UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: 2016

  • Lord Kennedy of Southwark – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Lord Kennedy of Southwark – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Kennedy of Southwark on 2016-01-13.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have to support Fairtrade Fortnight.

    Baroness Verma

    Fairtrade is trusted by consumers throughout the UK to enable the world’s poorest people to get a fair price for what they produce. Its leading role in the marketplace also makes it perfectly positioned to convene discussions of trade and development issues.

    Over the last six years, the Department for International Development has invested £18 million into Fairtrade and it will be continuing this support by engaging enthusiastically with Fairtrade fortnight.

    The Department is currently finalising a programme of events for this year’s Fairtrade Fortnight that will include DFID Ministers and expects to focus on raising awareness and discussions around food security for farmers in the developing world.

  • Stephen Timms – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Stephen Timms – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Timms on 2016-02-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, how many (a) ducts and (b) poles have been built with BDUK funding which are (i) more than one km in length and cost more than £50,000 to build and (ii) less than one km in length and cost less than £50,000 to build.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    BT predominately uses existing duct and pole infrastructure in BDUK project areas, but where state funded infrastructure has been used, they report it on their website at: https://www.openreach.co.uk/orpg/home/products/ductandpolesharing/contracts/contracts/downloads/State_Aided_Infrastruture_One_Truth.xls“

  • Joan Ryan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Joan Ryan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Joan Ryan on 2016-02-29.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what information his Department holds on A&E attendance, performance and emergency admission statistics for the Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust in each of the last three years.

    Jane Ellison

    Accident and emergency (A&E) attendances and emergency admissions data, including performance against the A&E waiting time standard (for 95% of patients to be admitted, transferred or discharged within four hours of arrival at A&E) are collected by NHS England and published on their website at the links below. Until June 2015, data were collected on a weekly basis; from June 2015 they are available on a monthly basis.

    Data for 2013-14 are available at the following link:

    https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/ae-waiting-times-and-activity/weekly-ae-sitreps-2013-14/

    Data for 2014-15 are available at the following link:

    https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/ae-waiting-times-and-activity/weekly-ae-sitreps-2014-15/

    Data for April and May 2015 are available at the following link:

    https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/ae-waiting-times-and-activity/statistical-work-areasae-waiting-times-and-activityweekly-ae-sitreps-2015-16/

    Data for June 2015 to December 2015 are available at the following link:

    https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/ae-waiting-times-and-activity/statistical-work-areasae-waiting-times-and-activityae-attendances-and-emergency-admissions-2015-16-monthly-3/

    “

  • Roger Godsiff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Roger Godsiff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2016-03-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment she has made of the potential merits of introducing a deposit return scheme for single use drinks containers to reduce litter.

    Rory Stewart

    Defra analysed the costs and benefits of implementing a deposit return system (DRS) for single use drink containers as part of the 2011 Review of Waste Policy in England, and sought views in the 2012 consultation on higher packaging recycling targets.

    This work showed that introducing a DRS may increase recycling and reduce litter but might impose additional costs on businesses, consumers and local authorities (which would lose revenue from recycling). However, we lack evidence to quantify these benefits and costs appropriately. The current approach has driven a significant increase in packaging waste recycling rates, from less than 47% in 2003 to nearly 65% in 2013.

    Last year, the Scottish Government published a feasibility study and a call for evidence investigating the implementation of a DRS for single use drink containers in Scotland. This valuable work highlighted significant uncertainties regarding the impacts and benefits that a DRS would have, notably regarding costs, environmental quality and littering, and existing waste collection systems. The Scottish Government is doing further work on the topic and we will review any new evidence arising from this in due course. However, in the meantime, we will continue to focus on improving existing waste collection and recycling systems, and developing a new National Litter Strategy for England to help coordinate and maximise the impact of anti-litter activity by local government, industry and others.

  • Jonathan Ashworth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Jonathan Ashworth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jonathan Ashworth on 2016-05-04.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what steps he plans the International Anti-Corruption Summit will take to tackle tax avoidance and the role played by offshore tax havens in such avoidance.

    Matthew Hancock

    This Government will continue to lead the international agenda to crack down on tax evasion and aggressive tax avoidance. The Summit will address a range of measures to tackle corruption, including promoting transparency.

  • Steve McCabe – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Steve McCabe – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steve McCabe on 2016-06-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, pursuant to the Answer of 4 May 2016 to Question 35884, on Bees: Pesticides, if she will make it her policy to exercise her powers to lift the temporary ban on neonicotinoids in the future; and if she will make a statement.

    George Eustice

    EU restrictions on the use of neonicotinoids have been fully implemented in the UK. Member States can authorise limited and controlled use of a pesticide on an exceptional basis in emergency situations to “control a danger which cannot be contained by any other reasonable means”. Emergency authorisations are not granted automatically and applications must be based on evidence relating to the need for the pesticide and possible harmful effects.

    Decisions on whether or not to grant authorisations for restricted neonicotinoids will be made on the basis of an examination of the technical and scientific information submitted by the applicant, by the UK Expert Committee on Pesticides and the Health and Safety Executive. Two applications are currently under consideration and will be assessed using the above regulatory criteria.

  • Alan Brown – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    Alan Brown – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Alan Brown on 2016-09-06.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, with reference to the speech of the then Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change on 18 November 2015, on a new direction for UK energy policy, when the terms of reference of the review into coal will be published; and if he will make a statement.

    Jesse Norman

    The continued use of unabated coal for power generation is not consistent with our policy of decarbonising the economy. The role of coal for electricity generation has declined rapidly in the last couple of years due to the success of the Government’s policies to penalise emissions of carbon dioxide and other pollutants and encourage investment in lower carbon alternatives.

  • Mary Glindon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Mary Glindon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mary Glindon on 2016-10-21.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what estimate he has made of the number of basic rate taxpaying company car drivers who will potentially pay more tax as a result of proposals in the HM Revenue and Customs’ consultation on salary sacrifice for the provision of benefits in kind.

    Jane Ellison

    The Government has recently consulted on proposals to limit the range of benefits in kind, such as company cars, that attract income tax and National Insurance Contributions advantages when they are provided as part of salary sacrifice arrangements. Responses have been received from a wide range of interested parties and the Government’s response will be published in due course.

    The Government is committed to encouraging company car drivers to take-up the driving of ultra-low emissions vehicles. A separate consultation published on 10 August sets out proposals to incentivise the take up of low and ultra-low emissions company cars.

  • Lord Laird – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Northern Ireland Office

    Lord Laird – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Northern Ireland Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Laird on 2016-01-13.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether in considering policy, they regard equality and parity of esteem to be the same, and if not, why not.

    Lord Dunlop

    The UK Government is committed to affording due respect and parity of esteem to all the people in Northern Ireland as underpinned by the 1998 Belfast Agreement and in accordance with the obligations on the Government to promote equality and prevent discrimination across the United Kingdom. The Northern Ireland Office and its agencies are subject to anti-discrimination law in Northern Ireland and to the provisions of section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998. This requires public authorities carrying out functions in Northern Ireland to have due regard to the need to promote equality of opportunity between a wide range of groups, specified in section 75(1), including persons of different religious belief or political opinion. They are also obliged to have regard to the desirability of promoting good relations between persons of different religious belief, political opinion or racial group.

  • Owen Thompson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Owen Thompson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Owen Thompson on 2016-02-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, for what reasons the decision was taken to cease displaying radioactive material hazard signs on vehicles carrying special nuclear materials.

    Penny Mordaunt

    The Defence Equipment and Support organisation decided to cease displaying radioactive material hazard warning signs on vehicles carrying special nuclear materials in July 2011. Before implementing this decision we sought legal advice and notified the regulator. The change was implemented in 2012 in anticipation of the transition to a single type of vehicle for the transport of both nuclear weapons and special nuclear materials and was needed in order to maintain the policy to neither confirm nor deny the presence of nuclear weapons. No changes were required to operating arrangements as a result of this decision. The Ministry of Defence’s arrangements for the safe transport of defence nuclear materials include the provision of information to the emergency services in the event of an incident; this does not rely on displaying radioactive material hazard warning signs.