UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Hilary Benn

  • Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Hilary Benn on 2014-06-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what representations his Department has received from (a) local authorities and (b) others on sanctions available to councils under the Localism Act 2011 where councillors have been found to have been in breach of the Code of Conduct under that Act.

    Brandon Lewis

    [Holding Reply: Thursday 12 June 2014]

    As stated in the impact assessment on the abolition of the Standards Board regime (published in January 2011), a post implementation review will be carried out three to five years after implementation of the policy which was in July 2012.

    My Department routinely receives representations about standards arrangements in local government, and indeed, on a whole range of local government issues. We will have regard to representations and comments when we undertake our post implementation review.

    However, Ministers are clear that the new provisions are a significant improvement on the old, discredited regime. The Localism Act has clarified predetermination rules allowing elected councillors to campaign and speak up on local issues. We have reversed the petty culture of malicious and unfounded complaints that wasted time and energy and undermined the good reputation of local government. We have increased transparency on councillors’ interests, and put in place criminal sanctions for the very rare instances of corruption. This is complemented by the role of political parties in ensuring good conduct, the law of libel, and the ultimate sanction: the ballot box.

  • Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Hilary Benn on 2014-04-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, to which local authorities he has written about their compliance with the Publicity Code asking them to take steps to ensure complete compliance with that Code; and whether each of these letters was copied to the Leader of the Opposition of the local authority.

    Brandon Lewis

    [Holding Reply: Monday 7 April 2014]

    On 25 March, Departmental officials wrote to the Chief Executives of every principal local authority in England, advising how the Secretary of State is minded to exercise his powers to direct compliance with the Code of Recommended Practice on local Authority Publicity. On the same day, I wrote individually to the Leaders of the Royal Borough of Greenwich, London Borough of Hackney, Newham Council, Nottingham City Council, Tower Hamlets Council and the London Borough of Waltham Forest. Without prejudicing any formal consideration by the Secretary of State, I observed that there were suggestions that those councils in particular might not be complying with the Code of Recommended Practice on Local Authority Publicity. I suggested that prior to the Secretary of State’s new powers for directing compliance with the Code on publicity coming on-stream at the end of March, they take steps to ensure that their council is in complete compliance with the provisions of the Code. Those letters were copied where applicable to the Leaders of the opposition in those authorities.

  • Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Hilary Benn on 2014-04-30.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what the reasons are for the time taken to answer question 191956 tabled for answer on 8 April 2014.

    Stephen Williams

    I refer the rt. hon. Member to my answer of 1 May, Official Report, Column 803W.

  • Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Hilary Benn on 2014-06-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what plans he has to carry out a post-implementation review of the local government standards framework in the Localism Act 2011.

    Brandon Lewis

    [Holding Reply: Thursday 12 June 2014]

    As stated in the impact assessment on the abolition of the Standards Board regime (published in January 2011), a post implementation review will be carried out three to five years after implementation of the policy which was in July 2012.

    My Department routinely receives representations about standards arrangements in local government, and indeed, on a whole range of local government issues. We will have regard to representations and comments when we undertake our post implementation review.

    However, Ministers are clear that the new provisions are a significant improvement on the old, discredited regime. The Localism Act has clarified predetermination rules allowing elected councillors to campaign and speak up on local issues. We have reversed the petty culture of malicious and unfounded complaints that wasted time and energy and undermined the good reputation of local government. We have increased transparency on councillors’ interests, and put in place criminal sanctions for the very rare instances of corruption. This is complemented by the role of political parties in ensuring good conduct, the law of libel, and the ultimate sanction: the ballot box.

  • Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Hilary Benn on 2014-03-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, how many applications to dispose of statutory allotments have been (a) submitted, (b) approved and (c) rejected in each local authority area in each year since 2010.

    Stephen Williams

    Further to the Allotments Act 1925, applications for consent to dispose of allotment land are submitted to the Department by local councils (parish councils and principal authorities). The table below shows the breakdown of applications since May 2010.

    Granted

    Withdrawn

    Refused

    May 2010- March 2011

    18

    6

    0

    2011-12

    17

    5

    0

    2012-13

    15

    2

    1

    2013-14

    17

    1

    4

    2014-15 to date

    1

    1

    0

    To place this in context, the Secretary of State granted 34 allotment disposals in 2007, granted 22 in 2008 and granted 18 in 2009, whilst only 2 were declined, which is a greater rate than under this Administration.

    I observe that the rt. hon. Member has been quoted in the media attacking such consents. He would have been wiser however to have undertaken a closer examination of the 68 individual consents granted to the local councils since May 2010.

    The table below provides some context to help explain why there was a reasonable case by the representative local bodies for changing the statutory status of the land.

    In January 2014, my Department published Allotment Disposal Guidance: Safeguards and Alternatives replacing the previous guidance from 2002. The new guidance strengthens allotment protection, as the requirement for waiting lists to be taken into account must now be rigorously applied to all that council’s waiting lists, not just the waiting list for the site to be disposed of. This aims to ensure that poorly maintained sites are not used to justify disposal. Ministers will be closely monitoring to ensure that this new guidance is followed.

    Notwithstanding, I have taken the opportunity to analyse these previous cases in the table below. The National Allotment Society was consulted in every case, and nine out of ten decisions were consistent with advice from the National Allotment Society (where advice was given); the remaining cases where the advice diverged related to land not actually in use as allotments, requiring a judgement call on whether it was realistic to bring the land back into productive use.

    Having analysed these approvals, I can note that half of the land disposed was not actually in use as allotments. Moreover, in every case where existing allotment plot holders were displaced, evidence from local authorities indicates that alternative plots were made available to them.

    More new plots were proposed to be created and/or vacant sites proposed to be brought back into use than the number of proposed disposals of in-use allotment plots. Consequently, the statutory disposal process overseen by the Secretary of State since May 2010 should have resulted in an increase in allotment provision not a reduction. This reflects this Government’s commitment both to supporting local communities grow their own food and to protecting important community assets.

  • Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Hilary Benn on 2014-04-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what assessment he has made of the use of public money by the Mayor of Tower Hamlets to fund third sector organisations; and if he will make a statement.

    Brandon Lewis

    I refer the rt. hon. Member to the Written Ministerial Statement made today by my rt. hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (Eric Pickles).

  • Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Hilary Benn on 2014-04-30.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, when he plans to answer Question 194894, tabled for answer on 8 April 2014.

    Stephen Williams

    I refer the rt. hon. Member to my answer of 1 May, Official Report, Column 803W.

  • Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Hilary Benn on 2014-06-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what representations his Department has received on the effectiveness of the role of the Independent Person under the Localism Act 2011.

    Brandon Lewis

    [Holding Reply: Thursday 12 June 2014]

    As stated in the impact assessment on the abolition of the Standards Board regime (published in January 2011), a post implementation review will be carried out three to five years after implementation of the policy which was in July 2012.

    My Department routinely receives representations about standards arrangements in local government, and indeed, on a whole range of local government issues. We will have regard to representations and comments when we undertake our post implementation review.

    However, Ministers are clear that the new provisions are a significant improvement on the old, discredited regime. The Localism Act has clarified predetermination rules allowing elected councillors to campaign and speak up on local issues. We have reversed the petty culture of malicious and unfounded complaints that wasted time and energy and undermined the good reputation of local government. We have increased transparency on councillors’ interests, and put in place criminal sanctions for the very rare instances of corruption. This is complemented by the role of political parties in ensuring good conduct, the law of libel, and the ultimate sanction: the ballot box.

  • Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Hilary Benn on 2014-03-12.

    To ask the Attorney General, what estimate he has made of the empty property business rates for the vacant properties recorded on the e-PIMS database owned by (a) the Law Officers’ Departments and (b) any executive agencies or non-departmental public bodies of the Law Officers’ Departments in the current financial year.

    Dominic Grieve

    The Law Officers’ Departments have been actively reducing their estate running costs since 2010 in line with Government policy and have already made significant savings.

    The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) estate rationalisation programme began in 2009 and is set to be completed in 2016, with most of the leases on empty property having expired by then. This programme has already led to a reduction in expenditure and increased efficiency. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has paid £320,178.38 in property business rates in the current financial year on the properties which are currently recorded as vacant on the ePIMS database as at 14 March 2014. The costs figure has been produced by DTZ who are CPS’ managing agents and has not yet been audited.

    The Treasury Solicitor’s Department owns a lease on a building which has some vacant space. This building attracts full business rates in the current financial year. This lease is due to expire in 2016. The estimated business rates for the vacant proportion of the property for 2013/14 are £59 372.71

    The remaining Law Officers’ Departments do not have any vacant properties.

  • Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Hilary Benn on 2014-04-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what assessment he has made of the effects of reductions in shire county council bus subsidies on the opportunities for social interaction of elderly and disabled people.

    Brandon Lewis

    The Department for Transport is the lead Department on policy and funding for buses.