UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: 2014

  • Lord Beecham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Lord Beecham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Beecham on 2014-06-09.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether, in the event of a rise in the anticipated costs of community rehabilitation companies emerging from the bidding process, the Secretary of State will delay the process; and, if so, what estimated impact on the National Probation Service would trigger such a decision.

    Lord Faulks

    The Transforming Rehabilitation Programme is opening up the market to a diverse range of new providers, so that we can harness the best that the private and voluntary sectors has to offer to reduce reoffending. We are on track to award and mobilise Payment by Results (PbR) contracts for offender rehabilitation services across England and Wales by 2015. Bids to run the Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs) have yet to be submitted, but are expected by the end of June 2014. We currently have strong, competitive bidder interest across all Contract Package Areas, and we do not expect rising costs to be an issue.

  • Steve Rotheram – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Steve Rotheram – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steve Rotheram on 2014-03-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many times a convicted attempted murderer released on licence has been allowed to enter an exclusion zone formed as part of their licence arrangement within one week of their release in each of the last 10 years.

    Jeremy Wright

    Unfortunately, it is not possible to answer these questions without carrying out a manual search through all relevant individual offender files, at disproportionate cost.

    Conditions such as an exclusion zone may be applied to an offender’s licence where it is necessary to manage the risk that the individual offender poses following release into the community – and where it is proportionate to that risk. Where qualifying victims have exercised their statutory right to make representations about the offender’s licence conditions, the exclusion zone set will take into account those representations. In each case, the supervising officer proposes conditions as appropriate and requests these from the appropriate authority, which applies it to the licence on behalf of the Secretary of State. In the case of determinate sentence prisoners, the authority is the prison governor; in the case of indeterminate sentence prisoners, or others whose release is on the direction of the Parole Board, the authority is the Parole Board.

    These conditions must be kept under review, and are intended to be flexible to the possible resettlement needs of an offender in the community and any new risks that arise.

    An exclusion zone will rarely be absolute, as it is recognised that there may be exceptional reasons why the offender needs to enter the exclusion zone. Thus, where an exclusion zone is included in the offender’s licence, it will usually be open to the supervising officer to grant the offender permission to enter the exclusion zone, for a temporary period and for a specific purpose.

    As this is a purely localised decision, there is no national record of the number of occasions such permission has been given. It is, therefore, not possible to answer the questions regarding how many times an offender has been granted permission to enter the exclusion zone applied to his licence.

    Data from the last 10 years is not available in the required electronic format to answer the question relating to numbers of offenders with exclusion zones included in their licence. To provide such information would again require a manual interrogation of offenders’ records and this would incur disproportionate cost.

  • Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2014-06-09.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made as to which alternative facilities will be used by those who currently use Worcester Walk-In Health Centre if it is closed.

    Earl Howe

    The reconfiguration of local health services is a matter for the National Health Service. All service changes should be led by clinicians and be in the best interests of patients, not driven from the top down.

    We are aware that the local consultation on the Worcestershire Urgent Care Strategy closed on 9 April 2014. The clinical commissioning groups in Worcestershire are now considering the responses. No decisions have yet been made.

  • Stephen Timms – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Stephen Timms – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Timms on 2014-03-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what plans his Department has for the future use of Post Office card accounts.

    Steve Webb

    The Post Office card account (POca) contract expires in March 2015 with the possibility of a 2 year extension beyond that date.

    No decision has been made on the future of the POca but discussions are currently taking place between DWP, Post Office Ltd and the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills to consider the future needs of customers beyond 2015.

  • Lord Berkeley – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lord Berkeley – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Berkeley on 2014-06-09.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the switch data encryption system proposed by HS2 Ltd for communication with petitioners against the High Speed Rail (London–West Midlands) Bill allows petitioners to copy, circulate and otherwise communicate as a normal email; and whether any tracking or monitoring of such communications will be available to HS2 through the system.

    Baroness Kramer

    Egress is an email system used by many government departments, NHS trusts and local authorities, including the London Borough of Camden, for communicating externally. It does not provide HS2 Ltd with any abilities to track or monitor emails sent by others. Petitioners will use Egress to download their petition response document; it will not be attached to an email. HS2 Ltd will only be able to confirm if and when the Petition Response Document (PRD) has been downloaded. Once downloaded, the PRD can be saved and copied, and circulated to others, subject to the constraints of email service providers on large files.

  • Charlie Elphicke – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Charlie Elphicke – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Charlie Elphicke on 2014-03-11.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what estimate his Department made before the 2012 Budget of the number of properties valued at more than (a) £2 million and (b) £5 million.

    David Gauke

    The number of residential properties in the UK valued at more than £2 million was estimated before Budget 2012 to be around 55,000.

    Before Budget 2012, an assessment of the average annual payment required from each property above £2 million in order to raise a net sum of £2 billion per annum was not made.

    On 1 July 2013, during Report stage of the Finance Bill, I referred to “a simple calculation arrived at by dividing £2 billion by 55,000 (an internal HMRC estimate of the number of properties valued at over £2 million) to give a ‘mean’ average of £36,000.”

    A so-called mansion tax would depress stamp duty land tax and inheritance tax yields. The exact impact would be dependent on the rates and bands chosen.

  • Lord Temple-Morris – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Lord Temple-Morris – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Temple-Morris on 2014-06-09.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many parents have been imprisoned for non-payment of fines in respect of taking their school-age children on holiday during term time.

    Lord Nash

    Parents who have been issued a penalty notice (fine) for failing to secure their child’s regular attendance at school cannot be imprisoned for not paying the fine. However, if a parent knowingly and deliberately takes their child on holiday during term time (without a leave of absence granted by the school) they could face a term of imprisonment for doing so if they are prosecuted under the substantive offence set out in section 444(1A) of the Education Act 1996 (the Act). It will be a matter for the prosecuting authority (the Local Authority) to decide on the particular facts and circumstances of the case whether to bring formal proceedings and under what offence.

  • Margaret Ritchie – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Margaret Ritchie – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Ritchie on 2014-04-03.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what progress has been made on the voluntary exit scheme for staff at HM Revenue and Customs offices in Northern Ireland.

    Mr David Gauke

    HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) launched two voluntary exit schemes in November 2013 for people in 21 of its offices and for people in its Debt Management and Banking division. Further schemes were opened in February 2014, for eligible staff at Administrative Assistant grade across the country and for people affected by the decision to replace enquiry centres with a new service for customers who need extra help.

    There are nine offices or enquiry centres across Northern Ireland where eligible people have been invited to apply for one of the schemes. A summary of the progress at 4 April 2014 can be found in the table below.

    Location

    Invited to apply

    Applied for VE

    Offered VE*

    Accepted VE

    Declined VE

    Pending Decision**

    Antrim

    1

    1

    1

    1

    Ballymena

    4

    3

    3

    1

    2

    Belfast

    17

    14

    11

    5

    3

    3

    Coleraine

    10

    9

    9

    3

    3

    3

    Craigavon

    11

    7

    7

    3

    1

    3

    Enniskillen

    30

    24

    23

    5

    17

    1

    Lisburn

    8

    7

    7

    4

    1

    2

    Londonderry

    79

    66

    66

    32

    34

    0

    Newry

    137

    45

    45

    30

    15

    0

    Total

    297

    176

    172

    83

    74

    15

    * 4 of those that applied withdrew their applications after being successful in obtaining a post in the new service for customers who need extra help

    ** A decision is pending for 15 people as they have until 28 April to decide whether or not to accept a formal offer of voluntary exit.
  • Robert Buckland – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Robert Buckland – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Robert Buckland on 2014-06-09.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what assessment he has made of the benefits of future mergers of public service ombudsman services in England.

    Mr Francis Maude

    The Government is considering recent reports of the Public Administration Select Committee (PASC) into how complaints about public services are handled. As part of this, the Cabinet Office is working to investigate further how public services can make best use of complaints and also to take a wider look at the role and powers of the Public Sector Ombudsmen. The Government will respond to the PASC in due course. I am happy to discuss this matter further with my Hon. Friend.

    The annual reports and accounts of the public service ombudsmen in the UK provide details of their performance over the past 12 months including information about complaints received.

  • Mr Frank Field – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Mr Frank Field – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mr Frank Field on 2014-03-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, if he will make an assessment of the potential effect on the housing benefit budget of limiting all rents to local authority rent levels.

    Steve Webb

    It is not possible to make a meaningful assessment. Limiting all rents to local authority rent levels would be a dramatic change to the housing market. It is therefore not possible to reliably predict what would happen to the supply and demand for accommodation, especially in the private rented sector, and the impacts on housing benefit expenditure.