UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Deidre Brock

  • Deidre Brock – 2023 Parliamentary Question on the Devolution Settlement

    Deidre Brock – 2023 Parliamentary Question on the Devolution Settlement

    The parliamentary question asked by Deidre Brock, the SNP MP for Edinburgh North and Leith, in the House of Commons on 29 March 2023.

    Deidre Brock (Edinburgh North and Leith) (SNP)

    1. What recent assessment he has made of the adequacy of the operation of the devolution settlement. (904292)

    Drew Hendry (Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey) (SNP)

    6. What recent assessment he has made of the adequacy of the operation of the devolution settlement. (904297)

    Chris Law (Dundee West) (SNP)

    7. What recent assessment he has made of the adequacy of the operation of the devolution settlement. (904298)

    The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr Alister Jack)

    I take this opportunity to congratulate Humza Yousaf on becoming Scotland’s new First Minister. I look forward to working with him. I heard him say that he wanted to put the independence drive into “fifth gear”; I would gently remind him that most Scots actually want him to put it into reverse and to work with the United Kingdom to tackle the issues that really matter to them, such as cost of living pressures and growing our economy.

    The devolution settlement gives Scotland the best of both worlds. Scotland benefits from the wide influence and economic strength of the UK, while also enjoying considerable devolved powers in vital areas such as health, education and justice to tailor policies to meet the needs of people in Scotland.

    Deidre Brock

    In his response to the hon. Member for Blaydon (Liz Twist) on 22 February, the Secretary of State claimed that the Scottish Government had not asked for an exemption from the UK Internal Market Act 2020 for the Scottish deposit return scheme. The Scottish Government have since published the timeline to show that that is incorrect and that the proposal has been under detailed discussion within the resources and waste common framework since last October, with the final detailed case for exclusion presented on 13 February. In the light of that, will he correct the record and apologise for inadvertently misleading Parliament?

    Mr Jack

    This is an important point and has had a lot of airtime in the media in Scotland. I can say to the hon. Lady that, while officials and civil servants spoke to one another over a period of time, the official request to Ministers came in the inter-ministerial group meeting, which the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland, my hon. Friend the Member for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk (John Lamont) was at, on 6 March. That is all minuted. It is a fact, it is on the record and there is no question. The UK Government have published it. The official request was on 6 March. I would also say that the Scottish Government proceeded with a deposit return scheme that small businesses, consumers and others are very concerned about. Even the chief executive of Tesco, the UK’s largest retailer, said yesterday that it is not the right scheme and it is not fit for purpose. They are concerned about it and they are right to be concerned about it. The Scottish Government asked for their UKIM exemption after they put their scheme together. If I were building a house, I would get planning permission and then build my house, not do it the other way around.

    Drew Hendry

    The Secretary of State knows that the process for gaining an exemption to the United Kingdom Internal Market Act is through developing the appropriate common framework. He also stated that there had been no request by letter from the Scottish Government, yet the Deputy First Minister wrote to the UK Government on 31 January and even received a positive reply on 10 February. Is the problem here that the Secretary of State just has a very selective memory, or is it that he is so busy preparing for his seat in the House of Lords that his office does not bother keeping him in the loop any more?

    Mr Jack

    Let us be absolutely clear about this: the letter the hon. Gentleman refers to was a letter to the Chancellor about value added tax treatment of the deposit return scheme. The letter mentioned that an exemption request would be coming forward, but the official request was made on 6 March—there is no question about that—and the detailed arguments were laid out on 6 March at the ministerial meeting.

    Chris Law

    It is not going too well for the Secretary of State, is it? Environmental charities across these islands have written to him, calling on him not to block the Scottish deposit return scheme. We know there are successful schemes across many other countries, and the British Soft Drinks Association, whose members include Coca-Cola and Irn-Bru maker A.G. Barr, called for it to go ahead as planned. What on earth is the future Baron von Jack thinking of when he ignores those calls and threatens to block the scheme—particularly when his own Government and other UK nations will follow Scotland’s lead and introduce their own scheme from 2025?

    Mr Jack

    I am not sure that there has been much joined-up thinking on the questions here. Again, I have suggested that the deposit return scheme should be paused. I think a UK-wide solution is right; I think recycling is absolutely right. But I agree with the chief executive of Tesco, Britain’s largest retailer, when he says that this is not the right scheme—it will be inflationary. As I have said before at this Dispatch Box, 12 bottles of Scottish water currently cost £1.59 in Aldi, but under the scheme, that would become £3.99 or even higher if a price is put on top. Although £2.40 of that could be reclaimed, the consumer will also pay an extra cost that is put on by the producer—producers have been clear about that.

    We met Coca-Cola, which said that 2p on a can and 5p on a bottle would be passed on to the consumer and could not be reclaimed. There are higher figures from other companies, including one small brewer that said it would have to add £1.40 to a bottle of beer on top of the 20 pence. The scheme is inflationary and very bad for the consumer’s shopping basket. That is why I think we need to pause it and get a scheme that works for the whole United Kingdom.

    Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Eleanor Laing)

    I call David Mundell.

    David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)

    What a pleasure it is to see you in the Chair for Scottish questions, Madam Deputy Speaker.

    I add my congratulations to Humza Yousaf on becoming First Minister of Scotland, and I recognise the inclusive and historic nature of his appointment. Does my right hon. Friend agree that, based on the experience of our constituents, Mr Yousaf will have to up his game considerably in his new role? As Transport Minister, he came to Dumfries in 2016 to hold a transport summit, and seven years later, precisely zero of the commitments given that day have been delivered.

    Mr Jack

    Not only did Humza Yousaf fail in the transport brief but, as we know from his opponent, who took almost half the vote—48%—he also failed in his other briefs of justice and health.

    Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)

    I join others in congratulating the new First Minister. The Barnett formula by which money is devolved to Scotland has existed for more than 40 years. Has the Secretary of State received any representations from the Scottish Government about reviewing that formula?

    Mr Jack

    At the moment, we are in discussions with the Scottish Government about a review of the fiscal framework. That review has been in train for some time, and the conclusions will be coming shortly.

    Robin Millar (Aberconwy) (Con)

    I, too, congratulate Mr Yousaf on his appointment as First Minister of Scotland. Does the Secretary of State agree that the effectiveness of devolution arrangements was demonstrated in the use of the Scotland Act 1998—section 35 in particular—to block the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill, specifically because it impacted on the effective operation of UK law across the UK?

    Mr Jack

    Yes. I have heard the new First Minister say that it was anti-devolution to block a Bill that had been passed by the Scottish Parliament, but section 35 exists for that very reason. When a Bill is passed by the Scottish Parliament—if it did not pass it, we could not block it—that has adverse effects on GB-wide legislation, section 35 exists to stop the Bill going for Royal Assent so that those adverse effects can be dealt with.

    Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Eleanor Laing)

    I call the shadow Secretary of State.

    Ian Murray (Edinburgh South) (Lab)

    It is great to see you back in the Chair, Madam Deputy Speaker. Welcome back, particularly to Scottish questions.

    There has been a seismic victory—an historic victory—this week: the Scotland football team beat Spain at Hampden last night, so we all send our congratulations to them. May I echo the Secretary of State’s congratulations to Humza Yousaf, the new First Minister of Scotland? The Secretary of State rightly challenged Mr Yousaf to engage reverse gear on independence, but I think he may already have crashed that car. The new First Minister of course inherits a divided party and the SNP’s dreadful record on public services, but he does not inherit Nicola Sturgeon’s mandate—at the Holyrood election, the ballot paper said

    “Nicola Sturgeon for First Minister”,

    not “Humza Yousaf”. Does the Secretary of State agree with me and with Humza Yousaf himself, who rightly called for a UK general election after there was twice a change in Prime Minister last year? Does the Secretary of State agree that a new First Minister with no mandate means that there should now be not only a general election, but a Scottish election?

    Mr Jack

    There is a precedent for political parties voting in new leaders who then assume office: Henry McLeish replaced Donald Dewar, Jack McConnell replaced Henry McLeish, Gordon Brown replaced Tony Blair, and even Nicola Sturgeon replaced her at-the-time great friend and mentor—her words, not mine—Alex Salmond. It would be hypocritical of me to say otherwise, because last year, of course, I defended the change of Prime Ministers, and it is hypocritical that Humza Yousaf suggested then that we should have an election and there is now deafening silence.

    Ian Murray

    That answer shows that both the Conservative party and the SNP are democracy deniers. In January—[Interruption.] In January, Madam Deputy Speaker—[Interruption.] They don’t like it up ’em! In January, the UK Government announced that they had signed a memorandum of understanding with BioNTech and Moderna to conduct trials of vaccines that can attack cancer cells. Such innovative treatments could be a lifeline for those with terminal cancers, such as David Williamson from Glasgow, who contacted me and others to plead to be accepted on to those trials. However, David lives in Scotland, and as it stands the trials are due to take place in England only. He has written to both the UK and Scottish Health Secretaries but has failed to receive a response. David does not want to die knowing that there could be a treatment that could help him. Does the Secretary of State agree that potentially life-saving treatments should be available throughout the UK? Will he work to resolve this matter urgently for David and thousands of others?

    Mr Jack

    This is a very serious issue and my sympathies are with David and his family. I know that he has written to the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care. I am a great believer in our NHS being reciprocal across the United Kingdom and will organisation a meeting for the hon. Gentleman with the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care at the earliest opportunity.

    Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Eleanor Laing)

    I call the SNP spokesperson, Dr Philippa Whitford.

    Dr Philippa Whitford (Central Ayrshire) (SNP)

    I, too, welcome you to the Chair for Scottish questions, Madam Deputy Speaker, and join Labour’s shadow Secretary of State in celebrating Scotland’s win. It is just a pity that people could not watch it on Scottish terrestrial television.

    The devolved Governments have led on many innovative policies, such as the carrier bag charge in Wales and the smoking ban and minimum unit pricing of alcohol in Scotland, with the UK Government following years later, if at all. The attacks on the latter policy at the time show that, had it existed then, the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 would inevitably have been used to block minimum unit pricing, which has recently been credited with a 13% drop in alcohol-related deaths in Scotland. Even the EU single market allows policy divergence to improve public health and the environment, so why are there no such derogations in the internal market Act?

    Mr Jack

    Let me pick up the hon. Lady’s first point, because we do not want the grievance factory to say, as I have seen on social media today, that the English Government blocked people in Scotland watching the game against Spain last night in which we were so victorious—[Interruption.] I said “on social media”. The Scottish Football Association sold the rights to the football match. It was the Scottish FA’s decision.

    On the hon. Lady’s second point, there are opportunities for derogations and exemptions within the UK internal market. We did it in the case of plastic cutlery because the same proposal was coming forward in the rest of the UK six months after it was introduced by the Scottish Government. The schemes worked together and a derogation for six months worked. But derogations do not work when there are different schemes in different parts of the United Kingdom, some of which include glass and some of which do not, and when producers have to sign up to different schemes that have a huge cost implication. We do not think that is the right way forward.

    Dr Whitford

    It is funny how differences in the different nations worked fine before Brexit. One has to wonder why the UK market does not seem able to cope right now. Is the Secretary of State planning to hold back the devolved Governments repeatedly to avoid making his Government look bad? Or is he just going to seek every single chance to attack devolution and enforce Westminster rule?

    Mr Jack

    I quoted earlier the chief executive of Tesco, the largest retailer in the United Kingdom. In the paper yesterday he made the very good point that there is one drinks industry across the United Kingdom and we should have one solution to the recycling problem.

  • Deidre Brock – 2023 Speech on Parliamentary Services for MPs

    Deidre Brock – 2023 Speech on Parliamentary Services for MPs

    The speech made by Deidre Brock, the SNP MP for Edinburgh North and Leith, in the House of Commons on 9 February 2023.

    I congratulate the hon. Member for Broxbourne (Sir Charles Walker) and the rest of the Administration Committee on securing this debate. It really is important that Members have an opportunity to reflect on how we can best ensure that the House’s services and facilities are equipped to help us carry out our roles as representatives of our constituents and as legislators. My hon. Friend the Member for Motherwell and Wishaw (Marion Fellows), who is a member of the Administration Committee, is very sorry that she is unable to be here today herself.

    Some might wonder why an SNP Member is concerned about the running of this Parliament, when one considers the fact that our dearest wish is to be away from it as soon as we possibly can be. However, we have to serve our constituents to the very best of our abilities, and we of course want to see addressed anything that might constrain that or reduce that impact.

    Michael Fabricant

    The hon. Lady mentioned her colleague who could not be here; the hon. Member for Motherwell and Wishaw (Marion Fellows) is a superb example of what my hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell (James Sunderland) asked about. She provides huge amounts of information and ideas to the Administration Committee. Regardless of whether she is SNP, Labour, Conservative or whatever, we all love her and wish she could be here today. That shows the degree of constructive co-operation that goes on among the parties in this place.

    Deidre Brock

    Well, I will certainly make sure that my hon. Friend hears that comment. I know she will be pleased that her efforts are appreciated. She is a very effective parliamentarian, as the hon. Gentleman knows, and would always be intent on making sure that services run as effectively as possible. I am sure she appreciates the admiration expressed by the hon. Gentleman and, I am sure, by other Committee members as well.

    The hon. Member for Broxbourne spoke of the importance of holding this conversation about improving not just House services, but the quality of representation and, indeed, representatives for our constituents. He made the fair point that this place needs to be aware of the competition it faces from so many other sectors in today’s world. He spoke about the uncertainty of this role and the fact that that can prove unattractive, as well as about the skills needed for the role, from spinning lots of plates to diplomatic skills—for most of us, anyway. He also touched on security, which I agree is a vital issue, particularly in the light of the dreadful circumstances of the deaths of two Members of this House in recent years.

    The hon. Member for Broxbourne mentioned the provision of better advice for Members. The information available to Members on how this place works has improved vastly, even since I was elected in 2015. I thank all the House staff for their long and hard work on that. I spent some time being interviewed by them and passing on my thoughts, and I know that many other Members have done so as well. I know that the staff are looking to make even further improvements to that information. The workings of this place can be really quite impenetrable at times, so the information is a really big help to anyone coming here for the first time, and I am pleased to see that that work will continue.

    I agree with the right hon. Member for Basingstoke (Dame Maria Miller) about the need for more transparency around the decisions of the House’s Committees, including the suggestion that Members should be elected to posts. It will be interesting to see how that conversation develops and how that might actually work, especially when it comes to ensuring that we get sufficient numbers of Members interested in taking on those roles. As I know from the work of the Administration Committee, there is quite a lot of work involved. We need only look at the work in the report, and the reports from previous Committees, to see what is involved. She also talked about the need for greater scrutiny of the House of Commons Commission to increase insight into what happens behind closed doors.

    I am on the Commission myself and wish to pay tribute to Mr Speaker and his team for the focus that they bring to the work. I know that he is intent on further professionalising the Commission and the work that it does, which is really starting to pay off—certainly from what I have seen in the short time that I have been on the Commission—especially on things such as the recent report from Lord Morse, the recommendations of which were accepted by the Commission.

    Dame Maria Miller

    I thank the hon. Member for referring to the comments that I made. May I draw her a little further on the role that House Committees could have in scrutinising the work of the Commission? Is that something that she feels that she might support?

    Deidre Brock

    I have only just heard about that from the right hon. Lady. Certainly I am sure the Commission would be prepared to consider it. We have a meeting coming up fairly shortly, so we might be able to put that into “any other business”.

    The hon. Member for Lichfield (Michael Fabricant) mentioned the duty of care to our teams. That is so important, because when a Member loses their seat for whatever reason, they are left scrambling to find work. I am really pleased that this has been raised. We all know how vital those members of staff are to our work, and how trusted and valued they are, and they deserve nothing less than the best that we can do for them.

    I thank colleagues and predecessors on the House of Commons Commission who last year agreed the next House of Commons service strategy for the period 2023 to 2027, which, of course, we will continue to monitor. I have been in this position for only a relatively short period of time. I was a councillor in Edinburgh Council for some years. That is a large public body in itself, but sitting on the House of Commons Commission and seeing the work entailed in keeping this particular parliamentary duck swimming along, even while underneath the waterline we know the feet are pedalling furiously, has still been something of an eye-opener. I have been so impressed by the dedication of those who report to, or work for, the Commission. I must mention in particular Clerks Gosia McBride and Ed Potton, who have been immensely helpful in interpreting some of the more obscure points made in some of the papers put before us.

    I wish to commend all the staff of both Houses and the Commission—from Mr Speaker, the Deputy Speakers and their offices to In-House Services—who, across so many different areas, do an absolutely exceptional job of keeping this place running smoothly, very often in trying circumstances. That was especially evident during the pandemic, but also evident in the events around the late Queen’s passing and in the sudden efforts required for President Zelensky’s very successful visit yesterday.

    I must also pay tribute to Sir John Benger, who has just announced that he will end his tenure as Clerk of the House in the autumn after four years, although after many years in total in this place. On behalf of the SNP, I wish him all the very best in his new role. However, his departure raises concerns about possible costly delays to the restoration and renewal programme as a result, so I look forward to hearing of a suitable replacement as soon as possible.

    I gathered some views from colleagues and staff members before I prepared for this speech. One point raised with me, which I am sure is of paramount importance, is that Members be given assurances that the R and R project will take full account of the potential impact on the health and safety of staff. This is an iconic and historic building, a world heritage site, but we know it is decaying in key areas and often falls short of what is required in a modern workplace.

    Wi-fi infrastructure can be unreliable—although I have nothing but high praise for those in the Parliamentary Digital Service, who are always remarkably responsive and incredibly patient with those of us who are not completely IT literate—many of the windows are single-glazed and do not open or close, which we know adds up to a giant carbon footprint, the lifts often break down and there are problems with the heating, to give just a few examples raised with me. We are told and we hope that the issues will be resolved once R and R is complete, but the urgency of addressing them should be emphasised on behalf of the many staff who spent so much of their lives here.

    I also need to pass on views received from staff members that less maintenance and procurement work in the building should be contracted out. One member of staff I spoke to felt that, for example, electrical and plumbing services were not carried out quite as well or as cost-effectively as they might have been with more oversight from the House, and others have spoken to me with exasperation of overly complicated procurement systems.

    Another issue raised with me, which is certainly dear to the heart of my hon. Friend the Member for Motherwell and Wishaw, is accessibility. Some hon. Members have highlighted the problems of too few adapted offices for disabled folk. Due to the present system of allocating offices after an election, suitable rooms are often not available for those who really need them—and it is worth bearing in mind that anyone can become disabled at any time. I ask what the House can do to ensure adaptable offices can be kept in reserve for Members and staff who have or develop disabilities.

    Dame Maria Miller

    I apologise for interrupting the hon. Lady again; she is being gracious in giving way. She referred to issues some people with a disability have in getting into this building, a concern I share with her, which highlights the issue we have with a lack of read- across between the House’s Committees. The Procedure Committee considered whether we should have the ability to participate in proceedings in this place remotely. All those opportunities were cut as a result of a recommendation from that Committee, but it strikes me that if one of our number were to become unable to enter this building because of a disability, or had a member of staff or constituent who wished to visit, they would not be able to participate at all, simply because the Procedure Committee, for another set of reasons, had decided to stop all remote participation. It feels to me that we need more read-across between the House Committees, so that we are not making decisions in isolation.

    Deidre Brock

    I agree, and I am about to go on to make that very point. I know that proxy voting has been improved recently, and I really welcome that as an important development, but there are other ways we should look to adapt and modernise this place, particularly as a workplace. For example, we know that in summer 2021 the Commons Executive Board agreed that, as an employer, the House and Parliamentary Digital Service would positively promote flexible and remote working. I also note that in the Leader of the House’s speech to the Institute for Government last month, she acknowledged that the systems that were built during covid demonstrate the range of options available and stated that “slow and dull” would no longer do. I think that is a fair point. I look forward to hearing what more she might present to us today and what proposals might be brought forward.

    I was interested to see the Administration Committee’s report on supporting MPs—and, indeed, their teams—at the point of departure from elected office. The report’s contribution to improving the accountability and preparedness of the House service and IPSA for future elections is an important one. I look forward to reflecting on it further.

  • Deidre Brock – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Deidre Brock – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Deidre Brock on 2016-06-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, which coastguard stations cover the Firth of Forth.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The operational concepts and procedures that underpin HM Coastguards National Network mean that the Coastguard Centres within it no longer have fixed geographic boundaries. The network enables the National Maritime Operations Centre (NMOC) and 9 Coastguard Operations Centres (CGOC) to coordinate any incident anywhere around the UK coast. Workload managed on a national basis enabling national capability and resource to be available to any incident, for example in the Firth of Forth, on the basis of the nature of the incident.

  • Deidre Brock – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Deidre Brock – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Deidre Brock on 2016-07-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to the Answer of 7 July 2016 to Question 41433, what assessment she has made of the compatibility of the Common Travel Area with a hard border between the UK and the EU after the UK has left the EU.

    James Brokenshire

    The Common Travel Area (CTA) arrangement pre-dates the EU and we re-main committed to it. The Prime Minister and the Taoiseach have reiterated their intention for both countries to work together to maintain the CTA.

    At present the UK remains in the EU and there will be no immediate changes. A meeting between UK and Ireland senior officials has already taken place underlining our desire to work together, when the UK begins to negotiate its exit from the EU, to maintain the benefits of the CTA.

  • Deidre Brock – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Scotland Office

    Deidre Brock – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Scotland Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Deidre Brock on 2016-07-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland, whether the Government plans to devolve the areas of law and policy on fishing formerly dealt with by the EU to Scotland’s Government and Parliament after the UK leaves the EU.

    David Mundell

    While the United Kingdom remains a member of the European Union, the current arrangements for fisheries remain in place.

    Preparations for our negotiations to leave the EU will include looking at future approaches to fisheries management and the UK Government will fully involve the Scottish Government in this process.

  • Deidre Brock – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Deidre Brock – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Deidre Brock on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether it is the Government’s policy that anti-terrorism cooperation under the Schengen Agreement should continue after the UK leaves the EU.

    Sarah Newton

    Cooperation against terrorism between the UK and European Union Member States has continued following the referendum. We continue to participate in those parts of the Schengen Agreement that relate to law enforcement cooperation, including the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II).

    Officials are exploring options for future cooperation arrangements once the UK has left the European Union. We will do what is necessary to keep people safe, but it would be wrong to set out unilateral positions in advance of negotiations.

  • Deidre Brock – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Deidre Brock – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Deidre Brock on 2016-06-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, how his Department measures the performance of the coastguard.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    Her Majesty’s Coastguard undertake an annual programme of Operational Standards Reviews to measure the quality, consistency and effectiveness of operational service delivery.

    Additionally HM Coastguard routinely review at least 5% of incidents to which their National Network has responded to assess the effectiveness of outcomes and learn any appropriate lessons for future operations.

  • Deidre Brock – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Deidre Brock – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Deidre Brock on 2016-07-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what steps she plans to take to reduce the concentration of microplastics in the marine environment.

    Dr Thérèse Coffey

    On 3 September 2016 the Government announced plans to ban the sale and manufacture of cosmetics and personal care products containing microbeads where these are capable of harming the marine environment. Our plans will be informed by a formal consultation later this year. At the same time, evidence will be gathered on the extent of the environmental impacts of microbeads found in other products before considering what more can be done in future to tackle other plastics, for example microfibres, which enter the marine environment.

    Given the trans-boundary nature of marine litter, we will also continue to work with other countries in the Oslo and Paris Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North East Atlantic (OSPAR) to address marine litter, including microplastics.

    In December 2015, the UK published its Marine Strategy Part Three: UK programme of measures. This sets out a comprehensive set of measures to address marine litter. Some measures address microplastics directly; others contribute indirectly by removing, or avoiding the release of, larger plastic particles, preventing their degradation into microplastics.

  • Deidre Brock – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Deidre Brock – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Deidre Brock on 2016-07-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what the cost to his Department was of its communications team in each year since 2007; and what the projected cost is of that team in 2016.

    Caroline Nokes

    The table below shows the details of actual and forecast expenditure for the staff cost of the Department’s Strategic Communications Directorate.

    The staff costs include the costs of salaries, employer national insurance contribution, employer pension contribution, performance related awards, overtime, travelling time, temporary duty allowance, secondments, contractors and staff substitutions. Also, associated IT costs and communications directorate external contracts are included.

    Financial Year

    Staff Costs £m

    2013-14

    17.543

    2014/15

    15.277

    2015/16

    15.109

    2016/17*

    15.134

    *forecast as at July 2016

    Following a significant organisational design review (ODR) which resulted in fundamental structural changes within the Corporate Centre of DWP, expenditure prior to 2013/14 is not readily available and could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

  • Deidre Brock – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Deidre Brock – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Deidre Brock on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how her Department plans to continue to work with European partners in the areas of her portfolio that were covered by the Schengen Agreement after the UK leaves the EU.

    Sir Oliver Heald

    As the Prime Minister has said, it would not be right for the Government to give a running commentary on negotiations with the EU.