Blog

  • Mark Prisk – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Mark Prisk – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mark Prisk on 2016-03-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what estimate he has made of the total funding allocated for the construction of cycle superhighways in London.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    Decisions on how much funding to allocate to cycling projects on the Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) are entirely a matter for the Mayor and Transport for London. The Department for Transport (DfT) provides the Greater London Authority with an annual transport grant for TfL, and it is up to the Mayor to determine how this grant is spent. In 2013, the Mayor published a vision for cycling which outlined plans to invest £913 million on a wide variety of schemes to improve conditions for cyclists in London, including the construction of a number of new and improved cycle superhighways.

  • Mark Prisk – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Mark Prisk – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mark Prisk on 2016-03-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, how much funding his Department has allocated to improve pavements and crossings for pedestrians in London in the last two years.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    Transport for London is responsible for pavements and pedestrian crossings on those major roads in London (or “red routes”) which form part of the Transport for London Road Network. The Department for Transport provides both a general (resource) and an investment (capital) grant to the Greater London Authority (GLA) for Transport for London (TfL) each year. This money is not ring-fenced and it is a matter for the Mayor to determine how it is spent. The great majority of pavements and crossings in London are the responsibility of individual London boroughs, which are funded primarily by the Department for Communities and Local Government, although TfL also provide some funding to boroughs for local road improvements. The Department for Transport has not provided any additional funding to individual boroughs for this purpose in the last two years.

  • Lilian Greenwood – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lilian Greenwood – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lilian Greenwood on 2016-03-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what estimate his Department has made of the cost to the public purse of preparing and publishing the Shaw Report on the future shape and financing of Network Rail, published in November 2015.

    Claire Perry

    The Department’s estimated incremental costs for preparing and publishing the Shaw Report scoping document is £8356.

  • Jim Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Jim Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2016-03-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what estimate his Department has made of the average increase in rail fares over the last five years; and if he will make a statement.

    Claire Perry

    All fares increased on average by 5% in real terms between 2010 and 2015, compared to 11.3% between 2005 to 2010.

  • Richard Burden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Richard Burden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Richard Burden on 2016-03-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what steps he has taken to ensure that Highways England (HE) has agreed contingency plans with each local authority for the management of major incidents in their areas; how many local authorities have agreed a contingency plan with HE; and how many local authorities have not yet agreed such a plan with HE.

    Andrew Jones

    Highways England has a Crisis Management Manual which provides protocols for the management of the response for incidents that significantly affect the strategic road network.

    Highways England is in the process of developing partnership agreements with 120 Local Authorities. So far, 65 partnership agreements have been sent out to Local Authorities. These include protocols for agreeing and using diversion routes when a section of the network has to be closed.

    The vast majority of these authorities accept the principles of the agreement, but in some cases specific local issues need to be resolved and Highways England is engaged with those authorities to resolve them. However, it should be noted that a partnership agreement or otherwise would not adversely interfere with Highways England and Local Authorities working cooperatively in an emergency.

    As a Category 2 responder in the Civil Contingencies Act 2004, Highways England participates in Local Resilience Forums and contributes to the development of multi-agency plans for the response to Major Incidents (led by Category 1 responders).

  • Lilian Greenwood – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lilian Greenwood – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lilian Greenwood on 2016-03-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, whether (a) his Department or (b) an arms-length body of his Department has authorised the sale of any land containing disused rail lines since May 2010.

    Claire Perry

    My Department does not hold records of all such land sales by its arm’s length bodies, however It is likely that, in the period since May 2010, Network Rail, London Continental Railways (LCR), BRB (Residuary) Ltd (BRBR) (dissolved in September 2013), and Highways England (formerly the Highways Agency) all sold land containing parts of disused rail lines. Compiling a record of all sales would involve incurring disproportionate costs.

  • Andrew Percy – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Andrew Percy – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Percy on 2016-03-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he is taking to remove foreign national offenders from prisons to their home countries.

    Andrew Selous

    It is right that foreign criminals who break our laws are properly punished but this shouldn’t be at the expense of the British taxpayer. This government has a longstanding policy to do everything possible to return foreign prisoners to their home country at the earliest opportunity. Since 2010, 29,000 foreign national offenders have been removed from the UK and the foreign national offender’s total population in our prisons is reducing, falling from 10,866 in December 2010 to 9,895 in December 2015.

    As announced in the Prime Minister’s speech on 8 February, my officials have been working closely with the Home Office to introduce a legal requirement for defendants appearing in court to provide their name, date of birth and nationality. This will enable earlier identification of foreign national offenders and help with the removals process.

  • Andrew Percy – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Andrew Percy – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Percy on 2016-03-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he is taking to ensure that more prisoners obtain employment on release.

    Andrew Selous

    Supporting offenders into meaningful employment is a vital aspect of the Government’s approach to rehabilitation. We already work with a wide range of employers in prison through One3One Solutions and engagement by Prison Governors. And we want Governors to do more so we are putting the tools to drive this change in the hands of those at the frontline who best know what works. We are keen to increase the number of employers who can provide valuable vocational work for offenders while in prison and who are able to offer them support in preparation for release and employment opportunities following their release. I regularly meet businesses across the country including at 2 successful roadshows at HMP Sudbury and HMP/YOI Drake hall. New businesses are now coming on board as a consequence. The Employers Forum for Reducing Reoffending brings together employers willing to employ offenders and we are working with the Department for Work and Pensions to increase the involvement of more businesses. The Prime Minister has announced changes to recruitment practises across the civil service to ensure that people are considered on their merits and not on their criminal conviction and we want to encourage more employers to do the same.

  • Andrea Jenkyns – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Andrea Jenkyns – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrea Jenkyns on 2016-03-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether juvenile victims of incestuous sexual abuse are eligible to claim criminal injury compensation; and what limitations apply to that eligibility.

    Mike Penning

    We deeply sympathise with anyone who has been a victim of crime. Some victims of incestuous sexual abuse may be eligible for compensation under the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme which awards taxpayer-funded payments to victims who are seriously injured as a result of violent crime.

    From 1964 to 1979 the scheme did not allow compensation to be awarded where the offender and victim lived in the same household as members of the same family. The so called ‘same roof rule’ was part of the original scheme and was introduced to stop offenders benefiting from compensation paid to victims who lived with them. It was amended in 1979 so the restriction only applied to adults who remained living together after the incident. This was to protect payments to the most seriously injured victims of crime, while reducing the burden on the taxpayer. The changes to the ‘same roof rule’ were not applied retrospectively. This decision was consistent with the general Government approach that rule changes apply to future claimants, rather than in respect of historical claims.

    The Government puts the highest emphasis on the needs of victims, which is why the Ministry of Justice has given them more rights and increased funding for specialist support to help victims of such heinous crimes.

  • Christopher Chope – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Christopher Chope – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Christopher Chope on 2016-03-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, pursuant to the Answer of 4 March 2016 to Question 28521, on holiday leave: pay, when work on the formal assessment of the financial impact began; and what the target date is for completion of that assessment.

    Nick Boles

    Our formal assessment of the financial impacts of the Court of Justice of the EU’s judgment in Lock v British Gas is based on the latest 2015 Labour Force Survey (LFS) micro data which was released on 17 February 2016. We are going through the final stages of quality assurance and hope to make the assessment available on the BIS website within the next few weeks.