Category: Speeches

  • Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chi Onwurah on 2016-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, if she will ask Ofcom to review communications markets definitions to reflect the role of advertising as a proxy for payment, particularly in regard to the standard SSNIP test.

    Matt Hancock

    As the independent communications regulator it is for Ofcom to determine how it should approach the issue of defining communications markets and how it applies the standard SSNIP test. Ofcom does already take into account developments such as the role of advertising and the role of data as proxy for payments in the course of carrying out its duties and will continue to do so in its assessments of market power and its analysis of competition.

  • Chi Onwurah – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Chi Onwurah – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chi Onwurah on 2015-11-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, if he will issue a response to the Federation of Small Businesses report, entitled Reassured, optimised, transformed: driving digital small business, published in September 2015.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    Ed Vaizey, Minister for Culture and the Digital Economy, and Anna Soubry, the Small Firms Minister, participated in roundtable discussions on September 10th when the report was launched. We do not propose to formally respond to the FSB report.

  • Jake Berry – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Jake Berry – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jake Berry on 2015-12-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many applications for Contact Orders submitted by people to see their grandchildren were granted in each of the last three years.

    Caroline Dinenage

    Under the Children Act 1989 the court may make a child arrangements order to determine with whom a child is to live or spend time. Prior to 22nd April 2014 such orders were called contact and residence orders. The Department collates figures on the numbers of applications made by grandparents for child arrangements orders and the figures for such applications since 2010 are shown below.

    Number of child arrangement (contact) order applications made by grandparents in England and Wales

    Year

    Applications by grandparents

    2011

    2403

    2012

    2574

    2013

    2755

    2014

    1624

    2015 – 3 quarters only

    1335

    Unlike parents, grandparents and other family members can only make an application for a child arrangements orders with the permission of the court. The requirement to apply for the court’s permission is not designed to be an obstacle to grandparents, or other close relatives, but to act as a filter to sift out those applications that are clearly not in the child’s best interests. Experience suggests that grandparents (or other interested relatives) would not usually experience difficulty in obtaining permission where their application is motivated by a genuine concern for the child.

    The Department does not collate figures on applications for a child arrangements order where the court’s permission has been sought. This information could only be obtained by manually checking each case file at disproportionate cost. Similarly, the Department does not collate figures centrally on family members named in a child arrangements order. Details of the numbers of child arrangements orders issued specifically for grandparents to see their grandchildren could only be obtained by checking each file at disproportionate cost.

  • Angela Eagle – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Angela Eagle – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Angela Eagle on 2016-01-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what discussions he has had with his EU counterparts on the potential effect of China obtaining market economy status on steel dumping across the EU.

    Anna Soubry

    My Rt hon Friend the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills has regular discussions with Cabinet colleagues, EU Commissioners and EU counterparts about a range of issues, including Market Economy Status (MES) for China. He most recently discussed trade aspects of the steel industry with Trade Commissioner Malmstrom on 20 January.

    We are awaiting a European Commission proposal on granting MES. We understand that the Commission will also be undertaking a detailed assessment of the economic impacts of granting MES as part of their consideration of this issue. We will examine any proposal and assessment carefully. The Prime Minister has previously stated that he will make the case for China to be granted MES but China will need to show that it is committed to becoming more open as it becomes more prosperous. In considering the Commission’s proposal it will be important to consider the wider trade and international political context including compliance with international commitments. If China is granted MES, the Commission will still be able to pursue anti-dumping and anti-subsidy cases and impose measures where evidence of dumping or subsidy is found.

    The government is strongly in favour of effective trade defences to tackle unfair trade practices. The Government voted in favour of anti-dumping measures on steel products in July and November and lobbied successfully for an investigation into re-bar. The Government is also pushing for faster, more effective action to deal with dumping of steel: this was one of the conclusions of the Extraordinary Competitiveness Council on Steel in November. The Secretary of State also raised the issue with the Trade Commissioner.

    The Government is playing an active role in the European Commission’s steel stakeholder’s conference summit on 15 February and is supporting a robust discussion of the issue of overcapacity through the EU’s ongoing dialogue with the Chinese.

  • Ruth Smeeth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Ruth Smeeth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ruth Smeeth on 2016-02-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, when she plans to issue a response to the Migration Advisory Committee review of Tier 2 visas.

    James Brokenshire

    The Government is carefully considering the Migration Advisory Committee’s recommendations and has not yet made its final decisions. We will announce our response in due course.

  • Philip Davies – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Philip Davies – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Philip Davies on 2016-03-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, in what circumstances the Independent Police Complaints Commission can refer a case back to the police.

    Mike Penning

    Police forces are required to refer (i) all Death and Serious Injury (DSI) matters and (ii) complaints and conduct matters that meet certain criteria, as set out in regulations, to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC). The IPCC assesses each referral on a case-by-case basis, by considering the seriousness of the matter and any relevant public interest factors. The IPCC may decide that an investigation is not required, in which case the matter will be referred back to the police force to decide what action to take. Alternatively, if the IPCC decides that the matter requires investigation, the IPCC must make a determination to undertake an independent investigation, an investigation under the supervision or management of the IPCC, or can refer back to the police force to investigate.

    In 2013 the Home Secretary announced a commitment to transfer resources to the IPCC to enable it to expand to undertake all serious and sensitive matters involving the police. The IPCC is currently undertaking a change programme to deliver this expansion. In 2013/14 the IPCC commenced 109 independent investigations whilst 241 were opened in 2014/15. The IPCC is on course to meet its target of delivering between 400 and 700 independent investigations in 2015/16.

    Reforms in the Policing and Crime Bill will build on this, enhancing the overall level of independence across IPCC investigations by removing managed and supervised investigations. Where the IPCC decides not to refer a matter back to the police force for investigation, it must undertake an independent investigation unless it considers that a directed investigation, a new form of investigation established by the Bill, is more appropriate.

    Information on how many cases referred to the IPCC have been referred back to the police for investigation is available on the IPCC’s website for the majority of the last six years (link: http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/page/archive-corporate-reports-and-plans). I will ask the IPCC to write to the Honourable Member, providing fuller information, and will ask for this response to be made available in the House Library.

  • Stephen Gethins – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Stephen Gethins – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Gethins on 2016-04-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what steps his Department is taking to source steel for the construction of new nuclear submarines.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 18 April 2016 to Question 33828 to the hon. Member for Islington South and Finsbury (Emily Thornberry).

  • Liz McInnes – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Liz McInnes – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Liz McInnes on 2016-05-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, if he will make an assessment of the potential effect on students living away from home of the closure of the iPlayer loophole.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    The Government consulted on adding on-demand programme services to the TV licence framework as part of its Green Paper published in July last year. Under the new proposals, all individuals will need to be covered by a TV licence if they stream or download television programmes through on-demand services provided by the BBC (notably the iPlayer). If an individual has a licence already, then they are automatically covered to watch BBC on-demand services under the new proposals.

  • Jim Shannon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Jim Shannon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Shannon on 2016-07-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, if he will provide support to overseas students who convert to Christianity in the UK to ensure they are not persecuted for their religious beliefs when they return to their country of origin.

    Alok Sharma

    The UK is a staunch defender of the right to freedom of religion or belief internationally. We believe that societies where freedom of religion or belief is protected are fairer, more tolerant and better able to resist extremist ideologies.

    With this in mind, we actively lobby governments for changes to laws and practices that discriminate against individuals on the basis of their religion or belief.

    In many cases students have access to alumni networks, often supported or endorsed by the British Embassy, once they have returned to their country of origin. Such networks can offer moral and practical support in times of need.

  • Barry Gardiner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    Barry Gardiner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Barry Gardiner on 2016-09-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, with reference to his oral statement of 15 September, how the measures announced in that statement will increase security at the Hinkley C project.

    Jesse Norman

    As announced on 15 September, following the comprehensive review of the Hinkley Point C project, my Rt Hon Friend the Secretary of State announced new safeguards for future foreign investment in critical infrastructure.

    In respect of Hinkley Point C, the Government is able to prevent the sale of EDF’s controlling stake prior to the completion of construction. This agreement has been confirmed in an exchange of letters between the Government and EDF.