Tag: Caroline Lucas

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2014-06-13.

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, what estimate he has made of the number of community energy schemes that have not gone ahead due to the cost of securing a connection to the local grid; if he will make it his policy to (a) introduce standardised affordable grid connection charges for community energy schemes and (b) exempt community energy schemes from wider network upgrade costs; and if he will make a statement.

Michael Fallon

In January 2014, the Department of Energy and Climate Change launched the UK’s first Community Energy Strategy. As part of this, my rt. hon. Friend the Secretary of State established a Community Energy Grid Connection Working Group to consider barriers to community energy project grid connections, including issues such as the cost of securing a connection and the impact this has on deployment. The Working Group is due to report to the Secretary of State in summer 2014 outlining its recommendations.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2014-05-07.

To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, with reference to the letter of 30 April 2014 from the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government to the chairmen of fire and rescue authorities and the Chairman of the Local Government Association’s Fire Service Management Committee, if he will put forward the revised proposals for consideration by firefighters and the Fire Brigades Union.

Brandon Lewis

It is common knowledge that we agreed to ask the Government Actuary’s Department to cost proposals put forward by the Fire Brigades Union. These were Fire Brigades Union proposals which the Government had not taken a view on.

My letter to the General Secretary of the Fire Brigades Union of 23 April said “we are now considering this proposal across Government. While we are not yet in a position to respond positively to your suggested changes, I will inform you of the outcome of those deliberations as soon as possible”. I had also been clear with the Fire Brigades Union leadership that it was only possible to consider such proposals during a period when strike action was in abeyance. Rather than continue and finalise that constructive process the Fire Brigades Union leadership chose to call a halt to discussions prematurely by announcing strike action.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2014-06-12.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, for what reasons a review of the scope of Project Pegasus is being undertaken at the Atomic Weapons Establishment; and what changes he expects to be made to the scope of the project as a result of the review.

Mr Philip Dunne

Pegasus is the replacement highly enriched uranium component manufacturing and storage facility, and forms part of the Government’s programme of investment in the Atomic Weapons Establishment sites.

In accordance with normal industry best practice, the project is under regular review to ensure that the facility will meet the Ministry of Defence’s requirements while also achieving the optimum balance of performance, cost and schedule. No changes to the approved scope of the project have been made.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2014-05-07.

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, if he will make an assessment of the British Medical Journal editorial Public Health England’s draft report on shale gas extraction: Mistaking best practices for actual practices published on 17 April 2014; and if he will make a statement.

Jane Ellison

I have been asked to reply.

Public Health England (PHE) has considered the British Medical Journal (BMJ) editorial on Public Health England’s draft report on shale gas extraction: Mistaking best practices for actual practices, published on 17 April 2014. PHE’s response to the article was published on-line on 30 April 2014 and can be found here:

www.bmj.com/content/348/bmj.g2728?tab=responses

PHE’s response to the BMJ article states that the conclusion of the report that risks from the process of shale gas extraction will be low if operations are properly run and regulated was a considered judgement. PHE has identified those aspects of operations that are considered to pose the greatest risks. PHE has made a number of recommendations for the control of risks, as have others. If shale gas extraction does take place, PHE will work with regulators to help ensure that environmental monitoring and health surveillance programmes are implemented appropriately. PHE agrees with Kovats et al (Lancet 383, 757-8; 2014) on the potential for Health Impact Assessments (HIA) to play a role in informing policy and local planning processes, considering all issues associated with shale gas extraction which may affect health, including Green House Gas emissions and climate change. PHE will seek to support HIAs and will continue to evaluate evidence on health risks associated with shale gas extraction and related technologies.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2014-06-12.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, if he will take steps to improve support and protection for women human rights defenders in Afghanistan; and if he will make a statement.

Hugh Robertson

The UK takes this issue very seriously. Our primary approach to supporting human rights defenders is to work with and through multilateral institutions such as the EU and the UN to support national efforts. These bodies have the expertise and resources to fulfil this important role in country. The UK played a significant part in the EU’s recent decision to increase support to human rights defenders in Afghanistan, including plans to refresh the 2010 EU Strategy on Human Rights Defenders. The UK will work with the EU and other Member States to ensure that the refreshed strategy recognises the specific challenges that women human rights defenders face. We are also working to ensure that human rights, including the protection of human rights defenders, are a top priority for the EU’s proposed post-2014 country strategy for Afghanistan.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2014-06-12.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what plans he has for reviewing the conduct of and representation on Local Liaison Committees for defence nuclear sites.

Mr Philip Dunne

There are no plans for the Ministry of Defence to review the conduct of, nor representation at, Local Liaison Committees relating to Defence nuclear sites. The operation of such committees is a matter for agreement between the individual site operator (the Licensee and/or Authorisee) and the appropriate local authorities.