Category: Speeches

  • Alison McGovern – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Alison McGovern – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Alison McGovern on 2015-10-28.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many and what proportion of people who started employment through the Work Based Sector Academy scheme were still in employment with the same organisation after 13 weeks since that scheme began.

    Priti Patel

    Official statistics record starts to sector-based work academy pre-employment training only. The Department does not collate information on outcomes, nor the number of benefit claimants finding work through a sector-based work academy placement. There are no current plans to do so.

    Official statistics are available on GOV.UK at:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/youth-contract-april-2012-to-may-2015

    “

  • Neil Coyle – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Neil Coyle – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Neil Coyle on 2015-12-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, how much he expects local authorities to raise through the proposed social care precept arrangements; and what steps he is taking to ensure those funds are ring-fenced for care services.

    Mr Marcus Jones

    I refer the hon. Members to information accompanying the provisional local government finance settlement 2016-17, which was announced by my rt. hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (Greg Clark) 17 December 2015, Official Report, Column 1722.

    This is available at:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/council-tax-in-2016-to-2017 and https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/486708/Core_spending_power_supporting_information.xlsx

    “

  • 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 2016-01-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many prison officers taking voluntary early departure since May 2010 have had (a) up to six, (b) six to 12, (c) 12 to 18, (d) 18 to 24 and (e) over 24 months’ continuous service.

    Andrew Selous

    Information on the number of prison officers taking voluntary early departure has been published in PQ 25478. The total and average amount of severance they received and their average length of service in each month since May 2010 is contained in the table below. The severance amounts in the table relate to the payments made to the officers who left during the particular month and may not reflect the actual date that the money was received. For this reason the information will not match with accounting records.

    All prison officers who left on voluntary early departure had at least 24 months continuous service.

    Voluntary exit was used in the last Parliament as a result of the closure of uneconomic prison places. These prison closures and benchmarking reforms have delivered savings of £300 million a year, with the average cost per prison place falling in real terms by 19% since 2009/10.

    Prison Officers Taking VEDS, May 2010 to September 2015

    Year

    Month

    VEDS Leavers

    Total Severance Received (£)

    Average Severance Received (£)

    Average Length of Service of VEDS leavers (Years)

    2010

    May

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    June

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    July

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    August

    70

    £2,132,290

    £29,209

    17.6

    September

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    October

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    November

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    December

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    2011

    January

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    February

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    March

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    April

    30

    £1,108,573

    £38,227

    17.1

    May

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    June

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    July

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    August

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    September

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    October

    20

    £617,345

    £38,584

    22.7

    November

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    December

    10

    £360,949

    £36,095

    21.8

    2012

    January

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    February

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    March

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    April

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    May

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    June

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    July

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    August

    30

    £1,257,194

    £41,906

    21.1

    September

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    October

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    November

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    December

    40

    £1,121,641

    £30,315

    14.6

    2013

    January

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    February

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    March

    180

    £6,204,024

    £33,718

    19.5

    April

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    May

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    June

    180

    £6,353,177

    £35,100

    20.3

    July

    170

    £7,010,396

    £40,290

    19.7

    August

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    September

    720

    £25,920,953

    £35,802

    18.9

    October

    130

    £4,964,209

    £37,608

    20.8

    November

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    December

    40

    £1,298,680

    £29,515

    17.2

    2014

    January

    100

    £3,152,467

    £32,838

    20.0

    February

    10

    £425,167

    £38,652

    24.5

    March

    30

    £1,308,937

    £39,665

    19.8

    April

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    May

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    June

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    July

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    August

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    September

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    October

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    November

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    December

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    2015

    January

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    February

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    March

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    April

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    May

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    June

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    July

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    August

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    September

    ~

    ~

    ~

    ~

    Notes:

    All figures are rounded to the nearest 10, with numbers ending in 5 rounded to the nearest multiple of 20 to prevent systematic bias. As with all HR databases, extracts are taken at a fixed point in time, to ensure consistency of reporting. However the database itself is dynamic, and where updates to the database are made late, subsequent to the taking of the extract, these updates will not be reflected in figures produced by the extract. For this reason, HR data are unlikely to be precisely accurate, and to present unrounded figures would be to overstate the accuracy of the figures. Rounding to 10 accurately depicts the level of certainty that is held with these figures.

    ~ denotes suppressed values of 5 or fewer or calculations based on a population of 5 or fewer. Low numbers are suppressed, in conjunction with the rounding policy to prevent disclosure in accordance with the Data Protection Act, 1998.

    Information in the table relates to cases of voluntary exits where payment information is available. In a small number of cases information on severance payments does not reflect the reason for leaving held on the central reporting system and may vary slightly from leavers figures published from that source in the NOMS Workforce Bulletin.

  • Jess Phillips – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Jess Phillips – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jess Phillips on 2016-02-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, for what reason her Department cancelled Round Six of the UK Aid Match Fund; for what reason that cancellation was not announced earlier; for what reason that cancellation was not announced earlier; and what assessment she has made of the effect of that cancellation on charities who were developing proposals.

    Mr Desmond Swayne

    The UKAid Match scheme has been a clear success in matching pound for pound public donations to charity appeals for projects changing lives in some of the poorest countries in the world. A sign of success is that some projects have substantially exceeded their fundraising targets. This has led to the programme’s full allocation of £120M being reached earlier than planned. DFID announced that there would not be a further funding round under the current programme as soon as it became clear that the budget had been fully allocated.

    The Government is committed to doubling UK Aid Match. This will provide further opportunities for charities who were developing proposals, including those intended for Round 6, to secure match funding for their appeals. Details of future funding opportunities will be set out in due course, including on the UK Government website.

  • Julie Cooper – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Julie Cooper – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julie Cooper on 2016-03-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, with reference to paragraph 1.242 of Budget 2016, how much of the additional £700 million for flood defence and resilience will be spent in Lancashire.

    Rory Stewart

    Of the additional £700 million announced in the Budget to be spent on flood defences and resilience, £150m has been allocated to new schemes in Yorkshire and Cumbria. The £40m per year increase in floods maintenance will be spent nationwide according to need. The remaining funding will be allocated following the outcome of the National Flood Resilience Review in the summer.

  • Kate Green – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Kate Green – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kate Green on 2016-04-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps he is taking to improve provision of IVF as a result of the meeting held by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State with Monitor and NHS England on 14 December 2015.

    Jane Ellison

    Following a meeting with Fertility Fairness in December 2015, officials from the Department and NHS England are considering options for addressing variation in the prices that clinical commissioning groups are currently paying for in vitro fertilisation treatment.

  • Lord De Mauley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lord De Mauley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord De Mauley on 2016-05-25.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of each of the issues raised in the response of the British Horse Society to their consultation on a draft cycling and walking investment strategy.

    Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

    We are now analysing the feedback received during the draft Cycling and Walking Investment Strategy eight week consultation period, which closed on Monday 23 May. We expect to publish the final Strategy this summer along with a Government response to the consultation.

  • Caroline Flint – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Caroline Flint – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Flint on 2016-07-21.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment he has made of the potential effect on his policies on pursuing country-by-country reporting through the EU of the UK voting to leave the EU.

    Jane Ellison

    The Government supports international efforts on public country-by-country reporting to enhance transparency. This will allow for a comprehensive, multilateral approach that applies consistently across UK multinationals and foreign multinationals.

    The UK will continue to engage in the EU negotiations on the Commission’s public country-by-country reporting proposal, as well as discussions at the G20 and other international fora.

  • Mark Hendrick – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Mark Hendrick – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mark Hendrick on 2016-10-07.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many enquiries were made to the Tax Credit Office by each hon. Member on behalf of constituents in (a) July, (b) August and (c) September 2016.

    Jane Ellison

    HM Revenue and Customs does not hold data showing the individual breakdown of enquiries by each hon. Member. The number of enquiries made to the Tax Credit Office by hon. Members on behalf of constituents between July and September 2016 were as follows:

    Telephone Enquiries

    Written Enquiries

    July

    642

    527

    August

    1169

    414

    September

    3172

    1838

    Total

    4983

    2779
  • Lord Rooker – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Lord Rooker – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Rooker on 2015-10-28.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Gardiner of Kimble on 22 July (HL1237), whether any proposed change to the Bread and Flour Regulations 1998 will be forwarded to the relevant scientific committee for consideration.

    Lord Gardiner of Kimble

    In June this year the Government held an informal consultation in order to seek views on possible additions to the exemptions currently allowed under the Bread and Flour Regulations 1998 from the requirement to fortify flour with calcium, iron, niacin, and thiamine. The exemptions that were envisaged would allow more efficient and streamlined manufacturing operations for foods produced for export as well as for the home market, without compromising the public health benefits which accrue from fortification. A range of interested parties were consulted including millers, flour users, retailers, fortificant manufacturers and health professionals.

    The options proposed in the consultation would allow millers to produce unfortified flour in England when used as a secondary ingredient which undergoes further processing, or is used in relatively small quantities in products. This approach was welcomed by most consultees and the Government is now considering how to take this forward.

    The Department of Health and Public Health England has considered the proposals and concluded that it is unlikely that an exemption from fortification for flour used in such products will have a nutritionally significant impact on the intakes of calcium, iron, thiamine or niacin.

    The changes proposed would apply to England only since food legislation is a devolved matter. The devolved administrations are aware of these proposals but have not yet made any decisions on whether to introduce similar changes.

    Respondents to the consultation also asked for some additional flexibility around the point at which the fortificants are added to flour. At the moment flour must be fortified at the mill and the four fortificants are added as a premix at the end of the milling process. Many businesses which manufacture foods both for the home market and for export requested the flexibility to be able to add the fortificants at the bakery stage. They highlighted that the requirement for separate storage and handling for, both fortified and unfortified flour (which is used for exported products) was creating significant manufacturing complexities. That resulted in a more restricted product range and is having an adverse effect on their export potential and their ability to diversify into new global markets. The Government is currently considering this.