UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: 2015

  • Ben Howlett – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Ben Howlett – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ben Howlett on 2015-11-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what assessment she has made of the effect of the introduction of statutory PHSE on the uptake of STEM subjects by girls.

    Edward Timpson

    Through the introduction to the national curriculum, the Government has made clear that all schools should make provision for Personal, Social and Health Education (PSHE). PSHE is, however, a non-statutory subject.

    The Government is determined to increase the number of young people studying Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths (STEM) subjects, particularly girls. There have been 12,000 more A Level entries in STEM subjects for girls over the last five years.

    PSHE plays an important part in preparing young people for the world of work including dispelling gender stereotyping. Resources to support PSHE include those produced by Siemens in collaboration with the PSHE Association. These resourced explore equality and the world of work which aim to inspire the next generation of female scientists, technicians and engineers.

    We are also supporting schools in other ways to tackle this issue through professional development and enrichment activities, including the Stimulating Physics Network, and the inspiring “Your Life” campaign, which will transform perceptions of science and mathematics.

  • Lord Higgins – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lord Higgins – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Higgins on 2015-10-29.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what estimate they have made of the effect on air pollution of the construction and use of bicycle lanes, particularly in London.

    Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

    The Department for Transport has not completed any estimates specifically on the effect of construction and use of bicycle lanes on air pollution. But we recognise that encouraging car users to switch to alternative, more sustainable, forms of transport like cycling can generally have both health and carbon reduction benefits as well as improving local air quality.

    When we appraise cycle schemes for funding, we apply WebTAG unit A5-1. This appraisal looks at outcomes only and does not consider impacts during the construction phase of a scheme. Where a scheme includes shifts away from mechanised modes and changes in congestion levels, we use marginal external costs, including air pollution. This is done at an individual scheme level and reported in the appraisal of each case; therefore no holistic study has been undertaken. This appraisal does not take account of potentially complex changes to motorists behaviour (such as speed and route choice) resulting from the introduction of cycle lanes.

    Transport for London state that during the construction phase some localised short-term slight impacts on local air quality can be expected from the use of plant and vehicles. However, contractors are required to minimise dust and emissions to air and comply with the Greater London Authority and London Councils’ Control of Dust and Emissions from Construction and Demolition Best Practice Guidance.

    Transport for London undertake air quality modelling to ascertain the impacts during operation. Schemes such as the East-West Cycle Superhighway show that the likely impact of the introduction of cycle lanes and changes to the road layout on air quality ranges from adverse to beneficial. The study shows that changes in traffic will redistribute emissions across the study area but will not increase overall emission levels.

  • Kevan Jones – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Kevan Jones – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevan Jones on 2015-11-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what funding his Department has provided to the BBC World Service in each year since 2010.

    Mr David Lidington

    In each year from 2010 the department provided the following funding to the BBC World Service: 2009/2010 – £268,043,000 2010/2011 – £268,523,000 2011/2012 – £255,200,000 2012/2013 – £244,200,000 2013/2014 – £238,480,000

  • Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town on 2015-10-29.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government when they anticipate publication of the results of the review of the United Kingdom’s system for the recall of unsafe products chaired by Lynn Faulds Wood.

    Baroness Neville-Rolfe

    The Review of UK product recalls chaired by Lynn Faulds Wood is due to be published soon.

  • Jamie Reed – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Jamie Reed – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jamie Reed on 2015-11-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many of the NHS vanguard sires are supporting the needs of people with inflammatory arthritis.

    Jane Ellison

    NHS England is working to support and stimulate the creation of a number of major new care models, led by the vanguard sites, which can be deployed in different combinations locally across England. These models are designed to overcome the traditional divide between primary care, community services and hospitals, as well as social and mental health care, which is increasingly a barrier to the personalised, coordinated and integrated services patients need.

    Improving continuity of care in this way is particularly relevant for patients with long term conditions (LTCs), such as inflammatory arthritis. A number of the vanguard sites (such as those introducing multispecialty community provider models and integrated primary and acute care system models) are focusing on the care of patients with LTCs. More information can be found at the following link:

    www.england.nhs.uk/ourwork/futurenhs/new-care-models/

    “

  • Kevin Brennan – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Kevin Brennan – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2015-10-29.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what ability the Government plans to retain to ensure that the Green Investment Bank operates according to its original purposes after that body’s privatisation.

    Anna Soubry

    Green investment is what the Green Investment Bank (GIB) does and is where its value lies. It is clear from preliminary feedback that potential investors are interested in GIB precisely because of its unique green specialism and its existing forward business plan and pipeline of green projects. Investors will have sound commercial reasons to maintain GIB’s green focus and continue operating in accordance with its clearly stated green principles and highly transparent and robust green reporting practices.

    As a key part of any sale discussions, potential investors will be asked to confirm their commitment to these values and to set out how they propose to protect them. We envisage this would involve new shareholders agreeing to:

    • ensure GIB continues to invest in a way that achieves a positive green impact; and
    • maintain GIB’s existing standards for reporting on its green investment performance as well as continue providing for independent assurance of this.

    It is important to understand Government could not impose binding conditions on future owners of GIB to act in a particular way while also securing our key objective of removing state control over GIB so it can be reclassified to the private sector.

  • Nicola Blackwood – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Nicola Blackwood – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nicola Blackwood on 2015-11-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how much of her Department’s funding allocated in the Spending Review 2015 will be for research and development expenditure up to 2020.

    Karen Bradley

    The Spending Review announcement set the overall budget for the Home Office. Officials are now going through the detail and will continue to provide advice to the Home Secretary on individual allocations and spending commitments. We anticipate that funding allocations for research and development will be confirmed in the new year.

  • Louise Haigh – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Louise Haigh – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Louise Haigh on 2015-10-29.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he will ensure that save-as-you-earn and share incentive plan savings limits are increased in line with inflation on an annual basis.

    Mr David Gauke

    The tax-advantaged Save As You Earn (SAYE) and Share Incentive Plan (SIP) limits were significantly increased from April 2014. The increases the Government have made are reasonable, given the average monthly SAYE savings and the value of awards currently made to employees under SIP, and they represent the best use of resources. The Government will continue to keep the SAYE and SIP limits under review.

    In addition to increasing the SAYE and SIP limits, the rules of the schemes were substantially reviewed and simplified following the recommendations made by the Office of Tax Simplification in March 2012. Last year, the requirement that these schemes must be approved by HM Revenue and Customs to qualify for favourable tax treatment was replaced by self-certification. Coupled with other changes to simplify some technical aspects of the rules, this will make these schemes more attractive to businesses and employees.

    No data is collected and no estimates are made of the income levels of the participants in SAYE schemes.

    Permitting private equity backed companies to offer all-employee tax advantaged schemes would be likely to involve significant changes to the rules of the schemes, and there would be a number of other factors to consider carefully, including the increased cost and complexity of any extension.

  • Luciana Berger – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Luciana Berger – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Luciana Berger on 2015-11-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, how much the Information Commissioner’s Office has spent on processing assessments pursuant to section 42 of the Data Protection Act 1998 in each of the last five financial years; how many such requests that Office has received in each of the those years; and what the recorded outcomes were of those requests.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    Under section 42 of the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA), any person who is, or believes that he is, directly affected by the processing of personal data, can ask the Information Commissioner to consider whether the processing is likely to comply with the law. On receiving such a request, the Commissioner is obliged to consider the concern and make an assessment. Any such request, and cases taken forward are dealt with by the ICO’s customer contact and performance improvement business areas. The ICO does not cost up S42 assessments separately from other data protection casework, but the total staffing costs for these two business areas for the last five financial years are set out below:

    2015/16 (April-Nov)

    £2,883,256.14

    2014/15

    £3,879,782.83

    2013/14

    £3,969,104.17

    2012/13

    £3,581,161.82

    2011/12

    £3,389,336.87

    Numbers of assessments received and concluded for each of the past 5 years are set out below:

    Financial years

    2010-11

    2011-12

    2012-13

    2013-14

    2014-15

    Number of assessments received under s42 DPA

    13034

    12980

    13760

    14738

    14268

    Number of assessments completed under s42 DPA

    14276

    12725

    14280

    15492

    15052

    The recorded outcomes of those assessments are set out below:

    Financial years

    Outcome of s42 assessment

    2010-11

    2011-12

    2012-13

    2013-14

    2014-15

    Not progressed

    14%

    11%

    13%

    14%

    Compliance likely

    22%

    21%

    22%

    19%

    Compliance unlikely

    33%

    31%

    35%

    34%

    Ineligible/Made too early

    27%

    36%

    30%

    33%

    Reopened – pending final outcome

    4%

    1%

    No Action for Data Controller

    35%

    Data Controller Action required

    22%

    Concern to be raised with Data Controller

    17%

    compliance advice given to Data Controller

    10%

    Response needed from Data Controller

    7%

    Complaint not applicable under DPA

    4%

    General advice given to Data Controller

    4%

    Data Controller outside UK

    1%

    Improvement action plan agreed with Data Controller

    1%

    “

  • Christopher Chope – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Christopher Chope – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Christopher Chope on 2015-10-29.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, pursuant to the Answer of 21 October 2015 to Question 12248, what the gross cost to the Planning Inspectorate was of the examination into the planning consent application for the Navitus Bay Wind Park; and how much of that cost was paid by Navitus Bay Development Ltd.

    James Wharton

    The gross cost to the Planning Inspectorate of the examination into the planning consent application for the Navitus Bay Wind Park was £995,660. Navitus Bay Development Ltd paid £565,660 of those costs.