Author: admin

  • Tom Blenkinsop – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Tom Blenkinsop – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tom Blenkinsop on 2016-06-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, if his Department will make an assessment of the effect of the withdrawal of funding from the UK Commission for Employment and Skills on the Government’s analysis of skills shortages in the North East.

    Nick Boles

    In the context of needing to make savings in non-participation budgets to allow the core adult skills participation budgets to be protected in cash terms, the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) has consulted the Devolved Administrations and other users of labour market information on future research priorities.

    Following these discussions, we have identified the significance of the Employer Skills Survey, the Employer Perspectives Survey and the LMI (Labour Market Information) for All Portal and decided that these products will be maintained. We are currently working with the Commission to transfer the management of these to BIS, and we will work users on how information from these surveys will be disseminated in the future including the provision of regional and local information.

  • Nicholas Brown – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Nicholas Brown – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nicholas Brown on 2016-06-10.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of extending the remit of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to cover Ombudsman Services provided by the Ombudsman Services Company.

    Matthew Hancock

    I refer the hon Member to my Written Ministerial Statement of 1 March 2016 [Hansard reference HCWS566]. There are no current plans to extend the scope of the FOI Act.

  • Nicholas Brown – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Nicholas Brown – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nicholas Brown on 2016-06-10.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what revenue the Government has received from the sale of government-owned assets in the Newcastle upon Tyne local authority area between 2010 and 2016.

    Matthew Hancock

    Since 2010, the Government has generated £1.8 billion in capital receipts and vacated over 2,000 individual properties. This includes over £600,000 raised from the sale of Government owned property in Newcastle upon Tyne between 2010 and 2016. Disposals of surplus property is improving Government’s estate management and releasing surplus land and property in a way that delivers value for the taxpayer, boosts growth and creates new homes.

  • Nicholas Brown – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Nicholas Brown – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nicholas Brown on 2016-06-10.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what plans the Government has to sell government-owned assets in the Newcastle upon Tyne local authority area.

    Matthew Hancock

    The Government is undertaking a programme to dispose of surplus Government owned land and property to improve the efficiency of the Government estate, deliver value for the taxpayer and support economic growth, in particular housing. The Government is committed to disposing of at least £5 billion of public sector land and property between 2015 and 2020 and freeing-up surplus Government owned land with capacity for at least 160,000 homes. This will involve selling surplus land and property across the country. In the Newcastle upon Tyne area for example, in the coming year, the Northumbria Probation Service Office at 6 Lansdown Terrace will be marketed for sale, and Network Rail are planning to release a former freight site at Heaton Down Yard for development. All Departments are working to accelerate the release of their surplus property and get it to market, so that it can deliver local benefits and value.

  • Richard Arkless – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Richard Arkless – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Richard Arkless on 2016-06-10.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many national infrastructure projects have been established in Scotland since 1997.

    Greg Hands

    More than 240 infrastructure schemes have been completed since the beginning of the last Parliament. The National Infrastructure Pipeline (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-infrastructure-pipeline-2016) contains a list of planned private and public infrastructure projects and programmes. Almost all Scottish economic infrastructure, including transport, water, flood defence and waste, is devolved to the Scottish government. However, the UK government has made significant investment in transport infrastructure, including £1.2 billion to replace the electric intercity 225 fleet that currently runs on the London to Edinburgh line, as well as £50 million, matched by the Scottish government, to replace the Cross-border Caledonian sleeper.

  • Richard Arkless – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Richard Arkless – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Richard Arkless on 2016-06-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, whether the Government plans to exempt the viewing of sporting events in which nations of the UK are participating from the obligation to pay the TV Licence.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    There are no current plans to amend the TV licence framework in this way.
    A TV licence is not a fee for broadcasting services, it is a legal permission to install or use television receiving equipment (such as televisions, computers, laptops, tablets, mobile phones, games consoles, digital boxes and DVD/VHS recorders) to watch or record television programmes as they are being broadcast. This applies regardless of which television channels a person receives or how those channels are received. The government is also bringing forward legislation to extend the requirement to hold a TV licence to people streaming or downloading television programmes through on-demand services provided by the BBC (notably iPlayer).

  • Richard Arkless – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Richard Arkless – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Richard Arkless on 2016-06-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, if the Government will review the mechanism by which service personnel are awarded payment in the event of life-changing injuries during their time in the armed forces to take greater account of the effect of those injuries on those people.

    Mark Lancaster

    The Ministry of Defence (MOD) provides no-fault compensation for members of the Armed Forces where illness, injury or death is caused by service from 6 April 2005 under the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme (AFCS) and, before that date, under the War Pensions Scheme (WPS).

    Any disablement, injury or illness, including those which are life-changing, can be claimed with awards made where the claimed disorder is accepted as being due to Service. Lay and scheme medical advisers work together and decisions are evidence based, reflecting the individual case facts, contemporary medical understanding of causation and the relevant law.

    Awards under the WPS depend on the assessed level of disablement with the method of assessment set out in the legislation and expressed as a percentage. The AFCS is tariff based. The legislation includes nine tables of injuries and disorders with associated tariff levels, relevant to military service. A lump sum is paid for pain and suffering taking account of the likely progress of the condition over the person’s lifetime. There are 15 tariff levels and, for the more serious disorders and injuries, a guaranteed income payment to cover reduced civilian employability is paid, in addition, from the date of claim for life.

    Service personnel may make a claim for damages under common law for Service after May 1987 and where the MOD has a proven legal liability, compensation is paid. The amount of compensation is determined by common law principles which, broadly, take into account an individual’s pain and suffering, degree of injury, past and future financial losses and level of care required. Compensation can therefore vary depending on an individual’s circumstances.

    The MOD has no plans to undertake a review of this mechanism, however the AFCS tariff levels and payment awards are currently being reviewed to ensure they are fit for purpose.

  • Kirsten Oswald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Kirsten Oswald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kirsten Oswald on 2016-06-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what account he took of the pattern of complaints relating to terms and conditions made through the service complaints procedures in reforming the pay structure for the armed forces.

    Mark Lancaster

    The new Pay 16 structure was specifically established in response to Service personnel criticisms of the old pay model. The Ministry of Defence (MOD) has developed the new pay model as a simpler, more transparent system which provides Service personnel with greater pay predictability. It addresses some of the concerns about the previous pay model reported by personnel through both the Service Complaints system and the Armed Forces Continuous Attitude Survey (AFCAS) and in feedback from the Armed Forces Pay Review Body (AFPRB). I fully expect these changes to be positive for morale overall.

    Many personnel will experience an increase in pay as a result of the new pay model, and no one will take a cut in core pay on implementation. We have taken steps to ensure that personnel are aware of the range and nature of the pay reforms that began on 1 April 2016 and comprehensive internal communications activity has been undertaken to explain the changes. This included Departmental guidance to help personnel understand their new pay statement and any changes. Personnel, including those under pay protection, continue to remain eligible for any Government-approved pay award. Pay protection has been put in place to ensure that no one will take a pay cut on implementation of Pay 16 and this arrangement will exist for at least the first three years to ensure that no one is disadvantaged.

    The new pay model is not designed as a cost saving exercise, but is a rebalancing of pay to make more efficient and effective use of the Armed Forces pay bill; the AFPRB will continue to recommend pay rates for all personnel. As we go forward the Service Complaints Process and AFCAS will be primary sources which inform our assessment of the benefits realised through the pay reforms.

  • Kirsten Oswald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Kirsten Oswald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kirsten Oswald on 2016-06-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what steps he is taking to take account of the levels of satisfaction with pay reported in the Regular Armed Forces Continuous Attitude Survey in his setting of pay policy for the armed forces.

    Mark Lancaster

    The new Pay 16 structure was specifically established in response to Service personnel criticisms of the old pay model. The Ministry of Defence (MOD) has developed the new pay model as a simpler, more transparent system which provides Service personnel with greater pay predictability. It addresses some of the concerns about the previous pay model reported by personnel through both the Service Complaints system and the Armed Forces Continuous Attitude Survey (AFCAS) and in feedback from the Armed Forces Pay Review Body (AFPRB). I fully expect these changes to be positive for morale overall.

    Many personnel will experience an increase in pay as a result of the new pay model, and no one will take a cut in core pay on implementation. We have taken steps to ensure that personnel are aware of the range and nature of the pay reforms that began on 1 April 2016 and comprehensive internal communications activity has been undertaken to explain the changes. This included Departmental guidance to help personnel understand their new pay statement and any changes. Personnel, including those under pay protection, continue to remain eligible for any Government-approved pay award. Pay protection has been put in place to ensure that no one will take a pay cut on implementation of Pay 16 and this arrangement will exist for at least the first three years to ensure that no one is disadvantaged.

    The new pay model is not designed as a cost saving exercise, but is a rebalancing of pay to make more efficient and effective use of the Armed Forces pay bill; the AFPRB will continue to recommend pay rates for all personnel. As we go forward the Service Complaints Process and AFCAS will be primary sources which inform our assessment of the benefits realised through the pay reforms.

  • Anne Main – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Anne Main – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Anne Main on 2016-06-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, when the UK’s liaison officer to Eurocorps was withdrawn.

    Mr Julian Brazier

    We have no digital record of there being a UK liaison officer to the Eurocorps.