Tag: 2016

  • David Amess – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    David Amess – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Amess on 2016-02-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what recent discussions he has had with C2C on the effect of changes to its timetable on consumer satisfaction.

    Claire Perry

    I met with c2c on the 10th February. I have asked them to make proposals to adjust their plans to deliver a more attractive balance between service levels and overcrowding, and the Department will work with c2c to deliver these at the earliest opportunity.

  • Kelvin Hopkins – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Kelvin Hopkins – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kelvin Hopkins on 2016-03-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what discussions his Department has had with Govia Thameslink Railways Ltd on extending driver-only operation on its services.

    Claire Perry

    Govia Thameslink Railway have made officials aware of the intention to engage with staff and their representatives regarding future plans for Driver Only Operation on some services.

  • Mark Prisk – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Mark Prisk – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mark Prisk on 2016-04-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what the period will be for a decision to be made on applications to the Primary Care Trust Fund.

    Alistair Burt

    NHS England will publish further guidance about the Primary Care Transformation Fund later this month.

  • Thangam Debbonaire – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Thangam Debbonaire – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Thangam Debbonaire on 2016-05-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what recent discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government about the effect on arts and culture of changes to local government funding from central government; and what further such discussions are planned on this issue.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    DCMS and DCLG Ministers and officials regularly discuss matters of shared interest including arts, culture and public libraries.The Culture White Paper which was published in March reflects the close working between the two Departments​.​

  • Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-06-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to the Answer of 13 June 2016 to Question 40383, whether the Government has the power under current delay repay infrastructure to allow people to claim compensation for 15-minute delays before it makes other planned improvements to compensation arrangements; and if he will make a statement.

    Claire Perry

    All franchised Train Operating Companies (TOCs) are required under their franchise agreement to have in place a Passenger’s Charter which will include arrangements for compensation for passengers. TOCs can, at their discretion, go beyond the commitments in their Passenger’s Charter including on compensation on an ex gratia basis.

  • Kate Osamor – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Kate Osamor – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kate Osamor on 2016-09-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment she has made of the effect of narrowing the defintion of torture in the draft guidance on adults at risk on the ability of her Department to meet Stephen Shaw’s recommendation to adopt a wider definition of those at risk.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    For the purposes of the Government’s “adults at risk in immigration detention” policy, which was implemented on 12 September, the Government has adopted a definition of torture in line with that set out in the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT). This covers acts of torture carried out by, or on behalf of state authorities and, in guidance issued to Home Office staff, to doctors working in immigration removal centres, and to other staff, it has been made clear that the definition also covers acts of torture or ill-treatment carried out by groups exploiting instability and civil war to hold territory. It does not, however, cover acts of violence carried out in the course of, for example, neighbourhood disputes. The definition employed most accurately reflects the need to protect those who are most likely to be deleteriously affected by detention – that is, those who have been harmed by the state (or by an organisation exercising similar control) and for whom detention is most likely to be redolent of the harm they have suffered. In addition, individuals will fall within the scope of the adults at risk policy if the harm to which they have been subjected causes them to suffer from a condition which also falls within the “indicators of risk” set out in the policy, regardless of whether it falls within the strict definition of “torture” and regardless of the perpetrator of the violence. The policy recognises a broad range of groups of individuals as those likely to be particularly vulnerable to harm in detention without necessarily having to define them as victims of torture.

    In making the decision to employ the UNCAT definition of torture, the Government took into account a range of considerations, including the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees guidelines, but concluded that the UNCAT definition provided the appropriate level of protection. The Government believes that this approach is fully in line with Stephen Shaw’s recommendations in respect of vulnerable people. The adults at risk policy as a whole represents a broadening of the scope of individuals considered vulnerable, by virtue of the inclusion within the list of indicators of risk set out in the policy of, for example, victims of sexual or gender based violence (including female genital mutilation), transsexual individuals, and those suffering from post traumatic stress disorder. Overall, the impact of the adoption of the UNCAT definition on different groups of vulnerable individuals will depend on the circumstances of the particular case. The Government does not anticipate that it will have a disproportionate impact on any specific group. In particular, the Government does not see that there are contradictions in applying the new definition of torture alongside the inclusion in the policy, as an indicator of risk, being a victim of sexual or gender based violence. Although the perpetrator of the violence is, by necessity, a key part of the definition of torture, the adults at risk policy focuses as a whole on the impact on the individual and on whether detention is appropriate in their particular case. Home Office caseworkers have been provided with training and communications on the new adults at risk policy, including in respect of the definition of torture. Guidance on the adults at risk policy has been issued, including to the commissioners of healthcare in Immigration Removal Centres.

  • Lord Wallace of Saltaire – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Lord Wallace of Saltaire – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Wallace of Saltaire on 2016-01-19.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many claims of diplomatic immunity were advanced in UK courts, or other legal procedures, between 1 January 2010 and 1 January 2016; how many of those were successful; and of which states those successful and unsuccessful claimants were citizens.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    A number of claims of diplomatic immunity have been advanced through the UK courts. However, statistics and details are not recorded centrally and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

  • 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 2016-02-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what recent assessment he has made of Highways England’s compliance with the conditions on environmental duties set out in paragraphs 5.23 and 5.24 of the Highways England: Licence, published in April 2015.

    Andrew Jones

    The Office for Rail and Road (ORR), as Highways Monitor, published a six month report on Highways England’s performance in December 2015. This comments on the Highways England Biodiversity Action Plan, which was published in June 2015.

    ORR will report annually on Highways England’s performance and in line with the requirement in the Licence, I expect Highways England to publish their environmental strategy shortly.

  • Stephen Timms – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Stephen Timms – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Timms on 2016-03-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, on what date he became aware that his Department would not be able to deliver the Universal Credit programme to its original deadline of the end of 2017.

    Priti Patel

    In early 2013 the Government reset the Universal Credit Programme, and a clear plan was developed to ensure delivery. The Programme has since been delivering against that plan in a safe, steady and secure way.

  • Mike Kane – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Mike Kane – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mike Kane on 2016-04-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what requirements NHS England has placed on Manchester Mental Health and Social Care Trust to provide alternative services to replace services which are to be closed.

    Alistair Burt

    We are advised that NHS England has placed no such requirements. These are matters for the Manchester Mental Health and Social Care NHS Trust and its commissioners.

    We expect all National Health Service trusts to use their resources wisely and within their statutory responsibilities, while delivering high quality, sustainable services to patients. It is for the local NHS to determine the provision of local health services.