Blog

  • Nic Dakin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Nic Dakin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nic Dakin on 2016-04-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, pursuant to the Answers of 2 and 8 February 2016 to Questions 25202 and 23871, and the update provided by Ofqual, what further progress has been made on A levels in (a) French, (b) German, (c) Spanish, (d) Religious Studies and (e) Geography being approved ready for first teaching from September 2016.

    Nick Gibb

    This is a matter for Ofqual, the Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation. I have therefore asked its Chief Regulator, Sally Collier, to write directly to the Honourable Member. A copy of her reply will be placed in the House of Commons Library.

  • Cheryl Gillan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Cheryl Gillan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Cheryl Gillan on 2016-04-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what her policy is on the provision of free school transport for children who receive the higher rate of the mobility component of disability living allowance.

    Nick Gibb

    I refer my Rt Hon Friend to the reply given to written questions 31573 and 31574 on 22 March 2016.

  • Colleen Fletcher – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Colleen Fletcher – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Colleen Fletcher on 2016-04-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, whether her Department has undertaken an assessment of the potential effect of changes to employer national insurance and pension contributions on (a) primary and (b) secondary school budgets.

    Nick Gibb

    The most recent change to the employer contribution rate for the Teachers’ Pension Scheme (TPS) took place in September 2015. At that time the rate was increased from 14.1% to 16.4% of the total pay bill from September 2015. The current employer contribution rate will not change until after the next scheme valuation is complete, which is expected to be in April 2018.

    On 1 April this year, the single tier state pension was introduced. Members of previously contracted out schemes will no longer receive a National Insurance rebate. The National Insurance rate for employers has increased therefore by 3.4% for all salary payments between £8,112.01 and £40,040. Based on data from the last scheme valuation this change is expected to add on average 2% to schools’ pay bill, in relation to the TPS, from 1 April 2016.

  • Nicholas Soames – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Nicholas Soames – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nicholas Soames on 2016-04-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, if she will publish the interim findings of the Area Based Review of further education which includes Central Sussex College; what the geographical extent of that review is; and which other further education institutions are included in that review.

    Nick Boles

    Central Sussex College is within the Sussex area review, part of wave 1 of the area review programme which began in September 2015. This review covers Brighton & Hove City, East Sussex, and West Sussex Councils, and Coast to Capital and South East Local Enterprise Partnerships.

    The other further education institutions included in this review are: Chichester College; City College, Brighton and Hove; Northbrook College, Sussex; Plumpton College; Sussex Coast College; Sussex Downs College; Worthing College; Bexhill College; Brighton Hove and Sussex Sixth Form College; and Varndean College.

    The local steering groups overseeing each area review hold regular meetings and do not intend to publish interim findings of any area review.

    The Department is committed to making the outcomes transparent, and once each review reaches its conclusions, there will be a report published at the end of each Area Review process.

  • Roger Godsiff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Roger Godsiff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2016-04-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether it is technically possible for Trident missiles to be used by the UK without US knowledge and agreement.

    Michael Fallon

    Yes. The UK’s nuclear deterrent is fully operationally independent.

  • Kirsten Oswald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Kirsten Oswald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kirsten Oswald on 2016-04-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what criteria his Department uses to determine links between cancer experienced by a current or former member of the armed forces and exposure to chemicals during periods of service.

    Mark Lancaster

    The Ministry of Defence (MOD) provides no-fault compensation for members of the Armed Forces where illness, injury or death is caused by service from 6 April 2005 under the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme (AFCS) and, before that date, under the War Pensions Scheme (WPS).

    Any disablement, injury or illness, including cancer, can be claimed with awards made where the claimed disorder is accepted as being due to service. Lay and scheme medical advisers work together and decisions are evidence based, reflecting the individual case facts, contemporary medical understanding of causation and the relevant law.

    Awards under the WPS depend on the assessed level of disablement with the method of assessment set out in the legislation and expressed as a percentage. The AFCS is tariff based. The legislation includes nine tables of injuries and disorders with associated tariff levels, relevant to military service. A lump sum is paid for pain and suffering taking account of the likely progress of the condition over the person’s lifetime. There are fifteen tariff levels and, for the more serious disorders like cancer, a Guaranteed Income Payment to cover reduced civilian employability is paid, in addition, from the date of claim for life.

    Where negligence exists on the part of the MOD, Service personnel may make a claim for damages under common law for service after May 1987. Awards are determined by common law principles which, broadly, take into account, as appropriate, an individual’s pain and suffering, degree of injury, past and future financial losses and level of care required. Levels of compensation which include these elements can vary depending on an individual’s circumstances.

  • Kirsten Oswald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Kirsten Oswald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kirsten Oswald on 2016-04-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to his Department’s press release, A new pay model for the Armed Forces, published on 7 January 2016, what assessment he has made of the potential effect of the reformed pay structure on the number of complaints about terms and conditions received through the service complaints process.

    Mark Lancaster

    The changes associated with the new Armed Forces pay model have been extensively communicated, both prior to and since their announcement in January. These communications are expected to address a significant proportion of the questions and concerns that might otherwise have been raised as service complaints. Whilst it is impossible to predict how many service complaints might be raised, planning is in place for a means of dealing with them if they do arise in volume in a way that is fair, effective and efficient and does not overwhelm the system.

  • Kirsten Oswald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Kirsten Oswald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kirsten Oswald on 2016-04-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what assessment he has made of the implication for his policies on a future nuclear deterrent of the development of the Boeing Echo Voyager and other new drone technology.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    We dedicate considerable resources to assessing these emerging capabilities. Despite potential advancements in technology the detection of submarines will remain extremely difficult. It would not be appropriate to go into specific detail of the steps taken to mitigate against these threats but we assess that our current and future submarine fleet remains safe and secure.

  • David Mackintosh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    David Mackintosh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Mackintosh on 2016-04-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what his Department’s timetable is for the renewal of Trident.

    Michael Fallon

    The key elements of the UK Trident nuclear deterrent are the Vanguard-class submarines, the Trident D5 missile and the UK warhead. As set out in the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015, we expect the first Successor submarine to enter service in the early 2030s. A replacement warhead is not required until the late 2030s, possibly later. Given lead times, however, a decision on replacing the current warhead may be required later in this Parliament or early in the next. While we have no plans to replace the current Trident D5 missile, we are participating with our US partners in a programme to extend its current life to the 2060s.

  • Madeleine Moon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Madeleine Moon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Madeleine Moon on 2016-04-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the answer of 14 December 2015 to Question 18992, on military bases: religious buildings, what recent steps his Department has taken to fully implement Parliament’s sanction of same-sex marriages.

    Penny Mordaunt

    The Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 reflects the Government’s commitment that no religious organisation or representative will be forced to conduct or participate in same sex marriages.

    Recognising the established position of the Sending Churches which does not allow for the conduct of same-sex marriages within military chapels, I have recently directed that a pilot project is implemented to explore registering Ministry of Defence sites for civil marriages and partnerships; this includes same-sex unions. The timing of the project is being finalised but I anticipate that it will start shortly and run for a number of months