Tag: Ian Austin

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Austin on 2016-01-07.

To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what representations he has received from (a) landfill operators and (b) environmental bodies on the proposed removal of third party contributions from the Landfill Communities Fund; and whether he plans to change that proposal in response to those representations.

Damian Hinds

Since its introduction in 1996, the Landfill Communities Fund (LCF) has contributed over £1.4bn to community projects in areas affected by a local landfill site and the government acknowledges the positive impact of this funding for communities. However, as the LCF is a tax credit scheme, it reduces tax revenues and we therefore have a responsibility to seek value for money for the taxpayer.

Despite difficult decisions on spending, the government has decided to retain and reform the LCF. Following representations on the issue of contributing third parties, the government softened proposals in this area at Budget 2016, and the requirement for a 10% landfill operator contribution has not been set in legislation. However, the government wants landfill operators to make a greater contribution to the LCF, and the regulator of the scheme, ENTRUST, has published guidance setting out this expectation.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Austin on 2016-01-25.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what criteria her Department used to identify the 312 schools that had been classified as having fallen beneath the floor target in the school performance tables in England for 2014 to 2015, published in January 2016.

Nick Gibb

In 2014/15, 312 schools were below the 5+ A*-C including English and mathematics and expected progress floor standard. Schools were deemed to be below the floor standard if:

• Fewer than 40% of pupils achieved five or more GCSEs at grade A*-C or equivalent, including both English and mathematics; and
• The school had a below median score for the percentage of pupils making expected progress between key stage 2 and key stage 4 in English; and
• The school had a below median score for the percentage of pupils making expected progress between key stage 2 and key stage 4 in mathematics.

From 2016 Progress 8 will replace the existing 5 A*-C headline measure. Progress 8 will show pupils’ progress to a suite of 8 qualifications compared to other pupils with the same starting point at the end of key stage 2. The new measure will reward better teaching of all pupils and make the system of measuring performance fairer for schools.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Austin on 2016-02-10.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education, if she will make applications for EU structural funds for the purposes of alleviating pressure on school places caused by migration from other EU countries.

Mr Sam Gyimah

The Government has no plans to make applications for EU structural funds to support investment in additional school places.

We have committed £23 billion to create 600,000 new school places, open 500 new free schools and address essential maintenance needs between 2016 and 2021. This includes sufficient funding to create the places required between now and the 2021/22 academic year.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Austin on 2016-03-01.

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will ensure that relevant National Probation Service staff attend Multi Agency Risk Assessment Conferences.

Andrew Selous

The Multi Agency Risk Assessment Conference (MARAC) chair or coordinator for each local authority area is responsible for scheduling meetings and notifying partners (including the National Probation Service (NPS)) of cases that are to be discussed. A representative of the NPS attends any meetings where offenders subject to NPS supervision are to be discussed.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Austin on 2016-04-26.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education, how many pupil referral units have been graded (a) outstanding, (b) good, (c) requires improvement and (d) inadequate in each year since 2010.

Nick Gibb

These are matters for Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector, Sir Michael Wilshaw. I have asked him to write to you and a copy of his reply will be placed in the libraries of the House.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Austin on 2016-05-18.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education, how many funding agreements have been terminated by each regional schools commissioner.

Mr Sam Gyimah

A funding agreement is contract between the Secretary of State and an academy trust. The model funding agreement states that the agreement can be terminated under the following grounds: termination by either party; by warning notice; by the Secretary of State after inspection; by the Secretary of State; and a change of control.

The Regional Schools Commissioners (RSCs) are civil servants, and as such, carry out their duties in the name of the Secretary of State. The RSCs have powers to make a decision, on behalf of the Secretary of State, to replace a sponsor or trust, where they have not been able to secure necessary improvements. In some circumstances, the funding agreement may be terminated as part of the process.

As with other areas of their responsibility, RSCs escalate decisions to the National Schools Commissioner or the relevant minister where they are sensitive, raise issues of interpretation of government policy, or relate to urgent safeguarding or extremism concerns.

The decision to terminate a funding agreement that results in the closure of an academy is made by the Secretary of State.

Listed below are the numbers of academy closures and re-brokerages by region since the RSCs’ appointment in September 2014:

RSC	Re-brokered	Closed	Total
East Midlands & Humber	28	7	35
Lancashire & West Yorkshire	15	3	18
North	6	3	9
North East London & East	15	2	17
North West London & South Central	10	2	12
South London & South East	9	4	13
South West	28	1	29
West Midlands	11	3	14
Total	122	25	147

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Austin on 2016-09-08.

To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what assessment she has made of the role of Gaelic language broadcasting in delivering the BBC’s commitment to public service broadcasting.

Matt Hancock

During the BBC Charter Review public consultation we have listened to views across a range of issues in relation to the BBC, including Gaelic language broadcasting.

There is a successful partnership between the BBC and MG Alba for the delivery of Gaelic language broadcasting. The White Paper, published in May 2016, sets out the Government’s intention to require maintain a commitment to minority language broadcasting through the new Charter.

The level of funding dedicated to BBC ALBA and the number of hours of in-house Gaelic language programming broadcast are matters for the BBC Board to consider when fulfilling this requirement under the new Charter.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Austin on 2016-10-07.

To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, with reference to section 6.5 of the Memorandum of Understanding between her Department and the Palestinian National Authority, whether the implications of any breach of the commitment on the principle of non-violence was discussed at the annual partnership talks between her Department and that Authority.

Rory Stewart

The UK raised the issue of incitement as part of the FCO-led UK-Palestinian strategic talks and in the DFID-Palestinian Authority (PA) annual talks that review the DFID-PA Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), sending a clear message of discouraging incitement to violence. The UK’s assessment is that the PA is not in breach of the MoU and the track record of President Abbas and Prime Minister Hamdallah demonstrates their overall commitment to non-violence and a negotiated two-state solution.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Austin on 2016-10-18.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps he is taking to ensure that workers in the care sector are paid the full national living wage.

David Mowat

Social care continues to be a key priority for the Government. This is why, against the context of tough public sector finances; the Government has taken steps to protect social care services. The Government is giving local authorities access to up to £3.5 billion of new support for social care by 2019/20. This should mean local government has access to the funding to increase social care spending in real terms by the end of the Parliament. This will support councils to continue to focus on core services and to pay fees which reflect provider costs including the National Living Wage.

The Spending Review took into account a range of financial and economic factors, including projections and data on the National Living Wage from the Office of Budget Responsibility and Skills for Care.

Under the Care Act 2014, local authorities must have regard to fostering an effective workforce with the appropriate capabilities when shaping their local markets. The Act and its statutory guidance make clear that prices and fee rates agreed with providers must reflect these new duties, including the National Living Wage.

Social care workers play a vital role in our society and it is unacceptable that there are some circumstances where they are not being paid properly. Non-compliance with the National Living Wage is illegal and the Department is working with HM Revenue and Customs to help eliminate it from the home care sector.

The Department has regular meetings with the trade bodies that represent the care sector and is grateful for the information provided that adds to our understanding of financial challenges including the National Living Wage. In addition major providers and associations in the care industry have formed their own taskforce to discuss key issues for the sector. The Department attends as an observer.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Austin on 2015-11-20.

To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what organisations her Department is working with to deliver humanitarian aid in Nepal.

Mr Desmond Swayne

DFID is working with a range of partners to deliver humanitarian aid in Nepal. These include: a set of Prequalified NGO partners working with local partners that helped facilitate a rapid response in the aftermath of Earthquake; International Organizations such as the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC); and the multilateral system which includes the United Nations.