UKPOL.CO.UK

Category: Speeches

  • Steve McCabe – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Steve McCabe – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steve McCabe on 2016-06-28.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what criteria his Department uses to decide when and how to negotiate the UK’s tax treaties with other countries.

    Mr David Gauke

    HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) have responsibility for negotiating the UK’s double taxation agreements, subject to oversight by HM Treasury. HMRC run a periodic consultation exercise to establish the negotiating priorities, which are then approved by ministers. As part of this exercise they consider representations made by UK businesses, non-governmental organisations and government departments, as well as the UK’s diplomatic missions throughout the world. The results of the last such review were published by HMRC on the gov.uk website in November 2015.

    Decisions on the negotiation or renegotiation of a tax treaty are taken on the basis of a range of factors including the results of HMRC’s periodic review of the tax treaty network, economic factors, the need to counter avoidance and evasion, and the role of treaties in promoting development. We also receive requests from countries to negotiate with us, and we will endeavour to accommodate them as time and negotiating resources permit. Given the number of treaties the UK already has, most of the programme will involve renegotiating existing agreements.

  • Tom Watson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Tom Watson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tom Watson on 2016-09-08.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, who the members of the committee that oversees special advisers’ pay are.

    Ben Gummer

    I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Sheffield, Heeley on 2 November 2015 to UIN: 13720.

  • Dawn Butler – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Dawn Butler – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Dawn Butler on 2016-10-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what provision her Department has put in place for SEND pupils who will not be able to pass selective school admission policies.

    Nick Gibb

    This Government is committed to ensuring all children, including those with Special Educational Needs and disabilities (SEND), have the opportunity to achieve their potential and make a successful transition to adult life.

    In the Children and Families Act 2014, we legislated to make fundamental changes to improve the SEND support system for the benefit of the 14.4% of children with SEND. These are the biggest reforms to the SEND system in a generation. To support local authorities and others to make these changes successfully, we have invested heavily in practical and financial support, including an extra £90 million of support for 2016/17.

    Following Sir Andrew Carter’s report on Initial Teacher Training (ITT), the Government published a new framework of core content in July 2016. This includes specific content on SEND, so that teachers have a clear understanding and early awareness of pupils with SEND. This will help to ensure that pupils with SEND have the opportunity to fully realise their potential.

  • Lilian Greenwood – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lilian Greenwood – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lilian Greenwood on 2015-10-28.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to the Answer of 16 June 2015 to Question 2215, and with reference to the indicative timetable contained in his Department’s Level Crossing Reform Action Plan, whether he will issue a public consultation on the reform of legislation relating to level crossings in 2015.

    Claire Perry

    The Department continues to develop its response to the Law Commission’s recommendations on the reform of level crossing legislation.

    Initial discussions with stakeholders have raised a number of concerns which the Department will need to consider further.

    This is a highly complex area and we must ensure that any amendments to the legislative framework do not adversely impact on the UK’s position of having the best level crossing safety record in Europe.

  • Maria Eagle – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Maria Eagle – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Maria Eagle on 2015-11-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to paragraph 7.6 of the National Security Strategy and Strategic Defence Review 2015, how he plans to meet the £11 billion of efficiency savings; and what assumptions have been made when calculating that figure.

    Michael Fallon

    The Ministry of Defence plans to deliver £9.2 billion of savings through a number of measures as set out in para 2.4 of the Spending Review and Autumn Statement 2015. All of these savings will be directly reinvested to fund the Strategic Defence and Security Review commitments.

    The balance of the £11 billion savings will be delivered by the security and intelligence agencies and from cross-Government counter-terrorism spending.

  • Alan Whitehead – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Alan Whitehead – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Alan Whitehead on 2015-12-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, how much overspend against original estimates within the levy control framework has arisen from variations in (a) performance of offshore wind, (b) levels between strike price and reference price and (c) variations in allocations feed in tariff payments for solar PV installations in each of the last three years.

    Andrea Leadsom

    We do not break down published information on components of Levy Control Framework (LCF) spend to the level of detail requested, due to potential disclosure of commercially confidential information.

    On 25 November 2015, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) published LCF projected spend of just under £9bn in 2020/21 (see Tables 1 and 2 below)1. Between the projections Government published in November 20142 and this forecast, we have undertaken analysis to make changes to many assumptions, including technology-specific factors (including offshore wind), fossil fuel prices and electricity demand3. Collectively, changes in these factors have all affected overall estimates of LCF spend. However, we do not provide published estimates of how much is attributable to each individual factor. DECC will publish a further update to its projections, including the underpinning assumptions, in 2016.

    Annex A

    Table 1: OBR November 2015 main projections were as follows:

    Policy (£m, nominal prices)

    2015/16

    2016/17

    2017/18

    2018/19

    2019/20

    2020/21

    RO

    3,850

    4,615

    5,375

    5,855

    6,035

    6,230

    FiTs

    1,325

    1,515

    1,700

    1,880

    2,055

    2,220

    CfDs

    15

    225

    545

    1,095

    2,225

    2,805

    Total

    5,190

    6,355

    7,620

    8,830

    10,315

    11,255

    Figures are rounded to the nearest five million pounds. Totals may not sum due to rounding.

    Table 2: OBR November 2015 main projections in 2011/12 prices:

    £m, 2011/12 prices

    2015/16

    2016/17

    2017/18

    2018/19

    2019/20

    2020/21

    RO

    3,360

    3,990

    4,555

    4,820

    4,820

    4,820

    FiTs

    1,155

    1,310

    1,440

    1,550

    1,640

    1,720

    CfDs

    15

    210

    500

    980

    1,950

    2,415

    Total

    4,530

    5,505

    6,495

    7,350

    8,415

    8,955

    Figures are rounded to the nearest five million pounds. Totals may not sum due to rounding.

    [1] Note that OBR publishes figures in nominal terms, as opposed to our figures which are in 2011/12 real prices. Both sets of figures are attached at Annex A

    2 Annual Energy Statement, page 73, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/371388/43586_Cm_8945_print_ready.pdf

    3 Data on fossil fuel prices and electricity demand assumptions have recently been published online at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/fossil-fuel-price-projections-2015 and https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/updated-energy-and-emissions-projections-2015 respectively.

  • Lord Morris of Aberavon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Lord Morris of Aberavon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Morris of Aberavon on 2016-01-14.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Bates on 30 November 2015 (HL3712), whether, in the interests of transparency, they will arrange for police forces to collate and publicise the occasions on which persons arrested but not charged have had their names disclosed.

    Lord Bates

    The Home Office currently has no plans to arrange for police forces to collate and publish data in relation to the occasions on which persons arrested but not charged have had their names disclosed.

    Police are guided in making such decisions by the College of Policing Authorised Professional Practice (APP) Guidance on ‘Relationships with the media’.

    There are clearly great risks in naming suspects and the College of Policing guidance makes clear that decisions should only be made on a case-by-case basis, and that the police should not release the names of those who are arrested or suspected of a crime unless they have clearly identified circumstances to justify disclosure.

  • Graham Brady – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Graham Brady – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Graham Brady on 2016-02-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what discussions his Department has had with the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills on the effect of bus franchising on the vehicle manufacturing sector.

    Andrew Jones

    My Department has not yet entered into discussions with the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills on the effect of bus franchising on the vehicle manufacturing sector. My officials have, however, discussed proposals with the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders.

  • Lilian Greenwood – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lilian Greenwood – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lilian Greenwood on 2016-03-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what estimate his Department has made of the cost to the public purse of preparing and publishing the Shaw Report on the future shape and financing of Network Rail, published in November 2015.

    Claire Perry

    The Department’s estimated incremental costs for preparing and publishing the Shaw Report scoping document is £8356.

  • Gareth Johnson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Gareth Johnson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gareth Johnson on 2016-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many harassment warning notices were issued by police forces in the last 12 months for which figures are available; and how many people who received such notices were subsequently prosecuted for harassment offences.

    Mike Penning

    The information requested is not collected centrally. The issuance of Police Information Notices (PINs) is an operational matter for police forces. Responsibility for the publication of information relating to PINs rests with Chief Constables.