Author: admin

  • Andrew Rosindell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Andrew Rosindell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Rosindell on 2016-02-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, with reference to the statement in the letter by the President of European Council on his proposal for a new settlement for the UK within the EU that the UK is not committed to further political integration, what mechanisms are included in that proposed agreement to prevent the UK being so committed without its consent.

    Mr David Lidington

    The Decision of the Heads of State or Government, meeting within the European Council, concerning a new settlement for the United Kingdom within the European Union, section C, paragraph 1, recognises that the United Kingdom is “not committed to further political integration into the European Union”. This will be incorporated into the Treaties at the time of their next revision “so as to make it clear that the references to ever closer union do not apply to the United Kingdom”.

    In addition, the Decision states that “the references in the Treaties and their preambles to the process of creating an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe do not offer a legal basis for extending the scope of any provision of the Treaties or of EU secondary legislation. They should not be used either to support an extensive interpretation of the competences of the Union or of the powers of its institutions as set out in the Treaties. . . The Treaties allow an evolution towards a deeper degree of integration among the Member States that share such a vision of their common future, without this applying to other Member States.”

    More widely, the European Union Act 2011 ensures that if a change to the EU Treaties is proposed that would transfer a power from the UK to the EU, the consent of the British people in a referendum would be required before such a transfer could be agreed.

  • Andrew Rosindell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Andrew Rosindell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Rosindell on 2016-02-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, if he will ensure that mechanisms are in place under the proposed draft deal with Europe to prevent the gradual transfer of powers to Brussels through EU directives and parliamentary resolutions.

    Mr David Lidington

    The draft European Council texts presented to Parliament on 1 February are part of the ongoing renegotiation of the UK’s EU membership. The draft text provided for a mechanism to ensure the EU’s commitment to subsidiarity is fully implemented, but as the Prime Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Mr Cameron), said in the House on 3 February, there are details that are still to be pinned down and intense negotiations to try and agree a deal with 27 other countries.

    More widely, the European Union Act 2011 ensures that if a change to the EU Treaties is proposed that would transfer a power from the UK to the EU, the consent of the British people in a referendum would be required before such a transfer could be agreed.

  • Michael Fabricant – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Michael Fabricant – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Michael Fabricant on 2016-02-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, what assessment she has made of the effect on the security of the electricity supply from the National Grid of the closure of Rugeley Power Station; and if she will make a statement.

    Andrea Leadsom

    We are clear that delivering energy security for our families and businesses is non-negotiable. We knew some old coal plants would likely be closing and we have already taken steps to protect supply for the coming winters, which took account of the possibility of further closures. Specifically, National Grid took into account the risk of coal plant closures in considering how much capacity to procure for next winter’s Contingency Balancing reserve.

    Longer term, the Capacity Market will drive investment in new capacity as well as get the best out of our existing power stations. We will continue to work alongside National Grid and Ofgem to take whatever additional steps are necessary to protect our energy supply.

  • Chris Stephens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Chris Stephens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chris Stephens on 2016-02-09.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assurances HM Revenue and Customs obtains from its potential contractors and suppliers on the level of their compliance with UK tax obligations.

    Mr David Gauke

    Prior to engagement, HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) require a new contractor or supplier to provide their tax details, and to agree to HMRC performing revenue compliance checks throughout the procurement process, using information from its own records and taking appropriate action where required in line with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015.

    Contracts for such engagements include clauses requiring that at all times the contractor or supplier shall comply with all statutes and regulations relating to direct or indirect taxes, and that failure to comply may constitute a material breach of the contract.

  • Chris Stephens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Chris Stephens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chris Stephens on 2016-02-09.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many days’ work were lost to industrial action taken by employees of the Government and its agencies in each year since 2010.

    Mr Rob Wilson

    The information requested falls within the responsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I have asked the Authority to reply.

  • Chris Stephens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Chris Stephens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chris Stephens on 2016-02-09.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what assurances the Government Digital Service obtains from potential contractors and suppliers on the level of their compliance with UK tax obligations.

    Matthew Hancock

    I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave him on 16 February 2016 to UIN: 26226.

  • Brendan O’Hara – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Brendan O’Hara – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Brendan O’Hara on 2016-02-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what the nature and quantity was of the nuclear materials released in terms of (a) its physical state, (b) its mass quantity, (c) the release fraction assumed for each transportation package and (d) the total released radioactivity in Becquerels for each Astral exercise between February 2011 and November 2012.

    Penny Mordaunt

    The Ministry of Defence maintains a Defence Nuclear Emergency Organisation (NEO) to respond in the unlikely event of an emergency involving the transport of defence nuclear materials. The NEO organises regular exercises to test the effectiveness of its emergency response planning and arrangements. These include the Astral series of exercises, which are designed to be challenging, and thus simulate the extremely unlikely event of a release of radioactive material from the transport containers. No radioactive materials are used or released to the environment during the exercises. The specific exercise objectives do not require assessments or estimates of decontamination, environmental or other post-incident decontamination costs or of radiological dose uptakes. The Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) undertook the modelling for each Astral exercise between February 2011 and November 2012.

    I am withholding information about the physical state, mass quantity, release fraction and total released radioactivity assumed for these exercises as disclosure would or would be likely to prejudice national security.

  • Brendan O’Hara – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Brendan O’Hara – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Brendan O’Hara on 2016-02-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether an assessment was made of the (a) decontamination, (b) environmental and (c) other costs was before each Astral exercise between February 2011 and November 2012; and what the incremental cost was of each of the major elements for managing the post-incident contamination.

    Penny Mordaunt

    The Ministry of Defence maintains a Defence Nuclear Emergency Organisation (NEO) to respond in the unlikely event of an emergency involving the transport of defence nuclear materials. The NEO organises regular exercises to test the effectiveness of its emergency response planning and arrangements. These include the Astral series of exercises, which are designed to be challenging, and thus simulate the extremely unlikely event of a release of radioactive material from the transport containers. No radioactive materials are used or released to the environment during the exercises. The specific exercise objectives do not require assessments or estimates of decontamination, environmental or other post-incident decontamination costs or of radiological dose uptakes. The Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) undertook the modelling for each Astral exercise between February 2011 and November 2012.

    I am withholding information about the physical state, mass quantity, release fraction and total released radioactivity assumed for these exercises as disclosure would or would be likely to prejudice national security.

  • Brendan O’Hara – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Brendan O’Hara – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Brendan O’Hara on 2016-02-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, which agency or organisation undertook the release dispersion and deposition modelling and radiological dose assessment of each Astral exercise between February 2011 and November 2012.

    Penny Mordaunt

    The Ministry of Defence maintains a Defence Nuclear Emergency Organisation (NEO) to respond in the unlikely event of an emergency involving the transport of defence nuclear materials. The NEO organises regular exercises to test the effectiveness of its emergency response planning and arrangements. These include the Astral series of exercises, which are designed to be challenging, and thus simulate the extremely unlikely event of a release of radioactive material from the transport containers. No radioactive materials are used or released to the environment during the exercises. The specific exercise objectives do not require assessments or estimates of decontamination, environmental or other post-incident decontamination costs or of radiological dose uptakes. The Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) undertook the modelling for each Astral exercise between February 2011 and November 2012.

    I am withholding information about the physical state, mass quantity, release fraction and total released radioactivity assumed for these exercises as disclosure would or would be likely to prejudice national security.

  • Brendan O’Hara – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Brendan O’Hara – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Brendan O’Hara on 2016-02-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what the estimated radiological dose uptake was in terms of (a) individual whole equivalent dose in milli-Sievert and (b) collective dose in man-Sievert for (i) Services and his Department’s civilian personnel involved in and responding to the incident, (ii) civilian emergency services personnel responders attending and (iii) members of the public during each Astral exercise between February 2011 and November 2012.

    Penny Mordaunt

    The Ministry of Defence maintains a Defence Nuclear Emergency Organisation (NEO) to respond in the unlikely event of an emergency involving the transport of defence nuclear materials. The NEO organises regular exercises to test the effectiveness of its emergency response planning and arrangements. These include the Astral series of exercises, which are designed to be challenging, and thus simulate the extremely unlikely event of a release of radioactive material from the transport containers. No radioactive materials are used or released to the environment during the exercises. The specific exercise objectives do not require assessments or estimates of decontamination, environmental or other post-incident decontamination costs or of radiological dose uptakes. The Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) undertook the modelling for each Astral exercise between February 2011 and November 2012.

    I am withholding information about the physical state, mass quantity, release fraction and total released radioactivity assumed for these exercises as disclosure would or would be likely to prejudice national security.