Author: admin

  • Kevan Jones – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Kevan Jones – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevan Jones on 2016-03-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how much of the £35 million transferred to his Department from Libor fines has been spent on projects supporting the armed forces community.

    Mark Lancaster

    All £35 million of LIBOR funding has been allocated to projects which support the Armed Forces Community. For details of the organisations and projects which benefited from this money, I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 2 June 2015 to Question 428 to the hon. Member for St Helens North (Mr McGinn). http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-question/Commons/2015-05-28/428/

    Organisations that have received LIBOR funds are required to provide a monthly report of progress; these are reviewed and monitored by the Ministry of Defence (MOD) Armed Forces Covenant Team and, where appropriate, action taken to ensure that the project is on track. At the end of each project, recipients of LIBOR funding also complete a close of project report and an assessment is conducted against the original terms and conditions. This enables the MOD to confirm the closure and record lessons learnt for future grants. Where appropriate, the MOD Armed Forces Covenant Team have engaged with projects on a one-to-one basis.

  • Douglas Chapman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Douglas Chapman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Douglas Chapman on 2016-03-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 1 February 2016 to Question 24213, on European fighter aircraft warnings, what the two possible equipment solutions selected for formal assessment in the coming months are.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    The collision warning system project for the Typhoon aircraft has not yet reached Main Gate. Therefore I am unable to disclose the two possible solutions as that information is commercially sensitive.

  • Craig Mackinlay – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Craig Mackinlay – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Craig Mackinlay on 2016-03-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, if she will take steps to ensure that there is no reduction in the funding of grammar schools as a result of recent changes to funding for pupils aged 16 to 19.

    Mr Sam Gyimah

    All providers of 16-19 education, including school sixth forms, sixth form colleges and general FE colleges, are funded according to a single national formula. We announced, as part of the Spending Review, that we will protect the national base rate of £4,000 per student for the duration of the parliament. From 2016/17 the large programme uplift will apply, which will give a funding uplift of 10 per cent for study programmes of four A levels and 20 per cent for five A levels, when at least a grade B in all subjects is gained. Equivalent uplifts will apply to the full level 3 International Baccalaureate and large TechBacc programmes.

    We set out full details of the funding rates for 16-19 institutions in 2016/17 in January and aim to provide further information on savings that will be required from 2017/18 as soon as possible. We have already announced that we will remove transitional formula protection funding over six years from 2016/17, ensuring sufficient lead-in time for institutions to manage this reduction.

  • Nicholas Brown – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Nicholas Brown – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nicholas Brown on 2016-03-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what steps the Government plans to take in response to the findings of the Effective Pre-School, Primary and Secondary Education project by the Institute for Education; and what steps the Government plans to take to improve access to high quality early years education.

    Mr Sam Gyimah

    We know from the findings of the Effective Pre-School, Primary and Secondary Education (EPPSE) study that early education has a significant impact on child outcomes, and that attending high quality pre-school provision has a positive and long term impact not only on children’s attainment progress, but also on their social-behavioural development.

    We have now invested in a major longitudinal Study of Early Education and Development (SEED) to update evidence from EPPSE and evaluate the effectiveness of the current early education model in England. Evidence from SEED will be used to continue to ensure that all children receive an effective, high quality early education experience that prepares them for school and allows them to fulfil their potential; that future investment is targeted correctly and policies are developed in the most effective way.

    We understand the importance of quality and its impact on children’s outcomes. The Common Inspection Framework recently introduced by Ofsted will give greater clarity, coherence and comparability on early years and education settings to parents and providers. The most recent Ofsted early years and childcare inspection report shows that, 85% of all providers currently on the Early Years Register were judged "good" or "outstanding" for overall effectiveness. This is a 5 percentage point increase on the previous year to 31 August 2014.

    And as part of our wider reforms, we will continue to work in collaboration with the early years sector to further develop our workforce strategy to improve the quality of the early years workforce. This will include a review of progression routes to identify what more can be done to ensure that good quality staff can maximise their potential and forge a successful career within the early years.

    We want all children, regardless of their starting point, to have access to high quality early education and childcare, as we know this is what makes the difference to outcomes. We are currently funding 15 hours a week of free childcare for all three- and four-year-olds, worth around £2,500 a year per child to parents; and funding 15 hours a week of free childcare for the 40% most disadvantaged two-year-olds, worth around £2,500 a year per child to parents.

    We know that the current model is extremely successful with 99% of four-year-olds and 94% of three-year-olds taking up a place. Based on survey data collected from local authorities in the autumn of 2015, it is estimated that 182,000 two-year-olds – around 72% of eligible children – have taken up a place on the two-year-old programme.

    From September 2017, we are introducing 15 hours of free childcare a week for the working parents of three- and four-year olds, worth around a further £2,500 a year per child – on top of the existing early education entitlement.

  • Catherine McKinnell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Catherine McKinnell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Catherine McKinnell on 2016-03-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, with reference to her Department’s consultation on out-of school education settings, launched on 26 November 2015, how many consultation responses were received (a) in favour of and (b) opposing the consultation proposals; and by which date she expects her Department to publish its response to that consultation.

    Edward Timpson

    The Government wants children to be educated in a safe environment without exposure to hateful and extremist views that undermine British values. The call for evidence on out-of-school education settings was launched on 26 November 2015 and ran for six and a half weeks closing on 11 January 2016

    Around 3,000 people completed the published response form, either online or manually. The Department for Education received a significant number of further representations to the consultation by email and post. All responses and representations are being logged, analysed and verified

    In line with Cabinet Office guidance, we will be publishing a response to the consultation in due course.

  • Jonathan Reynolds – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Jonathan Reynolds – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jonathan Reynolds on 2016-03-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, what assessment she has made of the effect on costs to the electricity system of limitations of the number of operating hours permitted for back-up electricity generation plants.

    Andrea Leadsom

    Defra will consult later this year on options which will include legislation that would set binding emission limit values on relevant air pollutants from diesel engines. As part of this process Defra will assess the impacts of any policy options it proposes to take forward, and will work with DECC to understand any implications this may have for the electricity system.

  • Melanie Onn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Melanie Onn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Melanie Onn on 2016-03-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, pursuant to her oral contribution of 2 March 2016 to the Ninth Delegated Legislation Committee on the draft Renewables Obligation Closure Etc. (Amendment) Order 2016, what the evidential basis is for the statement that, with reference to the solar industry, it is not true to say that there are thousands of job losses and that there will be thousands more.

    Andrea Leadsom

    We see a strong future for solar PV in the UK.

    In order to support the path to subsidy-free solar deployment, we have decided to keep the Feed-in-Tariff scheme open, and expect that the scheme could support 15,000-23,000 jobs in the sector. There will continue to be jobs in the operation and maintenance of existing solar installations.

    We also expect subsidy-free solar to be an increasingly attractive option. Lightsource, the biggest solar developer in the UK, have said publically that they will be installing and connecting subsidy-free sites in 2016.

    Support for solar comes directly from people’s bills, so when costs come down, so should support. Therefore we have taken steps to control the costs of support schemes and put solar on a path to delivering without subsidy.

  • Nicholas Soames – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Nicholas Soames – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nicholas Soames on 2016-03-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what the reasons are for late payments being made under the Basic Payment Scheme by the Rural Payments Agency; and how many farmers have received late payments to date.

    George Eustice

    The payment window for the 2015 Basic Payment Scheme runs from 1 December 2015 to 30 June 2016. While in recent years, the RPA has been able to make a higher proportion of payments earlier in the payment window, the new CAP is very complex and has created new administrative burdens for the RPA.

    As of 2 March 2016 some 71,700 claimants, representing over 82% of all eligible claims, have received their payments, bringing the total paid to date for the 2015 scheme to £1.13 billion.

  • Andrew Percy – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Andrew Percy – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Percy on 2016-03-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what steps he is taking to ensure that there are safeguards against flooding for the construction of new houses in potential flood-risk areas.

    Brandon Lewis

    There are strict tests in the National Planning Policy Framework to protect people and property from flooding which all local planning authorities are expected to follow, underpinned by our planning practice guidance. The Framework is clear that local planning authorities should avoid inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding by directing development away from areas at highest risk. Where development is necessary in a flood risk area, it must be demonstrated that it will be safe, without increasing flood risk elsewhere, and be appropriately flood resilient and resistant. Mitigation measures, such as land raising, raised building thresholds and improved flood management infrastructure, to make development acceptable in flood risk areas can be made a requirement of any planning consent.

    We are clear that where the strict tests on flood risk set out in national planning policy are not met, new development should not be allowed.

  • Andrew Percy – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Andrew Percy – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Percy on 2016-03-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment she has made of the (a) effectiveness of Flood Re and (b) whether her Department’s long-term strategy fund for flood defences has been distributed fairly.

    Rory Stewart

    Flood Re began its operational testing phase in July 2015. The Flood Re Board expect to be ready to accept policies from April 2016, once it is authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority. Once operational, Flood Re will be accountable directly to Parliament and be reviewed at least every five years.

    The allocation of Government Grant in Aid for projects in the long term capital programme uses Defra’s Partnership Funding approach which ensures a fair allocation for projects throughout the country. Funding is potentially available for any project where the benefits of the scheme are greater than the cost and are allocated based on outcomes (economic damages avoided and number of households protected), rather than a percentage of the costs. This approach secures value for money for the taxpayer, ensures that a fair share is available for all projects over time and that flood management is not limited to what central Government alone can afford.