Tag: Julian Lewis

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julian Lewis on 2016-05-25.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether obligations on private owners to preserve scheduled monuments and listed buildings are applicable to government departments; and what his policy is on fulfilling such obligations.

Mark Lancaster

There is no legal requirement for the Ministry of Defence (MOD), to maintain a listed building or scheduled monument.

The MOD acts in accordance with the ‘Protocol for the care of the government historic estate 2009’. This is mandatory across central government, and can be found via the following link:

https://content.historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/protocol-for-the-care-of-the-government-historic-estate/careofgovernmenthistoricestate-2009.pdf/.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julian Lewis on 2016-01-18.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 15 December 2015 to Question 19049, if he will ensure that there will be no gaps in capability between the decommissioning of HMS Ocean and its role being taken over by other ships.

Mr Philip Dunne

We will ensure that other ships are available to provide support to amphibious operations.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julian Lewis on 2016-05-25.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what assessment he has made of the value for money of the investment made by the Portsmouth Naval Base Property Trust from his Department’s reverse premium of £6 million on assets previously transferred; and what investment he expects the proposed further reverse premium of £13 million to attract.

Mark Lancaster

The Ministry of Defence has not made an assessment of the value of the investment made or proposed by the Portsmouth Naval Base Property Trust. This is a matter for the Trust.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julian Lewis on 2016-01-14.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, if he will make it his policy to ensure that (a) the armed policing of civilian-staffed MOD establishments will continue to be undertaken by units which are subject to civil police regulations, accountability and obligations and (b) such units will continue to be responsible for dealing with demonstrators at nuclear establishments.

Michael Fallon

It is Defence policy to use the MOD Police (MDP) as part of security arrangements at establishments where there is an essential requirement for constabulary powers. An ability to deploy appropriate trained and equipped public order capability in response to spontaneous or pre-planned incidents or events remains a core task of the MDP.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julian Lewis on 2016-05-25.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, for what reason the proposed transfer of land and historic buildings from his Department to Portsmouth Naval Base Property Trust by the end of 2016 has been delayed; and whether it remains his policy to carry out that transfer.

Mark Lancaster

The Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015, confirmed that both carriers will be operational concurrently. This changes the level of activity, security and safety considerations for Victory and Sheer jetties. Such operational consideration and financial challenges faced by the Department have resulted in the need to plan a deferral of the transfer, the Department is working to identify and limit the length of this delay.

Consideration is being given to deferring the transfer of some elements of the adjoining estate until the Naval Base better understands the challenges of maintaining the flow of logistics through the area in question and the security and safety aspects of operating two carriers in the vicinity of what could potentially become a tourist zone.

We have not made an assessment of the merits of preserving the historic assets now that the project has been delayed. The assessment made previously was that their preservation would be best delivered by transferring them to the Portsmouth Naval Base Property Trust (PNBP).

The Department remains committed to preserving these assets and will examine how best to do so in light of this delay and will work with the PNBP in doing so.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julian Lewis on 2016-01-14.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what recent assessment he has made of the advantages of (a) expertise, (b) experience and (c) continuity in the use of specialist MOD civilian police in guarding sensitive military establishments.

Michael Fallon

In 2013 the Ministry of Defence (MOD) completed a review of its civil policing and guarding policy and requirements to ensure that these reflect the main security and crime risks faced by the Department, and were being met as cost effectively as possible by the MOD Police, the Military Provost Guard Service and the MOD Guard Service.

The review recognised the very important role that the MOD Police played in support of security of the defence estate, but concluded that there was scope to make reductions to the number of guarding and civil policing posts at some sites, whilst maintaining effective and proportionate security at all of our sites. Overall the changes represented an improvement in security risk management; however, the safety of our personnel, assets and information continues to be our priority and our security arrangements are kept under review to meet these requirements.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julian Lewis on 2016-05-25.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what recent reports he has received on the state of disrepair of (a) the Block Mills, (b) numbers 1, 4, 5 and 6 dry docks, (c) the South Office Block, (d) the Old Naval Academy, (e) the Parade, (f) the former Iron Foundary and (g) other scheduled monuments and Grade I and Grade II* listed buildings at HM Naval Base Portsmouth; and what steps he is taking to prevent further deterioration of those monuments.

Mark Lancaster

All historical buildings are subject to quadrennial inspection.

Quadrennial inspection reports are held for the following listed buildings;

No 6 Dock, Portsmouth

Old Naval Academy, Portsmouth former Naval Academy and railings, Buildings No 1/14, 1/16-19

Block Mills Her Majesty’s Naval Base (HMNB) Portsmouth Building 153

South Office Block, HMNB Building 088

Dockyard Wall and Extension Wall, Portsmouth Naval Base Building NBW 1, 2 and 3

Former Iron Foundry (Buildings 1/140, 1/139 and 1/136) HMNB Portsmouth

No 1 The Parade, HMNB, Portsmouth

No 2 The Parade, HMNB, Portsmouth

No 3 The Parade, HMNB, Portsmouth

No 4 The Parade, HMNB, Portsmouth

No 5 The Parade, HMNB, Portsmouth

No 6 The Parade, HMNB, Portsmouth

No 7 The Parade, HMNB, Portsmouth

No 8 The Parade, HMNB, Portsmouth

No 9 The Parade, HMNB, Portsmouth (Mountbatten House)

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julian Lewis on 2016-01-14.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, for what reason the four desks allocated in his Department’s main building to the Defence Police Federation are being withdrawn; whether those allocated to Defence trades union representatives are also being withdrawn; and if he will make a statement.

Michael Fallon

The decision to ask the Defence Police Federation to relocate their Head Office function was made as part of our plans to make more efficient use of Ministry of Defence (MOD) Main Building and will generate substantial savings. An offer of alternative office accommodation at the MOD Police Headquarters has been made to the Defence Police Federation. This follows the standard approach taken by Home Office police forces where local Police Federation officials are collocated at the Force Headquarters for business reasons.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julian Lewis on 2016-05-25.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether the planned locating of future aircraft carriers at Sheer Jetty and Victory Jetty has resulted in reconsideration of the transfer of nearby land and buildings to the Portsmouth Naval Base Trust; what assessment his Department has made of the merits of preserving such assets; and if he will make a statement.

Mark Lancaster

The Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015, confirmed that both carriers will be operational concurrently. This changes the level of activity, security and safety considerations for Victory and Sheer jetties. Such operational consideration and financial challenges faced by the Department have resulted in the need to plan a deferral of the transfer, the Department is working to identify and limit the length of this delay.

Consideration is being given to deferring the transfer of some elements of the adjoining estate until the Naval Base better understands the challenges of maintaining the flow of logistics through the area in question and the security and safety aspects of operating two carriers in the vicinity of what could potentially become a tourist zone.

We have not made an assessment of the merits of preserving the historic assets now that the project has been delayed. The assessment made previously was that their preservation would be best delivered by transferring them to the Portsmouth Naval Base Property Trust (PNBP).

The Department remains committed to preserving these assets and will examine how best to do so in light of this delay and will work with the PNBP in doing so.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julian Lewis on 2015-11-23.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, for what reason callers to the International Enquiry Service of UK Visas and Immigration are charged £1.37 per minute.

James Brokenshire

The Home Office sets fees at a level that ensures it has sufficient resources to control migration for the benefit of the UK.

Income from fees helps provide the resources necessary to operate the immigration system. The remainder is provided through general taxation. The Home Office aims to reduce the overall contribution of funding that comes from general taxation and increase the proportion of income generated from fees. We estimate that about 60 per cent of immigration system costs will be recovered through fees, a slight increase from last year. The remainder of the costs will be met by the UK taxpayer.

To ensure that the system is fair and equitable, the government believes it is right that those who use and benefit directly from the UK immigration system make an appropriate contribution towards meeting the costs, thereby reducing the cost to the UK taxpayer. Customers can access a range of information on our application processes for free through our pages on gov.uk.