Author: admin

  • Jim Fitzpatrick – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Jim Fitzpatrick – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Fitzpatrick on 2014-06-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what recent discussions he has had with the Food Standards Agency on joined-up action at both national and local level to tackle food fraud.

    Jane Ellison

    The Food Standards Agency (FSA) continues to develop its capability in relation to food fraud, working closely with other Government Departments including the Department of Health, local authorities and industry to detect and deter food fraud.

    The FSA is building an enhanced intelligence gathering network to increase the opportunity to capture and act on intelligence which may be indicative of future risks relating to food fraud, as well as producing strategic and tactical assessments to share with relevant enforcement agencies. Through this, the FSA has strengthened its links with other enforcement agencies, including the National Trading Standards Board, National Crime Agency, the Intellectual Property Office and the Gangmasters Licencing Agency. The FSA is a member of the Government Agencies Intelligence Network and is sharing and receiving intelligence through this network to support cross-government investigations.

    At a European level, the FSA is fully engaged with the European Commission Food Fraud Team and its network which is now sharing intelligence to support cross-Europe investigations.

    The FSA also provide support to local authorities in their food fraud related investigations through the provision of financial support, expert advice and training.

  • Jim Fitzpatrick – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Jim Fitzpatrick – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Fitzpatrick on 2014-06-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what recent assessment he has made of the effectiveness of current tools available to enforcement officers to take swift action in tackling food fraud.

    Jane Ellison

    The Food Standards Agency (FSA) works with local authority enforcement officers to ensure that food law is applied across the entire food chain. Direction and guidance on the approach that local authority food law regulatory services should take is given in the statutory Food Law Code of Practice (the Code). The FSA regularly assesses the effectiveness of tools available to these enforcement officers through undertaking audit of local authorities’ enforcement services, reviewing the Code and ensuring lessons are learnt from major incidents.

    The Code sets out instructions and criteria to which the authorities must have regard and is periodically reviewed to ensure that it reflects current enforcement practices and supports local authorities’ delivery of their official control obligations and that enforcement is consistent, effective and proportionate.

    The FSA provides specific tools to support local authorities with investigations relating to potential food fraud. The FSA operates the Food Fraud Database, which utilises specialist intelligence management software to record intelligence reports and identify links, and uses this to assist local investigations. The FSA also provides local authorities with financial support through its Fighting Fund, expert advice through its Food Fraud Advisory Unit and holds dedicated training courses for enforcement officers.

    In addition, the FSA is building an enhanced intelligence gathering network to increase the opportunity to capture and act on intelligence which may be indicative of future risks relating to food fraud, as well as producing strategic and tactical assessments to share with relevant enforcement agencies.

  • Jim Fitzpatrick – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Jim Fitzpatrick – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Fitzpatrick on 2014-06-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps he has taken to strengthen food surveillance and the analytical capability of local authorities to pre-empt potential food fraud in the last 12 months.

    Jane Ellison

    The main role for the Food Standards Agency (FSA) in combatting food fraud is to provide assistance and resources to United Kingdom local authorities (LAs) food fraud related investigations through the provision of financial support, expert advice and training. The FSA continues to develop its capability in relation to food fraud, working closely with other Government Departments, LAs and industry to detect and deter food fraud.

    The FSA provides additional funding on an annual basis to UK Enforcement Authorities for sampling and surveillance of food to help ensure risk-based targeted checks at ports and inland. Food authenticity and food adulteration issues have been prioritised in consultation with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and the Department of Health.

    In 2013-14, the FSA made available £1.6 million to LAs and ports plus an additional £700,000 specifically for authenticity issues including: meat speciation and fish speciation by DNA testing; added water in chicken; authenticity of durum wheat; and authenticity of basmati rice.

    Over the last 12 months, FSA and DEFRA have worked with the Authenticity Steering Group to address and prioritise analytical method development for the Food Authenticity Research Programme. Current activities include knowledge transfer sessions, which have been joint-funded by FSA and DEFRA, to enhance the range of analytical methods available to support LA enforcement activity. For example, a knowledge transfer event took place for Public Analysts on DNA extraction processes in early 2014 with a further two planned for later this year.

  • Jim Fitzpatrick – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Jim Fitzpatrick – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Fitzpatrick on 2014-06-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many local authorities have not conducted any sampling to check food composition over the last 12 months.

    Jane Ellison

    The Food Standards Agency (FSA) collects food law enforcement monitoring returns from local authorities annually. Data for the period 1 April 2013 to 31 March 2014 is currently being collected. Following collation and analysis, the FSA plans to publish this data in November 2014.

    The FSA advises that the following local authorities did not report any food composition sampling in 2012-13 via the Local Authority Enforcement Monitoring System (LAEMS):

    Armagh

    Birmingham

    Blackburn

    Bolton

    Darlington

    Isle of Wight

    Leicester City

    Plymouth City

    Redcar and Cleveland

    Rochdale

    Rutland

    South Lanarkshire

    Swindon

    Tameside

    All of these authorities reported taking other labelling or microbiological samples in 2012-13.

    A table has been placed in the Library which shows how many food standards samples (composition and labelling) each local authority reported via LAEMS in 2012-13, together with a comparison against the number reported in 2011-12 and how many food standards samples each local authority reported through a FSA-funded project.

    All of the reported food standards samples were official samples and would have been submitted to the local authority’s appointed Public Analyst for analysis. Out of 22,055 food standards samples in 2012-13, 4,387 were funded by the FSA, all other food standards samples would have been paid for by the local authority. By comparison, in 2011-12, the FSA funded 5,072 out of 21,970 food standards samples.

    For some local authorities, the FSA funded sampling figure is larger than the number included in the LAEMS report. The difference will be due to the LAEMS reports only including samples for which the analytical result was received from the Public Analyst before 31 March 2013.

  • Dame Tessa Jowell – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Dame Tessa Jowell – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Dame Tessa Jowell on 2014-06-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what assessment he has made of the revenue that would be generated from additional council tax bands on higher value homes, broken down by (a) the total revenue generated UK wide, (b) the total generated in the Greater London region and (c) a breakdown for each threshold and band value (i) UK wide and (ii) in the Greater London region.

    Brandon Lewis

    No assessment has been made as we have no intention of introducing higher council tax bands.

    Council tax re-banding would require a wholesale council tax revaluation, hitting ordinary home owners with higher taxes, especially those who have undertaken home improvements. Fundamentally, council tax is not a wealth tax; it is a local charge for the use of local services. The current banded system is intentionally designed to avoid the flaws and inequities of both the poll tax and of domestic rates, the former which taxed multiple-adult homes too much, and the latter which taxed both family homes and pensioner households too much.

    I would note that the last Labour Government and Welsh Assembly Government jointly undertook a council tax revaluation and re-banding exercise in Wales in 2005. Four times as many homes moved up one or more bands than moved down. Two-thirds of the net rises were amongst homes (originally) in Bands A to C, meaning that those on more modest incomes were hardest hit.

    Labour Ministers originally claimed that revaluation was revenue-neutral, but this was not the case. In the first year of the revaluation, council tax income rose by 10 per cent, of which 4 per cent was due to that year’s increase in Band D rates, and 6 per cent due to more properties in higher bands due to the revaluation (Welsh Assembly Government, Submission to the Lyons Inquiry into Local Government, Annex B: Council Tax Revaluation and Rebanding 2005 Chronology and Facts, March 2006). To place that in context, a 6 per cent rise in council tax receipts in England would today represent a sustained tax increase on hard-working people of £1.4 billion a year, every year.

    As the then Chairman of the Communities and Local Government Select Committee, Phyllis Starkey (then the hon. Member for Milton Keynes South West), observed: “The Welsh Assembly – I believe it was my party, but I am not making an excuse for it – took advantage of the revaluation hugely to increase the total [tax] take” (3 February 2010, Official Report, Column 383).

    Instead of finding new ways to tax people, this Government has given extra funding to town halls to help freeze council tax. We cancelled any plans for a council tax revaluation. We have handed local residents new rights to veto big local tax hikes, so local people have the final say on the amount they pay. Council tax in England more than doubled under the Labour Government; under this Government, bills have fallen by 11 per cent in real terms, giving families financial security and helping hard-working people with the cost of living.

  • Elfyn Llwyd – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    Elfyn Llwyd – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Elfyn Llwyd on 2014-06-10.

    To ask the Attorney General, in respect of how many alleged offences under section (a) 2A and (b) 4A of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 proceedings are active in magistrates’ and crown courts in England and Wales; and if he will make a statement.

    Oliver Heald

    The Crown Prosecution Service does not maintain a central record of the number of particular offences that are currently active in either magistrates’ or crown courts in England and Wales.

    The CPS case management system does however record the number of finalised cases which reached a first hearing in the magistrates’ court as follows:

    2012-2013

    2013-2014

    Protection from Harassment Act 1997 { 4A(1)(a)(b)(i) and (5) }

    Stalking involving fear of violence

    9

    65

    Protection from Harassment Act 1997 { 4A(1)(a)(b)(ii) and (5) }

    Stalking involving serious alarm / distress

    10

    149

    Protection from Harassment Act 1997 { 2A(1) and (4) }

    Stalking

    72

    529

    There is no indication of final outcome or if the offence charged was the offence at finalisation.

  • Elfyn Llwyd – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Elfyn Llwyd – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Elfyn Llwyd on 2014-06-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many persons convicted under actions (a) 2A and (b) 4A of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 have been given custodial sentences.

    Jeremy Wright

    I have been asked to reply on behalf of the Ministry of Justice.

    The most recent figures showing the number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates’ courts and found guilty and sentenced to immediate custody for offences under Sections 2A and 4A of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, in England and Wales, from 2012 to 2013 (the latest data available), can be viewed in the table.

  • Elfyn Llwyd – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    Elfyn Llwyd – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Elfyn Llwyd on 2014-06-10.

    To ask the Attorney General, in respect of how many alleged offences under section 2A of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 proceedings are active in magistrates’ courts in England and Wales.

    Oliver Heald

    The Crown Prosecution Service does not maintain a central record of the number of particular offences that are currently active in either magistrates’ or crown courts in England and Wales.

    The CPS case management system does however record the number of finalised cases which reached a first hearing in the magistrates’ court as follows:

    2012-2013

    2013-2014

    Protection from Harassment Act 1997 { 4A(1)(a)(b)(i) and (5) }

    Stalking involving fear of violence

    9

    65

    Protection from Harassment Act 1997 { 4A(1)(a)(b)(ii) and (5) }

    Stalking involving serious alarm / distress

    10

    149

    Protection from Harassment Act 1997 { 2A(1) and (4) }

    Stalking

    72

    529

    There is no indication of final outcome or if the offence charged was the offence at finalisation.

  • Elfyn Llwyd – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Elfyn Llwyd – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Elfyn Llwyd on 2014-06-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many persons convicted under sections (a) 2A and (b) 4A of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 have been given a custodial sentence of (i) less than 12, (ii) 12 to 24, (iii) 24 to 36 and (iv) more than 36 months.

    Jeremy Wright

    I have been asked to reply on behalf of the Ministry of Justice.

    The most recent figures showing the number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates’ courts and found guilty and sentenced to immediate custody for offences under Sections 2A and 4A of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, in England and Wales, from 2012 to 2013 (the latest data available), can be viewed in the table.

  • Elfyn Llwyd – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    Elfyn Llwyd – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Elfyn Llwyd on 2014-06-10.

    To ask the Attorney General, how many people have been (a) charged and (b) prosecuted under sections 2A and 4A of the Protection from Harrassment Act 1997.

    Oliver Heald

    The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 came into effect on 25 November 2012 and introduced two new offences of stalking into the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 under S2A and S4A. A table showing the number of offences charged and prosecuted by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) under sections 2A and 4A that reached a first hearing in a magistrates’ court since these sections came into force has been deposited in the Library of the House. The data provided only shows the number of offences, not the number of people charged.