Category: Speeches

  • Peter Kyle – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Peter Kyle – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Peter Kyle on 2016-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, whether it remains Government policy to introduce a two per cent social care precept on council tax and additional funding for the Better Care Fund in 2017-18.

    David Mowat

    Yes. Local authorities who are responsible for social care will still have the flexibility in 2017-18 to raise council tax in their area by up to 2% above the existing threshold. This new funding for adult social care will be pooled with additional funding from the Better Care Fund.

  • Baroness Jones of Whitchurch – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Baroness Jones of Whitchurch – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Jones of Whitchurch on 2015-11-11.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have a list of invasive non-native species arriving on UK shores that they wish to eradicate, and if so, whether Japanese knotweed is on that list.

    Lord Gardiner of Kimble

    Biodiversity is a devolved matter. In England, there are currently five species subject to national eradication programmes. These are Ruddy duck, Monk parakeet, Topmouth gudgeon, American bullfrog and Water primrose.

    Nevertheless, in England, the work of Local Action Groups, established with Government support, has reduced or eradicated Japanese knotweed in several places. For example, in Bristol, 95% of the Japanese knotweed surveyed by the Avon Invasive Weed Forum is now under management.

    The Government also continues to explore biocontrol options through the controlled release of a psyllid insect.

  • Lord Hunt of Chesterton – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Lord Hunt of Chesterton – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Chesterton on 2015-12-07.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they plan to introduce planning and building regulations to ensure that within public and private buildings the concentrations of atmospheric pollutants do not exceed safety standards.

    Baroness Williams of Trafford

    There are already strong protections in place to safeguard people from unacceptable risks from air pollution. National planning policy in England is clear that new development should be appropriate for its location, taking proper account of the effects of pollution on people’s health, and building regulations require adequate means of ventilation for people in buildings. This requirement applies when new buildings are constructed or work is carried out on existing buildings.

  • Dan Jarvis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    Dan Jarvis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Dan Jarvis on 2016-01-18.

    To ask the Attorney General, what steps he plans to take in response to the findings of the report, entitled Communicating with victims, published by HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate in January 2016.

    Robert Buckland

    On the day of the report the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) agreed to act on each of the three recommendations made.

    • The CPS is already conducting a review of overall support to victims and witnesses with the police and agreeing our respective roles in communication will form part of this review;
    • The CPS will ensure that the quality assurance checks of communications from the Victim Liaison Units (VLUs) are improved through guidance and training; and
    • The CPS will seek to improve both the flagging of substantial alterations in appropriate cases and the systems for notification of the VLUs.

    In addition, the CPS has already taken action to address a range of issues identified in the report. For example, they have redeployed more paralegal staff and managers to Crown Courts to ensure that there are sufficient staff to support victims and witnesses. When rollout is complete around 350 paralegal staff and managers will be based at Crown Courts across England and Wales. The CPS is also introducing new guidance on Speaking to Witnesses at Court which will improve the service provided and is currently operating in a number of pathfinder sites. It will be rolled out across the country by summer 2016.

    The CPS is also reviewing the resourcing of VLUs to ensure that sufficient staff are in place to manage the workload of those units.

  • Andy Slaughter – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Andy Slaughter – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andy Slaughter on 2016-02-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the potential costs and benefits of reducing the mandatory retirement age of magistrates from 70 to 60; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr Shailesh Vara

    The Government position remains that a retirement age of 70 for all judicial office holders is appropriate.

    A mandatory retirement age of 70 means both judges and magistrates can continue to make a contribution to society whilst allowing for regular recruitment of the judiciary.

    It also enables the judiciary to have the correct number of judges and magistrates, while preventing them from retiring on an ad hoc basis, and ensuring judicial independence is protected.

  • Richard Arkless – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Richard Arkless – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Richard Arkless on 2016-03-01.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, who will be eligible to vote in the forthcoming EU referendum; and for what reason he plans to exclude European citizens resident in the UK from voting in that referendum.

    Mr David Lidington

    The franchise for the EU referendum was debated and agreed by both Houses during the passing of the EU Referendum Act 2015. This has now received Royal Assent and is set in law.

    The franchise for the EU referendum includes those enfranchised for UK parliamentary elections, with the addition of Members of the House of Lords and Commonwealth and Irish citizens in Gibraltar.

    Amendments during the passage of the EU Referendum Bill, seeking to include EU citizens in the franchise for the EU referendum, were considered and overwhelmingly rejected by both Houses.

  • Paul Blomfield – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Paul Blomfield – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Paul Blomfield on 2016-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what consultation took place with patient representative groups and charities representing older people on the changes to attendance allowance proposed in the provisional local government finance settlement 2016-17.

    Mr Marcus Jones

    In December, the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government announced that the Government will be consulting on giving councils in England “more responsibility to support older people with care needs – including people who, under the current system, would be supported through Attendance Allowance”. We want to explore if there is a better way to provide support for older people with care needs through local integration and we intend to launch a consultation on this in due course. Any change would not affect those already receiving Attendance Allowance. The consultation will be an open process that will give everybody a voice in determining the nature of any reform and will inform the decision about whether and how to proceed with any reform.

  • Ben Howlett – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Ben Howlett – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ben Howlett on 2016-05-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what consultations the Joint Work and Health Unit has undertaken with external groups on its work since its creation.

    Priti Patel

    The Work and Health Unit has been established to lead the drive for improving work and health outcomes for people with disabilities and long term health conditions, as well as improving prevention and support for people absent from work through ill health and those at risk of leaving the workforce.

    Since Q1 2014 the number of disabled people in employment has increased by around 365,000 people, with a total of 3.3million disabled people now in work as of Q1 2016.

    The Unit will build on this progress by improving integration across healthcare and employment services as well as supporting employers to recruit and retain more disabled people and people with long term health conditions. We have set up work-streams focused on delivery workforce, fitness for work, culture change and stakeholder engagement, employers and building the evidence base through developing a ‘test and learn’ approach.

    We have been seeking and listening to the views of people that use current health, care and employment services, engaging with charities and other stakeholders, to understand what works and what needs to change and will continue to engage at all levels over the coming months.

    The Work and Health Unit is leading the process for preparing a green paper which will be published later this year that will begin the consultation about how to improve support for people with disabilities and long term health conditions.

  • Tim Farron – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Tim Farron – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tim Farron on 2016-06-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what plans she has for future funding from her Departmental budget for women’s rights organisations in developing countries.

    Sir Desmond Swayne

    DFID supports a wide range of Women’s Rights Organisations (WROs) through specific central programmes, such as the £8 million pound commitment to Amplify Change, reaching WROs to tackle Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG), child, early and forced marriage and Female Genital Mutilation; through multilateral programmes, such as up to £6 million pound commitment to the UN Trust Fund to end VAWG which reaches WROs in 76 countries and territories; and through country programmes, such as the £12.5 million pound Strengthening Transparency, Accountability and Responsiveness (STAR) programme in Ghana.

    Future plans are to continue these mechanisms, ensuring their effectiveness and expanding or extending where appropriate, and in implementing DFID’s Civil Society Partnership Review to develop and share learning on reaching WROs and small-scale organisations, so that collectively we achieve a systemic approach to supporting a resilient and effective women’s rights movement.

  • Philip Davies – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Philip Davies – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Philip Davies on 2016-09-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, (a) how many and (b) what proportion of (i) men and (ii) women were refused bail and remanded in custody before conviction when the allegation related to (A) an offence against the person, (B) a public order offence, (C) a harassment offence and (D) a sexual offence in the latest period for which figures are available.

    Mr Sam Gyimah

    The Bail Act 1976 creates a presumption in favour of bail. The main reasons for refusing bail are that the defendant is accused of an imprisonable offence and the court is satisfied that there are substantial grounds for believing that the defendant, if released on bail, would abscond, commit further offences while on bail or interfere with witnesses or otherwise obstruct the course of justice. In deciding whether or not to grant bail, the court will consider a number of factors, including: the nature and seriousness of the crime; the character of the defendant; his past criminal record; associations and ties with the community; the defendant’s record in regard to his previous commitments to bail conditions; and the strength of evidence against the defendant.

    The number and proportion of offenders remanded in custody before conviction for violence against the person, public order offences, harassment or sexual offences, by gender, at magistrates’ courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales in 2015, can be viewed in the attached table.

    Court proceedings data for 2016 will be published in due course.