UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: 2016

  • David Davis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    David Davis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Davis on 2016-03-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 29 January 2016 to Question 23886, whether asset-sharing in Syria, Iraq or Libya was considered at the meeting of the Reaper User Group that took place on 14 to 18 March.

    Penny Mordaunt

    The MQ-9 Users Group primarily discussed generic, future interoperability between US, UK, French and Italian Reaper operators, particularly in terms of software standards, logistics and training. The sharing of assets in Syria, Iraq and Libya was therefore not discussed explicitly.

  • Ronnie Cowan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Ronnie Cowan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ronnie Cowan on 2016-04-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what assistance his Department provides to prevent job losses in highly-skilled manufacturing businesses.

    Anna Soubry

    We are creating a highly competitive business environment to make the UK an attractive location for advanced manufacturing investment, boosting skills and protecting spending on innovation and cutting edge manufacturing technologies. This drives the strong productivity growth, and exports, that will sustain the UK as a leading manufacturing nation.

  • Lilian Greenwood – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lilian Greenwood – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lilian Greenwood on 2016-06-06.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what assessment he has made of the potential effects of Clause 21 of the Bus Services Bill on the ability of Transport for London subsidiaries to bid for local bus service contracts on routes wholly outside of London.

    Andrew Jones

    Transport for London is not considered as a ‘relevant authority’ for the purposes of clause 21 of the Bus Services Bill, and as such the Bill does not affect anything Transport for London may do under its existing powers.

  • Lisa Cameron – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Lisa Cameron – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lisa Cameron on 2016-09-02.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to the Answer of 4 May 2016 to Question 35744, when his Department plans to carry out an impact assessment on the local economy of East Kilbride in addition to the People Impact Assessments that have already been conducted.

    Jane Ellison

    HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) location decisions were based on a number of key principles to enable it to deliver more for less. This included retention of its current staff and skills and local and national transport links. It does not plan to carry out an impact assessment on the local economy of East Kilbride in addition to the People Impact Assessments that have already been conducted.

    HMRC is considering a number of sites at each regional centre location, including Glasgow. More details will be available when commercial negotiations have finished.

  • Dame Caroline Spelman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Dame Caroline Spelman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Dame Caroline Spelman on 2016-10-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, if he will direct the UK’s representatives at the UN to call for an investigation of the alleged use of chemical weapons by the Sudanese armed forces in the Jebel Marra region of Darfur.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    ​We are very concerned by the allegations of chemical weapons use in Sudan and have raised our concern during UN Security Council consultations and directly with the Government of Sudan. We are aware that the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons is looking into the allegations and has asked the Government of Sudan to share all relevant information. The UK condemns any use of chemical weapons, by anyone anywhere.

  • Andrew Rosindell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Andrew Rosindell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Rosindell on 2016-01-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what plans her Department has to allow US border guards to patrol UK airports.

    James Brokenshire

    The US operates border pre-clearance facilities at a number of international airports to allow passengers on flights to the US to clear US customs and immigration controls before they arrive in the US. The US Government seeks to negotiate such arrangements with the relevant UK airports, as any interested airport would need to adapt its operations accordingly. However the introduction of pre-clearance operations would also require approval by the UK Government. We continue to discuss pre-clearance with the US but no formal agreement has yet been reached.

  • Tim Loughton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Tim Loughton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tim Loughton on 2016-02-02.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many women have died (a) in pregnancy and (b) during childbirth in each of the last 10 years.

    Mr Rob Wilson

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

  • Andrew Rosindell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Andrew Rosindell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Rosindell on 2016-02-23.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how much the Government expects to accrue to the public purse from the planned annual charge on Australian and New Zealand citizens for use of the NHS.

    James Brokenshire

    The Impact Assessment published on 4 February 2016, alongside the draft Immigration (Health Charge) (Amendment) Order 2016, estimates that a net additional £41 million could be raised for the NHS in present value, over 5 years, in 2016-17 prices, by applying the health charge to Australian and New Zealand nationals and reducing the annual health charge for Youth Mobility Scheme visa applicants from £200 to £150.

    The Impact Assessment can be viewed at the link below and is also available in the Vote Office (Commons): http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2016/9780111143278/impacts

    These changes are subject to affirmative resolution and will be debated in the House of Commons and House of Lords. If they are approved by Parliament, the Government plans to implement the changes from 6 April.

    The Government think it only fair that Australian and New Zealand nationals contribute to the UK’s health service in the same way as other non-EEA nationals. The changes will only apply to Australian and New Zealand nationals who plan to enter the UK for a temporary period of more than six months; visitors will not need to pay the charge and Australians and New Zealanders will continue to benefit from our reciprocal healthcare agreements.

    Further, the Government has in recognition of the close and important links between our countries, agreed during discussions with the Australian and New Zealand Governments, to reduce the health charge that applies to the Youth Mobility Scheme from £200 to £150 in line with students. This is the category used by more than half of Australian and New Zealand nationals granted visa’s to the UK.

  • 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 2016-03-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, if he will make it his policy to conduct a systematic analysis of existing science and research-based infrastructure in the UK for the purpose of guiding his Department’s future investment priorities.

    Joseph Johnson

    The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) is considering the National Audit Office’s recent report on capital investment in science projects, and will respond in due course.

    All funding decisions are subject to BIS and HM Treasury’s rigorous scrutiny process and must pass a robust business case process before spending is approved.

  • Graham Evans – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Graham Evans – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Graham Evans on 2016-04-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will make an assessment of potential steps to increase provision of (a) court time and (b) relevantly skilled members of the judiciary to ensure the timely management of legal proceedings on complex planning disputes.

    Mr Shailesh Vara

    The Planning Court was established in 2014 and has greatly increased the speed in which planning cases are dealt with.

    A dedicated cadre of lawyers and judiciary have been appointed to deal expediently with all significant planning cases.

    The Criminal Courts and Justice Act 2015 introduced a permission stage in applications for statutory review, to remove unmeritorious statutory challenges to planning decisions as early as possible.

    Current statistical data shows that the average time taken for a planning case to be dealt with in the Planning Court has reduced from 46.9 weeks in February 2014 to 25.9 weeks in March 2016.