Blog

  • Lilian Greenwood – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lilian Greenwood – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lilian Greenwood on 2015-02-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what the value was of support provided by (a) his Department and (b) Network Rail to the Technical Strategy Leadership Group in each year from 2010-11 to date.

    Claire Perry

    The Government, and Network Rail, to further their objective of supporting a safe, reliable and efficient rail network, engage with and support a broad range of stakeholders and initiatives across Government. These include the Technical Strategy Leadership Group; Rail Delivery Group Limited; the Planning Oversight Group; and the National Task Force.

    The Department provided the following funding towards the Technical Strategy Leadership Group’s strategic research programme through a grant to RSSB which facilitates the group:

    Year

    DfT grant towards TSLG’s research programme (£m)

    2010/11

    1.25

    2011/12

    1.75

    2012/13

    3

    2013/14

    3.5

    Network Rail does not provide direct financial support to the Technical Strategy Leadership Group.

    Network Rail, between 10th August 2012 and 31st March 2014, paid £240,000 to Rail Delivery Group Limited in membership fees. For the year April 2014 – March 2015, Network Rail has paid or is due to pay £1,568,509 in membership fees. The increased fees paid by Network Rail in the most recent year are as a result of the Group assuming responsibility for policy formulation and communications on behalf of the rail industry. Network Rail provides staff to Rail Delivery Group Limited, for which it is due to charge the group £261,312.

    The Planning Oversight Group is funded and supported by Rail Delivery Group Limited and does not receive direct financial support from the Department or Network Rail. The National Task Force does not have a budget, but those who attend are drawn from the various industry members.

  • Julian Lewis – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Julian Lewis – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julian Lewis on 2015-02-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what recent assessment he has made of the effect on the frequency with which the level crossing at Junction Road, Totton, will have to be operated resulting from increased use of the railhead at Marchwood Sea Mounting Centre, following the awarding of a lease at the site to a private enterprise.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The Marchwood Sea Mounting Centre is still under consideration for possible sale or lease by the MOD. Any subsequent use of the land would be for consideration at the local level along with an assessment of the transport implications on the surrounding network. The transport assessment would not be the responsibility for the Department for Transport but would be for the local highway authority to consider. In addition, it is a matter for Network Rail to make an assessment of the risk at the level crossing at Junction Road, Totton.

  • Julian Lewis – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Julian Lewis – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julian Lewis on 2015-02-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what recent assessment he has made of the potential effect on traffic on (a) the A326 and (b) Jacob’s Gutter Lane of projected heavy goods vehicle movements arising from the proposed leasing of land at the Marchwood Sea Mounting Centre; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The Marchwood Sea Mounting Centre is still under consideration for possible sale or lease by the MOD. Any subsequent use of the land would be for consideration at the local level along with an assessment of the transport implications on the surrounding network. The transport assessment would not be the responsibility for the Department for Transport but would be for the local highway authority to consider. In addition, it is a matter for Network Rail to make an assessment of the risk at the level crossing at Junction Road, Totton.

  • Lilian Greenwood – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lilian Greenwood – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lilian Greenwood on 2015-02-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what the value was of (a) Network Rail’s membership levy and (b) other support provided by Network Rail to the Rail Delivery Group in each year from 2011-12 to date.

    Claire Perry

    The Government, and Network Rail, to further their objective of supporting a safe, reliable and efficient rail network, engage with and support a broad range of stakeholders and initiatives across Government. These include the Technical Strategy Leadership Group; Rail Delivery Group Limited; the Planning Oversight Group; and the National Task Force.

    The Department provided the following funding towards the Technical Strategy Leadership Group’s strategic research programme through a grant to RSSB which facilitates the group:

    Year

    DfT grant towards TSLG’s research programme (£m)

    2010/11

    1.25

    2011/12

    1.75

    2012/13

    3

    2013/14

    3.5

    Network Rail does not provide direct financial support to the Technical Strategy Leadership Group.

    Network Rail, between 10th August 2012 and 31st March 2014, paid £240,000 to Rail Delivery Group Limited in membership fees. For the year April 2014 – March 2015, Network Rail has paid or is due to pay £1,568,509 in membership fees. The increased fees paid by Network Rail in the most recent year are as a result of the Group assuming responsibility for policy formulation and communications on behalf of the rail industry. Network Rail provides staff to Rail Delivery Group Limited, for which it is due to charge the group £261,312.

    The Planning Oversight Group is funded and supported by Rail Delivery Group Limited and does not receive direct financial support from the Department or Network Rail. The National Task Force does not have a budget, but those who attend are drawn from the various industry members.

  • Lilian Greenwood – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lilian Greenwood – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lilian Greenwood on 2015-02-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what the value of support provided by (a) his Department and (b) Network Rail to the Planning Oversight Group was in each year from 2010-11 to date.

    Claire Perry

    The Government, and Network Rail, to further their objective of supporting a safe, reliable and efficient rail network, engage with and support a broad range of stakeholders and initiatives across Government. These include the Technical Strategy Leadership Group; Rail Delivery Group Limited; the Planning Oversight Group; and the National Task Force.

    The Department provided the following funding towards the Technical Strategy Leadership Group’s strategic research programme through a grant to RSSB which facilitates the group:

    Year

    DfT grant towards TSLG’s research programme (£m)

    2010/11

    1.25

    2011/12

    1.75

    2012/13

    3

    2013/14

    3.5

    Network Rail does not provide direct financial support to the Technical Strategy Leadership Group.

    Network Rail, between 10th August 2012 and 31st March 2014, paid £240,000 to Rail Delivery Group Limited in membership fees. For the year April 2014 – March 2015, Network Rail has paid or is due to pay £1,568,509 in membership fees. The increased fees paid by Network Rail in the most recent year are as a result of the Group assuming responsibility for policy formulation and communications on behalf of the rail industry. Network Rail provides staff to Rail Delivery Group Limited, for which it is due to charge the group £261,312.

    The Planning Oversight Group is funded and supported by Rail Delivery Group Limited and does not receive direct financial support from the Department or Network Rail. The National Task Force does not have a budget, but those who attend are drawn from the various industry members.

  • Richard Burden – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Leader of the House

    Richard Burden – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Leader of the House

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Richard Burden on 2015-02-10.

    To ask the Leader of the House, what assessment he has made of the implications for the Government’s policies of the report from the Speaker’s Commission on Digital Democracy entitled Open Up, published in January 2015; and which recommendations of that report he plans to implement.

    Mr William Hague

    The majority of the recommendations in the report from the Speaker’s Commission on Digital Democracy are for the House itself to consider and respond to.

    In relation to the recommendations regarding the legislative process, the Government is committed to ensuring that the legislation it puts before Parliament is of a high standard and to ensuring that Parliament has the necessary means by which to perform its scrutiny function.

    In April 2013, the Government launched the Good Law initiative, designed to promote law which is effective, clear and accessible. Various initiatives have been introduced this Parliament designed to improve the legislative process, including the use of explanatory statements on amendments, improved explanatory notes and piloting public reading stages of Bills. The Government has also given sufficient time to allow proper scrutiny in public bill committees and provided additional days at Commons report stages where necessary.

    The Speaker’s Commission also recommended that secure online voting should be an option for all voters by 2020. To make online voting available for UK elections could be attractive in light of current advances in IT. However, there are concerns that e-voting is not sufficiently transparent or secure.

    The major issue raised by those opposed to the introduction of e-voting is that it is not sufficiently robust or trusted. In addition, the cost of introducing such a system would be substantial. Public support for such measures is still far from universal and traditional means of voting (such as polling stations and postal voting) remain popular with the electorate. Therefore, any means of e-voting would have to be introduced as an additional voting channel. Whilst e-voting may be something for the Government to consider in the future, it is not an immediate priority. The experience of the referendum on Scottish independence shows us that if people are engaged in the democratic process they will turn out to vote using the existing mechanism.

  • Andy Slaughter – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Andy Slaughter – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andy Slaughter on 2015-02-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many prisoners have been transferred to an external hospital following an incident of use of force in each private prison in England and Wales in each year since 2010.

    Andrew Selous

    Unfortunately it has not been possible to fully extract the relevant data with regards to this question in the given timeframe. I will write to the Hon. Member when I am able to provide a response.

  • Andy Slaughter – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Andy Slaughter – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andy Slaughter on 2015-02-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many incidents of use of force there were in each private prison in England and Wales in each year since 2010.

    Andrew Selous

    Unfortunately it has not been possible to fully extract the relevant data with regards to this question in the given timeframe. I will write to the Hon. Member when I am able to provide a response.

  • Greg Mulholland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    Greg Mulholland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Greg Mulholland on 2015-02-10.

    To ask the Attorney General, what steps he is taking to implement the recommendations of the report from HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate and HM Inspectorate of Constabulary entitled Joint Inspection of the Investigation and Prosecution of Fatal Road Traffic Incidents, published in February 2015.

    Jeremy Wright

    It is clear from the joint HMIC and HMCPSI report that there must be improvements in the way offences arising out of fatal road traffic incidents are investigated and prosecuted. It is therefore vital that police forces give due regard to the recommendations made in the report. However, it is rightly a matter for chief constables and Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) to ascertain how best to respond to the recommendations locally. Under Section 55 (5) of the Police Act 1996, all PCCs have a statutory requirement to publish their response to joint inspection reports that relate to their force.

    The CPS must provide the best possible service to the bereaved families in these cases. Whilst many of the recommended improvements have been achieved through more general development of CPS casework and guidance, there is clearly more which needs to be done. In order to make the improvements necessary to the prosecution of offences arising out of fatal road traffic accidents, the CPS is taking or has committed to take the following steps:

    • The introduction of accredited specialist prosecutors in each of the CPS Areas to prosecute these cases.
    • New mandatory training on the prosecution of fatal road traffic incidents to include case analysis and strategy, and how the CPS communicates with bereaved families.
    • CPS Area Coordinators to ensure that these sensitive and difficult cases receive the specialist attention they deserve and attract good quality, consistent decision making.
    • Amending guidance to remind prosecutors of the circumstances in which it is appropriate to charge assaults that arise from driving a motor vehicle.
    • Amending guidance to add a reference to the Criminal Practice Direction on acceptance of pleas in its Guidance on Charging Driving Offences.
    • A review of the flagging process of these cases to increase the accuracy of figures.
    • Consideration of better CPS Area access to appeals unit case reviews.
    • Consideration of existing protocols with police forces with the intention of drafting a model protocol for CPS Areas to agree with local forces.
  • Andy Slaughter – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Andy Slaughter – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andy Slaughter on 2015-02-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many incidents of use of force resulted in (a) minor and (b) serious injuries in each private prison in England and Wales in each year since 2010.

    Andrew Selous

    Unfortunately it has not been possible to fully extract the relevant data with regards to this question in the given timeframe. I will write to the Hon. Member when I am able to provide a response.