Tag: 2015

  • Andrew Smith – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Andrew Smith – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Smith on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, in which countries UK defence attachés are posted.

    Mr Julian Brazier

    There are resident Defence Attachés in the following countries:

    Afghanistan – Kabul

    Algeria – Algiers

    Argentina – Buenos Aires

    Australia – Canberra

    Austria – Vienna

    Bahrain – Manama

    Estonia – Tallinn

    Bangladesh – Dhaka

    Bosnia and Herzegovina – Sarajevo

    Brazil – Brasilia

    Brunei – Bandar Seri Begawan

    Burma – Rangoon

    Canada – Ottawa

    Chile – Santiago

    China – Beijing

    Colombia – Bogota

    Croatia – Zagreb

    Cyprus – Nicosia

    Czech Republic – Prague

    Denmark – Copenhagen

    Egypt – Cairo

    Ethiopia – Addis Ababa

    France – Paris

    Georgia – Tbilisi

    Germany – Berlin

    Ghana – Accra

    Greece – Athens

    India – New Delhi

    Indonesia – Jakarta

    Iraq – Baghdad

    Ireland – Dublin

    Israel – Tel Aviv

    Italy – Rome

    Jamaica – Kingston

    Japan – Tokyo

    Jordan – Amman

    Kazakhstan – Astana

    Kenya – Nairobi

    Korea – Seoul

    Kuwait – Kuwait City

    Lebanon – Beirut

    Libya – Tripoli

    Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia – Skopje

    Malaysia – Kuala Lumpur

    Mexico – Mexico City

    Morocco – Rabat

    Nepal – Kathmandu

    Netherlands – The Hague

    New Zealand – Wellington

    Nigeria – Abuja

    Norway – Oslo

    Oman – Muscat

    Pakistan – Islamabad

    Poland – Warsaw

    Qatar – Doha

    Romania – Bucharest

    Russia – Moscow

    Saudi Arabia – Riyadh

    Serbia – Belgrade

    Sierra Leone – Freetown

    Singapore – Singapore City

    Somalia – Mogadishu

    South Africa – Pretoria

    South Sudan – Juba

    Spain – Madrid

    Sudan – Khartoum

    Sweden – Stockholm

    Thailand – Bangkok

    Turkey – Ankara

    Uganda – Kampala

    Ukraine – Kyiv

    United Arab Emirates – Abu Dhabi

    United States of America – UK Mission to UN

    United States of America – Washington

    Uzbekistan – Tashkent

    Vietnam – Hanoi

    Yemen – Sana’a

    Zimbabwe – Harare

    There is Non-Resident Accreditation for a further 82 countries.

  • Alan Brown – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Alan Brown – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Alan Brown on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, pursuant to the Answer of 15 October 2015 to Question 11023, how many developers are developing proposals at each of the sites referred to in that Answer; what indicative electricity strike rates have been discussed with those developers; and what (a) generating capacity and (b) potential timescales have been discussed with each developer in each case.

    Andrea Leadsom

    I set out the position below. It is too soon to say what any strike price might be for these projects.

    Site

    Developer

    Proposed generating capacity

    Potential timescale for operation

    Wylfa

    Horizon

    2.7 GW

    mid-2020s

    Oldbury

    Horizon

    2.7 GW

    to be confirmed

    Moorside

    NuGen

    3.6 GW

    mid-2020s

    Sizewell

    EDF/CGN

    3.2 GW

    to be confirmed

    Bradwell

    EDF/CGN

    to be confirmed

    to be confirmed

  • Jim Shannon – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Jim Shannon – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Shannon on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment she has made of the effect on agricultural land of invasive non-native waterfowl.

    George Eustice

    A 2010 report produced by the Centre for Agriculture and Biosciences International (CABI) (part funded by Defra) estimated the annual costs of non-native geese and swans to agriculture to be approximately £1.5 million. These costs included damage to crops due to grazing, trampling and reduction in soil quality, as well as costs of applying mitigation measures.

  • Poulter – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Poulter – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Poulter on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what recent reports he has received about Iran testing a guided long-range ballistic missile.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    Reports that Iran carried out a ballistic missile test earlier this month are highly concerning. We believe such a test constitutes clearly a violation of Iran’s obligations under UN Security Council Resolutions. We have taken appropriate action to bring this matter to the attention of the Security Council.

  • Charlotte Leslie – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Charlotte Leslie – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Charlotte Leslie on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, whether his Department has had discussions with medical organisations on the implications of the recent European Court of Justice ruling against Ireland on the Working Time Directive.

    Ben Gummer

    The Department has commissioned Health Education England to take forward the recommendations of the task group led by Professor Sir Norman Williams into the impact of the European Working Time Directive on the training of junior doctors.

    Health Education England has set up a specific working group to take this work forward, with membership including the Royal College of Surgeons and other stakeholders. The group is taking forward work on all the taskforce recommendations. This includes looking at the categorisation of training time and will consider the impact of the recent European Court of Justice ruling on Ireland. Health Education England will deliver an interim report to the Department in due course.

  • Robert Neill – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Robert Neill – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Robert Neill on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, which organisation provides the secretariat for the NICE Implementation Collaborative; what the Collaborative’s current priorities and work programmes are; what funding the Collaborative has received from the public purse since it was established; and if he will make a statement.

    George Freeman

    The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has advised that it has provided the secretariat function for the NICE Implementation Collaborative (NIC) since January 2014 as part of a wider memorandum of understanding with NHS England. This year, the NIC agreed to undertake work in the following four areas, each of which was agreed because of their potential to generate learning about how to support uptake of NICE guidance:

    – Improving patient outcomes for patients with non ST Elevation acute Coronary Syndromes;

    – Improving Tuberculosis screening and data collection across health and social care;

    – Identifying appropriate treatment pathways for people with moderate alcohol consumption across health and social care; and

    – Increasing the knowledge base about the factors that increase use of technologies building on previous National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) research.

    NHS England has responsibility for funding any project costs and projects liaise with NHS England to access these funds.

    NHS England has advised that it provided £4,000 in 2014-15 and up to £10,000 in 2015-16.

  • Jim Shannon – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Jim Shannon – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Shannon on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assistance the Government provides to internet service providers to ensure that images of child pornography online are identified and removed.

    Mike Penning

    The Internet Watch Foundation (IWF), an independent organisation funded primarily by the internet industry itself, acts as the UK reporting hotline for criminal content online, including child sexual abuse material hosted anywhere in the world. The IWF works closely with internet companies to remove or block indecent images of children where they appear. Since April 2014, the IWF has been able to search proactively for indecent images as well as acting on reports received from the public.

    The Government has been working closely with the IWF and the internet companies as part of the WePROTECT initiative. In December 2014, the Prime Minister hosted the WePROTECT Summit in London which secured globally significant commitments from 50 governments and international organisations, 20 leading technology companies and 10 civil society organisations. These included: that the UK would work with UNICEF to establish a new Global Fund to Prevent Violence Against Children; to put in place the resources needed to better identify victims, track down criminals and remove child sexual abuse material from the internet; and, to forge strong partnerships with industry to develop technological solutions to protect children online. The UK and UAE governments are now preparing for a second summit, in Abu Dhabi this November, which will take forward these commitments.

  • Greg Mulholland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Greg Mulholland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Greg Mulholland on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment she has made of the effectiveness of current legislation regulating the use of CCTV cameras with facial recognition and biometric tracking capabilities.

    Mike Penning

    I have received no representations about the use of CCTV cameras with facial recognition and biometric tracking capabilities.

    The use of any CCTV system operating in a public place in England and Wales (whether or not any facial recognition or biometric tracking technology is being used) is subject to the Surveillance Camera Code of Practice, issued as guidance under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. The police, as a relevant authority, are duty bound to have regard to the Code when performing their functions. Any use of such technology for covert investigative purposes by a public authority would be subject to the requirements of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 and its related Code of Practice. Further, the use and disclosure of personal data, such as CCTV images, is generally governed by the Data Protection Act 1998.

    Information on the fields of data which any CCTV system operator may use to identify individuals of interest is not held centrally. Further, any person (including those not suspected of an offence) may make a subject access request to a police force in respect of personal information which is held about them (including CCTV images). In broad terms, pursuant to the Code of Practice on the Management of Police Information (MOPI) and accompanying guidance published by the College of Policing, this should trigger a review of whether or not to delete such material based on an assessment of danger to the public and its value for policing purposes.

    It is the longstanding policy of successive Governments not to comment on intelligence matters.

  • Jenny Chapman – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Jenny Chapman – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jenny Chapman on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many under-18 year olds in prison have been starred up in each prison in each month during each of the last five years for which figures are available.

    Andrew Selous

    Starring up is the term used to define the process whereby young people under the age of 18 can be moved into the young adult estate prior to their eighteenth birthday. The starring up process can be used for a range of reasons, but past usage has mainly been in relating to the management of disruptive or violent behaviour or transfers to Mother and Baby Units.

    In practice, the starring up process is rarely used and then only in exceptional circumstances.

    No young person has been starred-up into the young adult estate since January 2014. Data in relation to the number of young people who were starred-up into the young adult estate in the three years prior to that, broken down by the establishment they were starred-up from and the month in which the decision was made is provided in the tables below.

    2011

    Jan

    Feb

    Mar

    Apr

    May

    Jun

    Jul

    Aug

    Sep

    Oct

    Nov

    Dec

    Ashfield

    1

    1

    Hindley

    1

    Wetherby

    1

    1

    2012

    Jan

    Feb

    Mar

    Apr

    May

    Jun

    Jul

    Aug

    Sep

    Oct

    Nov

    Dec

    Feltham

    1

    Eastwood Park

    1

    Warren Hill

    1

    2013

    Jan

    Feb

    Mar

    Apr

    May

    Jun

    Jul

    Aug

    Sep

    Oct

    Nov

    Dec

    Warren Hill

    1

  • Antoinette Sandbach – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Antoinette Sandbach – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Antoinette Sandbach on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what steps he is taking to ensure that peak noise measurements are used by HS2 Ltd when developing proposals on the night use of High Speed 2.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of Phase One of HS2 includes predictions of maximum sound levels from HS2 trains on residential properties. This has informed the noise mitigation provided as part of the scheme. The maximum acceptable sound levels at night are set out in Information Paper E20.

    Phase Two will undertake an EIA that will include predictions of maximum sound levels from HS2 trains.