to document concerns in the same way and communicate outcomes to the complainant. It may also be worth considering how to respond to related incidents of ASB that take place across different authority boundaries. Neighbouring authorities may wish to agree whether and how these incidents taken together could meet the trigger threshold. ## Hate Incidents Although the trigger is intended specifically for tackling anti-social behaviour, it is recognised that ASB can often be linked to, or motivated by, hate. Areas may therefore wish to include hate incidents explicitly within their community trigger processes and therefore their threshold definition. Pilot areas adopting this approach used a lower threshold for hate incidents than other episodes of ASB, reflecting concerns that hate crimes may often be underreported and are highly likely to have a significant impact on the victim concerned. "A decision was made early on to include hate incidents. Communities affected by hate incidents have appreciated the inclusion in the process and this has had a positive impact on trust and confidence." ## Brighton And Hove Pilot Where hate incidents are not included in the trigger process, local agencies should ensure that their trigger procedures dovetail with other provisions for responding to haterelated reports. Hate incidents or crimes must be properly recorded and areas may wish to consider different case strategies for dealing with these. ## Manchester Trigger Request A caller was invited to use the community trigger after contacting the ASB team. The complainant had reported three incidents of ASB to the police and their housing provider within the previous six months, alleging racist abuse and threats to kill. Various meetings were held to review the case, which was complicated by a long history and police intervention involving both parties being the victim and perpetrator at times. An action plan was agreed and confirmed in writing to the complainant, including: - a police review of crimes reported during a specified period to reconsider whether independent evidence was available to support a criminal charge - police to share any evidence obtained, allowing the housing provider to consider whether civil proceedings would be possible - a follow-up meeting to review progress after four weeks - working with the complainant to be rehoused out of the area. - how quickly case reviews should proceed ## Establishing A Point Of Contact - when and how quickly complainants should be informed on review progress and outcomes - if and when review outcomes are followedup and/or escalated. (see also Outcomes and escalation and Communication sections). Section 104(3) of the Act states that there must be an established point of contact (SPOC) for requesting a review, and that the nominated contact passes on applications to all relevant bodies as part of the review process. Although there is no statutory definition of the nature of this role, local areas may consider that it would be best filled by a single individual in one of the relevant bodies who can receive requests and coordinate the initial stages of the review process on behalf of all partners. It may also be useful to identify contacts within each of the relevant bodies with whom the SPOC can liaise as the review process unfolds, for example regarding data-sharing and coordinating review panel meetings. In Richmond, both the Richmond Housing Partnership (RHP) and the CSP act as 'gateways' to the community trigger , who will then forward reports to the single point of contact (SPOC) within one working day . The online form is designed to gather information about the case history , the victim's vulnerability and what support has been provided. This then produces a risk matrix score to help assess the impact of the ASB on the victim. After the trigger is activated an acknowledgement letter is sent to the complainant within two working days and sets out the timeframes for the trigger process. All partners who may encounter trigger requests, which can include a wide range of front-line workers, call-handlers and elected members, will need to know who the point of contact is and how they can be contacted. These details should also be easily available to members of the public and it should be ensured that all partners advertise the same contact details to avoid duplication (see also Communication section below). Once a trigger request is received by the SPOC, the trigger panel, consisting of representatives from each of the agencies involved, will consider whether the report meets the trigger threshold (with a minimum of two of the three key partners required to agree). Agencies have 10 working days to research relevant case information and to meet as a panel to identify ways forward. Some large areas may feel that the SPOC role is too big for a single person alone and the function may instead be shared across a team, however identifying a contact in each partner agency will still be useful for the purposes of effective information-sharing. Further, it will be important to agree who should hold information about each trigger request itself and log all activity regarding that review. ## Setting Timescales Once the review meeting has taken place, the outcomes must be confirmed to the victim within one working day . The victim can then either agree to the actions proposed or ask for the case to be escalated. Areas should consider agreeing timescales for dealing with case reviews consistently. This might include: - how quickly initial responses are made to the complainant Actions agreed as part of a case review are monitored by the borough's ASB panel, held on a monthly basis and comprising representatives from the RHP , environmental health, health services, the police, Victim Support, social services and the troubled families team. - within what time the case is evaluated to determine whether or not the threshold has been met It is important that timescales are realistic and practical to help manage the expectations of complainants, that these are clear in the published procedures and are communicated to victims. Agreed timetables may need to dovetail with meeting structures if, for example, case reviews are to be undertaken as part of existing meetings. Some trial areas used very tight timescales for responding to victims; here it was felt that if the initial response to the ASB had been insufficient, the relevant bodies were keen to try and address this as quickly as possible. Setting procedural timescales for implementing new actions to deal with problem behaviour may be difficult as establishing some of these, such as a mediation process, may take a long time; instead, these can be reflected on an individual basis in any recommendations or action plans drawn up as part of each specific case review. Some force areas are considering adopting a consistent approach for contacting victims initially within a specific timeframe; beyond this local areas will have more flexibility around timeframes for other aspects of the process. Following the trials in Avon and Somerset it was agreed that five weeks would provide a realistic timeframe from when the trigger was activated until the victim was informed about the review outcomes. ## Data-Sharing Data-sharing will be an important aspect of managing reviews and implementing effective outcomes. Areas will need to ensure that the provisions in the Act regarding data-sharing, alongside local information-sharing protocols (ISPs), will be sufficient for their needs - particularly concerning arrangements with housing providers who are often not included in standard ISPs. Under Schedule 4 s7 of the Act, the relevant bodies are required to share relevant information for case reviews where they hold it (subject to the usual requirements of data protection legislation3). Requests made to other agencies for information may also be granted if that agency agrees. For local housing providers, including both those co-opted into the group of relevant bodies and those who are not, information requested in connection with the exercise of the case review must be provided. Beyond these agreements, it is worth exploring the extent to which all relevant bodies have compatible record management software, how consistently ASB is recorded and information shared, and whether staff will require training on any new software they may need to use. Similarly, areas will need to ensure that information can easily be collated across agencies to determine both whether or not the trigger threshold has been met and what action was taken in response. Several of the trigger trial areas used shared IT systems which assisted with information sharing across agencies. As noted previously, the written consent of the victim requesting the case review should be secured before any information about them is shared either with other agencies or with a third party requesting the review on their behalf. During the Boston pilot, there were difficulties in obtaining some information from one agency involved because of fears about how that might be used as part of a formal complaints process. One of the recommendations from the pilot was that a specific ISP may be needed to help remove barriers and increase transparency. 3 The Act does not therefore require or authorise the disclosure of information that would be in contravention of the Data Protection Act 1998 or prohibited by Part 1 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. ## Publishing Procedures Once agreed, local agencies are required to publish their procedures under s104(2)(b) of the Act (one relevant body can publish these on behalf of all the relevant bodies if preferred). It may be useful to include the following documents: - definitions - process map - timescales - application forms and information on the trigger for potential complainants - template letters for correspondence with complainants - template for recording review outcomes/ action plans - terms of reference for review panels - confidentiality agreements and information sharing protocols. Relevant bodies might also find it useful to run a table-top exercise once procedures have been drafted to help test the process. ## Approaching Case Reviews Case reviews are intended to provide an opportunity to assess what action has been taken in response to previous complaints and, where the problem behaviour persists, bring agencies together to identify a more joinedup, problem-solving response for the victim concerned. Beyond meeting the statutory requirements for the trigger threshold, the legislation does not prescribe how case review requests should be assessed, what reviews should look like or how they should run, so this will largely be for local areas to agree. "The community trigger helped agencies to collectively look at the problem from the victim's perspective and find a solution which may not otherwise have been tried." ## West Lindsey And Boston Pilot Receiving And Reviewing Case Review Requests Effective communication and awarenessraising amongst residents and staff from partner agencies should help ensure that trigger requests are channelled to the relevant individual point(s) of contact. Formally making a request should be possible through a variety of means, including by telephone, post or online application; areas should consider how to make this process as accessible as possible to all members of their local communities. This should include proactively offering victims the opportunity to report and record incidents in their first language and offering assistance with completing application forms. Some pilot areas agreed to allow case review requests to be channelled via the 101 switchboard. This was then forwarded to the central SPOC in the same way as other requests. Areas may wish to develop reporting templates for trigger applications, either for completion by the victim or their representative, or a member of staff where the request is made by telephone. This is an opportunity to collect as much information as possible about the incidents of ASB, when and to whom they were reported, their impact and about the victim themselves. The impact and precise nature of the incidents are even more important where the local trigger also incorporates hate incidents. At this point it may also be worth capturing the victim's consent to collect and share information about them in order to proceed with their trigger application. Determining whether or not the requirements of the local threshold have been met is likely to require initial investigation of the information provided by the complainant. However this does not need to be a formal process; a simple scoping exercise should be sufficient and using established points of contact in each partner agency will assist with this. During the trials in Avon and Somerset agency officers noted that often victims of ASB struggled to recall or were mistaken about when incidents had occurred or been reported. This meant that more time was needed than had been anticipated to check information provided by the victim against agencies' own records, sometimes requiring prolonged contact with the victim and agencies involved to establish this. The reporting form encourages applicants to include as much information as possible and this is followed up with a telephone call to the victim to clarify the details. Local areas should agree who should decide whether or not the threshold has been met in each case; for example whether this decision can be made by an individual, and who that should be, or through a range of agency representatives. Examples of reporting templates are attached at appendices 1 and 2. Examples of online application forms can be found at: Richmond: https://richmond.firmstep.com/popup.aspx/ RenderForm/?F .Name=e2JedpzUvSt The former offers simplicity and uses less resources, but the latter may offer greater transparency, share responsibility and provide different perspectives. Procedures might also cover how senior that person(s) should be and whether or not the original organisation(s) managing the case should be excluded from this process. Brighton & Hove: ww3.brighton-hove.gov .uk/index. cfm?request=c1265494&node=22096 ## Assessing Risk And Vulnerability Avon & Somerset: www.avonandsomerset.police.uk/advice/ neighbourhood-community/anti-socialbehaviour/anti-social-behaviour-communitytrigger/community-trigger-application-antisocial-behaviour/ Common templates should be shared across partners to ensure a consistent public message and approach. A case review request provides an appropriate opportunity to formally undertake an assessment of risk and vulnerability . At this point, local areas may wish to agree to review a case which does not meet the published threshold, to help address particular concerns. Agencies should consider the potential cumulative effect of ongoing ASB on the victim rather than simply assessing each separate incident in isolation. Further , the victim's perspective should also be considered when deciding whether or not the definition of ASB in the context of the community trigger (causing harassment, alarm or distress to the victim) has been met. In West Lindsey, either the police ASB coordinator or the council's community action officer review the trigger request to determine whether or not the threshold had been met. Once the case details are available, it is then allocated to the agency which had had most involvement in the case. All triggers are jointly investigated by the two officers above to add a degree of independence. ## West Lindsey Trigger Request A complaint was made about an ongoing nuisance linked to children playing ball games and roller skating in the resident's road. While the incidents appeared to be minor, and were the subject of an ongoing response by the police, there were concerns about the complainant's behaviour and the impact these incidents may be having. The case was subsequently reviewed at an Anti-social behaviour risk assessment conference (ASBRAC) and an action plan was then agreed with the victim. Assessing and responding to vulnerability should fit with existing procedures for managing risk across all partners. This might include a risk assessment matrix for each complainant, or embedding risk assessments into the initial ASB complaints process, which can then be reviewed as part of the trigger . Implementing the trigger may also provide an opportunity to assess the extent to which risk assessments are consistent and complementary across agencies and how these will fit with case reviews. ## Communicating Whether Or Not To Proceed The decision as to whether or not the threshold has been met (and thus, if a case review will be undertaken) will need to be communicated to the victim under s104(6) of the Act, in accordance with the agreed local timescales. Complainants should also be informed of their right to appeal if they wish. Where the trigger threshold has not been met, processes should also make it clear what happens next. Other actions might be considered here, for example referring the case to an appropriate agency for additional follow-up. In Brighton and Hove firm working relationships have been established with senior managers across partner agencies, who work in a management group to coordinate the process. Case review requests are received and reviewed using the following method: - trigger activations are received by a senior caseworker and senior ASB coordinator who decide whether or not the threshold has been met - the complainant is contacted within one working day and the process is explained, including contacting the victim again with a full response within five working days - where the trigger threshold has been met, a lead agency is allocated, which reviews the case and responds to the complainant - vulnerable victims are risk assessed and responded to where appropriate, overseen by the Multi-Agency Risk Assessment and Tasking meeting (MARAT). Areas should consider including an audit process in their procedures to scrutinise decisions about whether or not the threshold has been met to help ensure decisions are consistent. During the Richmond pilot cases were reviewed even where the trigger threshold was not met to ensure no issues were missed; actions were agreed by the trigger panel for monitoring and victim support purposes. The community trigger is not a complaints process and is not intended to replace organisations' own complaints procedures. However , a review may not necessarily require a formal case 'panel' meeting and in some instances, particularly where arranging a meeting is difficult within the set timescales, less formal arrangements may be regarded as sufficient. Following the trials in Avon and Somerset for instance, the format for consultation amongst the relevant bodies is now regarded as less important, and telephone conferencing and even email correspondence have both been used alongside more formal meetings. It should be clear to victims of anti-social behaviour that they will still have the opportunity to complain to organisations such as the Ombudsman or Independent Police Complaints Commission if they are unhappy about the service they have received from an individual officer or agency. Similarly, case reviews cannot be used to review decisions made by the Crown Prosecution Service; these instances should be referred to the CPS complaints process (see also Escalation and appeal, below). ## Approaches To Conducting The Case Review Have Varied Across Pilot Areas: Case Reviews - In the Brighton and Hove pilot the agency which had most contact with the victim was appointed as the lead agency for reviewing the case, working with other partners as appropriate. It is important to remember that the purpose of reviews is to achieve a better outcome for the victim concerned, particularly where they are vulnerable, and ultimately should lead to service improvement for local residents. Reviews may provide challenge between partners but are not intended to apportion blame or provide formal accountability. - In Boston, where one agency had had most contact with the victim, a lead was appointed from another organisation to review previous responses and consider further interventions, offering an independent perspective. During trials in Avon and Somerset, three trigger applications were received regarding incidents in the same location. Each request met the trigger criteria individually, but local bodies agreed that the applications should be combined and investigated jointly. - In Richmond the trigger panel comprised members from all agencies involved in that particular case. Where appropriate, health, mental health and other services will also be invited to attend. - In Manchester the Council's ASB lead, chief inspector from the police partnerships team and a senior manager from the housing provider would meet, along with other service representatives where appropriate. Case reviews should not be confused with case panels. The panel is simply a term given to the representative(s) from relevant bodies who will be responsible for reviewing the case (see below). However the format for case reviews may vary; reviews may be undertaken during a formal meeting of appropriate partners; this might include using existing meeting structures to hear reviews, such as ASB case panels or ASBRACs4 (Anti-social behaviour risk assessment conferences), or mean convening specific case review meetings when the trigger is activated. Attendance at review meetings by statutory partners might not be required on all occasions; it may make more sense for them to attend only where their agency is relevant to the case and they have related information. Additional members may also be invited depending on the circumstances of that particular case; where the perpetrator is under 18 for instance, the youth offending team should be invited. 4 ASBRACs are based on a similar victim-focussed model to MARACs (Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conferences), for supporting victims of domestic abuse; ASBRACs are being increasingly used to support victims of anti-social behaviour. Engagement with other services such as children and adult social care, health services (including mental health), drug misuse are also likely to be important to ensure that victims are offered the most effective interventions available. "We found that the community trigger strengthens existing partnership links. It has also helped to identify areas where partnership working could be improved; in particular they are developing stronger links with health and mental health agencies." ## West Lindsey Pilot Areas may also wish to consider how the victim is represented during reviews and/ or during review meetings, and whether someone should attend on their behalf. This might be achieved, for example, by securing representation from a victim's group. The role of elected members might also be considered here. London Borough of Richmond upon Thames use a 'Tenants' Champion' to help advocate on behalf of the victim. The Champion, an elected member whose role is to support tenants and leaseholders who rent or lease their properties from a registered housing provider, can refer cases to the trigger panel and provide an oversight role on the panel for those cases. Local areas may also wish to consider using independent representatives to provide additional challenge and objectivity; this may be particularly pertinent where, for example, a case is referred to the panel which involves personnel historically associated with that case. Some areas are exploring the use of 'peer reviews', where the case history is reviewed perhaps by an independent team from a neighbouring borough with whom reciprocal arrangements have been agreed. Alternatively this arrangement might form part of the appeals process. As noted above, the community trigger is not a complaints process. However , in Avon and Somerset there were some concerns amongst police officers about whether information passed on to the trigger case review panel could be used against individuals as part of a disciplinary process. Avon and Somerset found it useful to engage with the Police Federation and Professional Standards Department to agree assurances that nothing used during the trigger review could form part of a formal disciplinary hearing. ## Outcomes And Escalation Review Outcomes Under s104(7) of the Act, public bodies, or individuals working in them, are required to have regard to any recommendations made in exercising their public functions. Case reviews are likely to result either in the relevant bodies being satisfied that responses to the original complaints were appropriate and sufficient, or with recommendations for further action. Local procedures should be clear who should sign-off the outcome/ response; this may simply be those who attended the meeting (if held), or an individual (for example in Manchester, this will be undertaken by the chair of the CSP). Under s104(8) of the Act, the review applicant must be informed of the outcomes and any recommendations made. Although this means they are not required to act on those recommendations, they should acknowledge and consider them and may be challenged by other agencies should they decide not to act as suggested. Recommendations cannot however include actions for the CPS, as this is an independent body. Ideally the recommendations/action plan will include timescales and identify individuals responsible for undertaking these. There should also be opportunities agreed to review progress; in Avon and Somerset agencies will review a case again after three months to ensure that no further action or response is required. ## Escalation And Appeal Outcomes may also include recommendations about service provision more generally. Procedures should note how any wider issues are recorded, escalated and resolved and provide a mechanism for checking on progress to ensure these are followed up. Schedule 4 of the Act (Part 1, s3) states that review procedures must include provision for a process where applicants are dissatisfied either with the way their trigger application was dealt with, or how the case review has been carried out. There are no further statutory provisions on the nature of this appeal process, or to whom appeals can be made; local procedures should therefore cover how and where complaints are escalated. "The trigger has led to the identification of gaps in the services of some agencies." ## Brighton And Hove Pilot Examples from trial areas include referring the matter to the head of service, the CSP chair, a panel from neighbouring boroughs, a senior police officer or the police and crime commissioner. This might form part of a wider accountability framework for the trigger panel. Some reviews may identify broader issues in how cases are managed more generally, for example around working with specific agencies. Local areas may wish to formalise procedures for escalating these issues, perhaps to other forums such as the CSP or CCG, in their trigger processes. The appeals process could also dovetail with more formal complaints procedures where this is appropriate, such as referring an issue to the Ombudsman or the Independent Police Complaints Commission. ## Persistent Or Vexatious Complaints Some concerns have been raised about the potential for persistent complainants to abuse the trigger process, diverting resources away from those most in need. While this does not appear to have been a feature of the pilots, case review requests that are deemed to be vexatious can be rejected in accordance with local procedures. Some areas will already have procedures in place for dealing with persistent complaints. In the context of the trigger, partner agencies should review their existing vexatious complaints policies to ensure that these are appropriate here and agreed across all relevant bodies. However, managing the expectations of complainants and potential complainants and informing them of action taken in response to their concerns are key to helping prevent persistent calls. It is possible that even after a case review there may be successive requests to activate the trigger from the same complainant; agencies may wish to consider drafting their procedures such that a 'new set' of incidents has to be reported in accordance with the local threshold before a subsequent case review must be scheduled. ## Communication Raising Awareness Campaign materials should be tailored where possible for specific community groups; for example using social media may be particularly appropriate for targeting young victims of ASB. Section 104(3) of the Act states that the local procedures must set out how to apply for a case review and the relevant point of contact. This involves not only raising awareness amongst potential victims, but also includes elected members who will receive many complaints directly from their residents; staff across all partner agencies; and amongst all local professionals working with vulnerable people. It should be clear what the local trigger threshold is, including how ASB is defined in the trigger context, and how to make a case review request, including a phone number, email address and postal address. Some areas, such as Swale, are working with their PCC to raise awareness across the force area. Outcomes from all the pilot areas have suggested that internal communication and clarification around using the trigger are crucial. Many frontline workers recognise that their clients suffer ASB but often do not make referrals to ASB teams. For staff, awareness-raising might also include training sessions and developing scripts for customer service call-handlers. Communications should be coordinated between partner agencies and easy to access, with consistent messages used throughout. Within this context it is worth noting again that the trigger can be activated not only by the victim themselves, but by a carer, friends or family or by a professional acting on their behalf. In particular, points of contact and their contact details should be consistent to avoid duplication between agencies. Raising awareness will need to be an on-going process and local areas may wish to include this in broader media strategies to ensure that this continues. Relevant bodies may wish to publicise their trigger procedures using a variety of means, including partner websites, social media, launch events, poster and leaflet campaigns, staff briefings, local and national press, and public meetings/events. Coordinating publicity campaigns across bodies can help to maximise its impact. "Customers with active cases were signposted inappropriately by well-meaning colleagues in customer services who misunderstood the criteria." Leeds pilot Thought should be given as to how best to brand marketing materials; for instance, including logos from all the relevant bodies can help avoid the misconception that victims are reporting events to a single agency. Although s104(1) of the Act places the onus on the victim or their representatives to make a review request, agencies should not necessarily assume victims are aware of their right to apply; if a case appears to meet the local threshold, agencies may wish to proactively offer victims the opportunity to use it. During the West Lindsey trials for instance, a complainant was not aware of the community trigger, but it was clear the threshold had been met. The complainant was demonstrating signs of distress and as a result the case was dealt with as a trigger report and reviewed accordingly. In Brighton and Hove caseworkers promote the trigger as part of their general service offer for ASB and hate incidents. The trigger is also embedded in their online reporting processes so that victims reporting incidents online are alerted if the trigger threshold has been met and are invited to activate it. "This makes the trigger part of normal business and advertises it directly to those who meet the criteria." Threshold levels and the potential outcomes from trigger reviews should also be clearly communicated to avoid confusion and help manage public expectations. Outcomes from the pilots suggested that victims' understanding of what the trigger could achieve was mixed. Effective communication can help avoid instances where victims feel dissatisfied with the outcomes of the trigger process. "The investigating officer highlighted that managing expectations is key in the process, so that victims understand exactly what can be achieved…" ## Boston Pilot "Managing expectations is very important. Residents often think that agencies haven't done enough because tenants haven't been evicted, even where the problem behaviour has stopped. Our job is not to evict tenants but to respond to the ASB." ## Manchester Pilot Contact With The Victim Ongoing and constructive communication with complainants is crucial and can help provide transparency. Often dissatisfaction with the outcome of a complaint of antisocial behaviour is simply the result of poor communication about what action was taken in response. Evaluations from several of the pilots found that victims valued the increased levels of contact with agencies that the trigger process provided, even where ultimately no further action was taken. "The most significant outcome of the trial has been to improve communication with residents who feel that they had not received a good service and to identify gaps in service provision." ## Brighton And Hove Trial Local procedures should clarify whether one agency will be responsible for communicating with all victims, or whether this will be assigned to a lead agency depending on the circumstances of that case. This may be particularly important where a complainant feels they have not received a good service from a particular organisation in the past. ## Reporting On Local Activity The legislation sets out a number of points throughout the process at which case review applicants must be updated: Under s104(9) of the Act, the relevant bodies must publish information on the following for their locality: - the number of case review applications made during that period - under s104(6) of the Act, the applicant must be informed whether or not their application meets the threshold for review (see also Approaching case reviews, above) - how many times the threshold was not met - the number of case reviews carried out - how many case reviews resulted in recommendations being made. - under s104(8) complainants must be informed of case review outcomes and any recommendations made as a result (see also Outcomes and escalation, above). This may be done by one agency on behalf of all other agencies in the local area and might also comment on the effectiveness of procedures in place. During trials in Swale, all complainants in cases that did not meet the threshold criteria were contacted to set out the reasons why and given follow-up advice including signposting to other agencies or departments who might provide further assistance. Some areas plan to use this evaluation process to explore additional questions, such as why the trigger was not activated by victims despite meeting the review threshold. How frequently this information is published can be determined by local procedures (for example, as part of the community safety partnership's annual review) but this must be at least every 12 months. Any data published must not include information that could identify the victims involved. Areas may also wish to consider offering the victim a choice in their initial assessment; this might include, for instance a personal visit, where appropriate. In several pilot areas complainants are invited to meet directly with agency staff to talk through their concerns face-to-face. It was found that communicating directly with minority groups in particular helped to build confidence and trust with these communities and encourage both the reporting and resolving of incidents. ## Brighton And Hove Trigger Request Two separate reports were received about a family in an ongoing case being managed by the Council's housing department. The housing ASB manager undertook an immediate quick-time review of the case and met with both residents within five days to explain the plans in place to address the issue. Both residents were satisfied with the response. ## Further Information And Support Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime And Policing Act 2014 Www.Legislation.Gov .Uk/Ukpga/2014/12/Contents/Enacted/Data.Htm Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime And Policing Act 2014: Reform Of Anti-Social Behaviour Powers - Statutory Guidance For Frontline Professionals Www.Gov .Uk/Government/Uploads/System/Uploads/Attachment_Data/File/352562/Asb_Guidance_ V8_July2014_Final__2_.Pdf Evaluation report from the Home Office pilots www.gov .uk/government/publications/empowering-communities-protecting-victims-summaryreport-on-the-community-trigger-trials Putting victims first - more effective responses to anti-social behaviour www.gov .uk/government/publications/putting-victims-first-more-effective-responses-to-antisocial-behaviour ## Fact Sheets, Explanatory Notes And Impact Assessments Www.Gov .Uk/Government/Collections/Anti-Social-Behaviour-Crime-And-Police-Bill Presentations From Three Lga Community Trigger Workshops Held In Summer 2014: York: www.local.gov .uk/past-event-presentations/-/journal_content/56/10180/6254746/ARTICLE London: www.local.gov .uk/web/guest/past-event-presentations/-/journal_ content/56/10180/6309338/ARTICLE Birmingham: www.local.gov .uk/web/guest/past-event-presentations/-/journal_ content/56/10180/6366349/ARTICLE ## Home Office Community Trigger Pilot Areas: Brighton & Hove: www.brighton-hove.gov .uk Manchester: www.manchester.gov .uk/info/200030/crime_antisocial_behaviour_and_ nuisance/5654/community_trigger Richmond: www.richmond.gov .uk/community_trigger West Lindsey: www.west-lindsey.gov .uk Boston: www.boston.gov .uk ## The College Of Policing'S Anti-Social Behaviour: Your Powers E-Learning Package: http://asb1.ncalt.com/01/engine.html ## Appendix 1 Boston Borough Council pilot online trigger application template ## Appendix 2 Avon and Somerset online trigger application form ## Appendix 3 Process map used during the Manchester pilots ## Appendix 4 Community Trigger Process Local Government Association Local Government House Smith Square London SW1P 3HZ Telephone 020 7664 3000 Fax 020 7664 3030 Email info@local.gov .uk www.local.gov .uk For a copy in Braille, larger print or audio, please contact us on 020 7664 3000. We consider requests on an individual basis.

en

1393-pdf

## 1 Board, Content Board And Senior Management Specialists (Sms) Expenses 2 Recorded In August 2015 3 | Date Incurred | Expense Type | Purpose | Amount | |--------------------|----------------------------------|---------------------|----------| | Posting | | | | | Date | | | | | Camilla Bustani | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Aug 10, 2015 | Off-site Hospitality | Colleague meetings | 7.4 | | Camilla Bustani | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Aug 10, 2015 | Overseas Travel - Air | Stakeholder meeting | 135.88 | | Camilla Bustani | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Aug 14, 2015 | Overseas Travel - Rail/Bus/Coach | Stakeholder meeting | 219.89 | | Janet Campbell | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 28, 2015 | UK Travel - Taxis and cabs | Stakeholder meeting | 16.6 | | Tony Close | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 16, 2015 | Overseas Travel - Air | Stakeholder meeting | 10.99 | | Tony Close | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 17, 2015 | Overseas - Accommodation | Stakeholder meeting | 170.14 | | Fionnuala Cosgrove | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 29, 2015 | Off-site Hospitality | Stakeholder meeting | 25.77 | | Katie Curry | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jun 9, 2015 | UK Travel - Taxis and cabs | Stakeholder meeting | 14 | | Katie Curry | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jun 10, 2015 | UK Travel - Taxis and cabs | Stakeholder meeting | 11 | | Peter Davies | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jun 16, 2015 | UK Travel - Taxis and cabs | Stakeholder meeting | 7 | | Peter Davies | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jun 16, 2015 | UK Travel - Taxis and cabs | Stakeholder meeting | 10 | | Peter Davies | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jun 25, 2015 | UK Travel - Taxis and cabs | Stakeholder meeting | 11 | | Peter Davies | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jun 25, 2015 | UK Travel - Taxis and cabs | Stakeholder meeting | 15 | | Peter Davies | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 7, 2015 | UK Travel - Taxis and cabs | Stakeholder meeting | 15 | | Peter Davies | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 7, 2015 | UK Travel - Taxis and cabs | Stakeholder meeting | 18 | | Peter Davies | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 14, 2015 | Overseas Travel - Taxis | Stakeholder event | 17 | | Peter Davies | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 14, 2015 | Overseas Travel - Taxis | Stakeholder event | 17 | | Peter Davies | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 14, 2015 | UK Travel - Rail/Bus/Tube/Ferry | Stakeholder event | 35 | | Peter Davies | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 15, 2015 | Overseas subsistence | Stakeholder event | 9.29 | | Peter Davies | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 15, 2015 | Overseas Travel - Taxis | Stakeholder event | 7.8 | | Peter Davies | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 16, 2015 | Overseas - Accommodation | Stakeholder event | 118.02 | | Peter Davies | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 16, 2015 | Overseas Travel - Taxis | Stakeholder event | 17.58 | | Peter Davies | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 16, 2015 | Overseas Travel - Taxis | Stakeholder event | 33.25 | | Peter Davies | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 17, 2015 | Overseas - Accommodation | Stakeholder event | 169.48 | | Peter Davies | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 21, 2015 | Off-site Hospitality | Colleague meetings | 35.15 | | Gwen Morgan | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jun 16, 2015 | UK Accommodation | Colleague meetings | 89 | | Gwen Morgan | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jun 16, 2015 | UK Subsistence | Colleague meetings | 23.65 | | Gwen Morgan | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jun 17, 2015 | UK Travel - Taxis and cabs | Colleague meetings | 30 | | Victoria Nash | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 20, 2015 | UK Travel - Rail/Bus/Tube/Ferry | Colleague meetings | 9.6 | | Victoria Nash | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 30, 2015 | UK Travel - Air | Stakeholder meeting | 195.88 | | Victoria Nash | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 31, 2015 | External Conferences & Seminars | Stakeholder meeting | 601.82 | | Victoria Nash | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Aug 7, 2015 | UK Travel - Rail/Bus/Tube/Ferry | Stakeholder meeting | 9.4 | | Claudio Pollack | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 17, 2015 | Overseas - Accommodation | Stakeholder event | 169.48 | | Claudio Pollack | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 29, 2015 | Off-site Hospitality | Stakeholder meeting | 15.47 | | Claudio Pollack | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Aug 5, 2015 | Staff meals - Off site | Colleague meetings | 54.84 | | Claudio Pollack | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Aug 11, 2015 | UK Accommodation | Stakeholder event | 70 | | Jonathan Rose | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 20, 2015 | UK Travel - Parking costs | Colleague meetings | 26.78 | | Jonathan Rose | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 20, 2015 | UK Travel - Rail/Bus/Tube/Ferry | Colleague meetings | 19.4 | | 4 | | | | | 5 | | | | | 6 | | | | | 7 | | | | | 8 | | | | | 9 | | | | | 10 | | | | | 11 | | | | | 12 | | | | | 13 | | | | | 14 | | | | | 15 | | | | | 16 | | | | | 17 | | | | | 18 | | | | | 19 | | | | | 20 | | | | | 21 | | | | | 22 | | | | | 23 | | | | | 24 | | | | | 25 | | | | | 26 | | | | | 27 | | | | | 28 | | | | | 29 | | | | | 30 | | | | | 31 | | | | | 32 | | | | | 33 | | | | | 34 | | | | | 35 | | | | | 36 | | | | | 37 | | | | | 38 | | | | | 39 | | | | | 40 | | | | | 41 | | | | | 42 | | | | | 43 | | | | | Jonathan Rose | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 22, 2015 | UK Travel - Parking costs | Colleague meetings | 15.5 | ## 1 Pbs, Executive Committee And Senior Management Specialists (Sms) Expenses 2 Recorded In August 2015 3 | Date Incurred | Expense Type | Purpose | Amount | |----------------------|---------------------------------|---------------------|----------| | Posting | | | | | Date | | | | | 4 | | | | | Jonathan Rose | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 31, 2015 | UK Travel - Parking costs | Colleague meetings | 11.8 | | Jonathan Rose | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Aug 11, 2015 | UK Travel - Air | Colleague meetings | 91.98 | | Jonathan Rose | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Aug 11, 2015 | UK Travel - Rail/Bus/Tube/Ferry | Colleague meetings | 19.93 | | Mark Walls | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 31, 2015 | UK Travel - Car,Motorbike,Cycle | Colleague meetings | 63.9 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jun 16, 2015 | UK Subsistence | Colleague meetings | 30 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jun 16, 2015 | UK Travel - Rail/Bus/Tube/Ferry | Colleague meetings | 109 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jun 17, 2015 | UK Travel - Rail/Bus/Tube/Ferry | Colleague meetings | 46.1 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jun 18, 2015 | UK Travel - Rail/Bus/Tube/Ferry | Content Board | 96.5 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jun 22, 2015 | UK Travel - Rail/Bus/Tube/Ferry | Colleague meetings | 249 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jun 22, 2015 | UK Travel - Oyster card | Colleague meetings | 6.4 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jun 23, 2015 | Staff meals - Off site | Colleague meetings | 30 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jun 29, 2015 | UK Subsistence | Colleague meetings | 30 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jun 29, 2015 | UK Travel - Rail/Bus/Tube/Ferry | Colleague meetings | 12 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jun 29, 2015 | UK Travel - Toll Fee | Colleague meetings | 10 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jun 30, 2015 | UK Subsistence | Colleague meetings | 30 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 1, 2015 | UK Travel - Oyster card | Colleague meetings | 11 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 1, 2015 | UK Travel - Toll Fee | Colleague meetings | 11.5 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 6, 2015 | UK Accommodation | Content Board | 64.5 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 6, 2015 | UK Travel - Rail/Bus/Tube/Ferry | Stakeholder meeting | 127.5 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 11, 2015 | UK Travel - Rail/Bus/Tube/Ferry | Stakeholder meeting | 104 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 13, 2015 | UK Travel - Car,Motorbike,Cycle | Colleague meetings | 146.7 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 13, 2015 | UK Travel - Rail/Bus/Tube/Ferry | Stakeholder meeting | 124.5 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 14, 2015 | UK Subsistence | Stakeholder meeting | 30 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 14, 2015 | UK Travel - Rail/Bus/Tube/Ferry | Stakeholder meeting | 12 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 14, 2015 | UK Travel - Taxis and cabs | Stakeholder meeting | 12.5 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 14, 2015 | UK Travel - Oyster card | Stakeholder meeting | 11 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 15, 2015 | UK Subsistence | Stakeholder meeting | 30 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 20, 2015 | UK Travel - Parking costs | Colleague meetings | 3 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 20, 2015 | UK Travel - Rail/Bus/Tube/Ferry | Colleague meetings | 249 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 20, 2015 | UK Travel - Oyster card | Colleague meetings | 4.6 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 21, 2015 | UK Travel - Car,Motorbike,Cycle | Stakeholder event | 65.7 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 29, 2015 | UK Subsistence | Colleague meetings | 30 | | Rhodri Williams | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Aug 5, 2015 | UK Accommodation | Stakeholder event | 195 | | Christopher Woolford | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Jul 28, 2015 | UK Travel - Rail/Bus/Tube/Ferry | Stakeholder meeting | 4.6 | | Christopher Woolford | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Aug 5, 2015 | Overseas Travel - Air | Stakeholder meeting | 215.48 | | 44 | | | | | 45 | | | | | 46 | | | | | 47 | | | | | 48 | | | | | 49 | | | | | 50 | | | | | 51 | | | | | 52 | | | | | 53 | | | | | 54 | | | | | 55 | | | | | 56 | | | | | 57 | | | | | 58 | | | | | 59 | | | | | 60 | | | | | 61 | | | | | 62 | | | | | 63 | | | | | 64 | | | | | 65 | | | | | 66 | | | | | 67 | | | | | 68 | | | | | 69 | | | | | 70 | | | | | 71 | | | | | 72 | | | | | 73 | | | | | 74 | | | | | 75 | | | | | 76 | | | | | 77 | | | | | 78 | | | | | 79 | | | | | Christopher Woolford | SMS | | | | Aug-15 | | | | | Aug 5, 2015 | Overseas Travel - Air | Stakeholder meeting | 136.44 |

en

3022-pdf

# Health And Safety City Of York Council Internal Audit Report 2017/18 Business Unit: Customer and Corporate Services Responsible Officers: Assistant Director, Customer Services and Digital, Assistant Director, Public Protection and Plannning Date Issued: 15/3/2018 Status: Final Reference: 19519/009 ## Summary And Overall Conclusions Introduction The council has responsibilities for the health and safety of its employees, customers accessing services and people in the city. To meet these responsibilities, the council undertakes a broad and diverse range of activities. Previous audits have considered particular areas of health and safety management within the council. Following a request by the Audit & Governance Committee, it was agreed this audit would focus on the council's arrangements for ensuring safety at public events. Responsibility and liability for events differs depending upon who organises the event and who owns the land on which the event is held. Primary responsibility for health and safety lies with the event organiser. The vast majority of events held in York are organised by third parties, but the council and Make It York (MIY) both organise their own events. Make It York also acts on behalf of the council in respect of third party events held on council land. The council hosts and chairs the York Events Safety Advisory Group (SAG), which is made up of various bodies including the emergency services. The SAG provides advice and support to people organising events within the city; however, it has no statutory function and therefore cannot enforce compliance with its recommendations, nor require event organisers to submit their plans.1 Group members may independently exercise statutory powers afforded to them by their particular service area (e.g. Licensing may refuse to grant licences). By contrast, the council has a statutory duty to ensure safety at sports grounds as set out in the Safety of Sports Grounds Act 1975. The Sports Grounds SAG, which is also hosted and chaired by the council, carries out this function. Objectives and Scope of the Audit The purpose of this audit was to provide assurance to management that procedures and controls within the system will ensure that: - the council has appropriate arrangements in place for ensuring health and safety of events it organises; - Make It York has appropriate arrangements in place for ensuring health and safety of events it organises; - suitable arrangements are in place for ensuring health and safety at events held on council land or public highways but not organised by the council or Make It York; - the council has suitable oversight of other private events organised within the city. The audit included visits to Make It York and a review of arrangements at the SAG. ## Key Findings We found that, in general, arrangements for ensuring health and safety at events in the city are adequate. The audit primarily focused on the work of the Events SAG and MIY. A separate report is currently being drafted by North Yorkshire Police, with council involvement, regarding counter-terrorism measures at public events and in public spaces across York. An action plan was developed and training provided for the 2017 St Nicholas Fair and it is expected that other measures will be taken across the city as required. The council primarily gains assurance regarding health and safety at events through the work of the SAG and MIY. Although the SAG does not have a statutory function, ensuring that it is properly resourced and constituted is essential for it to provide effective oversight. Officers raised concerns about an impending lack of resources for the Events SAG due to staffing changes, which could impair its ability to provide timely advice and oversight of events. A similar issue was noted regarding the Sports Grounds SAG, although there is no suggestion that the council has been unable to carry out its regulatory duties. The Sports Grounds SAG was not the focus of this audit, but as the issue is similar to that of the Events SAG, it is raised here. These issues are discussed in Findings 1 and 2 below. Review of council-organised events found that health and safety responsibilities were specified and appropriate documentation completed. However, contracts with organisers did not include a requirement to submit event plans and other key documents to the SAG for scrutiny within a reasonable time frame. This is explained in Finding 3 below. The council's contract with MIY outlines health and safety responsibilities, but makes no requirement for them to refer events to the SAG, unlike in the separate service-level agreement for council land. This is further explained in Finding 4. Testing of third-party events found that key documentation had been completed and submitted to the SAG for scrutiny. However, it was noted that the contract for the event on council land did not include a clause requiring the organisers to submit plans to the SAG and comply with its advice. Discussions with the Assistant Director (Communities & Equalities) found that he currently has limited means of monitoring the servicelevel agreement with MIY. These issues are explained in Finding 5. Finally, the SAG's Terms of Reference (TOR) and meeting minutes were reviewed for adequacy. In general, the TOR was adequate, but some improvements could be made as outlined in Finding 6. The meeting minutes record events discussed and resulting actions, but do not always make clear if actions have been resolved. This is discussed further in Finding 7. ## Overall Conclusions The arrangements for managing risk were satisfactory with a number of weaknesses identified. An acceptable control environment is in operation but there are a number of improvements that could be made. Our overall opinion of the controls within the system at the time of the audit was that they provided Reasonable Assurance. ## 1 Resourcing Of The Events Sag Issue/Control Weakness Risk The Events SAG is facing resourcing pressures that may impact its ability to provide timely advice and oversight. If resources are not sufficient, this reduces the ability of the SAG to provide thorough and timely scrutiny of events. Officers have highlighted a lack of staff time as an issue. For example, the Licensing team is under particular pressure. The Senior Licensing Officer is the secretary to the Events SAG and the Licensing Manager is the secretary to the Sports Grounds SAG, which is a separate group with statutory powers. However, Licensing have lost two staff posts and are expecting a review of staffing requirements. At the same time licensing duties have increased, meaning that the Senior Licensing Officer has less time to devote to SAG issues. The role of the secretary is included in the job description of the Senior Licensing Officer and the Health & Safety representative is required to sit on the SAG. However, other roles, including the role of the chair, are not included in the job descriptions of officers. The Events SAG has also recently lost its chair. The chair of the Sports Grounds SAG has taken over temporarily. Currently it is thought that the Emergency Planning Manager will take over the chair in the long-term, but this is dependent upon her workload and other responsibilities. The SAG is not included in the directorate service plans, nor does it have a dedicated budget. This lack of formal recognition increases the risk that the staffing issues outlined above will not be addressed. a) A review of SAG arrangements will be undertaken. This will include reviewing Priority 2 governance, roles and responsibilities, resourcing, an internal escalation process (see Finding 6), and job descriptions. Responsible Officer b) The findings of the review will determine what decisions and actions need to be taken. Assistant Director (Planning and Public Protection) Responsibilities and timescales for their implementation will then be assigned and further follow up work carried out for these actions. Timescale March 2018 ## 2 Resourcing Of The Sports Grounds Sag Issue/Control Weakness Risk The Sports Grounds SAG is facing resourcing pressures that may impact its ability to carry out its statutory function. If resources are not sufficient, this reduces the ability of the SAG to provide thorough and timely scrutiny of events. The Head of Building Control currently acts as the chair, but this is not included in his job description and is done in addition to his day-to-day duties. He is planning on retiring in the next 18 months, but there is currently no plan of succession in place. The Licensing Manager is the secretary for the Sports Grounds SAG, while the Senior Licensing Officer acts as the secretary to the Events SAG. Licensing has lost two staff posts and a review of staffing requirements is expected. At the same time licensing duties have increased, putting increased pressure on the Licensing team. The SAG is not included in the directorate service plans, nor does it have a dedicated budget, despite having statutory obligations and powers. This lack of formal recognition increases the risk that the staffing issues noted above will not be addressed. A clear plan of succession for the Sports Grounds SAG chair will be developed. The review agreed as part of action 1.1 will include the Sports Grounds SAG to ensure the group is adequately resourced and recognised in service plans and job descriptions. ## 3 Health & Safety Guidance For Council Events Issue/Control Weakness Risk The council does not have sufficient oversight of health and safety at events it organises. There is no requirement for plans for council events to be submitted to the SAG. Relevant guidance on event planning and document retention is not available on the intranet. For two events tested, health and safety requirements were outlined in the brief or contract. However, neither included a requirement to submit event plans and other documentation to the SAG for scrutiny. The brief for the third event tested was no longer available, so it is not known if health and safety requirements were outlined, but risk assessments had been completed. Similar issues around submission of event plans to the SAG and document retention for the Grand Departy Concert were highlighted in the Tour de France Scrutiny Review Report that was presented to Executive Committee in September 2017. There is currently no information on event planning or the SAG on the council's intranet. The responsibility for health and safety at council-run events lies with the organising officer. Discussions with SAG officers identified that getting information in a timely fashion is problematic and hinders their work. Indeed, the SAG asked for information on one council event, but did not receive it. Further discussions identified that getting information in a timely manner is a broader issue (see Findings 4 & 5). Although there is information on the SAG available on the council's external website, officers said it does not clearly outline the application process for events, nor the SAG's expectations. It was agreed that links from the intranet and MIY's website to a single 'hub' of information on the council's website would be more useful than information replicated across three websites. a) Existing guidance on the council's website will be reviewed and guidance on the Priority 2 application process will be developed. This will include the SAG's expectations, timescales for the submission of documents, and a link to the Purple Guide. Responsible Officer b) The guidance will be published on the council's website and clearly signposted from the Assistant Director (Planning and Public Protection) council's intranet and Make It York's website. Timescale March 2018 ## 4 Contract Between The Council And Make It York | Issue/Control Weakness | Risk | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------| | The contract with MIY does not require it to refer events to the SAG. | MIY does not meet its responsibilities regarding health and | | safety at public events held in York. | | The responsibilities of MIY are generally well defined in the contract and SLA with regard to third parties. The SLA requires MIY to enter into an appropriate hire agreement with event organisers, binding them to carry out the event in line with the council's requirements and SAG's advice, but the same requirement is not included in the main contract in respect of events held in the city centre. Although in practice MIY does refer events to the SAG, the contract should be amended to ensure consistency between the two agreements. Priority 2 The contract between the council and MIY will be amended to include a requirement to refer events to the SAG and for event organisers to act upon its advice, bringing it in line with the SLA. Responsible Officer Assistant Director (Communities & Equalities) April 2018 ## 5 Sla Between The Council And Miy Issue/Control Weakness Risk The contract with MIY does not require it to refer events to the SAG and monitoring of the SLA is limited. MIY does not meet its responsibilities regarding health and safety at public events held in York. The SLA between the council and MIY states that MIY will enter into an appropriate hire agreement with event organisers that binds the event organiser to carry out their event in line with the council's requirements and the advice of the SAG (section 4.e). However, testing of the hire agreement for the recent Balloon Fiesta found that there was no reference to the event organisers having to comply with the advice of the SAG. Although SAG meeting minutes and discussion with officers suggest that the event organisers were cooperative, the hire agreement should be amended to include this requirement in future. Furthermore, discussion with the Assistant Director (Communities & Equalities) found that monitoring of the SLA is limited to general discussion at client meetings due to resourcing pressures. It was agreed that seeking feedback from the SAG prior to client meetings would be an appropriate way of monitoring MIY's performance. a) MIYs hire agreement will be amended to include a requirement for event organisers to 2 submit their plans in a timely fashion to the SAG and act upon its advice. It will include conditions about when and how permission to run events will be withdrawn if requirements are not met. Assistant Director (Communities & Equalities) b) The Assistant Director (Communities & Equalities) will seek feedback from the SAG April 2018 prior to routine client meetings. How this is done and what information is provided will be agreed with the SAG. ## 6 Sag Terms Of Reference Issue/Control Weakness Risk | The SAG's TOR has not been finalised. | |------------------------------------------| | health and safety. | The SAG has Terms of Reference (TOR), but these are in draft. Generally, the terms are adequate, but there are several improvements that could be made. The TOR states the SAG cannot stop an event going ahead, but discussion with officers found that the SAG will state whether or not it supports an event. This decision and how it is reached should be included in the TOR. The TOR also states that decision making will be delegated to the council via the Chair, but it is not clear what this means in practice. It also makes no provision for escalation of issues within the council should there be pressure on the SAG from within the council to support an event that in their opinion is not safe. Other issues identified include lack of version control, a process for amending the TOR, what constitutes quorum for meetings, who chairs meetings or how the chair is rotated. The TOR need revising to include the issues identified and a suitable escalation procedure should be developed to ensure that the SAG functions effectively and maintains its independence. The TOR will be reviewed and revised to reflect the outcome of the review of SAG arrangements (action 1.1). The points raised above will be considered, especially that of an internal escalation procedure to an appropriate officer (e.g. a Director). ## 7 Sag Meeting Minutes Issue/Control Weakness Risk Issues raised with event organisers are not resolved. It is not clear from SAG meeting minutes if issues raised with event organisers have been resolved or advice acted upon. SAG meeting minutes document which events have been discussed and any issues raised by group members. However, it is not always clear from the minutes whether issues raised have been resolved or event organisers have acted upon advice provided to them. When the SAG provides advice, the responsibility for ensuring adequate health and safety arrangements for events remain with the event organiser and not the SAG. However, it is suggested that a standing agenda item is included regarding updates on issues raised with, and advice provided to, event organisers. This will enable the SAG to keep a record of outcomes and gain insight into whether or not its advice is followed. A standing agenda item for issues raised with and advice provided to event organisers will be included in SAG meeting minutes and agendas. ## Audit Opinions And Priorities For Actions Audit Opinions Audit work is based on sampling transactions to test the operation of systems. It cannot guarantee the elimination of fraud or error. Our opinion is based on the risks we identify at the time of the audit. Our overall audit opinion is based on 5 grades of opinion, as set out below. Opinion Assessment of internal control | High Assurance | |--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | Substantial | | Assurance | | Overall, good management of risk with few weaknesses identified. An effective control environment is in | | operation but there is scope for further improvement in the areas identified. | | | | Reasonable | | Assurance | | Overall, satisfactory management of risk with a number of weaknesses identified. An acceptable control | | environment is in operation but there are a number of improvements that could be made. | | Limited Assurance | | Overall, poor management of risk with significant control weaknesses in key areas and major | | improvements required before an effective control environment will be in operation. | | No Assurance | | Overall, there is a fundamental failure in control and risks are not being effectively managed. A number of | | key areas require substantial improvement to protect the system from error and abuse. | | | ## Priorities For Actions Priority 1 A fundamental system weakness, which presents unacceptable risk to the system objectives and requires urgent attention by management. Priority 2 A significant system weakness, whose impact or frequency presents risks to the system objectives, which needs to be addressed by management. Priority 3 The system objectives are not exposed to significant risk, but the issue merits attention by management. Where information resulting from audit work is made public or is provided to a third party by the client or by Veritau then this must be done on the understanding that any third party will rely on the information at its own risk. Veritau will not owe a duty of care or assume any responsibility towards anyone other than the client in relation to the information supplied. Equally, no third party may assert any rights or bring any claims against Veritau in connection with the information. Where information is provided to a named third party, the third party will keep the information confidential.

en

1850-pdf

## Student Awards Agency Scotland (Saas) Is Committed To Providing A High-Quality Customer Service. We Want To Know If Something Goes Wrong Or If You Are Dissatisfied With Our Service. We Want To Use The Information Received On Complaints To Help Us Improve. We Are Committed To Making Our Service Easy To Use And, In Line With Our Statutory Equalities Duties. We Will Ensure That Reasonable Adjustments Are Made To Help You Access And Use Our Services. This Guide Can Be Printed In Other Languages And Formats (Such As Large Print, Audio And Braille). This Guide Describes Our Complaints Handling Procedures And How To Make A Complaint. It Also Tells You About Our Service Standards And What You Can Expect From Us. A Complaint Is An Expression Of Dissatisfaction About Our Action Or Lack Of Action Or About The Standard Of Service Provided By Us. The Definition Of A Complaint Is Very Broad And The List Is Not Exhaustive. A Complaint May Involve More Than One Service And Can Be Made About Things Like: - A Delay In Responding To An Enquiry Or Request - our failure to provide a service - a request for a service or information that we have not actioned - the quality and standard of service - treatment by or attitude of a staff member - our failure to follow proper administrative process - our policy ## There Are Some Things We Cannot Deal With Through Our Complaints Handling Procedure. These Include - A Disagreement About A Student Funding Decision (See Appeals Guide) - a routine first-time request for a service - a request for information or an explanation of policy or practice - Freedom of Information or Data Protection request decisions - legal proceedings or judgements ## Anyone can make a complaint. We understand that there may be reasons why a student is unable or reluctant to make a complaint therefore, we accept complaints from representatives, friends or relatives. IMPORTANT: If you are acting as a representative, we will not provide you with information we hold about a student until you provide us with written consent from the student agreeing to you acting on their behalf. Please see the attached form. By completing the attached form. Tell us:  your full name, address and student reference number  as much as you can about the complaint  what has gone wrong  how you want us to resolve the matter You can send this to us by email: SAASComplaints_Appeals@gov.scot In writing: Student Awards Agency Scotland, Complaints and Appeals Team, Saughton House, Broomhouse Drive, Edinburgh, EH11 3UT Please clearly mark your letter 'Complaint'. You can also complain by telephone: 0300 555 0505 and we will ask you for further information. You can also visit us at the above address. It is easier for us to resolve complaints if you make them quickly. Please talk to a member of our staff so that they can try to resolve any problems on the spot. Normally, you must make your complaint within six months of:  the event you want to complain about or  finding out that you have a reason to complain but no longer than 12 months after the event itself We may consider a complaint after the time limit in exceptional circumstances. Please tell us why the time limit should not apply to your complaint. ## We Aim To Resolve Complaints Quickly, This Could Mean An On-The-Spot Apology And Explanation If Something Has Clearly Gone Wrong And Immediate Action Taken To Resolve The Issue. Our Decision At Stage One Is Normally Made Within Five Working Days And It Will Be Reviewed Independently From The Area Where The Complaint Occurred. We Will Contact You If We Cannot Make A Decision In That Time And Agree An Extension Of Time. If We Cannot Resolve Your Complaint At This Stage, We Will Explain Why And Tell You What You Can Do Next. We Might Suggest That You Take Your Complaint To Stage Two. Stage Two Deals With Two Types Of Complaint - Those That Have Not Been Resolved At Stage One And Those That Are Complex And Require Detailed Investigation. When Using Stage Two We Will: - Acknowledge Receipt Of Your Complaint Within Three Working Days - give you a full response to the complaint within 20 working days We will agree revised time limits and keep you updated on progress if our investigation will take longer than 20 working days If you are still not satisfied with our decision after we have investigated your case, or the way we dealt with your complaint, you can ask the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (SPSO) to look at it. The SPSO cannot normally look at: - a complaint that has not gone through our two stage complaints procedure (please make sure it has done so before contacting SPSO) - events that happened, or that you became aware of, more than 12 months ago - a matter that has been or is being considered in court ## You can contact SPSO: In person: SPSO 99 McDonald Road Edinburgh EH7 4NS By post: Freepost SPSO Freephone: 0800 377 7330 Website: www.spso.org.uk ## We Have A System For Recording Complaints, Their Outcomes And Any Resulting Action, Which Allows Us To Identify Opportunities To Improve Our Services. Our Management Board And Executive Team Are Provided With Information On Complaints Received And About Patterns Or Trends That Suggest We Should Change Our Procedures. We Publish Details In Our Annual Reports.

en

3981-pdf

## Mortgage And Landlord Possession Statistics In England And Wales, April To June 2017 (Provisional) Main Points Since April to June 2016, the number of mortgage possession claims made to county courts has increased, and warrants and repossessions continue to fall. All landlord possession actions continue to decrease in line with the long-term trend. Mortgage possession: claims and orders have increased Mortgage possession **claims** and **orders** have **risen** again (compared to the same quarter last year), a continuation of the increase seen in October to December 2016, but figures remain at a similar level to the past two years. Mortgage: average time (from claim issued to possession action) has increased Average time from claim to order has decreased. Time from claim to warrant and **repossession** continues the long term rising trend (to over 135 weeks, up **from** 116 weeks in the previous year (Apr-Jun 2016). All stages of landlord possession actions have decreased Landlord possession claims, **orders** for possession, warrants of possession and **repossessions** by county court bailiffs have decreased, continuing the long-term downward trend seen since April to June 2014. 93 Local Authorities have **no repossessions recorded**. Mortgage possession claims and repossession rates remain at low levels Mortgage possession claim rates are highest in Blaenau Gwent with 55 per 100,000 households. Mortgage repossession rates are highest in South Lakeland with 23 per 100,000 households. Landlord possession claims and repossessions highest in London and the The highest rates of landlord possession actions are concentrated in London (8 of 10 highest claim rates and 16 of 20 highest repossession rates). East This publication provides mortgage and landlord possession statistics in April to June 2017, compared to the same quarter the previous year. A data visualisation tool has been introduced to this quarterly edition and can be accessed here. For technical detail, please refer to the accompanying supporting document. For feedback related to the content of this publication, please contact us know at CAJS@justice.gsi.gov.uk ## 1. Overview Of Mortgage Possession Claims And Order Possession Actions Have Increased Mortgage possession **claims** (5,186) and orders for **possession** (3,343), have both increased by 17% and 8% respectively (compared to the same quarter last year). However, while these figures are again an increase on the previous quarters, they remain broadly in line with the recent trend, seen since January to March 2015. The continuing downward trend seen for **warrants** of possession and **repossessions**, may reflect a time lag of cases progressing through the system. ## Mortgage possession claims fell from a peak of 26,419 in April to June 2009 before stabilising in April to June 2015 (4,849). In April to June 2017, claims for possession increased by 17% to 5,186 claims (compared to the same quarter in 2016). Orders for possession followed a similar trend to mortgage claims, falling from a peak of 23,850 orders in July to September 2009, but continuing to decline to 2,685 orders at July to September 2016. In the most recent quarter, orders have increased by 8% compared to the same quarter in 2016, from 3,101 to 3,343. The fall in the number of mortgage possession actions since 2008 coincides with lower interest rates, a proactive approach from lenders in managing consumers in financial difficulties and other interventions, such as the Mortgage Rescue Scheme and the introduction of the Mortgage Pre-Action Protocol. Additionally, the downward trend seen in recent years mirrors that seen in the proportion of owner-occupiers. However, in the most recent year, claims and orders have started to increase. Outer London is the region most driving these trends, with the largest percentage increase in both claims and orders. ## 2. Mortgage Possession Action Timeliness Average time between claims being issued to possession action has increased. The average time for orders to be issued has continued to slowly **fall**. For issues of warrants, the time taken has increased **to the highest** level seen for the past 5 years. Following a decline since the peak of 140.7 weeks in July to September 2016, the time for issue of repossessions has **increased** again to 135.8 weeks. Number of weeks taken from initial Mortgage claim to… | Orders | |------------| | | | | claims and court orders decreased slightly in the last quarter The average no. of weeks between claims and warrants has increased compared to early 2016 The average no. of weeks between claims and repossessions has increased compared to the previous year Claims to warrants have Claims to reposessions have Claims to orders have increased from 89.3 (Aprincreased from 115.8 (Apr-Jun decreased from 16.2 (Apr- Jun 2016) to 2016) to Jun 2016) to 13.8 weeks 93.3 weeks (Apr-Jun 2017) 135.8 (Apr-Jun 2017) (Apr-Jun 2017) The above charts distinguish the timeliness of possession claims at the different stages of a case. It is worth noting that timeliness can be affected by various factors. For example, the final two charts take account of the amount of time between the court order being issued and the user, such as the mortgage lender, issuing a warrant of possession. The increases in the average time from claim to warrant and claim to repossession shown above, are due to a small number of claims dating from 2004, where users have issued their warrants in the most recent quarter (possibly due to defendants recently breaking the terms of the mortgage agreements put in place at the start of the process). | | | Proportion of claims to reach each stage | |------------------------------------------|---------|---------------------------------------------| | In initial 6 months (first two quarters) | | 5 year period | | | | | | Apr-Jun 2016 | | | | Apr-Jun 2017 | | | | | Apr-Jun | | | | | | | 2016 | | | | Apr-Jun 2017 | | | | Orders | | | | 61% | | | | 58% | | | | | 68% | | | 65% | | | | Warrants | | | | 15% | | | | 14% | | | | | 36% | | | 32% | | | | Repossessions | | | | 6% | | | | 6% | | | | | 19% | | | 17% | | | Over the last 5 years, 65% of claims received orders of repossession; 32% received warrants, and 17% ended in repossession (by county court bailiff). Overall fewer claims progressed to orders and warrants both within 6 months of the claim date and over a 5 year period. Whilst repossessions made within 6 months of the claim date have remained at the same level, **fewer cases** progressed to **repossessions over 5 years**. ## 3. Overview Of Landlord Possession All Stages Of Landlord Possession Actions Have Decreased Landlord possession **claims** (32,077), **orders** for possession (25,195), **warrants** of possession (16,018) and **repossessions** by county court bailiffs (8,819) decreased by 6%, 10%, 12% and 16% respectively (compared to the same quarter last year; Apr-Jun 2016). This is in line with the **downward trend** seen since April to June 2014. Whilst the actual figures show a continuation of the annual downward trend in possession actions since April to June 2014, seasonally adjusted figures for possession claims, orders and repossessions show an increase of 3%, 4% and 2% respectively compared to the previous quarter, whilst warrants have fallen by 3%. Seasonally adjusted figures for possession claims have shown an increase for the past two quarters. The majority **(59%)** (18,815) of landlord possession claims were **social landlord** claims, 25% (7,924) were **accelerated** claims and 17% (5,338) were **private landlord** claims. By region, the proportion of landlord claims that are accelerated range from 10% in the North East, to 37% (3,197) in London. **Private** claims range from 13% in the **North East**, to 19% in the South East. **Social** claims range from 44% in **London**, to 78% in the **North East**. ## 4. Landlord Possession Timeliness Time Taken For Landlord Possession Claims To Order, Warrant And Repossession Have All Increased Since April to June 2016, **there has been a slight increase** in the time taken across all possession actions (however all are stable fluctuations around historic levels; 11 weeks (orders), 36 weeks (warrants) and 43 weeks (repossessions)). Number of weeks taken from initial landlord claim to … | Orders | | | Warrants | | | Repossessions | |------------|-----|-----|-------------|-----|-----|------------------| Claims to orders have Claims to warrants have Claims to reposessions increased slightly from increased from 34.7 weeks have **increased** from 41.1 11.1 weeks (Apr-Jun 2016) (Apr-Jun 2016) to weeks (Apr-Jun 2016) to to 11.4 weeks (Apr-Jun 35.9 (Apr-Jun 2017) 42.5 (Apr-Jun 2017) 2017) Proportion of claims to reach each stage In initial 6 months (first two quarters) 5 year period Apr-Jun 2016 Apr-Jun 2017 Apr-Jun 2016 Apr-Jun 2017 Orders 67% 68% 74% 75% Warrants 23% 24% 40% 40% Repossessions 12% 13% 24% 25% Over the last 5 years, 75% of claims progressed to orders of repossession; 40% to warrants, and a quarter ended in repossession. The **proportion** of landlord possession **claims reaching each possession stage increased** in April to June 2017 compared with the same period last year, in the initial 6 months from the date of claim. Over the 5 year period, there was an increase for orders and repossessions, but warrants remained stable. ## 5. Regional Possession Claims Mortgage possession claim rates were highest in **Blaenau Gwent** and **Barrow-in-Furness** (55 and 52 per 100,000 household respectively). Landlord possession claim rates were highly concentrated in **London**, with 8 of the 10 highest rates. **Newham** had the highest rate (382 per 100,000 household). ## Mortgage The number of mortgage possession claims per 100,000 households by local authority ranged from 2 in Waverley, to 55 in **Blaenau Gwent**. The Isles of Scilly, Hart, South Northamptonshire and the City of London had no mortgage possession claims. ## Landlord Wokingham showed the lowest rate of landlord possession claims (22 per 100,000 households) whilst **Newham** showed the highest (382 per 100,000 households). The Isles of Scilly had no landlord possession claims. London boroughs account for **8 of the 10** local authorities with the highest **rate** of landlord claims. In addition to London boroughs, **Halton** and Harlow had the highest rates, with 303 and 296 per 100,000 households respectively. ## 6. Regional Repossessions (By County Court Bailiffs) Mortgage repossessions are highest in **South Lakeland** with 23 per 100,000 households. Landlord repossessions are concentrated in London **(16 of the 20 highest rates)** and the **East** (3 of the 20 highest rates). ## Mortgage South Lakeland had the highest number of mortgage repossessions by county court bailiffs (23 per 100,000 households) in April to June 2017. No repossessions by county court bailiffs were recorded during this period in 93 local authorities. ## Landlord London local authorities account for 16 of the 20 boroughs, with the **highest rate** of landlord repossessions being in **Newham**, at 259 per 100,000 households, followed by Barking and Dagenham and Waltham **Forest** at 172 and 170 per 100,000 households respectively. There were six local authorities with no landlord repossessions by county court bailiffs in January to March 2017 (Isles of Scilly, Ribble Valley, South Bucks, Derbyshire Dales, Bracknell Forest and Chiltern). ## Further Information The statistics in the latest quarter are provisional and revisions may be made when the next edition of this bulletin is published and when the figures are reconciled at the end of the year. If revisions are needed in subsequent years, these will be annotated in the tables. ## Accompanying Files As Well As This Bulletin, The Following Products Are Published As Part Of This Release:  A supporting guide providing further information on how the data is collected and processed, including a guide to the csv files, as well as legislation relevant to mortgage possessions and background information.  A set of overview tables, covering key sections of this bulletin.  CSV files of the map data and the figures by local authority and county court.  A data visualisation tool available at: public.tableau.com/profile/moj.analysis#!/vizhome/MLPdatatool2017Q2/FrontPage 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 Queries about these statistics should be directed to the Justice Statistics Analytical Services, in the Ministry of Justice: Bridgette Miles - email: CAJS@justice.gsi.gov.uk Press enquiries should be directed to the Ministry of Justice press office: Simon Barrett- email: simon.barrett@justice.gsi.gov.uk And queries on the wider policy implications of these statistics should be directed to the Department for Communities and Local Government's press office: Philippa Silverman - email: Philippa.Silverman@communities.gsi.gov.uk ## Next Update: 9 November 2017 URL: www.gov.uk/government/statistics/mortgage-and-landlord-possession-statistics-aprilto-june-2017 © Crown copyright Produced by the Ministry of Justice Alternative formats are available on request from statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk

en

1196-pdf

Archives Sector Workforce Development Strategy August 2018 Cert No: QEC19593371/0/Q Pye Tait Consulting Royal House, 110 Station Parade Harrogate HG1 1EP 01423 509 433 info@pyetait.com www.pyetait.com ## Contents | Acknowledgements | 3 | |----------------------------------------------------------|------| | | | | About this document 4 | | | | | | Developing capacity in the Archives Sector | 5 | | | | | The Archives Workforce - an overview 6 | | | | | | Strategy - Summary 8 | | | | | | Objective 1: Adapting to change 13 | | | | | | Objective 2: Recruiting and retaining talent 18 | | | | | | Objective 3: Career and progression opportunities | 22 | | | | | Objective 4: Diverse and socially mobile workforce | 27 | | | | | Objective 5: Skills and training 33 | | | | | | Appendix 1. Methodology and survey respondent profile 47 | | | | | | Appendix 2. Additional skills scoring charts | 49 | | | | | | | | | | | | | ## Acknowledgements The National Archives and Pye Tait Consulting would like to extend their thanks and gratitude to all those who took part in the research and contributed to the development of this strategy. Special thanks go to the following organisations: | Archives and Records Association (ARA) | Manchester City Council | |----------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------| | Arts Council England | National Science and Media Museum | | Bank of England | Norfolk County Council | | Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals (CILIP) | Research Libraries UK (RLUK) | | Chief Cultural and Leisure Officers Association (CCLOA) | The Museums Association | | Creative and Cultural Skills | The Postal Museum | | Digital Preservation Coalition | University College London (UCL) | | East Riding Archives | University of Plymouth | | Explore York Libraries and Archives | University of Reading | | Heritage Lottery Fund | University of Southampton | | Historic Houses Archivists Group | Welsh Govt, Museums Archives & Libraries Division | Jisc Youth Club Archive ## About This Document This document forms the first Archives Sector Workforce Development Strategy (the strategy). Its purpose is to help foster a skilled, diverse, flexible and confident archives workforce. The strategy was commissioned by The National Archives and developed by research partner Pye Tait Consulting. This process involved wide-ranging consultation with the archives sector, including roundtable discussion groups, in-depth interviews with key stakeholders, and a national workforce survey1. The proposals contained in this document are intended for further discussion between The National Archives and key partners, including the Archives and Records Association (ARA) and the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals (CILIP), to define the most effective proposals and agree on implementation. The strategy is first presented in summary form on pages 8-12, comprising one overarching objective, five strategic objectives and a nested arrangement of 21 tactical objectives. These are explored more fully in subsequent chapters. ## Developing Capacity In The Archives Sector In 2017, The National Archives published the Government's vision for the sector, *Archives Unlocked - Releasing the Potential*. At its heart are three ambitions:  Impact - to develop and expand audiences, pilot approaches to using data and evidence, and influence thinking in the IT, commercial and knowledge sectors.  Trust - people and institutions trust the authenticity of archive records, and how they are preserved and presented; Crucial to achieving these outcomes is developing capacity in the archives workforce so that managers and staff have:  Enrichment - archives enhance and enrich our society intellectually, culturally and economically;  sufficient and appropriate knowledge and skills;  clarity on job roles, entry and progression routes; and  Openness - archives cultivate an open approach to knowledge and are accessible to all.  access to suitable forms of training and professional development. To deliver these ambitions, Archives Unlocked - Delivering the Vision sets out three broad areas of on-going focus:  Digital capacity - to develop the digital capacity of the archive sector to preserve digital records and increase discoverability of the paper and digital archives;  Resilience - to open the sector to new skills and a more diverse workforce, increase income generation capacities, and support innovative service models; ## The Archives Workforce - An Overview Research published by ARA and CILIP2 estimates that more than 86,000 people work across the UK Information economy. Of these, just under 11,000 (12.7%) are estimated to work in national or local archives settings. The parameters of the archives sector are difficult to define as job roles exist in a range of settings, including national organisations, local authorities, academic institutions, libraries, museums, nonprofit institutions, private businesses and more. There is no 'one size fits all' approach to how archives operate and a variety of reporting lines, role descriptions and job titles exist. The core role of Archivist requires a postgraduate qualification in the field of archives or records management, and usually one which is recognised by ARA. Paraprofessional roles such as Archive Assistant and Outreach Officer (or equivalent) do not always require qualifications up to degree level, although high demand for limited numbers of vacancies means many recruits are often at least degree-level qualified. In some organisations, Senior Archivists have supervisory or managerial (including budget management) responsibilities, whereas in other organisations (especially larger archive services) a more defined vertical hierarchy can be found. In local authorities, research undertaken for this strategy suggests that hierarchies appear to be flattening and archival responsibilities broadening and becoming more multi-disciplinary in response to tightening budgets and organisational restructures. In this strategy the term 'archives workforce' is used to encapsulate all those who work in the sector, from professional and paraprofessional staff to those who use IT, HR or maintenance skills to support the ongoing work of archives. In addition to the numerous roles which exist within the sector, a wide range of titles is now used by employers for the core, professional role of 'Archivist' such as 'Collections Officer' and 'Heritage Manager'. This can result in confusion as to the level of qualification and seniority required from the post-holder. This has an impact on recruitment both due to confusion as to the nature of 2 Archives and Records Association (ARA) and the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals (CILIP) (2016) UK Information Workforce - Sector Factsheets the role and concern from qualified candidates as to how this role would be seen by future employers. Existing job profiles published online by career organisations do not always appear to capture the wide range of skills and responsibilities needed by some organisations and settings. This could be based on an assumption that individuals looking to enter these job roles will already possess certain skills as prerequisites, but this could inevitably lead to misconceptions or inaccurate understanding about roles in the sector. ## Strategy Summary Structure Overarching Objective Develop capacity in the archives workforce so that managers and staff are equipped to deliver sustainable, resilient and forwardthinking archive services that foster trust, enrichment and openness by reflecting the communities they serve, meeting their needs and engaging with wider society. 5 strategic objectives and 21 tactical goals Support a culture change across the archives sector to embrace and proactively respond to digital technologies, changing user needs, collaboration and innovative working. 1. Empower the archives workforce to adapt to major drivers of change, including digital technologies. 1.1 1.2 Open new pathways to funding to enable archive services to respond to major drivers of change, including support for recruiting permanent roles and recruiting to appropriate skill sets. 1.3 Support managers to develop the skills needed to be intelligent clients in the digital sphere. 2. Make it easier for the sector to recruit and retain high quality talent. 2.1 Produce template job descriptions and person specifications that managers can adapt, which set out the range of skills, knowledge and behaviours needed of the archive workforce in a changing world. 2.2 Encourage more innovative and flexible recruitment options so that strong applicants are encouraged to join the sector. 2.3 Develop national guidance and salary benchmarking information that empower archive managers to put internal cases forward for better pay and physical resources. 2.4 Develop training and support for archive leaders to enable them to confidently address the challenges of the sector and equip them to move into senior leadership positions. 3. Open up career and progression opportunities in the sector through clearer information, better promotion and targeted support, and develop awareness of the ecology of the workforce, allowing the full range of jobs within the sector to be seen and appreciated. 3.1 Improve awareness and understanding about archive workforce roles and career opportunities among young people (especially those aged 16 onwards in schools), career changers and careers influencers. 3.2 Develop a functional and occupational map for archives to articulate the full scope and parameters of the sector for careers influencers and improve accuracy and consistency of interpretation of roles across the sector. 3.3 Create a central online careers hub to provide tools and support to aid progression and career development opportunities and show the varied careers possible within the wider archives workforce. 3.4 Develop more targeted support tools for mid-career archivists, to help them pursue specialisation/horizontal progression and develop business and leadership skills. This will minimise the risk of stagnation and stimulate the through-flow of new ideas. 4. Cultivate a more diverse and socially mobile workforce to enable archive services to better represent their communities. 4.1 Keep diversity and social mobility at the forefront of discussions in the sector, across all aspects of service delivery including workforce development, improving understanding of the importance of a diverse workforce to the long-term impact of archives. 4.2 Actively promote the benefits of welcoming and inclusive practices across workforce development and all aspects of service delivery through case studies that show how change has been needed, addressed and achieved to the benefit of both the service and the community it serves. 4.3 Develop an appropriate panel/working group to help raise awareness of issues of diversity and representation across the sector and act as a critical friend to The National Archives and partners. 4.4 Develop and promote more varied entry routes to the full range of careers within the sector to improve diversity in both skills and workforce, with an immediate focus on increasing opportunities for people from BAME backgrounds. 4.5 Create effective and well-executed volunteer strategies to harness the impact of volunteers in ways which enhance the work of paid and professional staff. 5. Broaden and deepen workforce skills through effective training and professional development opportunities. 5.1 Develop a cohesive sector-wide professional development strategy, including clear guidance around the nature, amount and impact of recommended annual Continuing Professional Development per annum for different roles in the archives sector. 5.2 Help the archives sector to access a range of flexible training and CPD resources that respond to the grand challenges and critical skills identified through this strategy. 5.3 Work with higher education institutions to ensure that courses offering pathways to archive job roles continuously adapt to address the modern challenges and critical skills needed by employers. 5.4 Explore options for a special training and professional development fund for individuals meeting certain criteria, who might not otherwise have the opportunity. 5.5 Grow awareness and understanding of apprenticeships within the archives sector and promote apprenticeships as credible parallel entry pathways to roles in the archives workforce. 5.6 Develop apprenticeship standards for appropriate archive-related job roles and promote the use of existing standards where suitable for roles within the wider workforce. The next five chapters examine each of these five strategic objectives in more detail, including underpinning evidence and detailed descriptions of the tactical objectives. ## Objective 1: Adapting To Change The first two of these challenges are considered 'very important' by most of the surveyed archives workforce, with the second two areas also considered 'very' or 'quite' important by the majority (Figure 1). ## "Archiving Is Becoming Less About Being A Custodian And More About Being An Enabler". Professional Body The Roundtable Discussions And Stakeholder Interviews, And The Survey Of The Archive Workforce, Both Led To Four 'Grand Challenges' For Workforce Development In This Sector: 1. Adapting to digital technologies; 2. Enabling easier access to collections by users and community groups; 3. Strengthening collaboration and partnership activities; and 4. Innovative working. Interestingly, although the themes strongly emerged, the level of importance placed on the 'grand challenges' showed more divergence. able to access new skills - including technical skills, as well as strengthening skills such as advocacy and partnership building to ensure they can access the support and resources that digital archiving needs. Digital archival content - either born-digital or digitised material - is a key challenge for archives. New technologies such as Artificial Intelligence (AI), other robotics (including drones), along with Big Data, are changing the way information is gathered and processed. Digital archiving can create huge amount of records, but being able to deal with these and enable better access and use of these records is considered key to the long-term continuity of services. Digital archiving requires innovative new approaches and techniques. It also ties in with the theme of collaboration, for example through building stronger links with IT professionals and identifying opportunities for shared use of infrastructure where inhouse resources are limited. Digital skills are being developed within the sector but there may be a limit to the extent that those who have taken the traditional humanities route into the sector can be upskilled in increasingly specialist digital areas. Therefore, the possibility of recruiting to new skillsets must also be explored although this presents particular challenge to small archive services which do not have capacity to support multiple roles. The survey showed that perceived levels of importance placed on these areas are similar across different archive settings, although charities and educational institutions are comparatively less concerned with pursuing innovative ways of working, whilst private businesses are slightly more ambivalent about partnership working. This is likely to be down to businesses having a more competitive, rather than collaborative, ethos to their work. Participants in the roundtable discussions and the individual stakeholder interviews, which involved participants from related sectors, put greater emphasis on the latter two of these 'grand challenges' - particularly noting that it is only through collaboration and innovation that all of these challenges can be met. This divergence is not significant but does suggest that the challenge of creating the collaborative, innovation-focused landscape which archives must inhabit may be clearer to those external to the sector. 1. Adapting to digital technologies The National Archives Digital Strategy states "archives around the world are grappling with the digital challenge". Digital technology is fundamentally changing the nature of the record, and archival practice needs to evolve to ensure archives can still be collected, preserved and made accessible and that the opportunities digital presents are fully exploited. The archives workforce needs to be Managers have a particular role within the digital challenge. They are unlikely to need to develop the level of skills and expertise that is needed by digital practitioners but they must develop confidence in recruiting and managing digital specialists and also be able to contract with suppliers and IT professionals when required. Therefore, managers must be equipped to recognise good digital interventions in a skills development pathway which may be separate from the specialist skills development needed by digital practitioners. "We cannot continue to perform our role, i.e. collect historically important records to support the business and external research, if we do not get to grips with digital preservation." Business "We don't have many resources to manage digital records, so we're vulnerable in that respect. Knowing the specific actions needed is something we don't feel particularly confident about." Charity 2. Enabling easier access to collections by users and community groups Advances in digital technology mean that archive users increasingly want to be able to access content quickly and easily through electronic channels. These developments present a huge opportunity for archive services. Expert knowledge of digital discovery and digital engagement is growing in importance as a way of drawing in new users and ensuring that the value of archives continues to be demonstrated. Additionally, archive services need to extend their relevance and appeal to as broad a cross-section of society as possible. Community outreach and engagement activities are therefore important to make services more visible. Expert outreach and engagement, like digital interventions, requires skills which can be developed in archive professionals but which can also be specifically recruited to as part of the workforce, As with digital skills, this development of an archives eco-system may be more available to larger organisations although there is the potential for smaller services to join together to share specialist roles. 3. Strengthening collaboration and partnership activities There are some excellent examples of collaboration and partnership working in archives. For example, one local authority archive service has joined up with universities and other organisations to bring a number of archives together under one umbrella and brand. This has helped to increase visibility of their respective archives, improve relevance to the community, and create a strong combined centre of excellence. In turn this has created opportunities for cross-working (giving staff exposure to other cultural organisations), relationship building, ideas sharing and CPD through master classes. These types of activities help members of the workforce to enjoy different experiences and enable archive services to become more joined up and accessible to users. Such approaches are welcomed by users of archives who are not necessarily attuned to, or concerned about, geographical boundaries and remits of any one organisation. 4. Innovative working External funding for archive services is becoming increasingly project based, requiring staff to consider aspects such as 'impact' and 'return on investment' more carefully when preparing bids. Limited funding for services in the public sector also means that staff need to become more business-savvy and identify new income-generating opportunities. There are some concerns that opportunities to innovate can be stifled by lack of time and financial resources. Archive managers need to have the tools and confidence to make businesses cases to senior managers for funding and resources and be able to negotiate successfully. Implications for archives All of these factors (and more) are contributing to a gradual change of emphasis from archive services being perceived as purely about managing collections, to being more outward-looking. This means becoming more interpretative and working to improve awareness, access and use of archives by increasingly diverse and digitallyresponsive community groups. Change appears to be evolutionary rather than revolutionary, with many archivists working in small organisations and often in quite siloed environments. However, by not adapting, there is a danger that services risk being scaled back by senior business managers who have little awareness of archives and may not recognise their true potential. Cuts to services risk even fewer resources being available to unlock the power of collections, but archivists say they do not always have the tools and confidence to make a strong business case for their continued support and expansion. Therefore developing advocacy skills in senior staff must be a priority for the sector. ## Objective 1.1: Support A Culture Change Across The Archives Sector To Embrace And Proactively Respond To Digital Technologies, Changing User Needs, Collaboration And Innovative Working. Managers Should Lead And Encourage Their Workforce To:  forge new partnerships or make better use of existing collaborations to share ideas, knowledge and best practice, e.g. through leadership networks, use of secondments and implementation of joint projects between networks of archives  harness and exploit digital technologies to enable archives to better reach out to their communities and encourage the wider use and exploitation of archives  pursue innovative business models, including incomegenerating opportunities - involving more upfront cost but offering greater long-term returns. They should also look to bring new skills into the workforce through targeted recruitment, where necessary. OBJECTIVE 1.2: Open new pathways to funding to enable archive services to respond to major drivers of change, including support for recruiting permanent roles and recruiting to appropriate skillsets. The National Archives and partners should continue to advocate the value, impact and outputs of archive services, and to support them to secure adequate resources by building funding skills in the sector, and also by working to develop relationships with funders. Most funding is currently project based and therefore cannot be used for core staff costs so further work is needed to secure funding which can address these vital needs. Sector leaders must also work to enable senior archives staff to develop the leadership skills required to advocate and build relationships on an individual service level. OBJECTIVE 1:3: Support managers to develop the skills needed to be intelligent clients in the digital sphere. Senior staff within archives must be equipped with the skills and confidence they need to be able to effectively run innovative digital services and to speak authoritatively to suppliers and partners about their digital needs. ## Objective 2: Recruiting And Retaining Talent Recruitment The recruitment picture is varied across the sector depending on the role and geographical area. Managers reported large numbers of highly academically qualified candidates for traditional archival roles, including at entry-level, noting that the ease of recruitment makes it hard to make a case for salary rises (Figure 2). In contrast, roles which have a strong digital focus receive fewer applications and are more challenging to recruit due to a lack of knowledge and skills in applicants (Figure 3). Recruitment into senior roles from outside the sector or the merging of senior roles within an organisation appears to be increasingly commonplace and can bring new strategic and corporate expertise. However, this can also increase the 'knowledge gap' between the archive and its senior leadership. On interview, managers and stakeholders reported that they see few archive professionals move into senior, cross-sectoral roles. This may be due to either lack of confidence or unwillingness to move from specialist archival roles. Staff retention More than a third of surveyed archives managers (35%) reported that individuals had left the service in the past two years to work for another employer in a similar role. A small minority (10%) reported losses to other sectors or areas of work (Figure 4). Reasons for staff attrition (from most to least mentioned):  Nature of the work is not as individuals originally expected  Pay levels are not competitive  Work volumes are too high  Changes have been made to individuals' responsibilities that they have not been happy with  Personal circumstances  Lack of promotion opportunities  Fixed term contracts ending  Lack of job flexibility (in terms of working hours)  Wanting a more challenging role in a more innovative environment. OBJECTIVE 2.1: Produce template job descriptions and person specifications that managers can adapt, which set out the range of skills, knowledge and behaviours needed of the archive workforce in a changing world. This means giving due prominence to the application of digital, collaboration, outreach and other business-related skills that are becoming increasingly important and could help to take archives in new directions. To ensure that expectations are managed, job descriptions should make clear what applicants can expect in terms of progression and professional development opportunities. These should be shared with course leaders from the postgraduate university courses to ensure that new entrants to the sector are equipped with the skills that managers are seeking. OBJECTIVE 2.2: Encourage more innovative and flexible recruitment options so that strong applicants are encouraged to join the sector. It is important that applicants are not put off joining the sector due to the issue of working hours. Where applicants to public sector roles are looking for full time posts but budgets cannot accommodate this, the use of local networks would enable individuals to work across multiple locations. This will also have the benefit of broadening exposure to different working environments and promote cross-pollination of ideas. It was also noted at the roundtable discussions that archive services can find it harder to retain young people in an organisation where there are not many others of a similar age and outlook. OBJECTIVE 2.3: Develop national guidance and salary benchmarking information that empowers archive managers to put internal cases forward for better pay and physical resources. Access to better pay and workplace conditions will enable archive services to attract and retain the best talent. As responsibilities of archivists change to meet new challenges, it will be important that these changes are reflected in pay levels and also in the workplace conditions of the sector with access to good digital resources (including IT infrastructure becoming ever more essential). OBJECTIVE 2.4: Develop training and support for archive leaders to enable them to confidently address the challenges of the sector and equip them to move into senior leadership positions. Growing confidence and skills levels will enable archives professionals to compete more effectively for senior positions, including cross-sectoral roles, thus enabling real understanding of archives to advance to higher levels within organisations. ## Objective 3: Career And Progression Opportunities however, this can be harder in other local settings due to various competing pressures on resources. Three quarters of survey respondents (75%) either strongly/tend to agree that more and better careers information, advice and guidance is needed for young people about working in archives (Figure 5). Career opportunities "Most young people wouldn't know the difference between an archivist and a librarian." Professional body Outside of the archives sector there is limited awareness about archive job roles, career opportunities and the level of professional status afforded to these positions. Anecdotal evidence points to poor insight among schools and careers advisers, which can lead to a lack of understanding (or even misconceptions) about the sector. Ultimately, students whose strengths and interests could lend themselves well to a career in archives may never know about the potential opportunities available. This lack of knowledge also affects adults who may be seeking a career change, even preventing those who may have relevant qualifications for broader roles, such as those in learning and outreach, from seeking these opportunities. The National Archives in particular has been proactive in engaging school-age children to experience and understand archives, Several survey respondents were clear that their service is facing a loss of skills and knowledge due to an aging workforce approaching retirement. This makes it especially important to lower the ladder for new talent, offer experiences and improve understanding about what it's like to work in the sector for new entrants of all ages. Progression Within archives, career progression opportunities can be limited, especially within smaller organisations. This can be a challenge when recruiting new talent since individuals may be keen to develop and progress but are unable to do so. Barriers can impact upon either vertical progression (through promotion opportunities), or horizontal progression (e.g. specialisation or change of role at a similar level). Progression can be stifled by relatively flat or rigid hierarchical structures that can impede promotion on merit. Problems include:  a lack of time and resources in the working day for training and professional development that encourages members of the workforce to explore areas of interest and potential specialisation The new government policies around technical and vocational qualifications offer a real opportunity to broaden and grow the reach of archives, introducing young people to the potential of an archives career at a younger age and allowing those from a variety of educational backgrounds, and with a different range of skills, to develop a career in the archives workforce. In particular, the opportunity of the cultural heritage pathway T-level (the new technical equivalent to A levels) to make young people who may have a less academic profile aware of archival careers cannot be underestimated. The archives ecology As well as seeking younger applicants, the sector needs to remain open to career changers entering later in life who will bring new skills and add to the richness of archive professions. Key aspects here will include being open to flexible working patterns and also broadening awareness of the range of roles available in the archives workforce. Digital and IT specialists, outreach, education and development professionals all have an important role within archives and it is to the workforce's detriment if awareness of these roles is not also raised. Movement in many of these roles is likely to be more fluid with individuals coming in and out of the sector at different points within their careers. This can bring welcome new ideas and creativity into the sector. Page 23  funding cuts and reports of 'no back-filling of posts' (especially in many local authorities)  the relatively small size of archive services (with numerous examples of small teams and solo working)  low staff turnover at senior levels (with progression often only through 'dead men's shoes') Survey respondents were asked to describe the current opportunities for someone working in archives who wants to progress. Almost two thirds (64%) consider vertical promotion opportunities to be either poor or very poor, and almost half (49%) are of the same view about horizontal progression opportunities (Figure 6).  career progression opportunities not being built into job descriptions or personal development plans for members of the workforce  instances of staff being on long term agency contracts. "Horizontal progression is sometimes achieved through secondment to other teams to gain experience in specialisms outside of archives, but because of the lack of time and resource, it is rare that archivists take up these opportunities." Museum/gallery The 'archivist' label hinders movement as it has strong connotations which aren't associated with contemporary digital roles (e.g. Product Manager, System Manager, Delivery Manager etc.). National library or archive There are notable differences by archive setting, with comparatively better opportunities for vertical progression appearing to exist within private businesses (28% saying 'very good' or 'good') followed by educational institutions (18%). The fewest vertical progression opportunities fall within local authorities (only 8% saying 'very good' or 'good'). Where horizontal progression is concerned, the best opportunities appear to exist within national libraries and archives settings (49% saying 'very good or 'good') followed by charities/non-profit organisations (32%). Local authorities fare better here, with 23% of the view that horizontal progression opportunities are generally good, whilst educational institutions fare least well (down to 20%). varied settings in which archives operate. Particular focus should be placed on reaching students and career changers with strengths in IT where these could be valuable for digital archiving. Awareness-raising should usefully tap into contexts that appeal to young people so they can see how they relate to archiving, for example, through using social media to illustrate how many people are increasingly becoming data creators and curators and how this relates to digital archive skills. Whilst important to be honest about typical pay levels and strong competition for limited job opportunities, it will also be important to illustrate how skills and knowledge that can be developed in archives can be transferred to other professions. OBJECTIVE 3.2: Develop a functional and occupational map for archives to articulate the full scope and parameters of the sector for careers influencers and improve accuracy and consistency of interpretation of roles across the sector. These maps should show a nested arrangement of functions and occupations to illustrate where there may be overlaps between the wider cultural heritage or information management spheres, as well as progression opportunities. OBJECTIVE 3.1: Improve awareness and understanding about archive workforce roles and career opportunities among young people (especially those aged 16 onwards in schools), career changers and careers influencers. Archive workforce roles and career opportunities should be more clearly articulated and the sector promoted as an accessible and inspiring place to work. This will help to unlock a wider talent pool and ultimately create a more diverse workforce with a wide range of skills. This should include actively engaging with the creation of the Cultural Heritage T Level pathway. Promoting the digital, collaborative, outreach and business aspects of archiving will be particularly important, as well as the resources, taking account of ARA's established Competency Framework. These should then be used for national careers guidance, and to enable employers to consider how to organise and structure local services and collaborations. OBJECTIVE 3.3: Create a central online careers hub to provide tools and support to aid progression and career development opportunities and show the varied careers possible within the wider archives workforce. The careers hub should be designed for use by stakeholders, careers influencers, schools and archive employers. It should include a range of information, advice and tools such as up-todate job role profiles (e.g. Education Officer) and pen portraits; careers journey maps; progression case studies; and templates that can be used by employers to aid staff personal development discussions. OBJECTIVE 3.4: Develop more targeted support tools for mid-career archivists, to help them pursue specialisation/horizontal progression and develop business and leadership skills, to minimise the risk of stagnation and stimulate the through-flow of new ideas. This should be supported by a structured culture of continuous professional development (CPD) and The National Archives should work with partners such as ARA to explore options for broadening the take-up of existing CPD programmes and ## Objective 4: Diverse And Socially Mobile Workforce is not simply about encouraging more entrants from more varied backgrounds. The sector must also seek to address barriers which prevent access to all levels, including the most senior, for diverse candidates and build a culture that is open and inclusive. A range of barriers have been identified as currently stifling workforce diversity and social mobility:  Previous research by ARA/CILIP3 has identified the archives workforce to be more than 95% white and more than 70% female, with new recruits primarily stemming from a humanities education background  Relatively poor progression opportunities mean there are limited numbers of jobs advertised, in turn empowering employers to be highly selective, which may enable both conscious and unconscious bias at all levels of recruitment  High levels of academic qualifications are both required and prized throughout the archive sector. This reduces the pool of available candidates and also reduces the diversity of recruits. Diversity The Public Sector Equality Duty, which applies to many archive services including those within local authorities, education bodies and government bodies, states that organisations must seek to: - Eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and other conduct prohibited by the Act. - Advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not. - Foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not. The significant diversity found within archive collections and the duty of services to collect material which is truly representative of society makes it important to nurture a similarly diverse workforce to represent those collections and engage effectively with communities. Bringing in entrants with a broader range of backgrounds will also help to boost skills available in the sector and encourage diversity of talent. However, achieving real diversity in the archive workforce  Lower pay levels within the sector and short-term opportunities benefit those who have access to family support, thus reducing social mobility  The lack of diversity at all levels within the archives workforce can prevent talented people from believing that they will be able to achieve a successful career in the sector This is considered important for enabling a more dynamic workforce that can bring diverse perspectives to the challenges and opportunities that the sector faces. Respondents made the point that a more diverse workforce can:  enable archives to be more reflective and representative of their local communities and society as a whole  encourage innovation through fresh ideas Whilst low staff turnover can be a positive sign of a relatively stable workforce, stakeholders commented that limited job openings and lack of diversity in the workforce run the risk of archive services becoming somewhat entrenched and inward-looking rather than open to new ideas. The vast majority of managers responding to the workforce survey (80%) believe it is important to achieve greater workforce diversity in archives, and 78% are of the same view regarding social mobility (Figure 7).  increase skills and diversity of talent  improve engagement with a more diverse range of donors and depositors of collections  increase visitor numbers  help the sector to live up to its major ambition of achieving openness to all. However, improving workforce diversity and social mobility is not going to be easy, especially where job opportunities at all levels are limited and recruiters can easily select from familiar candidates. It will require a major shift in mind-sets and proactive change in recruitment approaches as well as reflection on the paths candidates take, both to achieve archival qualifications and also in early career where candidates from diverse backgrounds can struggle to access opportunities for progression. "We are a white middle class team. Unfortunately, we do not represent our community." Local authority "I firmly believe that workforce diversity is essential if we are to get more people using archives and thinking they have something to offer." Charity "While diversity would be good, the most important thing is having someone who is capable and committed to doing the job regardless of their background." Local authority Striving towards greater diversity in the workforce is an evolutionary journey and is, therefore, an important long term strategic objective for archives. To enable this long term objective to be achieved the archive workforce needs to be more open to challenge and to create more opportunities to listen to the experiences of people from minority groups. Policies which seek to address the lack of diversity within archives must be developed with the support and active contribution of people from affected communities and their lived experience must be valued and reflected. Use of volunteers Half of surveyed managers (56%) say that they use volunteers all the time and a further 26% report doing so often (Figure 8). to action essential professional work. The development and needs of volunteers must also be considered in the planning of programmes, in particular the impact on wellbeing and where good volunteering positively impacts society-wide concerns such as loneliness. It is thus important to seek ways of highlighting best practice for volunteers and to continue to clearly delineate the roles of volunteers in relation to paid staff. This will help to ensure that the work of volunteers enhances and complements that of paid professionals, whilst also helping and supporting volunteers in terms of how they would like to develop. ## Objective 4.1: Keep Diversity And Social Mobility At The Forefront Of Discussions In The Sector, Across All Aspects Of Service Delivery Including Workforce Development, Improving Understanding Of The Importance Of A Diverse Workforce To The Long-Term Impact Of Archives. Encourage Senior Members Of The Archives Workforce To Consider The Value That Different Backgrounds And Experience Can Bring To Services– Keeping In Mind The Fundamental Questions "Is The Archive Service As Diverse As The Community It Serves?" And "How Is This Service Actively Advancing Equality Of Opportunity?". However, our survey reveals that almost a third (30%) admit they are under increasing pressure to pass responsibilities to volunteers that would otherwise be undertaken by paid staff. This pressure is formed by the lack of funding and resources to recruit and train additional paid staff. Where volunteers are used well they undertake less complex tasks, under the supervision of paid staff, thereby freeing up archives staff ## Create Opportunities For Those Recruiting For The Archives Workforce To Receive Unconscious Bias Training And Reflect On How Recruitment At All Levels Could Better Support Diversity. To Support Diversity In The Workforce, Gather And Share Statistics To Show How The Profile Of The Sector Changes Over Time And To Stimulate Continued Thinking In This Area. Objective 4.2: Actively Promote The Benefits Of Welcoming And Inclusive Practices Across Workforce Development And All Aspects Of Service Delivery Through Case Studies That Show How Change Has Been Needed, Addressed And Achieved To The Benefit Of Both The Service And The Community It Serves. Archives That Are Representative Of Their Communities And Which Seek To Be Open And Inclusive Are Often Successful Services With Strong Partnerships, Active User Groups And Good Relationships With Their Parent Organisation. Using Case-Studies And Bestpractice Guides To Highlight The Work They Have Undertaken Will Enable Other Archives To Reflect On Their Own Practice And See Where They Can Make Positive Changes. Objective 4.3 Develop An Appropriate Panel/Working Group To Help Raise Awareness Of Issues Of Diversity And Representation Across The Sector And Act As A Critical Friend To The National Archives And Partners. Credible and effective action to increase diversity must be cocreated alongside those who are impacted by current barriers within the sector. This panel/working group must therefore be actively involved in reflecting on current practices and developing the policies and broader actions needed to encourage greater diversity at all levels within the archives workforce. OBJECTIVE 4.3: Develop and promote more varied entry routes to the full range of careers with the sector to improve diversity in both skills and workforce, with an immediate focus on increasing opportunities for people from BAME backgrounds. These should include apprenticeships, internships, volunteer programmes, as well as secondment opportunities for individuals based in other roles in the wider information management sector. This will require strong collaborative working and best use being made of local networks, including professional fellowship schemes. OBJECTIVE 4.4: Create effective and well-executed volunteer strategies to harness the impact of volunteers in ways which enhance the work of paid and professional staff. Produce guidance and tools for managing volunteers in the archives sector, especially to better meet the needs of volunteers and also tackle the issue of employers being under pressure to perceive volunteers as alternatives to paid staff. Guidance for managers on this topic should cover:  advertising for and recruiting a diverse pool of volunteers from a range of age groups and backgrounds  establishing and tapping into volunteers' motivations and what they value  articulating ideas for types of activities and projects volunteers could undertake  Setting boundaries in terms of what volunteers should be reasonably expected to undertake in relation to the activities of paid staff  managing volunteers, including setting expectations and providing support through training  assessing the impact of volunteer work  case studies of the successful use of volunteers  legal and ethical considerations when using volunteers. ## Objective 5: Skills And Training  partnership working, including with other archive settings, in order to share resources and activities  networking and helping to raise the profile of archives to internal and external stakeholders  identifying commercial and income-generating opportunities Skills Roundtable participants and interviewees described a number of skills considered to be especially important for the future of archive services. These span a mix of technical and softer (transferable) skills which closely relate to the four grand challenge areas set out in chapter 3, namely: digital technologies; enabling easier access by users; collaboration; and innovative working. Specifically:  fundraising and bid writing, including determining potential impact and likely return on investment, as well as identifying new funding opportunities, e.g. crowd-sourced funding  managing 'born digital' content in addition to digitisation of analogue records  facilities management and understanding how changes to a building can affect the content of archives  strong management and leadership skills to get the most out of the workforce and the archive service as a whole  procurement skills.  community engagement and outreach skills, including oral communication, public speaking and presenting to community groups in their own setting  presenting, influencing, negotiating and communicating effectively with internal stakeholders, including senior managers Several roundtable participants and interviewees made the point that it can be common to outsource certain digital aspects of archive services to commercial service providers, such as IT functions. Recruitment of advanced digital roles such as software developers can be prohibitive, therefore, resource sharing between organisations may need to be considered. considerably', 5 meant 'remain the same' and 10 meant 'increase considerably'. By plotting the results on a scatter chart, each skills falls into one of four quadrants (Figure 9 and Table 1):  bottom left: Low current skill/low future demand  top left: High current skill/low future demand;  top right: High current skills/high future demand  bottom right: Low current skill/high future demand. The quadrant of greatest concern is bottom right, since these represent future critical skills which are potentially inadequate for what will be needed in the future. It is important to remember that this is the sector looking in at itself and judging both the level of skills held as a sector at the moment and also the skills believed to be needed in the future. The perspective of the cross-sectoral roundtables and interviews which put a greater emphasis on growing governance and management skills must not be lost and, indeed, may provide a useful counterbalance to the process and record-focused areas highlighted in the survey. Several stakeholders mentioned that archivists can feel isolated and lack confidence in developing leadership and management skills. This can affect the ability of services to successfully bid for funding and put a case forward to senior management to sustain or increase spending and resources for archives. The latter in particular requires strong skills in influencing, negotiating, stakeholder management and 'bigger picture' thinking. This is made more challenging by the lack of people from the sector reaching those senior positions that could bring greater awareness of archives into decision making without the need for repeated and targeted advocacy. "There's a lack of confidence within the sector to step up to management roles. Because so many services have been hollowed out, middle management roles rarely exist and the gap between an archivist and a head of service is now immense." Local authority Survey respondents were asked to rate 44 specific skills on a scale from 1 (very poorly skilled) to 10 (perfectly skilled)4. They were also asked to rate perceived future demand for those skills over the next two years on a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 meant 'decrease 4 Survey respondents answering in a managerial capacity rated the skills of their workforce, whilst those answering in an individual capacity rated their own skills. The future critical skills for archives fall into three main categories which tie in with the grand challenge areas set out in chapter 3:  digital (aligns with adapting to technological change)  stakeholder and community engagement (aligns with enabling easier access to collections by users and community groups)  business and transferrable skills (aligns with strengthening collaboration and partnership activities). All three of the above areas tie in with innovative working as a cross-cutting theme. Additional skills scoring charts filtered for different archive settings are presented in Appendix 2. ## Figure 9 Skills Scoring (All Respondents) Future critical skills (in order of weakest/inadequate) 20 Translating knowledge of digital archiving into services and tools 15 Preserving born digital archives 22 Using digital archiving technologies and techniques 16 Preserving digitised archives 23 Working with digital data structures, file types, applications and systems 19 Keeping on top of the latest developments in digital archiving 21 Understanding digital archiving principles and terminology 24 Articulating the importance of digital archiving, internally and externally 38 Fundraising and bid-writing, including assessing likely return on investment 39 Identifying commercial and income-generating opportunities 34 Developing/sustaining community networks 32 Meeting special needs (physical/intellectual) of users/community groups 37 Influencing and making business cases to senior managers ## Table 1 Skills Inventory Governance, Management And Leadership (Asked Of Managers Only) 1 Working with aims and objectives 2 Developing and using policies and procedures 3 Managing and using financial and other resources 4 Managing and leading people 5 Understanding/interpreting/complying with regulation and legislation 6 Managing risk and/or business continuity 7 Managing performance and impact ## Processing And Managing Archives 8 Archive collections management 9 Acquiring and accessioning of archives 10 Appraisal, retention, selection and disposal of archives 11 Arranging, cataloguing and/or describing archives 12 Enabling access to archives appropriate to the nature of information held 13 Managing and dealing with sensitive collections ## Preservation 14 Understanding and assessing preservation needs 15 Preserving born digital archives 16 Preserving digitised archives 17 Undertaking processes relating to buildings, environments, security, storage 18 Emergency and continuity planning: prevention, reaction and recovery ## Digital 19 Keeping on top of the latest developments in digital archiving 20 Translating knowledge of digital archiving into services and tools 21 Understanding digital archiving principles and terminology 22 Using digital archiving technologies and techniques 23 Working with digital data structures, file types, applications and systems 24 Articulating the importance of digital archiving, internally and externally ## Conserving 25 Assessing the stability and condition of archives and records 26 Identifying and evaluating conservation options and strategies 27 Applying conservation methods 28 Maximising the benefit and long-term value of collections 29 Planning and delivering activities to meet the needs of stakeholders 30 Working effectively in partnership with external stakeholders ## Stakeholder And Community Engagement 31 Planning and delivering activities to meet the needs of users/groups 32 Meeting special needs (physical/intellectual) of users/community groups 33 Providing learning and development opportunities for stakeholders and users/groups 34 Developing and sustaining community networks 35 Undertaking community engagement, advocacy and outreach activities 36 Marketing and event planning ## Business And Transferrable Skills 37 Influencing and making business cases to senior managers 38 Fundraising and bid-writing, including assessing likely return on investment 39 Identifying commercial and income-generating opportunities 40 Oral communication and presentation skills, including public speaking 41 Procurement skills 42 Developing understanding of the internal/external professional environment 43 Developing specialist knowledge and skills 44 Applying ethics and standards Professional development and training There is strong support across the archives sector for sustaining and continuing to promote high-quality university-based education pathways for working in archives. However, there are calls for greater focus in university courses on digital archiving, leadership development, community engagement and project management. Non-university based vocational training has yet to develop within the archive sector. However, the government's focus on technical and work-centred training as shown by both the development of T- levels and trailblazer apprenticeships and the apprenticeship levy provides a strong impetus for archive services to look again at the opportunities these would offer. There appears to be lack of awareness in the sector about Continuing Professional Development (CPD) opportunities, including existing programmes such as those developed by ARA. This issue may be partly due to the somewhat fragmented and disconnected nature of the sector, spanning a range of different settings and subject to different funding and resourcing pressures. The most commonly reported types of CPD by survey respondents include attendance at conferences and seminars, face-to-face training courses and independent reading (Figure 10). Total CPD hours undertaken by survey respondents in the previous 12 months are variable. The most common answer (by 36 out of 178 answering this question) is zero hours, the median is 20 hours and the mean is 37 hours. A total of 24 respondents reported more than 100 CPD hours in the previous 12 months. The three main barriers to training and CPD are cost, time and geographical accessibility of courses. There are some concerns that events are often prohibitively expensive, too London-centric Almost all survey respondents (94%) consider it important to have access to more and/or better training and CPD. The vast majority would also like to access more face-to-face (f2f) and/or online courses (Figure 11). and are scheduled sporadically and often at short notice. Some within the archives workforce say they can be put off joining membership organisations due to the fees involved. Several survey respondents mentioned holding back from investing in training due to not being convinced about the relevance of courses to their role and the context in which they work. A particular barrier to online training, mentioned at the roundtables and in response to the survey, is the level of IT security set by parent organisations, which can prohibit access to certain online content in the workplace. "My employer is very supportive but barriers include fitting in training and CPD around day-to-day work and having to make a business case for it. There also isn't a huge amount available within the sector for mid-career development." Charity "With respect to practical digital preservation skills, it's very difficult to know where to find training and get help." Local authority "Most CPD seems aimed at early stage career practitioners. There's less available for those in more senior roles." University ## Page 39 ## Objective 5.1: Develop A Cohesive Sector-Wide Professional Development Strategy, Including Clear Guidance Around The Nature, Amount And Impact Of Recommended Annual Cpd Per Annum For Different Roles In The Archives Sector. The National Archives Should Work Closely With Partners Such As Ara, Cilip And Digital Preservation Coalition To Capitalise On Existing Resources And Develop A Joined-Up And Agreed Stance On Cpd. This Should Focus On What Employers Really Need And Result In Solutions That Are Affordable And Realistic. Guidance Should Be Issued To Employers And Individuals On Why The Recommended Cpd Is Important, How It Can Be Achieved And Logged, As Well As Clear Signposting To A Central Menu Of Resources Suitable For Different Roles. Guidance Should Also Make Clear Where Access To Certain Content Requires Membership Of A Professional Body. Objective 5.2: Help The Archives Sector To Access A Range Of Flexible Training And Cpd Resources That Respond To The Grand Challenges And Critical Skills Identified Through This Strategy. This should initially involve a review of existing training and CPD resources to establish where there are gaps in existing provision, especially for non-members of professional bodies. The National Archives should then work with relevant partners and networks, including leading archives and professional bodies, to develop new provision to plug those gaps and encourage membership of professional bodies to enable access to other protected content. Particular focus should be placed on improving confidence among archivists in delivering management and leadership duties. This is especially important to enable archives to adapt to change, requiring a strong local vision and coordinated approach to delivering services and making best use of available budgets. Resources should include a range of face-to-face and online options, including flexible forms of acceptable CPD such as peerto-peer mentoring and secondment opportunities. It should be centrally coordinated (e.g. through a national extranet) and contain clear information on exactly what is covered, target audience, cost, duration and anticipated outcomes for individuals taking part. Provision should be of an appropriate length (i.e. not taking individuals out of their role for too long) and easily accessible without geographical restrictions. Regional networks could potentially be empowered to take charge of local delivery. OBJECTIVE 5.3: Work with higher education institutions to ensure that courses offering pathways to archive job roles continuously adapt to address the modern challenges and critical skills needed by employers. The National Archives, professional bodies and employers should work with universities to ensure that archives courses remain upto-date and applicants are as fully equipped and prepared as possible. This should go hand-in-hand with a wider range of qualification pathways and professional development opportunities, covered in more detail in chapter 7. OBJECTIVE 5.4: Explore options for a special training and professional development fund for individuals meeting certain criteria, who might not otherwise have the opportunity. This should take into account employees on fixed term contracts and/or in geographically remote locations where travel expenses to attend courses could be high. Care should be taken to discourage fixed term contracting being offered purely to attract special funding where permanent roles would otherwise have been advertised. Apprenticeships The UK Government is committed to apprenticeships as a high quality pathway to successful careers, and for these opportunities to be available across different sectors of the economy. Apprenticeships provide a combination of on-the-job and collegebased training, leading to industry recognised standards of competence. They can be offered to new or existing employees aged 16 or over, and must last for at least a year. Higher-level or degree apprenticeships are increasingly available for prestigious, academically demanding careers such as the Level 7 Solicitor apprenticeship or the Level 7 Architect apprenticeship which is currently in development. Apprenticeships are a devolved policy area, following slightly different rules and having different characteristics across the home nations. Employers across the UK with an annual pay bill of more than £3 million contribute to a mandatory apprenticeship levy. This money can only be reclaimed for spending on apprenticeships. Non-levy paying employers in England pay 10% towards the cost of training and assessing apprentices with the government paying the rest. In some circumstances, employers could be eligible for even more funding. Almost three quarters of survey respondents (71%) consider apprenticeships to be either 'very' or 'quite' important as part of the museums and galleries (80%), private businesses (72%), educational institutions (70%), charities (58%) and local authorities (66%). education and training landscape for the future archives workforce (Figure 12). Respondents in national libraries and archives settings are most favourable (95% view apprenticeships as important), followed by museums and galleries (80%), local authorities (71%), educational institutions (67%), charities and private businesses (63%). Interviewees and survey respondents in favour of apprenticeships for training the archives workforce believe they will be crucial to unlocking a more diverse and socially mobile workforce, particularly for those individuals who are less academically inclined or who may be unable to pursue university education due to affordability issues. There are similarly strong levels of agreement (71% overall) that apprenticeships represent a viable education and training pathway for the archives workforce, alongside university education routes (Figure 13). Again, respondents in national libraries and archives settings are most favourable (86% generally agree), followed by graduate, readier to take on the unique problem solving opportunities of an actual professional archival position. It also allows for more natural networking with established archivists and not just fellow students." University The main concern associated with apprenticeships for the archive profession is that a tension could be created between academic and vocational entry routes, with different employers favouring particular routes depending on their needs. In particular, some interviewees and survey respondents are concerned that many archival roles require specialist technical knowledge and a deep understanding and appreciation of the background and history of collections. This, it is felt, make postgraduate education an important entry route for some employers. Others feel that apprenticeships could lead to a two-tier system, whereby apprentices are unable to progress beyond a certain level due to being insufficiently qualified and knowledgeable. Given that progression opportunities in the sector are already limited, this raises questions as to how apprentice positions could be sustained after the period of training. Several respondents from smaller archives also made the point that they would find it difficult to support an apprentice financially. Buy-in to apprenticeships for archivists is only seen as possible if the sector is assured that those who have qualified through an apprenticeship route have reached an equal standard to those who have undertaken a postgraduate qualification. The relevance of apprenticeships to broader careers in the archives ecology is also an important driver for archives with standards to train paraprofessional roles such as archives assistants currently under development. The development of non-archive specific standards, such the standard for a Cultural Learning and Participation Officer, are providing new ways to develop roles which hugely benefit archive services and their audiences but which fall outside of the archives profession itself. Apprenticeships are also seen as potentially valuable for enabling individuals to gain practical, on-the-job experience in tandem with theoretical knowledge, and enable employers to mould young people to their ways of working and develop strong workplace behaviours alongside relevant knowledge. "I would like to see a new wave of paraprofessionals being produced via the apprenticeship route. These individuals may then progress to librarian/archivist career paths" Local authority "Archiving professionals learn by doing, not by reading about theory. An apprenticeship would produce a far more skilled "An undergraduate degree teaches you skills of analysis, logic, reasoning, research and writing which I feel are essential skills for any archivist. The postgraduate professional qualification in archives teaches you archival theory which I feel is essential to carry out correct professional practice. It would be unfair to qualified archivists who have spent four years gaining qualifications if apprentices could progress to the same jobs without having done so." Local authority Given this disquiet, it is clear that the development of an apprenticeship standard to qualify as an archivist would have to include broad cross-sectoral input so that employers could be assured of its quality. The level of apprenticeship considered should also be targeted at level 7 (post-graduate) with a focus on degree apprenticeships, which would include the requirement to complete either the postgraduate diploma or the Master's qualification, over a longer period of time, as a key part of the apprenticeship. Assuming they had access to relevant apprenticeships, just over half (54%) of archive managers responding to the survey would be very or quite likely to offer them (Figure 15). The most commonly reported barrier to apprenticeship training among survey respondents is a lack of knowledge and awareness, followed by apprenticeships not being perceived as relevant to archives and questions raised relating to the quality of external training provision (Figure 14). The relative prevalence of each of these barriers is similar across different archive settings. informed decisions about the role that apprenticeships should play in the future of the profession. Employers must feel confident that their skills needs can be addressed through apprenticeships and that the high standards expected in archives staff can be achieved through parallel entry routes working alongside established academic paths. Buy-in to apprenticeships among employers will ultimately be important for opening up the sector to a wider talent pool, working towards improved diversity and social mobility in the workforce, and maintaining high standards. OBJECTIVE 5.6: Develop apprenticeship standards for appropriate archive-related job roles and promote the use of existing standards where suitable for roles within the wider workforce. The Institute for Apprenticeships (IfA) requires that an apprenticeship occupation must cover a recognised stand-alone occupation for which there is a genuine demand in the job market. The National Archives should therefore work with the IfA and sector bodies such as Creative and Cultural Skills to pursue the development of standards for archive-related job roles for which employers do not always require a postgraduate level qualification. In particular, this should focus on paraprofessional roles such as Archive Assistant (including equivalent titles) and ## Objective 5.5: Grow Awareness And Understanding Of Apprenticeships Within The Archives Sector And Promote Apprenticeships As Credible Parallel Entry Pathways To Roles In The Archives Workforce. Developing Awareness Of The Role That Apprenticeships Already Play Within Prestigious And Demanding Professions And Growing Knowledge Of The Government Policy On Vocational Education And Training Is Essential If The Archives Workforce Is To Be Able To Make employer groups should be formed to help set the most desirable level (potentially level 3 or degree-level) and to design relevant content in accordance with apprenticeship rules. Research and development of the strategy was undertaken independently by Pye Tait Consulting, on behalf of The National Archives, between October 2017 and March 2018. Two roundtable discussion groups were held in London and York (October/November 2017) attended by a total of 17 key stakeholder organisations. A total of twelve in-depth telephone interviews were carried out, which in turn informed the development of a national online workforce survey. The survey was open to all staff and managers working in relation to archives in any type of organisation or setting. Certain questions were asked of individuals, whilst others were only relevant to those answering in a managerial capacity, i.e. on behalf of their archive staff. The survey was hosted by Pye Tait Consulting and the link was distributed by The National Archives through their partners/networks. The survey achieved 230 responses and a breakdown by archive setting and geographical areas of work are shown in Figures 16 and 17 respectively. A total of 157 survey respondents answered the survey as individuals and 73 answered in a managerial capacity. ## Appendix 2. Additional Skills Scoring Charts 23 28 39

en

1121-pdf

## During the month of April 2013, the following exceptions to the recruitment and consultancy freeze have been considered by the Chief Executive, in his capacity as Accounting Officer: Decision Approval date Ref: No. & directorate Summary of application Consultancy/ recruitment 14/04/2013 274 Legal Recruitment Approved Exception to Ext Recruitment - 1 x Grade G Legal administrator - 12 month FTC to Mar 14 19/04/2013 280 CO Approval to Recruit Grade F Business Planning Recruitment Approved HR Systems Officer (P Tran Maternity Leave) 23/04/2013 281 CO Recruitment Approved 29/04/2013 282 Legal Recruitment Approved Exemption to Recruit Grade C Legal Adviser fixed term appointment Requests for consultancy valued at <£20,000 considered by the Director of Corporate Operations: 277 RPP Consultancy Approved 02/04/2013 Exception to the Consultancy Freeze - Performance Investigations

en

1843-pdf

## Creating A Spire Logon Account And Company Registration Contents | 1. INTRO | 2 | |-------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------| | | | | 2. WHO SHOULD REGISTER | 2 | | | | | 3. CREATE A SPIRE LOGON ACCOUNT | 3 | | | | | 4. CREATE A REGISTRATION FOR YOUR COMPANY | 5 | | | | |  | Overview of SPIRE System Level Access | | 5. WHAT HAPPENS NEXT | 19 | | | | | 6. COMPANY SCENARIOS | 20 | | | | |  | Company set-up 1 | |  | Company set-up 2 | |  | Company set-up 3 | |  | Company set-up 4 | |  | Company set-up 5 | |  | Consultants (or equivalent) | | | | | | | | | | 1. Intro SPIRE is the Export Control Organisation (ECO) export licensing database. You should use this online system to register for Open General Licences or apply for export or trade licences issued by the ECO. SPIRE is accessible at https://www.spire.bis.gov.uk and also via the Businesslink website at http://www.businesslink.gov.uk This document is intended to guide users through the process of creating a SPIRE logon account and registering their company on SPIRE. Please read through this document in full before starting to create an account or a registration as there may be aspects of the process that you have not considered. (For example, you should be aware that you need to be the right person to create the SPIRE registration for your company). If you are going to be using SPIRE on behalf of a company, you have the ability to create a company registration. There are several benefits to using this facility.  You will be able to add users with different levels of access to SPIRE.  It will save time when completing applications as information can be automatically loaded from the registration details.  You can prevent others from applying for licences using your company details.  Applications can be shared with others from your company who are also users on SPIRE to allow holiday cover, etc. 2. Who should register The SPIRE system works on the basis of one SPIRE registration per Companies House registration number. If you have multiple users who want access to SPIRE within an organisation, you will need to decide whom within the company should initiate the registration. You should note that companies can list all sites using the one Companies House registered number on the SPIRE registration and can nominate different users for all sites. The creation of a SPIRE registration is a decision that each company needs to make and will depend on the set up of your company. It is not compulsory for any company to create a SPIRE registration although we do recommend it as it will give control over who applies for applications on behalf of your company and also gives visibility to users over what applications are being created and processed. 3. Create a SPIRE logon account  Go to https://www.spire.bis.gov.uk and select **'Account Registration'**.  The page will refresh and you will see a registration screen, as below  Enter relevant details in all fields. (All fields are mandatory).  Enter the digits displayed in the security image. This shows a 7 digit code that you have to type into the field below and protects against automatic registration.  Once you have completed all fields and confirmed the security image code, you can select to **'Register'**.  You will then be sent an e-mail containing an automatically generated password.  Once you have received this, go to the SPIRE web address again - https://www.spire.bis.gov.uk and enter your e-mail address into the existing users field, then enter the password sent to you by e-mail and click on 'Login'.  You will then be prompted to enter this password again and then choose a new password (it should be at least 8 characters long and needs to include at least 1 number; also make sure it is easy to remember). You will need to re-enter your chosen password and then answer your security question that you have chosen.  Click on 'Login'  Provided all the details are accurate, you will then be logged into SPIRE and you will be taken to your workbasket where you will see a welcome message. This message contains information about the layout of SPIRE and common processes which we hope will make using the system easier for you. If you delete this message, you will be able to access the information through the 'Help' link in the left hand side banner. 4. Create a registration for your company Please note that the creation of a company registration involves a letter being sent from ECO to the Company Secretary (or equivalent) who needs to sign a declaration and return it to us before the registration will be activated. This letter will be sent to the Companies House registered address for your company.  Click on the **'Manage my Registration'** link. This is found on the left hand side of the screen.  You will then get a message stating that you have not yet made any registrations, but pointing you towards the **'New Registration'** link on the left hand side. Click on this link to start the registration process.  You will then come to the **SPIRE Registration screen**. You should enter your Companies House Registration Number in the white box and then click on the **'find Company'** link. This will activate a link to the Companies House website and your official details will be located and entered. You will have to then complete any fields that are not automatically completed.  Alternatively, if your details are not generated by this search, you can always enter your organisation details manually by selecting the option to **'enter organisation details'** yourself.  Please double check the details that you enter here before going to the next screen.  Entering your organisation details is the first of 4 steps which will allow you to create your registration. The tabs for these steps can be seen across the top of the screen. The tabs are Organisation Details, Sites, Security and Submit.  Tab 1 is for Organisation Details. You will then need to enter details about your company, including your formal address, your VAT number, your EORI number, nature of business, etc. You will also be asked to provide details of the overseas registry name and company registration number if applicable.  You should note that some fields are mandatory (including address and nature of business fields). Mandatory fields are indicated by a *. If you fail to complete a mandatory field before moving to the next screen you will receive an error prompt to indicate which fields you need to complete.  To enter an address, you should click on **'Select Address'**.  You will then be taken to a new screen which contains a postcode search facility. Enter in your postcode and click on **'Search'**. The addresses contained within that postcode will then be displayed.  You should select your address from the available options. If your address is not displayed, you can use the 'Advanced Search' or 'Add a new address' options. The 'Advanced Search' allows you to search a company name, house number, street, town or city. For the 'Add a new address' option, you will simply see a screen where you can manually enter the address details. Once this has been done, click on 'Accept'. Take care to double check all the details of the address you have entered as once you accept them, they will appear in the 'Organisation Details' screen and if you have made a mistake, you will need to re-enter all the details again. If you have made an error, click on the 'Change Address' link to go through the process again.  When you have added all the relevant details, select next. If you click on 'Save and Exit', you will be taken to a **'Manage Registrations'** screen. This will show you a list of all your registrations. By clicking on the appropriate option, you can either: - Resume entering relevant details - View the registration - Cancel the registration If you click **'Save and Exit'** at any point during the registration process, you will be taken to this screen and all the information you have entered to date will have been saved.  Part 2 of the process is setting up sites. A company can operate from a number of sites. This screen will allow you to enter the details of these sites within your registration. You don't have to add all your sites at this stage, you can add more later; but you will have to add at least one to proceed to the next step.  On screen you have two options: - If you operate out of one premises, you should select the **'Create site from previous page'** option and add a department/division name (for example, this may be 'Commercial Department' or 'Shipping Department' - whichever is a relevant title for the area of the company that is responsible for export controls). - If your main site is not the same as the one entered on the previous screen, select '**Add new site'**. You will then be taken to the address search screens (shown above) and you can enter the details of the site. You can enter as many sites as you wish to.  If you have an EORI number for each site, you should enter it on this screen. An EORI number is a 'Economic Operator Registration and Identification' number. For more details see the Businesslink website.  You should also indicate the **'occupancy status'** of each site. If you do not currently export from a certain site, you can set the status to 'Suspended'. If at some point, you need to export from that site, you will just need to amend this status in order to complete an application for that site, rather than creating a site at that time. Click on **'Next'** to go to the next part of the process.  Part 3 is the stage when you define user access. You can do the following: - set up different levels of access for different users. - assign users to the organisation (which will allow them the level of access assigned for all sites in the organisation) or to individual sites.  It is at this stage that you can set up the registration according to the way your company operates. To better understand this process, several business set-up scenarios have been described at the end of this document to reflect these.  To set up a person to be an organisation user, click on 'Set access privileges for the organisation (all sites)'.  You will then be taken to a screen where you can add users or manage the access levels of existing users. You do not have to add all the users at this stage of the registration, as you will be able to do this when the registration is activated.  The **'Copy Team'** button allows you to copy any users that you have added to the organisation level team and the level of access selected. Once you have done this, a **'Paste Team'** button will appear. If you have a second Companies House registration number for which you are creating a registration, you can go into the 'Organisation Team Management' screen for that registration and click 'Paste Team' to add the same users for both Companies House registration numbers. You can only copy and paste organisation teams at organisation level, not site level. The 'Copy Team' and 'Paste Team' buttons also appear for the **'Site Team Management'** screen and the teams at site level can be copied and pasted to other sites within any Companies House registration number (whether for a site within the initial Companies House registration number or for any subsequent SPIRE registrations that you may be creating).  Additional users are added by selecting **'Add Person'**.  You will then be asked to enter their email address and name (again check the details that you add carefully). Then click on **'Add Person'**. You can then enter the required access level for that user. If you see a symbol next to the users name and hover over the symbol, it will tell you that this person does not have a logon account for SPIRE.  Everyone who wants to use SPIRE must have an individual account. Once the registration has been activated, and provided the information entered into the registration matches that entered when the account was created, the user will have access to the company registration to the level allocated to them.  The explanations for each of the levels of access are explained below and hints are also given on the screen by hovering over the symbol. ##  Overview Of Spire System Level Access  Organisation administrator - Any users with this level of access have full administration rights for an organisation (including all sites). - They will be able to add, edit and delete users from the organisation registration, and from all sites associated with it. - They are able to submit, prepare and view applications (and also be a contact on an application). - They will also be able to amend details within the registration. It is envisaged that the person with overall responsibility for export controls within a company should be an organisation administrator. - We recommend that there are at least 2 organisation administrators per registration so that a company retains a level of flexibility when amending the registration details.  Application submitter - Any users with this level of access will be able to prepare and submit applications. They will not be able to amend details within the registration and will not be able to add, edit or delete users from the registration.  Application preparer - Any users with this level of access will be able to prepare applications, but will not be able to submit them. In order for an application to be submitted, a user with that level of access will have to logon to SPIRE, resume the draft application and can submit the application. It is envisaged that a company would make use of this level if they wanted all applications to be approved by a certain person or team before submission but were happy with others completing most of the application preparation. ## Application Viewer - A user with this level of access can view applications for the organisation/site. This level of access may be useful to those involved with export controls who want overview of the export licensing activities of the company but who don't need the more hands on access that a preparer or submitted has. Note: This person will still be able to prepare and submit applications for themselves, other organisations who are not registered on SPIRE or organisations who have set them up as users on their SPIRE registration with the appropriate levels of access.  Application contact - This level of access can be assigned to any users who need to be added to the application form as a point of contact to answer specific questions (for example, an engineer or technical contact) but who wouldn't be involved in export licensing beyond this.  Wherever you set a tick in the row, you automatically give that user access to all the options to the right of the tick. For example, if a tick is placed against a user in the 'Application Submitter' column, they will be able to submit, prepare and view applications. If you place the tick against a user in the 'Application Viewer' column, they will only be able to view applications but will not be able to prepare or submit applications. However it is recommended that you select any options that you require for all users so that the levels of access are clear. Contact is a separate role and needs to be ticked for all users requiring that type of access.  You can add as many people as you want as organisation level users and can give any of these users whichever access you deem to be appropriate. Remember they will be able to perform the function you have allocated for **all sites** within your organisation.  Should you wish to remove a user at any time (for example if someone leaves the organisation), click on the recycle bin symbol under the users name and they will be removed. A pop-up will appear asking you if you are sure to prevent inadvertent deletions. This will not delete the users account, but will prevent them from accessing your SPIRE registration and related applications (again based on the level of access permitted for that user).  Once you have set up the organisation users, you should click on 'Save Contacts' and you will go back to the User Access screen. You will now be able to set up the site level users.  Click on **'Setup Site Privileges'**. The options on this screen are very similar to those found on the organisation users screen. You can add as many users as you want to and again you can give each user a suitable level of access.  The **SPIRE Site Administrators** are the equivalent of the Organisation Administrators described above but they only have the access rights to add, edit or delete users for the site (but not for the organisation or for other sites, unless they have administrator rights for these). They won't be able to change most the details of the site, this would fall to the Organisation Administrator. Again we recommend that there are at least two Spire Site Administrators per site to retain flexibility for amending details of users at a local level.  The final part of step 3 is the security level. The answers to the two questions indicate whether you want anyone to be able to prepare and submit an application on behalf of your company or only those users that have been nominated on SPIRE. For each question, you have one of two options to choose from - either 'Only people in the list above' or 'Anyone'. - If you select **'Only people in the list above'**, you are ensuring noone else can make an application in the name of your company and also ensuring that only those users that have been nominated on SPIRE can be involved in the export licensing process (to whatever access level you have determined). You are effectively protecting your organisation and ensuring the security of your interactions with ECO. - You may decide however, that you need to allow the flexibility for anyone to apply for licences on behalf of your company. If this is the case, you should answer **'Anyone'** to this question. We would recommend against choosing this answer in all instances. If you need increased flexibility, ensure that you have sufficient sites and users set-up to allow for any unforeseen circumstances to be dealt with and the required licences applied for.  Once you have answered these questions, click on **'Next'**.  NOTE: Completing both questions is mandatory. If you fail to answer the questions before moving to the next screen you will receive an error prompt before you can more forward.  Tab 4 is the last part of the registration process when you can submit the registration.  Here we will ask you to upload the company registration documents (for example a Companies House Registration Certificate). You should scan this document in (if possible) and upload it by clicking on **'Choose File'**. You will then be taken to a window where you can browse for the document and choose to upload it. If this has been successful, you will see a green tick (too large to replicate here). (If you see a large red cross, the file has not been uploaded properly and you should try again.) Close that window and details of the file will appear in the 'Upload Registration Documents' table shown above. You can choose to replace this file if the wrong document has been added, either delete the file, or click on '**Replace File'** to choose another document.  This is not a mandatory requirement but it may speed up the registration process if there are relevant documents that you think we should see.  Whether you have uploaded any documents or not, you then need to click **'Submit'** (provided you are happy with all of the details you have included in the registration). 5. What happens next  Once you have submitted the registration via SPIRE, ECO will then send a letter (posted in hard copy) to the Authorised Company Executive (e.g., Company Secretary), as nominated in the Companies House registration, at the Companies House Registered address. - This letter will ask the company secretary to sign a declaration stating that the user that has set up the account is authorised to do so by the company, that they are further authorised to nominate additional users within the registration and at the required access levels. - They will also be declaring that that initial user is responsible for the overall accuracy of applications made under SPIRE (including those prepared or submitted by other users). - It is therefore imperative that companies nominate a company representative who has that level of authority and can take responsibility of the SPIRE registration in this way. - The declaration will then need to be sent in hard copy (with an original signature) back to ECO at the following address: Licence Reception, Export Control Organisation, Floor 3, 1 Victoria Street, London, SW1H 0ET  The name of the user will be noted in a schedule to the letter so that the Company Secretary (or equivalent) can contact that individual with any questions that they may have. We advise that the user setting up the registration on SPIRE should contact the Company Secretary (or equivalent) once they have submitted the registration to warn them that a letter is on it's way and that it is very important that it is signed and returned as soon as possible so that the registration can be activated.  We will not be able to activate the SPIRE registration without a hard copy of the declaration signed by the Company Secretary (or equivalent). It has proved necessary to include this step in the process to protect companies against fraudulent registrations being made using their Companies House registration details which are available to the public.  Once the hard copy declaration has been received by us, and providing we are content, we will activate the registration. Once this is done, an email will be sent to the user who set up the registration indicating that they should go to their workbasket. If you then select the 'Manage Registrations' option in the left hand banner (as before), you will see your registration and the 3rd column along indicated the registration status which should say 'Approved'.  If you need to add additional sites or users, you can do this by selecting the **'Update'** option in the actions column of the relevant registration. ## 6. Company Scenarios  Company Set-Up 1 1 Companies House Registration number 1 Site - same as registered address The person within the company with lead responsibility for export control should register on SPIRE and then set up the company with the CH reg no and the one site listed. There can be as many users (at whatever level is required) as the company would like. As there is only one site, the users can be set up at organisation level or at site level. If there is only one person who applies for licences, they will be the organisation administrator. However, we advise that another individual within the company is also given this level of access so that they can use SPIRE and set up other users should the main contact leave the company or not be available for whatever reason. If there is a chance that additional sites will be added to the company at some point in the future, it is advisable that the users are set up at the site level so that the new site can be set up separately from the organisation at that time. 1 Companies House Registration number 1 Site - different to registered address This is done in exactly the same way as 'Company set-up 1' except different address details are entered in Part 2 to reflect the fact that the site is not at the same address as the registered company. 1 Companies House Registration number 1 or more sites The person within the company with lead responsibility for export control should register on SPIRE and then set up the company with the Companies House registration number and any or all of the sites using that number. It is recommended that all sites are added even if no exports are currently undertaken from some sites. This will give you the flexibility to export from such sites should the need arise. There can be as many users (at whatever level is required) as the company would like for the organisation and per site. It should be decided which users need to be set up at an organisation level. These users will have access to all sites at whatever level of access is permitted. Therefore, if a user has submitter access at an organisation level, they will have that access for all sites. At least one administrator should be set up at the organisation level. This is to ensure continuity of access to the registration. It is not necessary to add all sites and users when the initial registration is made. Once the registration has been activated, the organisation administrator can add the sites themselves or can set up another organisation administration (or more) to add the sites. It should then be decided which users need to be set up for each site. Once an administrator has been added for each site, authority can be delegated to that person to set up other users for the site or the organisation administrators can set up the users themselves. It is entirely up to each individual company to determine how the sites and users are set up and by whom. More than 1 Companies House registration number 1 or more sites Each separate Companies House registration number will need a separate registration on SPIRE. Each registration should follow the instructions above depending on the set-up of the company in question. If a user is set up as a submitter for an organisation or site for more than 1 Companies House registration number, they will be able to submit applications for all the organisations or sites from the one SPIRE logon. They will not have to have a different logon for each registration. 1 Companies House registration number Several business units involved in different activities In this scenario, it may be difficult to nominate someone with overall responsibility for export controls within the company if each business unit takes responsibility for their business unit but has nothing to do with the others in the company. Once the registration has been activated, each business unit would be set up as a site and the SPIRE site administrator would set up their users independently of the other business units. Therefore a decision would need to be taken regarding who should set up the registration in the first place. It will be down to the company to make this decision. It would then be recommended that this person be the organisation administrator. If, however, this user is directly involved with one of the business units, it could be prudent to add a user from each of the other business units as organisation administrators to ensure all have an equal standing within the registration. Once the registration is set up, it could be decided that the company secretary (or equivalent), becomes the organisation administrator on the understanding that each business unit is responsible for their own site administration. ##  Consultants (Or Equivalent) If a consultant is engaged to submit licence applications on behalf of a company, they can register as per one of the company set-ups described above. However, the letter that we send out will still go to the Company Secretary of the company nominated in the registration. If a consultant is a user in the registration of multiple companies, they will be able to see details (dependent on level of user access) of all applications for all those companies from the one SPIRE logon. Export Control Organisation Last Updated: March 2010

en

0446-pdf

New Cases (UK) Cases are reported when lab tests are completed. This may be a few days after initial testing. Testing capacity is increasing, the number of observed cases has remained stable over the last 7 days, though there are likely many more cases than currently recorded here. Source: Department of Health and Social Care. Pillar 1: Swab testing in PHE labs and NHS hospitals for those with a medical need and, where possible, the most critical key workers. Pillar 2: Mass swab testing for critical workers in the NHS, social care and other sectors and symptomatic household members, delivered by a partnership of universities, research institutes and companies. ## Estimate Of Covid-19 Hospital Admissions (England) This Is The Breakdown Of The Nhs England Estimate For Admissions With Covid-19. Source: NHS England. Data are for NHS Hospital Acute Trusts with a type 1 A&E in England. Inpatients diagnosed with COVID-19 after admission are assumed to have been admitted on the day prior to their diagnosis. ## People In Hospital With Covid-19 (Uk) Over The Last Week The Number Of People With Covid-19 In Uk Hospitals Has Fallen From 17,817 To 15,044, A Decrease Of 16%. Source: NHSE, Welsh Gov., Scottish Gov., Northern Ireland Executive. National data may not be directly comparable as data about COVID-19 patients in hospitals is collected differently across nations. Critical Care Beds with COVID-19 patients (UK) Percentage of all critical care beds that are being used for COVID-19 patients. Critical care comprises of all beds in HDU and ITU wards. They are a combination of Ventilator and Oxygen+ (V and O+) beds. Daily COVID-19 Deaths in All Settings (UK) There were an additional 674 deaths of people who had tested positive for coronavirus. Source: Department of Health and Social Care, sourced from Public Health England and the devolved administrations. 7-day rolling average (mean) of daily deaths. ## Global Death Comparison Country data is aligned by stage of the outbreak. Day 0 equals the first day **50 cumulative deaths were reported.** Different countries have different methods of counting COVID-19 deaths which means it is difficult to compare statistics across countries. Source: Public Health England, UK devolved administrations, Johns Hopkins University. UK figures on deaths relate to those who have tests positive for COVID-19, whichever setting they died in. International reporting procedures and lags are unclear, so may not be comparing like-for-like.

en

2607-pdf

Applicant's name: Partner's name: This declaration must be signed by the applicant's partner and not by a representative or other person acting on their behalf. It must be sent to the Home Office with the applicant's documents. If you fail to do so, the application may be refused. I confirm that (tick relevant box)  I am a British citizen  I am settled in the UK (I have indefinite leave)  I have leave to remain in the UK as a refugee / or as a person requiring humanitarian protection Tick the following to confirm which applies to you  Spouse/civil partner I confirm that I am the spouse or civil partner of the applicant. I declare that we are still married/in civil partnership and that we are living together as partners and intend to live together permanently in UK.  Fiancé(e)/proposed civil partner/unmarried partner I confirm that I am the proposed civil partner/ fiancé(e)/ unmarried partner of the applicant. I declare that we are living together in a relationship akin to marriage and that we intend to live together permanently in the UK. I understand that the information relating to me that is contained in this application and any supporting documentation will be handled according to the privacy policy at www.visas-immigration.service.gov.uk/privacyPolicy. I am aware that it is a criminal offence, to make a statement or representation which I know to be false or do not believe to be true, or otherwise to help someone to obtain leave to remain in the United Kingdom by means which include deception

en

4633-pdf

Telephone 020 7282 2072 Fax 020 7282 2042 E-mail rob.plaskitt@orr.gsi.gov.uk 6 March 2012 David Middleton, Chief Executive Transport Scotland Buchanan House 58 Port Dundas Road Glasgow G4 0HF ## Consent Not To Publish A Code Of Practice We consent to the holders of statements of national regulatory provisions (SNRPs) listed below not publishing a code of practice or other documents under paragraph 6 of condition 4 of the SNRPs, because these are dormant operators to be used only in the event that Transport Scotland needs to take over the operations of a franchised train operator. | Name | Date and | |----------------|-------------| | number | | | Name holder | Date and | | number | | | SOLR 1 Ltd | | | | | | 10 Oct 07 | | | UK02 2007 0006 | | | | | | SOLR 2 Ltd | | | | | | 10 Oct 07 | | | UK02 2007 0007 | | | | | In the event that either of these operators becomes active, this consent will expire for that operator's SNRP.

en

3098-pdf

## Tax Transparency Sector Board Terms Of Reference Purpose The Primary Purpose Of The Tax Transparency Sector Board Will Be To: - Drive the Departmental transparency agenda and the release of HMRC information in line with the Commissioners for Revenue and Customs Act 2005, Data Protection Act and other relevant legislation - Inform and advise HMRC's Open Data Strategy, serving as a focal point to direct requests for data and improving the Department's understanding of the value and use of tax information to the broader benefit of the UK MEASURING SUCCESS The following key output will enable the Board to measure success in meeting open data requirements: The further release of new HMRC data that could be reused for commercial purposes or analysed by academia for wider public benefit, with a particular focus on: ¾ large routine public service datasets ¾ provision of access for service users to their own identifiable data ¾ user feedback on services ¾ strategies for engagement with data users to drive social and economic growth ¾ supporting individuals and businesses to obtain fast, easy access to public sector data ## MEMBERSHIP Members of the Board will include stakeholders from academia and the public, voluntary and private sector and HMRC and Cabinet Office officials. Where exceptionally members cannot attend a deputy may represent them at the Chair's discretion. ## Membership is as follows : | Name | Business Area | Role | |-------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|-----------------| | HMRC | | | | Edward Troup | Central Tax & Strategy | HMRC Tax | | Assurance | | | | Commissioner | | | | and Second | | | | Permanent | | | | Secretary | | | | Mike Hawkins | Knowledge, Analysis and Intelligence | DD Data, Policy | | and Co-ordination | | | | Cindy Bell | Central Policy | Information, | | Policy and | | | | Disclosure | | | | Adrian Ball | Security and Information | Deputy Director | | Security & | | | | Information | | | | Directorate | | | | Alec Waterhouse | Personal Tax | Data Integrity | | Executive Agency | | | | Dyfed Alsop | Valuation Office Agency | Director of | | Strategy, People | | | | and Change | | | | Other Government Departments | | | | Ed Parkes | Cabinet Office | Transparency | | Account Manager | | | | for HMRC | | | | Public Sector Transparency Board | | | | Chris Taggart | Public Sector Transparency Board | | | Chief Executive | Economic & Social Research Council | | | (ESRC) | | | | Academia | | | | Paul Boyle / | | | | Fiona Armstrong | | | | Confidentiality and Data Protection | | | | Judith Jones | Information Commissioners Office ( ICO) | Group Manager, | | Government and | | | | Society Group. | | | | Experian | Chief Executive | | | Credit Rating Agencies and Private Sector | | | | Don Robert / | | | | Peter Cummings | | | | Neil Munroe / | | | | Johanna Edwards | | | | Equifax | Director of | | | External Affairs & | | | | Communications | | | | Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) | Director | | | Think Tanks | | | | Paul Johnson / | | | | Jonathan Shaw | | | | Other Representative Bodies | | | | | | | | Keith Dugmore | Demographics User Group (DUG) | Director | | Peter Fanning | Chartered Institute of Taxation (CIOT) | Chief Executive | Taxpayers Alliance Director Matthew Sinclair / Dominique Lazanski Richard Baron Institute of Directors (IOD) Head of Taxation ## Governance The Board Will Provide Progress Updates As Appropriate To The: - Public Sector Transparency Board - HMRC Executive Committee (EXCOM) In addition it should keep itself abreast of the developments of the Social Mobility Transparency Board. ## Frequency And Conduct Of Meetings - The board will initially meet every two months and then move to quarterly once it has developed a work plan. - Decisions taken at the board meetings will be communicated in writing as part of the minutes - Board members will routinely self assess their performance and review their ongoing attendance ## Secretariat The Secretariat Will Be Provided By Hm Revenue & Customs, Kai (Knowledge, Analysis & Intelligence) (Daniele Bega & Ian Parfitt) And Will: - Manage attendance on behalf of the chair - Issue an agenda, which will be agreed by the chair, and papers in advance of the meeting (ideally 5 working days but a minimum of 3 working days) - Issue minutes and action point logs within ten working days following a meeting - Commission documents / papers from the appropriate members / Business Area

en

0431-pdf

## 2019 Uk Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Provisional Figures National Statistics This publication provides the latest estimates of 1990-2019 UK territorial greenhouse gas emissions which are presented in carbon dioxide equivalent units throughout. - In 2019, total UK greenhouse gas emissions were provisionally 45.2 per cent lower than in 1990 and 3.6 per cent lower than 2018. - These figures rely on provisional estimates of carbon dioxide emissions based on UK energy statistics. In 2019, UK net emissions of carbon dioxide were provisionally estimated to be 351.5 million tonnes (Mt), 3.9 per cent lower than 2018 (365.7 Mt). Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the main greenhouse gas, accounting for 81 per cent of total UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2019. - The decrease in carbon dioxide emissions was driven by the continuing downward trend in emissions from power stations, with a 13.2 per cent decrease between 2018 and 2019. This is mainly as a result of changes in the fuel mix used for electricity generation, away from coal and towards renewables. - There was also a 2.8 percent fall in carbon dioxide emissions from transport, which fell for the second year in a row following several years of increases. But transport remains the largest source of carbon dioxide emissions in the UK, accounting for 34 per cent in 2019. - Adjusting emissions for external temperature does not change the long-term trend. While actual emissions are estimated to have fallen by 3.6 per cent, temperature adjusted emissions fell by 3.4 per cent between 2018 and 2019. The 2019 annual average temperature was warmer than the long-term 1981-2010 average by 0.5 degrees Celsius. What you need to know about these statistics: This publication provides the latest provisional estimates of 2019 UK territorial greenhouse gas emissions based on provisional inland energy consumption statistics, which are published in BEIS's quarterly Energy Trends publication. Emissions are presented in carbon dioxide equivalent units (CO2e) throughout this statistical release. These provisional emissions estimates are subject to revision when the final estimates are published in February 2021; however, they provide an early indication of emissions in 2019. They also include estimates of quarterly emissions and the impact on emissions of external temperature changes. For more detailed information about the sources of UK greenhouse gas emissions and information on UK emissions targets and progress towards them see the 2018 final UK greenhouse gas emissions statistics. ## Contents Introduction _______________________________________________________________ 3 2019 annual provisional emissions results ________________________________________ 5 Energy Supply ___________________________________________________________ 7 Residential and Public sectors _______________________________________________ 9 Transport sector _________________________________________________________ 10 Business sector _________________________________________________________ 10 Other sectors ___________________________________________________________ 10 Carbon dioxide emissions by fuel type __________________________________________ 11 2019 temperature adjusted provisional emissions results by sector ___________________ 13 Accompanying tables _______________________________________________________ 15 Technical information _______________________________________________________ 15 Coverage of emissions reporting ____________________________________________ 15 Basis of the provisional emissions estimates ___________________________________ 16 Quarterly totals __________________________________________________________ 16 Temperature adjustment ___________________________________________________ 16 Further information _________________________________________________________ 17 Future updates to these statistics ____________________________________________ 17 Related publications ______________________________________________________ 17 Revisions policy _________________________________________________________ 18 Uses of these statistics ____________________________________________________ 18 User engagement ________________________________________________________ 18 National Statistics designation ______________________________________________ 19 Pre-release access to statistics _____________________________________________ 19 Contact ________________________________________________________________ 19 ## Introduction This publication provides provisional annual and quarterly estimates of UK territorial greenhouse gas emissions by source sector for 2019. It also provides an estimate of temperature adjusted emissions, which give an idea of overall trends in emissions without fluctuations due to changes in external temperature. More information about the underlying methodology for the provisional emissions statistics can be found in the accompanying methodology summary. The estimates present emissions on a "territorial" basis, so only include emissions which occur within the UK's borders. They therefore exclude emissions from UK businesses and residents that occur abroad, including from international aviation and shipping, and any emissions embedded within the supply chain of manufactured goods and services imported into the UK (while including emissions that occur in the UK resulting from exported goods and services). Data for 1990-2018 are consistent with the annual emissions presented in the National Statistics publication 2018 final UK greenhouse gas emissions statistics. Data for 2019 emissions are provisional and are calculated based on UK energy statistics. The provisional estimates of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are based on provisional inland energy consumption statistics, which are being published at the same time by BEIS in the quarterly Energy Trends publication. Estimates of non-CO2 gases are based on a simple approach which assumes that emissions of non-CO2 gases in 2019 will change from the 2018 total in line with the percentage difference between the estimates for the 2018 and 2019 of non-CO2 emissions in the 2018 Energy and Emissions Projections published by BEIS, and that these emissions will be spread evenly over the year. Quarterly emissions estimates are presented as a moving annual total up to a particular quarter. For example, when quarterly emissions are presented up to quarter 4 (1 October to 31 December), 2019, this represents an annual total comprising the latest quarter (quarter 4 2019) and the preceding 3 quarters (quarters 1, 2 and 3 of 2019). Presenting the data in this way has some advantages over presenting data for single quarters, since seasonal fluctuations are smoothed out and long-term trends highlighted. Data on emissions in individual quarters are available in the data tables published alongside this publication. 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 2019 estimates are subject to a greater range of uncertainty than the final figures for earlier years. For more information on uncertainties see the annex published alongside the 2018 final UK greenhouse gas emissions statistics. The provisional estimates are not used for any formal reporting of how the UK is performing against its emissions reduction targets, as this requires final estimates based on the UK's greenhouse gas inventory. However, these statistics give policy makers and other users an initial steer as to the trend in emissions between 2018 and 2019, which helps them to form an initial assessment of the extent to which the UK is on track to meet targets. For information on UK emissions targets and progress towards them, see the 2018 final UK greenhouse gas emissions statistics. For the purposes of reporting, greenhouse gas emissions are allocated into sectors as follows: | Energy Supply | Emissions from electricity generation and other energy production activities | |--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | such as mining, refining and manufacturing fuels. | | | Business | Emissions from fuel combustion and product use in industrial and commercial | | sectors, and F gas emissions from refrigeration and air conditioning in all | | | sectors. Includes industrial off-road machinery but not business-related | | | transport emissions, which are included in the | Transport | | Transport | Emissions from road transport, domestic aviation, railways and domestic | | shipping. Only includes emissions from vehicles and not from transport | | | related infrastructure or from air conditioning. International aviation and | | | shipping emissions are not included in national totals. | | | Public | Emissions from the combustion of fuel in public sector buildings, e.g. hospitals | | and schools. Emissions from public transport are included in the | Transport | | sector. | | | Residential | Emissions from residential properties, including from consumer product use. | | Primarily consists of fuel combustion for heating/cooking, garden machinery, | | | and fluorinated gases released from aerosols and metered dose inhalers. | | | Agriculture | Emissions of greenhouse gases from livestock, agricultural soils (excluding | | carbon stock changes which are included in the | LULUCF | | agricultural machinery. | | | Industrial processes | Emissions resulting from industrial processes, except for those associated | | with fuel combustion which are included in the | Business | | Land use, land use | | | change and forestry | | | (LULUCF) | | | Emissions/removals of CO | | | 2 | | | from changes in the carbon stock in forestland, | | | cropland, grassland, wetlands, settlements and harvested wood products, and | | | | | | of other greenhouse gases from drainage (excl. croplands and intensive | | | grasslands) and rewetting of soils, nitrogen mineralisation associated with | | | loss and gain of soil organic matter, and fires. Because the impact of biomass | | | harvest on carbon stocks in ecosystems is included in this sector, any | | | emissions of CO | | | 2 | | | from burning biomass (regardless of the country of origin) | | | are excluded from other sectors to avoid double counting them. | | | Waste management | Emissions resulting from the treatment and disposal of solid and liquid waste, | | for example from landfill, incineration and composting. Emissions from | | | incineration with energy recovery are instead reported in the | Energy Supply | | sector and emissions from residential composting are included in the | | | Residential | sector. | 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)1 and which are used in international reporting tables which are submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)2 every year. It is important to note that these figures are based on provisional energy data and are subject to change. The sectoral breakdown is given mainly for information, and is included in the publication for completeness, but sectoral estimates are more uncertain than the overall total. When emissions are measured on this basis, UK emissions account for around 1% of the global total, based on a range of estimates produced by the UN, the International Energy Agency and the World Resources Institute amongst others. ## 2019 Annual Provisional Emissions Results In the data tables accompanying this publication, table 1 shows UK annual greenhouse gas emissions, including a breakdown by source sector for carbon dioxide emissions, table 3 shows quarterly moving annual totals for these emissions and table 4 shows temperature adjusted estimates. Between 2018 and 2019, provisional estimates indicate that UK territorial greenhouse gas emissions decreased by 3.6 per cent (16.2 MtCO2e), from 451.5 MtCO2e to 435.2 MtCO2e. Provisional estimates in 2019 were 45.2 per cent lower than in 1990. Because these provisional estimates are based on energy data it is only possible to make estimates of carbon dioxide emissions from different source sectors and not estimates of other gases. Therefore, the rest of this section presents the trends in carbon dioxide emissions. Carbon dioxide emissions are estimated to have decreased by 3.9 per cent (14.2 million tonnes (Mt)) between 2018 and 2019. In 2019, an estimated 34 per cent of carbon dioxide emissions were from the transport sector, 26 per cent from energy supply, 19 per cent from the residential sector and 18 per cent from business. Carbon dioxide emissions in the energy supply sector decreased by 8.4 per cent (8.3 Mt), between 2018 and 2019 driven by a change in the fuel mix for electricity generation. There was also a fall of 2.8 per cent (3.5 Mt) in transport carbon dioxide emissions. Changes in transport emissions are usually as a result of traffic volumes or improvements in fuel efficiency. Residential emissions also decreased over the same time period by 1.8 per cent (1.2 Mt), likely due to a difference in weather conditions between the two years. Since 1990, UK carbon dioxide emissions have decreased by 41.0 per cent. This decrease has resulted mainly from changes in the mix of fuels being used for electricity generation, with a shift away from coal and growth in the use of renewable energy sources. This was combined with lower electricity demand, owing to greater efficiency resulting from improvements in technology and a decline in the relative importance of energy intensive industries. Overall inland energy consumption is provisionally estimated to have decreased by 12 per cent since 1990, and if this figure is adjusted to allow for the effect of temperature, there was a 14 per cent decrease over this period. 1990-2019 | | | | | | | | |---------------------|--------|--------|--------|--------|--------|--------| | | | | | | | | | MtCO | | | | | | | | 2 | | | | | | | | e | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2010 | 2015 | 2018 | | Energy supply | 242.1 | 210.2 | 204 | 219.1 | 197.3 | 137.6 | | from power stations | 203 | 163.1 | 158.7 | 173.1 | 157.3 | 104.1 | | other Energy supply | 39.1 | 47.2 | 45.3 | 46 | 40 | 33.4 | | Business | 111.8 | 109.1 | 109.1 | 97.2 | 78.4 | 69.6 | | Transport | 125.4 | 126.8 | 131 | 134.3 | 123.4 | 122.2 | | Public | 13.4 | 13.2 | 12.1 | 11.1 | 9.5 | 8 | | Residential | 78.3 | 79.6 | 85.6 | 82.4 | 84.5 | 64.5 | | Agriculture | 6.5 | 6.5 | 5.5 | 6.1 | 5.4 | 5.5 | | Industrial process | 19.4 | 17.8 | 17 | 16.4 | 10.6 | 12.1 | | Waste management | 1.3 | 1 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.2 | | LULUCF | -2.4 | -4.5 | -6.3 | -9.1 | -10.9 | -11.4 | | Total CO | | | | | | | | 2 | | | | | | | | | 595.7 | 559.8 | 558.5 | 558.1 | 498.5 | 408.3 | | Other greenhouse | | | | | | | | gases | 198.1 | 185.6 | 149.4 | 125.8 | 102.5 | 89.7 | | Total greenhouse | | | | | | | | gases | 793.8 | 745.4 | 707.9 | 683.9 | 600.9 | 497.9 | ## Notes: 1. (p) 2019 estimates are provisional. 2. Provisional 2019 CO2 emissions for the agriculture, waste and LULUCF sectors are assumed to be the same as 2018 estimates as unlike other CO2 estimates these cannot be estimated from energy statistics. 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 (EU ETS), which was introduced in 2005. 6. Totals for CO2 emissions, energy supply and total greenhouse gases may not sum due to rounding. 7. Estimates of non-CO2 gases are based on a simple approach which assumes that emissions of non-CO2 gases in 2019 will change from the 2018 total in line with the percentage difference between the estimates for the 2018 and 2019 of non-CO2 emissions in the 2018 Energy and Emissions Projections published by BEIS. Note: 1. Figures are annual totals including the preceding 4 quarters. 2. From year ending Q1 2019 onwards, figures include provisional data. As shown in Figure 1 above, temperature adjusting greenhouse gas emissions show a similar overall trend to non-temperature adjusted emissions. Over a ten year period, temperature adjusted UK greenhouse gas emissions decreased by 25 per cent , similar to the fall in actual emissions over this period (26 per cent). ## Energy Supply The energy supply sector was the largest contributor to the decrease in carbon dioxide emissions between 2018 and 2019. Carbon dioxide emissions from this sector were provisionally estimated to be 90.1 Mt in 2019, a decrease of 8.4 per cent (8.3 Mt) compared to 2018. This fall was mainly as a result of a 13.2 per cent (8.7 Mt) fall in carbon dioxide emissions from power stations. In 2019, carbon dioxide emissions from power stations, at 57.4 Mt, accounted for 16 per cent of all carbon dioxide emissions. Carbon dioxide emissions from power stations were 71.7 per cent lower in 2019 than in 1990. This is despite consumption of electricity being provisionally estimated to be around 6 per cent higher in 2019 than in 1990 (although it peaked in 2005 and has decreased since then). This decrease has mainly resulted from changes in the mix of fuels being used for electricity generation with a switch from coal to natural gas and growth in the use of renewable energy sources, combined with greater efficiency resulting from improvements in technology and a decline in the relative importance of energy intensive industries. In 2019 coal made up 3 per cent of fuel used for electricity generation, compared to65 per cent in 1990. Nuclear and renewables, which are low carbon energy sources, accounted for 48 per cent of fuel used for electricity generation in 2019, up from 22 per cent in 1990. ## Figure 2: Fuel Mix For Uk Electricity Generation, 1990-2019 (Million Tonnes Of Oil Equivalent) ## Figure 3: Carbon Dioxide Emissions From Power Stations, Uk, 1990-2019 (Mtco2) Note: (p) 2019 estimates are provisional. Source: Table 1, Provisional UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2019 Excel data tables Note: (p) 2019 estimates are provisional. ## Residential And Public Sectors The main source of emissions in these sectors is the use of natural gas for heating (and for cooking in the case of the residential sector). It should be noted that emissions from these sectors do not include the emissions from the generation of the electricity consumed, as these emissions are included in the energy supply sector. In 2019, the residential sector emitted 65.2 MtCO2, accounting for 19 per cent of all carbon dioxide emissions. Emissions from the public sector were 8.0 MtCO2 accounting for 2 per cent of all carbon dioxide emissions. Between 1990 and 2019 carbon dioxide emissions from the residential sector have fallen by 17 per cent and from the public sector 40 per cent over the same time period. ## Between 2018 And 2019: - There was a 1.8 per cent (1.2 Mt) decrease in residential emissions - There was a small 0.5 per cent (0.04 Mt) increase in emissions from the public sector. These changes were affected by warmer weather in 2019 than the previous year. On a temperature adjusted basis between 2018 and 2019: - There was a 1.3 per cent (1.0 Mt) decrease in residential emissions - There was a 0.7 per cent (0.06 Mt) increase in emissions from the public sector. After we adjust the residential emissions figures to remove the effect of year on year variation in temperatures, we see a more consistent trend. Between 2009 and 2019 residential emissions fell by 13.1 per cent and by 9.6 per cent on a temperature adjusted basis. ## Transport Sector In 2019, carbon dioxide emissions from the transport sector were 119.6 Mt, 2.8 per cent (3.5 Mt) lower than in 2018, and 4.6 per cent lower than in 1990. In 2019 transport accounted for around a third (34 per cent) of all carbon dioxide emissions. The large majority of emissions from transport are from road transport. Primarily as a result of a continual growth in vehicle kilometres travelled on roads3, transport carbon dioxide grew to a peak in 2007, 8.5 per cent higher than in 1990. Since then emissions from this sector have fallen back to around 1990 levels, driven mainly by improvements in new car fuel efficiency4, as well lower traffic growth than in previous years as a result of a dip following the 2008/2009 recession. It should be noted that these estimates do not include emissions from international aviation and shipping. Domestic aviation (i.e. flights taking off and landing within the UK) and shipping, however, are included. ## Business Sector Carbon dioxide emissions from the business sector were estimated to be 64.7 Mt in 2019 and accounted for around 18 per cent of all carbon dioxide emissions. This was similar to the emissions seen in 2018. There has been a 42 per cent decrease in business sector emissions since 1990. Most of this decrease came between 2001 and 2009, with a significant drop in 2009 likely to have been driven by economic factors. ## Other Sectors For the agriculture, *waste management*, and *land use, land use change and forestry* (LULUCF) provisional CO2 emissions cannot be derived based on energy statistics, so the carbon dioxide emissions from these sectors are assumed to be the same as they were in 2018. This is also the case for most of the emissions from the *industrial processes* sector. ## Carbon Dioxide Emissions By Fuel Type In the data tables accompanying this publication, table 2 shows UK carbon dioxide emissions by fuel type. The combustion of fuel releases both energy and carbon dioxide. The amount of carbon dioxide released by the production of one unit of power depends on the type of fuel that is burned. For example, since coal has a higher carbon content than gas, more carbon dioxide emissions result from burning one tonne of coal to generate a unit of power than from one tonne of gas. Emissions per unit of electricity supplied from fossil fuels are estimated to have been around 400 tonnes of carbon dioxide per gigawatt hour (GWh) overall in 2019. Within this, emissions from electricity generated from coal (990 tonnes of carbon dioxide per GWh electricity supplied) were over twice as high as for electricity supplied by gas (370 tonnes of carbon dioxide per GWh). For all sources of electricity (including nuclear, renewables and autogeneration), the average amount of carbon dioxide emitted in 2019 amounted to 200 tonnes per GWh of electricity supplied. In 2019, total carbon dioxide emissions from the use of fossil fuels, including fuel used for generating electricity, were estimated at 338.0 Mt. This was 4.0 per cent lower than the 2018 figure of 351.9 Mt. The biggest change in emissions was from the use of coal, down 8.8 Mt (43.1 per cent) from 20.5 Mt in 2018 to 11.7 Mt in 2019. This largely resulted from the reduced use of coal for electricity generation. Over the period 1990 to 2019, carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels decreased by 40 per cent. Over the same period, primary consumption of fossil fuels dropped by 24 per cent. This relatively large decrease in emissions can be attributed to an increase in the use of gas accompanied by a decrease in the use of coal. Carbon dioxide emissions from gas as a proportion of all carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels has increased from 26 per cent in 1990 to 54 per cent in 2019, whilst emissions from coal as a proportion of all fossil fuel carbon dioxide emissions has decreased from 39 per cent to 3 per cent over the same period. The proportion of carbon dioxide emissions from oil relative to carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels has increased from 35 per cent in 1990 to 43 per cent in 2019. Note that we are considering changing the fuel categories presented in these statistics in future to provide more detail and bring them more in line with the energy statistics BEIS publishes. We intend to set out the proposed new categories in an article in the June 2020 Energy Trends publication. Note: (p) 2019 estimates are provisional. ## 2019 Temperature Adjusted Provisional Emissions Results By Sector A temperature adjustment has been applied to the quarterly CO2 emissions, in order to estimate what the overall trend of emissions would have been without the impact of differences in external temperatures. Table 2 compares temperature adjusted and unadjusted CO2 emissions by sector in 2019. Temperature adjusted emissions Actual emissions 2018 2019 **Percentage** 2018 2019 Percentage (MtCO2) (MtCO2) change (MtCO2) (MtCO2) change Energy supply 101.3 93.2 -8.1% 98.4 90.1 -8.4% Business 67.4 66.2 -1.8% 65.9 64.7 -1.9% Transport 123.0 119.6 -2.8% 123.0 119.6 -2.8% Public 8.4 8.4 0.7% 8.0 8.0 0.5% Residential 71.4 70.5 -1.3% 66.4 65.2 -1.8% Other 4.0 4.0 0.6% 4.0 4.0 0.6% Total CO2 375.5 361.8 -3.6% 365.7 351.5 -3.9% Source: Tables 3 & 4, Provisional UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2019 Excel data tables The sectors most affected by external temperatures are the residential sector and energy supply. When temperatures are lower there is greater use of natural gas and electricity for heating households. Residential emissions fluctuate from year to year owing to year on year variation in weather conditions, as seen in figure 6 below. ## Figure 6: Actual And Temperature Adjusted Residential Carbon Dioxide Emissions, Uk, Year To Q1 2009 - Year To Q4 2019 (Mtco2) Source: Tables 3 & 4, Provisional UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2019 Excel data tables Note: 1. Figures are annual totals including the preceding 4 quarters. 2. From year ending Q1 2019 onwards, figures include provisional data. The overall trend in temperature adjusted energy supply emissions is similar to the unadjusted trend, as the majority of electricity generated is used for other purposes rather than heating. ## Figure 7: Actual And Temperature Adjusted Energy Supply Carbon Dioxide Emissions, Uk, Year To Q1 2009 - Year To Q4 2019 (Mtco2) Source: Tables 3 & 4, Provisional UK greenhouse gas emissions national statistics 1990-2019 Excel data tables ## Accompanying Tables The following tables are available in Excel and ODS format on the department's statistics website https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/provisional-uk-greenhouse-gas-emissionsnational-statistics: Table 1 UK annual territorial greenhouse gas emissions, including a breakdown by source sector for carbon dioxide emissions Table 2 UK territorial carbon dioxide emissions by fuel type Table 3 UK territorial greenhouse gas emissions, annual totals Table 4 UK temperature adjusted territorial greenhouse gas emissions annual totals Table 5 UK territorial greenhouse gas emissions for individual quarters Table 6 UK temperature adjusted territorial greenhouse gas emissions for individual quarters Technical information ## Coverage Of Emissions Reporting The estimates present emissions on a "territorial" basis, so only include emissions which occur within the UK's borders. They therefore exclude emissions from UK businesses and residents that occur abroad, including from international aviation and shipping, and any emissions embedded within the supply chain of manufactured goods and services imported into the UK (while including emissions that occur in the UK resulting from exported goods and services). The basket of greenhouse gases covered by these statistics is based on that covered by the Kyoto Protocol, and consists of seven gases: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFC), perfluorocarbons (PFC), sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) and nitrogen trifluoride (NF3). The last four 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)5, 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 (CO2e). Carbon dioxide 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". ## Basis Of The Provisional Emissions Estimates The estimates of carbon dioxide emissions in 2019 have been produced based on provisional inland energy consumption statistics which are published in BEIS's quarterly Energy Trends publication. Carbon dioxide accounts for the majority of UK greenhouse gas emissions (81 per cent in 2019). However, in order to give an indication of what the latest provisional carbon dioxide emissions estimates imply for the total, we need to also produce an estimate of emissions of the remaining non-CO2 gases. Estimates of non-CO2 gases are based on a simple approach which assumes that emissions of non-CO2 gases in 2019 will change from the 2018 total in line with the percentage difference between the estimates for the 2018 and 2019 non-CO2 emissions in the 2018 Energy and Emissions Projections published by BEIS. Estimates of emissions of all greenhouse gases for 1990-2018 come from the latest UK greenhouse gas inventory. Information about the methodology behind these estimates can be found in the 2018 final UK greenhouse gas emissions statistics. ## Quarterly Totals In order to remove the seasonality in the data so that a trend in emissions over time can be observed, quarterly emissions are reported as annual totals, covering the stated quarter plus the preceding three quarters. When data becomes available for each new quarter, the estimates for the latest quarter are added to the total, while at the same time the estimates for the same quarter from the previous year are removed from the series. This procedure serves to smooth out short-term fluctuations and highlights long term trends and can be used to show the underlying trend each quarter. Emissions estimates for each individual quarter are reported in the data tables accompanying this publication. ## Temperature Adjustment Carbon dioxide emissions are indirectly influenced by external temperatures. During the winter months, emissions are generally higher than in summer months, due to higher demand for fuel for space heating. During a particularly cold winter for example, it is likely that more fuel will be burnt for domestic or commercial use than during an average winter, and therefore emissions will be higher due to the additional fuel consumption. Temperature adjusted quarterly emissions estimates therefore remove the effect of external temperatures. In a particularly cold winter quarter, for example, this will result in temperature adjusted emissions being lower than actual emissions, reflecting the lower fuel consumption which would have occurred if temperatures had been at average levels (based on the 30 year period 1981-2010). Temperature adjustment is determined by the average number of heating degree days in each quarter. This information can be found in Energy Trends. Further details of how quarterly emissions have been estimated and of the methodology underlying the temperature adjusted estimates can be found alongside this statistical release in a separate methodology summary. ## Further Information Future Updates To These Statistics On Thursday 25th June 2020 BEIS will publish estimates of carbon dioxide emissions by local authority for 2018. Final estimates of UK greenhouse gas emissions for 2019 will be published as National Statistics in February 2021. These estimates will be based on the UK's Greenhouse Gas Inventory for 1990-2019. In March 2021 the 1990-2019 UK emissions estimates will be updated to include estimates by end user and by fuel type, and provisional 2020 emissions estimates will be published. ## Related Publications - The UK's National Inventory Report (NIR) for 1990-2018 will be submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) on 15th April 2020. The report will contain national greenhouse gas emissions estimates for 1990-2018 and descriptions of the methods used to produce the estimates. Previous reports can be found on the NAEI website. - The background quality report provides a summary of quality issues relating to statistics on UK territorial greenhouse gas emissions. - The record of base year emissions table shows how the UK base year for UK Carbon Budgets and the Kyoto Protocol has changed from 2008 to the latest inventory year. - BEIS also publishes emissions projections based on assumptions of future emission reduction policies, economic growth, fossil fuel prices, electricity generation costs, UK population and other key variables. - Further information about the Kyoto Protocol can be found on the UNFCCC's website. - Further details of the European Union Emissions Trading System can be found at the EU ETS section of the Gov.uk website. - ONS publishes emissions on a "residential" basis in the UK Environmental Accounts. The figures represent emissions caused by UK residents and businesses whether in the UK or abroad but exclude emissions within the UK which can be attributed to overseas residents and businesses. - Defra publishes the UK's carbon footprint. This estimates emissions on a "consumption" basis, meaning it covers emissions associated with the consumption of goods and services by households in the UK. It includes estimates of emissions associated with each stage of the supply chain for those goods and services, regardless of where they occur, while excluding emissions occurring in the UK that are associated with the consumption of goods and services by households outside the UK. - The latest UK energy statistics, including revisions to earlier years' data, can be found in the Digest of UK Energy Statistics and Energy Trends quarterly bulletin produced by BEIS. Any enquiries about the UK energy statistics should be sent to energy.stats@beis.gov.uk. - Detailed UK temperature data can be found on both the Met Office website and the weather statistics section of the Gov.uk website. ## Revisions Policy The BEIS statistical revisions policy sets out the revisions policy for these statistics, which has been developed in accordance with the UK Statistics Authority Code of Practice for Statistics. Emissions estimates for 2019 are provisional and are based on UK energy statistics. They will be revised when the final 2019 estimates are published in February 2021. The full time series going back to 1990 will also be revised at this time in line with any methodology changes made to the UK greenhouse gas inventory. ## Uses Of These Statistics The provisional estimates are not used for any formal reporting of how the UK is performing against its emissions reduction targets, as this requires final estimates based on the UK's greenhouse gas inventory. However, these statistics give policy makers and other users an initial steer as to the trend in emissions between 2018 and 2019, which helps them to form an initial assessment of the extent to which the UK is on track to meet targets. They also include estimates of quarterly emissions and the impact on emissions of external temperature changes. For more detailed information about the sources of UK greenhouse gas emissions and information on UK emissions targets and progress towards them, see the 2018 final UK greenhouse gas emissions statistics. A statement of user needs for greenhouse gas emission statistics is published at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-greenhouse-gas-emissions-statisticsstatement-on-user-needs ## User Engagement Users are encouraged to provide comments and feedback on how these statistics are used and how well they meet user needs. Comments on any issues relating to this statistical release are welcomed and should be sent to: ClimateChange.Statistics@beis.gov.uk The BEIS statement on statistical public engagement and data standards sets out the department's commitments on public engagement and data standards as outlined by the Code of Practice for Statistics. ## National Statistics Designation National Statistics status means that our statistics meet the highest standards of trustworthiness, quality and public value, and it is our responsibility to maintain compliance with these standards. The continued designation of these statistics as National Statistics was confirmed in September 2018 following a compliance check by the Office for Statistics Regulation. The statistics last underwent a full assessment against the Code of Practice for Statistics in 2014. Since the latest review by the Office for Statistics Regulation, we have continued to comply with the Code of Practice for Statistics, and have made the following improvements: - Improved the accuracy of the historic emissions estimates by continuing to make methodological changes to the UK's Greenhouse Gas Inventory. - Improved the accuracy of the provisional estimates by reviewing and changing the methodology for making provisional estimates of non-CO2 emissions. ## Pre-Release Access To Statistics Some ministers and officials receive access to these statistics up to 24 hours before release. Details of the arrangements for doing this and a list of the ministers and officials that receive pre-release access to these statistics can be found in the BEIS statement of compliance with the Pre-Release Access to Official Statistics Order 2008. ## Contact - Responsible statistician: Georgina Smalldridge - Email: ClimateChange.Statistics@beis.gov.uk - Media enquiries: 020 7215 1000 - Public enquiries: 020 7215 0206 ## © Crown Copyright 2020 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/opengovernment-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk. Where we have identified any third-party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This publication is available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/provisional-ukgreenhouse-gas-emissions-national-statistics If you need a version of this document in a more accessible format, please email ClimateChange.Statistics@beis.gov.uk. Please tell us what format you need. It will help us if you say what assistive technology you use.

en

4564-pdf

## Contractor Details Gross amount paid (Excl VAT) (A) ## Subcontractor Details Subcontractor's full name £ 0 0 • Less cost of materials Unique Taxpayer reference (UTR) £ 0 0 • Amount liable to deduction Verification Number* £ 0 0 • / V Amount deducted (B) £ 0 0 • *Verification number only to be entered where a deduction at the higher rate has been made. Amount payable (A-B) £ 0 0 •

en

0096-pdf

From: Lee Simpson [leelee.simpson@virgin.net] Sent: 04 April 2012 12:25 To: Neediiam Andrea Subject: Re: Re!(^/DDD/1211 /131 T^roposed Conservatory at Thornsett Cottage, Chelmorton Dear Ms Needham I woufd like to withdravynm application for planning permission on the above named property. As discussed at our mgetirrgon 3rd April 2012. Regards Lee Simpson —- Original Message - From: Needham Andrea To: leelee.simDSon@virain.net Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 10:33 AM Subject: FW: Re: NP/DDD/1211/1317 - Proposed Conservatory at Thornsett Cottage, Chelmorton Dear Mr Simpson I refer to our telephone conversation on Monday. As requested, below is a summary of the Part 1, Class A of the General Permitted Development Order as requested. http://www.leaislation.aov.uk/uksi/2008/2362/pdfs/uksi 20082362 en.odf Secondly apologies for the error in my email below. To clarify Denise Hunt measured the conservatory at 3.2m from the wall of the House (not 2.2m) and you would need to reduce it in length to 3m or less if it were to be classed as permitted development. You will also note that subsection (g) of the above states that the eaves height must not exceed 3m within 2 metres of the boundary of the curtilage of the dwellinghouse. It is unfortunate that you were not informed that you could reduce the length of the extension slightly in order to bring the proposals under permitted development. On that basis and as a good will gesture I am prepared to agree to refund the fee on the current applciation if it is withdrawn and if we can agree at a meeting that the extension will be brought back to no more than 3m. That is on the presumption that the eaves height adjacent to the neighbours boundary does not exceed 3m. I am available next Tuesday 3''^ April at 9.15am to meet you at your property. Please could you let me know as soon as possible whether that is acceptable. Yours sincerely Andrea Needham From: Needham Andrea Sent: 19 March 2012 12:10 To: 'leelee.simpson@virgin.net' Subject: Re: NP/DDD/1211/1317 - Proposed Conservatory at Thornsett Cottage, Chelmorton Dear Mr Simpson I refer to the above planning application and our recent meeting at your property. I have now discussed your proposals with the south area team manager and researched the planning history for the property. One thing that was not mentioned at our meeting was that there had been a previous refusal for a conservatory on the property in 2006 on the grounds that the cottage has already been substantially extended and that any further extensions (particularly onto the original walls) would seriously harm its intrinsic character. Also the design of the conservatory was found to be unacceptable. On the basis of that decision I do not consider that a revised design to the scheme you have now submitted would resolve those 'in principle' objections. It is therefore my intention to recommend refusal of the current application. We do not know at this stage whether the application will go before the planning committee, but I will let you know that once the consultation period is over. I note from the enforcement file that the conservatory base walls, as built (and measured by Denise Hunt) extend out 2.2m from the wall of the house (the plans submitted with the applciation show that the conservatory would only extend out by 2m). It is that length that has triggered the requirement for planning permission. If you were to reduce the length (measure externally) to 2m or less, than planning consent would not be required, provided that the eaves height adjacent to the neighbour's house did not exceed 3m. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you wish to discuss any of the above in more detail. My phone number is 01629 816236 and I work Monday through to Wednesday. Yours sincerely Andrea Needham Senior Planner - Planning Service 01629816236 Peak District National Park Authority, Aldern House, Baslow Road, Bakewell, DE45 1AE t:01629 816200 f:01629 816310 www.peakdistrict.aov.uk Working together for the Peak District National Park; a special environment, a welcoming place at the heart of the nation, vibrant communities and a thriving economy. Please be green - don't print unless necessary. 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 Star. 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. star.net.uk This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive

en

2783-pdf

## Example Risk Assessment For Food Preparation, Cooking And Service This example risk assessment applies to restaurants, cafés, sandwich bars, pubs, takeaways or hotel kitchens. The café employs five permanent staff working a variety of shifts to prepare, cook and serve food. A young person under 16 helps on a Saturday to serve food and load and unload the dishwasher. One staff member does not speak English well. The business is open from 7 am to 5.30 pm. ## How Was The Risk Assessment Done? The manager followed the advice at www.hse.gov.uk/simple-health-safety/risk/. To identify the hazards and risks, they:  looked at the guidance on HSE's web pages for catering and hospitality and young workers;  walked around the kitchen, the stockroom and all other areas, noting things that might pose a risk;  talked to staff to learn from their knowledge and experience, and to listen to their concerns and opinions;  looked at the accident book, to understand which risks previously resulted in incidents. The manager noted what was already being done to control the risks and recorded any further actions required. Having put in place the actions the risk assessment identified, the manager discussed the findings with staff, displayed the assessment in a prominent place so all staff could see it and made it part of the induction process for new workers. They told the young person's parents about the findings and how risks to that young person will be controlled. They also made sure that the worker who had difficulty understanding English had the safety arrangements explained to her in a language she understood. The manager will review the risk assessment whenever there are any significant changes such as new work equipment, work activities or workers. ## Do Not Just Copy This Example And Put Your Company Name To It As That Would Not Satisfy The Law And Would Not Protect Your Employees. You Must Think About The Specific Hazards And Controls Your Business Needs. The Hse Site Has A Template And Other Examples **To Help You Produce Your Own Assessment.** Risk Assessment Company Name: Smith'S Café Assessment Carried Out By: Nk Simpson Date Assessment Carried Out: 9/10/19 What are the hazards? What are you already doing to control the risks? Who might be harmed and how?  Good housekeeping - work areas kept tidy, goods stored suitably etc. Slips and trips  Kitchen equipment maintained to prevent leaks onto floor.  Equipment faults leading to leaks Kitchen/food service staff and customers may be injured if they trip over objects or slip on spillages. quickly reported to manager.  Drainage channels and drip trays provided where spills more likely.  Staff clean up spillages (including dry spills) immediately using suitable methods and leave the floor dry.  Suitable cleaning materials available.  Good lighting in all areas including cold storage areas.  No trailing cables or obstruction in walkways.  Steps and changes in level highlighted. Done What further action do you need to take to control the risks? Who needs to carry out the action? When is the action needed by? Manager 31/10/19 31/10/19 Consider whether it is appropriate to change floor surface with better surface roughness. Manager 11/10/19 11/10/19 Remind staff to maintain good standard of housekeeping. Manager 29/11/19 28/11/19 Repair damaged floor tiles by the dishwasher in the kitchen. Manager 24/10/19 24/10/19 Ensure suitable footwear with good grip worn by staff. hazards? What are you already doing to control the risks? Who might be harmed and how? Manual handling  Ingredients bought in package sizes that are light enough for easy handling.  Commonly used items and heavy stock stored on shelves at waist height.  Suitable mobile steps provided and Handling heavy items such as flour sacks, ingredients, boxes of meat, trays of crockery, kegs etc Kitchen staff and food service staff may suffer injuries such as strains or bruising from handling heavy/bulky objects. staff trained to use them safely.  Handling aids provided for movement of large/heavy items.  Sink at good height to avoid stooping.  Staff trained in how to lift safely.  Staff trained in risks of hot oils and on procedure for emptying/cleaning fryers. Contact with steam, hot water, hot oil and hot surfaces  Staff trained in risks of releasing Kitchen staff and food service staff may suffer scalding or burns injuries. steam.  Water mixer taps provided.  All staff told to wear long sleeves.  Heat-resistant gloves/cloths/aprons provided.  Staff trained to handle knives.  Knives suitably stored when not in use.  First aid box provided and Knives Staff involved in food preparation and service could suffer cuts from contact with blades. nominated first aider always on site. What further action do you need to take to control the risks? Who needs to carry out the action? When is the action needed by? Manager From now on Ensure team working for moving heavier items (eg pots). Manager 28/10/19 28/10/19 Display 'hot water' signs at sinks and 'hot surface' signs at hot plates. Manager From now on Ensure handles on pans maintained. Manager 21/10/19 21/10/19 Ensure staff trained in use of coffee machine. 16/10/19 16/10/19 Manager and staff Tell staff not to use knives to remove packaging - suitable cutters will be provided. hazards? What are you already doing to control the risks? Who might be harmed and how?  Where possible and sensible, staff use tools (cutlery, tongs scoops etc) to handle food rather than hands.  Food grade, single‑ use, non-latex Food handling Frequent hand washing can cause skin damage. Some foods can cause some staff to develop skin allergies. gloves are used for tasks that can cause skin problems, eg salad washing, vegetable peeling and fish filleting.  Where handling cannot be avoided, hands are rinsed promptly after finishing the task.  Dishwasher used instead of washing up by hand. Contact with bleach and other cleaning chemicals  All containers clearly labelled.  Where possible, cleaning products marked 'irritant' not purchased and milder alternatives bought instead. Prolonged contact with water, particularly in combination with detergents, can cause skin damage.  Long-handled mops and brushes, and strong rubber gloves, provided and used.  Staff wash rubber gloves after using them and store them in a clean place. Staff cleaning premises risk skin irritation or eye damage from direct contact with bleach and other cleaning products. Vapour may cause breathing problems. What further action do you need to take to control the risks? Who needs to carry out the action? When is the action needed by? 14/10/19 14/10/19 Manager and staff Staff reminded to thoroughly dry hands after washing. 30/10/19 29/10/19 Manager and staff Provide non-taint, nut-oilfree cream for staff to apply regularly to replace the moisture 'stripped' by frequent washing. 11/10/19 11/10119 Manager and staff Remind staff to check for dry, red or itchy skin on their hands and to tell manager if this occurs. 11/10/19 11/10/19 Manager and staff Staff reminded to thoroughly dry hands after washing. 30/10/19 29/10/19 Manager and staff Provide non-taint, nut-oilfree cream for staff to apply regularly to replace the moisture 'stripped' by frequent washing. 11/10/19 11/10/19 Manager and staff Remind staff to check for dry, red or itchy skin on their hands and to tell manager if this occurs. hazards? What are you already doing to control the risks? Who might be harmed and how?  Daily check of gas appliance controls.  Inspection, service and test carried out by Gas Safe registered engineer every 12 months. Gas appliances Staff and customers could suffer serious/fatal injuries as a result of explosion/ release of gas.  Staff know where main isolation tap is and how to turn supply off in an emergency.  Manager visually inspects the system once a year and is competent to do so. Electrical Staff could suffer serious/fatal injuries as a result of electric shock.  System inspected and tested by an electrician every five years.  Staff trained to check equipment before use and to report any defective plugs, discoloured sockets or damaged cable and equipment.  Staff know where fuse box is and how to safely switch off electricity in an emergency.  Plugs, sockets etc suitable for kitchen environment.  Access to fuse box kept clear.  Residual current devices (RCDs) installed on supplies to hand-held and portable appliances. What further action do you need to take to control the risks? Who needs to carry out the action? When is the action needed by? Manager 16/10/19 16/10/19 Contact Gas Safe registered engineer to fit suitable flame failure device on oven. Manager From now on Manager to inspect plugs, cables etc regularly. Get electrician to inspect electrical equipment and advise on how often these should be inspected and tested. hazards? What are you already doing to control the risks? Who might be harmed and how? Fire risk assessment done as at www.communities.gov.uk/fire and necessary action taken. Fire Staff or customers could suffer serious/fatal injuries from burns/smoke inhalation.  Staff trained in cleaning, assembly and operating procedures.  All dangerous parts to machinery suitably guarded. Machinery Staff risk serious injury from contact with dangerous or moving parts of machinery.  Daily checks of machinery guards before use.  Staff trained to spot and report any defective machinery.  Safety-critical repairs carried out by competent person.  Operating instructions easy to locate. Published by the Health and Safety Executive 11/19 What further action do you need to take to control the risks? Who needs to carry out the action? When is the action needed by? None Manager 22/10/19 21/10/19 Remind staff to always isolate (switch off from power supply) machinery before carrying out maintenance or cleaning work.

en

3242-pdf

## Cabinet Report Report Title Finance And Monitoring - Provisional Impacts - Covid 2020/21 | AGENDA STATUS: | PUBLIC | |-----------------------------|------------------| | Cabinet Meeting Date: | 27 May 2020 | | Key Decision: | No | | Within Policy: | Yes | | Policy Document: | No | | Directorate: | Management Board | | Accountable Cabinet Member: | Cllr B Eldred | | Ward(s) | All | ## 1. Purpose 1.1 This report sets out the provisional financial implications of the Covid19 Pandemic on the Council's General Fund. ## 2. Recommendations 2.1. That Cabinet note the provisional financial impacts for the General Fund for the financial year 2020-21 as set out at appendix 1 and appendix 2. 2.2 That Cabinet notes the risks to the budgets for 2020-21 which may impact on the levels of reserves maintained and/or drive a need to seek additional in year savings measures. 2.3 It is recommended that Cabinet approves option 3.3.1c, to reduce the financial risk to the Council and the future West Northants Council ## 3. Issues And Choices 3.1 Report Background 3.1.1 The Council's budget is set in February each year, based on known assumptions and risks. Whilst risks around specific services are understood, the Council was not aware of the risk and impact of Covid19 on Local Authorities or their respective residents and economy. 3.1.2 Whilst it is too early to fully understand the full impact of the pandemic on the Council's finances. It is possible to highlight some of the specific costs incurred to date and to outline some of the risks and assumptions on costs and income that are being used to understand and model the full year impact. 3.1.3 The Council set a General Fund Reserve of £4M with a minimum safe level of £3M. There are further Reserves which are held but earmarked for specific purposes, if they were to be used it could add costs to future years and impact on the new West Northants Council. 3.1.4 Appendix 1 provides information relating to specific service areas, the costs and pressures incurred to date and the assumptions going forward. 3.1.5 Appendix 2 provides information on the Govt. funding received to-date both to support the Councils costs and to be administered by the Council to support the Community. ## 3.2 General Fund Balances And Earmarked Reserves 3.2.1 The latest risk-based assessment of reserves suggests that, taking all known risks into account along with the Council's gross expenditure requirement, the minimum level of balances should remain in the order of £4.0m. 3.2.2 The Council also holds general fund earmarked reserves of just over £25m to mitigate against specific risks to which the Council may be exposed and for investing in service improvement. ## 3.3 Choices (Options) 3.3.1 Cabinet is invited to note the report and the risks to the 2020-21 Budget and either: a) Agree to continue without seeking savings and relying on addition Govt. funding and if necessary the review and use of specific earmarked reserves, which may impact on future years funding, or b) Task the Chief Executive and Corporate Management Board to present proposals for cost savings to Cabinet in July 2020, to preserve a revised minimum level of General Fund Reserves. c) Task the Chief Executive and Corporate Management Board to identify and present proposals for cost savings to July Cabinet, which become contingent spend, subject to further Government funding becoming available, or agreed reprioritisation of earmarked reserves. ## 4. Implications (Including Financial Implications) 4.1 Policy 4.1.1. Annual Budget set by Council, including Section 25 statement on the robustness of reserves. ## 4.2 Resources And Risk 4.2.1 This report informs Cabinet of the current assumed pressures and risks in respect of the Council's own financial position. 4.2.2 The current forecast General Fund pressure after receipt of the Government Grants identified in Appendix 2, is between £2M to £3M. 4.2.3 The Council will have more information to base its projection on at the end of June, when detailed costs are known and whether there may be additional Govt. support. Should the assumptions be proven valid and there is no further funding support the Council will need to actively consider additional savings in year or risk breaching its minimum level of safe General Fund Reserves. ## 4.3 Legal 4.3.1 There are no specific legal implications arising from this report. ## 4.4 Equality And Health 4.4.1 There are no specific equality and health implications arising from this report. ## 4.5 Consultees (Internal And External) 4.5.1 Chief Executive, Service Directors, Partner Organisations, Government Departments and Cabinet ## 4.6 How The Proposals Deliver Priority Outcomes 4.6.1 The Council is required to deliver its statutory duties and obligations, it also seeks to deliver its Corporate Plan objectives, but must do so within the resources available. ## 4.7 Appendices 4.7.1 The Appendices are set out as follows: 1. Northampton Borough Council - covid costs/pressures 2. Government Grants ## 5. Background Papers 5.1Council Report - General Fund Revenue Budget and Capital Programme, 2020/21 and Medium Term Financial Plan 2020/21 - 2023/24 Budget setting and budget monitoring throughout 2019/20. [24 Feb 2020]. 5.2Council Report - Report by the Chief Finance Officer on the Robustness of Budget Estimates and Adequacy of Reserves [24 Feb 2020]. ## Stuart Mcgregor Chief Finance Officer (Section 151 Officer) Northampton Borough Council - Covid Costs/Pressures 1. Housing The Housing Service, along with the Council's ALMO, NPH, had worked hard to alleviate pressures from Temporary Accommodation during 2019-20 to reduce the risk of overspends in 2020-21. The Government requirement to provide Temporary Accommodation for Rough Sleepers saw the contracting with two hotels to provide 80 rooms for accommodation. As this scheme comes to an end, whilst it has provided positive outcomes for a traditionally hard to reach group of people. It is likely to see a block unanticipated pressure on the Temporary Accommodation budget. The scheme so far has cost in the order of £250K including accommodation, staffing and PPE. A specific Government grant of £21K has been received toward this cost. There are also unavoidable costs of those who were initially accommodated under Temporary Accommodation legislation, but found not to be entitled going forward, could not be moved on during the 'lockdown'. Due to a combination of factors from accommodating Rough Sleepers who do not wish to return to their prior position, unavoidable costs and an expectation of an increase in homelessness post lockdown, along with reduced income from enforcement and licensing. It is estimated that there will be pressure (possible overspend) on this Service Area of £750K to £1.5M during the year. ## 2. Economy Assets And Culture The pressures for this service area are primarily income related, from the risk of loss of income from commercial tenants, through to the loss of revenue income from car parking. The Council has a modest commercial property portfolio, primarily to support regeneration and the local economy, however the income is used to support services The Council as with many businesses is suffering from fixed property costs and a reduction / loss. At present the Council Car Parks have had charges suspended, to assist key workers with free parking in specific areas and to assist those businesses still trading. The Council continues to suffer costs such as Business Rates, Utilities, Insurance and Maintenance. Parking income is considered to be a perishable income, if it is not earned on a specific day / week it cannot be recovered at a future date. The current assumption is that the Council will have lost already c£700K with an anticipated reduction continuing throughout the year. The Council will also lose income from the lack of 'movements' on which payments are based in respect of the Bus Station. The total pressure therefore could be between £1.5M to £2M dependent on how transition works and no second peak to the pandemic. As the Market was and continues to be impacted, there is an estimated likely loss of income to the Council of £75K. Impact on Facilities Team and Museum from loss of income for room hire, wedding and events and paying back deposits, many prospective hirers are also awaiting to understand how the restrictions impact before progressing with future bokings. ## 3. Corporate Costs As a result of the Pandemic the Council along with other organisations was obliged to 'disperse' its staff and enable working from home, where practicable. Along with many organisations the Council had a good and robust Business Continuity Plan, however like many at the outset of 'lockdown' the plan assumed that there would be some capability to utilise some office/equipment capacity in another building or via a partner. There were therefore unbudgeted costs in acquiring additional ICT equipment and mobile phones to enable core key services to function whilst alternative solutions were developed and implemented. The Council has also had to acquire commercial versions of Telephone Conferencing and Video Conferencing, the latter and the additional volume working 'off site' also required an upgrade to the Council's IT infrastructure and in particular bandwidth, at speed. The costs of IT, telephony and conference facilities is currently estimated to be £75K. This was lower than anticipated due to innovative and swift work by ICT teams to enable more 'desk based' equipment to become mobile and so avoid the need to procure a large volume of laptops to enable 'home working'. As some services that cannot function remotely, continue to operate within the Guildhall, additional regular deep cleaning costs are being incurred, along with protective screens being installed in public customer service areas. There is a general Corporate Cost in respect of the acquisition of the appropriate PPE requirements to enable frontline and core services to operate in an appropriately safe manner for both staff and the public. At present the costs incurred are around £50K. ## 4. Customers & Communities This Service Area has responsibilities for parks and public spaces and has seen material costs in securing childrens play areas and supporting social distancing, as well as direct support to the community. As the Government prepares to ease restrictions, new requirements and proposals are coming forward that are likely to see further cost pressures around public spaces and facilities. This service is also anticipating a reduction in income through lower licensing activity. With some additional costs - cleansing and recycling due to additional agency costs, sickness to keep Environmental Services functioning during the pandemic. ## 5. Planning As a result of the restrictions in place, large new developments are not coming forward, resulting in a reduction in both Development Management and Building Control income from those applications. However, small scale and householder developments are continuing to be submitted, and the return to work on a number of existing building sites has seen a significant increase in the number of discharge of condition and Building Regulations applications needing to be processed. However, as these are lower income activities, the net impact on overall budgets is likely to be in the order of a £200K pressure. Land searches volumes have not seen significant changes. ## 6. Chief Finance Officer The CFO area encompasses the corporate finance costs, audit fees etc. Whilst the distribution of over £30M to local businesses of BEIS Grants is very welcome to assist with the local economy, along with the Business Rates reliefs being changed after bills were issued for 2020-21, providing over £34M of Business Rate Relief to the Retail, Hospitality, Leisure sector and Small Business Rates Relief. There is cost to administering both of these schemes, along with rebilling over 8,500 recipients of the Council Tax Reduction Schemes(CTRS). These costs exist, however additional 'administrative funding' has been proposed by Govt. however until it is provided, the Council has unfunded costs of around £200K. As the Pandemic struck at the end of March, it will be considered to have had a detrimental impact on asset valuations and other investments which had been valued prior to the Pandemic as part of the Financial Year End routine, there is likely to be cost to revisit those items and the impact on 2020-21, with a probable increase in Audit Fees for these impacts and the grant processes. Challenges around cashflow could also see reductions in 'interest earned' on deposits and the need to borrow to cover cashflow. ## Government Grants The Council has received two forms of funding, grant to support its services and costs and also specific grant to be administered on behalf of Government. ## 1. Government Administered Grants The Council has received funding from the Department of Business Economy, Investment and Strategy (BEIS) to distribute to specific business within the Retail Hospitality Leisure (RHL) Sector and businesses in receipt of Small Business Rate Relief (SBRR). The Council received initially, £37.374M of 'funds', of which it is expected that grants under Scheme One will require £34.550M. Under the new Scheme Two - Discretionary Scheme, the Council has been allocated £1.727M which will be drawn from the initial cash provided of £37.374M. At the time of this report, the Council will have paid out over 2,400 grants worth over £30M in respect of BEIS Grants Scheme One. The Council has also received £1.861M to fund the Govt initiative to reduce all residual Council Tax bills for those in receipt of locally funded Council Tax Reduction Scheme (CTRS), by £150.00 at any point during 2020-21. ## 2. Government Grant Funding To The Council The Council has received three tranches of funding to support the costs of Covid both on the Council and the delivery of its core services. | Tranche One: | £0.021M toward Rough Sleeper costs | |-----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------| | Tranche Two: | £0.120M non ringfenced funding [From Govt. first £1,6Bn] | | Tranche Three: | £2.239M non ringfenced funding [From Govt. second £1.6Bn] |

en

3117-pdf

## Hate Crime Public statement on prosecuting homophobic, biphobic and transphobic hate crime Hate crimes often have a disproportionate impact on the victim because they are being targeted for a personal characteristic. We recognise that hate crime not only impacts the individual victim but also the wider community. Hate incidents as one-offs or a related series of events can send reverberations through communities, just as they can reinforce established patterns of prejudice and discrimination. This is why it is so important for hate crime to be prosecuted effectively. Our policy is to: - Identify crimes involving hostility on the basis of sexual orientation or transgender identity as early as possible - Build strong cases with our partners that satisfy the tests within the Code for Crown Prosecutors - Remind the court of its power to increase the sentence under s.146 Criminal Justice Act 2003 (s.146 CJA 2003) where there is evidence of hostility based on sexual orientation or transgender identity or presumed sexual orientation or transgender identity, including minor offending - Recognise that crimes of stirring up hatred based on the grounds of sexual orientation are by their very nature highly sensitive. For this reason, and to ensure a consistent approach, all such cases will be considered by our Special Crime and Counter Terrorism Division. No charges can be brought without the consent of the Attorney General - Support victims and witnesses to give their best evidence - Work closely with the police, criminal justice agencies, academics, community stakeholders and other bodies to continuously refresh our understanding of homophobic, biphobic and transphobic crime and to improve our response to it - Improve awareness of homophobic, biphobic and transgender hate crime - Monitor the implementation of this policy When deciding whether it is in the public interest to prosecute homophobic, biphobic and transphobic hate crimes, our prosecutors must have regard to the Code for Crown Prosecutors. The Code states that where the offence was motivated by any form of discrimination, including against the victim's sexual orientation or gender identity or whether the suspect demonstrated hostility towards the victim based on sexual orientation or gender identity, the presence of any such motivation or hostility will mean that it is more likely that a prosecution is required. Monitored homophobic, biphobic and transphobic crime In order to identify cases involving homophobic, biphobic or transphobic hostility, we have agreed with the police a shared definition. This definition is wider than the legal definition of a hate crime within the CJA 2003 to ensure we capture all relevant cases: "Any incident/crime which is perceived by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice towards a person because of their sexual orientation or transgender identity or perceived sexual orientation or transgender identity by the victim or any other person." It is important that relevant incidents are identified as hate crimes as early as possible. This will assist the police to obtain the best available evidence in order to support the aggravating factor at court and at sentence. Once a case has been flagged as a hate crime and received by the CPS, it is CPS policy not to remove the flag for any reason other than administrative error. This signals the CPS commitment to treat all such crimes seriously and to accept the victim's perspective, even where we are unable to identify sufficient evidence to prosecute the case as a hate crime. The legal framework for homophobic, biphobic and transphobic crime 1. Sentence uplift under s.146 ## S.146 CJA 2003 gives the court the power to increase the sentence of any offence that is aggravated by hostility on the grounds of sexual orientation or transgender identity. An offence will be homophobic, biphobic or transphobic if: - At the time of committing the offence, or immediately before or after doing so, the offender demonstrated towards the victim of the offence hostility based on the sexual orientation (or the presumed sexual orientation) of the victim or the victim being (or being presumed to be) transgender; or - The offence is motivated (**wholly or partly**) by hostility towards persons who are of a particular sexual orientation or who are transgender. Both the CJA 2003 and the police/CPS definition refer to hostility, not hatred. There is no statutory definition of hostility and the everyday or dictionary definition is applied, encompassing a broad spectrum of behaviour. For more information about the nature of homophobic, biphobic or transphobic crime, see the CPS legal guidance. 2. Stirring up hatred on grounds of sexual orientation ## Part 3A Public Order Act 1986 covers stirring up hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation, whether towards persons of the same sex, the opposite sex, or both. As with all hate crime, any initial report to the police will be assessed by applying the police/CPS definition of what constitutes a hate incident/crime, before more detailed consideration of the evidence and charging options. We acknowledge that people have a right to freedom of speech. It is essential that in a free, democratic and tolerant society that people are able to exchange views, even when these may cause offence. However, we will balance the rights of an individual to freedom of speech and expression against the duty of the state to act proportionately in the interests of public safety, to prevent disorder and crime and to protect the rights of others. Stirring up hatred is committed if a person uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, if he intends thereby to stir up hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation. Threatening is the key word, and the offence is not committed by words or behaviour that is abusive or insulting. It covers behaviour such as making a speech, posting material online, displaying a poster, performing a play or broadcasting on the media. Stirring up hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation is limited to threatening words or behaviour and we have to prove intent. Additionally, there is a freedom of expression defence contained in Section 29J, but no corresponding statutory defence for the racial offence. Any prosecution for the offence of stirring up hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation requires the consent of the Attorney General. For more information, see the legal guidance on stirring up hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation. There is no offence of stirring up hatred on the grounds of transgender identity. 3. The Gender Recognition Act 2004 We acknowledge that in certain circumstances, breaches of s.22 of the Gender Recognition Act 2004 could be motivated by hostility and be considered as hate crimes. It is an offence under this section of the law, for a person who has acquired 'protected information' in an 'official capacity' to disclose the information to any other person. Protected information under the law relates to information regarding the gender status of the individual before his or her acquired gender. Where the victim perceives a disclosure to be, at least in part, motivated by hostility on the grounds of transgender identity, the police should seek evidence of such hostility, which may be used by the court to increase any sentence under s.146. 4. Those affected by homophobic, biphobic and transphobic crime ## The Public Order Act 1986 confirms that "hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation" means hatred against a group of persons defined by reference to sexual orientation whether towards persons of the same sex, the opposite sex or both. The CPS policy relating to sexual orientation therefore covers hostility towards lesbian, gay, bisexual and heterosexual people. Trans or transgender are terms for people whose gender identity does not correspond with their birth gender. The terms 'transgender' and 'transgender identity' are used in the hate crime legislation and include references to being transsexual, or undergoing, proposing to undergo, or having undergone a process or part of a process of gender reassignment. Gender identity is one of the most commonly used terms to acknowledge the gender spectrum. It includes those who identify as male and female and incorporates intersex, gender nonconforming or gender variance, for example those who might identify as non-gender, non-binary or gender fluid as well as those within the gender reassignment definition in the Equality Act 2010. Where there is no or insufficient evidence to prove the element of hostility based on sexual orientation or transgender identity, prosecutors may still be able to draw the attention of the court to any other relevant statutory aggravating features at sentencing. Younger people can often face a range of challenges when engaging with issues around personal identity and we will be alert to all the circumstances, including the particular impact for the younger victims of these offences. Offending behaviour Hate crime can take many forms, ranging from verbal abuse to physical and sexual assault and can include encouraging others to commit acts of violence, threats, criminal damage, harassment, stalking and anti-social behaviour. Incidents can be one-off events or form part of a series of repeated and targeted offending. The hostility may be targeted at individuals, groups, those associated with such groups, or property e.g. homes, places of work or worship, and community venues. Hate crime can occur anywhere. Hostility and hatred might be based on misconceptions about the individual's characteristics. However, there is no need to confirm a victim's personal characteristics in order to prosecute a hate crime. Evidence of hostility based on the perpetrator's presumption of the victim's sexual orientation or transgender identity is sufficient. We recognise that the victims of hate crime can be repeatedly targeted. We will encourage the police to investigate any previous incidents or allegations. We will bring charges that reflect the overall picture of offending or if possible make a bad character application to the court to present evidence of previous conduct towards the victim or others. We recognise that people can be targeted for a combination of reasons, including disability, race and religion, in addition to their sexual orientation or transgender identity. Prosecutors will consider the most appropriate charges and apply to courts for an appropriate increase in sentence, based upon all relevant aggravating features. Reporting hate crime It is important that all hate crime incidents are reported to the police whether it's a one off or part of a pattern of repeat offending. It is for the police to investigate the incident and to decide whether to refer the case to the CPS for a decision on whether to charge the suspect and, if so, with what offence. The reluctance of some people to report homophobic, biphobic or transphobic incidents that they experience or witness may stem from intimidation or fear of outing. In cases of attempts at extortion and blackmail targeted at victims due to their actual or perceived sexual orientation or transgender identity, we will make sure victims are properly supported to aid a successful prosecution. Some victims and witnesses may also fear becoming the subject of a police investigation and possible prosecution because of where they were or because of the activity they were engaged in when a crime was committed against them. Although the CPS cannot guarantee that people who commit offences will not be prosecuted, we will consider such offences in the context of what else occurred, such as a more serious crime. Internet and social media Hate crime can be perpetrated online or offline, or there can be a pattern of behaviour that includes both. The internet and social media in particular have provided new platforms for offending behaviour and our revised guidance on the prosecution of social media cases provides more detail. In approaching online hate crime, we will: - Recognise that modern communications technology provides opportunities for hate crime - Understand the internet and the changing nature of social media platforms as well as their community standards and policies for taking down material - Be familiar with the relevant law and referral systems - Be alert to the need to identify originators as well as amplifiers or disseminators - Prosecute complaints of hate crime online with the same robust and proactive approach used with offline offending, whilst recognising that children may not appreciate the potential harm and seriousness of their communications - Consider the potential impact on a targeted individual or community - Treat online complaints as seriously as offline complaints and encourage all to be reported to the police As with all hate crime offences the police will be required to seek a charging decision from us. Criminal investigation We adopt a proactive approach and will seek further evidence where necessary from the police, to assist in the identification of evidence of hostility or an intention to stir up hatred, to support a prosecution for a hate crime offence or an application to increase sentence. In some cases, we may advise the police to follow up other possible lines of enquiry. This might include looking at previously reported incidents involving the same victim, or the same suspect. It may also involve seeking information or evidence from other agencies such as specialist support groups and relevant community groups. There is no need to make enquiries as to the sexual orientation or gender identity of a complainant. The focus of an investigation should be on identifying the evidence of intent to stir up hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation, to support a hate crime prosecution, or hostility in support of an increase in sentence under s.146 CJA 2003. Charging decisions When making charging decisions relating to homophobic, biphobic or transphobic crime, as in all cases, prosecutors must apply the Code for Crown Prosecutors. Bail If there is a risk of danger or threats or repeat offences, we will seek to protect victims and witnesses by applying to the court to remand the defendant in custody where appropriate, or by asking the court to impose conditions on bail where possible (for example, not to approach any named person or to keep away from a certain area). Prosecution and sentencing In prosecutions involving homophobic, biphobic and transphobic hostility, we will build cases that present evidence based on these aggravating factors where possible. We will remind the court of its powers to increase the sentence under s.146. The Sentencing Council Guidelines provide an offence by offence basis on the way in which the s.146 uplift is determined. We shall draw the court's attention to a Victim Personal Statement (VPS), which gives victims an opportunity to describe the effects of the crime upon them, express their concerns and indicate whether or not they require any support. Making a VPS is entirely optional. Victims are entitled to choose whether they would like to read their VPS aloud in court, whether they would like someone else to read it aloud or whether it should be played back, if recorded, for them. A Community Impact Statement may also be made to show the impact of offending on the wider community, including the lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender community. We have a responsibility to assist the court in sentencing. Prosecutors will apply for appropriate additional or ancillary orders, including restraining orders and compensation for loss, injury or damage. We will always have regard to the victim's needs, including the question of their future protection. The court has a duty to give reasons for, and explain the effect of, the sentence that it imposes. Withdrawal Sometimes, a victim will ask the police not to proceed any further with the case, or will ask to withdraw the complaint. We will consider the impact on the victim of not proceeding, including the risk of further harm to the victim, however this does not necessarily mean that the case will automatically be stopped. Applying the Code for Crown Prosecutors, we will prosecute all cases where there is sufficient evidence; it is in the public interest to do so and there are no factors that prevent us from doing so. Case progress - information for victims Information on how victims of crime are kept informed of case progress can be found in the Code of Practice for Victims of Crime. Victims' Right to Review For qualifying decisions, if a victim requests a review of our decision not to bring proceedings, or to end all proceedings, we will look again at the decision to establish if it was correct. For information on how to ask for a review of a decision see The Victims' Right to Review Guidance. Support It is important to note that the majority of homophobic, biphobic and transphobic hate crime prosecutions result in a guilty plea from defendants, reducing the need for victims and witnesses to give evidence in court. However where victims and witnesses are required to give evidence, we are committed to supporting them to give their best evidence. Victims of hate crime are entitled to enhanced support services. Victims who are intimidated can be supported by applications to the court for Special Measures. Special Measures are a series of provisions that help 'vulnerable' and 'intimidated' witnesses give their best evidence in court and help to relieve some of the stress associated with giving evidence. Special measures can include the use of screens in court so the victim or witness does not have to see the defendant, or giving evidence from a separate courtroom via a video link. These measures can help reduce stress and anxiety. Automatic reporting restrictions apply to persons under the age of 18 in cases in the Youth Court and to victims of rape and other serious sexual offences, irrespective of age. Reporting restrictions can also be applied for in other circumstances, if specific criteria are satisfied, to protect the identity of the victim. More information can be found on the Victims and Witnesses section of the CPS website. Equality Duty We are a public authority for the purposes of equality legislation. This policy and our related legal guidance form a key part of our efforts to meet our obligations under the Public Sector Equality Duty to eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation of people due to their sexual orientation or gender identity and to promote equality and good relations. Working with stakeholders We work locally and nationally, with the police and other partners who have a role in addressing hate crime, as well as with individuals, community groups and academics with experience and expertise in relation to hate crime. This ensures that we are able to continuously refresh our understanding of the nature of homophobic, biphobic and transphobic offending and can improve our response to it. Monitoring and Implementation We will monitor our performance through our Hate Crime Assurance Scheme, under the oversight of our hate crime governance structures. We will also receive feedback on our performance through our local and national panels that provide scrutiny of CPS cases, decisions and policies. Our Hate Crime Annual Report provides transparent accountability in respect to our performance. It should be noted that the CPS can only monitor the work of the CPS. Hate Crime Webpage We have created a hate crime page on the CPS website, to provide more detail on the CPS approach to hate crime. The webpage includes the following information on homophobic, biphobic and transphobic crime: - The legal context of homophobic, biphobic and transphobic crime - What happens if a victim withdraws or no longer wishes to give evidence - Sentencing - Implementation of the CPS Policy ## About The Crown Prosecution Service The CPS is responsible for prosecuting most cases heard in the criminal courts in England and Wales. It is led by the Director of Public Prosecutions and acts independently on criminal cases investigated by the police and other agencies. The CPS is responsible for deciding the appropriate charge in more serious or complex cases and provides information, assistance and support to victims and witnesses.

en

3832-pdf

# Treatment Of Mers-Cov: Information For Clinicians Clinical Decision-Making Support For Treatment Of Mers-Cov Patients 16 August 2017 v4.0 ## About Public Health England Public Health England exists to protect and improve the nation's health and wellbeing, and reduce health inequalities. We do this through world-class science, knowledge and intelligence, advocacy, partnerships and the delivery of specialist public health services. We are an executive agency of the Department of Health, and are a distinct delivery organisation with operational autonomy to advise and support government, local authorities and the NHS in a professionally independent manner. Public Health England Wellington House 133-155 Waterloo Road London SE1 8UG Tel: 020 7654 8000 www.gov.uk/phe Twitter: @PHE_uk Facebook: www.facebook.com/PublicHealthEngland Prepared by: Colin Brown & Antonia Scobie For queries relating to this document, please contact: colin.brown@phe.gov.uk © Crown copyright 2017 You may re-use this information (excluding logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0. To view this licence, visit OGL or email psi@nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk. Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. Published August 2017 PHE publications PHE supports the UN gateway number: 2017180 Sustainable Development Goals ## Contents | | About Public Health England | 1 | |--------------------------------------------|--------------------------------|------| | 1. | Document Scope | 4 | | 2. | Literature | 4 | | 3. | SARS-CoV Approximation of MERS | 5 | | 4. | Evidence Base | 5 | | 5. | Management of Cases | 6 | | Table 1: Benefit is likely to exceed risk | 8 | | | Table 1: Data is inadequate for assessment | 10 | | | Table 1: Risk is likely to exceed benefit | 11 | | | Feedback | 14 | | | Useful Links | 14 | | | Document Authors | 14 | | | Consultation | 15 | | | Bibliography: Articles of Interest | 16 | | ## 1 Document Scope This evolving document is intended to provide an overview of available evidence and experience on investigational therapeutics for UK clinicians treating confirmed cases of MERS. It was produced by PHE and the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium (ISARIC) for the use of UK clinicians. It is informed by literature concerning SARS, pandemic 2009 H1N1 influenza and MERS, as well discussions with international experts convened through ISARIC. ## 2 Literature This document takes much of the SARS information from the following systematic review of SARS treatment: Stockman LJ, Bellamy R, Garner P, SARS: Systematic review of treatment effects, published in PLoS Med (2006;3(9):e343). A further useful review of SARS is: Cheng VCC et al, Clinical management and infection control of SARS: lessons learned, published in Antiviral Research (2013;100:407-419). Several useful summaries of MERS treatment options have now been published: Momattin H et al, Therapeutic Options for MERS-CoV - possible lessons from a systematic review of SARS-CoV therapy, published in the International Journal of Infectious Diseases (2013;17:e792–e798), Chan JFW et al, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus: Another Zoonotic Betacoronavirus Causing SARS-Like Disease, published in Clinical Microbiology Reviews (2015;28(2):465-521), Arabi YM et al. Middle East Respiratory Syndrome published in New England Journal Of Medicine (2017 376(6):584-594); Colleagues with experience of managing MERS patients in affected countries have also reviewed treatment options for MERS-CoV (see Section 10 Bibliography - general). A list of references used in this analysis is given at the end of this document. Regular literature reviews have been performed to ensure that evolving evidence is captured, up to date as of February 2017 using the search strategy detailed in Momattin et al (2013) searching across Pubmed, Embase, Scopus and the Web of Science. A further manual review of all recent MERS-related papers in Pubmed was performed for each therapeutic option. Some information contained herein is unpublished *in vitro* and animal model work on MERS-CoV from several international groups to whom we are indebted. The experts consulted are listed in Section 9 - Consultation. ## 3 Sars-Cov Approximation Of Mers-Cov Although we draw inferences from SARS in this document, there are important differences between SARS and MERS coronaviruses (CoVs), and some areas in which MERS-CoV data is not yet sufficient to enable comparison. MERS- and SARS-CoV infections demonstrate some differences in *in vitro* virological and immunological characteristics but the clinical relevance of these are unknown. The limited evidence available on viral dynamics and clinical course suggest that MERS patients have shorter time from illness onset to presentation for care and requirement for ventilatory support (median seven days; range 3-11) than SARS patients, as well as associated higher respiratory tract viral loads during the first week of the illness. Some therapeutic options that showed possible clinical effects in observational human trials of SARS patients have not demonstrated *in vitro* inhibition of MERS-CoV. ## 4 Evidence Base Therapies that are plausible and supported by reasonable *in vitro*, animal and/or clinical data from MERS-CoV or other respiratory virus infections are shown in Tables 1,2 and 3. A large number of other compounds have been evaluated for *in vitro* inhibition of MERS-CoV replication, and some have demonstrated an inhibitory effect at serum concentrations that might be achieved in patients. However, without animal studies or well-documented experience of clinical use in comparable contexts, these are not currently ready for clinical use in MERS- patients. Such therapies have therefore not been included. There has been no significant change in recommendations of therapeutic agents since the last published version (v3.0) in September 2015 based on available evidence. Research continues to progress on the rapid development and testing of monoclonal and polyclonal human neutralizing antibodies in small animal models. These may be options for compassionate use and a phase 1 trial of a polyclonal antibody has been undertaken in healthy volunteers. Of note, one RCT testing the combination of recombinant interferon-beta1a and ritonavir-boosted lopinavir has been initiated in MERS patients in KSA (NCT02845843). Treatment with specific therapeutic agents should ideally occur in the context of formal observational studies or controlled intervention trials (see https://isaric.tghn.org/articles/adapted-study-documents-protocols/ for open access protocols). We strongly encourage the enrollment of all patients infected with MERS-CoV into available clinical trials or observational studies on host response and viral kinetics. ## 5 Management Of Cases 5.1 Infection Control Effective infection control is essential to protect staff and patients. Instigate measures as described in the PHE guidelines: (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/merscovinfection-control-for-possible-or- confirmed-cases) and WHO guidelines: http://who.int/csr/disease/coronavirus_infections/technical-guidance-infection/en/ ## 5.2 Routine Investigations PHE will advise clinicians on samples for clinical and infection prevention and control purposes. (MERS clinical management and guidance is available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/middle-east-respiratory-syndrome-coronavirusmers-cov-clinical-management-and-guidance. We recommend that initial sampling from confirmed positive cases includes blood for viral load monitoring, since this may have prognostic value, and possibly serial lower respiratory tract sampling in severe cases for monitoring response to therapy and the emergence of possible antiviral resistance. Viral sampling for research purposes could include serial upper and lower respiratory tract, blood, stool and urine samples for monitoring of viral load and persistence within body compartments. MERS-CoV titres in respiratory secretions peak during the second week of illness onset; throat swabs may be an alternative source of diagnostic samples, especially when sputum cannot be obtainedW2. For organisations considering studies, ISARIC has developed a generic biological sampling protocol (www.prognosis.org/isaric) and case report forms (www.prognosis.org/isaric/crf.php) which are intended to make it as easy as possible for investigators to conduct internationallycompatible research studies in an outbreak. These are available for use without restriction. ## 5.3 Approach To Treatment The most important recommendation remains that high-quality supportive care is the keystone of management, as expressed in the updated WHO Interim Guidance on MERS: http://www.who.int/csr/disease/coronavirus_infections/case-management-ipc/en. The Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines also offer standards of care for the critically ill: http://www.survivingsepsis.org/guidelines/Pages/default.aspx Any additional benefit of investigational pharmacological agents is uncertain, because of lack of evidence, rather than lack of plausibility. Treatment with specific therapeutic agents should ideally occur in the context of formal observational studies or controlled intervention trials (see https://isaric.tghn.org/articles/adapted-study-documents-protocols/ for open access protocols). In the UK, two centres have experience of managing severely ill patients with MERS. Consultation with staff in these centres may be helpful. PHE will facilitate communications if required. WHO can also facilitate consultation with MERS experienced physicians outside of the UK. ## 5.4 Specific Therapies Based on the evidence presented in Table 1, convalescent plasma containing MERS-CoV antibodies, or interferon and lopinavir may be considered for specific treatment of MERS patients. Interferon and lopinavir are likely to be the most accessible treatments initially. PHE will advise on the availability of convalescent plasma once a case is identified. Specific MERS- CoV monoclonal and polyclonal antibodies are in pre-clinical development at the time of writing and a phase 1 trial of SAB-301 has been initiated in USA. UK physicians should contact PHE (Professor Maria Zambon's office, + 44 20 8327 6810) for information about the current availability of monoclonal or polyclonal antibodies. Other agents described in Tables 1, 2 and 3 have demonstrated antiviral effects *in vitro*, but without documented *in vivo* efficacy or sufficient clinical data, particularly in MERS patients. Some are associated with concerns about safety in clinical practice. Many require safety studies, animal studies, or both before clinical trials can be initiated. Expert consensus is to avoid those agents classified as "red", ie corticosteroids for specific treatment of MERS, ribavirin monotherapy, and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF). In some patients corticosteroids may be considered for other indications according to local policy, for example, exacerbations of asthma/COPD, suspected or documented adrenal insufficiency or refractory septic shock (in line with the WHO Interim Guidance on MERS and Surviving Sepsis International Guidelines). We have included promising novel antiviral agents for which compassionate use may be possible. A summary of additional MERS-CoV therapeutic candidates undergoing evaluation is available in Table S9 of Supplementary appendix to Arabi YM et al. Middle East Respiratory Syndrome NEJM 2017 376(6):584594 (http://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMsr1408795/suppl_file/nejmsr1408795_appendix.p df). The effect of corticosteroids on viral clearance of MERS-CoV is unknown, although systemic corticosteroid administration delayed clearance of SARS-CoV and has been associated with prolonged replication of other respiratory viruses. Consequently, serial viral load sampling with PCR testing should be performed in any MERS patients who receive corticosteroids for any indication. A retrospective analysis of data from SARS patients treated with corticosteroids suggested increased mortality. ## 5.5 Combination Therapies Therapeutic agents were used in multiple combinations for treatment of SARS patients, and increasingly in MERS patients, but there remain inadequate clinical data to disentangle the effects of individual agents from the possible benefits of any combinations. The vast majority of experience is from retrospective observational studies. Limited data from *in vitro* and animal studies of MERS-CoV infection suggests a possible synergistic effect from combining high doses of interferon (IFN) and intravenous ribavirin. However, the doses of ribavirin used are much higher than those used to treat hepatitis C virus infection. Ribavirin has also been associated with significant adverse effects in both SARS and MERS patients. Available data are inadequate to decide whether any benefit conferred by an interferon/ribavirin synergy outweighs the risk of ribavirin toxicity. Therefore, this combination is not recommended unless it is used in an appropriately planned clinical trial (see https://isaric.tghn.org/articles/adaptedstudy-documents-protocols/ for open access protocols). * SARS *in vitro* (SIV); SARS animal (SA); SARS clinical (SC); MERS-CoV *in vitro* (MIV); MERS animal (MA); MERS clinical (MC) Data: MERS Safety Profile UK feasibility Therapy Studies * Performed Data: SARS and other respiratory viruses SIV; SA; SC; MIV; MA Convalescent plasma (or high neutralizing antibody titre products) RCT not performed in SARS. One RCT supports use of hyperimmune globulin in severe A(H1N1)pdm09 influenzaE1. Observational data suggests efficacy in SARSE2-5 and A(H1N1)pdm09 and other influenza virus infectionsE6. A pooled meta-analysis including SARS-CoV and influenza studies showed a significantly lower risk of mortality in those treated with convalescent plasma or serumE7. In vitro neutralizing effect based on levels of MERS- CoV specific antibodiesE11-18 and high-titer camel serum improved viral clearance in infected miceE20. A clinical trial is ongoing but has not yet recruited any patients (NCT02190799)E22. There may be wide variation in the amount of neutralizing antibody depending on illness severity and the timing of plasma collection in relation to convalescence, with waning titres over timeE21. Serologic data from 17 South Korean MERS patients demonstrated robust neutralizing antibody responses by day 21 of illness in the majority of severely ill patients, however, this was not found in patients with milder infectionE22. Good safety profile in UK, risks as for other blood products. Availability depends on UK epidemiological situation. The largest Saudi study to identify donors to date showed that MERS antibodies are rarely positive following infection or exposureE22. Screening of 170 Saudi blood donors showed 0% seroprevalence E23. Convalescent plasma should be tested to have documented specific MERS antibody before use with assessment of antibody titres. Potential donors of convalescent sera should wait until at least 3 weeks after their symptom onsetE22. Antibody levels will likely decline with time, as see in one patient whose antibody response was measured longitudinallyE22. Please contact PHE for an update on availability. | Data: MERS | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Studies * | | | Performed | | | Data: SARS and other | | | respiratory viruses | | | Interferons | | | (IFNs) | | | SIV; SA; | | | SC; MIV; | | | MA; MC | | | Type I (α, β), type II (γ), | | | and type III (λ) IFNs show | | | activity against SARS in | | | extensive | | | in vitro | | | and | | | limited animal and | | | observational clinical | | | studies | | | M1-12 | | | . | | | In vitro | | | , MERS-CoV appears | | | to be more sensitive to Type I | | | IFNs than SARS-CoV, | | | especially IFN-β | | | M17-20 | | | . Some | | | animal evidence from | | | marmoset model in severe | | | disease with IFN-β1b | | | M25 | | | . | | | Animal studies with Poly IC | | | topical IFN inducer suggest | | | efficacy | | | M26 | | | . Type 1 IFNs are | | | among the most active drugs | | | at clinically achievable serum | | | levels | | | M26 | | | . IFN-α in | | | combination with very high- | | | dose ribavirin shows some | | | efficacy in non- human | | | primates but this animal | | | model does not accurately | | | reflect severe MERS illness | | | seen in humans | | | M27 | | | . | | | A phase II/III trial of lopinavir- | | | ritonavir and IFNβ-1b is open | | | to recruitment in Kingdom of | | | Saudi Arabia (NCT | | | 02845843). | | Well established agent. Clinicians experienced in managing side effects should be consulted e.g. those treating hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and multiple sclerosis. Consideration should be given to shorteracting preparations compared to peg- IFNs. Injectable recombinant IFN-β1b is currently first choice and is routinely available. Subcutaneous IFNβ-1b is being trailed in Saudi Arabia. Inhaled IFN-β is currently in Phase II trials but has not been adequately studied in severe lower respiratory tract infections. | Data: MERS | | Safety Profile | |----------------------------------|-----|------------------| | Studies * | | | | Performed | | | | Data: SARS and other | | | | respiratory viruses | | | | Lopinavir | | | | SIV; SA; | | | | SC; MIV; | | | | MA; MC | | | | Limited data that HIV | | | | protease inhibitors have | | | | in vitro | | | | anti-SARS-CoV | | | | effect | | | | S1 | | | | . Observational | | | | studies suggest clinical | | | | benefits in SARS patients | | | | treated with | | | | lopinavir/ritonavir, | | | | including a reduction in | | | | mortality reported in one | | | | study | | | | S1,2 | | | | . | | | | Lopinavir inhibitory for MERS- | | | | CoV | | | | in vitro | | | | at concentrations | | | | observed in blood during | | | | clinical use (note other HIV | | | | PIs tested, atazanavir and | | | | ritonavir, were inactive) | | | | S6 | | | | . | | | | Good | | | | in vivo | | | | evidence from | | | | marmoset model for improved | | | | outcomes | | | | S7 | | | | . | | Use in one | | patient alongside IFN and | | | | ribavirin | | | | S8 | | | | . Lopinavir-ritonavir | | | | was administered with | | | | ribavirin and PEG-IFN-α2a to | | | | many patients in the South | | | | Korea outbreak but outside | | | | the context of a clinical trial; | | | | unable to determine | | | | efficacy | | | | S9 | | | | . A phase II/III trial | | | | of lopinavir-ritonavir and | | | | IFNβ-1b is open to | | | | recruitment in Kingdom of | | | | Saudi Arabia (NCT | | | | 02845843). | | | Well established agent with favourable toxicity profile. Routinely available (as lopinavir and ritonavir combination preparation). Gastrointestinal side effects are common but self-limiting. | Data: MERS | | Safety Profile | |------------------------------|-----|------------------| | Studies * | | | | Performed | | | | Data: SARS and other | | | | respiratory viruses | | | | SIV; SA; | | | | MIV; MA | | | | Strong | | | | in vitro | | | | neutralising effect against | | | | the SARS-CoV spike | | | | protein | | | | P1,2 | | | | . | | | | | | | | Monoclonal | | | | and polyclonal | | | | neutralising | | | | antibodies | | | | (mAbs) | | | | Novel monoclonal antibodies | | | | to MERS-CoV spike protein | | | | have strong neutralising | | | | effect | | | | P3-5 | | | | . Potent MERS- | | | | CoV– neutralizing antibody | | | | have recently been isolated | | | | from memory B cells of an | | | | infected individual | | | | P | 6 | | | and | | | | polyclonal human | | | | neutralizing antibodies have | | | | been | | | | | | | | produced in | | | | transchromosomal bovines | | | | P7 | | | | . | | | | | | | | Camel antibodies have been | | | | successful in prophylactic | | | | and therapeutic use in | | | | murine models | | | | P8 | | | | . | | Human | | mAbs have been | | | | successfully trialed as both | | | | therapy and prophylaxis in | | | | murine models | | | | P9 | | | | . Intravenous | | | | human mAb 3B11-N reduces | | | | radiological evidence of | | | | pneumonia in rhesus | | | | macaques when given as | | | | prophylaxis | | | | P10 | | | | . | | | Contact PHE for an update on availability. A Phase 1 clinical trial assessing safety and tolerability of SAB-301 is ongoing (NCT 02788188). In those products which have satisfied UK regulatory safety requirements, benefit is likely to exceed risk. Use should be within a trial, or if not possible, through a compassionate use arrangement. ## Treatment Of Mers-Cov: Information For Clinicians. Clinical Decision-Making Support For Treatment Of Mers-Cov Patients. | Data: MERS | | Safety Profile | |----------------------------|-----|------------------| | Studies * | | | | Performed | | | | Data: SARS and other | | | | respiratory viruses | | | | SIV; SA; | | | | MIV; MA | | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | Monoclonal | | | | and polyclonal | | | | neutralising | | | | antibodies | | | | (mAbs) - | | | | continued | | | | Monoclonal antibody | | | | resistant mutants (MARMS) | | | | selected | | | | in vitro | | | | are not | | | | inhibited | | | | in vivo | | | | and show | | | | little loss of fitness | | | | P6 | | | | . | | A | | Phase 1 clinical trial has | | | | been initiated for SAB-301 | | | | (NCT 02788188). Phase 1 | | | | trials are expected to | | | | commence for LCA60 | | | | P6 | | | | , | | | | REGN3051 & REGN3048 | | | | P9 | | | | . | | | - - Treatment of MERS-CoV: Information for Clinicians. Clinical decision-making support for treatment of MERS-CoV patients. | Data: MERS | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----| | * SARS | | | in vitro | | | (SIV); SARS animal (SA); SARS clinical (SC); MERS-CoV | | | in vitro | | | (MIV); MERS animal (MA); MERS clinical (MC) | | | | | | Therapy | | | Studies * | | | Performed | | | Data: SARS and other | | | respiratory viruses | | | SIV; SA; | | | SC; MIV; | | | MA; MC | | | Interferon + | | | ribavirin | | | (combination | | | therapy) | | | Synergistic effect | | | in vitro | | | and in animal model | | | when ribavirin combined | | | with IFN-β | | | M7,12 | | | . Effect of | | | combination could not be | | | distinguished from other | | | concurrent treatments in | | | SARS patients, Where | | | outcomes could be | | | determined, adverse | | | effects were reported | | | M7 | | | . | | | IFN-α2b and ribavirin | | | combined | | | in vitro | | | had anti- | | | MERS-CoV effect at lower | | | concentration than when | | | used separately | | | M17 | | | . | | | Combination high dose IFN- | | | α2b and IV ribavirin in MERS | | | rhesus macaque model led to | | | some clinical, radiographic | | | and virological | | | improvements | | | M17 | | | . | | | IFN/ribavirin combination | | | therapy given late in illness to | | | 5 MERS patients did not | | | prevent death | | | M22 | | | , and was | | | not helpful in a further 3 out | | | of 6 cases | | | M24 | | | . | | | Some case reports of | | | apparent benefit when used | | | for early therapy | | | M24 | | | or post- | | | contact prophylaxis | | | M30 | | | but | | | there have been case studies | | | that show little effect on | | | mortality | | | M28,29 | | | . | | Routinely available. Data are inadequate to decide whether any benefit conferred by possible interferon and ribavirin synergy outweighs the risk of ribavirin toxicity, however expert opinion is to not use ribavirin, and if used should be in the context of a clinical trial. Adverse effects of ribavirin were frequent in SARS clinical studies (see ribavirin, below)T1, 12,13 . In combination studies, the experimental ribavirin concentrations were higher than those achievable clinically during treatment of hepatitis CM26. One retrospective cohort of 20 patients showed no increase in adverse effects apart from greater haemoglobin reductionM23. The largest Saudi Arabian cohort demonstrated no benefit with IFN/ ribavirin combination, and possible harm with ribavirinT18 . | Data: MERS | | |-------------------------------|-----| | Studies * | | | Performed | | | Data: SARS and other | | | respiratory viruses | | | SIV; SA; | | | SC; MIV; | | | MA; MC | | | Interferon + | | | ribavirin | | | (combination | | | therapy) - | | | continued | | | - | | | One retrospective cohort | | | study showed improved | | | outcomes in severe MERS- | | | CoV infection in those given | | | ribavirin and IFN-α2a at 14 | | | days but not 28 | | | M23 | | | . IFNβ | | | showed the strongest | | | inhibition | | | in vitro | | | compared | | | with IFNα, additionally IFN- | | | α2a may be less inhibitory | | | than IFN-α2b (higher | | | IC | | | 50 | | | ) | | | M20 | | | . | | | | | | A further case note review | | | from Saudi Arabia saw | | | patients given IFNα or IFNβ | | | in combination with ribavirin | | | but was an uncontrolled | | | retrospective chart review so | | | no conclusions can be | | | drawn | | | M31 | | | . | | - - | Data: MERS | | |-------------------------------|-----| | Studies * | | | Performed | | | Data: SARS and other | | | respiratory viruses | | | SIV; MIV; | | | SA, MA | | | GS-5734 | | | (Nucleoside | | | viral | | | polymerase | | | inhibitor) | | | 90 % Inhibition at ≤150nmol | | | against MERS-CoV in a | | | human airway epithelial cell | | | (HAE) model with average | | | IC | | | 50 | | | values of 0.074 µM | | | | | | J2,3 | | | . | | | Prophylactic intravenous | | | use in 6 Rhesus macaques | | | was associated with | | | reduced MERS-CoV viral | | | loads and reduction of | | | respiratory symptoms | | | J4 | | | . | | | Polymerase inhibitor with | | | in vitro | | | activity against a | | | number of RNA viruses | | | J1 | | | . | | | 90 % Inhibition at | | | ≤150nmol against SARS- | | | CoV in a human airway | | | epithelial cell (HAE) model, | | | with average IC | | | 50 | | | values of | | | 0.069 µM | | | J2,3 | | | . Prophylactic | | | use reduces SARS-CoV | | | lung titres and disease in | | | mice. Early therapeutic | | | use significantly reduced | | | viral titres in lung, and | | | improved lung function on | | | day 3 | | | | | | J3 | | | ; later use reduced | | | viral load but did not affect | | | clinical outcome - this may | | | be due to the truncated | | | course of disease in | | | murine models. | | | Inhibitory activity against | | | MERS CoV | | | in vitro | | | C1 | | | . | | | SIV, MIV | | | Polymerase inhibitor with | | | in vitro | | | activity against a | | | number of RNA viruses. | | | Inhibitory activity against | | | SARS CoV | | | in vitro | | | C1 | | | . | | | BCX4430 | | | (Nucleoside | | | viral | | | polymerase | | | inhibitor) | | | | | Currently unlicensed. Has been used compassionately for the treatment of EVD in two patientsJ5,6. Manufacturer reports two phase 1 trials completed results not available. Phase 2 trial involving Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) survivors is ongoing (NCT 02818582). Phase 1 trial completed but results not available (NCT02319772). Currently unlicensed. No record of compassionate use for any condition to date. | Data: MERS | | Safety Profile | |---------------------------------|------------|------------------| | Studies * | | | | Performed | | | | Data: SARS and other | | | | respiratory viruses | | | | Nitazoxanide | | | | MIV | | | | No SARS data. An RCT | | | | showed benefit in | | | | uncomplicated influenza | | | | in adults | | | | R1 | | | | . | | Inhibitory for | | two non- human CoVs | | | | in | | | | vitro | | | | R2,3 | | | | . | | | | | | | | Nitazoxanide, and the | | | | metabolite tizoxanide, have | | | | been shown to inhibit MERS- | | | | CoV cultured in LLC-MK2 | | | | cells at IC | | | | 50 | | | | s are similar to | | | | those observed for influenza | | | | and other viruses | | | | R4 | | | | . No | | | | animal model data available. | | | | Inhibits MERS-CoV | | | | in vitro | | | | , | | | | with a concentration | | | | achievable by standard | | | | clinical oral dosing, described | | | | in several papers | | | | D5 | | | | . | | | | Chloroquine | | | | SIV;MIV | Inhibitory | | | in vitro | | | | for | | | | multiple viruses including | | | | influenza | | | | D1,2 | | | | . No | | | | consistent activity in | | | | animal models of | | | | influenza | | | | D2,3 | | | | and negative | | | | results in one influenza | | | | RCT of seasonal | | | | prophylaxis | | | | D4 | | | | . | | | Routinely available. Well established agent with defined safety profile. Routinely available. Well established agent with defined safety profile. * SARS *in vitro* (SIV); SARS animal (SA); SARS clinical (SC); MERS-CoV *in vitro* (MIV); MERS animal (MA); MERS clinical (MC) Data: MERS Safety Profile UK feasibility Therapy Studies * Performed Data: SARS and other respiratory viruses SA; SC; MC Corticosteroids (as specific therapy for MERS-CoV infection) A SARS-CoV animal study suggests early antiinflammatory effects but found ongoing administration may enhance viral replication in the lungF1. SARS clinical studies have not demonstrated consistent mortality benefitsF2. Some observational studies found clinical improvements after treatmentF3,4 but one RCT found increased viral load associated with corticosteroid treatmentF5. A retrospective analysis suggests that glucocorticoids may be associated with increased mortality in SARSF7. No studies available. Given to many MERS patients under uncontrolled circumstances with limited outcome dataF9. Corticosteroids have been used to treat a late complication of MERS-CoV infection (organizing pneumonia) without apparent adverse effect, but at a time when MERS-CoV was no longer detectable in the affected individualF8. A conference abstract of one large retrospective Saudi Arabian cohort showed a model-dependent decrease in mortality following adjustment for disease severity, however further analysis (personal communication - manuscript currently under review) showed no association on mortality, with a delay in viral RNA clearanceF19. Routinely available. SARS studies found no mortality benefit and evidence for adverse effects of systemic steroids, with both acute and long-term harms, including delayed viral clearing reported, and increased opportunistic infectionsF10-12. Osteonecrosis was observed following pulsed methylprednisolone, more commonly in male, young patients, and in those receiving more than one administrationF13- 14 . ## Treatment Of Mers-Cov: Information For Clinicians. Clinical Decision-Making Support For Treatment Of Mers-Cov Patients. | Data: MERS | | |-----------------------------|-----| | Studies * | | | Performed | | | Data: SARS and other | | | respiratory viruses | | | - | - | | | | | - | | | Corticosteroids | | | | | | (as specific | | | therapy for | | | MERS-CoV | | | infection) - | | | continued | | | | | | - | | | Use of systemic | | | corticosteroids in patients | | | with severe influenza | | | A(H1N1)pdm09 was also | | | associated with increased | | | risks of prolonged lower | | | respiratory tract viral | | | replication, nosocomial | | | infections, ventilator- | | | associated pneumonia, | | | and higher mortality in | | | observational studies | | | F8 | | | . | | | Data: MERS | | Safety Profile | |---------------------------------|-----|------------------| | Studies * | | | | Performed | | | | Data: SARS and other | | | | respiratory viruses | | | | Ribavirin - | | | | monotherapy | | | | SIV; SA; | | | | SC; MIV; | | | | MC | | | | Four of six | | | | in vitro | | | | SARS | | | | studies found an antiviral | | | | effect | | | | T1 | | | | . | | No virological | | effects were found on | | | | SARS in animal models | | | | as monotherapy | . | In SARS | | clinical studies, the effect | | | | of ribavirin could not be | | | | distinguished from the | | | | effects of other | | | | therapies | | | | T1,13 | | | | . | | | | MERS-CoV is inhibited by | | | | ribavirin at very high | | | | concentrations | | | | in vitro | | | | . These | | | | exceed concentrations | | | | achievable during clinical | | | | use, except possibly for high | | | | IV dosages | | | | T14 | | | | . No animal | | | | monotherapy studies have | | | | been conducted. | | | | | | | | Combination therapy | | | | including ribavirin was | | | | given to five MERS | | | | patients late in the illness | | | | and did not prevent | | | | death | | | | T5 | | | | . One recent | | | | review suggests that | | | | decreased mortality at 14 | | | | days seen in combination | | | | therapy | | | | may be associated with the | | | | use of oral ribavirin, but this | | | | is speculative | | | | T10 | | | | . | | | Routinely available. Studies of ribavirin in large numbers of SARS patients found frequent adverse effects including haemolysis, metabolic disturbances, and liver function test derangementT1,13. | Data: MERS | | |--------------------------------|-----| | Data: SARS and other | | | respiratory viruses | | | Therapy | | | Studies * | | | Performe | | | d | | | SC; MIV; | | | MC | | | UK intravenous | | | human normal | | | immuno- | | | globulin (IVIG) | | | Five SARS studies | | | conducted; all | | | inconclusive as used | | | IVIG as part of | | | combination therapy | | | N1 | | | . In | | | one uncontrolled study in | | | Hong Kong, 12 patients | | | who had deteriorated | | | despite other therapies | | | were given IVIG as an | | | additional therapy, with | | | evidence of subsequent | | | improvement | | | N2 | | | . | | | PHE evaluation shows that | | | IVIG available in the UK | | | has no evidence of MERS- | | | CoV neutralising activity | | | (unpublished data). | | | IVIG from endemic | | | countries requires separate | | | evaluation. | | | Local IVIG was given to | | | correct platelet imbalance | | | in one Saudi patient (along | | | with high dose | | | corticosteroids), with | | | favourable outcome | | | N3 | | | . | | | SIV; SA; | | | MIV; MA; | | | MC | | | No effect on SARS-CoV | | | in vitro | | | or in a murine | | | model | | | Q1 | | | . | | | Mycophenolic | | | acid / | | | mycophenolate | | | mofetil (MMF) | | | Inhibits MERS-CoV | | | in vitro | | | , | | | with a concentration | | | achievable by standard | | | clinical oral dosing | | | Q2,3 | | | . | | | Synergy in vitro with IFN- | | | β1b | | | Q3 | | | . MERS- CoV | | | marmoset studies indicate | | | that MMF used alone may | | | increase viral replication and | | | worsen outcomes | | | Q4 | | | . One | | | patient acquired infection | | | while on MMF following renal | | | transplantation but survived | | | with reduction in dose | | | Q5 | | | . | | Routinely available. Commercial IVIG products have been associated with rare acute renal failure and thromboembolic eventsN4. Routinely available. Effect of transient immunosuppressive activity in this context is uncertain. Established treatment with multiple well characterised side effects. ## 6 Feedback As this is a document intended for continual update, we are particularly interested in the views of those who may be using it on the frontline of service. Please send thoughts or suggestions for improvement, or any other comments, to colin.brown@phe.gov.uk and maria.zambon@phe.gov.uk. ## 7 Useful Links PHE - https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/middle-east-respiratory-syndromecoronavirus-mers-cov-clinical-management-and-guidance ISARIC - http://www.isaric.org WHO - http://www.who.int/emergencies/mers-cov/en/ ECDC - www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/healthtopics/coronavirus-infections/pages/index.aspx CDC - www.cdc.gov/features/novelcoronavirus/ ## 8 Document Authors Dr Colin S Brown1,2 Dr Gail Carson3 Dr Meera Chand1,4 Dr Jake Dunning1,3,5 Dr Antonia Scobie1 Professor Maria Zambon1 1 National Infection Service, Public Health England, UK 2 Department of Infection, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, UK 3 International Severe Acute Respiratory & Emerging Infection Consortium (ISARIC), UK 4 Department of Infection, Guy's & St Thomas' Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, UK 5 Centre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, University of Oxford, UK Colin Brown, Gail Carson, Meera Chand, and Maria Zambon wrote version 1, with significant input from Jake Dunning as an expert adviser. Versions 2 and 3 were revised by Colin Brown, Gail Carson, Meera Chand, Jake Dunning and Maria Zambon. Version 4 was revised by all current authors, with particular updates from Antonia Scobie, Colin Brown and Jake Dunning. ## 9 Consultation The following coronavirus experts and clinicians and scientists with experience of SARS, MERS and other respiratory viruses were involved in PHE or ISARIC teleconferences or commented on drafts of this document. We are most grateful to them all for their valued input. This is a document intended for continual update. Contributors involved in literature review, documentation, and draft development: Ken Baillie*, University of Edinburgh, UK & ISARIC Working Group 3 chair Nick Barrett, Guy's & St Thomas' Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust Katrina Barlow, Public Health England, UK Nichola Goddard, Public Health England, UK Eli Harris, Oxford University, UK Kajsa-Stina Longuere, ISARIC Coordinating Centre, UK Nick Phin, Public Health England, UK John Watson, Public Health England, UK International experts invited to comment on basis of experience of SARS/H5N1/MERS/ critical care, or to contribute unpublished data: Neil Adhikari, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Canada Yaseen Arabi*, King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Saudi Arabia Abdullah Brooks, Johns Hopkins University, US & ISARIC past chair Janet Diaz, California Pacific Medical Center, US Jeremy Farrar*, Director, Wellcome Trust, UK Heinz Feldman, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, NIH, US Ron Fouchier, Erasmus Medical Center, The Netherlands Rob Fowler, University of Toronto, Canada & ISARIC Bart Haagmans, Erasmus Medical Center, The Netherlands Frederick Hayden*, University of Virginia School of Medicine, US & ISARIC past chair David Hui, Chinese University of Hong Kong, China Michael Ison, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, US Myoung-don Oh* Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, South Korea Eric Snijder, University Medical Center Leiden, The Netherlands WHO staff: Nikki Shindo, World Health Organization, Switzerland Maria Van Kerkhove*, World Health Organization, Switzerland *Contributed to the latest version of this document Clinicians, virologists, health professionals, and public health experts involved in managing MERS patients: many thanks to all who participated in the PHE and ISARIC/WHO teleconferences for their valuable input. ## 10 Bibliography: Articles Of Interest A. Antibiotics 1. Sung JJ, Wu A, Joynt GM, et al. Severe acute respiratory syndrome: report of treatment and outcome after a major outbreak. *Thorax* 2004;59(5):414-20. Download the PDF from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1746995/pdf/v059p00414.pdf ## B. Antiviral Peptides/Proteins 1. Sung JJ, Wu A, Joynt GM, et al. AVPdb: a database of experimentally validated antiviral peptides targeting medically important viruses. *Nucleic Acids Res* 2014;42(Database issue):D1147-53. Download the PDF from: http://nar.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=24285301 2. Channappanavar R, Lu L, Xia S, Du L, Meyerholz DK, Perlman S, Jiang S.Protective Effect of Intranasal Regimens Containing Peptidic Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus Fusion Inhibitor Against MERS-CoV Infection. *J Infect Dis* 2015; pii: jiv325. Download the PDF from: http://www.jid.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=26164863 3. Xia S, Liu Q, Wang Q, et al. Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) entry inhibitors targeting spike protein. Download the PDF from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168170214004122 C. BCX4430 1. Warren TK, Wells, J, Panchal RG et al. Protection against filovirus diseases by a novel broad-spectrum nucleoside analogue BCX4430. *Nature* 2014; 508, 402–405. Download the PDF from: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v508/n7496/pdf/nature13027.pdf 2. Taylor R, Kotian, P, Warren T et al. BCX4430 - A broad-spectrum antiviral adenosine nucleoside analog under development for the treatment of Ebola virus disease. J infect Pub Health 2016; 9, 220—226. Download the PDF from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876034116300193 D. Chloroquine 1. Ooi EE, Chew JS, Loh JP, Chua RC. In vitro inhibition of human influenza A virus replication by chloroquine. *Virol J* 2006;3:39. Download the PDF from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1481635/pdf/1743-422X-3-39.pdf 2. Vigerust DJ, McCullers JA. Chloroquine is effective against influenza A virus in vitro but not in vivo. *Influenza Other Respi Viruses* 2007;1(5-6):189-92. Download the PDF from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1750-2659.2007.00027.x/pdf 3. Yan Y, Zou Z, Sun Y, et al. Anti-malaria drug chloroquine is highly effective in treating avian influenza A H5N1 virus infection in an animal model. *Cell Res* 2013; 23(2):300–302. Download the PDF from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3567830/pdf/cr2012165a.pdf 4. Paton NI, Lee L, Xu Y, et al. Chloroquine for influenza prevention: a randomised, doubleblind, placebo controlled trial. *Lancet Infect Dis* 2011;11(9):677-83. Download the PDF from: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(11)70065-2/fulltext 5. Dyall J, Coleman CM, Hart BJ, et al. Repurposing of clinically developed drugs for treatment of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection. *Antimicrob Agents Chemother* 2014;58(8):4885-93. Download the PDF from: http://aac.asm.org/content/58/8/4885.long ## E. Convalescent Plasma 1. Hung IF, To KK, Lee CK, et al. Hyperimmune Intravenous Immunoglobulin Treatment: A Multicentre Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial for Patients with Severe A(H1N1)pdm09 Infection. *Chest* 2013;144(2):464-473. Download the PDF from: http://journal.publications.chestnet.org/article.aspx?articleid=1656407 2. Cheng Y, Wong R, Soo YO, et al. Use of convalescent plasma therapy in SARS patients in Hong Kong. *European J Clin Micro* 2005;24(1):44-6. Download the PDF from: http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/506/art%253A10.1007%252Fs10096-004-1271- 9.pdf?auth66=1362220920_4b68188c5ad3755a49b8647b565fa1d9&ext=.pdf 3. ter Meulen J, Bakker AB, van den Brink EN, et al. Human monoclonal antibody as prophylaxis for SARS coronavirus infection in ferrets. *Lancet* 2004;363(9427):2139-41. Download the PDF from: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140- 6736(04)16506-9/fulltext 4. Roberts A, Thomas WD, Guarner J, et al. Therapy with a severe acute respiratory syndrome-associated coronavirus-neutralizing human monoclonal antibody reduces disease severity and viral burden in golden Syrian hamsters. *J Infect Dis* 2006;193(5):685-92. Download the PDF from: http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/193/5/685.long 5. Soo YO, Cheng Y, Wong R, et al. Retrospective comparison of convalescent plasma with continuing high-dose methylprednisolone treatment in SARS patients. *Clin Microbiol Infect* 2004;10(7):676-8. Download the PDF from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1469- 0691.2004.00956.x/pdf 6. Hung IF, To KK, Lee CK, et al. Convalescent plasma treatment reduced mortality in patients with severe pandemic influenza A (H1N1) 2009 virus infection. *Clin Infect Dis* 2011 Feb 15;52(4):447-56. Download the PDF from: http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/52/4/447.long 7. Mair-Jenkins J, Saavedra-Campos M, Baillie K, et al. The effectiveness of convalescent plasma and hyperimmune immunoglobulin for the treatment of severe acute respiratory infections of viral aetiology: a systematic review and exploratory meta-analysis. *J Infect Dis* 2015;211(1):80-90. Download the PDF from http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2014/07/16/infdis.jiu396.full.pdf+html 8. Yeh KM, Chiueh TS, Siu LK, et al. Experience of using convalescent plasma for severe acute respiratory syndrome among healthcare workers in a Taiwan hospital. J Antimicrob Chemoth 2005;56(5):919-22. Download the PDF from: http://jac.oxfordjournals.org/content/56/5/919.full.pdf+html 9. Stockman LJ, Bellamy R, Garner P. SARS: systematic review of treatment effects. PLoS Med 2006;3(9):e343. Download the PDF from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1564166/pdf/pmed.0030343.pdf 10. Wong SSY, Yuen KY. The management of coronavirus infections with particular reference to SARS. *J Antimicrob Chemoth* 2008;62(3):437-41. Download the PDF from: http://jac.oxfordjournals.org/content/62/3/437.full.pdf+html 11. Du L, Zhao G, Yang Y, et al. A conformation-dependent neutralizing monoclonal antibody specifically targeting receptorbinding domain in middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus spike protein. *J Virol* 2014;88:7045–7053. Download the PDF from: http://jvi.asm.org/content/88/12/7045 12. Ying T, Du L, Ju TW, et al. Exceptionally potent neutralization of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus by human monoclonal antibodies. *J Virol* 2014;88:7796 –7805. Download the PDF from: http://jvi.asm.org/content/88/14/7796 13. Jiang L, Wang N, Zuo T, et al. Potent neutralization of MERS-CoV by human neutralizing monoclonal antibodies to the viral spike glycoprotein. *Sci Transl Med* 2014;6:234ra259. Download the PDF from: http://stm.sciencemag.org/content/6/234/234ra59 14. Tang XC, Agnihothram SS, Jiao Y, et al. Identification of human neutralizing antibodies against MERSCoV and their role in virus adaptive evolution. *Proc Natl Acad Sci USA* 2014;111:E2018 –E2026. Download the PDF from: http://www.pnas.org/content/111/19/E2018 15. Corti D, Zhao J, Pedotti M, et al. Prophylactic and postexposure efficacy of a potent human monoclonal antibody against MERS coronavirus. *Proc Natl Acad Sci USA* 2015;112(33):10473-8. Download the PDF from: http://www.pnas.org/content/112/33/10473.long 16. Ying T, Li H, Lu L, Dimitrov DS, Jiang S. Development of human neutralizing monoclonal antibodies for prevention and therapy of MERS-CoV infections. *Microbes Infect* 2015;17(2):142-8. Download the PDF from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1286457914003049 17. Zhang MY, Choudhry V, Xiao X, Dimitrov DS. Human monoclonal antibodies to the S glycoprotein and related proteins as potential therapeutics for SARS. *Curr Opin Mol Ther* 2005;7(2):151-56. Abstract only: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15844623 18. Burton DR, Saphire EO. Swift antibodies to counter emerging viruses. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2015;112(33):10082-3. Download the PDF from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4547222/pdf/pnas.201513050.pdf 19. Chan KH, Chan JF, Tse H, et al. Cross-reactive antibodies in convalescent SARS patients' sera against the emerging novel human coronavirus EMC (2012) by both immunofluorescent and neutralizing antibody tests. *J Infect* 2013;67(2):130-140. Download the PDF from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0163445313000716 20. Zhao J, Perera RA, Kayali G, Meyerholz D, Perlman S, Peiris M. Passive immunotherapy with dromedary immune serum in an experimental animal model for Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection. *J Virol* 2015;89(11):6117-20. Download the PDF from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4442417/pdf/zjv6117.pdf 21. Arabi YM, Balkhy HH, Hayden FG, Bouchama A, Luke T, et al. Middle East Respiratory Syndrome.*N Engl J Med* 2017;376(6):584-594. Download PDF from: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsr1408795 22. Arabi YM, Hajeer AH, Luke T, et al. Feasibility of using convalescent plasma immunotherapy for MERS-CoV infection, Saudi Arabia. *Emerg Infect Dis* 2016;221554-61. Download the PDF from: https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/22/9/15-1164_article 23. Park WB, Perera RAPM, Choe PG, et al. Kinetics of Serologic Responses to MERS Coronavirus Infection in Humans, South Korea. *Emerg Infect Dis* 2015;21(12):2186-2189. Download the PDF from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4672454 24. Alrashid M, Taleb AA, Hajeer A, Arabi Y. Prevalence of antibodies against the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus, influenza A and B viruses among blood donors, Saudi Arabia. *Ann Thorac Med* 2017;12:217-8. ## F. Corticosteroids 1. Zhang X, Alekseev K, Jung K, Vlasova A, Hadya N, Saif LJ. Cytokine responses in porcine respiratory coronavirus-infected pigs treated with corticosteroids as a model for severe acute respiratory syndrome. *J Virol* 2008;82(9):4420-8. Download the PDF from: http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC2293053?pdf=render 2. Soo YO, Cheng Y, Wong R, et al. Retrospective comparison of convalescent plasma with continuing high-dose methylprednisolone treatment in SARS patients. Clin Microbiol Infect 2004;10(7):676-8. Download the PDF from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1469- 0691.2004.00956.x/pdf 3. Sung JJ, Wu A, Joynt GM, et al. Severe acute respiratory syndrome: report of treatment and outcome after a major outbreak. *Thorax* 2004;59(5):414-20. Download the PDF from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1746995/pdf/v059p00414.pdf 4. Chen RC, Tang XP, Tan SY, et al. Treatment of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome With Glucosteroids: The Guangzhou Experience. *Chest* 2006; 129(6): 1441-1452. Download the PDF from: http://journal.publications.chestnet.org/article.aspx?articleid=1084497 5. Lee N, Allen Chan KC, Hui DS, et al. Effects of early corticosteroid treatment on plasma SARS-associated Coronavirus RNA concentrations in adult patients. *J Clin Viro* 2004;31(4):304-9. Download the PDF from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1386653204001957 6. Loutfy MR, Blatt LM, Siminovitch KA, et al. Interferon alfacon-1 plus corticosteroids in severe acute respiratory syndrome: a preliminary study. *JAMA* 2003;290(24):3222-8. Download the PDF from: http://jama.jamanetwork.com/data/Journals/JAMA/4909/JPC30087.pdf 7. Auyeung TW, Lee JS, Lai WK, et al. The use of corticosteroid as treatment in SARS was associated with adverse outcomes: a retrospective cohort study. *J Infect* 2005;51:98-102. Download the PDF from: http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/16038758 8. Kim SH, Hong SB, Yun SC, et al. Corticosteroid treatment in critically ill patients with pandemic influenza A/H1N1 2009 infection: analytic strategy using propensity scores. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2011;183(9):1207-14. Download the PDF from: http://www.atsjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1164/rccm.201101-0110OC 9. Arabi YM, Arifi AA, Balkhy et al. Clinical Course and Outcomes of Critically Ill Patients With Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus Infection. *Ann Intern Med* 2014;160(6):389-97. Download the PDF from: http://annals.org/aim/article/1817260/clinicalcourse-outcomes-critically-ill-patients-middle-east-respiratory-syndrome 10. Wong SSY, Yuen KY. The management of coronavirus infections with particular reference to SARS. *J Antimicrob Chemoth* 2008;62(3):437-41. Download the PDF from: http://jac.oxfordjournals.org/content/62/3/437.full.pdf+html 11. Levy MM, Baylor MS, Bernard GR, et al. Clinical issues and research in respiratory failure from severe acute respiratory syndrome. *Am J Resp Crit Ca*re 2005;171(5):518-26. Download the PDF from: http://www.atsjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1164/rccm.200405-621WS 12. Stockman LJ, Bellamy R, Garner P. SARS: systematic review of treatment effects. PLoS Med 2006;3(9):e343. Download the PDF from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1564166/pdf/pmed.0030343.pdf 13. Griffith JF, Antonio GE, Kumta SM, et al. Osteonecrosis of hip and knee in patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome treated with steroids. Radiology 2005;235(1):168-75. Download the PDF from: http://pubs.rsna.org/doi/pdf/10.1148/radiol.2351040100 14. Guo KJ, Zhao FC, Guo Y, Li FL, Zhu L, Zheng W. The influence of age, gender and treatment with steroids on the incidence of osteonecrosis of the femoral head during the management of severe acute respiratory syndrome: a retrospective study. Bone Joint J 2014;96-B(2):259-62. Download the PDF from: http://www.bjj.boneandjoint.org.uk/content/96- B/2/259 15. Sessler CN, Gay PC. Are corticosteroids useful in late-stage acute respiratory distress syndrome? *Respir Care* 2010;55(1):43-55. Download the PDF from: http://rc.rcjournal.com/content/55/1/43.short 16. Tang BM, Craig JC, Eslick GD, et al. Use of corticosteroids in acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. *Crit Care Med* 2009;37(5):1594-603. Download the PDF from: http://criticalcaremedicine.pbworks.com/f/tang+2010+crit+care+med.pdf 17. Khilnani GC, Hadda V. Corticosteroids and ARDS: A review of treatment and prevention evidence. *Lung India* 2011;28(2):114–119. Download the PDF from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3109833/?lopireport=reader 18. Kim I, Eun Lee J, Kim K-H et al. Successful treatment of suspected organizing pneumonia in a patient with Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection: a case report. *J Thorac Dis* 2016;8(10):E1190-E1194. Download the PDF from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5107491/pdf/jtd-08-10-E1190.pdf 19. Arabi YM, Mandourah Y, Al-Hameed F, et al. The Association of Corticosteroid therapy and the Outcome of Critically ill Patients with the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome. ATS: Washington, 2017. Abstract 8289. Abstract available from: http://www.atsjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1164/ajrccmconference.2017.195.1_MeetingAbstracts.A6868 G. Cyclosporin 1. de Wilde AH, Zevenhoven-Dobbe JC, van der Meer Y, et al. Cyclosporin A inhibits the replication of diverse coronaviruses. *J Gen Virol* 2011;92(Pt 11):2542-8. Download the PDF from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3352363/ 2. Pfefferle S, Schopf J, Kogl M, et al. The SARS-coronavirus-host interactome: identification of cyclophilins as target for pan-coronavirus inhibitors. *PLoS Path* 2011;7(10):e1002331. Download the PDF from: http://www.plospathogens.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.ppat.1002331 3. de Wilde AH, Ray VS, Oudshoorn D, et al. Human coronavirus-EMC replication induces severe in vitro cytopathology and is strongly inhibited by cyclosporin A or interferon-alpha treatment. *J Gen Virol* 2013; 94, 1749-1760. Download PDF at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3749523/pdf/1749.pdf 4. De Wilde AH, Raj VS, Oudshoom D, et al. MERS-coronavirus replication induces severe in vitro cytopathology and is strongly inhibited by cyclosporin A or interferon-α treatment. J Gen Virol 2013;94(Pt 8):1749–60. Download the PDF from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3749523/pdf/1749.pdf 5. AlGhamdi M, Mushtaq F, Awn N, Shalhoub S. MERS CoV infection in two renal transplant recipients: case report. *Am J Transplant* 2015;15:1101-4. Download the PDF from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ajt.13085 H. Cytokines and chemokines 1. Glass WG, Subbarao K, Murphy B, Murphy PM. Mechanisms of host defense following severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus (SARS-CoV) pulmonary infection of mice. J Immunol 2004;173(6):4030-39. Download the PDF from: http://www.jimmunol.org/content/173/6/4030.full.pdf+html 2. Wong CK, Lam CW, Wu AK, et al. Plasma inflammatory cytokines and chemokines in severe acute respiratory syndrome. *Clinical Exp Immunol* 2004;136(1):95-103. Download the PDF from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1808997/pdf/cei0136-0095.pdf 3. Lau SKP, Lau CCY, Chan K, et al. Delayed induction of proinflammatory cytokines and suppression of innate antiviral response by the novel Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus: implications for pathogenesis and treatment. *J Gen Virol* 2013;94(12):2679-2690. Download the PDF from: http://vir.sgmjournals.org/content/94/Pt_12/2679.full.pdf+html 4. Shirato K, Kawese M, Matsuyama S. Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus Infection Mediated by the Transmembrane Serine Protease TMPRSS2. *J Virol* 2013; 87 (23):12552-61. Download the PDF from: http://jvi.asm.org/content/87/23/12552.full.pdf+html ## I. General 1. Bosma KJ, Taneja R, Lewis JF. Pharmacotherapy for prevention and treatment of acute respiratory distress syndrome: Current and experimental approaches. *Drugs* 2010;70(10):1255-82. Abstract only: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20568833 2. DuVernoy T, Briese T, et al. Panel discussion - Viral respiratory pathogens. Influenza Other Respi Viruses 2010;4:21-22. Download the PDF from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1750-2659.2010.00136.x/pdf 3. Barnard DL, Kumaki Y. Recent developments in anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus chemotherapy. *Future Virol* 2011;6(5):615-31. Download the PDF from: http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3136164/ 4. Josset L, Menachery VD, Gralinski LE, et al. Cell host response to infection with novel human coronavirus EMC predicts potential antivirals and important differences with SARS coronavirus. *mBio* 2013;4(3):e00165-13. Download the PDF from: http://mbio.asm.org/content/4/3/e00165-13 5. Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Rhodes A, et al; Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines Committee including the Pediatric Subgroup. Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008. *Crit Care Med* 2008; 36:296–327. Download the PDF from: http://www.survivingsepsis.org/Guidelines/Pages/default.aspx 6. World Health Organization. Interim Guidance Document - updated July 2015. Clinical management of severe acute respiratory infections when novel coronavirus is suspected: What to do and what not to do. Geneva: WHO, 2015. Download the PDF from: http://www.who.int/csr/disease/coronavirus_infections/case-management-ipc/en/ 7. Hayden FG. Advances in antivirals for non-influenza respiratory virus infections. Influenza Other Respi Viruses 2013;7(Suppl. 3): 36–43. Download the PDF from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/irv.12173/pdf 8. Cheng VCC, Chan JFW, To KKKW, Yuen KY. Clinical management and infection control of SARS: lessons learned. *Antivir Res* 2013;100:407-419. Download the PDF from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166354213002246 9. Momattin H, Mohammed K, Zumla A, Memish ZA, Al-Tawfiq JA. Therapeutic Options for MERS-CoV - possible lessons from a systematic review of SARS-CoV therapy. *Int J Infect Dis* 2013;17:e792–e798. Download the PDF from: http://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201- 9712(13)00229-4/pdf 10. Hui DS, Memish ZA, Zumla A. Severe acute respiratory syndrome vs. the Middle East respiratory syndrome. *Curr Opin Pulm Med* 2014;20(3):233-41. Download the PDF from: http://meta.wkhealth.com/pt/pt-core/templatejournal/lwwgateway/media/landingpage.htm?issn=1070- 5287&volume=20&issue=3&spage=233 11. Sharif-Yakan A, Kanj SS. Emergence of MERS-CoV in the Middle East: origins, transmission, treatment, and perspectives. *PLoS Pathog* 2014;10(12):e1004457. Download the PDF from: http://journals.plos.org/plospathogens/article?id=10.1371/journal.ppat.1004457 12. Dyall J, Coleman CM, Hart BJ, et al. Repurposing of clinically developed drugs for treatment of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2014;58(8):4885-93. Download the PDF from: http://aac.asm.org/content/58/8/4885.long 13. Memish ZA, Assiri A, Alhakeem R, et al. Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Corona virus, MERS-CoV. Conclusions from the 2nd Scientific Advisory Board Meeting of the WHO Collaborating Center for Mass Gathering Medicine, Riyadh. *Int J Infect Dis* 2014;24:51-3. Download the PDF from: http://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(14)01491-X/pdf 14. Al-Tawfiq JA, Memish ZA.What are our pharmacotherapeutic options for MERS-CoV? Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol 2014;7(3):235-8. Download the PDF from: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1586/17512433.2014.890515 15. Chan JF, Lau SK, To KK, Cheng VC, Woo PC, Yuen KY. Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus: Another Zoonotic Betacoronavirus Causing SARS-Like Disease. Clin Microbiol Rev 2015;28(2):465-522. Download the PDF from: http://cmr.asm.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=25810418 16. Zumla A, Hui DS, Perlman S. Middle East respiratory syndrome. *Lancet* 2015; 386: 995– 1007. Download the PDF from: http://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140- 6736(15)60454-8.pdf 17. Mo Y and Fisher D. A review of treatment modalities for Middle East Respiratory Syndrome. J *Antimicrob Chemother* 2016;71(12):3340-3350. Download the PDF from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27585965 18. Chong YP, Song, JY, Seo YB, Shin HS. Antiviral Treatment Guidelines for Middle East Respiratory Syndrome. *Infect Chemother* 2015;47(3):212-222. Download PDF from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4607778/ 19. Arabi YM, Balkhy HH, Hayden FG, Bouchama A, Luke T, et al. Middle East Respiratory Syndrome. *N Engl J Med* 2017;376(6):584-594. Download PDF from: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsr1408795# 20. Al Ghamdi, Alghamdi KM, Ghandoora Y et al. Treatment outcomes for patients with Middle Eastern Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS CoV) infection at a coronavirus referral center in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. *BMC Infect Dis* 2016; 16:174. Download PDF from: https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12879-016-1492-4. 21. Arabi Y, Balkhy H, Hajeer A et al. Feasibility, safety, clinical, and laboratory effects of convalescent plasma therapy for patients with Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection: a study protocol. *SpringerPlus* 2015;4:709. Download PDF from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4653124 22. Uyeki TM, Erlandson KJ, Korch G, O'Hara M, Wathen M, Hu-Primmer J, et al. Development of medical countermeasures to Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus. Emerg Infect Dis 2016;22(7):DOI:10.3201/eid2207.160022. Download PDF from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4918159/ 23. Zumla A, Azhar EI, Arabi A et al. Host-directed therapies for improving poor treatment outcomes associated with the middle east respiratory syndrome coronavirus infections. Int J Infect Dis 2015;40:71-4. Download PDF from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1201971215002155 J. GS-5734 1. Lo MK, Jordan R, Arvey A et al. GS-5734 and its parent nucleoside analog inhibit Filo-, Pneumo-, and Paramyxoviruses. *Sci Rep* 2017;7:43395. Download the PDF from http://www.nature.com/articles/srep43395 2. Sims AC. The small molecule nucleoside prodrug GS-5734 exhibits broad antiviral activity against pathogenic human coronaviruses and related zoonotic strains. 6th Clinical Microbiology Conference: Rome, 2016. Abstract available at: http://clinicalmicrobiology.conferenceseries.com/abstract/2016/the-small-molecule-nucleosideprodrug-gs-5734-exhibits-broad-antiviral-activity-against-pathogenic-human-coronaviruses-andrelated-zoonotic-strains 3. Sheahan TP, Sims AC, Graham RL et al. Broad-spectrum antiviral GS-5734 inhibits both epidemic and zoonotic coronaviruses. *Sci Trans Med* 2017;9(396):PII:eaal3653. Download the PDF from: http://stm.sciencemag.org/content/9/396/eaal3653/tab-pdf 4. de Wit E, Feldmann F, Cronin J et al. Intravenous treatment with the nucleoside analog GS- 5734 reduces viral lung loads and disease burden in rhesus macaques infected with MERS- CoV. Personal communication (following presentation at American Society for Virology: Virginia, 2016). 5. Jacobs M, Rodger A, Bell DJ et al. Late Ebola virus relapse causing meningoencephalitis:a case report. *Lancet* 2016; 388: 498–503. Download the PDF from: http://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(16)30386-5.pdf 6. Dörnemann, J, Burzio C, Ronsse A et al. First Newborn Baby to Receive Experimental Therapies Survives Ebola Virus Disease. *J Infect Dis* 2017;215:171–4. Download the PDF from: https://academic.oup.com/jid/article/215/2/171/2877903/First-Newborn-Baby-to-Receive- Experimental ## K. Herbal Medicine 1. Arastoo M, Khorram Khorshid HR, Radmanesh R, Gharibdoust F. Combination of IMOD and Arbidol to increase their immunomodulatory effects as a novel medicine to prevent and cure influenza and some other infectious diseases. *J Med Hypotheses Ideas* 2014;8:53-36. Download the PDF from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2251729414000032 ## L. Indomethacin 1. Amici C, Di Caro A, Ciucci A, et al. Indomethacin has a potent antiviral activity against SARS coronavirus. *Antiviral Ther* 2006;11(8):1021-30. Download the PDF from: http://www.intmedpress.com/servefile.cfm?suid=35d8dc5e-70f4-491f-acad-e35f99be9211 ## M. Interferon (Ifn) 1. Loutfy MR, Blatt LM, Siminovitch KA, et al. Interferon alfacon-1 plus corticosteroids in severe acute respiratory syndrome: a preliminary study. *JAMA* 2003;290(24):3222-8 Download the PDF from: http://jama.jamanetwork.com/data/Journals/JAMA/4909/JPC30087.pdf 2. Haagmans BL, Kuiken T, Martina BE, et al. Pegylated interferon-α protects type 1 pneumocytes against SARS coronavirus infection in macaques. *Nat Med* 2004;10(3):290-93 Download the PDF from: http://www.nature.com/nm/journal/v10/n3/full/nm1001.html 3. Sainz B, Jr., Mossel EC, Peters CJ, Garry RF. Interferon-beta and interferon-gamma synergistically inhibit the replication of severe acute respiratory syndrome-associated coronavirus (SARS-CoV). *Virology* 2004;329(1):11-7. Download the PDF from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0042682204005422 4. Scagnolari C, Vicenzi E, Bellomi F, et al. Increased sensitivity of SARS-coronavirus to a combination of human type I and type II interferons. *Antivir Ther* 2004;9(6):1003-11.Download the PDF from: http://www.intmedpress.com/serveFile.cfm?sUID=175607d8-e6a4-439e-a9d2- e345e2ec3ef4 5. Barnard DL, Day CW, Bailey K, et al. Evaluation of immunomodulators, interferons and known in vitro SARS-coV inhibitors for inhibition of SARS-coV replication in BALB/c mice. Antivir Chem Chemother 2006;17(5):275-84. Download the PDF from: http://www.intmedpress.com/serveFile.cfm?sUID=9ed38ddd-648c-40ad-9a4c-3e4a9a42f562 6. Haagmans BL, Osterhaus ADME. Coronaviruses and their therapy. *Antivir Res* 2006;71(2-3 Spec Iss):397-403. Download the PDF from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166354206001707 7. Stockman LJ, Bellamy R, Garner P. SARS: systematic review of treatment effects. PLoS Med 2006;3(9):e343. Download the PDF from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1564166/pdf/pmed.0030343.pdf 8. Cervantes-Barragan L, Züst R, Weber F, et al. Control of coronavirus infection through plasmacytoid dendritic-cell- derived type I interferon. *Blood* 2007;109(3):1131-37. Download the PDF from: http://bloodjournal.hematologylibrary.org/content/109/3/1131.full.pdf 9. Wong CK, Lam CW, Wu AK, et al. Plasma inflammatory cytokines and chemokines in severe acute respiratory syndrome. *Clin Exp Immunol* 2004;136(1):95-103. Download the PDF from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1808997/pdf/cei0136-0095.pdf 10. Wong SSY, Yuen KY. The management of coronavirus infections with particular reference to SARS. *J Antimicrob Chemoth* 2008;62(3):437-41. Download the PDF from: http://jac.oxfordjournals.org/content/62/3/437.full.pdf+html 11. Danesh A, Cameron CM, Leon AJ, et al. Early gene expression events in ferrets in response to SARS coronavirus infection versus direct interferon-alpha2b stimulation. *Virology* 2011;409(1):102-Download the PDF from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0042682210006380 12. Morgenstern B, Michaelis M, Baer PC, Doerr HW, Cinatl J Jr. Ribavirin and interferon-beta synergistically inhibit SARS-associated coronavirus replication in animal and human cell lines. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2005 Jan 28;326(4):905-8. Download the PDF from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006291X04027299 13. Bruno R, Sacchi P, Cima S, et al. Comparison of peginterferon pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles. *J Viral Hepatitis* 2012;19 Suppl 1:33-6. Download the PDF from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2893.2011.01519.x/pdf 14. Cameron MJ, Kelvin AA, Leon AJ, et al. Lack of Innate Interferon Responses during SARS Coronavirus Infection in a Vaccination and Reinfection Ferret Model*. PloS One* 2012;7(9). Download the PDF from: http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0045842 15. Mordstein M, Neugebauer E, Ditt V, et al. Lambda interferon renders epithelial cells of the respiratory and gastrointestinal tracts resistant to viral infections. *J Virol* 2010;84(11):5670-7. Download the PDF from: http://jvi.asm.org/content/84/11/5670.full 16. Kindler E, Jónsdóttir HR, Muth D, et al. Efficient Replication of the Novel Human Betacoronavirus EMC on Primary Human Epithelium Highlights Its Zoonotic Potential. mBio 2013;4(1):DOI:10.1128/mBio.00611-12. Download the PDF from: http://mbio.asm.org/content/4/1/e00611-12.full.html 17. Falzarano D, de Wit E, Martellaro C, Callison J, Munster VJ, Feldmann H. Inhibition of novel human coronavirus-EMC replication by a combination of interferon-a2b and ribavirin. Sci Rep 2013;3(1686);DOI:10.1038/srep01686. Download the PDF from: http://www.biomedsearch.com/attachments/00/23/59/49/23594967/srep01686.pdf 18. de Wilde AH, Ray VS, Oudshoorn D, et al. MERS coronavirus replication induces severe in vitro cytopathology and is strongly inhibited by cyclosporin A or interferon-alpha treatment. *J Gen Virol* 2013;94(Pt 8):1749-60. Download the PDF from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3749523/pdf/1749.pdf 19. Chan JF, Chan KH, Kao RY, et al. Broad-spectrum antivirals for the emerging Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus. *J Infect* 2013;67(6):606-16. Download the PDF from: http://www.journalofinfection.com/article/S0163-4453(13)00298-3/pdf 20. Hart BJ, Dyall J, Postnikova E, et al L. Interferon-b and mycophenolic acid are potent inhibitors of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus in cell based assays. *J Gen Virol* 2014;95:571-577. Download the PDF from: http://vir.sgmjournals.org/content/95/Pt_3/571.full.pdf+html?sid=b01f8c80-bde3-49d9-b716- c9b153f5dddc 21. Adedeji AO, Sarafianos SG. Future treatment strategies for novel Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection. *Future Med Chem* 2013;5(18):2119–2122. Download the PDF from: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/258827095_Future_treatment_strategies_for_novel_ Middle_East_respiratory_syndrome_coronavirus_infection 22. Al-Tawfiq JA, Mommatin H, Dib J, Memish ZA. Ribavirin and interferon therapy in patients infected with the Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus: an observational study. Int J Infect Dis 2014;20:42-6. Download the PDF from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2013.12.003 23. Omrani AS, Saad MM, Baig K, et al. Ribavirin and interferon alfa-2a for severe Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection: a retrospective cohort study. *Lancet Infect Dis* 2014;14(11):1090-5. Download the PDF from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1473- 3099(14)70920-X 24. Khalid M, Khan B, Al Rabiah F, et al. Middle Eastern Respiratory Syndrome Corona Virus (MERS CoV): case reports from a tertiary care hospital in Saudi Arabia. *Ann Saudi Med* 2014;34(5):396-400. Download the PDF from: http://www.annsaudimed.net/files.php?force&file=2014_0435_OA_233141539.pdf 25. Chan JFW, Yao Y, Yeung M-L, et al. Treatment with lopinavir/ritonavir or interferon-β1b improves outcome of MERS-CoV infection in a non-human primate model of common marmoset. *J Infect Dis* 2015; 212(12):1904-13. Download the PDF from: http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2015/07/20/infdis.jiv392.short 26. Strayer DR, Dickey R, Carter WA. Sensitivity of SARS/MERS CoV to Interferons and Other Drugs Based on Achievable Serum Concentrations in Humans. *Infect Dis - Drug Targets* 2014;14:1-7. Download the PDF from: http://www.eurekaselect.com/123324/article 27. Falzarano D, de Wit E, Rasmussen AL, et al. Treatment with interferon-α2b and ribavirin improves outcome in MERS-CoV–infected rhesus macaques. *Nat Med* 2013;19(10):1313-7. Download the PDF from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nm.3362 28. Shalhoub S, Farahat F, Al-Jiffri A, Simhairi R, Shamma O, Siddiqi N, Mushtaq A. IFN-α2a or IFN-β1a in combination with ribavirin to treat Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus pneumonia: a retrospective study. *J Antimicrob Chemother* 2015;70(7):2129-32. Download the PDF from: http://jac.oxfordjournals.org/content/70/7/2129.full.pdf+html 29. Spanakis N, Tsiodras S, Haagmans BL, et al. Virological and serological analysis of a recent Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection case on a triple combination antiviral regimen. *Int J Antimicrob Agents* 2014;44(6):528-32. Download the PDF from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857914002787# 30. Khalid M, Al Rabiah F, Khan B, Al Mobeireek A, Butt TS, Al Mutairy E. Ribavirin and interferon-α2b as primary and preventive treatment for Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus: a preliminary report of two cases. *Antivir Ther* 2015;20:87-91. Download the PDF from: http://www.intmedpress.com/journals/avt/abstract.cfm?id=2792&pid=48 31. Al Ghamdi M, Al Ghamdi M, Ghandoora et al. Treatment outcomes for patients with Middle Eastern Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS CoV) infection at a coronavirus referral center in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. *BMC Infect Dis* 2016;16:174. Download PDF from: https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12879-016-1492-4. ## N. Intravenous Immunoglobulin (Ivig) 1. Stockman LJ, Bellamy R, Garner P. SARS: systematic review of treatment effects. PLoS Med 2006;3(9):e343. Download the PDF from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1564166/pdf/pmed.0030343.pdf 2. Ho JC, Wu AY, Lam B, et al. Pentaglobin in steroid-resistant severe acute respiratory syndrome. *Int J Tuberc Lung Dis* 2004: 8(10):1173–1179. Download the PDF from: http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/iuatld/ijtld/2004/00000008/00000010/art00003 3. Arabi YM, Arifi AA, Balkhy HH, Najm H, Aldawood AS, Ghabashi A, Hawa H, Alothman A, Khaldi A, Al Raiy B. Course and Outcomes of Critically Ill Patients With MERS-CoV Infection. Ann Intern Med 2014;160(6):389-97. Download the PDF from: http://www.annals.org/article.aspx?volume=160&issue=6&page=389 4. Katz U, Achiron A, Sherer Y, et al. Safety of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) therapy. Autoimmun Rev 2007;6(4):257-9. Download the PDF from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1568997206001352 ## O. Mannose-Binding Lectin 1. Ip WK, Chan KH, Law HK, et al. Mannose-binding lectin in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection. *J Infect Dis* 2005;191(10):1697-704. Download the PDF from: http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/191/10/1697.full.pdf+html 2. P Zhou Y, Lu K, Pfefferle S, et al. A single asparagine-linked glycosylation site of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus spike glycoprotein facilitates inhibition by mannose- binding lectin through multiple mechanisms. *J Virol* 2010;84(17):8753-64. Download the PDF from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2919028/pdf/0554- 10.pdf 3. Michelow IC, Lear C, Scully C, et al. High-dose mannose-binding lectin therapy for Ebola virus infection. *J Infect Dis* 2011;203(2):175-9. Download the PDF from: http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/203/2/175.full.pdf+html 4. Arabi YM, Arifi AA, Balkhy HH, Najm H, Aldawood AS, Ghabashi A, Hawa H, Alothman A, Khaldi A, Al Raiy B. Course and Outcomes of Critically Ill Patients With MERS-CoV Infection. *Ann Intern Med* 2014;160(6):389-97. Download the PDF from: http://annals.org/aim/article/1817260/clinical-course-outcomes-critically-ill-patients-middleeast-respiratory-syndrome 5. Rahman E, Sulaiman M, Mohboob M, et al. Fate of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus infection in four haemodiaysis patients in Prince Sultan Military Medical City. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2014;29(suppl 3):iii1-iii2S(Poster-P633). Abstract available at: http://www.abstracts2view.com/era_archive/view.php?nu=ERA14L1_103 P. Monoclonal and polyclonal antibodies 1. Zhong X, Yang H, Guo Z, et al. B-Cell Responses in Patients Who Have Recovered from Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Target a Dominant Site in the S2 Domain of the Surface Spike Glycoprotein. *J Virol* 2005;79(6):3401-3408. Download the PDF from: http://jvi.asm.org/content/79/6/3401.full 2. Ho JC, Wu AY, Lam B, et al. Pentaglobin in steroid-resistant severe acute respiratory syndrome. *Int J Tuberc Lung Dis* 2004: 8(10):1173–1179. Download the PDF from: http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/iuatld/ijtld/2004/00000008/00000010/art00003# 3. Du L, Zhao G, Yang Y, et al. A conformation-dependent neutralizing monoclonal antibody specifically targeting receptor binding domain in middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus spike protein. *J Virol* 2014;88:7045–7053. Download the PDF from: http://jvi.asm.org/content/88/12/7045 4. Jiang L, Wang N, Zuo T, et al. Potent neutralization of MERS-CoV by human neutralizing monoclonal antibodies to the viral spike glycoprotein. *Sci Transl Med* 2014;6:234ra259. Download the PDF from: http://stm.sciencemag.org/content/6/234/234ra59 5. Tang XC, Agnihothram SS, Jiao Y, et al. Identification of human neutralizing antibodies against MERSCoV and their role in virus adaptive evolution. *Proc Natl Acad Sci USA* 2014;111:E2018 –E2026. Download the PDF from: http://www.pnas.org/content/111/19/E2018 6. Corti D, Zhao J, Pedotti M, et al. Prophylactic and postexposure efficacy of a potent human monoclonal antibody against MERS coronavirus. *Proc Natl Acad Sci USA* 2015;112(33):10473-8. Download the PDF from: http://www.pnas.org/content/112/33/10473.long 7. Luke T, Wu H, Zhao J, Channappanavar R, Coleman CM, Jiao JA, Human polyclonal immunoglobulin G from transchromosomic bovines inhibits MERS-CoV in vivo. Sci Transl Med 2016;8:326. Download the PDF from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26888429 8. Zhao J, Perera RA, Kayali G, Meyerholz D, Perlman S, Peiris M. Passive immunotherapy with dromedary immune serum in an experimental animal model for Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection. *J Virol* 2015;89(11):6117-20. Download the PDF from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4442417/pdf/zjv6117.pdf 9. Pascal KE, Coleman cm, Mujica AO et al. Pre- and postexposure efficacy of fully human antibodies against Spike protein in a novel humanized mouse model of MERS-CoV infection. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2015;112(28):8738-43. Download the PDF from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4507189/pdf/pnas.201510830.pdf 10. Johnson RF, Bagci U, Keith L, et al. 3B11-N, a monoclonal antibody against MERS-CoV, reduces lung pathology in rhesus monkeys following intratracheal inoculation of MERS-CoV Jordan-n3/2012. *Virology* 2016;490:49-58. Download the PDF from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4769911/pdf/nihms752288.pdf 11. Dixit R, Herz J, Dalton et al . Benefits of using heterologous polyclonal antibodies and potential applications to new and undertreated infectious pathogens. *Vaccine* 2016;34:1152– 1161. Download the PDF from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X16000426 Q. Mycophenolic Acid (MMF) 1. Barnard, DL Day CW, Bailey, Heiner, KM et al. Enhancement of the infectivity of SARS-CoV in BALB/c mice by IMP dehydrogenase inhibitors, including ribavirin. *Antiviral Res* 2006;71:53– 63. Download the PDF from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2441846/ 2. Hart BJ, Dyall J, Postnikova E, et al. Interferon-b and mycophenolic acid are potent inhibitors of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus in cell based assays. *J Gen Virol* 2014;95:571-577. Download the PDF from: http://vir.sgmjournals.org/content/95/Pt_3/571.full.pdf 3. Chan JF, Chan KH, Kao RY, To KK, Zheng BJ, Li CP, Li PT, Dai J, Mok FK, Chen H, Hayden FG, Yuen KY. Broad-spectrum antivirals for the emerging Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus. *J Infect* 2013;67(6):606-16. Download the PDF from: http://www.journalofinfection.com/article/S0163-4453(13)00298-3/pdf 4. Chan JFW, Yao Y, Yeung M-L, et al. Treatment with lopinavir/ritonavir or interferon-β1b improves outcome of MERS-CoV infection in a non-human primate model of common marmoset. *J Infect Dis* 2015;212(12):1904-1. Download the PDF from: http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2015/07/20/infdis.jiv392.short 5. AlGhamdi M, Mushtaq F, Awn N, Shalhoub S. MERS CoV infection in two renal transplant recipients: case report. *Am J Transplant* 2015;15:1101-4. Download the PDF from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25716741 6. Faure E, Poissy J, Goffard A, et al. Distinct immune response in two MERS-CoV- infected patients: can we go from bench to bedside? *PLoS One* 2014; 9:e88716. Download the PDF from: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0088716 ## R. Nitazoxinide 1. Haffizulla J, Hartman A, Hoppers M et al. Effect of nitazoxanide in adults and adolescents with acute uncomplicated influenza - a double blind, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 2b/3 trial. Rossignol JF, Samudrala S, Hoppers M. *Lancet infect Dis* 2014. Download the PDF from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1473309914707170 2. Belardo G, La Frazia S, Cenciarelli O. Nitazoxanide, a Novel Potential Anti-Influenza Drug, Acting in Synergism with Neuraminidase Inhibitors. IDSA: Boston, 2011. Download the PDF from: https://idsa.confex.com/idsa/2011/webprogram/Paper31075.html 3. Cao J, Forrest JC, Zhang X. A screen of the NIH Clinical Collection small molecule library identifies potential anti-coronavirus drugs. *Antiviral Res* 2015;114:1-10. Download the PDF from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0166-3542(14)00331-3 4. Rossignol JF. Nitazoxanide, a new drug candidate for the treatment of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus. *J Infect Public Health* 2016: 9,227—230 Download the PDF from: http://www.jiph.org/article/S1876-0341(16)30018-1/pdf S. Protease inhibitors 1. Chu CM, Cheng VC, Hung IF, et al. Role of lopinavir/ritonavir in the treatment of SARS: initial virological and clinical findings. *Thorax* 2004;59(3):252-6. Download the PDF from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1746980/pdf/v059p00252.pdf 2. Chan KS, Lai ST, Chu CM, et al. Treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome with lopinavir/ritonavir: a multicenter retrospective matched cohort study. *Hong Kong Med J* 2003;9: 399–406. Download the PDF from: http://www.hkmj.org/article_pdfs/hkm0312p399.pdf 3. Stockman LJ, Bellamy R, Garner P. SARS: systematic review of treatment effects. PLoS Med 2006;3(9):e343. Download the PDF from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1564166/pdf/pmed.0030343.pdf 4. Wong SSY, Yuen KY. The management of coronavirus infections with particular reference to SARS. *J Antimicrob Chemoth* 2008;62(3):437-41. Download the PDF from: http://jac.oxfordjournals.org/content/62/3/437.full.pdf+html 5. Barnard DL, Kumaki Y. Recent developments in anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus chemotherapy. *Future Virol* 2011;6(5):615-31. Download the PDF from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3136164/pdf/nihms304163.pdf 6. de Wilde AH, Jochmans D, Posthuma CC et al. Screening of an FDA-approved compound library identifies four small-molecule inhibitors of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus replication in cell culture. *Antimicrob Agents Chemother* 2014; 58(8):4875-84. Download the PDF from: http://aac.asm.org/content/early/2014/05/13/AAC.03011- 14.full.pdf+html 7. Chan JFW, Yao Y, Yeung M-L, et al. Treatment with lopinavir/ritonavir or interferon-β1b improves outcome of MERS-CoV infection in a non-human primate model of common marmoset. *J Infect Dis* 2015;212(12):1904-13. Download the PDF from: http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2015/07/20/infdis.jiv392.short 8. Spanakis N, Tsiodras S, Haagmans BL, et al. Virological and serological analysis of a recent Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection case on a triple combinationantiviral regimen. *Int J Antimicrob Agents* 2014;44(6):528-32. Download the PDF from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857914002787# 9. Choi WS, Kang C-I, Kim Y, et al. Clinical Presentation and Outcomes of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome in the Republic of Korea. *Infect Chemother* 2016;48(2):118-126. Download the PDF from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4945721/pdf/ic-48- 118.pdf T. Ribavirin 1. Stockman LJ, Bellamy R, Garner P. SARS: systematic review of treatment effects. PLoS Med 2006;3(9):e343. Download the PDF from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1564166/pdf/pmed.0030343.pdf 2. Morgenstern B, Michaelis M, Baer PC, Doerr HW, Cinatl J Jr. Ribavirin and interferon- beta synergistically inhibit SARS-associated coronavirus replication in animal and human cell lines. *Biochem Biophys Res Commun* 2005;326(4):905-8. Download the PDF from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006291X04027299 3. Falzarano D, de Wit E, Martellaro C, Callison J, Munster VJ, Feldmann H. Inhibition of novel human coronavirus-EMC replication by a combination of interferon-a2b and ribavirin. Sci Rep 2013; 3:1686. Download the PDF from: http://www.biomedsearch.com/attachments/00/23/59/49/23594967/srep01686.pdf 4. Falzarano D, de Wit E, Rasmussen AL, et al. Treatment with interferon-α2b and ribavirin improves outcome in MERS-CoV–infected rhesus macaques. *Nat Med* 2013;19(10):1313-7. Download the PDF from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nm.3362 5. Al-Tawfiq JA, Mommatin H, Dib J, Memish ZA. Ribavirin and interferon therapy in patients infected with the Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus: an observational study. Int J Infect Dis 2014;20:42-6. Download the PDF from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2013.12.003 6. Khalid M, Khan B, Al Rabiah F, et al. Middle Eastern Respiratory Syndrome Corona Virus (MERS CoV): case reports from a tertiary care hospital in Saudi Arabia. *Ann Saudi Med* 2014;34(5):396-400. Download the PDF from: http://www.annsaudimed.net/files.php?force&file=2014_0435_OA_233141539.pdf 7. Khalid M, Al Rabiah F, Khan B, Al Mobeireek A, Butt TS, Al Mutairy E. Ribavirin and interferon-α2b as primary and preventive treatment for Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus: a preliminary report of two cases. *Antivir Ther* 2015;20:87-91. Download the PDF from: http://www.intmedpress.com/journals/avt/abstract.cfm?id=2792&pid=48 8. Shalhoub S, Farahat F, Al-Jiffri A, Simhairi R, Shamma O, Siddiqi N, Mushtaq A. IFN-α2a or IFN-β1a in combination with ribavirin to treat Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus pneumonia: a retrospective study. *J Antimicrob Chemother* 2015;70(7):2129-32. Download the PDF from: http://jac.oxfordjournals.org/content/70/7/2129.full.pdf+html 9. Spanakis N, Tsiodras S, Haagmans BL, et al. Virological and serological analysis of a recent Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection case on a triple combinationantiviral regimen. *Int J Antimicrob Agents* 2014;44(6):528-32. Download the PDF from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857914002787# 10. Omrani AS, Saad MM, Baig K, et al. Ribavirin and interferon alfa-2a for severe Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection: a retrospective cohort study. *Lancet Infect Dis* 2014;14(11):1090-5. Download the PDF from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1473- 3099(14)70920-X 11. Hart BJ, Dyall J, Postnikova E, et al L. Interferon-b and mycophenolic acid are potent inhibitors of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus in cell based assays. *J Gen Virol* 2014;95:571-577. Download the PDF from: http://vir.sgmjournals.org/content/95/Pt_3/571.full.pdf+html?sid=b01f8c80-bde3-49d9-b716- c9b153f5dddc 12. van Vonderen MGA, Bos JC, Prins JM, Wertheim-van Dillen P, Speelman P. Ribavirin in the treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). *Neth J Med* 2003;61(7):238-41. Download the PDF from: http://www.njmonline.nl/getpdf.php?id=25 13. Sung JJ, Wu A, Joynt GM, et al. Severe acute respiratory syndrome: report of treatment and outcome after a major outbreak. *Thorax* 2004;59(5):414-20. Download the PDF from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1746995/pdf/v059p00414.pdf 14. Chan JF, Chan KH, Kao RY, et al. Broad-spectrum antivirals for the emerging Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus. *J Infect* 2013;67(6):606-16. Download the PDF from: http://www.journalofinfection.com/article/S0163-4453(13)00298-3/pdf 15. Adedeji AO, Sarafianos SG. Future treatment strategies for novel Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection. *Future Med Chem* 2013;5(18):2119–2122. Download the PDF from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4085789/pdf/nihms606665.pdf 16. Gross AE, Bryson ML. Oral Ribavirin for the Treatment of Noninfluenza Respiratory Viral Infections: A Systematic Review. *Ann Pharmacother* 2015;49(10):1125-35. Download the PDF from: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1060028015597449 17. Al Ghamdi M, Al Ghamdi M, Ghandoora Y, et al. Treatment outcomes for patients with Middle Eastern Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS CoV) infection at a coronavirus referral center in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. *BMC Infect Dis* 2016;16:174. Download PDF from: https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12879-016-1492-4. 18. Arabi YM, Shalhoub S, Al Omari A, et al. Effect of ribavirin and interferon on the outcome of critically ill patients with MERS. ATS: Washington, 2017. Abstract 9690. Abstract available from: http://www.atsjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1164/ajrccmconference.2017.195.1_MeetingAbstracts.A6067 U. SiRNA 1. Li BJ, Tang Q, Cheng D, et al. Using siRNA in prophylactic and therapeutic regimens against SARS coronavirus in Rhesus macaque. *Nat Med* 2005;11(9):944-51. Download the PDF from: http://www.nature.com/nm/journal/v11/n9/pdf/nm1280.pdf 2. Haagmans BL, Osterhaus ADME. Coronaviruses and their therapy. *Antivir Res* 2006;71(2-3 Spec. Iss.):397-403. Download the PDF from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166354206001707 V. Vaccine 1. Tang J, Zhang N, Tao X, et al. Optimization of antigen dose for a receptor-binding domain- based subunit vaccine against MERS coronavirus. *Hum Vaccin Immunother* 2015;11(15):1244-50. Download the PDF from: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/21645515.2015.1021527?url_ver=Z39.88- 2003&rfr_id=ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub%3dpubmed 2. Muthumani K, Falzarano D, Reuschel EL, et al. A synthetic consensus anti-spike protein DNA vaccine induces protective immunity against Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus in nonhuman primates. *Sci Transl Med* 2015;7(301):301ra132. Download the PDF from: http://stm.sciencemag.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=short&pmid=26290414 W. Viral loads 1. Hung IF, Cheng VC, Wu AK, et al. Viral loads in clinical specimens and SARS manifestations. *Emerg Infect Dis* 2004;10(9):1550-7. Download the PDF from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3320271/pdf/04-0058.pdf 2. Oh MD, Park WB, Choe PG et al. Viral Load Kinetics of MERS Coronavirus Infection. *N Engl J Med* 2016;375(13):1303-5. Download the PDF from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27682053 3. Corman VM, Albarrak AM, Omrani AS et al. Viral Shedding and Antibody Response in 37 Patients With Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus Infection. *Clin Infect Dis* 2016;62(4):47783. Download the PDF from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26565003

en

0634-pdf

# 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 ## Crestwood Report Reference: Ce-Bq0776-Rp01 - Final: | Issued | Date | |---------------------------------|------------------------------| | Version Status | Produced | | Written / Updated by: | Checked & Authorised by: | | Adam Collinge | | | Draft v1 | 23-03-2015 | | Karl Jones | | | (Principal Landscape Architect) | (Senior Landscape Architect) | | Adam Collinge | | | Final | 03-06-2015 | | Karl Jones | | | (Principal Landscape Architect) | (Senior Landscape Architect) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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) | | 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 (LVIAs) 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 steepsided 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 seminatural 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 Countryscape, 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 Countryscape, 2009). The key relevant priorities that could be applied to the Site and Proposed Development are summarised in ## Landscape Guidelines Limestone Dales Priority Limestone Plateau Pastures LCT 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 manmade 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 twoturbine windfarm (circa 24.5m tall) is present to the north-northwest of Hilltop Farm and a larger fourturbine 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 seminatural 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. 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 northnorthwest. 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 On southern Site boundary, on public highway near entrance to the Site and Close-range view potentially affecting a skyline. 1 Footpath FP5. Close-range view representing views from two areas of Access Land 2 150m east of the Site on elevated Access Land. (one Close range, another Medium range). Close-range view representing views from area of Access Land and Medium range views beyond from Pennine Bridleway recreational 3 240m northeast of the Site on elevated Access Land. 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. Medium-range view from near Ballidon village on long distance 6 600m south of the Site on the Limestone Way Long Distance recreational route, at a low-lying location with the Site forming the Bridleway. skyline. 630m south-southeast of the Site on Medium-range view from long distance recreational route, from an the Limestone Way Long Distance 7 elevated position to south-southeast. Bridleway. 800m southwest of the Site on footpath FP9 at edge of Parwich Medium-range view on public footpath near edge of residential area. 8 village. 1.47km southwest of the Site on Medium-range view from long distance recreational route with elevated section of Limestone Way 9 pleasant views over Parwich. Long Distance Bridleway. 10 1.52km south of the Site on local road. Long-range view from broad valley to the south, within National Park, representative of views from roads and dispersed residences. 2.59km south-southwest on elevated Long-range view from long distance recreational route, from an 11 section of Limestone Way Long elevated position to the south-southwest. Distance Bridleway. 2.31km south of the Site from 12 footpath FP18, near Bradbourne Long-range view from public footpath, from an elevated position to the south also representing views from residences facing the Site at village. Bradbourne. 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: 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. | | Site Only | Locality | |---------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|-------------| | (Direct effects) | (Indirect effects) | | | Landscape Sensitivity | Low - Medium | High | | Operational Period Magnitude | Generally Very Small Adverse overall | | | of overall effect | | | | Small Adverse | | | | Specific area: Small Adverse | | | | magnitude | | | | Generally Minor-Moderate, where | | | | experienced | | | | Operational Period - | | | | Specific effect experienced from part | | | | Significance of Landscape | Minor-Moderate (of adverse effect) | | | of Village Farmlands and Shale Ridges | | | | Effects | | | | (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 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 Very High sources. Very high **susceptibility to change** as a very high level of attention focussed on the landscape and particular views. Well-known area recognised regionally for high landscape **value**. Open areas of recognised public access where primary enjoyment is of the views of the High landscape. High **susceptibility to change** as a high level of attention focused on the landscape and particular views. Locations afford views of some **value**, but visual amenity not well recognised beyond locality. Medium Moderate **susceptibility to change** as a moderate level of attention focussed on the landscape and particular views. Viewpoint context and location is of lesser value than similar views from nearby visual receptors that may be more accessible. Low Low **susceptibility to change** as low level of attention focussed on the landscape and particular views. Viewpoint context is such that views have a very low **value**. Very Low Expectations of visual amenity are very low. Activity at viewpoint is incidental to the view. 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. 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. Users of local advertised circular, recreational or wellused 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. 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. 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. People at their place of work where there the type of activity has no relationship to the surrounding landscape context. ## Summary Visual Sensitivity Of Receptors At Viewpoints (Vps) Viewpoint No. Location Description Main Receptors 1 On southern Site boundary, on public highway near entrance to the Site and Footpath FP5. 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. 5 900m northwest of Site on public footpath FP12. Footpath users Medium Medium- 6 600m south of the Site on the Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway. 7 630m south-southeast of the Site on the Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway. 8 800m southwest of the Site on footpath FP9 at edge of Parwich village. 1.47km southwest of the Site on elevated 9 section of Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway. 10 1.52km south of the Site on local road. 11 2.59km south-southwest on elevated section of Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway. 12 2.31km south of the Site from footpath FP18, near Bradbourne village (outside National Park) 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. Represented Range Sensitivity Long Distance Footpath / Bridleway users Medium Very High High Long Distance Footpath / Very High Bridleway users Medium Residents (Ballidon) High Long Distance Footpath / Bridleway users Medium Very High Road users Medium Long Distance Footpath / Medium Bridleway users Very High Residents High Long Distance Footpath / Bridleway users Medium Very High Road users Medium Long Residents High Long Distance Footpath / Bridleway users Long Very High Footpath users Medium Long Residents High Magnitude of Visual Effect Visual Criteria Where the proposals become the only dominant feature in the view and to which all other Very Large elements become subordinate. Typically involves direct views at close range over a wide horizontal and vertical extent. Where the proposals would form a significant and immediately apparent element of the scene Large 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. Where proposals would form a visible and recognisable new development but where it is not Medium 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. 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. Small 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. 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). 4.5.11 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 1. 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**. 4.5.16 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 2. 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 Shortterm 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**. 4.5.22 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 3. 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 midground 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. 4.5.28 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 4. 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**. 4.5.32 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 5. 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 midground, 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 wellestablished. 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. 4.5.38 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 6. 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. 4.5.44 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 7. 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**. 4.5.48 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 8. 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. 4.5.52 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 9. 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 reestablish 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**. 4.5.56 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 10. 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. 4.5.60 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 11. 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. 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 Closerange) 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 Countryscape, 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/npmp [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: | AGL | Above Ground Level | | SINC | Site of Importance for Nature Conservation | |--------|----------------------------------------|-----|---------|--------------------------------------------------| | AGLV | Area of Great Landscape Value | | SLINC | Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation | | AOD | Above Ordnance Datum | | SSSI | Site of Special Scientific Interest | | AONB | Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty | | TPO | Tree Preservation Order | | AVR | Accurate Visual Representation | | VEM | Visual Envelope Map | | c. | Circa | | ZVI | Zone of Visual Influence | | CoP | Code of Practice | | ZTV | Zone of Theoretical Visibility | | CWS | County Wildlife Site | | ZPV | Zone of Primary Visibility | | DEM | Digital Elevation Model | | ZSV | Zone of Secondary Visibility | | 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 | | | | | | | | | | ## 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 A component part of the landscape (e.g. landform, roads, hedges, woods). Element Landscape A prominent eye-catching element (e.g. wooded hilltop or church spire). Feature 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 LCTs refer to multiple areas of the same character. Character Types 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 (nonbuilt) 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. Significant Effect 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 (1o) 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 (2o) 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: | Value Level | |----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 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: Value Level Relevant Criteria 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. Very High In rural landscapes, diverse range of large and continuous habitats of very high importance. Characteristics in good condition but not in unified manner: interrupted character. Landscape and cultural elements are mostly in a strong functional and visual condition. High In rural landscapes, the semi-natural habitats are fairly large, closely clustered and frequent allowing relatively easy cross-interaction. 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 Medium 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. Weak or degraded landscape character with a small number of characteristics present and at least as many incongruous elements present. Low 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. 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 Very and cultural significance. Low 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 | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 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 In Relation To Rarity | 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 In Relation To Representativeness | | | 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 in relation to Conservation Interest | 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 in relation to Tranquillity/Wildness | Value Level | Relevant Criteria | |------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Strong sense of remoteness or isolation with virtually no obvious human influences present - | | | Relative abundance of landscape characteristics contributing to an experience of tranquillity. | | | Very High | | | A Tranquil Area. | | | Secluded parts of the landscape are wild in character, where there is a sense of remoteness or | | | High | isolation. Human influences are not dominant, with settlement being sparsely distributed. | | Occasional minor detractors to an experience of tranquillity. | | | Wildness is not a strong contributing characteristic and human influences are evident, with | | | Medium | 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 in relation to Associations | Value Level | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 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: Table Ap 9 Recreation Value Value Level Relevant Criteria Internationally recognised or promoted area or routes for tourism and recreational use (e.g. Very High National Park, European Long Distance Footpath) and very well used generally recreationally by more distant visitors and local population. Nationally or regionally promoted areas of open recreation or routes for such use (e.g. country High 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: Table Ap 10 Agricultural Value 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. Medium       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. | Susceptibility | Relevant Criteria | |--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Key landscape characteristics highly susceptible to change and very difficult to replace without | | | Very High | affecting the existing character. Strong landscape structure with many distinct characteristics worthy | | of conservation. | | | Landscape characteristics susceptible to change and fairly difficult to mitigate without affecting the | | | High | existing character. Typically of recognisable landscape structure and some features worthy of | | conservation. | | | Landscape characteristics with a degree of susceptibility to change; some scope to replace these | | | Medium | elements without adversely affecting the character. Distinguishable landscape structure, few or no | | features worthy of conservation; may contain occasional detracting features. | | | Landscape characteristics of low susceptibility to change or easily replaced and potentially enhanced. | | | Low | Weak landscape structure or transitional in nature; some evidence of degradation and a number of | | detracting features. | | | Landscape characteristics are not susceptible to change. High probability to mitigate or replace the | | | Very Low | 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 ## 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. 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. ## Significance Of Landscape Effects | Significance | Adverse Landscape Effects | |-----------------------------------------------|------------------------------| | Overall, typically, there may be some Small | | | scale, Short-term impacts but virtually no | | | Negligible | | | lasting adverse effect on existing landscape | | | character. | | | Typically: | | | Some Small-Medium scale effects on existing | | | landscape character in poor condition. | | | Minor | | | Very Small or Temporary changes to Medium | | | sensitivity landscape. | | | Minimal effect on landscape character. | | | 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 | | | Moderate | 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. | | | Typically: | | | Numerous Long-term effects on Medium | | | sensitivity landscape and/or landscape | | | receptor. | | | Major | | | Small permanent effects on highly sensitivity | | | landscape and/or landscape receptor. | | | Landscape receptor and/or character is | | | affected to a significant degree. | | 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 Overall, typically, there may be some Small scale Short-term positive impacts but virtually no lasting beneficial effect on existing 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 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-Longterm duration in areas of Medium landscape sensitivity; For a small number of characteristics for a Short- Medium-term duration in lower sensitivity landscapes 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 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 acknowledged that levels of effects can be a useful aid when reading and understanding the assessment. ## General Relationship Between Magnitude, Sensitivity And Significance 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. ## Sensitivity Of Visual Receptors Visual Sensitivity Value and Susceptibility to Change Criteria Typical Receptor Types/Locations 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 Very High sources. Very high **susceptibility to change** as a very high level of attention focussed on the landscape and particular views. Well-known area recognised regionally for high landscape **value**. Open areas of recognised public access where primary enjoyment is of the views of the High landscape. High **susceptibility to change** as a high level of attention focused on the landscape and particular views. Locations afford views of some **value**, but visual amenity not well recognised beyond locality. Medium Moderate **susceptibility to change** as a moderate level of attention focussed on the landscape and particular views. Viewpoint context and location is of lesser value than similar views from nearby visual receptors that may be more accessible. Low Low **susceptibility to change** as low level of attention focussed on the landscape and particular views. Viewpoint context is such that views have a very low **value**. Very Low Expectations of visual amenity are very low. Activity at viewpoint is incidental to the view. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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: Magnitude of Visual Effect Visual Criteria Where the proposals become the only dominant feature in the view and to which all other Very Large elements become subordinate. Typically involves direct views at close range over a wide horizontal and vertical extent. Where the proposals would form a significant and immediately apparent element of the scene Large 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. Where proposals would form a visible and recognisable new development but where it is not Medium 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. 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. Small 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. ## Significance Of Visual Effects | Significance | |---------------------------------------------------| | Adverse effect has minimal significance due to | | low visual amenity even from otherwise | | Negligible | | sensitive viewpoints. | | Produces only very slight deterioration to views. | | Typically: | | Large-very large scale deterioration to low | | sensitivity views of low quality. | | Small scale deterioration to lower and Medium | | Minor | | sensitivity views of high quality. | | Very Small-Medium scale deterioration to higher | | sensitivity receptors with low existing visual | | amenity. | | Typically: | | Noticeable Long-term or Large scale | | deterioration in low sensitivity but high quality | | views. | | Medium scale deterioration to Medium | | Moderate | | 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: | | Medium scale deterioration in High sensitivity, | | high quality views, or larger scale deterioration | | in High sensitivity but lower quality views. | | Major | | Small scale deterioration to higher sensitivity | | views of high quality. | | Considerable Long-term deterioration in | | Medium sensitivity views of high amenity value. | | Clear and obvious Very Large-scale adverse | | changes resulting in considerable and Long-term | | Substantial | | deterioration in Highly sensitive and important | | views. | 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. Beneficial effect has minimal significance due to limited scope to improve existing view even from sensitive viewpoints. Provides only very slight improvement to views. 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. 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. 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. Clear and obvious very large scale changes resulting in considerable and Long-term improvement in existing poor view for High sensitivity receptors. ## 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. Cumulative Visual Effect Sub-type of Effect Description Simultaneous Two or more developments visible from one viewpoint in field of view gained from looking in one direction Combined Effect Successive Two or more developments visible from one viewpoint only by changing orientation of viewing direction (i.e. by turning round) Where similar visual effects are experienced along a route, from different Frequently viewpoints separated by short distances or short time gaps (e.g. along a sequential motorway) Sequential Effect Where similar visual effects are experienced along a route, from different Occasionally viewpoints separated by large distances or long time gaps (e.g. along a sequential 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 Protect and maintain the historic fi eld pattern Protect and maintain historic drystone walls Protect and maintain historic fi eld barns ## Manage Manage and enhance surviving areas of natural landscapes Enhance the diversity of agricultural grassland Manage traditional plantation woodlands Manage and enhance woodlands Manage and enhance linear tree cover and amenity trees Manage the network of tracks and footpaths to maximise opportunities to enjoy the landscape Manage the network of minor roads to maintain character and local access Manage historic mineral landscapes ## Plan Create areas of limestone grassland and heath Create new native broadleaved woodland Develop appropriate landscapes from mineral workings Develop small-scale renewable energy for local needs 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 ## W L O 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 typifi ed 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 The Historic Fi Eld Pattern Field pattern is a prominent feature in the Limestone Village Farmlands and Plateau Pastures, refl ecting the historic character of these landscapes. It is important that these fi eld patterns are protected, particularly in the Limestone Village Farmlands where the enclosure refl ects the earlier, Medieval, open fi eld system. Where the fi eld pattern has become fragmented through the removal of fi eld 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. ## 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 Fi Eld Barns Traditional farm buildings are of signifi cant value to the character of the landscape and it is important to maintain the fabric and appearance of such buildings. Isolated fi eld 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. ## 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 benefi t 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 signifi cantly 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 infl uenced 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.

en

0021-pdf

Clean Water Trunk Mains Greater London Authority February 2015 ## Trunk Mains: Consequence Of Failure Wick Lane 2012 Regent St 2012 Maida Vale 2007 Tooley St 2009 Trunk Mains can cause unacceptable disruption to our customers ## Addressing Trunk Main Failures - Root cause analysis - Trunk main testing - Trunk mains replacement, relining or duplication - Monitoring for preventative or rapid response - Risk analysis and impact assessment - Innovation investment - Further research with University of Surrey on probability and corrosion modelling ## Root Cause Analysis - When a major failure occurs, a root cause analysis is undertaken to: ─Review all data ─Perform detailed operational review ─Forensic analysis of any pipe cutout ─Non destructive testing of remaining main ─Assessment of any external factors - The aim is to determine the best long-term solution for the main and to learn lessons (to update procedures and standards if needed). ## Trunk Main Testing Site survey/questionnaire and soil testing Non-destructive testing (NDT) Laboratory testing of soils Laboratory testing of pipe material ## Trunk Main Monitoring Risk Analysis Installation of monitoring allows preventative or rapid response Impact assessment ## Trunk Main Risk Model • 4,700km of Trunk Main • 157,000 simulated burst points spread evenly across this network (at least every 100m). • Probability of Failure and Consequence of Failure calculated at every one of these simulated burst points. ## Calculating Risk Of Failure • Trunk Main Risk Model calculates risk using the corporate risk framework (Cost of Failure) for the following measures: ─Health & Safety ─Internal Flooding ─Pollution ─Interruption to Supply ─Low Pressure "Asset Investment Manager" Risk Map # Leakage & Burst Detection: Syrinix Trunkminder Trunk Main Monitoring Tool For Leakage And Bursts We'll be installing approximately another 300 trunk main monitoring units to protect high consequence locations over the next five years. Burst detection: Hydroguard Trunk main monitoring tool for early burst detection We've already installed circa 350 across London and Thames Valley at the highest consequence locations ## Leakage Detection: Sahara • Highly accurate trunk main mobile leakage detection tool • Used to find 24Ml/d of leakage per year • Significant investment over next 5 years to install more survey chambers ## Trunk Mains Strategy: Looking Ahead Long Term: Reducing risk, development to meet predicted changes in failure

en

1754-pdf

number to be emboldened. 99 XXXXXXXXX 9999 Heading 18pt Arial bold. X = 16mm, Y = 108mm ## Construction Industry Scheme Sub-heading and data item to be 11pt Arial bold. X = 16mm Confirmation of subcontractor verification as requested on 99 XXXXXXXXX 99 Please keep this letter as you may need to use these details when filling in your next Contractor's monthly return. If you have any questions, please phone the CIS Helpline. Please note that for each subcontractor shown, the specified tax treatment should be applied to any payments you make until we tell you otherwise. 1) V9999999999. We were able to match the following subcontractors to our records. The verification number for these subcontractors is | Name | UTR | Tax treatment | Deduction rate | |-------------------------------------|-------------|-----------------|------------------| | NAME LINE 1 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX | 99999 99999 | XXXXX | 999 | | NAME LINE 2 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX | | | | 2) We were not able to match the following subcontractors to our records. When paying these subcontractors you must deduct 30% from their payments. Each of these subcontractors has their own unique verification number, as shown below. | Name | Name | |-------------------------------------|-------------------------------------| | NAME LINE 1 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX | NAME LINE 1 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX | | NAME LINE 2 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX | NAME LINE 2 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX | | Address | Address | | ADDRESS LINE 1 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX | ADDRESS LINE 1 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX | | ADDRESS LINE 2 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX | ADDRESS LINE 2 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX | | ADDRESS LINE 3 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX | ADDRESS LINE 3 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX | | ADDRESS LINE 4 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX | ADDRESS LINE 4 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX | | ADDRESS LINE 5 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX | ADDRESS LINE 5 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX | | POSTCODE X | POSTCODE X | 99999999999999999999 99999999999999999999 Telephone number Telephone number V V9999999999/XX V9999999999/XX Verification number Verification number Only print logo on page 1. Top of second and subsequent pages to start with either Overlay body text left aligned at: X = 16mm . Overlay body text 11pt Arial, emboldened where shown. Variable overlay will be one of three options. 1) 1st marked paragraph only. 2) 2nd marked paragraph only. 3) 1st and 2nd paragraph together. The two paragraphs will also be variable lengths depending on how many subcontractors the contractor has verified. All data items in body of letter to be 11pt Arial. Unmatched verification - Only print address and telephone number (including titles) if the contractor supplied them at time of verification and they are held on the unmatched verification record. Note: the unmatched verification record will be held within new CIS (recognised by the unique unmatched verification number) and linked to the Contractor scheme.

en

1061-pdf

## Introduction This is a short guide and glossary for the Calderdale Anti-Poverty Dashboards. We hope you find it useful. If you have any further questions about the dashboards please contact performance.businessintelligence@calderdale.gov.uk. The Calderdale Anti-Poverty Dashboards show the latest results for 17 statistics about poverty in Calderdale. Ward and lower layer super output area (LSOA) results are included where available. The dashboards are available at opendata.calderdale.gov.uk/extensions/Poverty-index/Poverty-index.html. The dashboards accompany the Calderdale Anti-Poverty action plan. The plan has been produced in consultation with local partner agencies. More information on the plan and tackling poverty in Calderdale is available on the Calderdale Council website at www.calderdale.gov.uk/nweb/COUNCIL.minutes_pkg.view_doc?p_Type=AR&p_ID=62433. ## Quick Links Click On One Of These Links To Go Straight To A Topic | | User Guide | Glossary | |--------------------------|-------------------------------|-------------| | 1. | Geographical terms | | | 2. | Acronyms | | | 3. | Statistic data sources | | | | | | | How to download an image | | | | | | | | 1. | Getting Started | | | 2. | Home Page | | | 3. | Ward and LSOA Overviews | | | 4. | Benefits summary | | | 5. | Ward and LSOA maps and charts | | | 6. | Calderdale only charts | | ## User Guide 1 Getting Started Click on the following link to view the Calderdale Anti-Poverty Dashboards home page opendata.calderdale.gov.uk/extensions/Povertyindex/Poverty-index.html. ## 2 Home Page This dashboard shows the latest published results for Calderdale. Sixteen of the statistics have additional dashboards showing results at ward and / or LSOA in map and chart form. The remaining dashboards show results over time and / or in comparison to other local authorities: - Click on Ward or LSOA overview to view a snapshot of results by ward / LSOA; - Click on a number to view charts and maps about that number. Return to page 1 ## 3 Ward And Lsoa Overviews These dashboards show the latest published results for Calderdale or one or more wards or LSOAs. Use the Ward / LSOA filter to view the latest published results for the areas you have selected: - Click on a term in a drop down list - A green tick ✓ will appear - Click on the green tick to apply the term you have selected as a filter - The dashboard will update in line with the filter. To remove filters click on the "Clear all filters" link in the top right of the screen. Click on a number to view charts and maps showing results by ward and LSOA. ## 4 Benefits Summary This dashboard provides an overview of benefit take up by ward and LSOA. Use the scroll bar at the bottom of the chart to find results for a ward or LSOA not immediately on display. ## 5 Ward And Lsoa Maps, Charts And Tables There are sixteen statistics which have results by ward and/or LSOA. For each one you can view results by map, chart and/or table by LSOA / ward. Smart screen and desktop users can zoom in on maps to view areas in more detail. Desktop users can use the central button on the computer mouse to zoom in. ## 5 Ward And Lsoa Maps, Charts And Tables (Continued) Use filters by Ward / LSOA or topic band to create customised tables, charts and maps that reflect your area of interest: - Click on a term in a drop down list - A green ✓ will appear - Click on the green tick to apply the term you have selected as a filter - The map will update in line with the filter. The numbers in the "Selected .." buttons at the top of the screen will update to reflect your selection. To remove all filters click on the "Clear all filters" link in the top right of the screen. ## 5 Ward And Lsoa Maps, Charts And Tables (Continued) Tables can be sorted by any column. Click on the column heading to sort or filter Some tables are grouped using tabs such as in the example below. Click on a tab such as "Unauthorised school absence" in this example to view a different table. Return to page 1 ## 6 Calderdale Only Charts There are six topical statistics which have Calderdale information but do not have Ward or LSOA results. Three examples are provided in this guide. The dashboard format varies depending on the statistic. You can customise charts by selecting time periods or local authority names. Return to page 1 ## Glossary 1 Geographical Terms Many of the statistics can be viewed at either lower layer super output (LSOA) or ward level. Descriptions of Calderdale's LSOAs, Wards and other sub-district geographies are available from **dataworks.calderdale.gov.uk/dataset/lower-super-output-areas-by-postcode**. ## 2 Acronyms | Acronym | Description | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | DPP | | | | Deprivation Pupil Premium. Pupils who have been eligible for free school meals within the previous six years are eligible for | | DPP | | | FSM | | | Free school meals. | | | IDACI | | | Income deprivation affecting children index. Part of the English Indices of Deprivation 2015 | | | IDAOPI | | | Income deprivation affecting older people index. Part of the English Indices of Deprivation 2015 | | | IMD | | | Index of multiple deprivation. Part of the English Indices of Deprivation 2019. Government measure of deprivation at LSOA / | | | neighbourhood level. | | | KS2 RWM | | | Key stage 2 Reading Writing and Mathematics. An acronym included in measures used to assess the number and proportion | | | of pupils sitting key stage 2 tests in reading, writing and mathematics who achieve the expected standard in all three. | | | LSOA | | | Lower Layer Super Output Area. A statistically defined area created by the Office for National Statistics. Each area contains | | | approximately 1700 people. LSOAs are different sizes depending on their population density. LSOAs tend to be larger in rural | | | areas compared with urban areas due to the difference in population density. There are 128 LSOAs in Calderdale. Each | | | LSOA has a label: eg Calderdale 001A and a code eg E01010911 | | Return to page 1 ## Glossary 3 Dashboard Statistic Data Sources | Dashboard | Statistic | Data source | |-----------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|----------------------------| | Technical note | | | | Benefits | | | | Summary | | | | People claiming Disability | | | | Living Allowance, Personal | | | | Independence Payment, | | | | Pension Credit or Universal | | | | Credit, Households claiming | | | | Universal Credit, Housing | | | | Benefit claimants, Claimant | | | | Count | | | | See individual dashboard statistic data source descriptions | | | | below. The Benefits summary dashboard is updated monthly | | | | with latest results. The period displayed depends on the | | | | benefit. Data on Claimant Count and people claiming universal | | | | credit is updated monthly and available within one month of | | | | period end. Data for Housing Benefit and Households claiming | | | | Universal Credit* is updated quarterly in February, May, August | | | | and November and is available within three months from period | | | | end. Data for people claiming Pension Credit or Disability | | | | benefits* is updated quarterly in February, May, August and | | | | November and is available within six months of period end. | | | | Child Poverty | | | | Percentage of Children in | | | | Low Income Families | | | | (Relative measure, before | | | | housing costs) | | | | HM Revenues and Customs (HMRC) and Department of Work | | | | and Pensions (DWP), Children in Low Income Families: c/o | | | | stat-xplore.dwp.gov.uk | , updated annually. Updates expected | | | March of following year | | | | NOMIS WEB Office for National Statistics (ONS) Claimant | | | | Count | nomisweb.co.uk | . Results updated monthly | | Claimant Count | | | | Number or percentage of | | | | people claiming Jobseekers | | | | allowance or Universal | | | | Credit and looking for work, | | | | overall and for selected age | | | | groups | | | Calderdale results may differ to total ward or total LSOA results due to DWP internal processes Calderdale results may differ to total ward or total LSOA results due to ONS internal processes. | Dashboard | Statistic | Data source | |---------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------|----------------| | Technical note | | | | Council Tax | | | | Debt | | | | Total Council Tax Debt | Calderdale Council Tax system c/o Calderdale Council | | | Qlikview July 2019, accessed September 2019. Next update | | | | expected July 2020 | | | | Disability | | | | Claimants* | | | | Number of people claiming | | | | Disability Living Allowance | | | | and Personal Independence | | | | Payment | | | | Department of Work and Pensions (DWP), | stat- | | | xplore.dwp.gov.uk | , updated quarterly. Updates expected six | | | months after period end in February, May, August and | | | | November | | | | Employment | | | | rate | | | | Percentage of people aged | | | | 16 to 64 who are in | | | | employment | | | | NOMISWEB, Annual Population Survey, | nomisweb.co.uk | . | | Updated quarterly. Updates expected four months after period | | | | end in April, July, October and January | | | | Employment | | | | rate Disabled | | | | NOMISWEB, Annual Population Survey, | nomisweb.co.uk | . | | Updated quarterly. Updates expected four months after period | | | | end in April, July, October and January | | | | % People in Employment | | | | aged 16 to 64 who are | | | | Employment rate EA | | | | (Equality Act) core or | | | | work limiting disabled | | | | | | | | Free school | | | | meals | | | | Number of school pupils | | | | eligible and claiming free | | | | school meals. | | | | Calderdale School Census January 2019, c/o Calderdale | | | | Council Performance and Business Intelligence Team and DFE | | | | Schools Pupils and their Characteristics Accompanying Tables, | | | | www.gov.uk | . January results published in June. | | Calderdale results differ to total ward and LSOA results as a small number of payment addresses are outside the district Dashboard results are based on pupils living in Calderdale. Published results include pupils living in neighbouring boroughs | Dashboard | Statistic | Data source | |--------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------|--------------------------------| | Technical note | | | | Public Health England; c/o Public Health England Fingertips | | | | website | www.phoutcomes.info | . Next update to be confirmed | | Healthy Life | | | | Expectancy Gap | | | | Average in the number of | | | | years difference in healthy | | | | life expectancy at birth | | | | between the most and least | | | | deprived Medium Layer | | | | Super Output Areas in the | | | | local authority area between | | | | 2009 and 2013 | | | | Homelessness | | | | Assessments | | | | Number of initial | | | | assessments of homeless | | | | households, or households | | | | at risk of homelessness | | | | Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government | | | | (MHCLG) Initial Assessments table Assessments_201903 | | | | sheet LA Dropdown, | www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data- | | | sets/live-tables-on-homelessness | , updated quarterly. Updates | | | expected six months after period end in December, March, | | | | June and September. | | | | Number of Households | | | | claiming Universal Credit | | | | Department of Work and Pensions (DWP), | stat- | | | xplore.dwp.gov.uk | , Updates expected six months after period | | | end in February, May, August and November | | | | Households | | | | claiming | | | | Universal | | | | Credit* | | | | Percentage of households in | | | | fuel poverty | | | | Households in | | | | Fuel Poverty | | | | Gov.uk (2019) Fuel Poverty sub-regional statistics; | | | | www.gov.uk/government/collections/fuel-poverty-sub-regional- | | | | statistics | , updated annually. Updates expected in June | | | Housing Benefit | | | | Number of Housing Benefit | | | | claimants | | | | Department of Work and Pensions (DWP), | stat- | | | xplore.dwp.gov.uk | , updated quarterly. Updates expected three | | | months after period end in February, May, August and | | | | November | | | Calderdale results may differ to total ward or total LSOA results due to DWP internal processes. | Dashboard | Statistic | Data source | |----------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|----------------------------| | Technical note | | | | Insolvency Service (2019) Individual Insolvencies by Ward, | | | | England and Wales 2013 to 2018. Next update to be | | | | confirmed | | | | Insolvencies | | | | Number of individual | | | | insolvencies including | | | | individual voluntary | | | | arrangements, debt relief | | | | orders and bankruptcies | | | | National Consortium of Examination Results (NCER). | | | | Calderdale and comparative results from | www.gov.uk | . Ward | | and LSOA results from Calderdale Council Performance and | | | | Business Intelligence team. Annual results published in | | | | November. | | | | Key Stage 2 | | | | Reading Writing | | | | and | | | | Mathematics | | | | achievement | | | | Number and percentage of | | | | pupils sitting key stage 2 | | | | test in reading, writing and | | | | mathematics who have | | | | achieved the expected | | | | standard in all three | | | | subjects. | | | | Living Wage | | | | Number of employee jobs | | | | with hourly pay below the | | | | living wage | | | | Office for National Statistics (ONS), "Annual Survey of Hours | | | | and Earnings (ASHE) - Estimates of the number and proportion | | | | of employee jobs with hourly pay below the living wage, by | | | | parliamentary constituency and local authority, UK, April 2016 | | | | and April 2017"; | www.ons.gov.uk | , accessed 2/1/2018. Next | | update to be confirmed | | | | Older People in | | | | Poverty | | | | Percentage of Older People | | | | aged 60+ who are income | | | | deprived | | | | Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government | | | | (MHCLG), English Income deprivation affecting older people | | | | index 2019; c/o LG Inform Plus | www.lginform.local.gov.uk | , | | updated every three or four years. Next update expected | | | | 2023. | | | | Pension Credit | | | | Number of people claiming | | | | Pension Credit | | | | Department of Work and Pensions (DWP), | stat- | | | xplore.dwp.gov.uk | , updated quarterly. Updates expected six | | | months after period end in February, May, August and | | | | November | | | Dashboard results are based on pupils living in Calderdale. Published results include pupils living in neighbouring boroughs Total ward and total LSOA results may differ due to MHCLG / LGINFORM PLUS internal processes Calderdale results may differ to total ward or total LSOA results due to DWP data process. | Dashboard | Statistic | Data source | |--------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------|---------------------------------------| | Technical note | | | | Number of People claiming | | | | Universal Credit | | | | Department of Work and Pensions (DWP); | stat- | | | xplore.dwp.gov.uk | . Results updated monthly | | | People claiming | | | | Universal | | | | Credit* | | | | Percentage of People who | | | | are income deprived | | | | People in | | | | Poverty | | | | Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government | | | | (MHCLG), English Index of Income Deprivation 2019; c/o LG | | | | Inform Plus | www.lginform.local.gov.uk | , updated every 3 or 4 | | years. Next update expected 2023 | | | | Repossessions | | | | Number of Mortgage and | | | | Landlord Repossessions | | | | Ministry of Justice, Mortgage and Landlord Repossessions | | | | Statistics; c/o | gov.uk | , updated quarterly. Updates expected | | four months after period end in February, May, August and | | | | November | | | | 1) Calderdale School Census Annual Full Absence Report. | | | | School Absence | | | | Number of absence | | | | Results updated each March | | | | 2) Department for Education Local authority Interactive Tool | | | | https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/local-authority- | | | | interactive-tool-lait | | | | | | | | sessions and absence rates | | | | for all schools, primary and | | | | secondary schools; | | | | difference in the absence | | | | rates of pupils eligible for | | | | Deprivation Pupil Premium | | | | and pupils not eligible; | | | | results for all absence, | | | | unauthorised and authorised | | | | absence | | | Calderdale results may differ to total ward or total LSOA results due to DWP data process. Total ward and total LSOA results may differ due to MHCLG / LGINFORM PLUS internal processes. Calderdale results may differ to total ward results, as the latter do not include results for pupils who live outside the district. | Dashboard | Statistic | Data source | |----------------------------------------------------------|--------------|----------------| | Technical note | | | | | | | | School | | | | Readiness | | | | National Consortium of Examination Results (NCER). | | | | Calderdale and comparative results from | www.gov.uk | . Ward | | and LSOA results from Calderdale Council Performance and | | | | Business Intelligence team. Annual results published in | | | | November. | | | | Percentage of children | | | | ready for school | | | | Also known as Percentage | | | | of children achieving a good | | | | level of development within | | | | the Early Years Foundation | | | | Stage Profile. | | | * Ward level results for Universal Credit and Disability Benefits are based on the Office for National Statistics (ONS) definition of "best fit" between LSOAs and Wards. A list of LSOAs for each ward is available from dataworks.calderdale.gov.uk/dataset/lower-super-outputareas-by-postcode. Return to page 1 ## How To Download A Map As An Image This will vary depending on your web browser. For Google Chrome 1. Click on the map you wish to export; 2. Right click 'Save image as…'. Return to page 1 ## Snipping Tool - This is a free tool on all Windows PCs. - It is a great way to take a copy of an image from your screen If you have not used Snipping Tool before you can find it as follows: - Click on the "Start Button" - Type "Snipping Tool" in the search… box - Snipping tool will appear in your search menu. - Follow the instructions in the tool to use.

en

2650-pdf

# Fees And Charges 2016-17 City Of York Council Internal Audit Report Business Unit: Economy and Place Responsible Officer: Corporate Director of Economy and Place Date Issued: 12th October 2017 Status: Final Reference: 10580/003 Overall Audit Opinion Reasonable Assurance ## Summary And Overall Conclusions Introduction Councils can charge for services delivered in order to raise revenue and to cover the cost of providing the service. The Localism Act 2011 developed the powers that councils have in terms of fees and charges that were originally set down in the Local Government Act 2000. The amounts that can be charged are either set by the Government or the council and may be limited to cost recovery in order to avoid excessive charges being made to deliver surplus income for the council. The council has several fees and charges that are agreed each year by the Full Council as part of the budget setting report that is presented in February. The amount of money the fees and charges generate varies between £1k and £250k per year depending on the service. ## Objectives And Scope Of The Audit The purpose of this audit was to provide assurance to management that procedures and controls within the system will ensure that:  Fees and Charges are correctly calculated on a regular basis.  The principals behind the Fees and Charges are understood and can be explained when necessary. The audit reviewed a sample of six fees and charges within the Economy and Place directorate. These were selected following discussions with the Assistant Director of Planning and Public Protection. The following fees and charges were reviewed as part of the audit: Animal Health, Court Cases, Premises Licence, xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Private Taxi Hire Licenses and New Roads and Street Works. ## Key Findings The methodology behind the calculations for the fees and charges was generally understood by the Service Managers and the majority were correctly calculated, however, improvements could be made to support the business case behind them to ensure an appropriate level for the fees are set. The basis for including costs and monitoring demand for the service were not always known which meant it was not possible to confirm whether the fees were set at appropriate levels or whether there was justification to change their level. An annex has been included to provide details of individual fees and charges reviewed. ## Overall Conclusions The arrangements for managing risk were satisfactory with a number of weaknesses identified. An acceptable control environment is in operation but there are a number of improvements that could be made. Our overall opinion of the controls within the system at the time of the audit was that they provided Reasonable Assurance. ## 1 Business Case Supporting Fees And Charges Issue/Control Weakness Risk Charges are not being set at the optimal level. The business case to support the level of fees and charges was not always known. ## Findings Fees and charges can be set based on the costs involved in providing the service, the demand level for the service or because the fees were set based on political decisions that were taken either by the council or the government. The following issues were noted with the setting of the level of fees and charges.  The costs that were involved in setting the charges were not always known therefore it was not possible to confirm whether the fees that were set covered all the costs in providing the service. In particular it was not always possible to confirm whether indirect costs such as overheads, enforcement or costs from other services had been correctly included in the calculation.  The demand for the service was often based on historical assumptions that had no supporting evidence. For example fees were set on the basis that demand would not change because York was a popular tourist town. Although this would justify the assumption that demand for services wouldn't fall it is not known whether the level of fees could be increased above what is currently charged based on the demand for the service.  In five out of six cases in the sample it was not known whether there was a surplus or deficit for the service or what level the surplus was even though in some cases it was likely to be quite large. In addition there was no adequate explanation for the surpluses or the political reasoning behind them. ## Agreed Action 1.1 This has been shared with all Heads of Service across Economy & Place. They have been asked to consider the rationale for fees when setting as part of the next budget round. The primary focus will be on those charges that raise the highest level of fees. Managers are to consider costs, charges of other authorities and policy implications. ## 2 Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | Issue/Control Weakness | Risk | |-----------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------| | xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | | xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. | | ## Findings xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Agreed Action 2.1 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Corporate Director of Economy and Place 30th November 2017 | Comments | Regulatory | |--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Charge | | | 2016/17 | | | Budgeted | | | Income | | | Animal Health | £9,820 | | cost element has been calculated with a working paper to support this, however, the level of income has not been | | | calculated. Given that the charges are included on the NL209 cost centre which includes ten other charges and | | | therefore it is not known whether there is a surplus or deficit for these charges. | | | Court Cases | £14,410 | | because it is not possible to predict whether court cases will be successful or how the court will award costs. Given | | | that the basis of the charge is that only costs relating to cases are recovered then a deficit will occur on this | | | because not all prosecutions will be successful. However, the level of the deficit is not known because the income | | | and expenditure relating to the entire service is included on one cost centre. | | | £249,560 The level of the charge is set by the Government with the methodology for the current level being introduced in | Premises | | Licenses | 2005. The amount of income is fairly fixed because the license fees are set by the Government with the number of | | licensed premises not changing significantly. However, the amount of administration and enforcement work is not | | | known and it may not cover the level of income meaning there is a significant surplus. Given that the cost centre for | | | the charge is NL209 and is shared with other charges the level of surplus is not known. | | | £192,100 The taxi account should balance to zero and although the surplus is quite high at the end of the 2016/17 financial | Private Taxi | |--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Hire | year this is due to be reduced over the following three financial years. No significant issues were noted in settings | | fees or estimating the costs of the service. | | | xxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx | xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx | | xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx | | | xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx | | | £209,540 Some of the charges are set by the Government with others by the council, however, it is not known how the | New Roads | | and Street | | | Works | | | council's element was set as general overheads have not been apportioned to the relevant cost centre. The amount | | | of income depends on the workplan that utility companies agree with the council and whether the utility companies | | | follow this. There appears to be a surplus on this account but it was not possible to confirm the level of this surplus | | | because the number of fines received from contractors for poor performance varies from year to year. | | ## Audit Opinions And Priorities For Actions Audit Opinions Audit work is based on sampling transactions to test the operation of systems. It cannot guarantee the elimination of fraud or error. Our opinion is based on the risks we identify at the time of the audit. Our overall audit opinion is based on 5 grades of opinion, as set out below. Opinion Assessment of internal control | High Assurance | |----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | Substantial | | Assurance | | Overall, good management of risk with few weaknesses identified. An effective control environment is in | | operation but there is scope for further improvement in the areas identified. | | | | Reasonable | | Assurance | | Overall, satisfactory management of risk with a number of weaknesses identified. An acceptable control | | environment is in operation but there are a number of improvements that could be made. | Limited Assurance Overall, poor management of risk with significant control weaknesses in key areas and major improvements required before an effective control environment will be in operation. No Assurance Overall, there is a fundamental failure in control and risks are not being effectively managed. A number of key areas require substantial improvement to protect the system from error and abuse. ## Priorities For Actions Priority 1 A fundamental system weakness, which presents unacceptable risk to the system objectives and requires urgent attention by management. Priority 2 A significant system weakness, whose impact or frequency presents risks to the system objectives, which needs to be addressed by management. Priority 3 The system objectives are not exposed to significant risk, but the issue merits attention by management. Where information resulting from audit work is made public or is provided to a third party by the client or by Veritau then this must be done on the understanding that any third party will rely on the information at its own risk. Veritau will not owe a duty of care or assume any responsibility towards anyone other than the client in relation to the information supplied. Equally, no third party may assert any rights or bring any claims against Veritau in connection with the information. Where information is provided to a named third party, the third party will keep the information confidential. This page is intentionally left blank

en

3933-pdf

| SUPPLIER NAME | PORTFOLIO | COST CENTRE | EXPENDITURE CLASS | POST. DATE | AMOUNT | REF. | |------------------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------------------------|-------------------------------|--------------|-----------|--------| | 2B DANCE PRODUCTIONS | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Minor Financial Items | Unallocated Costs | 12/03/2014 | 775.00 | 111358 | | 3T LOGISTICS LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Debtors Suspense | 20/03/2014 | 234.34 | 111865 | | AA SHOPFITTING & BUILDING SERVICES LTD | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | The Pavillion - Land And Build | Rea: Plumbing | 05/03/2014 | 900.00 | 111088 | | ABEL ALARM COMPANY LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Noise Pollution | Works In Default | 26/03/2014 | 430.00 | 111018 | | ABRITAS | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Applications - Business | 26/03/2014 | 2,902.00 | 112287 | | ABRITAS | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Applications - Business | 26/03/2014 | 4,537.00 | 112287 | | AC TRAINING SERVICES | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Vehicle Maintenance | Seminars & Short Training | 12/03/2014 | 1,200.00 | 111417 | | ADECCO UK LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Environmental Health | Gross Pay | 20/03/2014 | 397.27 | 111863 | | ADECCO UK LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Environmental Health | Gross Pay | 20/03/2014 | 416.99 | 111864 | | ADMIRAL CLEANING SUPPLIES LTD | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Council Offices & Land | Hygiene Equip & Supps | 26/03/2014 | 515.58 | 111403 | | AIR QUALITY CONSULTANTS | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 12/03/2014 | 528.00 | 111339 | | ALLPAY LIMITED DIRECT DEBIT ACCOUNT | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Banking Charges | Transaction Costs - All Pay | 06/03/2014 | 419.20 | 111096 | | ANCHORPRINT GROUP LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Communications | District Magazine Publication | 26/03/2014 | 540.00 | 112185 | | ANDY THURMAN LIMITED | Community Services | Benefits Section | Temporary/Casual Staff | 19/03/2014 | 787.50 | 111859 | | ASPE | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Non-Kerbside Recycling Prom. | Seminars & Short Training | 20/03/2014 | 552.00 | 111969 | | A & S PROPERTIES | Community Services | Homelessness | Homelessness | 27/03/2014 | 1,000.00 | 112263 | | BADENOCH & CLARK | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | C.Tax Billing, Coll & Recovery | Temporary/Casual Staff | 06/03/2014 | 913.61 | 111021 | | BADENOCH & CLARK | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | C.Tax Billing, Coll & Recovery | Temporary/Casual Staff | 06/03/2014 | 895.81 | 111022 | | BARTON PETROLEUM LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Fuel | 06/03/2014 | 2,659.76 | 111071 | | BLABY & WHETSTONE YOUTH CLUB LTD | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Local Sports Alliance | Grants - Sportivate | 24/03/2014 | 530.00 | 112006 | | BOTTOMLINE TECHNOLOGIES | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Applications - Business | 27/03/2014 | 2,473.79 | 112363 | | BRAUNSTONE TOWN COUNCIL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Customer Services | Rent Payments | 06/03/2014 | 11,068.00 | 111085 | | BRITISH PARKING ASSOCIATION | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Car Parks | Subscriptions | 26/03/2014 | 882.00 | 112215 | | BRITISH TELECOM PLC | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Telecoms - Calls | 26/03/2014 | 2,090.05 | 112205 | | BRITISH TELECOM PLC | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Telecoms - Calls | 26/03/2014 | 2,114.50 | 112206 | | BRITISH TELECOM PLC | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Telecoms - Calls | 26/03/2014 | 2,090.05 | 112207 | | BRITISH TELECOM PLC | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Telecoms - Internal | 26/03/2014 | 5,930.50 | 112205 | | BRITISH TELECOM PLC | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Telecoms - Internal | 26/03/2014 | 6,570.50 | 112206 | | BRITISH TELECOM PLC | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Telecoms - Internal | 26/03/2014 | 5,905.69 | 112207 | | CAPITA BUSINESS SERVICES LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Applications - Business | 19/03/2014 | 8,354.67 | 111861 | | CAPITA BUSINESS SERVICESLTD | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Banking Charges | Transaction Costs - Cards | 12/03/2014 | 829.26 | 111329 | | CARLTON ESTATES | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Debtors - Rent Deposit Scheme | 06/03/2014 | 1,060.00 | 110982 | | CELLAR SYSTEMS LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Infrastructure - Cre | 21/03/2014 | 411.60 | 111038 | | CHARNWOOD BOROUGH COUNCIL | Community Services | Crime & Disorder | Hired Services | 25/03/2014 | 500.00 | 111794 | | CHEF PATRON | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Chair & V-Chair Of The Council | Hospitality | 20/03/2014 | 2,025.70 | 111986 | | SUPPLIER NAME | PORTFOLIO | COST CENTRE | EXPENDITURE CLASS | POST. DATE | AMOUNT | REF. | |---------------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------|-----------|--------| | CHEMPAC SOLUTION LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Protective Clothing/Uniforms | 25/03/2014 | 230.00 | 112219 | | CHILL ENTERPRISES LIMITED | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Oadby & Wigston Pay P Expend. | 20/03/2014 | 1,360.00 | 112011 | | CIEH | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Environmental Health | Subscriptions | 26/03/2014 | 480.00 | 112258 | | CIPFA | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Staff Training And Development | Training Costs | 12/03/2014 | 729.50 | 111386 | | CIPFA BUSINESS | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Financial Services | Seminars & Short Training | 12/03/2014 | 2,962.25 | 111316 | | CIVICA UK LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Applications - Business | 24/03/2014 | 14,242.78 | 110223 | | CLOCKWISE | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Deductions - Clockwise | 27/03/2014 | 580.00 | 112298 | | COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Grant Aid & Access Activities | Grants - Cabd | 12/03/2014 | 1,048.10 | 110989 | | COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 24/03/2014 | 1,337.50 | 112186 | | CONNEXION 2 | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Control A/C - Solo Protect | 12/03/2014 | 758.65 | 110234 | | CONNEXION 2 | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Control A/C - Solo Protect | 27/03/2014 | 758.65 | 111851 | | COUNTESTHORPE COMMUNITY COLLEGE TRUST | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Leisure Development - Sports | Hired Services | 12/03/2014 | 360.00 | 111415 | | COUNTESTHORPE COMMUNITY COLLEGE TRUST | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Local Sports Alliance | Grants - Sportivate | 12/03/2014 | 432.50 | 111439 | | CRAEMER UK LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Bins - Domestic | 19/03/2014 | 3,810.00 | 111800 | | CRAEMER UK LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Bins - Trade | 19/03/2014 | 2,540.00 | 111800 | | C & R ASSOCIATES MIDLANDS LIMITED | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Financial Services | Public Consultation | 12/03/2014 | 1,428.00 | 111385 | | DAISY COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Telecoms - Calls | 06/03/2014 | 974.82 | 111025 | | DENNIS EAGLE LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Vehicle Maintenance | Normal Repairs | 06/03/2014 | 533.12 | 111026 | | D H PEPPER & SON | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Composting Fees | 21/03/2014 | 1,236.60 | 111346 | | DISABILITY ADAPTATION SERVICES | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 24/03/2014 | 4,360.00 | 112180 | | DISCLOSURE & BARRING SERVICE | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Misc - Criminal Records Bureau | 06/03/2014 | 357.00 | 111083 | | DOG SQUAD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Environmental Health | Gross Pay | 13/03/2014 | 1,001.00 | 111479 | | DTM GARDENS & LANDSCAPES LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 06/03/2014 | 4,828.00 | 109344 | | DURA SPORT (LEISURE CARE) LIMITED | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | The Pavillion - Land And Build | Pla: All Weather Pitch Works | 28/03/2014 | 518.75 | 112221 | | DURA SPORT (LEISURE CARE) LIMITED | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | The Pavillion - Land And Build | Pla: Floor Coverings | 28/03/2014 | 350.00 | 112222 | | EAST MIDLANDS HOUSING | Community Services | Homelessness | Homelessness | 31/03/2014 | 410.21 | 112555 | | EDDISONS | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Council Offices & Land | Rent Payments | 12/03/2014 | 406.35 | 111483 | | EDDISONS - STANDING ORDER ACCOUNT | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Council Offices & Land | Rent Payments | 12/03/2014 | 4,187.50 | 111482 | | EIBS LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 05/03/2014 | 1,350.00 | 108655 | | ELECTORAL REFORM SERVICES | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Register Of Electors | Hired Services | 27/03/2014 | 524.35 | 112255 | | ELECTORAL REFORM SERVICES | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Register Of Electors | Postages | 27/03/2014 | 342.50 | 112255 | | EMERGENCY DIESEL ENGINE SERVICES | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Vehicle Maintenance | Accidental Damage Repair Costs | 24/03/2014 | 465.00 | 112178 | | ENFORCEMENT SERVICES | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | I&E Account - General Fund | Provision Amounts | 12/03/2014 | 66,740.00 | 111441 | | ESPO | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Council Offices & Land | Gas | 26/03/2014 | 2,019.32 | 111818 | | ESPO | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Littlethorpe Depot | Gas | 26/03/2014 | 556.89 | 111817 | | ESPO | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | The Pavillion - Land And Build | Gas | 21/03/2014 | 642.94 | 111816 | | SUPPLIER NAME | PORTFOLIO | COST CENTRE | EXPENDITURE CLASS | POST. DATE | AMOUNT | REF. | |-------------------------------|--------------------------------|-------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------|-----------|--------| | ESPO | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 26/03/2014 | 432.00 | 112304 | | ESPO | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 26/03/2014 | 432.00 | 112305 | | ESPO | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 26/03/2014 | 432.00 | 112306 | | EXPERIAN LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Performance Management | Research & Development | 12/03/2014 | 6,189.73 | 111426 | | FAROL LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Mobile Equipment | 24/03/2014 | 2,278.00 | 111803 | | FAROL LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Mobile Equipment | 26/03/2014 | 602.00 | 112309 | | FORD & SLATER | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Cleansing Services | Accidental Damage Repair Costs | 24/03/2014 | 303.52 | 112173 | | FORD & SLATER | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Vehicle Maintenance | Normal Repairs | 12/03/2014 | 1,447.02 | 111325 | | FRANK MAWBY & COMPANY | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Littlethorpe Depot | Rea: Plumbing | 19/03/2014 | 273.30 | 111323 | | FREIGHT TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Fleet Management | Services And Inspections | 24/03/2014 | 680.00 | 112175 | | GGP SYSTEMS LTD | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Applications - Corporate | 26/03/2014 | 16,256.06 | 112289 | | GHM PLANNING LTD | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Gross Pay | 12/03/2014 | 1,840.00 | 111423 | | GHM PLANNING LTD | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Gross Pay | 21/03/2014 | 1,840.00 | 111830 | | GLENFIELD BATHROOMS LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 12/03/2014 | 4,287.00 | 111446 | | GLEN PARVA PARISH COUNCIL | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Pay P Expenditure | 12/03/2014 | 230.00 | 110675 | | GMB | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Deductions - Gmbatu | 06/03/2014 | 221.96 | 111063 | | GMB | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Deductions - Gmbatu | 27/03/2014 | 221.96 | 112302 | | GREENERGY FUELS LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Fuel | 05/03/2014 | 19,642.31 | 111049 | | GREENERGY FUELS LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Fuel | 20/03/2014 | 19,276.59 | 111988 | | HANDS FREE COMPUTING | Community Services | Supporting Families | Project/Initiatives Fees | 27/03/2014 | 320.00 | 108569 | | HANDS FREE COMPUTING | Community Services | Supporting Families | Project/Initiatives Fees | 27/03/2014 | 320.00 | 108570 | | HARBOROUGH DISTRICT COUNCIL | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Economic Development | Project/Initiatives Fees | 26/03/2014 | 1,504.00 | 112226 | | HARBOROUGH DISTRICT COUNCIL | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Head Of Policy & Partnerships | Gross Pay | 26/03/2014 | 9,137.48 | 112232 | | HAYS SPECIALIST RECRUITMENT | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 12/03/2014 | 660.80 | 110776 | | HAYS SPECIALIST RECRUITMENT | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 12/03/2014 | 661.50 | 111013 | | HAYS SPECIALIST RECRUITMENT | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 12/03/2014 | 656.21 | 111014 | | HAYS SPECIALIST RECRUITMENT | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 21/03/2014 | 518.59 | 111825 | | HAYS SPECIALIST RECRUITMENT | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 21/03/2014 | 552.38 | 111827 | | HAYS SPECIALIST RECRUITMENT | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 21/03/2014 | 658.92 | 111963 | | HAYS SPECIALIST RECRUITMENT | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 21/03/2014 | 687.39 | 111964 | | HBINFO LIMITED | Community Services | Benefits Section | Seminars & Short Training | 19/03/2014 | 225.00 | 111804 | | HEALTH MANAGEMENT LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Recruitment Costs | Medical Consultations | 24/03/2014 | 1,125.00 | 111315 | | HEALTH MANAGEMENT LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Recruitment Costs | Medical Consultations | 28/03/2014 | 700.00 | 112362 | | HINCKLEY & BOSWORTH COUNCIL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Communications | Gross Pay | 05/03/2014 | 5,201.50 | 110229 | | HINCKLEY & BOSWORTH COUNCIL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Communications | Gross Pay | 31/03/2014 | 5,201.50 | 112200 | | HINCKLEY & BOSWORTH COUNCIL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Hbbc: Ict Services Provision | 27/03/2014 | 27,122.39 | 107591 | | SUPPLIER NAME | PORTFOLIO | COST CENTRE | EXPENDITURE CLASS | POST. DATE | AMOUNT | REF. | |--------------------------------|--------------------------------|------------------------------|------------------------------|--------------|-----------|--------| | HINCKLEY & BOSWORTH COUNCIL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Hbbc: Ict Services Provision | 27/03/2014 | 27,122.39 | 108620 | | HINCKLEY & BOSWORTH COUNCIL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Hbbc: Ict Services Provision | 27/03/2014 | 27,122.39 | 108625 | | HINCKLEY & BOSWORTH COUNCIL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Hbbc: Ict Services Provision | 27/03/2014 | 27,122.39 | 110227 | | HINCKLEY & BOSWORTH COUNCIL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Hbbc: Ict Services Provision | 27/03/2014 | 27,122.39 | 112203 | | HINCKLEY & BOSWORTH COUNCIL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Performance Management | Gross Pay | 24/03/2014 | 2,060.00 | 112201 | | IDOX SOFTWARE LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Applications - Business | 27/03/2014 | 4,475.98 | 112212 | | IDOX SOFTWARE LIMITED | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Administration | Seminars & Short Training | 19/03/2014 | 300.00 | 110974 | | INTELLIGENT DISABLED SOLUTIONS | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 05/03/2014 | 5,015.52 | 111158 | | IRRV | Community Services | Benefits Section | Seminars & Short Training | 20/03/2014 | 245.00 | 111785 | | JAMES BROOKE | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 06/03/2014 | 712.50 | 111168 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Cleansing Services | Temporary/Casual Staff | 06/03/2014 | 696.83 | 111031 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Cleansing Services | Temporary/Casual Staff | 12/03/2014 | 636.97 | 111443 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Cleansing Services | Temporary/Casual Staff | 20/03/2014 | 508.73 | 111409 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Cleansing Services | Temporary/Casual Staff | 20/03/2014 | 564.30 | 111991 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Cleansing Services | Temporary/Casual Staff | 21/03/2014 | 1,201.28 | 105823 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Cleansing Services | Temporary/Casual Staff | 21/03/2014 | -1,201.28 | 111976 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Cleansing Services | Temporary/Casual Staff | 21/03/2014 | -816.53 | 111978 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Cleansing Services | Temporary/Casual Staff | 21/03/2014 | 816.53 | 111981 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Cleansing Services | Temporary/Casual Staff | 27/03/2014 | 1,201.28 | 112267 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Cleansing Services | Temporary/Casual Staff | 27/03/2014 | 628.43 | 109826 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Temporary/Casual Staff | 06/03/2014 | 273.60 | 111031 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Temporary/Casual Staff | 12/03/2014 | 337.73 | 111443 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Temporary/Casual Staff | 21/03/2014 | -269.32 | 111978 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Temporary/Casual Staff | 21/03/2014 | 273.60 | 111981 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Temporary/Casual Staff | 27/03/2014 | 273.60 | 112267 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Temporary/Casual Staff | 27/03/2014 | 269.32 | 109826 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Temporary/Casual Staff | 06/03/2014 | 2,508.42 | 111032 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Temporary/Casual Staff | 19/03/2014 | 2,204.74 | 111444 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Temporary/Casual Staff | 19/03/2014 | 2,150.66 | 111408 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Temporary/Casual Staff | 20/03/2014 | 1,989.71 | 111982 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Temporary/Casual Staff | 20/03/2014 | 2,941.06 | 111990 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Temporary/Casual Staff | 21/03/2014 | 1,872.06 | 107501 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Temporary/Casual Staff | 21/03/2014 | 928.35 | 107567 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Temporary/Casual Staff | 21/03/2014 | -1,834.50 | 111974 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Temporary/Casual Staff | 21/03/2014 | -1,872.06 | 111975 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Temporary/Casual Staff | 21/03/2014 | -2,149.35 | 111977 | | SUPPLIER NAME | PORTFOLIO | COST CENTRE | EXPENDITURE CLASS | POST. DATE | AMOUNT | REF. | |------------------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------|------------|--------| | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Temporary/Casual Staff | 21/03/2014 | -1,636.93 | 111979 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Temporary/Casual Staff | 21/03/2014 | 1,663.94 | 111980 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Temporary/Casual Staff | 21/03/2014 | 1,838.66 | 111983 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Temporary/Casual Staff | 27/03/2014 | -928.35 | 112266 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Temporary/Casual Staff | 27/03/2014 | 895.50 | 112268 | | JAM PERSONNEL MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Temporary/Casual Staff | 27/03/2014 | 2,154.82 | 112269 | | JELSONS LTD | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | The Pavillion - Land And Build | Contributions Towards Expenses | 27/03/2014 | 1,318.90 | 112265 | | JONES LANG LASALLE | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Capital Financing Adjustments | P&L On Sale Of Fixed Assets | 06/03/2014 | 1,733.22 | 111090 | | JONES LANG LASALLE | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Capital Financing Adjustments | P&L On Sale Of Fixed Assets | 06/03/2014 | 1,906.00 | 111091 | | KALU TRAINING & CONSULTANCY LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Performance Management | Seminars & Short Training | 20/03/2014 | 425.00 | 112013 | | KAREN BENT | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Leisure Development - Sports | Other Equipment | 19/03/2014 | 732.00 | 111807 | | KATYLOUS MUSIC & MOVEMENT | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Change For Life Project | Hired Services | 12/03/2014 | 450.00 | 111416 | | KINGS ARMOURED SECURITY SERVICES LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Customer Services | Security Services | 26/03/2014 | 503.08 | 112227 | | KINGS ARMOURED SECURITY SERVICES LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Car Parks | Security Services | 06/03/2014 | 214.84 | 111080 | | LAFARGE AGGREGATES LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Commercial Waste Fees | 05/03/2014 | 726.88 | 111058 | | LAFARGE AGGREGATES LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Commercial Waste Fees | 05/03/2014 | 415.36 | 111060 | | LAFARGE AGGREGATES LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Commercial Waste Fees | 12/03/2014 | 575.84 | 111404 | | LAFARGE AGGREGATES LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Commercial Waste Fees | 12/03/2014 | 385.15 | 111425 | | LAVAT CONSULTING LIMITED | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Financial Services | Vat Consultancy | 12/03/2014 | 300.00 | 111317 | | LCC GUTHLAXTON COLLEGE | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Oadby & Wigston Pay P Expend. | 20/03/2014 | 3,780.00 | 112012 | | LCC SHARNFORD | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Green Space Development | Hired Services | 05/03/2014 | 500.00 | 110980 | | LEICESTER CITY COUNCIL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | External Legal Fees | Legal Fees | 05/03/2014 | 1,520.79 | 109384 | | LEICESTER CITY COUNCIL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | External Legal Fees | Legal Fees | 06/03/2014 | 877.02 | 111099 | | LEICESTER CITY COUNCIL | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Economic Development | Project/Initiatives Fees | 20/03/2014 | 400.00 | 111984 | | LEICESTER MARRIOTT HOTEL | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Economic Development | Project/Initiatives Fees | 12/03/2014 | 758.75 | 111353 | | LEICESTERSHIRE CONSTABULARY | Community Services | Crime & Disorder | Hired Services | 05/03/2014 | 800.00 | 111043 | | LEICESTERSHIRE CONSTABULARY | Community Services | Crime & Disorder | Project/Initiatives Fees | 05/03/2014 | 1,152.00 | 111044 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Local Land Charges | Lcc Fees | 05/03/2014 | 1,596.00 | 111028 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Local Land Charges | Lcc Fees | 05/03/2014 | 1,295.00 | 111029 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Local Land Charges | Lcc Fees | 26/03/2014 | 1,750.00 | 112224 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Local Land Charges | Lcc Fees | 26/03/2014 | 2,158.00 | 112225 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | At. Poll. (Enforce & Mon) | Air Quality Analysis | 27/03/2014 | 439.60 | 112172 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | At. Poll. (Enforce & Mon) | Air Quality Analysis | 27/03/2014 | 979.38 | 112275 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Environmental Health | Seminars & Short Training | 05/03/2014 | 500.00 | 110652 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Creditors -County-Superann Ees | 06/03/2014 | 118,875.08 | 111062 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Creditors -County-Superann Ees | 27/03/2014 | 118,897.65 | 112368 | | SUPPLIER NAME | PORTFOLIO | COST CENTRE | EXPENDITURE CLASS | POST. DATE | AMOUNT | REF. | |--------------------------------------|--------------------------------|-------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------|-----------|--------| | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Creditors-County-Superann Memb | 06/03/2014 | 1,215.73 | 111062 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Creditors-County-Superann Memb | 27/03/2014 | 1,215.73 | 112368 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Debtors Suspense | 12/03/2014 | 46,795.21 | 111378 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 12/03/2014 | 745.00 | 111484 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 24/03/2014 | 3,399.00 | 112179 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Economic Development | Project/Initiatives Fees | 07/03/2014 | -400.00 | 111362 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Listed Bldgs & Conserv. Areas | Consultant'S Fees | 06/03/2014 | 1,050.00 | 111020 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Consultant'S Fees | 12/03/2014 | 3,300.00 | 111351 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Consultant'S Fees | 26/03/2014 | 9,000.00 | 112214 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Community Development | Other Partnership Support | 05/03/2014 | 2,500.00 | 110671 | | LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 12/03/2014 | 850.92 | 111024 | | LEICESTERSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS TRUST | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Corporate Health Improvement | Project/Initiatives Fees | 26/03/2014 | 1,300.00 | 112288 | | LEICESTERSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS TRUST | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 05/03/2014 | 14,180.75 | 111055 | | LEICESTERSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS TRUST | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 05/03/2014 | 14,180.75 | 111056 | | LEICESTERSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS TRUST | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 12/03/2014 | -8,000.00 | 111331 | | LEICESTERSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS TRUST | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 19/03/2014 | 8,303.40 | 111801 | | LEICESTERSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS TRUST | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 21/03/2014 | 1,553.68 | 111967 | | LOCAL WORLD LIMITED | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Advertising - Notices | 12/03/2014 | 408.00 | 111335 | | LOCAL WORLD LIMITED | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Advertising - Notices | 12/03/2014 | 367.20 | 111338 | | LOCAL WORLD LIMITED | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Advertising - Notices | 20/03/2014 | 326.40 | 111337 | | LOCAL WORLD LIMITED | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Advertising - Notices | 27/03/2014 | 285.60 | 112371 | | MALCOLM LANE & SONS LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 20/03/2014 | 790.00 | 111334 | | MALCOLM LANE & SONS LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 20/03/2014 | 1,948.00 | 111334 | | MALCOLM LANE & SONS LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 28/03/2014 | 460.00 | 112369 | | MALCOLM LANE & SONS LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 28/03/2014 | 2,936.64 | 112370 | | MANUBHAI MISTRY | Community Services | Homelessness | Homelessness | 06/03/2014 | 538.34 | 111100 | | MARRONS SOLICITORS | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | External Legal Fees | Legal Fees | 05/03/2014 | 1,147.50 | 109399 | | MARRONS SOLICITORS | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Recharged Legal Fees | 05/03/2014 | 2,750.00 | 111082 | | MARS DRINKS UK | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | The Pavilion | Goods For Resale | 28/03/2014 | 329.75 | 111867 | | MARS DRINKS UK | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Council Offices & Land | Cyc: Vending Contracts | 27/03/2014 | 259.98 | 102029 | | MARY DOUGHTY | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Leisure Development - Sports | Grants - Sports | 20/03/2014 | 212.50 | 111810 | | MECH BUILDING SERVICES LIMITED | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Littlethorpe Depot | Rea: Electrical | 19/03/2014 | 333.00 | 111784 | | MERTRUX LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Vehicle Maintenance | Normal Repairs | 12/03/2014 | 2,819.01 | 111407 | | MIDLAND HR | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Applications - Business | 19/03/2014 | 250.00 | 111854 | | MIDLAND HR | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Applications - Business | 19/03/2014 | 2,762.45 | 111855 | | MOLE GROUNDWORKS | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Open Spaces Management | Open Space Development | 05/03/2014 | 407.36 | 111067 | | SUPPLIER NAME | PORTFOLIO | COST CENTRE | EXPENDITURE CLASS | POST. DATE | AMOUNT | REF. | |-------------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------|-----------|--------| | MOLE GROUNDWORKS | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 12/03/2014 | 525.50 | 111387 | | MOLE GROUNDWORKS | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 25/03/2014 | 11,620.00 | 112230 | | MOLYNEUX ROSE LTD | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Trad Services - Whet Ind Est | Head Lease | 06/03/2014 | 49,875.00 | 111002 | | MORLEYS EARLY YEARS | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 26/03/2014 | 1,125.00 | 112294 | | MORLEYS EARLY YEARS | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 26/03/2014 | 1,125.00 | 112295 | | MS EMMA CALVER | Community Services | Benefits - Rent Allowance | Rent Allowances | 06/03/2014 | 219.24 | 111102 | | MSP INSTALLATIONS | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 05/03/2014 | 1,850.00 | 111157 | | NEWLINE MIDLANDS LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Engineering Inspections | 12/03/2014 | 235.13 | 111314 | | N J APPLETON | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Leisure Development - Sports | Protective Clothing/Uniforms | 25/03/2014 | 534.00 | 112284 | | NORFOLK COUNTY COUNCIL | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Environmental Health | Consultant Fees | 27/03/2014 | 2,700.00 | 112259 | | NVIRON LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Infrastructure - Servers | 21/03/2014 | 1,216.90 | 111832 | | OCE FINANCE | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Reprographics | Printroom Equipment Rental | 21/03/2014 | 3,406.77 | 111868 | | OWEN CRESSWELL | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Vehicle Maintenance | Redundancy Payments | 12/03/2014 | 467.00 | 111473 | | PARKEON LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Car Parks | Pay & Display M/Cs | 27/03/2014 | 520.00 | 112209 | | PAYNES GARAGES LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Vehicle Maintenance | Normal Repairs | 19/03/2014 | 257.10 | 111787 | | PHS GROUP PLC | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Council Offices & Land | Cyc: Hygiene Equipment/H Dryer | 19/03/2014 | 530.40 | 111165 | | PHS GROUP PLC | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Council Offices & Land | Cyc: Hygiene Equipment/H Dryer | 19/03/2014 | 659.00 | 111167 | | PHS GROUP PLC | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | The Pavillion - Land And Build | Cyc: Hygiene Equipment/H Dryer | 26/03/2014 | 2,337.08 | 111164 | | PITNEY BOWES LTD | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Customer Services | Post Room Equipment | 19/03/2014 | 1,570.29 | 111352 | | P&MM LIMITED - DIRECT DEBIT ONLY | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Deductions - Childcare Voucher | 12/03/2014 | 3,238.00 | 111480 | | POLYCOPY | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Reprographics | Print Mats (Int. Print Room) | 05/03/2014 | 482.00 | 110973 | | POST OFFICE LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Fleet Management | Road Fund Licence | 20/03/2014 | 1,825.00 | 111837 | | PRATT & CHESTERTON ELECTRICAL | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Council Offices & Land | Pla: Electrical | 12/03/2014 | 1,655.00 | 110669 | | PRATT & CHESTERTON ELECTRICAL | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Littlethorpe Depot | Rea: Electrical | 24/03/2014 | 705.00 | 111791 | | PREMIER SECURITY SERVICES | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Council Offices & Land | Security Services | 07/03/2014 | 269.92 | 111092 | | PREMIER SECURITY SERVICES | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Council Offices & Land | Security Services | 24/03/2014 | 552.08 | 111396 | | PREMIER SECURITY SERVICES | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Council Offices & Land | Security Services | 24/03/2014 | 552.08 | 111397 | | PREMIER SECURITY SERVICES | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Littlethorpe Depot | Security Services | 27/03/2014 | 552.08 | 109134 | | PREMIER SECURITY SERVICES | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Littlethorpe Depot | Security Services | 27/03/2014 | 552.08 | 111392 | | PREMIER SECURITY SERVICES | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | The Pavillion - Land And Build | Security Services | 12/03/2014 | 552.08 | 111395 | | PREMIER SECURITY SERVICES | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Security Services | 26/03/2014 | 912.51 | 111393 | | PREMIER TAXIS | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 21/03/2014 | 1,323.50 | 111962 | | PRICE MARRINER & ASSOCIATES LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Environmental Health | Gross Pay | 26/03/2014 | 1,158.00 | 112292 | | PRICE MARRINER & ASSOCIATES LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Environmental Health | Gross Pay | 26/03/2014 | 861.00 | 112293 | | PROJECT SKILLS SOLUTIONS LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Seminars & Short Training | 12/03/2014 | 552.00 | 109814 | | PROJECT SKILLS SOLUTIONS LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Highway Cyclic Main Ptnership | Seminars & Short Training | 12/03/2014 | 398.00 | 109814 | | SUPPLIER NAME | PORTFOLIO | COST CENTRE | EXPENDITURE CLASS | POST. DATE | AMOUNT | REF. | |--------------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------------------------|-------------------------------|--------------|-----------|--------| | PROPERTY MAINTENANCE SERVICES LTD | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 24/03/2014 | 4,830.00 | 112181 | | REACH MARKETING COMMUNICATIONS | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | C.Tax Billing, Coll & Recovery | Advertising - Notices | 12/03/2014 | 711.98 | 111448 | | REACH MARKETING COMMUNICATIONS | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | C.Tax Billing, Coll & Recovery | Advertising - Notices | 12/03/2014 | 1,143.61 | 111449 | | REALITY YOUTH PROJECT | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Pay P Expenditure | 19/03/2014 | 506.82 | 111806 | | REALITY YOUTH PROJECT | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Pay P Expenditure | 19/03/2014 | 506.82 | 111812 | | RICS BOOKS | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Development Strategy | Books, Newspapers And Pubs | 26/03/2014 | 1,050.00 | 112248 | | RISING STARS MULTI-SPORTS LTD | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Active Together (Oper Funding) | Hired Services | 20/03/2014 | 670.00 | 112003 | | RISING STARS MULTI-SPORTS LTD | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Change For Life Project | Hired Services | 20/03/2014 | 630.00 | 112008 | | RISING STARS MULTI-SPORTS LTD | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Leisure Development - Sports | Grants - Sports | 25/03/2014 | 1,100.00 | 112252 | | R & N PLANT SPECIALISTS | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Running Costs | 12/03/2014 | 342.00 | 111401 | | ROYAL MAIL | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Neighbourhood Serv. Management | Postages | 05/03/2014 | 224.10 | 110814 | | ROYAL MAIL GROUP LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Register Of Electors | Postages | 12/03/2014 | 500.00 | 111354 | | RUDKIN & HERBERT LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 12/03/2014 | 8,545.00 | 111163 | | SECTOR TREASURY SERVICES LTD | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Interest On Investments | Hired Services | 06/03/2014 | 3,375.00 | 111009 | | SHONKI BROS LEICESTER LIMITED | Community Services | Homelessness | Homelessness | 20/03/2014 | 1,250.00 | 111821 | | SING & SIGN | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Change For Life Project | Hired Services | 12/03/2014 | 450.00 | 111421 | | SLM | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Corporate Health Improvement | Hired Services | 25/03/2014 | 5,303.33 | 112281 | | SLM BUILDING CONTRACTORS | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Council Offices & Land | Rea: Building | 12/03/2014 | 753.50 | 111399 | | SLM BUILDING CONTRACTORS | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Open Spaces Management | Open Space Development | 12/03/2014 | 210.00 | 111413 | | SOUTHERN ELECTRIC | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Blaby Joint Service Shop | Electricity | 25/03/2014 | 1,043.87 | 110691 | | SOUTHERN ELECTRIC | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Blaby Joint Service Shop | Electricity | 25/03/2014 | -1,043.87 | 112196 | | SOUTHERN ELECTRIC | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Blaby Joint Service Shop | Electricity | 26/03/2014 | 1,361.66 | 112197 | | SOUTHERN ELECTRIC | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Council Offices & Land | Electricity | 13/03/2014 | 2,840.66 | 111368 | | SOUTHERN ELECTRIC | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Littlethorpe Depot | Electricity | 26/03/2014 | 3,842.23 | 112198 | | SOUTHERN ELECTRIC | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | The Pavillion - Land And Build | Electricity | 05/03/2014 | 1,296.82 | 110695 | | SOUTHERN ELECTRIC | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | The Pavillion - Land And Build | Electricity | 28/03/2014 | 1,375.68 | 112199 | | SOUTH LEICESTERSHIRE COLLEGE | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Economic Development | Professional Fees | 12/03/2014 | 5,000.00 | 111451 | | SOUTH LEICESTERSHIRE COLLEGE | Policy, Partner & Health Impr | Lpc - Commissioning | Lpc Expenditure | 26/03/2014 | 1,733.33 | 112296 | | SOUTH WIGSTON HIGH SCHOOL | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Active Together (Oper Funding) | Project/Initiatives Fees | 25/03/2014 | 3,262.50 | 112228 | | SOUTH YORKSHIRE AIR QUALITY SAMPLERS | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | At. Poll. (Enforce & Mon) | Air Quality Analysis | 21/03/2014 | 1,352.24 | 111829 | | SPS GROUNDWORK'S & BUILDING LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 24/03/2014 | 4,470.00 | 112184 | | SQUAIR CARE LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Vehicle Maintenance | Normal Repairs | 05/03/2014 | 220.55 | 110997 | | STEER TYRES LTD (LUTTERWORTH) | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Vehicle Maintenance | Tyres | 12/03/2014 | 244.00 | 111344 | | STEER TYRES LTD (LUTTERWORTH) | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Vehicle Maintenance | Tyres | 19/03/2014 | 229.00 | 111857 | | SYSTON FENCING COMPANY LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Grounds Maintenance Service | Countryside Areas Maintenance | 25/03/2014 | 322.00 | 112174 | | TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH | Community Services | Benefit Fraud | National Anti Fraud Incentive | 19/03/2014 | 1,894.00 | 111853 | | SUPPLIER NAME | PORTFOLIO | COST CENTRE | EXPENDITURE CLASS | POST. DATE | AMOUNT | REF. | |------------------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------------------------|------------------------------|--------------|----------|--------| | TAYLOR ENGINEERING & FABRICATIONS LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Vehicle Maintenance | Normal Repairs | 12/03/2014 | 473.50 | 111405 | | THE AIR AMBULANCE SERVICE | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Misc - Misc Suspense | 27/03/2014 | 1,192.83 | 112360 | | THE PRUDENTIAL ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Deductions - Avc | 27/03/2014 | 691.78 | 112297 | | THOMAS INTERNATIONAL UK LTD | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Staff Training And Development | Hired Services | 27/03/2014 | 500.00 | 112290 | | TNT POST NORTH LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Misc - Postage Meter - Tnt | 05/03/2014 | 1,090.23 | 111048 | | TNT POST NORTH LIMITED | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Misc - Postage Meter - Tnt | 25/03/2014 | 454.03 | 112256 | | TOM PLUMB DOMESTIC PLUMBING SERVICES | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | In Year Capital Additions | 24/03/2014 | 2,500.00 | 112182 | | TRAVIS PERKINS TRADING CO LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Car Parks | Other Equipment | 20/03/2014 | 305.36 | 110770 | | TREVOR ROBERTS ASSOCIATES LIMITED | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Development Strategy | Seminars & Short Training | 25/03/2014 | 1,950.00 | 112223 | | UK CONTAINER MAINTENANCE LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Bins - Trade | 12/03/2014 | 1,280.00 | 111061 | | UNISON | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Deductions - Unison | 06/03/2014 | 545.05 | 111064 | | UNISON | Other | General Fund Balance Sheet | Deductions - Unison | 27/03/2014 | 545.05 | 112303 | | VALUATION OFFICE AGENCY | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Assets Management | Valuation Fees | 28/03/2014 | 794.10 | 112285 | | VALUATION OFFICE AGENCY | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | Council Offices & Land | Pla: Stock Condition Surveys | 28/03/2014 | 500.00 | 112286 | | VENN GROUP LTD | Community Services | Benefits Section | Temporary/Casual Staff | 20/03/2014 | 1,017.72 | 111815 | | VENN GROUP LTD | Community Services | Benefits Section | Temporary/Casual Staff | 25/03/2014 | 1,045.99 | 112194 | | VENN GROUP LTD | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | C.Tax Billing, Coll & Recovery | Temporary/Casual Staff | 06/03/2014 | 806.87 | 110833 | | VENN GROUP LTD | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | C.Tax Billing, Coll & Recovery | Temporary/Casual Staff | 19/03/2014 | 904.75 | 111813 | | VENN GROUP LTD | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | C.Tax Billing, Coll & Recovery | Temporary/Casual Staff | 19/03/2014 | 636.02 | 111814 | | VENN GROUP LTD | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | C.Tax Billing, Coll & Recovery | Temporary/Casual Staff | 20/03/2014 | 934.13 | 110834 | | VENN GROUP LTD | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | C.Tax Billing, Coll & Recovery | Temporary/Casual Staff | 27/03/2014 | 881.25 | 112192 | | VENN GROUP LTD | Finance, Efficiency & Assets | C.Tax Billing, Coll & Recovery | Temporary/Casual Staff | 27/03/2014 | 837.17 | 112193 | | VENTURE BUSINESS FORMS LTD | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Reprographics | Print Mats (Int. Print Room) | 19/03/2014 | 387.00 | 111073 | | VIBROCK LTD | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Noise Pollution | Equipment R & M | 20/03/2014 | 325.00 | 111781 | | VODAFONE LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Telecoms - External | 06/03/2014 | 2,569.59 | 111107 | | VODAFONE LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Telecoms - External | 12/03/2014 | 2,868.75 | 111370 | | WINSTANLEY COMMUNITY COLLEGE | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Leisure Development - Sports | Hired Services | 19/03/2014 | 551.00 | 111811 | | W T CLARKE & SON | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Refuse Coll & Domestic Recyc | Composting Fees | 27/03/2014 | 804.01 | 112249 | | WYBONE LIMITED | N'Hood & Env. Health Services | Cleansing Services | Bins - Trade | 12/03/2014 | 229.99 | 109823 | | XMA LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Customer Services | Other Equipment | 21/03/2014 | 905.20 | 109343 | | XMA LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Customer Services | Other Equipment | 21/03/2014 | 377.72 | 110969 | | XMA LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Customer Services | Other Equipment | 24/03/2014 | 722.32 | 110673 | | XMA LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Desktop - Printers | 21/03/2014 | 233.98 | 109346 | | XMA LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Desktop - Printers | 27/03/2014 | 313.20 | 109341 | | XMA LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Desktop - Printers | 27/03/2014 | 626.40 | 109392 | | XMA LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Desktop - Workstations | 27/03/2014 | 628.00 | 109762 | | SUPPLIER NAME | PORTFOLIO | COST CENTRE | EXPENDITURE CLASS | POST. DATE | AMOUNT | REF. | |-----------------|--------------------------------|-------------------|--------------------------|--------------|----------|--------| | XMA LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Infrastructure - Cre | 24/03/2014 | 768.59 | 109816 | | XMA LIMITED | Corp Serv, Perform. & Leisure | Ict Services | Infrastructure - Servers | 31/03/2014 | 781.12 | 111972 | | XMA LIMITED | Planning, Econ. Dev. & Housing | Planning Delivery | Other Equipment | 21/03/2014 | 274.89 | 111793 | | TOTAL: | 1,048,061.72 | | | | | |

en

3453-pdf

Country: United Kingdom Date: 13 September 2012 Name of Official responsible for reply: Sheila Ward Official Address (in full): Forestry Commission, 231 Corstorphine Road, Edinburgh EH12 7AT, UK ## Jq1 Telephone:+ 44 131 314 6475 Fax: + 44 131 316 4344 E-mail: sheila.ward@forestry.gsi.gov.uk ## Removals And Production | 51 | 51 | |-----------------------------|------------------------------------------| | Product | | | Product | | | 2010 | 2011 | | Unit | | | Code | Quantity | | ROUNDWOOD REMOVALS OVERBARK | | | 3 | | | 10,895 | 11,235 | | 1 | ROUNDWOOD | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 10,360 | 10,694 | | 1.C | Coniferous | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 535 | 541 | | 1.NC | Non-Coniferous | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 1,555 | 1,390 | | 1.1 | WOOD FUEL, INCLUDING WOOD FOR CHARCOAL | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 1,155 | 990 | | 1.1.C | Coniferous | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 400 | 400 | | 1.1.NC | Non-Coniferous | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 9,340 | 9,845 | | 1.2 | INDUSTRIAL ROUNDWOOD (WOOD IN THE ROUGH) | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 9,205 | 9,704 | | 1.2.C | Coniferous | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 135 | 141 | | 1.2.NC | Non-Coniferous | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 6,434 | 6,713 | | 1.2.1 | SAWLOGS AND VENEER LOGS | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 6,358 | 6,633 | | 1.2.1.C | Coniferous | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 75 | 81 | | 1.2.1.NC | Non-Coniferous | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 2,319 | 2,518 | | 1.2.2 | PULPWOOD (ROUND & SPLIT) | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | | 2,513 | | 1.2.2.C | Coniferous | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 5 | 5 | | 1.2.2.NC | Non-Coniferous | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 588 | 614 | | 1.2.3 | OTHER INDUSTRIAL ROUNDWOOD | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 533 | 559 | | 1.2.3.C | Coniferous | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 55 | 55 | | 1.2.3.NC | Non-Coniferous | | 1000 m | | 13 September 2012 Name of Official responsible for reply: Sheila Ward Official Address (in full): Forestry Commission, 231 Corstorphine Road, Edinburgh EH12 7AT, UK ## Eu Jq P Telephone/Fax: + 44 131 314 6475 + 44 131 316 4344 E-mail: sheila.w ard@forestry.gsi.gov.uk Pellets JQ1 Production Production Product 2010 2011 Unit of quantit code Product Quantity Quantity y 4 WOOD RESIDUES 1000 m3 729 770 4.1 of which: Pellets 1000 m3 4 WOOD RESIDUES 1000 mt 4.1 of which: Pellets 1000 mt 197 244 Total Import 2010 2011 Product 2010 2011 Unit of quantit code Product Quantity Value Quantity Value Quantity Value Quantity Value y 4 WOOD RESIDUES 1000 m3 836 72,406 1,527 134,087 288 11,000 516 11,283 4.1 of which: Pellets 1000 m3 787 68,575 1,450 128,651 86 6,781 54 2,953 4 WOOD RESIDUES 1000 mt 72,406 134,087 11,000 11,283 4.1 of which: Pellets 1000 mt 551 68,575 1,015 128,651 60 6,781 38 2,953 Extra EU Import Extra EU Export Product 2010 2011 2010 2011 Unit of quantit code Product Quantity Value Quantity Value Quantity Value Quantity Value y 4 WOOD RESIDUES 1000 m3 758 64,046 1,339 115,418 0 81 0 122 4.1 of which: Pellets 1000 m3 729 63,448 1,286 113,974 0 14 0 51 4 WOOD RESIDUES 1000 mt 64,046 115,418 81 122 4.1 of which: Pellets 1000 mt 511 63,448 900 113,974 0 14 0 51 JQ2 TTrade Total Export EU1 ExtraEU trade Country: United Kingdom Date: 13 September 2012 (Revised 25 August 2016) Sheila Ward ## Jq1 Forest Sector Questionnaire Removals And Production Product Product 2010 2011 Code Quantity Quantity ROUNDWOOD REMOVALS (underbark) 1 ROUNDWOOD 1000 m 1.C Coniferous 1000 m 1.NC Non-Coniferous 1000 m 1.1 WOOD FUEL, INCLUDING WOOD FOR CHARCOAL 1000 m 1.1.C Coniferous 1000 m 1.1.NC Non-Coniferous 1000 m 1.2 INDUSTRIAL ROUNDWOOD (WOOD IN THE ROUGH) 1000 m 1.2.C Coniferous 1000 m 1.2.NC Non-Coniferous 1000 m 1.2.1 SAWLOGS AND VENEER LOGS 1000 m 1.2.1.C Coniferous 1000 m 1.2.1.NC Non-Coniferous 1000 m 1.2.2 PULPWOOD (ROUND & SPLIT) 1000 m 1.2.2.C Coniferous 1000 m 1.2.2.NC Non-Coniferous 1000 m 1.2.3 OTHER INDUSTRIAL ROUNDWOOD 1000 m 1.2.3.C Coniferous 1000 m 1.2.3.NC Non-Coniferous 1000 m PRODUCTION 2 WOOD CHARCOAL 1000 mt 5 5 3 WOOD CHIPS AND PARTICLES 1000 m 4 WOOD RESIDUES 1000 m 5 SAWNWOOD 1000 m 5.C Coniferous 1000 m 5.NC Non-Coniferous 1000 m 5.NC.T of which:Tropical 1000 m 6 WOOD-BASED PANELS 1000 m 6.1 VENEER SHEETS 1000 m 6.1.C Coniferous 1000 m 6.1.NC Non-Coniferous 1000 m 6.1.NC.T of which:Tropical 1000 m 6.2 PLYWOOD 1000 m 6.2.C Coniferous 1000 m 6.2.NC Non-Coniferous 1000 m 6.2.NC.T of which:Tropical 1000 m 6.3 PARTICLE BOARD, OSB and OTHERS 1000 m 6.3.1 of which:OSB 1000 m 6.4 FIBREBOARD 1000 m 6.4.1 HARDBOARD 1000 m 6.4.2 MDF (MEDIUM DENSITY) 1000 m 6.4.3 OTHER FIBREBOARD 1000 m 7 WOOD PULP 1000 mt + + + + + + 7.1 MECHANICAL 1000 mt + + + + + + 7.2 SEMI-CHEMICAL 1000 mt 0 0 7.3 CHEMICAL 1000 mt 0 0 7.3.1 SULPHATE UNBLEACHED 1000 mt 0 0 7.3.2 SULPHATE BLEACHED 1000 mt 0 0 7.3.3 SULPHITE UNBLEACHED 1000 mt 0 0 7.3.4 SULPHITE BLEACHED 1000 mt 0 0 7.4 DISSOLVING GRADES 1000 mt 0 0 8 OTHER PULP 1000 mt 3,199 3,194 8.1 PULP FROM FIBRES OTHER THAN WOOD 1000 mt 0 0 8.2 RECOVERED FIBRE PULP 1000 mt 3,199 3,194 9 RECOVERED PAPER 1000 mt 8,003 8,036 10 PAPER AND PAPERBOARD 1000 mt 4,300 4,341 10.1 GRAPHIC PAPERS 1000 mt 1,637 1,669 10.1.1 NEWSPRINT 1000 mt 1,195 1,227 10.1.2 UNCOATED MECHANICAL 1000 mt + + + + + + 10.1.3 UNCOATED WOODFREE 1000 mt + + + + + + 10.1.4 COATED PAPERS 1000 mt + + + + + + 10.2 SANITARY AND HOUSEHOLD PAPERS 1000 mt 729 765 10.3 PACKAGING MATERIALS 1000 mt 1,640 1,600 10.3.1 CASE MATERIALS 1000 mt + + + + + + 10.3.2 CARTONBOARD 1000 mt + + + + + + 10.3.3 WRAPPING PAPERS 1000 mt + + + + + + 10.3.4 OTHER PAPERS MAINLY FOR PACKAGING 1000 mt + + + + + + 10.4 OTHER PAPER AND PAPERBOARD N.E.S. 1000 mt 294 307 + + + denotes data not available. Name of Official responsible for reply: Official Address (in full): Forestry Commission, 231 Corstorphine Road, Edinburgh EH12 7AT, UK Telephone: + 44 131 314 6475 Fax: + 44 131 316 4344 E-mail: sheila.w ard@forestry.gsi.gov.uk | 51 | 51 | |-------|--------| | Unit | | | 3 | | | 9,718 | 10,021 | | 3 | | | 9,250 | 9,548 | | 3 | | | 468 | 473 | | 3 | | | 1,381 | 1,234 | | 3 | | | 1,031 | 884 | | 3 | | | 350 | 350 | | 3 | | | 8,337 | 8,788 | | 3 | | | 8,219 | 8,665 | | 3 | | | 118 | 123 | | 3 | | | 5,743 | 5,993 | | 3 | | | 5,677 | 5,922 | | 3 | | | 66 | 70 | | 3 | | | 2,071 | 2,248 | | 3 | | | 2,066 | 2,244 | | 3 | | | 5 | 5 | | 3 | | | 524 | 547 | | 3 | | | 476 | 499 | | 3 | | | 48 | 48 | | 3 | | | 2,188 | 2,309 | | 3 | | | 729 | 770 | | 3 | | | 3,101 | 3,279 | | 3 | | | 3,053 | 3,227 | | 3 | | | 48 | 52 | | 3 | | | 0 | 0 | | 3 | | | 3,370 | 3,384 | | 3 | | | 0 | 0 | | 3 | | | 0 | 0 | | 3 | | | 0 | 0 | | 3 | | | 0 | 0 | | 3 | | | 0 | 0 | | 3 | | | 0 | 0 | | 3 | | | 0 | 0 | | 3 | | | 0 | 0 | | 3 | | | 2,594 | 2,625 | | 3 | | | + + + | + + + | | 3 | | | 776 | 759 | | 3 | | | 0 | 0 | | 3 | | | 776 | 759 | | 3 | | | 0 | 0 | ## FOREST SECTOR QUESTIONNAIRE Official Address (in full): Forestry Commission, 231 Corstorphine Road, Edinburgh EH12 7AT, UK Trade Telephone: + 44 131 314 6475 Fax: + 44 131 316 4344 | 1000 UK £ (Sterling) | | |------------------------------------------|-------------| | | | | Specify Currency and Unit of Value | | | (e.g.:1000 US $) | | | : | | | E X P O R T | I M P O R T | | Product | | | | | | Unit of | | | 2011 | 2010 | | code | Product | | quantity | | | | | | | | | Quantity | Value | | 3 | | | 345 | 70,523 | | 1 | | | ROUNDWOOD | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 4 | 947 | | 1.1 | | | WOOD FUEL, INCLUDING WOOD FOR CHARCOAL | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 341 | 69,576 | | 1.2 | | | INDUSTRIAL ROUNDWOOD (WOOD IN THE ROUGH) | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 240 | 18,225 | | 1.2.C | | | Coniferous | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 101 | 51,350 | | 1.2.NC | | | Non-Coniferous | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 10 | 5,458 | | 1.2.NC.T | | | of which: Tropical | | | 1000 m | | | 2 | | | WOOD CHARCOAL | | | 1000 mt | 102 | | 3 | | | 94 | 8,563 | | 3 | | | WOOD CHIPS AND PARTICLES | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 836 | 72,406 | | 4 | | | WOOD RESIDUES | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 5,699 | 1,198,630 | | 5 | | | SAWNWOOD | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 5,230 | 958,043 | | 5.C | | | Coniferous | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 469 | 240,587 | | 5.NC | | | Non-Coniferous | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 127 | 75,582 | | 5.NC.T | | | of which: Tropical | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 2,701 | 780,808 | | 6 | | | WOOD-BASED PANELS | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 28 | 31,671 | | 6.1 | | | VENEER SHEETS | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 12 | 4,231 | | 6.1.C | | | Coniferous | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 15 | 27,440 | | 6.1.NC | | | Non-Coniferous | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 9 | 9,749 | | 6.1.NC.T | | | of which: Tropical | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 1,264 | 384,103 | | 6.2 | | | PLYWOOD | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 418 | 105,774 | | 6.2.C | | | Coniferous | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 846 | 278,329 | | 6.2.NC | | | Non-Coniferous | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 246 | 84,336 | | 6.2.NC.T | | | of which: Tropical | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 649 | 137,960 | | 6.3 | | | PARTICLE BOARD, OSB and OTHERS | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 196 | 40,525 | | 6.3.1 | | | of which: OSB | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 760 | 227,074 | | 6.4 | | | FIBREBOARD | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 109 | 60,880 | | 6.4.1 | | | HARDBOARD | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 597 | 155,254 | | 6.4.2 | | | MDF (MEDIUM DENSITY) | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 54 | 10,940 | | 6.4.3 | | | OTHER FIBREBOARD | | | 1000 m | | | 7 | | | WOOD PULP | | | 1000 mt | 1,061 | | 7.1 | | | MECHANICAL | | | 1000 mt | 13 | | 7.2 | | | SEMI-CHEMICAL | | | 1000 mt | 58 | | 7.3 | | | CHEMICAL | | | 1000 mt | 918 | | 7.3.1 | | | SULPHATE UNBLEACHED | | | 1000 mt | 9 | | 7.3.2 | | | SULPHATE BLEACHED | | | 1000 mt | 892 | | 7.3.3 | | | SULPHITE UNBLEACHED | | | 1000 mt | 0 | | 7.3.4 | | | SULPHITE BLEACHED | | | 1000 mt | 17 | | 7.4 | | | DISSOLVING GRADES | | | 1000 mt | 71 | | 8 | | | OTHER PULP | | | 1000 mt | 33 | | 8.1 | | | PULP FROM FIBRES OTHER THAN WOOD | | | 1000 mt | 28 | | 8.2 | | | RECOVERED FIBRE PULP | | | 1000 mt | 5 | | 9 | | | RECOVERED PAPER | | | 1000 mt | 115 | | 10 | | | PAPER AND PAPERBOARD | | | 1000 mt | 7,254 | | 10.1 | | | GRAPHIC PAPERS | | | 1000 mt | 4,608 | | 10.1.1 | | | NEWSPRINT | | | 1000 mt | 1,079 | | 10.1.2 | | | UNCOATED MECHANICAL | | | 1000 mt | 634 | | 10.1.3 | | | UNCOATED WOODFREE | | | 1000 mt | 1,049 | | 10.1.4 | | | COATED PAPERS | | | 1000 mt | 1,846 | | 10.2 | | | SANITARY AND HOUSEHOLD PAPERS | | | 1000 mt | 359 | | 10.3 | | | PACKAGING MATERIALS | | | 1000 mt | 2,120 | | 10.3.1 | | | CASE MATERIALS | | | 1000 mt | 1,039 | | 10.3.2 | | | CARTONBOARD | | | 1000 mt | 724 | | 10.3.3 | | | WRAPPING PAPERS | | | 1000 mt | 307 | | 10.3.4 | | | OTHER PAPERS MAINLY FOR PACKAGING | | | 1000 mt | 49 | | 10.4 | | | OTHER PAPER AND PAPERBOARD N.E.S. | | | 1000 mt | 167 | United Kingdom Country: Date: 13 September 2012 Name of Official responsible for reply: Sheila Ward E-mail: sheila.w ard@forestry.gsi.gov.uk Official Address (in full): Forestry Commission, 231 Corstorphine Road, Edinburgh EH12 7AT, UK ## Jq3 Telephone: + 44 131 314 6475 Fax: + 44 131 316 4344 sheila.w ard@forestry.gsi.gov.uk ## Secondary Processed Wood And Paper Products Trade Specify Currency and Unit of Value (e.g.:1000 US $): 1000 UK £ (Sterling) | I M P O R T V A L U E | E X P O R T V A L U E | |--------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------| | Product | Product | | code | | | Secondary wood products | | | 11 | | | 11.1 | Further processed sawnwood | | 166,600 | 144,034 | | 11.1.C | Coniferous | | 44,846 | 37,742 | | 11.1.NC | Non-coniferous | | 121,754 | 106,292 | | 11.1.NC.T | of which: Tropical | | 60,877 | 53,146 | | 11.2 | Wooden wrapping and packing equipment | | 69,996 | 71,879 | | 11.3 | Wood products for domestic/decorative use (excl. furniture) | | 107,964 | 109,290 | | 11.4 | Other manufactured wood products | | 200,356 | 192,259 | | 11.5 | Builder's joinery and carpentry of wood | | 504,227 | 493,076 | | 11.6 | Wooden furniture | | 2,490,219 | 2,243,902 | | 11.7 | Prefabricated buildings | | 108,952 | 110,997 | | 11.7.1 | of which: made of wood | | 31,867 | 34,801 | | Secondary paper products | | | 12 | | | 12.1 | Composite paper and paperboard | | 46,703 | 41,780 | | 12.2 | Special coated paper | | 270,298 | 286,442 | | 12.3 | Carbon paper and copying paper, ready for use | | 35,102 | 26,266 | | 12.4 | Household and sanitary paper, ready for use | | 605,919 | 654,668 | | 12.5 | Packaging cartons, boxes, etc. | | 548,612 | 573,976 | | 12.6 | Other articles of paper or paperboard | | 663,058 | 643,592 | | 12.6.1 | of which: printing & writing paper, ready for use | | 24,912 | 21,415 | | 12.6.2 | of which: articles, moulded or pressed from pulp | | 27,503 | 17,189 | | 12.6.3 | of which: filter paper & paperboard, ready for use | | 15,056 | 15,601 | | 12.7 | Printed articles | | 1,623,347 | 1,744,814 | | 12.7.1 | Printed books | | 918,662 | 1,006,398 | | 12.7.2 | Newspapers | | 124,897 | 115,931 | | 12.7.3 | Other printed products | | 579,787 | 622,486 | Country: Date: Sheila Ward # Ece/Eu Species Trade Forest Sector Questionnaire ## Trade In Roundwood And Sawnwood By Species 1000 UK £ (Sterling) Specify Currency and Unit of Value (e.g.:1000 national currency): | | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------| | Product | | | Classification Classification | | | Unit of | | | Code | HS2007 | | Quantity | | | Quantity | Value | | 1.2.C | 44.03.20 | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 240 | 18,225 | | ex 44.03.20 | | | Fir/Spruce (Abies spp., Picea spp.) | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 37 | 4,119 | | 44.03.20.11 | | | sawlogs and veneer logs (Abies alba, Picea abies) | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 9 | 899 | | 44.03.20.19 | | | pulpwood and other industrial roundwood (Abies alba, Picea abies) | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 28 | 3,221 | | ex 44.03.20 | | | Pine (Pinus spp.) | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 67 | 7,423 | | 3 | | | 12 | 752 | | 44.03.20.31 | | | sawlogs and veneer logs (Pinus sylvestris) | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 56 | 6,672 | | 44.03.20.39 | | | pulpwood and other industrial roundwood (Pinus sylvestris) | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 135 | 6,683 | | ex 44.03.20 | | | Other / Non-specified | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 99 | 2,700 | | 44.03.20.91 | | | sawlogs and veneer logs | | | 1000 m | | | 44.03.20.99 | | | pulpwood and other industrial roundwood | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 36 | 3,983 | | 3 | | | 101 | 51,350 | | 1.2.NC | 44.03.40/90 | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 46 | 24,657 | | 44.03.91 | | | of which: Oak (Quercus spp.) | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 23 | 7,109 | | 44.03.91.10 | | | sawlogs and veneer logs | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 23 | 17,548 | | 44.03.91.90 | | | pulpwood and other industrial roundwood | | | 1000 m | | | 44.03.92 | | | of which: Beech (Fagus spp.) | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 9 | 529 | | 44.03.92.10 | | | sawlogs and veneer logs | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 0 | 0 | | 44.03.92.90 | | | pulpwood and other industrial roundwood | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 9 | 529 | | ex 44.03.99 | | | of which: Birch (Betula spp.) | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 1 | 49 | | 3 | | | 0 | 28 | | 44.03.99.51 | | | sawlogs and veneer logs | | | 1000 m | | | 44.03.99.59 | | | pulpwood and other industrial roundwood | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 0 | 21 | | 44.03.99.10 | | | of which: Poplar (Populus spp.) | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 0 | 0 | | 3 | | | 1 | 1,079 | | 44.03.99.30 | | | of which: Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus spp.) | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 5,230 | 958,043 | | 5.C | 44.07.10 | | 1000 m | | | ex 44.07.10 | | | of which: Fir/Spruce (Abies spp., Picea spp.) | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 2,471 | 431,511 | | 3 | | | 1,278 | 247,610 | | ex 44.07.10 | | | of which: Pine (Pinus spp.) | | | 1000 m | | | 5.NC | 44.07.20/90 | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 469 | 240,587 | | 3 | | | 169 | 100,313 | | 44.07.91 | | | of which: Oak (Quercus spp.) | | | 1000 m | | | 44.07.92 | | | of which: Beech (Fagus spp.) | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 25 | 8,420 | | 44.07.93 | | | of which: Maple (Acer spp.) | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 4 | 2,623 | | 3 | | | 2 | 1,396 | | 44.07.94 | | | of which: Cherry (Prunus spp.) | | | 1000 m | | | 44.07.95 | | | of which: Ash (Fraxinus spp.) | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 17 | 8,096 | | 3 | | | 20 | 6,508 | | ex 44.07.99 | | | of which: Poplar (Populus spp.) | | | 1000 m | | | ex 44.07.99 | | | of which: Birch (Betula spp.) | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | + + + | + + + | Light blue cells are requested only for EU members using the Combined Nomenclature to fill in - other countries are welcome to do so if their trade classification nomenclature permits "ex" codes indicate that only part of that trade classication code is used + + + denotes data not available. United Kingdom 13 September 2012 Name of Official responsible for reply: Official Address (in full): Forestry Commission, 231 Corstorphine Road, Edinburgh EH12 7AT, UK + 44 131 314 6475 + 44 131 316 4344 Telephone: Fax: E-mail: sheila.ward@forestry.gsi.gov.uk | | | I M P O R T | E X P O R T | |------|------|---------------|---------------| | 2010 | 2011 | 2010 | 2011 | ## Eu1 FOREST SECTOR QUESTIONNAIRE Official Address (in full): Forestry Commission, 231 Corstorphine Road, Edinburgh EH12 7AT, UK Trade with countries outside EU Telephone: + 44 131 314 6475 Fax: + 44 131 316 4344 | 1000 UK £ (Sterling) | | |------------------------------------------|-------------| | | | | Specify Currency and Unit of Value | | | (e.g.:1000 EUR) | | | : | | | E X P O R T | I M P O R T | | Product | | | | | | Unit of | | | 2010 | 2010 | | code | Product | | quantity | | | | | | | | | Quantity | Value | | 3 | | | 14 | 7,531 | | 1 | | | ROUNDWOOD | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 2 | 529 | | 1.1 | | | WOOD FUEL, INCLUDING WOOD FOR CHARCOAL | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 12 | 7,002 | | 1.2 | | | INDUSTRIAL ROUNDWOOD (WOOD IN THE ROUGH) | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 2 | 516 | | 1.2.C | | | Coniferous | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 10 | 6,485 | | 1.2.NC | | | Non-Coniferous | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 7 | 4,372 | | 1.2.NC.T | | | of which: Tropical | | | 1000 m | | | 2 | | | WOOD CHARCOAL | | | 1000 mt | 49 | | 3 | | | 59 | 5,101 | | 3 | | | WOOD CHIPS AND PARTICLES | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 758 | 64,046 | | 4 | | | WOOD RESIDUES | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 702 | 235,466 | | 5 | | | SAWNWOOD | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 468 | 100,920 | | 5.C | | | Coniferous | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 233 | 134,546 | | 5.NC | | | Non-Coniferous | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 101 | 54,026 | | 5.NC.T | | | of which: Tropical | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 1,020 | 279,948 | | 6 | | | WOOD-BASED PANELS | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 9 | 9,868 | | 6.1 | | | VENEER SHEETS | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 5 | 2,617 | | 6.1.C | | | Coniferous | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 4 | 7,251 | | 6.1.NC | | | Non-Coniferous | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 1 | 323 | | 6.1.NC.T | | | of which: Tropical | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 967 | 255,860 | | 6.2 | | | PLYWOOD | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 303 | 71,072 | | 6.2.C | | | Coniferous | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 664 | 184,788 | | 6.2.NC | | | Non-Coniferous | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 172 | 57,329 | | 6.2.NC.T | | | of which: Tropical | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 10 | 2,227 | | 6.3 | | | PARTICLE BOARD, OSB and OTHERS | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 3 | 743 | | 6.3.1 | | | of which: OSB | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 33 | 11,993 | | 6.4 | | | FIBREBOARD | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 5 | 1,997 | | 6.4.1 | | | HARDBOARD | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 27 | 9,280 | | 6.4.2 | | | MDF (MEDIUM DENSITY) | | | 1000 m | | | 3 | | | 1 | 716 | | 6.4.3 | | | OTHER FIBREBOARD | | | 1000 m | | | 7 | | | WOOD PULP | | | 1000 mt | 610 | | 7.1 | | | MECHANICAL | | | 1000 mt | 13 | | 7.2 | | | SEMI-CHEMICAL | | | 1000 mt | 0 | | 7.3 | | | CHEMICAL | | | 1000 mt | 527 | | 7.3.1 | | | SULPHATE UNBLEACHED | | | 1000 mt | 7 | | 7.3.2 | | | SULPHATE BLEACHED | | | 1000 mt | 519 | | 7.3.3 | | | SULPHITE UNBLEACHED | | | 1000 mt | 0 | | 7.3.4 | | | SULPHITE BLEACHED | | | 1000 mt | 0 | | 7.4 | | | DISSOLVING GRADES | | | 1000 mt | 69 | | 8 | | | OTHER PULP | | | 1000 mt | 14 | | 8.1 | | | PULP FROM FIBRES OTHER THAN WOOD | | | 1000 mt | 14 | | 8.2 | | | RECOVERED FIBRE PULP | | | 1000 mt | 0 | | 9 | | | RECOVERED PAPER | | | 1000 mt | 6 | | 10 | | | PAPER AND PAPERBOARD | | | 1000 mt | 1,344 | | 10.1 | | | GRAPHIC PAPERS | | | 1000 mt | 836 | | 10.1.1 | | | NEWSPRINT | | | 1000 mt | 465 | | 10.1.2 | | | UNCOATED MECHANICAL | | | 1000 mt | 84 | | 10.1.3 | | | UNCOATED WOODFREE | | | 1000 mt | 247 | | 10.1.4 | | | COATED PAPERS | | | 1000 mt | 40 | | 10.2 | | | SANITARY AND HOUSEHOLD PAPERS | | | 1000 mt | 88 | | 10.3 | | | PACKAGING MATERIALS | | | 1000 mt | 406 | | 10.3.1 | | | CASE MATERIALS | | | 1000 mt | 128 | | 10.3.2 | | | CARTONBOARD | | | 1000 mt | 152 | | 10.3.3 | | | WRAPPING PAPERS | | | 1000 mt | 122 | | 10.3.4 | | | OTHER PAPERS MAINLY FOR PACKAGING | | | 1000 mt | 4 | | 10.4 | | | OTHER PAPER AND PAPERBOARD N.E.S. | | | 1000 mt | 14 | United Kingdom Country: Date: 13 September 2012 Name of Official responsible for reply: Sheila Ward E-mail: sheila.ward@forestry.gsi.gov.uk 2011 2011 Country: United Kingdom Date: 13 September 2012 Name of Official responsible for reply: Sheila Ward Official Address (in full): Forestry Commission, 231 Corstorphine Road, Edinburgh EH12 7AT, UK Telephone: + 44 131 314 6475 Fax: + 44 131 316 4344 E-mail: sheila.ward@forestry.gsi.gov.uk Removals by type of ownership Unit 2010 2011 Ownership Product code Quantity Quantity ROUNDWOOD REMOVALS 3 9,718 10,021 1 ROUNDWOOD 1000 m 3 9,250 9,548 1.C Coniferous 1000 m 3 468 473 1.NC Non-coniferous 1000 m 3 4,604 4,848 State forests 1000 m 3 4,542 4,782 Coniferous 1000 m 3 62 66 Non-coniferous 1000 m 3 + + + + + + Other publicly owned forests 1000 m 3 + + + + + + Coniferous 1000 m 3 + + + + + + Non-coniferous 1000 m 3 5,115 5,173 Private forest 1000 m 3 4,708 4,766 Coniferous 1000 m 3 407 407 Non-coniferous 1000 m ## Note: - Ownership categories correspond to those of the TBFRA. State forests: Forests owned by national, state and regional governments, or government-owned corporations; Crown forests. Other publicly owned forests: Forests belonging to cities, municipalities, villages and communes. Private forests: Forests owned by individuals, co-operatives, enterprises and industries and other private institutions. - The unit should be solid cubic metres, under bark. + + + denotes data not available. The first six digits of the HS and CN codes are identical. Under the CN column, 8-digit codes are listed w hen they provide greater detail. Product Product Code CN 2011 1 ROUNDWOOD 44.01.10 44.03.20/40/90 1.1 WOOD FUEL, INCLUDING WOOD FOR CHARCOAL 44.01.10 1.2 INDUSTRIAL ROUNDWOOD (WOOD IN THE ROUGH) 44.03.20/40/90 1.2.C Coniferous 44.03.20 1.2.NC Non-Coniferous (Eurostat to attribute all of 440399.95 to 1.2.NC) 44.03.40/90 1.2.NC.T of which:Tropical ex440399.95 44.03.40 ex44.03.99 2 WOOD CHARCOAL 44.02.90 3 WOOD CHIPS AND PARTICLES 44.01.20 4 WOOD RESIDUES Includes pellets 440130.20, w hich are to be entered separately in sheet 'Pellets' 5 SAWNWOOD 44.07 5.C Coniferous 44.07.10 5.NC Non-Coniferous 44.07.20/90 5.NC.T of which:Tropical 440799.96 44.07.20 ex44.07.99 6 WOOD-BASED PANELS 44.08 44.10 44.11 44.12.30/90 6.1 VENEER SHEETS 44.08 6.1.C Coniferous 44.08.10 6.1.NC Non-Coniferous (Eurostat to attribute all of 440890 to 6.1.NC) 44.08.30/90 6.1.NC.T of which:Tropical ex440890 44.08.30 ex44.08.90 6.2 PLYWOOD 44.12.30/90 6.2.C Coniferous 441239.00; 441294.90; 441299.85 6.2.NC Non-Coniferous 441231.10 and 441231.90; 441232.10; 441232.90; 441294.10; 441299.30; 441299.40; 441299.50 6.2.NC.T of which:Tropical 441231.10 and 441231.90; 441232.90; 441299.50 44.12.31 ex44.12.32 ex44.12.90 6.3 PARTICLE BOARD, OSB and OTHERS 44.10 6.3.1 of which: OSB 44.10.12 6.4 FIBREBOARD 44.11 6.4.1 HARDBOARD 44.11.92 6.4.2 MDF (Medium Density) 44.11.10 6.4.3 OTHER FIBREBOARD 44.11.93/94 7 WOOD PULP 47.01 47.02 47.03 47.04 47.05 7.1 MECHANICAL 47.01 7.2 SEMI-CHEMICAL 47.05 7.3 CHEMICAL 47.03 47.04 7.3.1 SULPHATE UNBLEACHED 47.03.10 7.3.2 SULPHATE BLEACHED 47.03.20 7.3.3 SULPHITE UNBLEACHED 47.04.10 7.3.4 SULPHITE BLEACHED 47.04.20 7.4 DISSOLVING GRADES 47.02 ## Codes For Jq2 And Eu1 For Eu And Efta Countries Trade Cross Reference Between Hs2007 (Bold Print) And Cn2011 (Normal Print) C l a s s i f i c a t i o n s HS2007 44.01.30 44.12.39 ex44.12.90 44.12.31/32 ex44.12.90 ## Codes For Jq2 And Eu1 For Eu And Efta Countries Forest Sector Questionnaire Trade CROSS REFERENCE between HS2007 (bold print) and CN2011 (normal print) The first six digits of the HS and CN codes are identical. Under the CN column, 8-digit codes are listed w hen they provide greater detail. C l a s s i f i c a t i o n s Product Product Code CN 2011 HS2007 8 OTHER PULP 47.06 8.1 PULP FROM FIBRES OTHER THAN WOOD 47.06.10/30/90 8.2 RECOVERED FIBRE PULP 47.06.20 9 RECOVERED PAPER 47.07 10 PAPER AND PAPERBOARD 48.01/02/03/04/05/06/08/09/10 48.11.50 48.12/13 10.1 GRAPHIC PAPERS 48.01 48.02.10/20/50/60 48.09 48.10.10/20 10.1.1 NEWSPRINT 48.01 10.1.2 UNCOATED MECHANICAL 48.02.60 10.1.3 UNCOATED WOODFREE 48.02.10/20/50 10.1.4 COATED PAPERS 48.09 48.10.10/20 10.2 SANITARY AND HOUSEHOLD PAPERS 48.03 10.3 PACKAGING MATERIALS 48.04.10/20/30/42/49/50 48.05.10/20/30/90 48.06.10/20/40 48.08 48.10.30/90 48.11.50 10.3.1 CASE MATERIALS 48.04.10 48.05.10/20/91 10.3.2 CARTONBOARD 48.04.42/49/50 48.05.92 48.10.32/39/92 48.11.50 10.3.3 WRAPPING PAPERS 48.04.20/30 48.05.30 48.06.10/20/40 48.08 48.10.31/99 10.3.4 OTHER PAPERS MAINLY FOR PACKAGING 48.05.93 10.4 OTHER PAPER AND PAPERBOARD N.E.S 480441.98 48.02.40 48.04.41 48.05.40/50 48.06.30 48.12/13 HS: The Harmonised Commodity Description and Coding Systems, a multipurpose international product nomenclature developed by the World Customs Organization (WCO), comprises up to six digits and is updated every 4 - 6 years. CN: The Combined Nomenclature of the EU is identical to the HS on the first six digits and comprises two extra digits, making it more detailed than the HS. It is updated and published every year. How to interpret the notation: The dots are used for readability and have no meaning. A code ending in "0" means that all subcodes are to be included, e.g. 47.03.10 includes subcodes 47.03.11 and 47.03.19. If only 4 digits are indicated, all subcodes are included, e.g. 47.06 includes 47.06.10, 47.06.20, 47.06.30, and 47.06.90. Code numbers separated by "/" mean that all the following codes ending in the digits indicated (and their subcodes) are to be included. The term "ex" means that only part of the data available under a code is usable because the code encompasses a wider product range. For instance, "ex44.07.99" under "Sawnwood - of which tropical" means that only part of the data under HS-code 44.07.99 is usable, because insufficient detail is available. However, the table shows that CN code 440799.96 is sufficiently detailed to identify "Sawnwood - of which tropical". In case even the CN is not detailed enough, bold print is used in the CN column. Many tropical timber products contain "ex" codes in the above list, since the HS explicitly recognises less than 100 tropical timber species. Species not explicitly recognised as tropical are grouped in "other" categories with non-tropical, non-coniferous timbers that are likewise not explicitly recognised by the HS (e.g. 44.07.99). Estimates of tropical timber trade totals therefore require that these "other" categories be analysed to ascertain how much of the total was sourced from tropical countries. This can only be done at country level; Eurostat must extract foreign trade data for all countries. ## Codes For Jq3 For Eu And Efta Countries FOREST SECTOR QUESTIONNAIRE Secondary Processed Wood and Paper Products CROSS REFERENCE between HS2007 (bold print) and CN2011 (normal print) | | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------| | C l a s s i f i c a t i o n s | | | Product | Product | | Code | | | CN 2011 | HS2007 | | | | | 11 | | | Secondary wood products | | | 11.1 | | | Further processed sawnwood | | | 44.09.10 44.09.29 | | | 11.1.C | | | Coniferous | | | 44.09.10 | | | 11.1.NC | | | Non-coniferous | | | (Eurostat to attribute all of 440929 | | | to 11.1.NC) | | | 44.09.29 | | | 11.1.NC.T | | | of which: Tropical | | | ex440929 | | | ex44.09.29 | | | 11.2 | | | Wooden wrapping and packing equipment | | | 44.15 44.16 | | | 11.3 | | | Wood products for domestic/decorative use (excl. furniture) | | | 44.14 44.19 44.20 | | | 11.4 | | | Other manufactured wood products | | | 44.17 44.21 | | | 11.5 | | | Builder's joinery and carpentry of wood | | | 44.18 | | | 11.6 | | | Wooden furniture | | | 94.01.60 ex 94.01.90 94.03.30/40/50/60 ex94.03.90 | | | 940190.30 (parts, of seats, of | | | wood) | | | 940390.30 (furniture, parts, of | | | 11.7 | | | Prefabricated buildings | | | 94.06 | | | 11.7.1 | | | of which made of wood | | | 940600.20 | | | ex94.06 | | | 12 | | | Secondary paper products | | | 12.1 | | | Composite paper and paperboard | | | 48.07 | | | 12.2 | | | Special coated paper | | | 48.11.10/40/60/90 | | | 12.3 | | | Carbon paper and copying paper, ready for use | | | 48.16 | | | 12.4 | | | Household and sanitary paper, ready for use | | | 48.18 | | | 12.5 | | | Packaging cartons, boxes, etc. | | | 48.19 | | | 12.6 | | | Other articles of paper or paperboard | | | 48.14/15/17/20/21/22/23 | | | 12.6.1 | of which printing & writing paper, ready for use | | 482390.40 | | | ex48.23.90 | | | 12.6.2 | of which articles, moulded or pressed from pulp | | 48.23.70 | | | 12.6.3 | of which filter paper & paperboard, ready for use | | 48.23.20 | | | 12.7 | Printed articles | | 49.00 | | | 12.7.1 | Printed books | | 49.01 | | | 12.7.2 | Newspapers | | 49.02 | | | 12.7.3 | Other printed products | | 49.03/04/05/06/07/08/09/10/11 | | HS: The Harmonised Commodity Description and Coding Systems, a multipurpose international product nomenclature developed by the World Customs Organization (WCO), comprises up to six digits and is updated every 4 - 6 years. CN: The Combined Nomenclature of the EU is identical to the HS on the first six digits and comprises two extra digits, making it more detailed than the HS. It is updated and published every How to interpret the notation: The dots are used for readability and have no meaning. A code ending in "0" means that all subcodes are to be included, e.g. 49.00 includes all codes from 49.01 to 49.11. If only 4 digits are indicated, all subcodes are included, e.g. 48.18 includes 48.18.10, 48.18.20, 48.18.30, 48.18.40, 48.18.50 and 48.18.90. Code numbers separated by "/" mean that all the follow ing codes ending in the digits indicated (and their subcodes) are to be included. The term "ex" means that only part of the data available under a code is usable because the code encompasses a wider product range. For instance, "ex94.06" under "Prefabricated buildings - of w hich made of w ood" means that only part of the data under HS-code 94.06 is usable, since mobile homes and prefabricated buildings of wood, iron or steel are all lumped together under that code. How ever, the table show s that the CN classification covers sufficient detail to identify "Prefabricated buildings of w ood". In case even the CN is not detailed enough, bold print is used in the CN column. Many tropical timber products contain "ex" codes in the above list, since the HS explicitly recognises less than 100 tropical timber species. Species not explicitly recognised as tropical are grouped in "other" categories with non-tropical, non-coniferous timbers that are likewise not explicitly recognised by the HS. Estimates of tropical timber trade totals therefore require that these "other" categories be analysed to ascertain how much of the total was sourced from tropical countries. This can only be done at country level; Eurostat must extract foreign trade data for all countries.

en

4722-pdf

## Press Release Winners Of The National Archives' First World War Short Film Competition Announced EMBARGOED until 09:00 GMT Monday 16 February 2015: The winner and runners-up of the First World War 'Files on film' competition by The National Archives are announced today. Abdul Qualam Aziz, age 40 from West Norwood, South London, wins first prize of £500 with his short film 'I Stood With The Dead' which uses Siegfried Sassoon's record (WO 339/51440) for inspiration and features his son, Qualam Junior age 6, reading parts of Sassoon's famous war poem of the same name. Judging panel member, Alastair Bruce OBE, Royal, Religious and National Events Commentator for *Sky News* and historical advisor for several feature films and ITV's *Downton Abbey*, commented on the winning entry: "The mix of the mesmeric delivery of the young narrator, the sense of loss in the playground, the haunting and yet polished clean helmet all juxtaposed to compare today, youth and innocence with the Great War. The children of the late 19th century were evoked for me in this piece and the documents were thereby brought both to life but also to compelling reality." Abdul Qualam Aziz said: "I'm delighted to have won The National Archives competition. It was a brilliant learning process for both myself and my son about a different aspect of the First World War. Although he's too young to understand everything surrounding the film at the moment, I'm looking forward to telling him we won and using it as an opportunity to continue his education." Second prize of £200 went to John Ryder, age 47 from Leytonstone, East London, for his short film 'July 1917' which uses Siegfried Sassoon's protest letter as inspiration. The judges felt this was a very atmospheric piece of work with a haunting and resonating combination of imagery and voice. Also on the judging panel, Chris Croucher, award-winning filmmaker and producer of season five of ITV's *Downton Abbey,* said: "The voice over working against the text on the screen was impressive. The constant rolling of names with Sassoon's words ending in the Tower of London's poppy display was very powerful." Third prize of £100 went to Matylda Wierietielny, age 25 from Manchester, for her film 'Shellshock', which interprets medical records of servicewomen in the First World War (MH 106/2208) through music and contemporary dance with flashes of real images of barbed wire and ruined buildings. Chris Croucher, award-winning filmmaker and producer of season five of *Downton Abbey,* said: "For me, I am always a fan of taking a story and looking at interesting ways of interpretation. The modern dance and voice over of Shellshock really hooked me in. Simple BUT very effective." All 5 shortlisted entries can be seen on The National Archives YouTube channel. Jeff James, Chief Executive and Keeper of The National Archives and Chair of the Files on Film judging panel, said: "We are delighted with all the entries received for the First World War Files on Film competition. Using imagination, creativity and filming technique, they explore the diverse collection of records held at The National Archives allowing people to engage with the First World War as never before." The Files on Film competition, supported by the Friends of The National Archives, aims to encourage filmmakers to use the diverse collection of documents and pictures housed at The National Archives in Kew as the inspiration for an original feature. For further information, please contact Rebecca Simpson, Press Officer at The National Archives on: 020 8392 5277 or e-mail: press@nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk. Notes to Editor: Social Media: Follow The National Archives @UKNatArchives. The competition will be using the hashtags: #filesonfilm #FWW100 Images for publication use: https://www.flickr.com/gp/59260229@N06/98su5v/ More about the Files on Film competition: Ten First World War documents were selected from the archives and put online for this competition. Entrants had to use one or more of these documents as the starting point for their three-minute short film. It could be a character, a line, or the whole document. Documents include songs from the Women's Land Army booklet, Siegfried Sassoon's famous war protest letter and Mata Hari's security service file. The competition closed on Wednesday 7 January 2015. The winners were chosen by the Files on Film panel of judges comprising: Chris Croucher is an award winning filmmaker with nearly ten years of on set experience within the film and TV business. He is currently producing season five of 'Downton Abbey' for Carnival Films & TV. His most recent short 'Friend Request Pending' (writer/producer) toured the globe. The film premiered at the 2012 BFI London Film Festival and stars Judi Dench, Penny Ryder and Tom Hiddleston. Alistair Bruce OBE is the Royal, Constitutional and Religious Commentator for Sky News, the UK's premier 24hr satellite news channel. Alastair contributes to FOX News, ABC and the BBC giving an insight to modern events with a historical perspective. Alastair was involved with the multiple Oscarwinning hit movie *The King's Speech*, the award-winning film *Young Victoria*, and the Masterpiece Classic TV series *Downton Abbey*. Jeff James is Chief Executive and Keeper of The National Archives. Jeff has overall responsibility for The National Archives' future direction as well as current performance, and is accountable to ministers for both. His role is to lead in all The National Archives' many different activities, in our work with government and in providing services to the public. Jeff is Keeper of Public Records and Historic Manuscripts Commissioner. Ian Hay-Campbell is Chairman of The Friends of the National Archives. Originally from New Zealand, he has a keen interest in 19th and 20th century British and Commonwealth history. Before he retired in 2005, Ian was a broadcaster with the BBC World Service and then joined the Foreign & Commonwealth Office as a career diplomat. Since his retirement he has researched his family's history, using the resources at The National Archives. Krishna Kaur is Equality and Diversity Coordinator at The National Archives. She has over twenty years' experience of working strategically at a European, national, regional and local level to facilitate organisational cultural change, working predominantly across the Criminal Justice Service. About The National Archives: For the record, for good…The National Archives is a government department and an executive agency of the Ministry of Justice (MoJ). As the official archive of the UK government and England and Wales, we look after and make available to the public a collection of historical records dating back over 1,000 years, including records as diverse as Domesday Book and MI5 files. Follow the press office on Twitter @TNApressofficer and for general news @UkNatArchives. About Friends of The National Archives: The Friends of The National Archives, established in 1988, is a voluntary organisation, dedicated to supporting The National Archives' role in preserving and providing access to the nation's records. They provide vital help to The National Archives in many projects, enabling records of all kinds and classes to be conserved, preserved, catalogued, made accessible and studied. Support for projects is provided through grants and volunteers.

en

0994-pdf

## Analysis Of Gender As A Factor Associated With Custodial Sentences For Breach Of A Court Order Kathryn Hopkins, Miriam Light, And Jorgen Lovbakke, Ministry Of Justice Analytical Services Aim The aim of this analysis was to investigate whether gender is associated with being sentenced to custody for breach of a court order, independently of offence type, criminal history and other factors. Approach This analysis used an extract from the Police National Computer (PNC) recording the sentence (disposal) given to all offenders convicted or cautioned for breach between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2011 plus their previous criminal history (38,041 offenders)1. The analysis looks specifically at sentences given for breach of a court order (community order, conditional discharge, and suspended sentence order). Where an offender had more than one breach in 2011, only the first sentence for breach is included in this analysis. Logistic regression models were built using the PNC data to explore whether any independent associations were observed between main (index) offence type, criminal history, gender, age, nationality, ethnicity, and being sentenced to immediate custody. These models cannot account for all factors which were used in making sentencing decisions: for example there is no record of all aggravating and mitigating circumstances which were taken into account by the sentencing court, including the plea (guilty or not guilty), which is known to affect sentencing (MOJ, 2010). However, this approach shows which factors (out of all factors in the model) were independently associated with being sentenced to prison, and can highlight where further exploration may be warranted. Results Of the 38,041 offenders included in the PNC extract, 5,526 were female (15% of the cohort) and 32,515 were male (85% of the cohort). The number and type of court order which was breached is shown in **Table 1.** and Wales, 2011. | Breach offence | No. | % | |------------------------------------|--------|-----------------------| | Breach of a community order 22,154 | 58 | | | 8,539 | 22 | Breach of conditional | | discharge | | | | 7,348 | 19 | Breach of suspended | | sentence order | | | | Total | 38,041 | 100 | Totals may not add up to 100% because of rounding. Table 2 shows the sentences received by these offenders for the breach of a court order, by gender. The most frequent sentence for all offenders was 'other' (42%), followed by 'new court order' (37%), then 'immediate custody' (14%). 'Other' sentences included: order revoked; order varied; bound over; order to continue; order amended; no action on breach; and order extended. This suggests that the most common sentence for breach of a court order was a modification to the original order. Fourteen per cent of offenders (n= 5,173) received an immediate custodial sentence for breach of the court order. Female offenders were less likely to receive immediate custody following a breach of a court order (9%, n = 497) than male offenders (14%, n = 4,676), although this was not adjusted for the type of index offence, criminal history, or other factors. Fines, fully suspended sentences, and conditional and absolute discharges made up fewer than 10% of sentences received. | Gender | Female | |-----------------------|-----------| | Male | Total | | Sentence | n | | Absolute discharge | 2 | | Conditional discharge | 60 | | Fully suspended | 189 | | Fine | 225 | | Immediate custody | 497 | | Community sentence | 2,010 | | Other | 2,543 | | Total | 5,526 | Totals may not add up to 100% because of rounding. Table 3 shows the number and percentage of offenders that received an immediate custodial sentence by the type of court order breached. Offenders on suspended sentences were the most likely to receive a custodial sentence, with over half (54%) of this group being sentenced to custody. Community orders were the least likely to receive an immediate custodial sentence (2.5% were sentenced to custody), followed by offenders who had breached a conditional discharge (7.5% were sentenced to custody). Breach offence Total breaching court order Number sentenced to custody % sentenced to custody Breach of community order 550 22,154 2.5 Breach of conditional discharge 638 8,539 7.5 Breach of suspended sentence order 3,985 7,348 54.2 Total sentenced to custody 5,173 38,041 13.6 The main (index) offence which resulted in the court order which was then breached is shown in **Table 4**. Table 4. Main (index) offence committed by those who received a court order and later breached the court order Index offence2 No. % Violence against the person 3,111 8 Sexual offences 166 <1 Burglary 1,936 5 Robbery 258 <1 10,484 28 Theft and handling stolen goods Fraud and forgery 1,091 3 Criminal damage 557 1 Drug offences 3,522 9 Other indictable3 offences 2,163 6 Indictable motoring offences 225 <1 12,400 33 Summary offences excluding motoring Summary motoring offences 2,128 6 Total 38,041 100 Totals may not add up to 100% due to rounding The most frequently recorded main (index) offence (for which a court order was received and later breached) was Summary offences excluding motoring4 (33%), followed by Theft and handling stolen goods (28%). Less than one per cent of offenders who had breached a court order had an index offence for either Sexual offences, Robbery, or Indictable motoring offences. Offenders breaching a court order were recorded as having an average (median5) of 11 previous cautions and convictions each. Female offenders who breached a court order had fewer previous cautions and convictions recorded than male offenders (median of 10 compared with 12). Logistic regression model To test for independent associations with being sentenced to custody for breach of a court order, gender, age, ethnicity, previous criminal history, index offence type, breach offence type, and previous breaches were entered together into a logistic regression model6 with 'sentenced to immediate custody' (or not) as the outcome. Ethnicity was grouped into two categories (white: 84%7 and Black, Asian, or Minority Ethnic (BAME):8 16% of the sample, respectively). Results from the model are shown in Annex A. A summary follows: Magistrates' Court). Gender The odds of male offenders receiving an immediate custodial sentence for breach of a court order were approximately 73% higher than the odds of female offenders receiving the same. Age Each increasing year of age was independently associated with a less than 1% decrease in the odds of receiving an immediate custodial sentence for breach of a court order. Ethnicity The odds of BAME offenders receiving an immediate custodial sentence for breach of a court order were approximately 39% higher than the odds of White offenders receiving the same. Previous convictions and cautions The odds of receiving an immediate custodial sentence for breach of a court order increased by approximately 1% for each previous conviction or caution recorded. Main (index) offence The index offence type (which first resulted in a court order) was a predictor of receiving an immediate custodial sentence for breach of a court order, with Theft and handling stolen goods, Burglary, and Robbery most likely to result in a custodial sentence for breach. Type of court order breached Type of court order breached was a good predictor of custodial sentence with offenders who breached a suspended sentence order associated with an approximate 50 times higher odds of being sentenced to custody than offenders who breached a community order. Offenders who breached a conditional discharge were associated with approximately three times the odds of being sentenced to custody, compared with offenders who breached a community order. Previous breaches Previous breaches were independently associated with receiving a custodial sentence, particularly breaches of the same court order (where the court order was imposed before 2011, the offender may have breached the sentence once or more before the breach offence in 2011 which is included in this study): an approximate 15% higher odds of receiving a custodial sentence was associated with each breach offence. Each breach of previous court orders was associated with an approximate 2% increase in the odds of receiving a custodial sentence. Summary Male offenders were more likely to be sentenced to immediate custody for breaching a court order: the odds of male offenders receiving a custodial sentence was 73% higher than for female offenders. A number of other factors were found to be predictive of custodial sentencing for breach offences: age; ethnicity; criminal history; index (main) offence type; type of court order breached; and number of previous breaches. The differences in custodial sentencing rates may be due to factors which were not taken into account in the models. Sentencing outcomes may depend on a wide range of other factors, e.g. family responsibilities, mental health issues, and opportunities for diversion from custody. ## Annex A: Logistic Regression Model: Sentenced To Immediate Custody For Breach Of A Court Order. Logistic regression model (sentenced to custody or not) coefficient (B) standard error (S.E.) significance level, odds ratios (OR) 9 and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Reference categories are labelled with (re | 95% CI | Factor | B | S.E. | Sig. | OR | |-------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------|--------|---------|---------|--------| | Lower | Upper | | | | | | Female | | | | | | | (ref) | | | | | | | n/a | n/a | <0.01 | n/a | n/a | n/a | | Male | .547 | .061 | <0.01 | 1.728 | 1.533 | | Age | Age at index offence | -.007 | .002 | <0.01 | .993 | | White | | | | | | | (ref) | | | | | | | n/a | n/a | <0.01 | n/a | n/a | n/a | | BAME | .332 | .049 | <0.01 | 1.393 | 1.266 | | Previous convictions and cautions | Number of previous convictions or cautions | .008 | .001 | <0.01 | 1.008 | | Index offence (which resulted in a | | | | | | | court order, which was later | | | | | | | breached) | | | | | | | Violence against the person | | | | | | | (ref) | | | | | | | n/a | n/a | <0.01 | n/a | n/a | n/a | | Sexual offences | -.246 | .296 | .406 | .782 | .438 | | Burglary | .542 | .092 | <0.01 | 1.719 | 1.436 | | Robbery | .488 | .212 | .022 | 1.628 | 1.074 | | Theft and handling stolen goods | .668 | .070 | <0.01 | 1.951 | 1.701 | | Fraud and forgery | .250 | .129 | .052 | 1.284 | .998 | | Criminal damage | .195 | .183 | .289 | 1.215 | .848 | | Drug offences | -.238 | .089 | .007 | .788 | .662 | | Other indictable offences | -.073 | .096 | .447 | .929 | .769 | | Indictable motoring offences | -.080 | .191 | .674 | .923 | .634 | | Summary offences excluding motoring | .000 | .069 | .995 | 1.000 | .874 | | Summary motoring offences | .121 | .098 | .214 | 1.129 | .932 | | Type of breach offence | Breach of a community order | | | | | | (ref) | | | | | | | | n/a | n/a | <0.01 | n/a | n/a | | | Breach of a conditional discharge | 1.149 | .062 | <0.01 | 3.154 | | | Breach of a suspended sentence order | 3.881 | .052 | <0.01 | 48.473 | | Previous breaches | Number of breaches since index offence | .139 | .028 | <0.01 | 1.149 | | | Number of breaches before the index offence | .021 | .006 | <0.01 | 1.021 | | (Constant) | n/a | -4.543 | .107 | <0.01 | .011 | 9 The odds ratio can be interpreted as the independent association of each factor in the model with the outcome (sentenced to immediate custody), whilst controlling for all other factors in the model. A significance level of less than 0.05 shows whether the factor was significantly associated with immediate custody (compared with the absence of the factor, or with the reference category). An odds ratio greater than one (1.0), for those factors which were significantly associated with immediate custody, demonstrates an independent association with increased odds of immediate custody, and an odds ratio less than one demonstrates an independent association with decreased odds of immediate custody.

en

0695-pdf

A country in a jam: tackling congestion in our towns and cities How councils are dealing with congestion and how they could do more ## Foreword For many, traffic is an inconvenience, though some might also describe it as a consequence of economic success. Indeed, it's a sign that a lot of people have jobs to go to. However, if left unchecked it can have a significant impact on our towns, cities and communities, and act as a drag on local growth. The Department for Transport (DfT) predicts up to 55 per cent growth in traffic levels by 2040. However, levels of congestion are predicted to rise - up to 85 per cent worse in the same period1. If traffic isn't managed effectively, congestion on our streets can lead to stalled growth and productivity, and worse still, toxic air and reduced quality of life. The cost will continue to rise if we do nothing. It is estimated that congestion will cost the economy £307 billion between 2013 to 20302. Delays on our strategic roads equate to 4.9 days wasted per person each year. The environmental impact comes from vehicles in a traffic jam emitting four times as much pollution into the atmosphere as free flowing traffic3 which in turn contributes towards the estimated 40,000 premature deaths a year from air pollution4. These impacts are avoidable, and we all - local authorities, central government, individuals and businesses - can help. Over the last year we have seen plenty of media interest in congestion on our roads. It was revealed that traffic in central London at times moves slower than a horse and cart.5 Councils, as local traffic authorities, have a statutory duty to manage their networks with the aim of 'securing the expeditious movement of traffic' and are already leading the way with innovative approaches to tackling congestion and curbing the predicted levels of traffic growth. We have detailed some of the best things councils are doing in this report but it is clear from the statistics that we need to do much more. Unfortunately councils are constrained by a lack of resources and a lack of powers to act. 5 www.standard.co.uk/news/london/london-traffic-means-buses-are-slower-than-a-horse-and-cart-a3370316.html Councils use existing measures to the best of their ability and how local circumstances dictate. However, they need greater powers to introduce proven measures that will help us curb further congestion. We cannot solve the problem with just punitive measures. We need positive, practical and attractive alternatives to car journeys with public transport, walking and cycling playing an important role. Some journeys will always need to be done by car but our goal should be to shift journeys to other means, such as onto public transport, or off the roads entirely. This will help those that need to use the roads as well as those that have to live with the consequences of congestion. This report is being presented at the same time as the Government has started drafting legislation on transitioning towards electric and autonomous vehicles. It is not clear how this will impact the transport networks of the future. Different outcomes are possible - road capacity could increase as smart technology could make better use of existing capacity, or it is also conceivable that a reduction in the cost of travel could make car travel so cheap people do far more whilst undermining the viability of public or other forms of transport. What is clear is that we have a pressing problem on our roads now, which require more immediate solutions. The new Government has shown that it remains committed to a forward-looking industrial strategy with growth across the country being one of the key pillars of success. Devolution deals to date have shown councils' appetite for managing transport demand. We need the Government to work with all councils in order to make sure the examples we have highlighted in this report become the norm across the country and the predicted economic and human costs of congestion are avoided. The recent announcement of the Transport Investment Strategy with the prospect of the National Roads Fund being available for improving the capacity of economically vital local roads shows that the Government are listening and recognise the interdependency of the national and local roads network. The Local Government Association (LGA) will continue to push for other reforms recommended in this report. Finally, I'd like to thank the councils that shared their congestion busting innovations with us - I hope that councils all around the country find the case studies of value. ## Contents | Introduction | 6 | |-----------------------------------------------------|-----| | Workplace parking levy | 8 | | Nottingham's workplace parking levy scheme | 8 | | Promoting bus travel | 9 | | Bus prioritisation, Brighton | 9 | | Reading buses | 9 | | | | | Big data | 10 | | Total Transport, Northamptonshire | 10 | | Smart cities, Oxfordshire | 12 | | Mobility as a service, Transport for West Midlands | 12 | | Active travel | 14 | | Bristol's approach | 14 | | Funding certainty, Transport for Greater Manchester | 15 | | | | | Roadworks innovation | 16 | | Connected roadworks, Staffordshire | 16 | | Managing roadworks through lane rental, Kent | 17 | | | | | How councils could do more | 19 | ## Executive Summary million journeys a month made by those using or working for public services could be combined. This report identifies congestion as a serious problem for economic development, quality of life and public health. It also identifies the steps that innovative councils have taken to reduce congestion and its impacts. We have highlighted nine different innovative policies as well as case studies where they have been implemented. These include: • the introduction of a workplace parking levy In order for these examples of best practice to become more widespread we have compiled further steps that the Government could take to work with councils to ensure that the traffic growth is both better managed, congestion is reduced and our air quality problems are tackled. These include: by Nottingham City council, which has led to reductions in peak hour journey time • long term funding certainty for local • bus prioritisation in Brighton and Reading, authorities such as that enjoyed by Highways England and Network Rail • flexibility from Highways England on using which has led to both authorities bucking the national trend in the decline of bus passengers • mobility as a service in the West Midlands, its resources on the local network to improve the strategic network • an end to competitive bidding for local which has the potential to transform the way transport networks work, making them far more efficient • Bristol's investment in cycling, which has transport funds, with complete discretion given to authorities to make the best decision based on local need • the resources and powers necessary to led to a doubling of the number of people cycling in a decade improve air quality • the long term funding certainty secured by • spreading the lessons of the Total Transport pilot project • full implementation of the Bus Services Act transport for Greater Manchester, allowing them to secure £3 billion for locally targeted measures • Oxfordshire's use of big data to crowd- 2017 ensuring all authorities can access the new powers if they wish to make use of them • all authorities should be given access to lane source traffic patterns and help people tailor their route to avoid congestion rental powers if they wish to make use of them • Kent's introduction of a lane rental scheme • a clear statement that the Government will which has reduced the average length of major works on key routes by a day • Staffordshire's roadwork collaboration allow more authorities to make use of a workplace parking levy should they wish to consider one • immediate and full implementation of Part project which has seen councils and utilities work together, delivering £4.6 million benefit to the area in reduced congestion • Northamptonshire's total transport analysis which shows that 99 per cent of the one 6 of the Traffic Management Act 2004, allowing civil enforcement of moving traffic offences, such as banned turns and blocking of yellow box junctions. ## Introduction Congestion And Its Cost As well as the obvious inconvenience and sometimes distress caused by congestion, there is a serious cost to industry from delays, especially to those that rely on just-in-time deliveries. There are also financial and health costs to individuals and negative impacts on public transport, which can further lead to increased traffic and congestion. Congestion is repeatedly cited as a key concern by the public. The DfT is forecasting up to 55 per cent increase in traffic by 2040 and up to 85 per cent in congestion levels. The British Social Attitudes Survey has revealed that concern about congestion has risen significantly. The percentage of people seeing congestion in towns and cities as a serious or very serious problem rose from a low of 39 per cent in 2012 to 55 per cent in the latest survey. Inrix estimates that congestion costs the UK economy £30.8 billion a year. This works out at an average cost per driver of £968 a year, which includes direct costs like wasted time and fuel and indirect costs to businesses, such as increased prices through delays in production.6 By 2030 the cumulative cost of congestion will exceed £300 billion. Clearly traffic growth has the potential to inhibit economic growth and stall productivity improvements if not managed effectively. Since the publication of 'Every breath we take' last year by the Royal College of Physicians, which linked air pollution to 40,000 deaths a year, there has been an increased focus on the dangers of congestion. A great deal of media attention has focused on the health cost of air pollution, in particular nitrogen dioxide from diesel engines. The Government acknowledges that air pollution is now one of the most serious public health issues facing the UK and their own figures confirm that 80 per cent of emissions come from transport in areas that breach EU legal limits. The Secretary of State for Transport, Chris Grayling MP , has repeatedly signaled his Congestion also has an impact on public transport viability. Research by Greener Journeys found that congestion slows both bus journey times and reliability. In order to counteract this bus companies are forced to put on more vehicles to maintain service levels. This increases costs but there is also a direct correlation between operating speeds and usage: a 10 per cent decrease in speeds reduces bus use by at least 10 per cent7. This double effect can seriously impact on the viability of bus routes. The withdrawal of a service forces more people into cars which further exacerbates the problem. desire to tackle congestion. In October, whilst setting out his departments priorities he said "On the roads our focus should be congestion busting for both the public and business users". In November in a speech to the County Council Network he stated that "in some cases, devolution will be part of the solution" to congestion. 6 http://inrix.com/press-releases/traffic-congestion-cost-ukmotorists-more-than-30-billion-in-2016/ 7 www.greenerjourneys.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/ Prof-David-Begg-The-Impact-of-Congestion-on-Bus- Passengers-Digital-FINAL.pdf p.7 Congestion also has a significant environmental impact. It increases the amount of time cars are producing harmful emissions and the stop-start nature of congested roads is the most inefficient way of running an engine. In a traffic jam vehicle emissions are four times the level they are in free flowing traffic. Road transport is responsible for some 80 per cent of nitrogen oxides (NOx) concentrations at roadside, with diesel vehicles the largest source. In areas where NOx breaches legal limits transport is the biggest contributor. NOx limits are set by the EU as exposure to high concentrations leads to respiratory conditions and has been linked to increasing the rate of heart disease and strokes. Air pollution is linked to 40,000 early deaths a year. The Royal College of Physicians estimate that 340,000 lost years of life are attributable to air pollution. Air pollution also costs the UK economy up to £16 billion a year8, with £2.7 billion of this loss through lost productivity. The World Health Organisation sets air quality guidelines and the EU sets limits for citizens' exposure. However there is no safe amount of exposure to air pollutants. Any reduction will improve health outcomes. Given the scale of the problem and the amount of contribution traffic congestion makes, it is imperative that we act to reduce congestion. Relatively simple changes could make a large difference as TomTom Traffic Vice President, Ralph-Peter Schaefer, said: "If only five per cent of us changed our travel plans, we could improve traffic congestion on our main roads by up to 30 per cent." Therefore the LGA has focused on how the further roll out of existing powers and relatively small scale interventions could improve the situation. Councils, as local traffic authorities, have a statutory duty to manage their networks with the aim of 'securing the expeditious movement of traffic'. The examples in this report illustrate the range of initiatives and innovations councils around the country are exploring to deal with both congestion and long-term traffic growth. Measures include managing peak time traffic, bus prioritisation and making buses more attractive, investing in cycling, smarter investment in infrastructure, use of real-time data, managing roadworks and better public sector transport planning. The Government is currently drafting legislation on transitioning towards electric and autonomous vehicles. It is not clear how this will impact the transport networks of the future. It is conceivable that a future of connected and autonomous vehicles would be able to smartly manage their routes, adjusting in real time to make the best use of road capacity. It is also conceivable that the reduction in the cost of travel could make travel so cheap that people do far more whilst undermining the viability of public transport. This could result in our existing road capacity being overwhelmed regardless of how well journeys are coordinated. Following this report, the LGA will be working on how councils are responding to changes to changing travel patterns driven by technological progress, including connected and autonomous vehicles. Whilst there are many possibilities this report makes no predictions on how traffic patterns will evolve as technology develops. What is clear is that we have a pressing problem on our roads today. We need immediate solutions to tackle the issues our transport networks face right now, that can be implemented quickly and simply. ## The Following Pages Highlight Good Practice From Innovative Councils In Tackling Congestion And Its Harmful Impacts. Workplace Parking Levy The workplace parking levy was introduced as part of the Transport Act 2000. It allows transport authorities to impose a charge for every parking space provided by an employer. The revenue raised must be spent on things that support the local transport plan. Local authorities are able to bring forward proposals for schemes but the Government has stated that they must demonstrate they have consulted local businesses and addressed their concerns. Although local authorities are responsible for bringing forward schemes it is for the Secretary of State to approve them.  ## Nottingham'S Workplace Parking Levy Scheme The charge raised £9.3 million in 2015/16 which has been invested in a major set of improvements to Nottingham's public transport, including the second phase of the city's tram network. The tram improvements led to an immediate £100 million boost into the local economy as well as further long term benefits. Public transport patronage in Nottingham is increasing as a share of total journeys, accounting for over 40 per cent of journeys taken in Nottingham. Unlike the rest of England's core cities, the number of car miles is in decline. Between July 2014 and July 2015, after major works to improve the tram network were complete, Nottingham was the only core city in England to observe a reduction in journey time per vehicle mile on locally managed A roads in the morning rush hour . Nottingham indicated that they intended to access these powers in 2007. They consulted widely across the city and held a five day public examination to assess the plans. The DfT approved the scheme in 2009 and agreed that the scheme could become operational in 2012. Nottingham implemented the scheme for employers with more than 11 parking spaces. They set the charge initially at £288 per space per year . Employers are allowed There has also been no evidence of an adverse economic impact as a result of the changes. Nottingham has experienced a growth in the commercial property market as well as significant jobs growth throughout the period that the charge has been in effect. The workplace parking levy has proved an efficient way to encourage people to leave their car at home and use Nottingham's public transport, reducing journey times for those who have to use the roads. to pass the charge onto employees who use the spaces and about 53 per cent of the spaces covered currently do so. There was an immediate impact as employers sought to reduce their liability, with eligible parking places decreasing by 17.5 per cent in the run up to implementation. The charge is reviewed annually and increases at the rate of inflation. ## Promoting Bus Travel Buses are the most common form of public transport in the UK. They do 4.4 billion journeys a year. Buses have a key role in reducing congestion. Every full bus can take up to 75 cars off the road. This means that less road space is used up and congestion is relieved. However buses are also uniquely susceptible to the negative effects of congestion. Research by Greener Journeys found that for every 10 per cent increase in congestion bus journeys decrease by 10 per cent. Congestion makes buses slower and less predictable and consequently less attractive. In order to compensate bus companies have to put extra buses on congested routes which adds to their cost base, forcing up fares. All this means that more journeys will be made by car which leads to greater congestion and therefore a vicious circle of decline. There are steps that local authorities can take to address this decline and whilst nationally the number of bus journeys is in long term decline outside of London there are examples of good practice which demonstrate what can be achieved to increase bus use. ## Bus Prioritisation, Brighton Brighton has been at the forefront of bus prioritisation for many years. The city has an extensive network of bus lanes. There are 20km of bus lanes and 3000 buses a day use their city centre bus lanes, which were launched in the mid-1990s. The council has had the ability to enforce them through CCTV and fixed penalty notices since 2005. Brighton have identified key corridors in and out of the city in order to maximise how attractive bus travel is to passsengers. They have also identified real time passenger information as a key driver to increasing bus use. Information on when a bus will arrive and how long it will take is key to allowing people to make informed choices about travel as well as allowing the council to monitor performance. Brighton has also agreed a bus partnership with all the big operators within the city . They have identified five critical factors for their success. • prioritising road space for buses • improved passenger waiting areas • real time information displays • ITS - Intelligent Transport System • bus lane and traffic regulation enforcement. ## Reading Buses Reading Council has been supportive of buses for a number of years. As a result, Reading now has more bus lanes per mile of road than anywhere else in the UK. Reading buses have prioritised customer service and investment in new technologies in order to increase use. Buses offer free wifi, on board charging for mobile devices, smart ticketing, real time rail information for buses that link with the rail network, audio and visual displays and GOS tracking for real time information. Bus use in Reading has increased since 2010 against a back drop of national decline. Few places have similarly bucked the long term trend of decline in bus use. ## Big Data Total Transport, Northamptonshire The use of data has the potential to revolutionise our understanding of congestion and also provides new ways to prevent it. It is difficult to predict the ways in which big data, machine learning and/or artificiaI intelligence may help us solve traffic problems. It is clear that they have the potential to completely reshape our transport patterns. Transport systems are vital to ensuring society functions effectively. However, they are large and hugely complex and therefore are unlikely to fundamentally change overnight. Change will come in fits and starts and there will be a period of transition as we move from a traditional transport network to whatever comes next. Councils have a vital role in managing this transition and ensuring that the current network runs as efficiently as possible. Based on ideas generated by local government, the Government launched the Total Transport initiative in 2015. A key aim of the initiative is to explore the feasibility and benefits of pooling public money that is spent on transport in a locality and spend it jointly, rather than different parts of the public sector securing their own transport needs. Around £2 billion is spent on procuring transport by the public sector but it is split across a number of departments. The principle is that joint procurement can lead to fewer journeys, better coordination and less expenditure on transport by public services. The pilot programme has made £4 million available to local authorities to investigate ways which they could combine transport budgets across the public sector. Councils are already at the forefront of using data to maximise the efficiency of transport systems and finding new ways to tackle traffic jams. Incentivised by a need to respond to financial pressures and achieve greater operational efficiencies, Northamptonshire have pushed the boundaries that this opportunity offered. The initial desktop exercise revealed tremendous opportunities for enhanced service provision at lower cost as well as making journeys more efficient. The University of Northampton was commissioned to lead on the process of data collection and analysis. For the first time extensive travel data from the County Council, University of Northampton, Northampton General Hospital, St Andrew's Healthcare and the Northamptonshire Health Foundation Trust was consolidated into a single data set for Northamptonshire as a 'place'. A new social enterprise board was created, which now had access to live travel information on around 32,000 travellers, covering almost 38 per cent of all trips in the county carried out by employees and students associated with the parent organisations. This 'Big Data' set allows individual travel plans to be combined into a single virtual picture without compromising the sovereignty of any of the individual organisations. Planning for transport was now in a new realm. The outcome of the analysis was both revealing and remarkable. By way of example, it was discovered that up to 43 per cent of patients provided with dedicated transport to medical facilities had conditions which meant that they could have used other forms of transport. At the same time, an analysis of just one county council transport contract suggested that almost 1000 spaces were available on their vehicles which were potentially suitable for such patients during this down time as a more cost effective alternative. Moreover, an assessment of home to school transport indicated that contracts could be rationalised by as much as a third if considered holistically with other transport provision, including university travel, further education and voluntary services. It was discovered that the partnership accounted for over one million cars on the road each month, generating over eight million kg of CO2 emissions. Around 700,000 square metres of car parking spaces are needed (102 football fields) to accommodate this demand. Nearly 43 million miles are travelled each month by the combination of staff and students - accounting for almost 30,000 workdays. Around 10,500 employees of the cohort live within five miles of their work place and 99 per cent of employees could rideshare with at least one co-worker living near them. The potential for change is great if the approach to travelers is correct and they can see, and share in, the social benefits that a social enterprise could bring. All, of this, and much more, was emerging at a time when the university was in the process of building a new campus for over 14,000 students - with no car parking spaces. The county council was moving into a new building for access by around 2,500 staff, with only 134 dedicated car parking spaces. The hospital and other medical facilities had car parks at capacity and with little scope for growth. A new solution was needed and the social enterprise model provided a fresh approach that was both affordable and sustainable for the partners if they acted collaboratively. No single organisation can deal with these pressures in isolation. Northamptonshire have taken the concept of the original programme, looking at public sector procurement, and are now pushing it further to examine any employer or service provider in the area that is willing to contribute. They are doing this by mapping a substantial number of journeys that can provide targeted interventions to encourage more journeys to be combined. ## Smart Cities, Oxfordshire Mobility As A Service, Transport For West Midlands With the £500 million Westgate Shopping Centre redevelopment currently under construction, Oxfordshire County Council is particularly determined to find a solution to what could be a huge increase in congestion. Millions of visitors are expected to flock to the heart of Oxford to take advantage of the 800,000sq ft retail destination. With average car speeds in city centres continuing to slow, failing to address fundamental issues will put the local economy at risk. The concept of mobility as a service is to get people to think about the best way to make their journey from end to end. It seeks to shift journeys away from a single mode of transport and seeks to react to the transport network as a whole. The end goal is for a passenger to have detailed information available to them about the price and cost of the different modes and combination of modes. They can then make a decision prioritising the cost of the trip, the time it will take or even its impact on the environment. It is hoped that modern technology, in particular real time information through smart phones, will allow more trips to be made this way in the future. In order to be successful it requires real time information on as many transport options as possible. Oxfordshire County Council has launched its UK Connected Citizens Partnership (CCP) with Waze, the real-time, crowdsourced satnav app. In a bid to speed up journey times and ease up traffic hotspots, CCP is designed as a free, two-way data exchange that empowers areas to harness real time driver insights to improve congestion and make better informed traffic planning decisions. The roll out of this technology could have a significant impact on reducing congestion. Passengers will know in advance what the most efficient journey will be. Real time price adjustments could incentivise people onto underused parts of a transport network. This could be particularly useful for trips that are not time sensitive. It also plays a role in giving accurate information of the impact of delays to the network. The possibilities of this type of technology are extremely large. Transport for the West Midlands has already begun to experiment through trials of an app called Whim (https://whimapp.com/fi-en/). The hope is to catch congestion before it gets into Oxford and direct people to the most effective and efficient routes into town. Using Waze data to identify incidents and congestion hotspots in real time, users can make more intelligent journey choices. This puts Oxfordshire County Council at the forefront of using data effectively and tapping into a vast knowledge base of traffic and real time driver insights to improve congestion in the local area. This is just one example of how the county will be working with other partners who own and have access to data, allowing road users in Oxfordshire to benefit from data share alliances across the board. The app, developed in Finland, allows passengers to get a tailored travel plan for their journeys which encourages them to consider an alternative to a car. Users can pay for their transport on a subscription or pay as you go basis. The app deals with all necessary ticketing on the chosen route. It includes transport providers like National Express West Midlands, Enterprise Car Hire and train ticket service SilverRail. The pilot is currently on a small scale involving 500 people for 12 months. It is anticipated that this kind of technology could allow councils to manage transport networks more effectively as they can not only see in real time what journeys people take, but also they can learn what incentives are successful in persuading people to alter their plans. ## Active Travel • delivering improved on-street cycle parking, plus up to 20 new on street cycle hangars for residents who have difficulty parking their bike at home A key way to reduce congestion is to divert journeys onto other modes of transport. There are also health benefits associated with a more active lifestyle if journeys can be diverted towards walking and cycling. ## Bristol'S Approach • working closely with the Access Fund to ensure the promotion of new infrastructure to employees, schools and the wider community through new residential developments and their developed network of community groups Bristol has some of the worst congestion of any English city. According to the TomTom traffic index it is the ninth most congested town or city in the UK, with residents losing 148 hours a year to congestion. • using Access Fund resources to provide loan bikes, cycle training and route planning • working closely with planning colleagues to ensure that new cycling infrastructure is included in developments. The city has prioritised cycling as a way to combat this trend and has actively sought to benefit from national initiatives, including Cycling City and Cycling Ambition City. Both of these were Government initiatives with competitive bidding elements to receive funding to improve cycling infrastructure. As a result of on-going investment the number of cyclists has doubled in Bristol between 2001 and 2011. Bristol have committed to: There is emerging evidence that prioritising cycling can have a positive effect on congestion by using less road space. Over the last eight years the proportion of cycling journeys have increased by 25 per cent in Bristol. • consulting on shared use routes; to resolve some of the key issues they are focusing on delivering segregated infrastructure for cyclists wherever possible Monitoring of the full roll out of Bristol's plans is ongoing and as their network is developed they will expect to see a number of benefits from reduced congestion and better air quality on improved public health. • improving legibility in shared use areas to make it clearer to those on bike and foot ## Funding Certainty, Transport For Greater Manchester Greater Manchester authorities have long recognised that greater connectivity and less congestion in the city is one of the key ways to encourage local growth. That recognition has led to a different kind of conversation with local politicians and businesses, backed by a new approach to funding decisions in partnership with the Government. Greater Manchester stated in their submissions to the Government that they would be prepared to stake significant resources into a fund in return for greater certainty of funding over a longer period and also removal of ring-fences so money can be managed in one fund which has a set of local priorities and criteria for investment. This led to the creation of the Greater Manchester Transport Fund. By committing local funding of approximately £1 billion by the end of this decade, nearly £3 billion worth of investment has been secured. The local funds were raised through a top slice of the integrated transport block, a proportion of the income from Manchester's tram system income and an additional levy on council tax. It was agreed with Government that Greater Manchester could lead the regional arrangements for major scheme funding and pool resources across the city. Those elements allowed Greater Manchester to have a local process of prioritisation and a robust delivery vehicle for major schemes. The transport fund has delivered flexibility and scale over transport funding. This approach has enabled Greater Manchester to sustain a successful delivery partner for the Metrolink programme allowing improvements to the Metrolink on time and on budget which would have been considerably more difficult if budgets for works had to be renewed annually. Provision of Metrolink Phase 3 has resulted in overall public transport capacity into the city centre increasing by five per cent, with Metrolink capacity into the city centre increasing by 68 per cent. These figures will be significantly boosted now that the Second City Crossing is open and service frequencies increase. This funding approach has enabled people in Greater Manchester access to an even better public transport system, thereby helping to manage congestion levels. Manchester has engendered developer confidence in the infrastructure which has improved investor confidence in the city. This has been achieved whilst delivering a capital programme focused on the city's transport needs. ## Roadworks Innovation Connected Roadworks, Staffordshire Staffordshire received £650,000 funding from Innovate UK over an 18 month period in order to find ways through which roadworks could be coordinated more effectively. The project, called Connected Roadworks, collects, maps, and analyses forward planning data from utilities to boost the number of joint street works, to improve coordination, and to cut the cost of disruption arising from street works. It does this in a holistic way by: • developing an interactive mapping tool and a central data hub Roadworks cause congestion, they take road space out of use and force traffic into less space. They are also unavoidable, as they are necessary to provide vital utility services and ensure road conditions are maintained. DfT estimates put the cost to the UK economy of traffic disruption associated with street works at some £4.3 billion each year. The social costs of utility works, meanwhile, are put at £5.5 billion annually, with street works giving rise to more pollution and accidents, less reliable journeys, and reduced resident satisfaction. London tops a world list for driver hours wasted annually and for fuel consumed per vehicle while idling in roadwork congestion. Any attempt to reduce congestion therefore needs to include attempts to minimise the amount of time taken by roadworks. • promoting fruitful collaboration between utilities and the local authority • identifying joint street works opportunities and regulatory barriers to their adoption Whilst we can never eliminate them entirely councils are working to ensure that roadworks take place for the least amount of time, in the most co-ordinated way, while closing the minimum amount of road space to ensure that works can be carried out safely. • making the evidence base business case for joint street work. Central to the success of the Staffordshire Connected Roadworks project has been the quality of the conversation between local authority operations team and contractors, encouraging stakeholders to share or pool data in a spirit of open innovation and mutual respect. As well as gathering mid-term (one to five year) planning data from a wide range of utilities, developers and contractors, Connected Roadworks breaks new ground by prototyping and developing an interactive portal for mapping the potential for joint street works in target areas. It also: • measures the operational, financial and social impact of prospective street works from the viewpoint of residents, contractors and the council • engages with local communities and businesses by publishing open databases with the aim of improving communications relating to street works and assesses the current regulatory landscape in order to make policy recommendations. Among the important outcomes is an economic impact assessment 'white paper' prepared by Future Cities Catapult and Staffordshire University. As well as exploring the effect of roadworks on economic activity - identifying, for example, up to £4.6 million in travel time savings per annum to the local economy through reduced congestion and £1.3 million of efficiency savings to industry - the paper analyses the UK-wide roadworks marketplace in order to baseline data and to evidence findings. It also surveys a substantial cohort of contractors, utilities, businesses and citizens in order to balance quantitative with qualitative data. ## Managing Roadworks Through Lane Rental, Kent Whilst road work permit schemes are a welcome improvement to help achieve planning and implementing work effectively so that it has the least possible impact on highway users, for many authorities they do not offer an incentive to think differently to finish works in the shortest possible time or least impactful way. Lane rental powers derive from section 255 of the Transport Act 2000. They allow councils, with approval by the Secretary of State, to designate the busiest part of their most traffic sensitive road network and charge those undertaking works for the time and manner that they occupy the road. The Government allowed trial schemes in London and Kent but has not invited any other areas to access the powers. In effect companies undertaking utilities and other works are hiring the lane for the period they need it. Charges can be varied to reflect the extra disruption caused by undertaken roadworks in the busiest parts of the day and the economic impact within a particular area. This allows councils to incentivise roadworks at quiet periods, like overnight or at weekends or at certain times of year, by charging less or nothing at all for lane rental during this period. The aim of the Kent scheme is to incentivise those carrying out works on critical roads to plan and work so that it minimises impact on the road, for example by taking place outside of rush hour and other busy periods such as during term times. The scheme does not apply across the whole of Kent. It is applied to specified locations identified within the Kent road network, which represent the most critical and busiest parts of the county's road network. The average occupation time for urgent and emergency works that cause congestion on the Kent lane rental scheme road network at traffic sensitive times dropped from four days to three days in the first year of the scheme. The main reason for the drop in occupation appears to be a reduction in the time taken to reinstate work sites. For example, repairs to failed utility equipment have been completed generally within a few hours whereas previously the reinstatement has taken a number of days. These delays have been reduced to avoid lane rental charges. There are further benefits as surplus revenue collected through the Kent Lane Rental Scheme has been put towards projects and initiatives associated with the objectives of the scheme. Funds are applied to the following areas and available to all organisations that work on the highway: • transportation - managing and monitoring traffic and works to avoid disruption • enabling infrastructure - promoting and providing facilities for future maintenance, access and improvement • industry practices and research and development –operational practices, materials and news ways of working for the control, planning and execution of works. The purpose of these projects and initiatives is to reduce the impact of works on Kent's highways and to raise standards in the planning and execution of works for the benefit of road users in Kent. This will create a double benefit with the money acting as an incentive to work quicker and smarter, and any surplus used to find ways to make works even better. ## How Councils Could Do More There is no doubt that congestion is a serious problem for the UK with mounting economic, social and environmental costs. The good practice in this report are just some examples of the work that local authorities are doing to tackle the problem. However they are being held back by a lack of powers, insufficient influence over funding and external factors outside of their control. Despite the multiple causes of congestion there are simple steps that could be taken to help local authorities manage congestion. Many of these lie with convincing people to change their behaviour. ## Overcoming Barriers To Further Progress. We will never be able to completely eradicate congestion, but local authorities can help avoid further worsening of the situation and even reduce congestion levels through a range of measures. They need to be able to make alternatives to the car as attractive as possible as well as the ability to ensure that those that motorists do not drive in a selfish and irresponsible way that makes life more difficult for others. The LGA believes the following recommendations will go a long way to helping councils manage the growing traffic and congestion levels across the country. ## Greater Certainty And Influence Over Transport Funding Local authorities transport budgets should enjoy the same long term funding certainty that Highways England and Network rail are given by the Government. Both have five year funding programmes which allow them to make long term commitments to strategic projects. Longer term certainty has allowed Greater Manchester to deliver a programme of improvements to its public transport system. All local authorities need the same level of commitment in order to plan the same kind of strategic projects to improve congestion on local road networks. The sector would also benefit from considerable simplification of the transport funding regime. Currently funding is provided on a competitive basis by a number of different funders in a variety of different funding regimes. Competitive bidding takes considerable upfront investment from authorities with no guarantee of results. Given the wide variety of schemes with different geographies and criteria it can be difficult for authorities to design schemes that tackle locally identified problems. Some funding comes directly to councils, whilst other transport funding goes to Local Enterprise Partnerships. We welcome the Government's commitment to simplify transport funding for areas with devolution deals but all authorities need a simplified regime in order to take local decisions on how to best combat congestion. There are also infrastructure problems associated with areas with low land values. Areas with low values, often exacerbated by poor infrastructure, can struggle to gain sufficient funding through the Community Infrastructure Levy (CiL) or the section 106 process. Greater local discretion on funding could ease this vicious circle with targeted infrastructure investment part of wide-ranging regeneration. ## Legislative Powers To Encourage Behaviour Change As well as London, enforcement of moving traffic offences is also available to local authorities in Wales - there is no logic for this distinction with the rest of England. The powers that would allow this to happen are already on the statute book but the Government has never chosen to enact them. We urge the Government to pass the necessary secondary legislation that would give all authorities the power to enforce traffic offenses. There is an appetite from local authorities across the country - the Government should therefore immediately give local authorities the power to keep traffic moving through providing the necessary supporting secondary legislation to Part 6 of the Traffic Management Act 2004. Whilst councils can help make alternatives to car travel more attractive, sometimes different measures are required to encourage behaviour change to incentivise people to use alternative, more sustainable and heathier travel choices. ## Managing The Strategic/Local Road Network Interface Workplace parking levy - all authorities should be able to use powers to introduce the work place parking levy which has been successful in Nottingham. Local authorities should not have to go through a cumbersome process of seeking Secretary of State approval to access a power than has proven its ability to reduce congestion and simultaneously improve public transport. By using the revenue stream to improve public transport alternatives Nottingham has led the way in reducing unnecessary commuting traffic through its city centre. Highways England should mitigate the impact of their road improvement programme on local networks. Almost all road journeys start and end on local road networks and if they cannot cope with the increased capacity of the strategic network all we are doing by improving the strategic network is making it easier to get between traffic jams. Highways England have committed to work in partnership with local authorities in their Road Improvement Strategy. They should continue to do so and demonstrate that how their schemes will mitigate the impact on local networks. Funding from the RIS programme should also be spent on local networks where it could relieve congestion on the strategic network. This could include Highways England funding park and ride schemes or parkway stations. It could also mean funding for local network improvements. Enforcement of moving traffic offences - in all of England, except for London, selfish and dangerous behaviour like blocking yellow box junctions and making banned turns can only be enforced by police. In practice, police forces do not have the resources, nor do they prioritise, the use of this power. Consequently, rules are flouted, junctions get blocked and local authorities, who are responsible for ensuring a smooth flow of traffic, are powerless to stop costly congestion at busy junctions. We have welcomed the flexibility shown with the Government's proposal to set up a Major Routes Network (MRN), which will be formed of strategically important local controlled roads. The new MRN will be able to access funding from the Government's National Road Fund. The LGA will work closely with the Government to ensure that the network is set up in a way that matches local priorities. This money is welcome but will not be a substitute for effective engagement from Highways England at a local level. ## Managing Streetworks All local authorities should have access to the full range of powers to manage street works. There are many examples of successful permitting schemes and pilots of lane rental schemes have shown that this can be a powerful additional tool in managing the impact of roadworks at key locations on the road network. We would urge the Government to allow all local authorities to take decisions about what the appropriate regime is for street works in their area and give them access to powers that have worked well in pilot areas. ## Total Transport The Government's Total Transport initiative has the potential to significantly reduce the amount of journeys taken by the public sector fleet. The lessons learned should be shared as soon as possible and the Government should ensure all parts of the public sector are encouraged and able to play a full role in local total transport initiatives and consider ways in which good practice can be spread across the sector. ## Promoting Bus Travel The LGA supported the Bus Services Act 2017. The Act introduces important improvements to partnership arrangements making them easier for councils to introduce. It also gives Mayoral combined authorities the automatic right to introduce a franchising model should they wish to. It is important that the Act is fully implemented as quickly as possible in a way that enables councils in all areas to make use of the new powers and make bus travel a more viable and attractive alternative to car travel for local people. The Government should also act to address the long term decline of bus ridership. They could start by devolving the Bus Service Operator Grant (BSOG) to local authorities. This would allow it to be targeted better according to local needs - it has led to improvements in areas where devolved BSOG has been trialled. The Government should also commit to fully fund the national statutory concessionary fares scheme to ensure councils are not forced to cut other areas in order to meet the cost. ## Powers To Improve Air Quality All local authorities should be given a wider range of powers to improve air quality, including Clean Air Zones. The problem of congestion and air quality are two sides of the same coin and efforts to tackle one cannot ignore efforts to tackle the other. Different areas of the country have different problems when it comes to air quality and the solutions will need to be tailored to suit accordingly. All authorities should enjoy the wide ranging powers that London currently uses to tackle air quality issues. Many of the powers suggested in this report would help curb traffic growth and improve congestion. It is also imperative that action to cut air pollution is properly resourced by the Government as this is as much a national issue as a local one. ## Diesel Charging, Westminster Westminster Council is trialing parking incentives to reduce the number of diesel vehicles on their streets. The Marylebone area is one of the worst areas in the country for air pollution. As part of a pilot programme pay and display parking charges have been increased by 50 per cent for diesel cars using Section 122 of the 1984 Road Traffic Regulation Act. The scheme is seeking to implement a 'polluter pays' principle for an area that suffers from high levels of nitrogen dioxide. It is hoped that additional costs for diesels will make people reconsider their travel choices in central London. The pilot 50 per cent surcharge for diesel will also provide valuable insight into how the policy works practically and whether there are positive behavioural changes from it that could be replicated elsewhere. The borough also simultaneously invested in its electric vehicle infrastructure and freight consolidation. Local Government Association Local Government House Smith Square London SW1P 3HZ Telephone 020 7664 3000 Fax 020 7664 3030 Email info@local.gov .uk www.local.gov .uk © Local Government Association, August 2017 For a copy in Braille, larger print or audio, please contact us on 020 7664 3000. We consider requests on an individual basis.

en