Blog

  • Lord Pearson of Rannoch – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Lord Pearson of Rannoch – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Pearson of Rannoch on 2014-04-09.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have discussed with the government of Botswana its decision to allow only the 189 successful applicants in the Bushmen’s case against their government in 2006 to return to the Central Kalahari Game Reserve.

    Lord Wallace of Saltaire

    The British Government have had regular discussions with the Government of Botswana regarding the situation of the San (Bushmen). In those discussions we have consistently encouraged the Government of Botswana to seek an inclusive, sustainable and negotiated solution. The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my Rt. Hon. Friend the Member for Richmond (Yorks) (Mr Hague), raised the situation of the San communities in Botswana with President Khama when they met on 13 February.

  • Lord Pearson of Rannoch – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Lord Pearson of Rannoch – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Pearson of Rannoch on 2014-04-09.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what discussions they have had with the government of Botswana about the ban on hunting imposed on the Bushmen, in contravention of the terms of independence agreed by the United Kingdom in 1966.

    Lord Wallace of Saltaire

    The British Government have had regular discussions with the Government of Botswana regarding the situation of the San (Bushmen). In those discussions we have consistently encouraged the Government of Botswana to seek an inclusive, sustainable and negotiated solution. EU Heads of Mission discussed the impact of the hunting ban on the San (Bushmen) in February 2014 with the Minister of Environment, Wildlife and Tourism.

  • Lord Pearson of Rannoch – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Lord Pearson of Rannoch – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Pearson of Rannoch on 2014-04-09.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they will take to guarantee the safety of Mr Stephen Yaxley-Lennon if he is moved to another prison from HM Prison Winchester.

    Lord Wallace of Saltaire

    NOMS takes the safety of all prisoners very seriously and individual risk assessment based on all relevant information informs any decisions made to safeguard individual prisoners.

  • The Earl of Sandwich – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The Earl of Sandwich – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by The Earl of Sandwich on 2014-04-09.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have made representations to the government of Sudan following reports of population displacement by violence in Darfur since the beginning of 2014 and that UNAMID and humanitarian agencies have been prevented from entering the affected areas; and if so, at what level of government, and whether any other countries have been involved in those representations.

    Lord Wallace of Saltaire

    We continue to raise the issues around Darfur with the Government of Sudan consistently and frequently, and at all levels. Most recently, the Minister for Africa, my hon. Friend the Member for Boston and Skegness (Mr Simmonds), issued two statements on 6 March and 7 April condemning the escalating violence in Darfur, calling for humanitarian access and for all sides to immediately cease the violence. Our Ambassador in Khartoum raised Darfur with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (State Minister level) in late March, and with the Chairman of the Darfur Regional Authority on 1 April. The Head of the Department for International Development (DFID) in Sudan met the Commissioner of the Humanitarian Aid Commission (HAC) to raise access for humanitarian agencies in Darfur in April. The UN Resident Coordinator and Humanitarian Coordinator’s Office also led a high level mission of UN and EU/US ambassadors and heads of agency to Darfur, during which UK representatives raised this issue with the Governor of North Darfur. Officials have also raised Darfur with the acting Ambassador of the Sudanese Embassy in London.

    UN Resolution 2148 which focuses on UNAMID was adopted on 3 April. It expresses particular concern at reports of an escalation of violence in Darfur since February 2014, resulting in the displacement of a large number of civilians, and at the denial of access for UNAMID and humanitarian actors to the affected areas by the Sudanese authorities and calls on the Government of Sudan to comply with the Status of Forces Agreement fully and without delay, and to enhance its cooperation with UNAMID on the implementation of the peacekeeping mission’s mandate.

  • Lord Lester of Herne Hill – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Lord Lester of Herne Hill – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Lester of Herne Hill on 2014-04-09.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Faulks on 2 April (WA 208–12), how many prosecutions brought in the last 10 years in connection with religious hatred offences (as distinct from homophobic hatred offences) under 29B and 29C of the Public Order Act 1986 and in connection with religiously aggravated offences (as distinct from racially aggravated offences) under sections 31 and 32 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 have resulted in a guilty verdict.

    Lord Faulks

    It is not totally possible to identify separately offences of religious hatred from those of homophobic hatred or religious aggravation from those offences of racial aggravation. Relevant details may be held on the court record, which can only be checked at disproportionate cost.

  • Lord Lester of Herne Hill – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Lord Lester of Herne Hill – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Lester of Herne Hill on 2014-04-09.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Faulks on 2 April (WA 208–12), how many prosecutions have been brought in the last 10 years in connection with religious hatred offences (as distinct from homophobic hatred offences) under sections 29B and 29C of the Public Order Act 1986 and in connection with religiously aggravated offences (as distinct from racially aggravated offences) under sections 31 and 32 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998.

    Lord Faulks

    It is not totally possible to identify separately offences of religious hatred from those of homophobic hatred or religious aggravation from those offences of racial aggravation. Relevant details may be held on the court record, which can only be checked at disproportionate cost.

  • Lord Tyler – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Lord Tyler – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Tyler on 2014-04-09.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the implications for future elections and referendums to be held in the United Kingdom of the relative voting rights in the Scottish independence referendum of (1) electors resident overseas but formerly resident in a Scottish parliamentary constituency, and (2) electors resident in England, Wales or Northern Ireland but registered in a Scottish parliamentary constituency within the last 15 years.

    Lord Bates

    The Government has made no such assessment.

  • Lord Patel of Bradford – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture Media and Sport

    Lord Patel of Bradford – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Patel of Bradford on 2014-04-09.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of the BBC’s decision to withdraw one of its black and minority ethnic (BME) reporter posts and its BBC UK Black weekly Podcast, whether in the negotiations with the BBC in respect of the renewal of its Charter they intend to set requirements relating to the coverage of BME issues in the BBC’s output; and if so, what requirements.

    Lord Gardiner of Kimble

    The process, scope and timing of the review of the BBC’s Charter has yet to be determined. However, the Government is committed to the issue of BAME diversity in TV, film and the Arts, both on and off screen. The Culture Minister recently met with leading figures from these sectors, including the BBC, to consider options to improve representation.

  • Lord Barnett – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Lord Barnett – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Barnett on 2014-04-09.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the average interest rate charged to small and medium-sized enterprises by United Kingdom banks.

    Lord Deighton

    The Government is committed to supporting small and medium sized businesses and recognises their importance to the economy. Since 2010, the Government has introduced a number of schemes aimed at improving access to finance for businesses, including the creation of the British Business Bank and the introduction of the joint Government and Bank of England Funding for Lending Scheme.

    Decisions about whether to lend to specific individuals or businesses including the rate of interest charged, remain commercial decisions for banks and building societies.

  • Lord Berkeley – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Lord Berkeley – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Berkeley on 2014-04-09.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Earl Attlee on 30 April 2012 (WA 420), what is their policy on grants and state aids for harbour dredging; under which United Kingdom Government and European Union funding programmes grants are permitted; what account they take of the effect of any grant on competition with other ports in the area or region; under what circumstances grants for dredging are available for a single beneficiary which will be the main commercial beneficiary; and whether, in any application for a grant for port development, any dredging element must be identified and justified separately.

    Lord Bates

    The Government’s policy, as confirmed in the National Policy Statement for Ports, is that the ports industry in England and Wales is generally successful in funding investment, including in capital dredging, on a commercial basis without need for support from public funds. Consequently there is a general presumption against such grants, which can displace and deter private sector investment and distort competition, whether for single or multiple beneficiaries. There may, however, be occasional exceptions, as in the case of the Regional Growth Fund grant awarded for dredging in Liverpool Bay and the Mersey Estuary. This was based on an exceptional regional economic regeneration justification. In any such case, the prospective impact on competition with other ports would be taken into account during consideration of the application.

    Dredging costs, along with other port costs, could potentially be eligible for grants from European funding schemes such as the Connecting Europe Facility and Trans-European Networks – Transport (CEF/TEN-T). The Government would normally expect any grant application for UK or EU funds to show disaggregated costings, including clear identification of any dredging element that may be present.