Tag: David Anderson

The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Anderson on 2015-11-26.

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department is taking to mitigate the effect of proposed courts and tribunal closures on (a) staff with caring responsibilities, (b) disabled staff, (c) black and minority ethnic staff and (d) court users.

Mr Shailesh Vara

The staff impact of these proposals will be managed using the department’s Managing Organisational Change Framework which has been endorsed by the Departmental Trade Unions. This will make sure that the transition to new arrangements proceeds in a fair and transparent manner for all staff.

In an increasingly digital age, court users will not always need to attend hearings in person in order to access the justice system and whilst we have already established alternative ways users can interact with our services, we are looking to expand these provisions to provide more choice than is currently available.

In order to achieve these aims, we have secured over £700m of funding to invest in our courts and tribunals. We have worked closely with the senior judiciary to develop a plan for investing this in reforming the courts and tribunals so they can deliver swifter, fairer justice at a lower cost. This will include digitisation and modernisation of our IT infrastructure. This will mean court users can attend hearings remotely, and not be inconvenienced by having to take a day off work to come to court. It will also mean victims of crime can give evidence from somewhere they feel safe.

A full impact assessment will be published alongside the consultation response.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Anderson on 2016-01-04.

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, who in the Government takes decisions on what information is shared with which members of the Royal Family.

John Penrose

The decision to share Government information lies with individual Ministers and their departments as stated in Chapter 11 of the Cabinet Manual. Government information is managed in accordance with the Lord Chancellor’s Code of Practice on the Management of Records issued under section 46 of the Freedom of information Act 2000.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Anderson on 2016-01-20.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what working definition of imminence his Department uses in the application of article 51 of the UN Charter.

Penny Mordaunt

It has long been the position of successive UK Governments that "the inherent right of self-defence", as recognised in Article 51 of the UN Charter, does not require a State to wait until an armed attack is actually under way before it can lawfully use force to alleviate the threat. A State may use force in anticipation of an armed attack where such an attack is imminent, provided that such force is both necessary and proportionate to averting the threat. The assessments would depend on the facts of each case, with consideration likely to include issues such as the nature and immediacy of the threat, the probability of an attack, its scale and effects and whether it can be prevented without force.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 27 January 2016 to Question 23290, what his Department’s policy is on (a) the application of the convention on giving Parliament the opportunity to debate military intervention abroad to armed drones and (b) informing the House of any exceptional operation on the grounds of self-defence of the UK.

Michael Fallon

The Government is committed to the convention that, before UK troops are committed to conflict, Parliament should have an opportunity to debate the matter except when there is an emergency. It is fitting to keep Parliament informed of major new developments and to answer questions on them.

The Government will inform the House of any exceptional operation where there has not been prior debate in Parliament as the Prime Minister did on 7 September 2015 in relation to the precision airstrike that took place on 21 August 2015.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Anderson on 2016-02-09.

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, pursuant to the Answer of 8 February 2016 to Question 25444, whether she has made an estimate of the proportion of coal that may have been mined by children.

Andrea Leadsom

The majority of power station operators in the UK are members of BetterCoal, an industry-led initiative which is taking action to promote responsible coal mining and has established a set of ethical, social, and environmental principles with which companies in the supply chain are expected to align. This includes conformity with a number of International Labour Organization conventions and recommendations which aim to eradicate child labour.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Anderson on 2016-02-26.

To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what assessment he has made of the potential risk of legal proceedings against his Department as a result of non-implementation of EU Directive 41/2003 on Institutions for Occupational Retirement Provision.

Mr Marcus Jones

I am satisfied that the potential risk of successful legal proceedings against the Department in relation to implementation of EU Directive 41/2003 is low, because it has been properly implemented in respect of the local government pension scheme.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Anderson on 2016-03-07.

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, whether her Department has commissioned research on the potential effect on the purchase of energy through the interconnectors in the event of a majority leave vote in the EU referendum.

Amber Rudd

At the February European Council, the Government negotiated a new settlement, giving the United Kingdom a special status in a reformed European Union. The Government’s position, as set out by the Prime Minister to the House on 22 February, is that the UK will be stronger, safer and better off remaining in a reformed EU.

We currently expect our electricity interconnector capacity with the EU to double by the early 2020s with studies showing they could deliver benefits to British consumers of almost £12 billion over 25 years. As the White Paper that the Government recently published on the process for withdrawing from the European Union makes clear, a vote to leave the EU would lead to a prolonged period of uncertainty, including on the nature of our access to the EU’s single energy market.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Anderson on 2016-04-08.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment his Department has made of what constitutes a safe level of exposure of electromagnetic fields from mobile telephone use for (a) the population as a whole and (b) young people.

Jane Ellison

Government policy is that exposures to electromagnetic fields from mobile phones should comply with the guidelines on limiting exposures from the International Commission on Non-ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). Public Health England keeps the evidence relevant to this policy under review and published a comprehensive review of the evidence prepared by its independent Advisory Group on Non-ionising Radiation in 2012. Acute and long-term effects of high frequency exposure from the use of mobile phones have been studied extensively without showing any conclusive evidence of adverse health effects. The ICNIRP website can be found at:

http://www.icnirp.org

“

The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Anderson on 2016-04-27.

To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, pursuant to the Answer of 27 April 2016 to Question 34542, whether his Department has made an assessment of risks from lasers; and how he plans to use the General Product Safety Regulations to ensure the safe use of lasers in driverless cars.

Anna Soubry

The Government, via Public Health England, has made an assessment of the health risks posed by different classes of lasers, and as a result my Department has advised Trading Standards to use their powers under the General Product Safety Regulations to remove laser pointers higher than Class 2 from sale.

However, we are also aware that there is a second risk from the intentional directing of a laser at aviation (and other modes of transport) so as to dazzle or distract the pilot (or driver).

This is a cross-Whitehall issue and we are working with other departments to address it, including looking at legislative options. However, the practical implementation of the General Product Safety Regulations is a matter for Local Authority Trading Standards.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Anderson on 2016-05-24.

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, what the cost to the public purse was of the Notifications of Inadequate System Margin issued on 9 May 2016 by the National Grid; and if she will make a statement.

Andrea Leadsom

There was no cost to the public purse resulting from the Notice of Inadequate System Margin issued on 9 May.