Tag: 2016

  • Lord Berkeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Lord Berkeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Berkeley on 2016-05-03.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of reports of collusion within the police forces and other agencies after the Hillsborough disaster, whether they will introduce legislation to prevent serving members of the police force and the judiciary from belonging to the freemasons.

    Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

    Any police officer must be able to discharge their duties within the law and is expected to abide by the oath of constable. The Standards of Professional Behaviour, set out in Schedule 2 to the Police (Conduct) Regulations (2012), require police officers to be ‘honest, act with integrity and . . . not compromise or abuse their position’. Police officers must be able to do so, irrespective of membership of any external membership organisations.

    The College of Policing introduced a Code of Ethics in July 2014 which applies to all police officers and staff in England and Wales and sets out clear principles and standards of behaviour expected of them. It is for individual forces to determine whether an individual officer’s behaviour or misconduct meets the standards that are set out and where they are not, to investigate and instigate disciplinary proceedings where appropriate.

    Following the Chapman Review in 2014, the Government is continuing its programme of reforms to improve police integrity and the police discipline system, including through the Policing and Crime Bill which is currently before parliament to improve the system and its ability to hold officers to account for their actions and behaviour.

    In the case of judges it is also essential to the rule of law that they are independent and impartial when exercising their judicial functions. All judicial office holders should recuse themselves in any case where bias or the appearance of bias arises and are counselled against engaging in any activity which might undermine or be reasonably thought to undermine their judicial independence or impartiality. These commitments are enshrined in the judicial oath.

  • Tom Blenkinsop – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Tom Blenkinsop – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tom Blenkinsop on 2016-06-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what steps he is taking to increase accessibility to university buildings for disabled students.

    Joseph Johnson

    The Government is committed to ensuring that everyone with the potential has the opportunity to benefit from higher education, irrespective of their background or mode of learning. In the last academic year we saw record entry rates to higher education, including among those from disadvantaged backgrounds

    Higher Education Institutions have responsibilities under the Equality Act 2010 to support their students, including those with disabilities. They have a clear legal duty to make reasonable adjustments for disabled people to ensure they are not placed at a substantial disadvantage compared to non-disabled students.

    To support Higher Education (HE) providers to prepare for the changes to Disabled Students’ Allowances that come into effect from academic year 2016/17, the Department has supported the establishment of a sector-led group ofstakeholders. The group’s focus is to communicate with senior leaders of HE providers, to help provide information about institutions’ responsibilities under the Equality Act 2010 to make reasonable adjustments for disabled students, and to encourage HE providers to develop inclusive learning environments.

    In addition, universities expect to spend more than £745 million through access agreements agreed with the Director of Fair Access on measures to improve access and success for students from disadvantaged groups, including disabled students – up significantly from £404 million in 2009.

  • Baroness Northover – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Baroness Northover – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Northover on 2016-09-12.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the impact of tobacco use on international development as well as on public health.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The Government recognises the significant impact of tobacco use on international development.

    Tobacco use is the world’s single most preventable cause of disease. If current patterns of use persist, tobacco will kill about 1 billion people in the 21st century. Evidence indicates that by 2030, over 80% of the world’s tobacco-related mortality will be in low and middle income countries.

    Tobacco use is also a major barrier to sustainable development. A major driver of social inequities, tobacco use imposes significant social, economic and environmental harm on individuals, families and national economies.

  • Angus Brendan MacNeil – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Angus Brendan MacNeil – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Angus Brendan MacNeil on 2016-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, whether he plans to review the planned business rate increase for organisations that seek to own or supply their energy with roof top solar panels in the light of carbon emissions targets agreed at the Paris Climate Change Conference.

    Mr Marcus Jones

    Business rates policy in Scotland is devolved to the Scottish Government. In England, business rates are based on valuations from the Valuation Office Agency and we do not intervene in their independent assessments. We have proposed a £3.4 billion transitional relief scheme for England to ensure that no ratepayer is unfairly penalised by the 2017 revaluation.

  • Marion Fellows – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Marion Fellows – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Marion Fellows on 2016-01-13.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he will take fiscal steps to support exports by SMEs.

    Mr David Gauke

    The government has provided significant support to first time exporters, many of whom are Small and Medium Enterprises.

    A significant package was announced at Autumn Statement 2014, and funding for this initiative was continued at Spending Review 2015.

  • Lord Krebs – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Lord Krebs – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Krebs on 2016-02-04.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the levels of compliance with the Environmental Protection (Restriction on Use of Lead Shot) (England) Regulations 1999, as amended, and the effectiveness of those Regulations in reducing lead poisoning of waterbirds.

    Lord Gardiner of Kimble

    Through the Environmental Protection (Restriction on Use of Lead Shot) (England) Regulations 1999, the use of lead shot ammunition is restricted to protect waterfowl from lead poisoning. Its use is banned on all foreshores, certain Sites of Special Scientific Interest and for the shooting of all ducks and geese, coot and moorhen. The supply of lead weights for fishing is also prohibited. One recent piece of research suggests compliance with the Regulations is relatively low with around 70% of wild duck carcasses bought from game dealers in England having been shot with lead ammunition. We will continue to look at how the Lead Shot Regulations can be better implemented.

  • David Winnick – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    David Winnick – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Winnick on 2016-03-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, when she plans to reply to the letter from the hon. Member for Walsall North of 8 February 2016 on behalf of a constituent concerning Workshop to Raise Awareness of Prevent training sessions in PSHE lessons.

    Mr John Hayes

    The correspondence was passed to the Department for Education for response. They accepted the transfer on 12 February 2016.

  • Robert Syms – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Robert Syms – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Robert Syms on 2016-03-23.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will postpone the start date for the introduction of standardised packaging on tobacco products in order to undertake an assessment of the implications of the post-implementation review of a similar measure in Australia on his policies in this area.

    Jane Ellison

    The Government has no current plans to postpone the introduction of standardised packaging of tobacco products. The Standardised Packaging of Tobacco Products Regulations 2015 come into force on 20 May 2016. Standardised packaging is an important public health measure and any delay in implementing the policy would also delay the health benefits from accruing. The Government continues to consider relevant information and evidence on standardised packaging, including the Post-Implementation Review of Tobacco Plain Packaging published by the Australian Government last month.

  • Helen Jones – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Helen Jones – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Helen Jones on 2016-05-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what steps he is taking to restrict the amount that mobile telephone companies and other communication providers can charge for the provision of a Porting Authorisation Code to customers; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    Industry rules require mobile telephone companies to provide mobile number portability (the ability to transfer a mobile phone number) to customers within the shortest possible time, and the Porting Authorisation Code (PAC) must be issued over the phone, or by text message, within two hours of a customer’s request. Companies are permitted to make reasonable charges for providing number portability, but those charges should be based on the costs of providing the PAC and should not disincentivise customers from switching. In general, mobile telephone companies do not charge customers for requesting or issuing a PAC, nor for the process of switching a customer to another provider. However, some service providers may make a termination charge, if for example a customer terminates a contract before the expiry of the minimum contract term, or if the customer changes provider before they have served out any required minimum notice period for termination (usually 30 days). The Government is committed to making it easier and quicker for consumers to switch services enabling more customers to obtain better value from their mobile service provider and fully supports Ofcom’s interim findings in the recent digital communications review. This includes Government efforts encouraging industry on a voluntary basis to remove/reduce charges for handset unlocking for consumers at the end of their contracts.

  • Richard Burgon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Richard Burgon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Richard Burgon on 2016-06-15.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment his Department has made of the systemic financial risk from tranching of securitised assets.

    Harriett Baldwin

    The Government welcomed the development of international and EU standards to revitalise the regulatory framework for securitisation by encouraging the use of simpler and more transparent products. We agree with the Bank of England that a well-functioning and stable securitisation market will benefit financial stability and the wider economy. We support the Basel standards for securitisation, set with the intention of enhancing financial stability, which see features such as tranching and synthetic structures as being legitimate activity. We also support the need for all securitisations to adhere to appropriate rules on transparency and investor due diligence, and that they must be afforded sensibly calibrated capital requirements. Following the financial crisis it was Basel, working with the Financial Stability Board and the International Organization of Securities Commissions which, set the 5 percent risk retention standard.

    In the development and delivery of policy, Treasury Ministers and officials are in regular contact with relevant institutions, regulatory authorities, other governments, industry and other civil society groups including think tanks such as Finance Watch.