UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: 2014

  • Justin Tomlinson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Justin Tomlinson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Justin Tomlinson on 2014-06-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what recent steps her Department is taking to help end domestic abuse and violence against women.

    Norman Baker

    Domestic violence is a dreadful form of abuse and is not acceptable within our
    society. The Coalition Government’s approach to tackling domestic violence and
    abuse is set out in its Violence against Women and Girls Action Plan, updated in March
    2014.

    In 2013, the Home Secretary commissioned Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of
    Constabulary to undertake a comprehensive review on how the police deal with
    domestic violence and abuse. HMIC’s report exposed significant failings. In response
    to the Review, the Home Secretary has established a National Oversight Group, which
    she is chairing, and on which I sit, to ensure HMIC’s recommendations are acted upon.
    The Group met for the first time on 10 June. The Home Secretary has also written to chief constables making it clear that every police force must have an action plan in place by September 2014, to improve their response to domestic violence and abuse.

    The Government is committed to ensuring that the police and other agencies have
    the tools necessary to tackle domestic violence, to bring offenders to justice
    and to ensure victims have the support they need to rebuild their lives. On 8
    March 2014, the Government announced the national roll-out of Domestic Violence
    Protection Orders following the successful conclusion of a one-year
    pilot in three police force areas including Wiltshire, as well as the Domestic
    Violence Disclosure Scheme following the successful conclusion in
    September 2013 of a one-year pilot in four police force areas – once again
    including Wiltshire.

  • Emily Thornberry – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    Emily Thornberry – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Emily Thornberry on 2014-04-08.

    To ask the Attorney General, how much money subject to a Crown Prosecution Service restraining or confiscation order has been diverted to meet the costs of a private-sector receiver in each of the last three financial years; and what proportion that amount was of all assets subject to such orders.

    Oliver Heald

    The following table contains data from the last 3 financial years on the total amount restrained under restraint orders, the total fees paid to management receivers, and the percentage of receivership fees as a proportion of the restrained amount:

    Management Receiverships:

    Financial Year

    Fees Paid to Management

    Receivers

    *Total Amount Restrained Under

    Restraint Order Amount

    % of Receivership Fees as a Proportion

    of the Amount Restrained

    2011 – 2012

    £1,677,316.04

    £ 142,861,002.70

    1.17%

    2012 – 2013

    £ 995,667.35

    £ 142,878,474.31

    0.70%

    2013 – 2014

    £ 1,168,938.64

    £ 145,485,882.31

    0.80%

    It should be noted that the amount restrained is constantly fluctuating due to a number of factors including payment of reasonable living expenses from restrained funds and the changing values of real property. Accordingly, it is difficult to get an accurate value as to the amount restrained at any one time.

    *It should further be noted that the amount shown represents the entirety of restrained funds. However, in many cases, the receiver is appointed to manage carefully selected assets and not all of the funds restrained. Accordingly, the receiver’s fees as a proportion of the amount of restrained funds he manages could be considerably higher than the figures shown above.

    The following table contains data from the last 3 financial years on the total confiscation order amount (i.e. the sum of all assets included in confiscation orders), total fees paid to enforcement receivers, and the percentage of receivership fees as a proportion of the confiscation order amount:

    Enforcement Receivers:

    Financial Year

    Fees Paid to Enforcement

    Receivers

    *Total Confiscation Order Amount

    (including any variations)

    % of Receivership Fees as a Proportion

    of the Confiscation Order Amount

    2011 – 2012

    £2,716,436.53

    £109,684,469.49

    2.48%

    2012 – 2013

    £2,982,980.41

    £140,752,428.67

    2.12%

    2013 – 2014

    £1,413,235.87

    £138,249,651.38

    1.02%

    *It should further be noted that the amount shown represents the total sum of assets available for confiscation. However, in many cases, the receiver is appointed to realise carefully selected assets and not all assets listed in the confiscation order. Accordingly, the receiver’s fees as a proportion of the assets he is appointed to realise could be considerably higher than the figures shown above.

  • Mark Hendrick – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the House of Commons Commission

    Mark Hendrick – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the House of Commons Commission

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mark Hendrick on 2014-06-17.

    To ask the hon. Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross representing the House of Commons Commission, what the cost to date has been of the contract for the Independent Assessment of Options to Take Forward a Restoration and Renewal Programme for the Palace of Westminster awarded to Deloitte Real Estate and AECOM together with HOK in December 2013.

    John Thurso

    The full cost of the Independent Options Appraisal is expected to be £2,423K, including VAT. The cost incurred to 18 June 2014 was £2,213K, including VAT and a sum accrued but not yet invoiced. The cost is shared 60:40 between the House of Commons and the House of Lords.

  • Chi Onwurah – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Chi Onwurah – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chi Onwurah on 2014-04-08.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, pursuant to the Answer of 17 March 2014, Official Report, column 469W, on public sector: fraud, if he will publish the independent project review of the Counter Fraud Checking Service when it is completed.

    Mr Francis Maude

    As is usually the case, such a decision would be taken after the review is completed.

  • Sadiq Khan – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Sadiq Khan – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sadiq Khan on 2014-06-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many (a) chief executives, (b) deputy chief executives and (c) assistant chief officers of probation trusts who left their posts since 1 January 2014 had non-disclosure or compromise agreements as part of their departure packages.

    Jeremy Wright

    There have been no non-disclosure or compromise agreements included as part of the departure packages of the Trust Chief Executives who have taken early retirement. The terms of departure for other former Trust staff were agreed through their own local arrangements.

  • Julie Hilling – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Julie Hilling – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julie Hilling on 2014-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what proportion of local authorities in England and Wales require a Disclosure and Barring Service check on applicants before issuing a (a) taxi and (b) private hire vehicle licence.

    Stephen Hammond

    The Department for Transport does not hold this information. Local authorities are under a statutory duty to ensure that any person to whom they grant a taxi or private hire vehicle driver’s licence is a “fit and proper person”. As part of this process they can undertake criminal record checks on applicants but we do not keep details of the assessment policies and procedures adopted by local authorities.

  • Gloria De Piero – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Gloria De Piero – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gloria De Piero on 2014-06-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many claimants for personal independence payments who require a home consultation have waited longer than (a) one, (b) two, (c) three, (d) four, (e) five and (f) six or more months for such a consultation.

    Mike Penning

    The information you have requested is not currently available.

  • Madeleine Moon – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Madeleine Moon – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Madeleine Moon on 2014-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 31 March 2014, Official Report, column 443W, on armed forces: disciplinary proceedings, how many cautions are recorded on the Joint Personnel Administration database; and if he will make a statement.

    Anna Soubry

    The total number of police cautions recorded on the Joint Personnel Administrative system, since rollout in 2006 to date, is 900 cases involving 870 personnel. Figures have been rounded to the nearest 10.

    These numbers are for police cautions issued by the civilian police and the civilian courts.

  • Biography information for Jim Cunningham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Biography information for Jim Cunningham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Biography information for Jim Cunningham on Home Office.

    1

    Karen Bradley

    The UK has a proud record of offering sanctuary to those who need it. Each
    claim for asylum is carefully considered and where we find individuals are in
    need of our protection, asylum is given. However, to be eligible for
    international protection, a person must be located outside of their country of
    origin.

  • Kelvin Hopkins – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Kelvin Hopkins – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kelvin Hopkins on 2014-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, for what reasons he deleted Question 10 in the current consultation exercise on the reductions in the size of the Energy Company Obligation; and what his policy is on the Obligation and its size after March 2017.

    Gregory Barker

    As stated on page 6 of the consultation document, the Government has confirmed that ECO is intended to be ambitious and long term, extending through at least until 2022. The precise shape of the obligation beyond 2017 will be consulted on in due course, and is not in scope of the current consultation exercise which focuses on the period through to 2017.

    The original question 10 was unclear, in that it requested views on the proposed ECO target in the obligation period to March 2017, but followed a series of specific questions (now questions 10, 11, 12 and 13 in the amended consultation document) seeking views on targets for each of the ECO sub-obligations in that period. As explained on the DECC website, the question was therefore removed in the interests of clarity and to avoid unnecessary repetition.