Tag: 2014

  • Iain Wright – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Iain Wright – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Iain Wright on 2014-03-31.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of presumption for contact in relation to the role of fathers in the family courts; and if he will make a statement.

    Simon Hughes

    I have been asked to reply. Section 11 of the Children and Families Act 2014 requires courts to presume that a child benefits from the involvement of each parent who can be involved in a way which does not put the child at risk of harm. This is subject to the principle that the welfare of the child must be the courts’ paramount consideration. ‘Involvement’ may be direct or indirect and it is for courts to determine the most appropriate way for a parent to be involved in the light of the individual circumstances.

    Section 11 of the Act will be commenced in the autumn. One of the aims of the policy is to encourage parents to resolve disputes without the need for court intervention. The Government therefore intends to consider the impact of the policy as part of wider work to assess the impact of the family justice provisions in the Act.

  • Michael Meacher – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Michael Meacher – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Michael Meacher on 2014-06-16.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, in what capacity he and the Secretary of State for International Development attended the recent Bilderberg Conference in Copenhagen; and whether the visits have been recorded in the register of interests.

    Andrea Leadsom

    The Chancellor of the Exchequer attended the Bilderberg conference in Copenhagen. All travel undertaken by Treasury ministers is carried out in line with the Ministerial and Civil Service Management Codes. Details of all ministerial overseas travel are published quarterly:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/hmt-ministers-meetings-hospitality-gifts-and-overseas-travel

    “

  • Chris Ruane – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Chris Ruane – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chris Ruane on 2014-03-31.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what the percentage change in long-term youth unemployment was in each constituency between 2010 and the most recent period for which figures are available.

    Mr Nick Hurd

    The information requested falls within the responsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I have asked the Authority to reply.

  • Angus Robertson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Angus Robertson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Angus Robertson on 2014-06-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether the deviations or exemptions from the Military Air Systems Certification Process that allowed the inaugural flight of the Rivet Joint aircraft on May 27 2014 were the final form that will be used for all operations.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 16 June 2014, (Official Report, column 364W), to the hon. Member for Plymouth, Moor View (Alison Seabeck).

    Ongoing work will progressively refine this release as additional information becomes available and further analysis is conducted.

  • Lord Mendelsohn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Lord Mendelsohn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Mendelsohn on 2014-03-31.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what guidelines are followed by HM Revenue and Customs and the Crown Prosecution Service in determining whether to investigate or prosecute VAT carousel fraud.

    Lord Newby

    HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) seek to disrupt VAT carousel (Missing Trader Intra-Community – MTIC) fraud using both civil and criminal interventions.

    When using criminal action HMRC seek to investigate the ‘guiding minds’ behind MTIC fraud, as well as, selectively, other participants, including key enablers.

    Such cases are notified and referred to the relevant independent prosecutors. The final charging decision is made by the prosecuting agency, based on the evidence presented as a result of the HMRC investigation. Cases in England and Wales will be referred to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).

  • Angus Robertson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Angus Robertson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Angus Robertson on 2014-06-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what assets his Department has sold and leased back over the last 12 months; what the sale price was of each asset so sold; and what estimate his Department has made of the cost to the public purse of leasing back each such asset over the period of the lease.

    Dr Andrew Murrison

    This information is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost. However, normally the Ministry of Defence sells its assets with vacant possession, only leasing back properties for short periods pending relocation of the occupants.

  • Helen Jones – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    Helen Jones – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Helen Jones on 2014-03-31.

    To ask the Attorney General, how many people have been prosecuted under the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004 for breach of a non-molestation order in each police force area in each year since that Act came into force.

    Oliver Heald

    The records held by the Crown Prosecution Service do not identify the number of people prosecuted for a breach of a non-molestation order. Such information could only be obtained through a manual search of records which would incur disproportionate cost.

  • Robert Buckland – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Robert Buckland – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Robert Buckland on 2014-06-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, when his Department will publish further information on pilots testing the role of the Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal in making recommendations on the health and social care aspects of Education, Health and Care Plans.

    Mr Edward Timpson

    The Department for Education, in consultation with the Ministry of Justice and others, is in the process of developing proposals for the review of redress and complaint arrangements for children and young people with special educational needs and disabilities. The review will consider:

    1. Whether the amended mediation arrangements set out in the Act provide parents and young people with a way of having their complaints considered in a holistic way and whether they reduce the number of appeals to tribunals.
    2. How successful the new assessment and EHC planning process itself is at resolving disagreements.
    3. If health and social care complaint arrangements are working for parents and young people.
    4. What role the Tribunal might play in hearing appeals and complaints across education, health and social care.

    Running parallel to the review will be pilots to test an expansion of the powers of the first tier tribunal to make recommendations about the health and social care elements of EHC Plans. We estimate that the pilots will begin in the spring of 2015 as the first appeals about the new Education, Health and Care Plans begin to be heard and that the pilots will last for two years as they build up the evidence on which to base any recommendations.

    The Secretary of State for Education and the Lord Chancellor must lay a report on the outcome of the review before Parliament within three years of any of the provisions of Part 3 of the Children and Families Act 2014 coming into force in September 2014. Interim findings from the pilots could be published before the final report on the review.

  • Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Hilary Benn on 2014-03-31.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what the status is of the ICT Relet Project; what costs his Department has incurred; and if he will make a statement.

    Brandon Lewis

    As I outlined to the rt. hon. Member in my answer to him of 29 January 2014, Official Report, Column 600W, the programme replaces computers which are seven years old, and also upgrades the systems from Windows XP which is no longer being formally supported by Microsoft with security patches.

    The last Administration failed to get value for taxpayers’ money due to poor management of IT contracts. Indeed, the Department published a contract tender in December 2009 for a desktop IT programme costing up to £160 million. This was subsequently cancelled under this Government as part of our wider reduction in departmental spending and reconfiguration of IT procurement policy.

    The fact that we have delivered a 40 per cent saving on our IT costs is an example of how all parts of the public sector can deliver sensible savings through better procurement.

  • Liam Byrne – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Liam Byrne – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Liam Byrne on 2014-06-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many meetings he has had with his Department’s Chief Scientific Adviser in the last 12 months.

    Dr Daniel Poulter

    As was the case under previous administrations, details of internal meetings are not normally disclosed.