HC Deb 17 May 2004 vol 421 cc682-3W
Mr. Denham

To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what assessment she has made of the pay gap between men and women employed by her Department and its agencies in(a) Southampton, (b) Eastleigh, (c) Winchester and (d) Romsey constituencies. [171643]

Ms Hewitt

My Department, including the Small Business Service Executive Agency, currently employs no staff in Southampton, Eastleigh, Winchester and Romsey constituencies.

Agency Chief Executives will be replying on behalf of their organisations where they employ staff within the constituencies mentioned. These are Employment Tribunal Service and the Insolvency Service.

Letter from Desmond Flynn to Mr. John Denham, dated 17 May 2004: The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry has asked me to reply to directly on behalf of The Insolvency Service in respect to your question (2003/2875) asking what assessment have been made of the pay gap between men and women employed by her Department and its agencies in (a) Southampton, (b) Eastleigh, (c) Winchester and (d) Romsey constituencies. In March 2003, The Insolvency Service carried out an Equal Pay audit on a national basis. The Audit along with The Service's action plans setting out proposals for future reviews are available in the House of Commons and published on The Service's website www.insolvency.gov.uk.

Letter from Roger Heathcote to Mr. John Denham, dated 17 May 2004: You asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what assessment she has made of the pay gap between men and women employed by her Department and its agencies in (a) Southampton, (b) Eastleigh, (c) Winchester and (d) Ramsey. I have been asked to reply on behalf of the Employment Tribunals Service (ETS). ETS undertook an Equal Pay Review in 2003. The Review was undertaken separately for all those staff on London and National pay scales and did not cover the situation in individual offices. The results for staff on our National pay scales, which would include those staff in our Southampton office, showed a differential in favour of males of 5.2% (only 0.2% above the Equal Opportunities Commission benchmark).