UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Katy Clark

  • Katy Clark – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Katy Clark – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Katy Clark on 2014-04-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, if he will investigate whether any tear gas exported to Turkey under the standard individual export licence granted in May 2011 was used on demonstrators in Turkey in 2013.

    Michael Fallon

    The licence granted in May 2011 was for temporary export of "inert tear gas/irritant ammunition" for exhibition purposes. It was a condition of the licence that the goods were returned to the UK within 12 months and they were returned on 13 May 2013 .The licence did not authorise the export of any tear gas or "live" tear gas ammunition.

  • Katy Clark – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Katy Clark – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Katy Clark on 2014-04-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, if he will undertake a comparative assessment of Government spending on apprenticeships in the UK and Germany.

    Matthew Hancock

    A wide variety of public sources frequently make comparative assessment of international Apprenticeships systems.

  • Katy Clark – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Katy Clark – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Katy Clark on 2014-06-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many applications were made to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority’s Hardship Fund in 2013-14; and what proportion of such applications were successful.

    Damian Green

    The Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority received ten applications under the hardship fund in 2013-14, of which four were successful.

    People who did not meet the fund’s earnings criteria lodged the six remaining applications. The fund is there to support low-paid workers and four of these six people earned too much to be eligible, while the other two lost no income as a result of the injuries they sustained.