Tag: Daniel Zeichner

  • Daniel Zeichner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Daniel Zeichner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Daniel Zeichner on 2016-03-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to the Answer of 16 March 2016 to Question 30285, whether the working assumption that benefits from the Bus Service Operators Grant are passed on to passengers 50 per cent through lower fares and 50 per cent through increased service levels was informed by discussions with bus operators.

    Andrew Jones

    The working assumption that the Bus Service Operators Grant (BSOG) is passed on to passengers 50% through lower fares and 50% through increased service levels was presented to and informally sense checked with industry members attending BSOG related working groups held by the Department over 2014 and early 2015.

  • Daniel Zeichner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Daniel Zeichner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Daniel Zeichner on 2016-04-18.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what assessment he has made of representations from the science community to his Department’s plans to insert a new clause into all new and renewed grant agreements.

    Matthew Hancock

    As I made clear in the House on 27 April, we are continuing to consider the comments of all interested parties, ahead of the introduction into grant agreements of the clause aimed at protecting taxpayers’ money from being wasted on government lobbying government. We are pausing the implementation, pending a review of the representations made, and to give further time to consider any necessary adjustments to the wording of the clause, or the policy on its implementation, to help to deliver this policy in the best possible way for all involved.

  • Daniel Zeichner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Daniel Zeichner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Daniel Zeichner on 2016-05-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will make plans to use the statutory powers granted to him by section 128 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 to reform the Parole Board release test.

    Dominic Raab

    IPP prisoners are released where the Parole Board is satisfied that they can be safely managed in the community.

  • Daniel Zeichner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Daniel Zeichner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Daniel Zeichner on 2016-05-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, with reference to his Department’s press release, Rip-off pedicabs to be driven off the road under new proposals, published 26 May 2016, whether he plans to (a) amend secondary legislation or (b) bring forward legislative proposals to regulate pedicabs in London.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    Primary legislation will be needed to enable the Mayor to introduce a licensing regime for pedicabs. The Government is looking at how to bring the legislation forward in the next year.

  • Daniel Zeichner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Daniel Zeichner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Daniel Zeichner on 2016-06-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, with reference to his Department’s Local Transport Note No. 2/95, published in April 1995, if he will amend that note to assume a lower walking speed for pedestrian crossing timings.

    Andrew Jones

    Local Transport Note 2/95 provides advice to local authorities on calculating timings for crossings.

    The design walking speed of 1.2m/s used in the guidance covers 85% of the population. It is generally felt that this allows enough time for pedestrians to cross, and is long enough to accommodate people that walk more slowly. Where a crossing might be used by a large number of older people or those with mobility issues, for example outside residential care homes, we recommend that this should be taken into account when setting timings. The guidance for crossings is not statutory and local authorities can choose to use a slower walking speed if they deem it suitable.

    The Department is considering how best to update guidance, including that on pedestrian crossings, in light of the revision to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 which came into force on 22 April.

  • Daniel Zeichner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Daniel Zeichner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Daniel Zeichner on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, with reference to the Answer of 29 February 2016 to Question 27306, if his Department will undertake analysis to understand the potential benefits for bus passengers of the municipal bus company model.

    Andrew Jones

    There are only 8 existing municipal bus companies operating services in England and the Department does not currently have any plans to undertake analysis on the potential benefits of the municipal bus company model.

  • Daniel Zeichner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Daniel Zeichner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Daniel Zeichner on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what estimate he has made of the effect that the changes to plug-in grants from March 2016 have had on the take-up of electric vehicles.

    Mr John Hayes

    Many consumers brought forward their orders of new plug-in vehicles to before March to take advantage of the higher grant rates. The effect of this sales spike is still being felt with some vehicles ordered in February still to be delivered. This impact of the grant change will become clearer after the new registration plate in September. Registrations of ULEVs have continued to grow since the grant change.

  • Daniel Zeichner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Daniel Zeichner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Daniel Zeichner on 2016-09-06.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, with reference to page 8 of the Government’s report entitled, Childhood Obesity: a Plan for Action, published in August 2016, how much the Government has invested in (a) walking to school and (b) cycling to school in each year since 2010.

    Andrew Jones

    The table attached shows investment in walking and cycling to school programmes in each year since 2010:

    In 2010/11 Bikeability was one of a portfolio of programmes delivered by Cycling England, which received £63m government funding in 2010/11.

    Between 2011/12 and 2015/16, the Local Sustainable Transport Fund was open to local authorities to bid for funding for projects to address local transport problems. For some areas, this included support for walking and cycling to school projects. The Department does not hold information on precise funding allocated to these projects.

    Similarly, the Department has made £20.6m revenue funding available in 2016/17 through the Sustainable Transport Transition Year Fund, which is eligible for local authorities to bid for projects which support walking and cycling to school.

  • Daniel Zeichner – 2022 Speech on the Annual Fisheries Negotiations with EU and North Atlantic States

    Daniel Zeichner – 2022 Speech on the Annual Fisheries Negotiations with EU and North Atlantic States

    The speech made by Daniel Zeichner, the Labour MP for Cambridge, in the House of Commons on 20 December 2022.

    I congratulate the hon. Member for Waveney (Peter Aldous) on securing the urgent question. I share the hon. Gentleman’s frustration that it took an urgent question to hear about the negotiations. I hear what the Minister said about the timeframes, but there was a convention under which each year the House had a proper discussion about the outcome of the negotiations. I hope the Minister will promise today to return to that convention so that we can have proper and full discussions.

    I pay tribute to the Royal National Lifeboat Institution and other charities, as well as the fishers, who last week intervened so effectively to save human life in the channel. I remind the Minister of the continuing anguish that is being caused to many in the inland fleet at the hands of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency; the Minister really needs to work with colleagues to get a grip on that.

    On the recent negotiations, it is clear that many industry players have welcomed the outcomes of the various sets of talks, and that is positive, but may I ask the Minister about the status of the Faroe talks? What efforts were made to ensure that the deals made with the EU and other coastal states included a commitment to keep Russia’s fleet out of their waters? Although we welcome the promise to stop the fishing of sand eels in our waters, will the Minister tell us when that will take effect and whether we have secured commitments from others during the negotiations?

    In general, we will, of course, want to see the detail of the outcome and understand the potential environmental impact, but not everyone in the industry is quite as happy as the Minister says. Therein lies a fundamental problem that we have identified in the new architecture, including in the latest version of the joint fisheries statement, something also recently published and not discussed in this House. Although the Minister speaks for the UK Government, the devolved Governments of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland also play an important role in fisheries management, so we ask again: who speaks for England?

    Labour has consistently pointed out that no one fights the corner for English fishing in these negotiations. The statement has been welcomed by the Scottish Government and fishing sector, but can the Minister explain how much of the increase in catch will be available to the hard-hit English fishing sector? What will be the overall impact on jobs and economic opportunities in our English North sea fishing ports and surrounding communities?

    The Minister mentioned the distant fleet. Jane Sandell, the chief executive officer of UK Fisheries Ltd, which is based in Humberside and operates in distant Arctic waters, did not react with any positivity about this outcome. She called it

    “yet another body blow for fishers in the North East of England. While the government is gloating over its ‘success’ in the Norway talks, we are having to make skilled people redundant in the Humber region. It’s an absolute travesty of fairness and common sense.”

    She also said:

    “The few extra tonnes of whitefish in the Norwegian zone won’t come close to offsetting the loss in Svalbard due to the reduced TAC. Defra knows this, and yet it simply doesn’t seem to care about the English fleet.”

    That was borne out at the Select Committee on Environment, Food and Rural Affairs a couple of weeks ago, when the Secretary of State appeared to be unaware of the problems facing the English distant fleet. So perhaps the Minister can explain today why the English distant fleet has fared so badly, and what he plans to do about it.

    Mark Spencer

    We have of course tabled a written statement; we did that as soon as we were able, give that we signed the deal this morning. Once again, it is a little disingenuous to say that we were not prepared to make a statement, as the deal was not signed until after the statement deadline.

    I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will be aware that the Faroe Islands has just concluded its general election and is in the process of forming a Government, so it is difficult to negotiate with its Fisheries Minister when that Minister has not been appointed. As soon as that Minister is appointed, we will be back around the table talking to them to try to sort out the challenges we face, particularly on the Russian fleet, which the Faroes has allowed access to its waters.

    I will write to the hon. Gentleman with the details on sand eels. He talked about the devolved Administrations, the north-east fleet and who represents England. We tried very hard on this. We work with our devolved Administration colleagues constantly and we worked very hard to get a fair deal for all parts of the UK. We get the best deal for the UK and we try to divvy that deal up as best as we can among the devolved Administrations and around the coastline. I think we have struck the right balance. It is entirely possible to increase quota for any part of the UK that we want to, but we have to take that off somebody else. If he wants to write to me to tell me from whom he wants to remove quota, we will give due consideration to that representation and consider his thoughts.

  • Daniel Zeichner – 2022 Speech on the Cost of Food

    Daniel Zeichner – 2022 Speech on the Cost of Food

    The speech made by Daniel Zeichner, the Labour MP for Cambridge, in Westminster Hall, the House of Commons, on 14 December 2022.

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Gray. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, West Derby (Ian Byrne) on securing this timely debate. He is a hugely passionate and determined campaigner on this issue who speaks up for people across the country who are left hungry as prices soar. It is striking that, with one honourable exception—the hon. Member for Central Suffolk and North Ipswich (Dr Poulter)—the Government Benches are empty, while the Opposition Benches are overflowing with Members who have spoken passionately in this debate. I have been impressed by the contributions from my hon. Friend the Member for Jarrow (Kate Osborne), my right hon. Friend the Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell), and my hon. Friends the Members for Salford and Eccles (Rebecca Long Bailey), for Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport (Luke Pollard), for Leeds East (Richard Burgon) and for Swansea West (Geraint Davies). I am not going to repeat the points they made because time is short.

    I will go straight to a point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport, who observed the effect of food prices on primary producers. We have seen with rising egg prices that the issue has been well rehearsed but not resolved. Consumers pay more but producers do not cover their costs, so they stop producing, leading retailers to turn to lower standard imports. The excellent and widely reported research by Sustain last week shows just how fine the margins are for many producers, and how, when they are locked into fixed-term contracts, they are blown away by sudden and dramatic rises in costs.

    For probably the third or fourth time in these debates, I ask the Minister for an update on the dairy code, the pork code and the fate of the Grocery Code Adjudicator. I do not expect any answers. I could not help smiling at the comments by Minette Batters of the National Farmers Union at the weekend, when she told The Times that the Secretary of State, the right hon. Member for Suffolk Coastal (Dr Coffey), was “asleep at the wheel”. I thought that was a bit unfair; the Secretary of State does not even think she should be at the wheel. As my hon. Friend the Member for Swansea West will recall, she made clear it to the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee last week that she does not think it is the role of the Government to hand out free food or make price interventions.

    That prompts this question: if it is not for the Government to intervene when people go hungry, then whose role is it? Ministers may be surprised to find that many people in this country do think that the Government have a role—just not this Government. My big question for the Minister is: what does he think his role is as the Food Minister? What is he for? It is almost exactly a year on from the Government sneaking out the food security review under the Agriculture Act 2020. Can he tell us what the situation is today? Farmers tell me that we are less food secure than we were a year ago. Growers are not planting, the sow herd is smaller and poultry farmers are not restocking. Are the Government concerned? Do they have a view? Can he even tell us whether we are more or less secure than we were a year ago?

    I am grateful to the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds for pointing out in its briefing for this debate that the Government said the biggest medium to long-term risk to the UK’s domestic production

    “comes from climate change and other environmental pressures like soil degradation, water quality and biodiversity.”

    What have the Government done to address that challenge, other than miss their own so-called legally binding date to publish the targets promised under the Environment Act 2021?

    Has there been any progress on the Government’s half-hearted food strategy from a few months ago? Although we all accept that there are big cost pressures, a more active Government would be using their convening power to make a difference. Will the Minister tell us how often he meets the major players in the industry? What are they telling him? What is he telling them? Is it down to just the big retailers to decide the nation’s food policy, or does anyone else get a say? Perhaps he can tell us how often the Food and Drink Sector Council meets and what it has achieved to tackle this crisis. Its website says that it last met in February, although I understand there was a more recent meeting. What did the Minister get from it? Can he tell us?

    What assessment have the Minister and his colleagues made of the impact of the rising cost of food? What discussions has he had with Department for Education colleagues on the impact on children of real cuts in the nutritional value of school meals? Caterers try to provide meals, and yet they are handed just a few pence to make up the loss when costs soar.

    What are the health consequences of the changing buying patterns, as people move to cheaper options? What discussions has the Minister had with colleagues at the Department of Health and Social Care; or has he succumbed to his Secretary of State’s clear intention to dump any plans to tackle the obesity crisis that Henry Dimbleby highlighted? There are plans to ban adverts for foods that are high in saturated fat, salt and sugar before 9 o’clock. Why, when type 2 diabetes is rising faster in children and young adults in Britain than anywhere else in the world, has implementation been delayed until 2025?

    I doubt we will get any answers today. I wish the Minister and his colleagues a merry Christmas and a happy new year, but my sense is that on the cost of food—a very real issue facing every family in the country this Christmas—this Government have nothing to say, and frankly they show little interest. As always, their message is, “Leave it to the market; it is nothing to do with us. You’re on your own.” For too many this Christmas, that is exactly how it will feel.