Author: admin

  • Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-02-05.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how much her Department has paid out in compensation to (a) internal and (b) external claimants in each year since 2010.

    Karen Bradley

    This information is not available, except at disproportionate cost.

    The Home Office records all Special Payments (of which compensation is a type). However, we are not required to report whether the recipient is internal or external to the Department.

    It is therefore not possible, from the data we have, to provide a compensation figure that separates out internal and external claimants.

    Page 154 of the Home Office’s 2014/15 Annual Report and Accounts has a table that lists the total value and number of all Special Payments

  • Keith Vaz – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Keith Vaz – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Keith Vaz on 2016-02-05.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what recent steps her Department has taken to allow aid to enter and be distributed throughout Yemen without restriction.

    Mr Desmond Swayne

    Improving access into and within Yemen for commercial goods and humanitarian aid is one of the UK’s top priorities. We have consistently called on all parties to improve commercial access for essential imports of food, fuel and medical supplies; facilitate rapid, safe and unhindered access to all people in need; and safeguard major access routes and key infrastructure in Yemen, including airports, sea ports and fuel distribution sites.

    In addition, we fund agencies and NGOs who have the best access and ability to deliver humanitarian aid. In addition, we have provided:

    • £1 million to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), who broker humanitarian access for the international response.
    • £1 million to the UN Humanitarian Air Service (UNHAS) to provide an air bridge into Yemen for humanitarian staff and essential medical supplies.
    • £1.42 million for the UN Verification and Inspection Mechanism (UNVIM) to improve supply of essential goods into Yemen.
  • Joan Ryan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Joan Ryan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Joan Ryan on 2016-02-05.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what support her Department has provided to projects fostering co-existence between Israelis and Palestinians in each of the last five years.

    Mr Desmond Swayne

    DFID does not directly fund joint Israeli-Palestinian programmes. However, through the Conflict Stability and Security Fund (CSSF), the UK provides support for the ‘Youth Creating Peace On/Line’ project which encourages educational cooperation between Palestinians and Israelis. The project, run by NGO ‘Kids Creating Peace’, uses dialogue and leadership workshops to train participants to become peace advocates in their communities and beyond. The UK is providing £40,000 to ‘Youth Creating Peace On/Line’ for 2016/17.

    DFID provided £349 million in support of Palestinian development from 2011-15 and will provide a further £72 million in 2015-16. For a breakdown on how financial assistance in the Palestinian Territories is spent, information is published on DFID’s Development Tracker website (https://devtracker.dfid.gov.uk).

    “

  • Kirsty Blackman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Kirsty Blackman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kirsty Blackman on 2016-02-05.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 2 February 2016 to Question 24107 on tribunals: Scotland, how many of those people whose data was breached were made aware that that breach had occurred.

    Mr Shailesh Vara

    Her Majesty’s Courts & Tribunals Service takes its responsibility for data incidents very seriously and treats each case on its individual merits. Notifying individuals of data breaches or incidents is considered, but is not a mandatory action in every instance.

    Informing people and organisations about a breach is not an end in itself. Notification should have a clear purpose, whether this is to enable individuals who may have been affected to take steps to protect themselves or to allow the appropriate regulatory bodies to perform their functions, provide advice and deal with complaints.

    The above criteria is considered when deciding whether or not to inform individuals or organisations of a data breach. In relation to the incidents referred to in this PQ it is unclear, as no statistical information has been retained, as to whether or not individuals were notified.

    Guidance on data breach notification is set out by the Information Commissioners Office (ICO) in the link below:

    https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/principle-7-security/

    “

  • Kirsty Blackman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Kirsty Blackman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kirsty Blackman on 2016-02-05.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 2 February 2016 to Question 24107 on tribunals: Scotland, how many of those people whose data was breached were not made aware that that breach had occurred.

    Mr Shailesh Vara

    Her Majesty’s Courts & Tribunals Service takes its responsibility for data incidents very seriously and treats each case on its individual merits. Notifying individuals of data breaches or incidents is considered, but is not a mandatory action in every instance.

    Informing people and organisations about a breach is not an end in itself. Notification should have a clear purpose, whether this is to enable individuals who may have been affected to take steps to protect themselves or to allow the appropriate regulatory bodies to perform their functions, provide advice and deal with complaints.

    The above criteria is considered when deciding whether or not to inform individuals or organisations of a data breach. In relation to the incidents referred to in this PQ it is unclear, as no statistical information has been retained, as to whether or not individuals were notified.

    Guidance on data breach notification is set out by the Information Commissioners Office (ICO) in the link below:

    https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/principle-7-security/

    “

  • Alex Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Alex Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Alex Cunningham on 2016-02-05.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will commission an assessment of the effect on victims of domestic abuse and their families of the use of common entrances at family courts for both the perpetrators and victims of that crime.

    Mike Penning

    Every family court has a system to support vulnerable court users. Protective measures are put in place whenever a court is aware that an individual involved in a case may be violent. These can include separate waiting areas, additional security and the use of separate entrances where appropriate.

    Information on the number of children or women injured by a perpetrator of domestic violence after a Family Court decision relating to child contact is not held centrally and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost by manually checking case files in criminal and family courts and matching records.

    The family court takes the issue of domestic violence extremely seriously. Where domestic violence or abuse is admitted or proven, any child arrangements order put in place must protect the safety and wellbeing of the child and the parent with whom the child is living, and not expose them to the risk of further harm. In particular, the court must be satisfied that any contact ordered with a parent who has perpetrated violence or abuse is safe and in the best interests of the child.

    Where the court does conclude that direct contact is safe and beneficial for the child, it can impose conditions such as supervised contact to protect the child.

  • Andy Slaughter – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Andy Slaughter – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andy Slaughter on 2016-02-05.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 10 December 2015 to Question 18874, on offensive weapons: confiscation orders, how many such confiscations took place in each Crown and magistrates’ court in each of those years.

    Mr Shailesh Vara

    The information requested could only be obtained at a disproportionate cost.

  • Andy Slaughter – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Andy Slaughter – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andy Slaughter on 2016-02-05.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 10 December 2015 to Question 18874, what assessment he has made of the reasons for the increase in the number of knives confiscated in Crown courts between 2012-13 and 2014-15.

    Mr Shailesh Vara

    My Department takes the issue of security within courts extremely seriously and has robust security and safety systems in place to protect all court users and judiciary. These systems include mandatory bag searches, modern detection equipment, X-ray machines and surveillance cameras, as well as court security officers with the legal powers to seize items where required. Security procedures, including the detection technology used, are continuously reviewed to ensure that security is as effective as possible.

    The increase in the number of knives taken from people as they enter Crown Courts between 2012/13 and 2014/15 may be due to the implementation of more robust training for Court Security Officers; improved rates of recording for the taking of such items and improved searching of people entering Crown Courts.

  • Greg Mulholland – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Greg Mulholland – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Greg Mulholland on 2016-02-05.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of penalties for motorists causing death by car dooring.

    Andrew Selous

    A death caused by a collision with a car door can, depending on the circumstances, be classified as one of a number of offences carrying different maximum penalties. While there is a specific offence, under regulation 105 of the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986, to

    “open, or cause or permit to be opened, any door of a vehicle on a road so as to injure or endanger any person” which has the maximum penalty of a level 4 fine (£2,500), other possible charges include offences against the person which carry maximum penalties of up to life imprisonment.

    The Government is aware of concerns about a number of sentencing issues and intends to start a consultation on sentencing before the end of the calendar year. This would include driving offences and penalties.

  • Keir Starmer – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Keir Starmer – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Keir Starmer on 2016-02-05.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, when he plans to publish proposals to introduce a victims’ law.

    Mike Penning

    In the Queen’s Speech we made a commitment to bring forward measures to increase the rights of victims of crime. Further detail on our plans will be published in due course.