UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: 2014

  • Caroline Lucas – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    Caroline Lucas – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2014-06-11.

    To ask the Attorney General, whether officials of the Crown Prosecution Service have (a) met the Attorney General of Nigeria since January 2012, (b) had any conversations about the sale of the OPL 245 oil concession in Nigeria involving Shell and ENI with (i) the Attorney General of Nigeria and (ii) any other senior official of the Nigerian government and (c) received any requests for mutual legal assistance regarding the OPL 245 case.

    Oliver Heald

    The CPS Criminal Justice Advisor in Abuja has met with the Attorney-General of Nigeria a number of times since January 2012 to discuss criminal justice reform. The CPS are not aware of any other contact between CPS officials and the Attorney General of Nigeria.

    The CPS is not aware of any of its officials having conversations with the Attorney General of Nigeria or with any other senior official of the Nigerian government about the sale of the OPL 245 oil concession in Nigeria involving Shell and ENI.

    Requests for mutual legal assistance attract a duty of confidentiality to the requesting country and, therefore, the CPS can neither confirm nor deny the receipt of any such requests.

  • Mr David Hanson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Mr David Hanson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mr David Hanson on 2014-03-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many arrests were made for immigration offences as a result of information received from the public in each week in 2013; and how many resulted in (a) prosecution and (b) deportation.

    James Brokenshire

    The following table outlines the number of arrests made for immigration offences as a result of allegations received from the public in each week in 2013 and how many resulted in (a) prosecution and (b) removal.

    In order to align this answer with the method used for collating the data- "Information received from the public" has been interpreted as allegations and "deportation" has been referred to as removals.

    Week

    Arrests

    Prosecutions

    Removals

    Week 01

    15

    –

    10

    Week 02

    75

    –

    30

    Week 03

    35

    –

    15

    Week 04

    65

    –

    20

    Week 05

    60

    –

    20

    Week 06

    55

    –

    20

    Week 07

    75

    –

    30

    Week 08

    65

    –

    20

    Week 09

    60

    –

    25

    Week 10

    60

    –

    25

    Week 11

    75

    –

    25

    Week 12

    75

    –

    30

    Week 13

    45

    –

    20

    Week 14

    55

    *

    30

    Week 15

    55

    –

    30

    Week 16

    80

    –

    40

    Week 17

    90

    –

    55

    Week 18

    120

    *

    55

    Week 19

    145

    75

    Week 20

    95

    –

    50

    Week 21

    80

    *

    40

    Week 22

    85

    *

    35

    Week 23

    85

    5

    40

    Week 24

    90

    –

    45

    Week 25

    115

    –

    50

    Week 26

    215

    5

    95

    Week 27

    120

    –

    50

    Week 28

    155

    *

    65

    Week 29

    145

    –

    60

    Week 30

    100

    –

    35

    Week 31

    120

    *

    30

    Week 32

    80

    –

    20

    Week 33

    125

    –

    40

    Week 34

    85

    –

    25

    Week 35

    80

    –

    25

    Week 36

    90

    –

    25

    Week 37

    75

    –

    20

    Week 38

    75

    –

    20

    Week 39

    90

    –

    30

    Week 40

    75

    –

    20

    Week 41

    95

    –

    35

    Week 42

    80

    –

    15

    Week 43

    105

    –

    35

    Week 44

    55

    –

    20

    Week 45

    125

    –

    30

    Week 46

    120

    –

    20

    Week 47

    100

    –

    20

    Week 48

    95

    –

    5

    Week 49

    75

    –

    5

    Week 50

    95

    –

    5

    Week 51

    85

    –

    *

    Week 52

    20

    –

    –

    Week 53

    10

    –

    –

    Grand Total

    4,535

    15

    1,585

    The number of prosecutions and removals refers directly to the allegations received in that week, but may not have taken place within that timeframe.

  • Adam Afriyie – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Adam Afriyie – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Adam Afriyie on 2014-06-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many disabled entrepreneurs have been able to access additional support funding through the Access to Work programme.

    Mike Penning

    In the financial year April 2013 – March 2014 DWP supported 4066 disabled customers who are registered as self employed through the Access to Work programme. Of which 57 customers were also from The New Enterprise Allowance programme.

  • Mr Dominic Raab – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Mr Dominic Raab – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mr Dominic Raab on 2014-03-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with which countries the EU as a legal personality has concluded co-operation agreements in the field of justice and home affairs.

    Mr Shailesh Vara

    I refer to the response provided by the Minister for Europe on 24 March [PQ 191707 Col 70W]. In addition, JHA agreements have been concluded between the EU and Brazil, Ukraine and Moldova during the course of this Government, which build on the borders and immigration aspects of the Schengen system, in which the UK does not participate.

  • Grahame M. Morris – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Grahame M. Morris – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Grahame M. Morris on 2014-06-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what discussions her Department has had with B&K Universal Ltd, Yorkshire Evergreen or their associates about their planning application for a facility at Grimston, Yorkshire for the breeding of dogs and other animals for laboratory use in the last 12 months.

    Norman Baker

    Home Office officials have advised B&K Universal Ltd of the requirements for the proposed facility of European Directive 2010/63/EU, which was implemented in the UK and other Member States on 1 January 2013.

    Decisions on planning applications are a matter for the relevant local planning authority.

  • Mr Gordon Marsden – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Mr Gordon Marsden – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mr Gordon Marsden on 2014-03-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, when he expects to appoint the working group to assess the impact of the Equality Act 2010 (Work on Ships and Hovercraft) Regulations 2011 in the shipping industry; what the terms of reference will be for that group; and what the expected timeframe will be within which it will report its findings to Ministers.

    Stephen Hammond

    Discussions have already been held with government, association and union representatives and we have a broad understanding. A meeting of interested parties will be convened within the next two months and will focus that understanding into formulating the terms of reference and to agreeing the membership of the group. The review will be fully compliant with Section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 (working on ships and hovercrafts) 2011.

    Another action of that meeting will be to set the timeframe in which the Group will report back. Members of the Group will be asked to give consideration to their own timescales that will be necessary to deliver their contributions to the Group. Therefore while Section 6 sets an absolute deadline of 17th July 2016 it would be expected for the working group to publish it report before then.

  • Lord Stevens of Kirkwhelpington – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lord Stevens of Kirkwhelpington – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Stevens of Kirkwhelpington on 2014-06-11.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Kramer on 12 March (WA 375), in relation to the United Kingdom general aviation sector, what action has been taken to ensure cross-party cooperation and support for the Civil Aviation Authority in encouraging the growth of a vibrant United Kingdom general aviation sector.

    Baroness Kramer

    The Government and Civil Aviation Authority are taking forward a programme of work aimed at encouraging the growth of a vibrant general aviation sector. This has involved consultation with a wide range of stakeholders. My Noble Friend, Lord Rotherwick, secured a Question for Short Debate on the regulation of general aviation on 21 January 2014 [Official Report, column GC319], at which there was wide support for our programme of work.

  • Ian Austin – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Ian Austin – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Austin on 2014-03-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what powers the Child Support Agency has to investigate the weekly expenses of parents who are paying child maintenance.

    Steve Webb

    Section 14 of the Child Support Act 1991 and the Child Support Information Regulations 2008 provide the Child Support Agency and Child Maintenance Service with wide powers to obtain information from parents and third parties for the purpose of making decisions relating to child maintenance, including those decisions which relate to establishing the child maintenance of a Paying Parent.

    The Receiving Parent is not responsible for estimating the weekly expenses of a Paying Parent. The Child Maintenance Service, which administers the 2012 Scheme, is built to make best use of taxable income information that is regularly and reliably available from HMRC. However, in the 1993 and 2003 schemes, administered by the Child Support Agency, the Receiving Parent can sometimes be asked to provide evidence of expenditure in order to support an application for a variation on the grounds of “lifestyle inconsistent with declared income”.

  • Lord Bradley – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Bradley – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Bradley on 2014-06-11.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what recent assessment they have made of the adequacy of National Health Service community physiotherapy services for patients who have had (1) knee, and (2) hip, replacement operations.

    Earl Howe

    No assessment has been made centrally of the adequacy of National Health Service community physiotherapy services for either hip or knee replacement operations.

    The commissioning of community therapy services is a matter for clinical commissioning groups using the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance where available.

    Recently, case-mix adjusted health gain following hip and knee replacement has been added to the Clinical Commissioning Group Outcomes Tool “Commissioning for Value”. This data should facilitate conversations between commissioners and their provider trusts.

    The Health & Social Care Information Centre publishes a National Joint Registry (NJR) of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), which measures health gain in patients undergoing hip replacement, knee replacement, varicose vein and groin hernia surgery in England, based on responses to questionnaires before and after surgery.

    The Best Practice Tariff for total hip and knee replacements pays for the whole episode of surgery and hospital based rehabilitation. Payment of the Best Practice Tariff for primary hip and knee replacement surgery is conditional on criteria linked to data collected through the NJR PROMs. If a provider’s NJR PROMs falls into the lowest 5% nationally in terms of outcomes the commissioner is able to remove the Best Practice Tariff funding unless a plan is made for how to improve the services.

  • Tom Greatrex – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Tom Greatrex – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tom Greatrex on 2014-04-01.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, what audit requirements are (a) in place and (b) planned for generating stations over 1Mw in size that use solid biomass or biogas.

    Gregory Barker

    The Renewables Obligation (Amendment) Order 2014, which came into force on 1 April 2014, requires generating stations with a total installed capacity of 1MW and above that use solid biomass or biogas to provide an annual sustainability audit report in respect of the biomass that they use. There are exceptions for landfill gas, sewage gas, municipal waste, manure and for other fuels which do not meet the specific definition of biomass within the Renewables Obligation (RO).

    The audit report must be prepared to ISAE3000 standard or its equivalent, and must be prepared by a person who is not the owner or operator of the station or a connected person. In the case of biomass which is not waste or derived from waste, the audit must cover the information provided by the operator of the station in respect of the land criteria or Timber Standard, and greenhouse gas sustainability criteria. In the case of biomass which is waste or derived from waste, the audit must cover the information provided by the operator of the station that the biomass was waste or wholly derived from waste. Other detailed requirements for the audit report are set out in article 54B of the Renewables Obligation Order 2009, as inserted by article 15 of the Renewables Obligation (Amendment) Order 2014.

    A similar audit requirement is planned to apply to Combined Heat and Power (CHP) stations receiving support under the Renewable Heat Incentive (RHI) if they choose not to source fuel from the RHI Biomass Suppliers List (BSL), a list of suppliers selling sustainable fuel, but instead report against the RHI sustainability criteria to Ofgem.

    It is intended that the Contracts for Difference (CfD) awarded for bioenergy under the first Electricity Market Reform Delivery Plan will follow the same approach on sustainability audit as set out under the Renewables Obligation.

    Ofgem, as the administrator of the Renewables Obligation, carries out a programme of audits of accredited generating stations, primarily to guard against fraud and error. This can include stations over 1MW in size that use solid biomass or biogas. They also ensure that a generating station remains an eligible renewable generating station for the purposes of the RO, that Ofgem holds the most up-to-date information for a station, and that the correct number of Renewables Obligation Certificates (ROCs) has been issued to the generator in question. The audits are carried out on a rolling basis, with targeted audits where it is deemed necessary. The CfD Counterparty company will be empowered under the Contracts for Difference to audit any generating station it chooses, with 1 business day’s written notice, to check compliance with agreed Fuel Measurement and Sampling procedures.