The below Parliamentary question was asked by Richard Fuller on 2016-02-02.
To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what steps his Department has taken to tackle homelessness.
Mr Marcus Jones
This Government is clear one person without a home is one too many. Despite the need to take tough financial decisions we have increased central funding for homelessness programmes to £139 million over the Parliament.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hamilton of Epsom on 2016-02-25.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the Decision of the Heads of State or Government, meeting within the European Council, concerning a new settlement for the UK within the EU returns to the UK Parliament any competences that are presently conferred on the EU by Title 1 of Part One of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Baroness Anelay of St Johns
The deal agreed at the February European Council delivers a binding commitment that the Treaties will be changed in the future so that the UK is carved out of ‘ever closer union’. It ensures that the UK will not be liable for eurozone bailouts or discriminated against in the Single Market, and that the Treaties will be changed to reflect that. It establishes a new mechanism for the European Council to review EU legislation every year to see what can be done better at the national level and what can be dropped altogether. It ensures that Parliament will be able, acting with others in Europe, to block unwanted new EU laws. The deal also secures new powers to tackle the abuse of free movement and reduce the unnatural draw of our benefits system, to meet our aim of reducing immigration, by creating fairer rules, while protecting our open economy.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-03-21.
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the cost of retail crime was to businesses in each year for which data is available.
Karen Bradley
The Home Office does not hold the information requested.
The Home Office runs an annual Commercial Victimisation Survey (CVS) which asks business premises in different sectors about their experience of various crime types, including fraud, in the latest year.
In order to keep the length of the survey, and hence the burden on respondents, to a minimum, businesses are only asked about the cost of the latest incident of each crime type experienced in the year. Therefore, it is not possible to provide an aggregate cost of fraud or overall crime to businesses in the retail sector.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Rowe-Beddoe on 2016-04-26.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their estimate of costs incurred by them in connection with the recent visit of the President of the United States.
Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
It is long established Government policy not to comment upon matters of personal protective security and their associated costs. Disclosure of such information could compromise the integrity of those arrangements and affect the security of the individuals concerned.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2016-06-08.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what estimate he has made of the amount spent by his Department on audio-visual systems intended for buses in the last three years; and if he will make a statement.
Andrew Jones
The Department has not funded audio/visual equipment on buses, but we understand the importance of accessible on-board information to many passengers, including those who are visually impaired, and have supported initiatives to develop innovative and low-cost approaches for delivering it.
For instance, we worked with the Transport Systems Catapult on the All Aboard Competition, resulting in the development of a prototype vibrating wristband which alerts users to upcoming stops.
Many bus operators have already embraced audible and visual next stop announcements, and I encourage the wider industry to consider the potential benefit for all of its customers.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nick Clegg on 2016-09-02.
To ask the Secretary of State for International Trade, how much his Department has spent to date on legal advice relating to Britain’s exit from the EU from (a) the Government Legal Department and (b) external legal firms; and how much he plans to spend on such advice over the next 12 months.
Mark Garnier
DIT already has a strong and capable in-house legal team and has not needed to spend on external legal advice. In the next two years we will be developing our in-house team to build the expertise needed to deliver the best outcomes for the UK and position the UK as a global leader in free trade. We have also received many offers of pro bono support from the UK’s outstanding legal profession.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Justin Madders on 2016-10-14.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what discussions Ministers of his Department have had with Ministers of the Department for Justice on the investigation of stillbirths and neonatal deaths.
Mr Philip Dunne
No recent meetings have been held with colleagues at the Ministry of Justice to discuss this subject.
By law coroners can only investigate deaths of a baby when they have lived independently of their mother. Coroners have no role in investigating stillbirths, and there are no plans to change this. If there is doubt as to whether a baby was stillborn or lived independently of their mother the loss should be reported to the coroner to consider whether an investigation should be carried out.
We are providing £500,000 of funding, via the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership, for the development of a new system – the Standardised Perinatal Mortality Review Tool – which once complete will be used across the National Health Service to enable maternity services to review and learn from every stillbirth and neonatal death. We have also asked the new independent Healthcare Safety Investigation Branch, established in April 2016, to consider a particular focus on maternity services in its first year.
On 17 October my Rt. hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health announced a comprehensive package of measures designed dramatically to improve the safety of maternity care in the NHS, with a particular focus on learning and supporting the NHS to become the world’s largest learning organisation. The announcement introduced the commitment to consult on a new voluntary alternative to litigation for families affected by severe birth injury (Rapid Resolution and Redress (RRR)).
RRR will provide an independent and thorough investigation of all instances of severe avoidable birth injury (around 500 cases per year), and for eligible cases the option to join an alternative system of compensation that offers support and regular payments without the need to bring a claim through the courts. We will be consulting to ensure the policy design best meets the needs of families.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andy Slaughter on 2016-01-07.
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, with reference to proposed changes in personal injury law and procedure announced in the Spending Review and Autumn Statement 2015, what assessment he has made of the level of potential reduction in recoupment of social security benefits paid to personal injury victims following such changes; and if he will make a statement.
Justin Tomlinson
DWP officials have been working with the Ministry of Justice to assess the potential impact of the proposed changes to personal injury legislation on the level of recoupment of social security benefits paid by the compensator to DWP. The early analysis indicates that the vast majority of personal injury victims who claim compensation for whiplash do not claim DWP benefits which are recoverable under the Social Security (Recovery of Benefits) Act 1997. Therefore, if this trend continues, the potential changes to the personal injury legislation will have a minimal impact on the level of recoupment of social security benefits. DWP officials will continue to work with the Ministry of Justice as the proposed changes to personal injury legislation are developed and progressed.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Campbell of Pittenweem on 2016-02-01.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what conclusions they have drawn from the recent study of the UK’s future rotary wing requirements carried out by the Joint Helicopter Command.
Earl Howe
The 2015 Air Manoeuvre Future Capability Study reviewed and confirmed a number of major assumptions made about Battlefield Helicopter capabilities in the Rotary Wing Strategy of 2009. These were further tested through the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2010 and in the Defence Rotary Wing Capability Study of 2011. These included:
Attack Helicopter capability will be sustained through the Apache Capability Sustainment Programme until at least 2040.
Rotary Wing Heavy Lift capability will be sustained through a Chinook Capability Sustainment Programme until at least 2040.
An opportunity exists to review the means by which medium lift capabilities are delivered from the mid-2030s, following the out of service dates for Puma Mk 2 and Merlin Mk 3/4. This will be examined initially through a capability investigation that will also consider the broader utility of unmanned aviation.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord McColl of Dulwich on 2016-02-25.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what processes are in place, and what action they have taken, to ensure that EEA nationals who have made applications for discretionary leave to remain (DLR) as confirmed victims of human trafficking are not considered for administrative removal until a decision has been made about their application for DLR.
Lord Bates
The processes and guidance in place relating to the factors to take into account in deciding whether to remove a person from the United Kingdom, including EEA nationals and potential victims of trafficking, are found within “Chapter 50: (EEA) EEA administrative removals” of the Enforcement Instructions and Guidance published on gov.uk.
The Home Office will consider exceptional and compassionate individual circumstances that may justify leave on a discretionary basis. The “Discretionary leave” Asylum Instruction on gov.uk gives guidance to Home Office staff on considering whether to grant discretionary leave (DL).
No action is taken to enforce the administrative removal of an EEA national identified as a potential victim of trafficking where their case is still being considered in accordance with the “Discretionary leave” Asylum Instruction. However, DL is not normally granted to EEA nationals (or their family members) where they have free movement rights under EU law and are exercising those treaty rights.
Guidance to immigration enforcement staff on how to identify and manage victims of trafficking is provided in “Chapter 9: identifying victims of trafficking” of Enforcement Instructions and Guidance. “Chapter 53: extenuating circumstances” gives guidance to immigration enforcement staff how to consider any extenuating circumstances. Section 4 of “Chapter 50: (EEA) EEA administrative removals” sets out the criteria that apply in considering whether it is right and reasonable to remove an EEA national and whether it is proportionate given all the circumstances of the case.