Category: Speeches

  • Liam Byrne – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Liam Byrne – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Liam Byrne on 2014-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, when the Higher Education Funding Council for England will run its annual monitoring exercise to collect information about the ongoing financial sustainability, quality of provision, and changes to management and governance arrangements at alternative learning providers; and when the Higher Education Funding Council for England will publish this information.

    Mr David Willetts

    The Department will publish guidance on the annual monitoring process and associated timetable in July 2014.

  • Baroness Healy of Primrose Hill – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Baroness Healy of Primrose Hill – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Healy of Primrose Hill on 2014-06-12.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what proportion of women remanded in custody are subsequently convicted and receive an immediate custodial sentence in (1) each magistrates’ court, and (2) each Crown Court, in England and Wales.

    Lord Faulks

    The decision to sentence a person to a custodial sentence, or to remand a person into custody prior to trial or sentencing, is a matter for the independent judiciary and courts will take into account all the circumstances of the offence and the offender in determining this. The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 introduced a new “no real prospect” test which means that people should be released on bail if it is unlikely that they would receive a custodial sentence on conviction. Sentencing guidelines also make clear that if an offender is the sole or primary carer for dependent relatives then this should be considered a mitigating factor for avoiding a custodial sentence.

    We are committed to making sure sentencers have robust community options at their disposal. Companies bidding for contracts under our Transforming Rehabilitation reforms will be expected to demonstrate in their bids an effective approach to the identification and recognition of women’s needs, as well as protected characteristics, to make sure that individual needs are properly addressed, and they will be held to account to deliver these services in their contracts. We have recently introduced Section 10 of the Offender Rehabilitation Act which requires contracts and service level agreements with all future providers for the supervision and rehabilitation of offenders to identify which services are designed to meet the particular needs of female offenders.

    We are also working through the Female Offenders Advisory Board to improve options for Enhanced Community Provision and will be raising awareness of this to criminal justice system practitioners.

    Table 1 shows the proportion of female defendants remanded in custody at magistrates’ courts and subsequently given immediate custody, broken down by local justice area in England and Wales in 2013.

    Table 2 shows the proportion of female defendants remanded in custody at the Crown Court and subsequently given immediate custody, broken down by Crown Court centre in England and Wales in 2013.

  • Tom Watson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Tom Watson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tom Watson on 2014-04-08.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what steps have been taken to monitor and regulate contacts between Mr Lynton Crosby and representatives of the tobacco industry, in particular in relation to consultations on the introduction of standard packaging.

    Mr Francis Maude

    Mr Lynton Crosby is not employed by the Government.

  • Roger Godsiff – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Roger Godsiff – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2014-06-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, if he will increase the minimum rate of pay for apprentices from £2.68 per hour to £2.96 per hour.

    Jenny Willott

    This Government is fully committed to the National Minimum Wage set by the independent Low Pay Commission at a level that maximises the wages of the low paid without damaging their employment prospects by setting it too high.

    We ask the Low Pay Commission to consider the evidence and recommend the National Minimum Wage rates, to achieve this.

    This Government has accepted an above inflation increase in the NMW including an increase in the apprentice rate from £2.68 to £2.73. The increase will come into effect on 1 October 2014 and will provide low paid workers with the biggest cash increase in their pay packets since 2008.

    The Low Pay Commission has judged that a higher increase in the minimum wage would risk damaging employment prospects for the lowest paid.

  • Caroline Lucas – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture Media and Sport

    Caroline Lucas – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2014-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what assessment he has made of the effect of the delay in debating the draft Council Regulation on the European Citizens Programme on funding for civil society organisations in UK planning (a) events to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the outbreak of the First World War and (b) other events; what the timescale for implementation and release of monies under the Programme is; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    No formal assessment has been undertaken. Following completion of the Parliamentary scrutiny process the UK voted in support of the programme, which is now ready for implementation. The timing of the release of monies under the programme is a matter for the EU Commission, and it is expected that details will be made available in due course on the Commission web-site, which is: http://ec.europa.eu/citizenship/about-the-europe-for-citizens-programme/future-programme-2014-2020/index_en.htm

    “

  • Mike Crockart – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture Media and Sport

    Mike Crockart – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mike Crockart on 2014-06-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, when his Department plans to publish draft legislation to amend the legal threshold from substantial damage and distress to nuisance, annoyance, inconvenience or anxiety for the International Commissioner’s Office to take enforcement action from substantial damage or distress under the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations 2003; and when he expects that legislation to be in force.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    We plan to publish a consultation document shortly, which will seek views on proposals to lower the legal threshold for enforcement of the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations (PECR) 2003. Following consultation we will look to implement any reforms as soon as parliamentary time allows.

  • Madeleine Moon – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Madeleine Moon – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Madeleine Moon on 2014-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the his reply 192877, how many service complaints taken to an employment tribunal were settled (a) by out of court or other payments and (b) at Army Board CO Level 2 complaints appeal; what the total of those payments was; and if he will make a statement.

    Anna Soubry

    The following table sets out details of Employment Tribunal (ET) cases brought by Service personnel since 2008 which were subject to an out of court settlement. I am unable to answer the second part of this question as the internal appeal process does not include any separate complaints appeal stage which is distinct from the Superior Officer or Defence Council levels.

    Calendar year

    No of ET cases settled out of court (of those lodged in each year)

    Total settlement monies (paid against ET claims lodged in each year)

    2008

    27

    £393,584

    2009

    4

    £131,000

    2010

    4

    £28,075

    2011

    6

    £37,243

    2012

    1

    Withheld

    2013

    0

    £0

    Notes:

    1. Data refer to the date of submission of the ET claim. ET settlements and monies paid may have occurred in different years, but are presented in this format to show the outcomes of the claims which were lodged in each calendar year.

    2. Settlement payments made are covered by Compromise Agreements which contain a confidentiality clause. For this reason the figure for the single case settled out of court in 2012 is withheld.

    3. The figure for 2008 includes the Royal Irish class action Industrial Tribunal cases in which 21 of the 22 complainants received a settlement.

    4. Not all cases lodged in 2013 have reached their conclusion.

  • Jeremy Corbyn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Jeremy Corbyn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jeremy Corbyn on 2014-06-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what facility rekit projects have taken place at the Atomic Weapons Establishment under the scope of the Nuclear Weapons Capability Sustainment Project; and what the cost of each such project was.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    The term rekit is used by the Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) to mean the replacement or modernisation of process plant and /or equipment within an existing facility, including upgrading of building services. The following is a list of major facility rekits that have or are taking place at AWE. There are also a number of more minor rekits underway which are not listed.

    Depleted Uranium Upgrade
    Beryllium Facility
    Plutonium Capability Programme (A90)
    Enriched Uranium Facility (A45)
    Explosive storage and processing Facility
    Salts Sustainment
    Facility for assembly/disassembly of Warhead

    The information relating to individual rekit costs for each facility for the years 2003 to date is not centrally held and could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

  • Julie Elliott – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Julie Elliott – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julie Elliott on 2014-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, pursuant to the Answers of 19 December 2013, Official Report, column 745W and 13 January 2014, Official Report, column 342W, on wind power: planning permission, what recent assessment he has made of whether the average time taken from submission of a planning application to full generation for offshore wind is reasonable; and whether he has recently discussed this matter with the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government.

    Michael Fallon

    Since the introduction of the new Planning Act 2008 regime in March 2010 in England and Wales (planning is devolved in Scotland), there is now a statutory maximum timescale of 12 months for the examination, report writing and decision making phases of applications for the development consent of nationally significant infrastructure projects (including offshore wind farms over 100MW). My rt. hon. Friend the Secretary of State has made decisions on three offshore wind farms under that regime, all within the statutory deadlines.

    The time taken to construct the offshore wind farm following consent is a matter for the developer.

  • Kevan Jones – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Kevan Jones – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevan Jones on 2014-06-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to the National Audit Office report, Army 2020, HC 263, published on 11 June 2014, page 10, which Minister in his Department signed off on the decision not to provide supporting ICT infrastructure for Capita’s new recruitment software as part of his Department’s contractual arrangements with Capita in relation to the Recruiting Partnering Project.

    Anna Soubry

    I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 21 January 2014 (Official Report, column 111W).