The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Tonge on 2016-09-06.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will make representations to the government of Israel following reports that Israeli forces prevented an ambulance from taking an injured person from Fawwar refugee camp on 16 August.
Baroness Anelay of St Johns
We have not made representations to the Israeli authorities over this specific issue.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Suttie on 2016-10-21.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is the total anticipated cost of salaries for new members of staff recruited to work in the Department for Exiting the European Union and the Department for International Trade for 2016–17 and 2017–18.
Baroness Chisholm of Owlpen
The budget required to fulfil both the Department for International Trade’s and the Department for Exiting the EU’s set-up and responsibilities, including staffing budget, will be presented to the House of Commons and approved as part of the supplementary estimates in the New Year, as is standard practice.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Yasmin Qureshi on 2016-01-13.
To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what steps his Department is taking to support property level flood resilience measures.
James Wharton
The Department is supporting local authorities affected by Storm Desmond and Storm Eva with community recovery, business support and property resilience through the Communities and Business Recovery Scheme. Initial guidance on the support available was sent to local authorities in December. More detailed guidance on support for property resilience was issued on 15 January, on the same day that a Property Level Resilience Workshop was hosted at Manchester Metropolitan University.
To date the Department has paid out over £47 million under the Communities and Business Recovery Scheme. It is for local authorities to determine how to use this money to best meet local need and ensure value for money.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sarah Wollaston on 2016-02-08.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will ask the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation to conduct an equality impact assessment as part of its decision-making process on the vaccination of adolescent boys.
Jane Ellison
I refer the hon. Member to the Written Answer I gave the hon. Member for Basildon and Billericay (Mr John Baron) on 20 July 2015 to Question 7298.
“
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Richard Burden on 2016-02-29.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what the latest estimated costs or final costs are for each of the road projects referred to in the Government’s announcement entitled Major Roads Investment in the South West, published on 1 December 2014.
Andrew Jones
The latest cost estimates for road projects in the South West of England included in the Government’s Roads Investment Strategy (RIS) for 2015-20 are below:
|
M49 Avonmouth Junction |
£37.3m – £53.6m |
|
A303 Sparkford to Ilchester Dualling |
£104.6m – £142.2m |
|
A358 Taunton to Southfields |
£351m – £517m |
|
M5 Junction 23 |
less than £25m* |
|
A30 Chiverton Cross to Carland Cross |
£100m – £250m* |
|
A303 Amesbury to Berwick Down |
£864m – £1321m |
|
A417 Missing Link |
£250m – £500m * |
|
A30 Temple to Higher Carblake |
scheme cost £56.5m. Highways England contribution = £46.5m. |
* cost as provided in RIS Investment Plan
Updated range estimates have been prepared for some schemes since the cost categories provided in the RIS in December 2014. As schemes are developed further, they will all have their estimates updated.
I note in particular that historic attempts to improve the A303 were shelved by the previous Labour Government; we are determined to finally deliver the connectivity the south west deserves.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by William Wragg on 2016-03-24.
To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what steps his Department is taking to maximise engagement of children and young people in the arts.
Mr Edward Vaizey
The Culture White Paper published last month makes clear that this Government is committed to ensuring that the arts should be an essential part of every child’s education both in and out of school. This includes working with the Department for Education on a range of music and cultural education programmes since 2012, supporting the Arts Council’s Cultural Education Challenge to create a network of cultural education partnerships and a new Cultural Citizens programme which will be piloted in three areas to support the engagement of disadvantaged young people with arts and culture in their local community.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Rosindell on 2016-05-04.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, whether (a) the Government will be able to bring cases to Investor State Dispute Settlements tribunals and (b) UK companies will be able to instigate actions against the US administration through such tribunals under the current terms of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.
Anna Soubry
Investment protection provisions in trade and investment treaties such as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) aim to protect international investors from discriminatory or unfair treatment by a state. Their investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) provisions allow international investors to bring claims if they think the obligations set out in the treaty have been breached by the host state. As such, Governments cannot initiate claims against investors. Under the European Commission’s proposals for TTIP, in line with normal investment treaty practice, UK investors would be able to bring ISDS claims against the US Government.
The jurisdiction of any ISDS tribunal established in TTIP will be set out in the investment protection and ISDS provisions of the agreement. The aim of the European Commission’s proposals for investment protection provisions in TTIP is to clearly define the scope for ISDS claims and tribunal jurisdiction, including protecting the right of governments to regulate lawfully in the public interest. If an ISDS tribunal did exceed its jurisdiction in making an award, typically those elements of the resulting award would not be enforceable.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kirsten Oswald on 2016-06-08.
To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what steps his Department is taking to prevent regulated financial intermediaries from promoting products in the unregulated sector by implying that victims of misselling or fraud will have recourse to the protections offered by regulation.
Harriett Baldwin
The issues raised are a matter for the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), who are operationally independent from Government.
The question has been passed on to the FCA. The FCA will reply directly to the honourable member by letter. A copy of the letter will be placed in the Library of the House.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Altmann on 2016-09-05.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what estimate they have made of the number of women who are in hardship as a result of the decision to change women’s state pension age.
Lord Freud
The welfare system provides a safety net for those of working age and there are a range of benefits tailored to individual circumstances. The system is designed to deal with the problems which affect those most in need and takes into account difficulty in finding work, disability and caring responsibilities. No figures are available as to why claimants apply for help to the benefits system.
Independent analysis by the Institute for Fiscal Studies has shown that the rise in women’s State Pension age since 2010 has been accompanied by increases in employment rates for the women affected.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Blencathra on 2016-10-20.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Prior of Brampton on 25 July (HL1283), and in the light of the need to maintain compliance with EU law until the UK leaves the EU, what plans they have to discuss with NHS Trusts the introduction of new rotas for doctors which, following the UK’s departure from the EU, would exceed the current hours prescribed by the Working Time Directive.
Lord Prior of Brampton
The new rotas being introduced as part of the new contract for doctors in training include contractual limits on working hours that are stronger than those prescribed in the Working Time Directive. The contract limits weekly average hours to 48, and it places a cap of 72 hours on the number of hours that can be worked in any one week, compared to 91 hours under the Directive. It also reduces the number of consecutive nights and consecutive long days that doctors in training can work, compared to the current arrangements. Trusts are contractually obliged to observe these limits, regardless of the Working Time limits. Robust arrangements are in place to ensure this happens, with Guardians of Safe Working Hours in each trust. Trusts will be fined if junior doctors miss more than 25% of their designated meal breaks, work more than an average of 48 hours a week over 17 weeks or work more than the 72 hours limit in any one week.
Negotiations on a new contract for consultants have included a similar focus on safe working hours and limits. Discussions have been constructive and are continuing.