Tag: 2016

  • Stephen Doughty – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Stephen Doughty – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Doughty on 2015-12-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what discussions he has had with (a) ECOWAS and (b) the African Union on ensuring free and fair elections in the Gambia in 2016.

    James Duddridge

    The UK has not yet had discussions with either ECOWAS or the African Union about the December 2016 Presidential elections in The Gambia. The 2011 Presidential elections in The Gambia were overseen by both EU funded election observers and the African Union, and recognised by the international community as reflecting the will of the people. We will work with our EU and regional partners to encourage the Gambian authorities to ensure the next Presidential election also meets accepted standards.

  • Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-01-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, pursuant to the Answer of 22 January 2016 to Question 23237, if he will place in the Library a list of the recent representations he has received on the privatisation of the Green Investment Bank.

    Anna Soubry

    The Government does not intend to place a list of the recent representations received on the privatisation of the Green Investment Bank in the Library.

  • Louise Haigh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Louise Haigh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Louise Haigh on 2016-02-23.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many complaints his Department has received on the sale of electoral roll data by credit reference firms.

    John Penrose

    Available records show that in the last calendar year the Cabinet Office received one letter of complaint about access to the electoral register by credit reference agencies, and nine letters of complaint about the sale of the edited electoral register.

  • Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-03-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what the criteria are for referral of a child maintenance case to the Child Maintenance Group’s Financial Investigations Unit.

    Priti Patel

    The current referral criteria requires the non-resident parent to have agreed the income figure provided by HMRC and for this to have then been challenged by the parent with care.

    However, it has been recognised that this criteria does not identify all potential triggers for referral and does not take into account those non-resident parents that do not respond to Child Maintenance Group (CMG) contact. Non-resident parents are told in their calculation letters to contact CMG if anything used in the calculation is wrong. CMG intend therefore, to use this instruction as a gateway to investigate cases where the HMRC information is challenged. The criteria for these challenges are currently being formulated, to ensure the Financial Investigations Unit act proportionately and will be delivered to all CMG caseworkers as soon as it is agreed.

  • Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead on 2016-04-18.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the findings of Human Rights Watch in its recent report Nepotism and Neglect, which identifies the failure of the authorities in Bangladesh to respond to the effects of arsenic in the drinking water of Bangladesh’s rural poor; and whether they will raise that issue with the government of Bangladesh.

    Baroness Verma

    The UK Government along with other donors, discusses issues such as safe drinking water with members of the Government of Bangladesh. Water quality testing, which focussed upon arsenic, has been a major part of DFID’s support for ensuring access to clean arsenic free water in rural Bangladesh. DFID has also supported arsenic testing by assisting the Government of Bangladesh to establish a national water-point database. The UK works with the Government of Bangladesh to use the database to identify water points which exceed the arsenic national standard can be identified and corrective necessary action taken.

    DFID has also delivered large scale results on water, sanitation and hygiene education through our strategic partnership with BRAC. This has given 699,000 people access to clean drinking water, including in arsenic prone areas, through deep tube wells, piped water supply systems and pond sand filters to over the last 5 years.

  • Nick Herbert – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Nick Herbert – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nick Herbert on 2016-05-25.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to his Department’s analysis: the long-term economic impact of EU membership and the alternatives, what estimate he has made of the long-term reduction of trade from leaving the EU in each UK region.

    Mr David Gauke

    In April 2016 HM Treasury published analysis that showed that reduced access to the Single Market under each of the alternatives set out would have a negative impact on trade.

    The analysis does not make any estimate of the impact on the long-term trade position in each UK region. HM Revenue and Customs Regional Trade Statistics on the value of trade in goods in each region are publically available through the UK Trade Info website. The value and percentage share of goods exports to the EU from each region are shown in the table below.

    Region

    Value of goods exports to the EU in 2015 (billions)

    Value of goods exports to the EU as a share of total goods exports in 2015

    North East

    £7.0

    58%

    North West

    £11.6

    47%

    Yorkshire & the Humber

    £7.8

    47%

    West Midlands

    £12.0

    42%

    East Midlands

    £8.7

    45%

    East of England

    £11.4

    54%

    London

    £12.7

    39%

    South East

    £19.0

    47%

    South West

    £9.7

    64%

    Wales

    £5.0

    41%

    Scotland

    £6.7

    38%

    Northern Ireland

    £3.5

    55%
  • Paula Sherriff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Paula Sherriff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Paula Sherriff on 2016-07-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps she is taking to ensure that police officers are trained to deal with hate crime.

    Sarah Newton

    The Government condemns all hate crimes and is committed to tackling these crimes in partnership with the communities affected.

    We have in place some of the strongest legislation to tackle hate crime in the world – this includes specific offences for racially and religiously aggravated activity and offences of the stirring up of hatred on the grounds of race, religion and sexual orientation.

    We also have stronger sentences for hate crime. We continue to carefully consider the recommendations from the Law Commission review into hate crime legislation. The Government has committed to taking action to improve our response to hate crime.

    This includes joint training between the police and Crown Prosecution staff to improve the way the police identify and investigate hate crime; building on the improvements to police recording of hate crime by working with the police to break down religious-based hate crime by religion; and working with victims and advocacy groups to improve victims confidence to come forward and report such crimes.

    The police are also improving their operational practices and recording. Last year, the College of Policing published Operational Guidance for officers responding to hate crime which comprehensively covers how to address all forms of hate crime.

    Hate crime statistics show number of crimes recorded by the police by force area. The decision as to how hate crime is resourced in individual forces is an operational matter for the Police and Crime Commissioner for that area. The latest police funding settlement represents a fair deal for the police and reinforces this Government’s commitment to protect the public. No Police and Crime Commissioner who maximised precept income is facing a reduction in cash funding this year.

    Police and Crime Commissioners are also responsible for commissioning local support services for victims of crime. The Ministry of Justice provides the Commissioner with a grant to enable services which best meet the needs of local victims of crime to be funded.

    The Home Office published a new hate crime action plan on 26 July 2016, which sets out Government action over the next four years to tackle hate crime. It includes:

    ● new steps to boost reporting of hate crime and support victims;

    ● new CPS guidance to prosecutors on racially aggravated crime;

    ● a new £2.4 million fund for protective security measures at potentially vulnerable places of worship;

    ● and additional funding to community organisations tackling hate crime.

    Nobody in this country should live in fear because of who they are and anyone who experiences hate crime should report it to the police, either in person at a police station, online through the True Vision website, or by phoning 101.

  • Peter Dowd – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Peter Dowd – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Peter Dowd on 2016-10-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what assessment her Department has made of the effect of allowing schools to admit children from one religion on integration and social cohesion.

    Caroline Dinenage

    All schools must promote integration and social cohesion whatever their character and ethos. The Department is currently consulting on proposals to remove the 50% cap on faith admissions in new faith free schools. We have proposed additional measures to promote inclusivity and community cohesion, alongside existing requirements to promote fundamental British values, which will apply to all new faith free schools. These are aimed at ensuring all pupils can play an active role in our society and are prepared for life in modern Britain. The consultation document is available at: https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/schools-that-work-for-everyone

    “

  • Gerald Howarth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Gerald Howarth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gerald Howarth on 2016-01-06.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to the Government’s Counter-Extremism Strategy, published in October 2015, what her definition is of non-violent expressions of religious belief which are (a) extreme and (b) not extreme.

    Karen Bradley

    The Government definition of extremism is ‘vocal or active opposition to our fundamental values, including democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and the mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs.’ We have been consistent on this since 2011 and have reaffirmed this definition in the Counter-Extremism Strategy.

    The overwhelming majority of people in this country support these values and condemn those who try to undermine them.

    The Government would not consider the ‘claim’ that an individual’s religion is ‘the only one true faith’ to be extremist.

    We are clear that Government should not restrict anyone’s freedom of speech or right to practise a faith. These are core values that help to make our country great. However we shouldn’t allow the extremist voice to go unchallenged, causing harm to our society and promoting hatred and division.

    The Government has engaged on the strategy, and will continue to engage with partners – including faith groups, communities and civic society groups on the new proposed powers to tackle the most dangerous extremists. This provides an opportunity to consult on the proposed powers further, and ensure that sufficient safeguards are in place to protect our rights to free speech and debate.

  • Nigel Mills – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Nigel Mills – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nigel Mills on 2016-01-26.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many notices under section 93 of the Finance Act 2015 were issued by HM Revenue and Customs in the period from 1 April 2015 to 31 December 2015.

    Mr David Gauke

    The Diverted Profits Tax is designed to counter contrived tax arrangements used by some multinationals to shift their profits to other countries. It is deliberately set at a higher rate than corporation tax, so it acts as a deterrent and encourages more companies to pay corporation tax.

    No notices under section 93 Finance Act 2015 were issued during the period 1 April 2015 to 31 December 2015 but HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) received notifications from eleven companies under section 92 in relation to section 86 Finance Act 2015.

    For companies with accounting periods ending on or before 31 March 2016 the notification period is six months from the end of that period. HMRC is not able to disclose details of notifications relating to sections 80 and 81 of the Finance Act 2015 due to its duty to protect taxpayer confidentiality.