UKPOL.CO.UK

Category: Speeches

  • Jim McMahon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Jim McMahon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim McMahon on 2016-01-19.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, if he will commission an assessment of the potential economic impact on Oldham of the reduction in Oldham’s public estate.

    Matthew Hancock

    The Government Property Unit is working closely with Oldham Council and others across Greater Manchester on future plans across the public sector estate. Oldham Council is part of the Greater Manchester Combined Authority Partnership on the One Public Estate Programme. The programme, delivered by Cabinet Office and the Local Government Association, aims to maximise local economic growth from better use of public assets. 108 councils have recently joined a third phase of the programme. Together, they expect to generate £172 million capital receipts, reduce running costs by £65 million, and create 30,000 new homes and 43,000 new jobs over the next 5 years.

  • Andrea Jenkyns – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Andrea Jenkyns – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrea Jenkyns on 2016-02-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what progress has been made on the implementation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action with Iran.

    Mr Philip Hammond

    The Government is committed to the success of the nuclear deal and we welcome the steps taken by Iran to comply – including decommissioning centrifuges and removing the core from Arak and exporting 90+% of its stock of enriched uranium – leading to Implementation Day on 16 January. We fully support expanding our trade relationship with Iran and are encouraging businesses to take advantage of the new opportunities that are available. Foreign Minister Zarif’s recent visit to London marked a significant step in our relationship with Iran.

  • Lord Scriven – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Lord Scriven – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Scriven on 2016-03-02.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government when the report on the review of the retention of custody images will be made public.

    Lord Bates

    The Review of the use and Retention of Custody Images has concluded and will be published in due course.

  • 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 2016-04-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps the Government is taking to investigate the findings of the report by HM Senior Coroner, Mary Hassell on the death of Mr Sivaraj Tharmalingham, that Serco fabricated the number of checks that its staff made on Mr Tharmalingham at Thames Magistrates’ Court.

    Andrew Selous

    Following the inquest into the tragic death of Mr Tharmalingham, a prevention of future deaths report has been sent to Serco by HM Senior Coroner for Inner North London under Regulation 28 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013. The National Offender Management Service (NOMS) has received a copy of the report. Serco are currently considering the report and will respond in accordance with the Regulations. NOMS manages all contracts with third party providers robustly and will work closely with Serco to ensure that the matters of concern identified by the Coroner are examined and appropriately addressed.

  • Emily Thornberry – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Emily Thornberry – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Emily Thornberry on 2016-05-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what the total size was of the Government’s fleet of M3 Amphibious Rig bridging vehicles in each of the last six years.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    38 M3 Amphibious Rigs have been in service with the British Army in each of the last six years. No additional rigs have been loaned from the German Army during that time. The planned out of service date for the M3 amphibious rig is 2027; early work is under way to provide a wide wet gap crossing capability in future. No decisions have yet been made about future basing sites for the M3 Amphibious Rig.

    The following table shows the number of recorded equipment failure reports (EFR) in each of the last six years.

    Calendar Year in which EFR recorded

    No of EFRs recorded in calendar year

    2010

    16

    2011

    0

    2012

    5

    2013

    1

    2014

    4

    2015

    0

  • Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-06-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what assessment he has made of the effect of the Government’s bilateral investment treaties on its policies on human rights, development and the environment in each of the countries with which it has signed a treaty.

    Anna Soubry

    The UK is signatory to over 90 bilateral investment treaties (BITs). The objective of BITs is to provide investors with fair and equitable treatment, protection against discriminatory action and a commitment not to expropriate investments without compensation. The contents of BITs do not provide specific obligations to either investors or states regarding human rights, development or the environment, however fair, non-discriminatory and proportionate action taken by a host state to protect human rights, development and the environment would not breach an investment protection. The Government is not aware of any Investor-State Dispute Settlement claims made by UK investors under existing BITs that have led directly to or contributed towards a negative impact on these areas.

  • Kate Osamor – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Kate Osamor – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kate Osamor on 2016-09-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many women detained in Yarl’s Wood Immigration Removal Centre have children who are British citizens.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The Department does not hold the data in the form requested.

  • Carolyn Harris – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Carolyn Harris – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Carolyn Harris on 2015-11-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, how many prosecutions there have been for owning a dog banned under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 in each of the last two years.

    George Eustice

    The number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates’ courts for possession, without exemption, of a prohibited dog, in England and Wales from 2013 to 2014 (latest available), can be viewed in the table below.

    Defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts for possession, without exemption, of a prohibited dog (1), England and Wales, 2013 to 2014 (2)(3)

    2013

    2014

    232

    216

    (1) An offence under Section 1(3) of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991
    (2) The figures given in the table relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences it is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe.
    (3) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.

    Source: Justice Statistics Analytical Services – Ministry of Justice.

    Ref: PQC 599-15 to PQ 16503

  • Angela Crawley – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Angela Crawley – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Angela Crawley on 2015-12-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether injured army veterans are exempt from personal independence payment assessments.

    Justin Tomlinson

    Service personnel and veterans who are entitled to a Guaranteed Income Payment of 50% or higher through the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme (AFCS) are eligible to apply for Armed Forces Independence Payment (AFIP) instead of having to claim Personal Independence Payment (PIP). Entitlement to AFIP does not involve an assessment other than by reference to the AFCS award.

    All individuals claiming PIP are subject to an assessment of their daily living and mobility needs. In the majority of claims an assessment will involve a face-to-face consultation with an independent health professional. Assessments may also be carried out on paper evidence alone. We ask claimants to provide any evidence that they have to hand when they submit their PIP2 questionnaire. Such evidence could include evidence used or received in relation to a claim for AFCS or a War Pension. We also ask claimants to tell us who should be contacted in case further evidence is required.

  • Chris Law – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Chris Law – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chris Law on 2016-01-19.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether preliminary impact assessments were carried out on the effect of the current HM Revenue and Customs Location Strategy on local tax compliance, across all heads of duty, the Scottish economy, equal opportunities in Scotland, the environment, and the individual staff whose offices are to be closed and what those assessments have indicated.

    Mr David Gauke

    HM Revenue and Customs’ (HMRC) Location Programme is the result of an extended period of consultation and deliberation. The Department has taken account of a number of criteria in reaching its decisions, including the quality of local transport links, the local labour market and future workforce supply, the cost of buildings and asset value, and the need to retain the staff and skills it needs to continue its transformation. These changes will reduce HMRC’s estates costs by around £100 million a year by 2025.

    HMRC’s modelling estimates that the majority of staff in Scotland live within Reasonable Daily Travel of Glasgow or Edinburgh. Reasonable Daily Travel is calculated in line with established HR policies and procedures. Every worker at HMRC will have a one-to-one meeting with their manager to discuss their individual circumstances.

    HMRC conducted high level People Impact and Equality Assessments to inform its planning. The Department plans to update these once discussions have been held with its staff.

    Activities of trade union representatives are governed by long-standing agreements with departments.