Tag: 2015

  • Maria Miller – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Maria Miller – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Maria Miller on 2015-11-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, for what reasons section 80 of the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 has not been brought into force.

    Andrew Jones

    Section 80 of the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 contains a duty on persons carrying out works in the carriageway. As the question indicates, this has never been brought into force. It concerns occasions where a person undertaking works in the street finds apparatus belonging to an undertaker that does not appear or differs from the underground asset records provided. In such cases, the person would be required to take steps to inform the owner, or keep a record of its location and inform the relevant local authority of the nature of what they have found and its location.

    The associated section 79 (Records of location of apparatus) of the Act was brought into force in 2003. This section provides that those with apparatus under the street must maintain records of that apparatus, and provide it to those requesting it with a legitimate interest.

    Some years ago, the industry considered how the requirements in section 80 might operate in practice if they were brought into force. I am aware that at the time, those undertaking street works felt that there would be challenges in identifying the asset owner and conveying the information in a way that would provide an accurate and reliable record for the future. This process could delay completion of the works, causing additional congestion to traffic and adding cost to the job. These consequences conflict with the aims of minimising disruption and cost in carrying out street works. The range of methods used to maintain records, and inconsistency in how the information could be conveyed raised concerns about the feasibility of doing this, and future liability issues.

    No further consideration has been given to this matter recently.

  • Baroness Coussins – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Baroness Coussins – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Coussins on 2015-12-15.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many (1) Afghan interpreters, and (2) members of their immediate families, have been relocated to the UK under (a) the ex gratia redundancy scheme, and (b) the intimidation policy.

    Lord Bates

    Up to the end of November, 230 Afghan locally engaged civilians along with 297 members of their families have been relocated to the UK under the ex gratia redundancy scheme.

    No locally engaged civilians have been relocated to the UK under the current intimidation policy. One former staff member was relocated to the UK under a previous version of the policy.

  • Tania Mathias – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Tania Mathias – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tania Mathias on 2015-11-17.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what assessment he has made of the potential effect of a fundraising preference service on the work of the charity sector.

    Mr Rob Wilson

    The Fundraising Preference Service, recommended by the Etherington reviewinto fundraising, will re-balancepower back to individuals and help them to press the ‘reset’ button on their relationship with fundraisers, giving them control over the fundraisingcommunications they receive from charities. It will stop people being inundated withrequests which they do not wish to receive and it will stop charities wasting resources oncommunicating with people that do not wish to hear from them. It also seeks to underwritepublic trust and confidence in charities which is vital to the sector’s work.

    A working group involving charities is being established to develop the detailed plans for theimplementation of the service.

  • Lord Warner – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Lord Warner – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Warner on 2015-12-15.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of their commitment to consult on 100 per cent retention of business rates by local authorities by the end of this Parliament, what additional resources would be available to each local authority with adult social care functions if they had been able to keep all the business rates collected in their area in 2014–15, and what proportion of their total expenditure that business rate retention amounted to.

    Baroness Williams of Trafford

    The Government intends to move to 100 percent business rates retention in England by the end of this Parliament. We have confirmed that as part of the new system there will continue to be redistribution of local tax revenue between authorities and protections in place for authorities that see their business rates income fall significantly. Over the coming months we will be working with local government on the details of the scheme. Ahead of final decisions, it is too early to assess what the impact will be on individual areas or authorities.

  • Karen Buck – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Karen Buck – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Karen Buck on 2015-11-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, how many staff are currently working on the review of the localisation of council tax benefit; and whether he plans for further appointments to be made to this team.

    Mr Marcus Jones

    The details of the Chair and terms of reference for the independent review of local council tax support schemes will be published in due course. A Review team comprising four full-time equivalents staff has been set up to provide project and analytical support to the Chair.

    The Review will be completed by the end of March 2016.

  • Seema Malhotra – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Seema Malhotra – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Seema Malhotra on 2015-12-15.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, which external organisations have contributed to his Department’s review on business rates.

    Mr David Gauke

    The Government has held a range meetings with stakeholders and received a large number of submissions in response to the business rates review. The review will be fiscally neutral and will report at Budget 2016.

  • David Hanson – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    David Hanson – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Hanson on 2015-11-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, how much support from EU agricultural funding has been awarded to UK organic food producers in each of the last five years.

    George Eustice

    In England between 2010 and 2014, support for organic farmers was provided under the Organic Entry Level Stewardship scheme (OELS) and Organic Higher Level Stewardship scheme (OHLS), which were set up under the Rural Development Programme for England (RDPE). The following table provides details of the annual funding provided during this period. Organic farmers were also eligible for payments under the Single Payment Scheme.

    OELS and OHLS funding in England 2010-2014:

    Year

    Annual funding for OELS:

    Annual funding for OHLS:

    2010

    £1,986,129

    £17,454,578

    2011

    £4,285,822

    £21,059,841

    2012

    £6,088,660

    £24,443,405

    2013

    £7,503,473

    £27,495,231

    2014

    £8,665,682

    £29,486,762

    Total Funding:

    £28,529,766

    £119,939,817

    Footnote 1: Because agriculture is a devolved matter, separate schemes operate in other UK countries. Data on other funding provided is available from devolved administrations.

    Footnote 2: These data include payments to organic farmers under conventional land management options in combined organic and conventional agreements and include payments for existing and new agreements each year.

    Footnote 3: RDPE funding comprises EU funding allocated under the CAP for England and relevant Exchequer match funding.

  • James Cartlidge – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    James Cartlidge – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by James Cartlidge on 2015-12-15.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, when the Financial Conduct Authority will conclude its investigation into issues relating to the Connaught fund and allow those affected to submit claims to the Financial Services Compensation Scheme.

    Harriett Baldwin

    This is a matter for the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), which is operationally independent from Government.

    This question has been passed on to the FCA. They will reply directly to the Honourable Member by letter. A copy of the letter will be placed in the Library of the House.

  • Jim Cunningham – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Jim Cunningham – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2015-11-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what financial support his Department has provided to the National Suicide Prevention Alliance in each of the last five years; and if he will make a statement.

    Alistair Burt

    The Department has provided the following financial support for the National Suicide Prevention Alliance since its establishment in 2012:

    Year

    Funding

    2013/14

    £60,000

    2014/15

    £60,000

    2015/16

    £60,000

    Total

    £180,000

    Source: Department of Health

  • Steve Reed – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Steve Reed – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steve Reed on 2015-12-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what steps his Department has taken in response to the recommendations and key findings of the National Audit Office’s report, Financial sustainability by local authorities 2014, published in November 2014; and what work his Department has carried out on improving its understanding of the financial stability of local authorities.

    Mr Marcus Jones

    The National Audit Office report, Financial Sustainability of Local Authorities made four key recommendations.

    In line with my rt. hon. Friend, the Secretary of State’s (Greg Clark) statement to the House on 17 December, Official Report, Columns 1722-1724, we have noted the criticism of the Public Accounts Committee and the DCLG select committee about previous inclusions of the existing Better Care Fund and the Public Health Grant in councils’ spending power. So we will follow their advice, and henceforth report only resources over which councils have discretion.

    In relation to transformation projects, the overall local government finance system sets the conditions to achieve value for money through strong pressure to improve outcomes, whilst delivering services more efficiently

    We have learnt from previous spending reviews. In preparation for the Spending Review 2015 officials had early and extensive engagement with all departments that rely on local government to deliver services. This enabled the department to build up a clear picture of whether local authorities core funding was sufficient to deliver their statutory services.

    The Department monitors the financial stability of local authorities as part of its oversight of local government expenditure. Officials use the detailed data returns that provided by local authorities throughout the year and they gather intelligence through routine interactions with local authorities, representative bodies and other departments. This helps them to anticipate and act on potential problems.