Tag: 2014

  • Tom Watson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Tom Watson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tom Watson on 2014-04-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what progress has been made by the cross-government working group on remotely piloted aircraft systems.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The Cross Government Working Group has been discussing its draft Terms of Reference (extract copied below) and its membership. The focus of its work so far has been to gather information from the relevant departments to identify areas of common interest requiring collaboration.

    RPAS Cross Government Working Group Vision and Activities

    Vision : To provide a consistent government message on RPAS issues.

    Objectives:

    • Inform RPAS-related Departmental policies and publish a UK Cross Government vision / strategy for UAS.
    • To identify Cross Government synergies and opportunities for efficiencies.
    • To identify and address barriers to a successful UK industry base, to support the Government’s growth agenda.

    Approach

    • Focus for the co-ordination of all UK Government RPAS related activities.
    • Developing a better knowledge and a shared understanding of Departmental priorities, activities, ambitions & concerns.
    • Help industry understand Government needs and vision.
    • Identify opportunities.
    • Identify key questions.
    • Community of users [identification of user requirements].
    • UK PoC for RPAS.

    Issues to Address

    • Identifying the extent to which the UK can support safe and secure RPAS operations in the UK, including options for the certification of RPAS, pilot licensing, and associated systems.
    • Identifying the key characteristics of RPAS infrastructure, including the potential radio spectrum for RPAS operations in the UK.
    • Seek to identify common Cross Government user requirements to understand future concepts for shared assets / system procurement and maintenance.
    • Determining how the UK might best position itself to take advantage of RPAS industry and technology.

    Engagement

    Understand the potential benefits of RPAS to Government.

    Inform and be informed by active industry associations e.g.

    • Aeronautical and Aerospace and Defence Knowledge Transfer Network Autonomous Systems National technical committee.
    • Robotics and Autonomous Systems Special Interest Group.
    • Through identification of best practice and successful projects.
    • UK industry

  • Gregory Campbell – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Gregory Campbell – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gregory Campbell on 2014-06-17.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment HM Revenue and Customs has made of changes in the extent of (a) fuel smuggling and (b) other organised revenue avoidance schemes in Northern Ireland in the last three years.

    Nicky Morgan

    Estimates of the non UK duty paid market for petrol and diesel fuels in Northern Ireland are published in ‘Measuring Tax Gaps 2012-13′. The non UK duty paid estimate covers both the illicit market and cross border shopping. These estimates cannot be disaggregated into its component parts or by the type of illicit activity e.g. through smuggling or other fraud.

    The excise duty losses due to the non-UK duty paid diesel market for 2010-11 were £110m and for 2011-12 were £120m. The excise duty losses due to the petrol non-UK duty paid market for 2010-11 were £30m and for 2011-12 were £30m. Figures for 2012-13 will be published in the autumn.

    The information on other organised revenue avoidance schemes in Northern Ireland is not available. The figures cannot be disaggregated by country. UK figures are available from “Measuring Tax Gaps 2012-13”.

    The methodologies for producing the estimates are provided in the ‘Methodological Annex for Measuring Tax Gaps 2013′.

    Both documents can be accessed via the following page on the HMRC website:

    http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/statistics/tax-gaps.htm

    “

  • Kate Green – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Kate Green – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kate Green on 2014-04-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what costs his Department has incurred in the development, promotion, monitoring and evaluation of the Sorting Out Separation web app to date; and what budget his Department assigned for the future promotion, updating, monitoring and redesign of that web app.

    Steve Webb

    The costs of the Sorting out Separation web app are £417.5k to date. This includes initial build, maintenance and development, hosting and promotion. It also includes the costs of the development of the diagnosis tool and the videos hosted on Sorting out Separation.

    The Department is in the process of considering the future direction of the Sorting out Separation web app and will shortly be taking steps to improve the profile of the app through search engine optimisation.

  • David Lammy – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    David Lammy – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Lammy on 2014-06-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, when his Department received the application from Haringey Council for a Compulsory Purchase Order to be issued for the site of 1-3 Paxton Road, London, N17 0PB.

    Nick Boles

    We are currently considering whether to confirm a Compulsory Purchase Order known as The London Borough of Haringey (Northumberland Development Project) (No 1) submitted by Haringey Council which includes the site of 1-3 Paxton Road. The Order was received in the Department on 5 September 2012.

    This is a complex case. After the close of the inquiry there were matters in respect of which further views of the interested parties were sought and considered. This has delayed the decision in this case.

    We hope to issue the decision on this shortly. It is not appropriate to comment further as to do so may prejudice the Secretary of State’s decision.

  • Tracey Crouch – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Tracey Crouch – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tracey Crouch on 2014-04-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what steps his Department has taken to provide families with financial assistance in caring for a child; and if he will make a statement.

    Mike Penning

    The Department provides families with financial assistance in caring for a child through Disability Living Allowance, Carer’s Allowance and the disability and carer premiums in the income-related benefits.

  • Bill Wiggin – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture Media and Sport

    Bill Wiggin – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Bill Wiggin on 2014-06-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what steps he plans to take to ensure that the people have adequate mobile signal coverage in light of the decision not to proceed with a mast at Fownhope.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    The Mobile Infrastructure Project can intervene in areas where there is no mobile coverage from any operator, and where the cost of the build of a mast considered alongside the numbers of premises that would benefit from the additional coverage provides value for money. Recent changes in coverage provided by the private sector have proved beneficial to Fownhope, but unfortunately this means that the Mobile Infrastructure Project can no longer go forward with plans for a mast.

    The Mobile Infrastructure Project can only intervene in areas where there is no coverage from any operator, and where an intervention achieves good value for money for the taxpayer. Government is looking at what else can be done to extend coverage.

  • Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2014-04-02.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the report, Asbestos in Schools, published by the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Occupational Safety and Health; what assessment they have made of the view of the Committee on Carcinogenicity of the vulnerability of children to asbestos; what recent figures they have for the incidence of asbestos-related diseases in children and teachers; and when they intend to publish their response to the evidence submitted to their review of policy on asbestos management in schools.

    Lord Nash

    The Department for Education is currently reviewing its policy on asbestos management in schools and intends to publish the outcome of the review by the end of June.

    The scope of the review includes the conclusions of the Committee on Carcinogenicity’s statement on the relative vulnerability of children and the recommendations from the report “Asbestos in schools: the need for action” produced by the All Party Parliamentary Group on Occupational Safety and Health. The Health and Safety Executive publishes figures on asbestos related deaths – including occupational information – on its website. We do not know of any figures detailing the incidence of asbestos related diseases in children.

  • Dan Jarvis – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Dan Jarvis – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Dan Jarvis on 2014-06-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, if he will estimate the cost of sending a copy of the Magna Carta to every school.

    Elizabeth Truss

    Magna Carta and the emergence of Parliament are included within the new history curriculum, to be taught in maintained secondary schools from September 2014.

    To support teachers to commemorate the 800th anniversary, a range of projects and resources are being provided by Parliament and others for primary and secondary school pupils.

    We have no plans to send a copy of the Magna Carta to every school and therefore have not made an estimate of what this might cost.

  • Baroness Byford – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Baroness Byford – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Byford on 2014-04-02.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the three crop rule included in the new Common Agricultural Policy relates to single parcels of land owned or rented by one person or company, or whether the entire holding can be treated as one parcel of land.

    Lord De Mauley

    The requirements of the crop diversification measure of greening, also known as the “three crop rule”, apply to the total arable area of a holding.

    Farmers with between 10ha and 30ha of eligible arable land will usually need to grow at least two crops. Farmers with over 30ha of eligible arable land will usually need to grow at least three crops. Compliance with the measure will be assessed at the holding level, not the parcel level.

  • Huw Irranca-Davies – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Huw Irranca-Davies – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Huw Irranca-Davies on 2014-06-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, whether any alternatives to a full ban on the importation of Indian mangoes were (a) considered by his Department’s officials and (b) put forward to European Commissioners.

    Dan Rogerson

    The ban was imposed following persistent interceptions of plant pestson imports of Indian produce into the European Union (EU) and critical reports from the European Commission’s Food and Veterinary Office audits in 2010 and 2013. Despite assurances from India in response to these reports the level of interceptions remained high. The EU’s decision to introduce a ban was therefore fully justified and supported by all Member States including the UK, in line with our policy of strengthening plant health controls. Therefore, no alternatives to a ban were considered by Defra.

    Protecting plant health is a key Defra objective. Plant pests and diseases such as those intercepted from India in recent years can cause serious damage to the UK glasshouse industry which is worth over £300 million per annum. However, I am aware of the importance of the mango trade and Defra officials are liaising with the Indian High Commission on what support the UK can offer to India to help it ensure compliance with EU import requirements.

    The following table shows the number of consignments of mangoes imported into the UK in the last five years which were infested with Tephriditae (and therefore rejected) by country of origin. The European Commission is considering similar measures to those taken against India for other countries with high levels of interceptions of plant pests. Such consideration takes account of findings from all Member States, and covers all plant commodities and all pests identified.

    Year

    Country of origin

    No. of consignments imported into the UK

    No. of consignments infected with Tephritidae

    2010

    Dominican Republic

    351

    1

    India

    1977

    1

    Jamaica

    228

    3

    Pakistan

    3302

    6

    2011

    Dominican Republic

    417

    2

    India

    1836

    11

    Jamaica

    262

    3

    Pakistan

    3690

    19

    Puerto Rico

    1

    1

    Sri Lanka

    144

    1

    Uganda

    138

    1

    2012

    Bangladesh

    146

    1

    Brazil

    445

    1

    Costa Rica

    70

    2

    Dominican Republic

    606

    18

    Ghana

    628

    15

    India

    3448

    23

    Jamaica

    332

    24

    Kenya

    2044

    4

    Pakistan

    5128

    81

    Philippines

    12

    2

    Sri Lanka

    189

    10

    St Lucia

    50

    1

    Thailand

    1050

    3

    Uganda

    104

    2

    2013

    Brazil

    316

    3

    Dominican Republic

    756

    16

    Ghana

    357

    4

    Guinea

    7

    1

    India

    3563

    13

    Jamaica

    516

    17

    Kenya

    1654

    17

    Pakistan

    5910

    47

    Puerto Rico

    104

    1

    Sri Lanka

    111

    3

    U A E

    1

    1

    Vietnam

    77

    1

    2014 (to 18/06/14)

    Brazil

    106

    1

    Dominican Republic

    420

    3

    Ghana

    271

    1

    India

    401

    1

    Jamaica

    464

    9

    Kenya

    698

    7

    Mexico

    61

    1

    Senegal

    4

    1

    Sri Lanka

    69

    3

    Source: Fera and Europhyt