Category: Speeches

  • Steven Paterson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Steven Paterson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steven Paterson on 2016-06-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what forecast he has made of by how long the Mk4A upgrade programme will extend the operational life of the current warhead.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    The UK currently fields the Trident Mk4 warhead as part of the Trident Strategic Weapons System. In order to ensure continuity of the Mk4-based capability, the Mk4A Arming, Fuzing and Firing system is a non-nuclear component being introduced into the UK Trident warhead to replace a similar component. The Mk4A programme will not increase the destructive power of the warhead.

    Approval to procure the new Arming, Firing and Fuzing mechanisms, to manage obsolescence in Mk4 and to adopt a Mk4A component was given in January 2006. I am withholding further details of the date of the Mk4A component’s entry into service, the cost of the Mk4A programme and the extension in operational life expected for the purposes of safeguarding national security.

  • Anna Turley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Anna Turley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Anna Turley on 2016-09-06.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment he has made of the effect of the living wage on the earnings threshold for carers allowance; and if he will bring forward proposals to raise the existing threshold.

    Penny Mordaunt

    The primary purpose of Carer’s Allowance is to provide a measure of financial support and recognition for people who give up the opportunity of full-time employment in order to provide regular and substantial care for a severely disabled person. It is not, and was never intended to be, a carer’s wage or a payment for the services of caring, nor is it intended to replace lost or forgone earnings in their entirety.

    The earnings limit for Carer’s Allowance is a net figure which is the figure left once income tax, National Insurance contributions and half of any contributions to an occupational or personal pension are deducted from earnings. There are also a number of other deductions which can be made that mean that people can earn significantly more than £110 per week and still be eligible for Carer’s Allowance.

    Whilst the Government does not link the earnings limit to any other particular factor (including the National Living Wage), we do keep it under regular review and increase it when it is warranted and affordable, and this will continue to be our approach. Most recently in April 2015 the earnings limit was increased by 8% to £110, far outstripping the general increase in earnings.

  • Greg Mulholland – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    Greg Mulholland – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Greg Mulholland on 2016-10-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, what discussions his Department has had with the senior management team at the Royal Bank of Scotland on that Bank’s global restructuring group and that group’s treatment of small businesses during the financial crisis.

    Margot James

    Since the beginning of this Parliament, no discussions have taken place between the Department and the senior management team at the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) about the bank’s Global Restructuring Group. This matter is currently being investigated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).

  • Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2015-11-09.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what response they have made to the representations from the GMC and other health regulators that the Recognition of Professional Qualifications Directive does not provide sufficient safeguards to ensure that doctors who provide temporary and occasional services in the UK have the right knowledge, skills and behaviours to practise safely.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The Department supports the principle of free movement for healthcare professionals that the Directive helps provide for and the benefits this can bring. Temporary and occasional provision of services in particular provides important benefits in terms of movement of professionals around the European Union and is not a new concept in the Directive.

    The Department has worked with the General Medical Council and other health regulators extensively over a number of years, including during the negotiations with other Member States, as part of the revision of the Directive. The United Kingdom secured positive changes to the requirements placed on individuals seeking to provide work on a temporary and occasional basis. The changes include the requirement for professionals to provide the regulatory body with a declaration of their knowledge of language and an attestation confirming the absence of temporary or final suspensions and criminal convictions; these supplement the existing requirements, such as providing proof of legal establishment in their home Member State, proof of nationality and evidence of professional qualifications.

    In addition, individual employers ensure that the people they employ or contract with have the required knowledge and skills for the posts for which they are applying.

  • Lord Storey – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Lord Storey – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Storey on 2015-12-03.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government who line manages Regional School Commissioners.

    Lord Nash

    The eight Regional Schools Commissioners (RSCs) take decisions in the name of the Secretary of State in relation to schools and academies (including free schools, university technical colleges and studio schools). The RSCs were appointed through open competition, with successful candidates being appointed for their outstanding leadership skills and track record. The process was overseen by the Civil Service Commissioner. RSCs are line managed by the national Schools Commissioner.

    The responsibilities of RSCs include:

    a) monitoring the performance of the academies, free schools, UTCs and studio schools in their area;

    b) taking action when an academy, free school, UTC or studio school is underperforming;

    c) approving the conversion of maintained schools to academies and making the decision on the sponsor for new academies in areas where the local authority has identified a need for additional school places;

    d) making recommendations to ministers about free school applications and advising on whether approved free school projects are ready to open;

    e) encouraging organisations to become academy sponsors or to establish free schools, approving applications to become sponsors and helping to build the capacity and capability of existing sponsors within their area;

    f) approving changes to open academies, for example: changes to age ranges, mergers between academies, and changes to MAT arrangements;

    g) addressing underperformance in local authority maintained schools through sponsored academy arrangements.

  • The Marquess of Lothian – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The Marquess of Lothian – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by The Marquess of Lothian on 2016-01-13.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what contact, if any, they have had with the Assad regime in Syria over the last two months.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    There has been no contact with the Asad regime over the last two months. Since the closure of the Syrian Embassy in London in August 2012, the British Government has had only limited contact with the Asad regime in relation to consular matters. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth East (Mr Ellwood), wrote to the Syrian Foreign Minister in August 2015 about a consular case.

  • Emily Thornberry – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Emily Thornberry – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Emily Thornberry on 2016-02-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 27 January 2016 to Question 23290, for what reasons he will not make it his policy that the House be given the opportunity to debate any decision to deploy UK Reaper aircraft outside of Syria and Iraq.

    Michael Fallon

    I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend, the then Minister for the Armed Forces (Mark Francois), on 23 June 2014 (Official Report, column 99W), to the hon. Member for West Bromwich East (Tom Watson).

  • Stephen Timms – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Stephen Timms – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Timms on 2016-02-29.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many graduates have begun the Think Ahead programme in each year since its formation; and how many have been enrolled to start in 2016.

    Alistair Burt

    Conditional offers have been made for the first cohort of 80-100 participants, who will begin the Think Ahead programme in July 2016.

  • Christopher Pincher – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Christopher Pincher – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Christopher Pincher on 2016-03-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if she will estimate the costs to local authorities of (a) mixing a tonne of air pollution control residues into concrete blocks and (b) disposing of a tonne of air pollution control residues to secure hazardous waste landfill.

    Rory Stewart

    The derogation to allow the landfilling of air pollution control residues that are three times above normal waste acceptance criteria was originally granted because there was a lack of alternative treatment capacity at the time to either treat certain wastes to levels meeting normal waste acceptance limits, to treat the wastes via alternative treatment technologies or to recycle or recover the residues. The availability of sufficient alternative treatment capacity and the costs of that treatment are therefore the two central criteria that the government will use to decide whether or not to remove the derogation.

    The Government is making an assessment of the quantity of air pollution control residues produced at energy from waste facilities to inform its decision on whether or not to remove the derogation to allow the landfilling of air pollution control residues that are three times above normal waste acceptance criteria. These figures will be available following the announcement of that decision.

    The Government is making an assessment of the costs of the different forms of treatment for air pollution control residues, including their mixing into concrete blocks and their disposal to hazardous waste landfill, to inform its decision on whether or not to remove the derogation to allow the landfilling of air pollution control residues that are three times above normal waste acceptance criteria. These figures will be available following the announcement of that decision.

  • Jonathan Ashworth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Jonathan Ashworth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jonathan Ashworth on 2016-05-04.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what his policy is on making it mandatory for British Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies to provide a central, public register of beneficial ownership.

    Matthew Hancock

    Our priority for the Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies has been for them to establish a central register of beneficial ownership information (or a similarly effective system) where they do not already have one, and for UK law enforcement and tax authorities to have full and automatic access to that information. As has repeatedly been set out the registers will not be public, these measures will place our Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories well ahead of many other similar jurisdictions and represent a significant step forward in our ability to counter criminal activity.