Tag: Chi Onwurah

  • Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chi Onwurah on 2016-01-19.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether (a) all and (b) part of the funding for universal technology schools count as public sector borrowing for the purposes of calculating the national debt.

    Greg Hands

    The Department for Education provides capital funding to support the construction of new University Technical Colleges and allocates resource funding to support day to day running costs.

    This funding impacts on public sector borrowing and public sector net debt in the same way as other central government spending.

  • Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chi Onwurah on 2016-02-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, pursuant to the Answer of 5 February 2016 to Question 22981, if he will ask Ofcom to publish an assessment of whether the 26 per cent of BT’s ducts identified as being empty in the report, Telecoms infrastructure access – sample survey of duct access, published in March 2009, reflected the proportion of BT’s ducts that were able to have fibre blown through them without further civil works in the superfast broadband rollout.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    I understand from Ofcom that the sample surveyed in the Ofcom report ‘Telecoms infrastructure access – sample survey of duct access’, published in March 2009, provided an indicative rather than representative assessment of the potential spare capacity in BT’s ducts.

  • Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chi Onwurah on 2016-02-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what estimate her Department has made of the number of state (a) primary and (b) secondary students who are learning a musical instrument; and how many such students are learning that musical instrument for free.

    Nick Gibb

    Music is compulsory for all children in key stages 1-3 in maintained schools. One of the requirements of the National Curriculum is that pupils are taught to play musical instruments. Schools are not permitted to charge for teaching that is required by the National Curriculum.

    The Government is investing £75m in 2015-16 in a network of music education hubs. Music education hubs have four core roles, one of which is to ensure that every child aged 5-18 learns to play a musical instrument through whole class ensemble teaching. Data published by Arts Council England in March 2015 showed that 596,820 pupils in the academic year 2013/14 learned to play an instrument through whole class ensemble teaching. This teaching is provided free for pupils.

    The data is available here: http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/media/uploads/Music_Education_Hubs_2014_Report_final_March_2015.pdf.

    Arts Council England will publish data for the 2014-15 academic year in due course. This will include more extensive data on the number of pupils who have singing or instrumental lessons.

    “

  • Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chi Onwurah on 2016-04-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what assessment he has made of the potential effect of changes to the subsidy profile for the Northern Rail franchise on the quality of rail services.

    Claire Perry

    Thanks to the work of this Government, the hon. Lady’s constituents will benefit from a transformed rail service under the new franchise. In addition, this improvement for passengers will be provided while improving the value for money of the operation for the benefit of all tax payers.

  • Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chi Onwurah on 2016-05-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what steps he has taken to review the rating system for fibre networks in order to remove disadvantages for new operators.

    Mr Marcus Jones

    All properties including new and existing fibre telecom networks are valued for business rates to the same standard of annual rental value. Rateable values are assessed independently by the Valuation Office Agency and may be challenged in the courts. The Upper Tribunal, the Court of Appeal and the European Commission have all supported the Valuation Office Agency’s valuation method for telecom networks.

  • Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chi Onwurah on 2016-06-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of moving television from broadcast spectrum to other delivery mechanisms.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    The most recent assessment was made by the independent regulator, Ofcom, in their report: The Future of Free to View TV (May 2014). This is a fast moving market and as it evolves, the Government will keep these issues under review.

    Detailed spectrum planning is a matter for Ofcom.

  • Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chi Onwurah on 2016-07-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, how many full-time equivalent staff of his Department are working on the Digital Single Market.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    There a number of departments across Whitehall who work on aspects of the Digital Single Market (DSM) including the Department for Culture Media and Sport, the Home Office and HM Treasury. And, within the Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS) there are a number of policy areas that are involved directly or indirectly in aspects of the Digital Single Market including the Intellectual Property Office, Competition and Consumer Policy and Advanced Manufacturing and Services.

    BIS leads on behalf of Government and coordinates activity across those departments with an interest. There is a core team of five FTEs who act as the hub for all of this work.

  • Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chi Onwurah on 2016-09-05.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what discussions she has had with the Department for Communities and Local Government on how to replace the funding potentially lost to public sector organisations for rooftop rental as a result of the changes to rooftop valuation proposed in the Digital Economy Bill.

    Matt Hancock

    Government remains committed to a Code that is fit for a digital economy, delivers improved coverage and connectivity for the UK, and greater investment in UK infrastructure . The revised Electronic Communications Code has been developed in discussion with colleagues across Government including the Department of Communities and Local Government.

  • Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chi Onwurah on 2016-10-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, whether public consultations or surveys were undertaken in the former Department for Energy and Climate Change to ascertain whether people trusted and understood the data-sharing element of the Warm Home Discount Scheme in the run-up to implementing that scheme.

    Jesse Norman

    The Warm Home Discount consultation, published in December 2011, included questions on data sharing.

    Prior to the Warm Home Discount, the Energy Rebate Scheme, which ran for one year, used data-matching (of DWP and energy suppliers’ data) to identify a group of pensioners likely to be vulnerable to fuel poverty, so that their electricity supplier could award a one-off rebate to their electricity bill. This earlier scheme ran for one year.

    DWP Social Researchers carried out a small-scale qualitative evaluation of the scheme, involving telephone interviews with customers to investigate reactions to their personal data being used in this way – this includeding issues around privacy, security and data sharing, and the broader concept of data use in Government.

    The findings of the research and consultation responses can be found here:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/the-warm-home-discount-scheme

    “

  • Chi Onwurah – 2022 Speech on Post Office Compensation Scheme

    Chi Onwurah – 2022 Speech on Post Office Compensation Scheme

    The speech made by Chi Onwurah, the Labour MP for Newcastle upon Tyne Central, in the House of Commons on 7 December 2022.

    I welcome today’s statement and apology, which represent an important step forward in the delivery of justice following what may well be the largest miscarriage of justice in our country’s history. There have been 900 prosecutions. All the postmasters involved have their own stories of dreams crushed, careers ruined, families destroyed, reputations smashed, and lives lost. Innocent people have been bankrupted and imprisoned.

    Let me start by paying tribute to the Justice for Subpostmasters Alliance, the campaigning group, and to the hundreds of sub-postmasters whom no monetary amount can compensate for the injustice that they have suffered. This has been a long walk towards justice, and Members in all parts of the House have stood and spoken out in solidarity with the postmasters. I want to recognise, in particular, my right hon. Friend the Member for North Durham (Mr Jones) and Lord Arbuthnot, who are rightly to be members of the independent advisory board.

    I also pay tribute to the Minister who was previously formerly responsible for the Post Office, the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam (Paul Scully). I do not do so lightly, but after successive Conservative Governments had sat on the scandal, he was the first to take hold of it and eventually—following much campaigning by Members of Parliament and members of the Labour party—to establish a statutory inquiry. Finally, I want to thank the journalist Nick Wallis, whose BBC Radio 4 series “The Great Post Office Trial” did much to bring this scandal to general attention.

    While I am pleased that some kind of acceptable outcome for the postmasters seems finally to be in sight, I have some questions to ask. The press release refers to a compensation scheme for postmasters who helped to expose the scandal, but I remind the Secretary of State that it was his Government who spent years aiding and abetting the Post Office in targeting those self-same postmasters who were looking for justice. Nearly £100 million was spent by the Post Office to defend the indefensible as part of a campaign of intimidation and deceit. The Government are the only shareholder in the Post Office, so it is right for the Secretary of State to take responsibility.

    At the core of this unforgivable scandal is the belief that workers were dishonest and technology infallible. Perhaps that is not surprising, given the Government’s track record on defending the rights of working people. Decent, honest people have had their lives torn apart, have been put in prison, and have been made to wait years for justice. Will the Secretary of State tell us how long he expects it will take for this scheme, and the other schemes, to pay the appropriate compensation, and whether the aim of these schemes is to return people to what would have been their original position had it not been for their involvement in Horizon? Will he also tell us which legal firm will be involved in the administration of this scheme, and whether that firm has previously advised either the Government or the Post Office on this matter?

    Value for taxpayers’ money is a key consideration on this side of the House, even if the Government like to waste it. Having wasted tens of millions of pounds on persecuting postmasters, can the Secretary of State tell us where the money for the scheme will come from as we face a cost of living crisis made in Downing Street? Will post office services suffer, or will other budgets be cut? The press release does not mention the Justice for Subpostmasters Alliance or Alan Bates, who led its efforts. Does the scheme have their full support?

    I hope the Secretary of State agrees that those who were involved in this injustice should not benefit from their involvement. Will he tell us how he intends to hold Fujitsu to account, and whether it is still being given Government contracts? Will he also tell us whether he supports the continued retention of the CBE that was awarded to Paula Vennells—who oversaw the Horizon scandal—for services to the Post Office?

    The Post Office is a national institution. It is part of so many of our lives. Its reputation has been hugely tarnished by this scandal, and I hope the Secretary of State will tell us how he intends to ensure that this never happens again and that the sub-postmasters receive justice as soon as possible.

    Grant Shapps

    I am grateful for the hon. Lady’s comments, although I rather hoped the House would come together today and debate this matter in a non-political, cross-party way, and she sought to make a number of, I think, somewhat inappropriate political points. I should gently point out that it was her party that was in power for the first 11 years of this scandal. I am pleased that we have worked across parties to fix it, and I think we should leave it there.

    Earlier today I spoke to Alan Bates, the founder and leader of the Justice for Subpostmasters Alliance, who is sitting in the Public Gallery. Obviously the members of the JFSA will speak for themselves, as they always have, about the extent to which they are satisfied with today’s statement, but we have been working closely together. The Minister for Enterprise, Markets and Small Business, my hon. Friend the Member for Thirsk and Malton (Kevin Hollinrake), has been meeting them as well, and will be keeping a close eye on the operation of the scheme.

    I reiterate the hon. Lady’s comments in thanking not just the right hon. Member for North Durham (Mr Jones) —as I did earlier—but my hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam (Paul Scully), Lord Arbuthnot, and others who have campaigned endlessly on this issue, including the BBC journalist Nick Wallis, who has played an important role in this long battle.

    The hon. Lady asked about timescales. As I said in my statement, we aim to complete this part of the scheme by the end of 2023, or, I hope, sooner. The large number of documents that we are putting online this morning will enable people to get on with processing their applications before making formal applications early next year. Sir Wyn Williams, who is conducting the formal inquiry, will, I hope, be able to shed significant light on what went wrong and provide a set of recommendations to prevent it from happening again. I have no doubt that Members, certainly on this side of the House, will be anxiously awaiting those recommendations.