Blog

  • Lord Tebbit – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Lord Tebbit – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Tebbit on 2016-01-13.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what progress has been made towards agreement within the EU on updating the fourth Anti-Money Laundering Directive.

    Lord O’Neill of Gatley

    The Fourth Anti-Money Laundering Directive (‘the Directive’) has been agreed and was formally adopted in June 2015. Member States now have until June 2017 to transpose its requirements into national law. The Government plans to publish a consultation on transposition of the Directive by early Spring which will run for a full 12 weeks. We will consult on areas where the Directive gives us options or discretion on how we transpose its provisions as well as areas where we can improve the UK’s anti-money laundering and counter-financing of terrorism regime.

    We will continue to consider any further changes to this regime in response to emerging threats.

  • Baroness Northover – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Baroness Northover – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Northover on 2016-01-13.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will nominate a candidate to serve on the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and if not, why not.

    Baroness Williams of Trafford

    The UK strongly supports the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and is committed to advancing women’s rights through the United Nations machinery.

    We have not nominated a candidate to the CEDAW Committee and do not intend to do so. Our decision not to nominate a UK expert for election to the Committee is based on a number of considerations, including the need to allow for a reasonable amount of time and substantial resources to mount a campaign.

    CEDAW Committee members serve in their personal capacity and do not represent the Member State that nominated them. We have full faith in the independence of the Committee and applaud the high quality of its work.

    UK nationals are well represented on other UN treaty monitoring bodies, such as the Human Rights Committee and the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

  • Baroness Massey of Darwen – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Baroness Massey of Darwen – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Massey of Darwen on 2016-01-13.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many children’s centres have closed in the last year, and how many will close in 2016.

    Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

    In 2015, 144 children’s centres closed. The Department does not routinely collect data on the number of anticipated closures but expects local authorities to fulfil their duties under the Childcare Act 2006 to ensure sufficient children’s centres to meet the needs of local families. Local authorities must consult fully before any significant changes are made to children’s centre services.

  • Baroness Massey of Darwen – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Baroness Massey of Darwen – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Massey of Darwen on 2016-01-13.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many pupils in Pupil Referral Units are reintegrated into mainstream education annually, and what support is available for that to happen.

    Lord Nash

    Every child, including those who have been excluded, should receive a good quality education to allow them to achieve their full potential. Information on the number of pupils in pupil referral units (PRUs) reintegrated into mainstream education annually is not readily available and it could only be determined at a disproportionate cost.

    PRUs and other alternative providers should work with commissioners to develop a clearly defined set of objectives for each pupil’s time in alternative provision and their reintegration into mainstream education. Progress against these objectives should be frequently monitored and assessed to ensure that pupils’ needs are being addressed and they return to mainstream school when they are ready. An appropriate package of support should be in place to assist in the reintegration process.

    The Department has published statutory guidance in 2013 on alternative provision with clearly defined objectives for commissioners of PRUs and alternative provision (AP) to support pupils back into school after an alternative education placement. A copy has been attached to this answer.

  • Baroness Massey of Darwen – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Baroness Massey of Darwen – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Massey of Darwen on 2016-01-13.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what funding exists to provide early years education for children who cannot attend school because of health needs.

    Lord Nash

    The Department funds local authorities for high needs provision through the Dedicated Schools Grant. Local authorities have reported that they are planning to spend £11.62 million from this grant on children in their early years and £72.48 million on hospital education. Local authorities are able to allocate some of this funding to children who cannot attend school because of health needs.

    We are not able to provide a response with an amount allocated specifically to these children as the needs of children varies amongst different local authorities, and therefore it is right that decision making on allocation of funding for special educational needs and disabilities is made at a local level.

  • Baroness Massey of Darwen – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Baroness Massey of Darwen – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Massey of Darwen on 2016-01-13.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government why pupils not attending school due to health needs are not entitled to the pupil premium.

    Lord Nash

    This Government is determined that all children, regardless of their circumstances, should receive a good education. Where a child of compulsory school age would not receive suitable education due to health needs, local authorities have a duty to ensure that alternative arrangements are put in place. Local authorities are funded to make these arrangements through their high needs budgets.

    The pupil premium is additional funding that recognises the further barriers to educational achievement faced by disadvantaged pupils. Disadvantaged pupils who are unable to attend school because of health needs continue to attract the pupil premium. The premium is paid to all state funded schools with eligible pupils, including special schools, special academies, pupil referral units and alternative provision academies. Where eligible pupils are recorded on the alternative provision census as receiving other forms of alternative provision then the pupil premium is paid to the local authority. Information about pupil premium funding arrangements can be found at: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/pupil-premium-information-for-schools-and-alternative-provision-settings

    “

  • Lord Kilclooney – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Lord Kilclooney – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Kilclooney on 2016-01-13.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of whether an incident of sectarian violence against Protestant families took place in Chiapas, Mexico, on 4 January; and what representations they have made about that incident to the government of Mexico.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    While British officials in Mexico City have not yet been in touch with the Mexican authorities on this specific reported incident, our Embassy has for some time been in touch with a range of Mexico and UK-based non-government organisations about discriminatory violence against Protestant families in Chiapas. The most recent reported incident on 4 January seems to suggest an escalation in this violence. Our Embassy also regularly lobbies to ensure the perpetrators of all crimes are brought to justice and that all minority groups are respected and, where appropriate, offered protection.

    We continually raise the issue of freedom of religion or belief in bilateral and multilateral fora. This forms a core part of our human rights work and we frequently raise security and human rights concerns with Mexico. For example, the Prime Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Mr Cameron); the then Deputy Prime Minister, the Rt Hon Member for Sheffield, Hallam (Mr Clegg), and the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr Hammond), discussed human rights issues during the State Visit of President Enrique Peña Nieto to the UK in March 2015.

  • Lord Hylton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Lord Hylton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hylton on 2016-01-13.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what are the functions of the officials from the Home Office and other departments who are now serving in the north of France; whether they will instruct those officials to give priority to finding and assisting refugees there (1) who may be eligible for family reunion in the UK, or (2) for whom the Government have some responsibility, such as interpreters formerly employed by the Armed Forces; and if not, whether they will fund an NGO to do that work.

    Lord Bates

    Border Force officers are deployed to the Northern French ports to undertake immigration and customs functions as part of the juxtaposed controls arrangements with France, whereby elements of border control are completed prior to travel to the UK. Under the treaties which govern these arrangements, Border Force officers can only undertake official functions within defined “control zones” at the ports. Under the terms of the August 2015 UK-France Joint Declaration, Border Force officials additionally visit the migrant camps in conjunction with French officials to inform migrants of the dangers in seeking entry to the UK illegally and the importance instead of seeking asylum in France, and the fact that this is a prerequisite to apply for family reunion. French officials, as the responsible authority, also provide information to migrants during these visits.

    Separate schemes have existed since 2013 to assist interpreters previously employed by the UK Armed Forces. These apply only to those who have remained in Afghanistan and, in recognition of their unique and exceptional service or the danger the interpreters may face because of their work, can lead to relocation to the UK if certain criteria are met.

  • Lord Hylton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Lord Hylton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hylton on 2016-01-13.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will ask the UNHCR to select individuals and families for resettlement in the UK on grounds of family reunion with relatives, as well as of vulnerability and extreme need.

    Lord Bates

    We work closely with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)to identify cases that they deem in need of resettlement according to agreed vulnerability criteria for the Syrian Resettlement Scheme. One of the criteria is ‘refugees with family links in resettlement countries’. The scheme was expanded in September 2015 to ensure more of those in the greatest need are resettled in the UK.

  • Lord Hylton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Lord Hylton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hylton on 2016-01-13.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their policy regarding presidents and others who perpetuate their power and authority in the Commonwealth; and whether the Commonwealth as a whole has a policy on that matter.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    The British Government expects all Commonwealth states to uphold the standards enshrined in the Commonwealth Charter; which makes clear that governments, political parties and civil society are responsible for upholding and promoting democratic culture and practices and are accountable to the public in this regard.

    In supporting greater adherence to Commonwealth political values and principles, the Commonwealth Secretariat, under its Strategic Plan (2014/15), has engaged with the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) and the services of the Secretary General’s Good Offices. The Secretariat has also carried out election management and promoted the values of respect and understanding. This resulted in CMAG’s decision to restore Fiji to full Commonwealth membership and involved the deployment of election observation teams to 13 elections in 11 countries. All election missions reported credible results in accordance with Commonwealth norms.