Category: Speeches

  • Chris Evans – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Chris Evans – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chris Evans on 2015-12-01.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, which parliamentary constituencies do not fall entirely within the 90 per cent coverage of the 4G replacement system being considered as sole bidder for Emergency Services as part of the Emergency Services Mobile Communications Programme.

    Mike Penning

    The Emergency Services Mobile Communications Programme (ESMCP) will provide geographic coverage to 97% of the country (including the 90% required by the Regulator) by requiring the Mobile Services supplier to infill commercial coverage area and extend their network over sites provided by ESMCP’s Extended Area Services (EAS) project.

    Listed below are the Parliamentary Constituencies that do not fall entirely within the 90% coverage (as required by the Regulator), and those that do not fall entirely within the 97% coverage (with a further 7% provided by ESN) are:

    Parliamentary Constituency

    Not met 90%

    Not met 97%

    Aberavon Co Const

    *

    *

    Aberconwy Co Const

    *

    Angus Co Const

    *

    *

    Arfon Co Const

    *

    Barrow and Furness Co Const

    *

    Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk Co Const

    *

    *

    Bishop Auckland Co Const

    *

    Brecon and Radnorshire Co Const

    *

    *

    Bridgwater and West Somerset Co Const

    *

    *

    Carmarthen East and Dinefwr Co Const

    *

    *

    Central Devon Co Const

    *

    Clwyd South Co Const

    *

    *

    Clwyd West Co Const

    *

    *

    Copeland Co Const

    *

    *

    Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale Co Const

    *

    *

    East Kilbride, Strathaven and Lesmahagow Co Const

    *

    Hexham Co Const

    *

    *

    High Peak Co Const

    *

    Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey Co Const

    *

    *

    Kilmarnock and Loudoun Co Const

    *

    Lancaster and Fleetwood Co Const

    *

    Ludlow Co Const

    *

    *

    Montgomeryshire Co Const

    *

    *

    North Devon Co Const

    *

    Ochil and South Perthshire Co Const

    *

    *

    Penrith and The Border Co Const

    *

    Perth and North Perthshire Co Const

    *

    *

    Ribble Valley Co Const

    *

    *

    Richmond (Yorks) Co Const

    *

    *

    Scarborough and Whitby Co Const

    *

    Skipton and Ripon Co Const

    *

    *

    South West Wiltshire Co Const

    *

    Stirling Co Const

    *

    *

    Thirsk and Malton Co Const

    *

    *

    Totnes Co Const

    *

    Westmorland and Lonsdale Co Const

    *

    West Dunbartonshire Co Const

    *

    Dwyfor Meirionnydd Co Const

    *

    *

    Ceredigion Co Const

    *

    *

    Torridge and West Devon Co Const

    *

    North Cornwall Co Const

    *

    Berwick-upon-Tweed Co Const

    *

    *

    South East Cornwall Co Const

    *

    South West Devon Co Const

    *

    Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross Co Const

    *

    *

    Ross, Skye and Lochaber Co Const

    *

    *

    Moray Co Const

    *

    *

    Na h-Eileanan an Iar Co Const

    *

    *

    Argyll and Bute Co Const

    *

    *

    West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine Co Const

    *

    *

    Gordon Co Const

    *

    East Lothian Co Const

    *

    North Ayrshire and Arran Co Const

    *

    *

    Dumfries and Galloway Co Const

    *

    *

    Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire Co Const

    *

    Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock Co Const

    *

    *

    Preseli Pembrokeshire Co Const

    *

  • Frank Field – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Frank Field – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Frank Field on 2016-01-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many licences for experimentation with animals the Animals and Science Committee granted in the most recent year for which data is available.

    Mr John Hayes

    The Animals in Science Committee (ASC) are responsible for providing impartial, balanced and objective advice to Ministers relating to the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 (ASPA). The Committee is not responsible for granting licences. Under Section 9 of ASPA, the Secretary of State may consult the Committee regarding licence applications. Current policy requires referral of the following categories of project licence application:

    • the use of wild-caught non-human primates;

    • the use of cats, dogs, equidae or non-human primates in severe procedures;

    • use of endangered species;

    • projects with major animal welfare or ethical implications;

    • projects involving the use of admixed embryos falling into category 3 of the Academy of Medical Science report on Animals Containing Human Material and category 2 where the predominance of an admixed embryo is unclear or uncertain;

    • projects which may invoke any of the ‘safeguard clauses’ in the Directive with respect to the purpose of primate use, proposals for the use of a great ape, or proposals to cause long-lasting pain, suffering or distress that cannot be ameliorated; or

    • projects of any kind raising novel or contentious issues, or giving rise to serious societal concerns.

    In 2014, the most recent year for which we have data available, the ASC provided advice on four project licences. These were subsequently granted by the Home Office. The numbers of licences the ASC provided advice on in 2015 will be published in the ASC Annual Report later this year.

  • Ann Clwyd – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Ann Clwyd – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ann Clwyd on 2016-02-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will establish an independent inquiry into the cases of 792 miners in Wales who were arrested during the miners’ strike in 1984.

    Mike Penning

    There are no plans to establish an independent inquiry into the cases of 792 miners in Wales who were arrested during the miners’ strike in 1984.

  • Lord Browne of Belmont – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Lord Browne of Belmont – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Browne of Belmont on 2016-02-25.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they have taken over the past five years to disrupt and intercept the supply of illicit drugs into UK prisons.

    Lord Faulks

    Prisons in England and Wales take a zero tolerance approach to illicit drugs. We have a comprehensive range of security measures and searching techniques in place to detect drugs, and to prevent smuggling into prisons. We are about to pilot the use of body scanners to reveal drugs concealed within the body, we have introduced specific dog training to allow dogs to detect new psychoactive substances (NPS) and will introduce widespread drug testing of prisoners for NPS as part of the national mandatory drug testing programme in April 2016. We have also made it illegal to smuggle NPS into prisons. We are working with the Department of Health and others to improve our understanding of the risks NPS present for offenders and to provide appropriate information, guidance and support to offenders and those working with them in prison. Anyone caught with any drugs in prison will be severely dealt with. Punishments available include closed visits, loss of privileges and up to 42 days added to their time in custody. Where prisoners are caught with controlled drugs, we will work with the police to consider prosecution and a further sentence.

  • Tom Brake – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Tom Brake – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tom Brake on 2016-03-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what support the Government provides to Kurdish authorities in (a) Iraq and (b) Syria to support refugees in those regions.

    Mr Nick Hurd

    I have been asked to reply.

    Since June 2014, the UK has committed £79.5 million of humanitarian aid to Iraq. This support is needs-based and provides life-saving assistance for the most vulnerable, including those in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq (KRI). All UK humanitarian aid in Iraq is delivered through UN agencies, NGOs and other trusted humanitarian partners. We are providing funding to UNDP to build the capacity of the Joint Crisis Centre (JCC) within the Kurdistan Regional Government as part of this support. The JCC works closely with the UN, the Government of Iraq, and the international community to provide life-saving coordination.

    To date, we have allocated £561 million to support vulnerable people inside Syria. Roughly half our support is delivered by agencies and INGOs working out of Damascus with the consent of the regime, and half is delivered across borders from neighbouring countries without regime consent, under the authorisation of the UN Security Council. In line with the key humanitarian principles of neutrality and impartiality, we work with trusted humanitarian partners with experience of operating in fragile and conflict affected states. These include UN agencies, international organisations, NGOs and civil society organisations. Through these partners, our support is reaching vulnerable Syrians in areas controlled by Kurdish groups.

  • Angela Smith – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Angela Smith – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Angela Smith on 2016-04-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, whether Public Health England will be responsible for drafting and publishing the obesity strategy.

    Jane Ellison

    The Childhood Obesity Strategy, which will be launched in the summer, is being led by the Department with input from across Government, including Public Health England.

  • Daniel Zeichner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Daniel Zeichner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Daniel Zeichner on 2016-06-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, when he plans to undertake a review of the sentencing guidelines for traffic offences.

    Dominic Raab

    Sentencing guidelines are issued by the independent Sentencing Council for England and Wales. Following the announcement by the previous Justice Secretary of a government review of driving offences and penalties, the Sentencing Council have paused their review of sentencing guidelines for causing death by driving.

    The government is aware of concerns about a number of sentencing issues and is committed to making sure sentencing for driving crimes is proportionate within the context of our wider sentencing framework. It is our intention to commence a consultation in due course which will look at driving offences and penalties.

  • Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, if he will make it his policy to introduce a paternal allowance for people who do not qualify for statutory paternity pay; and if he will make a statement.

    Margot James

    The Government is taking a range of steps to improve provision for working parents . The eligibility rules for statutory paternity entitlements balance the needs of parents and the cost both to employers and to the taxpayer.

  • Justin Madders – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Justin Madders – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Justin Madders on 2016-10-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what proportion of girls were (a) White British, (b) White British eligible for free school meals, (c) White Non-British, (d) White Non-British eligible for free school meals, (e) Black, (f) Black eligible for free school meals, (g) Indian, (h) Indian eligible for free school meals, (i) Chinese ethnicity, (j) Chinese ethnicity eligible for free school meals, (k) other Asian, (l) other Asian eligible for free school meals, (m) any other ethnicity and (n) any other ethnicity eligible for free school meals received a place in a grammar school in each of the last five years.

    Nick Gibb

    Proportion of Year 7 pupils in Selective schools by selected ethnic groups, gender & FSM eligibility

    Girls

    2012

    2013

    2014

    2015

    2016

    White
    British

    3.80%

    3.80%

    4.10%

    4.00%

    3.90%

    White
    British – Eligible for FSM

    0.60%

    0.60%

    0.60%

    0.70%

    0.70%

    White
    non-British

    3.40%

    3.30%

    3.50%

    3.40%

    3.40%

    White
    non-British – Eligible for FSM

    0.20%

    0.60%

    0.60%

    0.60%

    1.30%

    Black

    2.70%

    3.20%

    3.60%

    3.30%

    3.90%

    Black –
    Eligible for FSM

    0.40%

    0.50%

    0.80%

    0.50%

    0.90%

    Indian

    12.20%

    12.90%

    13.90%

    15.80%

    15.80%

    Indian –
    Eligible for FSM

    2.00%

    1.80%

    1.90%

    2.50%

    2.40%

    Chinese

    20.00%

    18.10%

    19.70%

    18.20%

    18.00%

    Chinese –
    Eligible for FSM

    11.50%

    5.40%

    9.70%

    12.50%

    4.40%

    Other
    Asian

    5.10%

    5.60%

    5.40%

    5.80%

    5.60%

    Other
    Asian – Eligible for FSM

    1.40%

    0.90%

    1.30%

    1.30%

    1.30%
  • Douglas Chapman – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Douglas Chapman – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Douglas Chapman on 2015-11-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answers of 10 June 2015 and 20 October 2015 to Questions 794 and 11461, when the decision was made not to commission an investigation into the reasons for the delay between ministerial endorsement of CWS and its entry into service referred to in the conclusions of the report attached to the first of those Answers; and what the reasons for that decision were.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    The answers to Questions 794 and 11461 relate to document D/VCDS&2ndPUS/8/1/4 PR 11 which refers to a report into improving our processes for assessing equipment safety risk, not the commissioning of an investigation into the reasons for the delay between Ministerial endorsement of CWS and its entry into service.