UKPOL.CO.UK

Category: Speeches

  • Helen Goodman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Helen Goodman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Helen Goodman on 2016-02-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what meetings (a) she and (b) Ministers of her Department have had with (i) arms manufacturers, (ii) tobacco manufacturers and (iii) representatives of the Israeli embassy since the period covered in the Cabinet Office’s most recent ministerial gifts, hospitality, travel and meetings data release.

    George Eustice

    Departments publish details of Ministers meetings’ with external organisations routinely on Gov.uk. Details of meetings held during the period October – December 2015 will be published in due course.

  • Jess Phillips – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Jess Phillips – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jess Phillips on 2016-03-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, how much school deficit has remained with local authorities after schools have converted to academy status.

    Edward Timpson

    The Department does not hold this information on local authority budgets

    Deficits for schools which convert to become sponsored academies remain with the local authority. It is right that these deficits remain with their local authority as these schools were the responsibility of the authority when they were found to be failing or underperforming and it is the authority’s responsibility for ensuring the school managed its expenditure satisfactorily.

  • Jack Dromey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Jack Dromey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jack Dromey on 2016-04-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will make it her policy that volunteers should not be used in the operational areas of (a) child sexual exploitation, (b) serious crime and (c) counter-terrorism under proposals in the Policing and Crime Bill.

    Mike Penning

    Our consultation on the reform of the roles and powers of civilians and volunteers demonstrated the demand from forces for flexibility in how they deploy volunteer staff, and therefore we should not make assumptions about the operational areas where volunteers can make a contribution. For example, they can play a hugely valuable role in supporting vulnerable victims. As Victim Support told the consultation: “enabling chief officers to designate powers to volunteers would allow them to assist police officers in supporting victims of crime and improving service delivery.”

    Volunteers will be subject to the same tests as police staff before they are designated with powers, namely that the chief officer must be satisfied that they are suitable, capable and adequately trained (that is, the tests set out in section 38(4) of the Police Reform Act 2002), so police forces will not be able to deploy volunteers on tasks they are not capable of performing.

    If it is acceptable to confer all the powers of a constable on one type of volunteer, namely special constables, it is inconsistent to object in principle to conferring a narrower set of powers on other suitably trained volunteers. Under this Bill, however, Parliament will retain control of the list of core powers that will only be available to police officers. For example, all powers under counter-terrorism legislation are listed in Schedule 7 to the Bill as core powers of police officers.

    These reforms will place the individual decision-making as to which personnel perform which roles firmly in the hands of chief officers, who have the professional expertise and local knowledge to know which powers are needed in their area. It is important that we do not restrict the operational powers of the police, who retain the right to deploy staff as they see fit.

  • Maria Eagle – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Maria Eagle – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Maria Eagle on 2016-05-23.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what estimate his Department has made of the number of (a) households and (b) businesses unable to access broadband speeds of (i) 10 Mbit/s and (ii) two Mbit/s in the latest period for which figures are available.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    According to Ofcom’s Connected Nations 2015 report – based on the state of the market in May 2015 – 8% of premises were unable to access broadband speeds of 10Mbp/s and 2% of premises were unable to access broadband speeds of 2Mbp/s. These figures are likely to have reduced due to continued commercial and BDUK broadband deployment across the UK – superfast broadband access has increased from 45% in 2010 to 90%, and by the end of next year, 95% of homes and businesses will have access to superfast broadband. In addition, all premises with speeds below 2Mbp/s now have access to speeds greater than this through the Government’s Basic Broadband Scheme, and the Prime Minister has announced the Government’s intention to implement a new broadband Universal Service Obligation, with a minimum speed of 10Mbps, to help ensure no-one is left behind.

  • Dawn Butler – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Dawn Butler – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Dawn Butler on 2016-07-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what support the Government is providing to micro-insurance schemes in developing countries for the protection of livelihoods from the effects of climate change.

    Rory Stewart

    DFID’s work on climate resilience includes a number of weather-related microinsurance initiatives and a major research programme on scaling up microinsurance in the agricultural sector.

  • Andy McDonald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Andy McDonald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andy McDonald on 2016-10-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what the cost to his Department was of each re-tendering exercise held for franchises for (a) long distance and (b) regional passenger rail services in each year since 2005-06.

    Paul Maynard

    Prior to the re-launch of the Franchising Programme in spring 2013, the costs of different franchising projects were not individually recorded.

    The cost of each re-franchising project since the re-launch is as follows:

    Franchise

    Cost (£M)

    Notes

    Essex Thameside

    4.815

    1

    Thameslink, Southern & Great Northern

    7.288

    East Coast

    8.429

    2

    Northern

    8.668 (to date)

    3

    TransPennine Express

    7.577 (to date)

    3

    East Anglia

    7.413 (to date)

    3

    These figures include adviser costs (financial, technical and legal advisers), pay costs for the project team, “non-pay” costs (such as bidder day seminars, public consultations, etc), and VAT where applicable, for the duration of the procurements.

    The (admin) sums invested in competent staff and advisors are dwarfed by the (Resource) SPRS benefits to the Department – £200 for every pound spent.

    Notes

    NOTE 1: The Essex Thameside figure represents the work done after the relaunch of the Franchising Programme. There was a significant amount of work completed prior to the pausing of the programme in autumn 2012 which is not included here.

    NOTE 2: The costs for the refranchising of the Intercity East Coast Franchise were not charged to the public purse, but were covered by the Performance Bond that National Express put forward following its default of the previous East Coast contract.

    NOTE 3: The figures for Northern, TransPennine Express (TPE) and East Anglia are the latest figures (as at the end of August 2016). East Anglia is still a ‘live’ project. Whilst Northern and TPE have concluded, there are still some residual costs that may affect the final figures.

  • Daniel Zeichner – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Daniel Zeichner – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Daniel Zeichner on 2015-11-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, how many local authorities permit taxi drivers to charge for carriage of a wheelchair; and how many local authorities specify in their licensing rules that such charges may not be levied.

    Andrew Jones

    The Department for Transport does not hold information regarding individual licensing authorities’ taxi tariffs or licensing rules.

  • Debbie Abrahams – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Debbie Abrahams – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Debbie Abrahams on 2016-01-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, if he will extend the deadline for submissions on his Department’s Consultation on aids and appliances and the daily living component of personal independence payment.

    Justin Tomlinson

    The Department’s consultation on aids and appliances and the daily living component of PIP began on 10 December 2015 and is scheduled to run until 29 January 2015, a period of 7 weeks and one day.

    The time period for the consultation was decided in line with the Government’s consultation principles guidance. This advises that consultations should typically run for between 2 and 12 weeks, but that “the timing and length of a consultation should be decided on a case-by-case basis”.

    As we are consulting on the specific and discrete issue of how aids and appliances are accounted for when determining eligibility to the daily living component, we feel 6 weeks is an appropriate length. The last PIP consultation, on the Moving Around activity, also lasted for 6 weeks. As the consultation is running over the Christmas period this was extended by 8 days.

    The Department therefore believes that the existing consultation deadline allows reasonable time in which to respond.

  • Paul Monaghan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Paul Monaghan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Paul Monaghan on 2016-01-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department is taking to provide alternatives to criminalization and incarceration of people with drug-use disorders and to encourage alternatives to imprisonment facilitating the eventual rehabilitation, re-skilling and reintegration of drug users.

    Andrew Selous

    We are currently trialling ‘Liaison and Diversion’ services. These services place health professionals at police stations and courts to assess suspects for a range of health problems, including drug misuse, and make referrals to treatment and support. Information shared with the criminal justice system can be used to inform decisions, supporting diversion into treatment as part of an alternative to charge or to custody where appropriate.

    We are also interested in problem-solving courts, such as drug courts, given evidence of success in other jurisdictions. Officials are now working with members of the judiciary to consider how the problem-solving approach might be developed for England and Wales.

  • Julian Knight – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Julian Knight – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julian Knight on 2016-02-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what reports he has received on the installation by China of missile launchers on Woody Island in the South China Sea; what representations he has made to China on that matter; and if he will discuss with his Japanese counterpart what steps the UK and Japan can take to oppose the militarisation of the South China Sea.

    Mr Hugo Swire

    We are very concerned about Chinese missile deployments on Woody Island in the Paracel Islands as reported in the media on 17 February. We oppose any actions which are likely to increase tensions in the South China Sea, including militarisation. We urge all parties to exercise restraint, to pursue the settlement of disputes peacefully in accordance with international law, and to uphold freedom of navigation and freedom of overflight.

    The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right Hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr Hammond) has held detailed discussions with his Japanese counterpart about the South China Sea, most recently, during his visit to Japan in January for the annual UK-Japan Foreign and Defence Ministerial talks. Following those meetings the UK and Japan released a joint statement setting out our shared concerns about the situation in the South China Sea, calling on all parties to refrain from activities that increase tension and to pursue urgently the settlement of the maritime disputes peacefully in accordance with international law.