Tag: 2016

  • Nic Dakin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Nic Dakin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nic Dakin on 2016-10-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 18 October 2016 to Question 48618, how many UK bids were received for the supply of steel for that part of the Successor submarine manufacture.

    Harriett Baldwin

    The management of the steel procurement process for the Successor programme is the responsibility of the Prime Contractor, BAE Systems. One UK firm participated in the tendering process for the submarine pressure hull steel, but did not make a viable proposal.

    Other stages of construction will include grades of steel manufactured by British suppliers and we encourage them to take the opportunity to bid.

    85% of BAE System’s supply chain for the new submarines is based in the UK.

  • Lord West of Spithead – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Lord West of Spithead – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord West of Spithead on 2016-01-11.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Earl Howe on 5 January (HL4757), at what range from an airbase could UK land-based fighter aircraft provide constant air cover for one of the Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers.

    Earl Howe

    The range would be variable and dependent on a number of factors, such as: the geographical location of the theatre of operation; basing options available; the threat level being faced; the specific task in question, and types and numbers of assets available. Precise ranges and specific capabilities cannot be disclosed for reasons of safeguarding operational security.

  • Seema Malhotra – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Seema Malhotra – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Seema Malhotra on 2016-02-03.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what the (a) primary and (b) secondary policy purposes are of stamp duty exemption for transfers under schemes of company reconstruction and similar arrangements.

    Mr David Gauke

    Relief from stamp duty is available for company reconstructions where the same people hold the same proportion of shares before and after the reconstruction. The relief ensures that stamp duty does not apply where there is no real change in ownership of a company. The relief also recognises that reconstructions of companies often occur for genuine commercial reasons unrelated to tax, so in strictly defined circumstances should be able to take place in a tax neutral way. All claims are adjudicated by HM Revenue and Customs to ensure the strict conditions for relief are met.

  • Luciana Berger – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Luciana Berger – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Luciana Berger on 2016-02-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what representations his Department has made to the NHS England consultation on the future of mental health support for veterans of the armed forces.

    Mark Lancaster

    The Ministry of Defence takes the mental health of our veterans very seriously. The Department has made no representations in response to the NHS England consultation on the future of mental health support for veterans of the Armed Forces. The consultation is aimed at veterans who have used NHS veterans’ mental health services, their family members and carers, and staff and organisations that are providing mental health care, treatment and support for veterans and their families.

    https://www.engage.england.nhs.uk/survey/veterans-mental-health-services

  • Lord Tebbit – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Lord Tebbit – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Tebbit on 2016-03-23.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many people held in Immigration Control Centres are not free to leave to go to other jurisdictions.

    Lord Keen of Elie

    There are no countries to which, as a matter of immigration policy, the Home Office does not return people if they wish to return voluntarily.

    There may be a small number of people who might be detained for immigration purposes who are not free to leave the jurisdiction of the UK because, for example, of ongoing criminal proceedings but this is not centrally recorded.

    For those being detained with a view to removal, detention may continue lawfully only for as long as there is a realistic prospect of removal within a reasonable period of time. Home Office guidance is clear that detention must be used sparingly and for the shortest period reasonably necessary to achieve its purpose.

  • Chris Stephens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Chris Stephens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chris Stephens on 2016-04-28.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what current locations and sites have been identified as new offices for HM Revenue and Customs under its building our future plan; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr David Gauke

    HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) will open regional centres in Newcastle, Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Nottingham, Birmingham, Cardiff, Belfast, Bristol, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Stratford and Croydon. In addition there will be four specialist sites, in Telford, Worthing, Dover and at the Scottish Crime Campus in Gartcosh, for work that cannot be done elsewhere as well as a London Headquarters.

    HMRC is considering a number of sites at each regional centre location and will give more details when commercial negotiations have finished.

  • Nigel Evans – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Nigel Evans – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nigel Evans on 2016-06-13.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many women aged under 50 died as a result of breast cancer in England in (a) 2012, (b) 2013 and (c) 2014.

    Mr Rob Wilson

    The information requested falls within the responsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I have asked the Authority to reply.

  • Danny Kinahan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Danny Kinahan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Danny Kinahan on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, for what reasons people who are from or live in Northern Ireland are required to complete a counter terrorist check as part of an application to join the armed forces.

    Mark Lancaster

    Every eligible applicant, irrespective of their background, residency or nationality undergoes appropriate security vetting as part of the selection process to join the UK Armed Forces.

  • Lucy Powell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Lucy Powell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lucy Powell on 2016-10-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, how many children in receipt of free school meals dropped out of grammar schools in each selective and partially-selective education authority area in the most recent year for which data is available.

    Nick Gibb

    The information required to answer this question is not held and compiling it would be a very complex task which would incur disproportionate cost.

  • Lord Quirk – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Lord Quirk – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Quirk on 2016-01-11.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Bates on 21 December 2015 (HL4282), how they reconcile that answer with the statement by the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology in Postnote on forensic linguistics of September 2015 that even recordings of an offender’s voice, verified to the satisfaction of police experts, are not admissible as evidence” in the criminal justice system.”

    Lord Faulks

    The research briefing to which the noble Lord refers distinguishes between speaker profiling, which courts have yet to find to be sufficiently reliable a technique to constitute admissible evidence in a criminal case, and speaker comparison, evidence of which may be admissible.

    Expert evidence is admissible in criminal proceedings at common law. In summary, the evidence must be relevant to what is in issue; it must be capable of helping the court to assess the significance of matters beyond everyday experience (for example, the results of scientific tests); and it must be given by someone who is competent to do so. The Criminal Procedure Rules and the associated Criminal Practice Directions set out the procedure for introducing expert evidence, and list the factors to which the court will have regard in determining the reliability of expert opinion.