Tag: Kevin Brennan

  • Kevin Brennan – 2023 Speech on Arts Council Funding for England

    Kevin Brennan – 2023 Speech on Arts Council Funding for England

    The speech made by Kevin Brennan, the Labour MP for Cardiff West, in Westminster Hall, the House of Commons on 18 January 2023.

    I echo many of the comments that have been made. I thank the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Sir Robert Neill)—

    Sir Robert Neill

    Just honourable.

    Kevin Brennan

    I thank the noble Gentleman, or whatever he is, for securing the debate. I also thank the former arts Minister, the hon. Member for Gosport (Dame Caroline Dinenage). She appeared many times before the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee, and she was a very refreshing Minister to have in front of us. I thank her for the candid and supportive way in which she carried out her duties as a Minister and for the work she did during covid to keep many cultural institutions going. I also thank my hon. Friends, including my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Camberwell and Peckham (Ms Harman), who has campaigned assiduously on this issue.

    I mentioned the Welsh National Opera earlier, because when this debate about Arts Council England started, it focused—understandably, perhaps—on the decisions around the English National Opera, but in some ways, what was done around the Welsh National Opera was even more invidious, or at least as invidious, because it signalled that this was not a rational, strategic decision-making process by Arts Council England. Like the hon. Member for Gosport, I would normally express support and admiration for the way that Arts Council England goes about things. However, rather than being a strategic, well-thought-through plan for the arts, it resembled more an emotional spasm of some sort, as a result of wanting to do something very quickly to meet the perceived needs of the Secretary of State at the time, the right hon. Member for Mid Bedfordshire (Ms Dorries). We are now told by the former Secretary of State, Ministers and Government Members that that was not what the Secretary of State wanted all along, which makes the whole affair all the more strange.

    One thing that is perhaps good about this whole incident is that it gives us an opportunity to highlight the fact that the Welsh National Opera is an opera company for Wales and England, despite its name. It is value for money because we have a proper national opera company with an international reputation that can serve both England and Wales, including, when it goes on tour, the parts of England that are not often well served by other cultural institutions. That is an integrated system for opera across England and Wales.

    Arts Council England decided to cut a third of the funding that it provides to the Welsh National Opera for its touring work in England. That includes many different parts of England, such as Liverpool; the west midlands, which is the part of Arts Council England that looks after the Welsh National Opera in terms of its administration; the west of England, in places such as Bristol; and Southampton, Oxford and elsewhere. It is right that these touring opera companies form an essential part of our regional theatres right across the country.

    When Arts Council England appeared before the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee, I was interested to know what its decision-making process was, so I asked Darren Henley whether he had consulted the Arts Council of Wales prior to the decision being taken to cut the funding to the Welsh National Opera. He waffled for a bit, and I had to interrupt him to get him to answer the question, at which point he said:

    “They were aware just before the announcement was made, but we didn’t consult them in the announcement”.

    I put it to him and to Members here today that it is a dereliction of duty for a decision that has profound implications—as we know, it has resulted in Liverpool being denied any opera whatsoever—to be taken in that haphazard way.

    There are no SNP Members here, so I think we are all Unionists in this room. The hon. Member for Blackpool South (Scott Benton) was born in Newport, and he understands the importance of the Union. Arts Council England did not consult the Arts Council of Wales on a decision that has a profound implication for the future of that opera company and the whole system of opera around the country, and that undermines the whole so-called levelling-up agenda that we were told this decision making was about.

    I profoundly believe that creativity is a good thing in and of itself. I profoundly believe that this country’s greatest strength, or certainly one of its greatest, is its creative industries, and that we are one of the few countries in the world that is a net exporter. Our creative industries are a huge earner for our country and culturally enrich us all. Quite frankly, as a white, heterosexual male from a working-class background, I am sick of people speaking on my behalf, and talking about wokeism and all the rest of it. The arts and culture are profoundly important to enriching our lives, and we should all stand up for them, whatever our backgrounds.

    Let us hope that this was just an emotional spasm. I say to Arts Council England: please, get your act together and start thinking about these things. The arm’s length principle is important, but it does not mean being so arm’s length as to not even consult the Arts Council of Wales. That is not what the arm’s length principle is about, so Arts Council England should get its act back together, and let us return to some sense around this issue.

  • Kevin Brennan – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Kevin Brennan – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2015-11-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many Syrian refugees have been admitted to the UK since September 2015 in each region; and how many she plans to admit by the end of 2016.

    Richard Harrington

    We will not be giving a running commentary on numbers. The refugees that we are bringing to the United Kingdom are very vulnerable people. Our prime concern is their safety and protection as they arrive in this country. We believe that one way to protect their privacy and ensure their recovery and integration is to limit the amount of information about them that we make publicly available. We want to ensure the understandable public interest in the scheme is not based on a running commentary on the numbers that have arrived.

    Notwithstanding this, the Home Office is committed to publishing data in an orderly way as part of the regular quarterly Immigration Statistics, in line with the Code of Practice for Official Statistics. The next set of figures will be in the quarterly release on 26 November 2015 and will cover the period July-September 2015.

    The programme is driven by need, and the number resettled in a particular period will depend on a range of factors. This includes the number of referrals we have received from UNHCR and the number of confirmed places we have received from local authorities that are suitable for the specific needs of those who have been accepted for resettlement. Rather than a monthly or yearly target we acknowledge that some months we will resettle more or less than others because it is based on the need in the region at that time and the progress of those people through the system. We cannot, therefore, state at this time how many confirmed places will be made available by the end of 2016.

  • Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-01-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, if he will meet members of the Manufacturing Commission to discuss its report, entitled Industrial Evolution, published in October 2015.

    Anna Soubry

    The Government’s top priority is to continue creating a highly competitive business environment that makes the UK an attractive location for new manufacturing investment in sustainable processes. We are protecting spending on innovation and the cutting-edge smart manufacturing technologies that will encourage digital, virtual, resource-efficient factories in the future. The High Value Manufacturing Catapult has skills, expertise and equipment available to help partner companies improve the efficiency and sustainability of their processes. As part of Autumn Statement 2015, my Rt Hon Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced that funding to the nine existing Catapults would increase in real terms over the Spending Review period ensuring the UK remains a world leader in high-value manufacturing.

    In addition, we are taking into account UK business opportunities during negotiations on the EU Circular Economy proposals which include aims to improve business sustainability, resource and energy efficiency.

    At the Summer Budget 2015, the Chancellor announced a review of the business energy efficiency tax landscape and Government launched a consultation in September. The consultation set out proposals for delivering a simpler and more stable environment for business that will reduce administrative costs and improve incentives to invest in energy efficiency. This will help increase the productivity of UK businesses, save carbon emissions and ensure secure energy supplies. The Government is currently considering all consultation responses and is likely to publish its formal response at Budget 2016.

    I would be delighted to receive further representations from the Manufacturing Commission on their recent Industrial Evolution report.

  • Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-01-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, pursuant to the Answer of 30 November 2015 to Question 14108, whether the Government has imposed binding conditions in previous privatisations.

    Anna Soubry

    A body such as the Green Investment Bank can only be classified to the private sector if it is not subject to significant government control over its corporate policy. That includes any control Government has over the body in terms of legislation, regulation and its contractual agreements.

  • Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-01-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what plans his Department has to ensure that a privatised Green Investment Bank would be able to maximise the deployment of equity and debt from the European Fund for Structural Investment and other EU sources.

    Anna Soubry

    There is no reason why the Green Investment Bank (GIB) could not invest alongside the EFSI whether GIB is in public or private hands, as it seeks to gather the range of financing necessary to sponsor projects.

  • Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-01-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what assessment he has made of the ability of a privatised Green Investment Bank to address market failures in the low carbon economy.

    Anna Soubry

    The Government’s position on this matter was set out in paragraphs 31 – 36 of our November 2015 policy statement on the future of the UK Green Investment Bank (GIB) which can be found on the GIB pages of the GOV.UK website.

    This makes clear that GIB’s remit has always been to invest in green projects on fully commercial terms to help demonstrate green investment can be profitable and attract additional private sector investment into green sectors from mainstream finance providers. GIB will continue to perform that role in private ownership.

    There are other Government policy mechanisms in place aimed at promoting investment in more high risk projects and early stage technologies.

  • Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-01-28.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many workers who were transferred from the public sector to the private sector under previous privatisations will be covered by the Government’s proposed changes to exit payments in the Enterprise Bill.

    Greg Hands

    The Government consulted on implementing a public sector exit payment cap in July 2015. The Government response to this consultation was published on 16 September 2015. This response provides detail on which organisations and types of payments the Government intends to capture within the scope of the public sector exit payment cap. This accords with the Government’s manifesto commitment to end tax payer funded six figure payoffs for public sector workers.

    The response document can be found at the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/464367/Public_sector_exit_payments_response.pdf

    The exit payment cap will apply to payments made as a result of an employee leaving their employment. It will not affect any pension a person has earned through their years of service or have any impact on accrued pension rights or pension lump sum entitlements on retirement. It will capture contributions, made by the employer, to fund early access to an unreduced or partially reduced pension. This is because such costs are ultimately funded by the tax payer.

    The Government has been clear that early retirements relating to ill health are outside the scope of the cap and will not be affected. Additionally, any payments directed by a Court or Tribunal will not be included in the scope of the cap.

    Exits on compassionate grounds are not such a clearly defined concept as exits related to ill health or redundancy. There will generally be a large degree of employer discretion on the terms of such exits, and on any payments. In these cases there will be discretion available to relax the cap in individual cases, subject to relevant Ministerial or local council approval, as will be set out in further detail in forthcoming Treasury guidance and directions.

  • Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-02-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what research has been commissioned by his Department into the effects of the extension of Sunday opening hours in each year for which data is available.

    Anna Soubry

    In 2006 Indepen were commissioned by the DTI to evaluate the economic costs and benefits of extending Sunday Trading hours, a copy of the report can be found on the GOV.UK website.

    My Department has not commissioned any research since then into the effects of the extension of Sunday opening hours.

  • Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-03-18.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what the average penalty awarded against employers who failed to pay the national minimum wage was in each year since 2012.

    Mr David Gauke

    The Government is determined that everyone who is entitled to the National Minimum Wage (NMW) receives it. Anyone who feels they have been underpaid NMW should contact the Acas helpline on 0300 123 1100. HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) reviews all complaints that are referred to them.

    Employers who pay workers less than the minimum wage not only have to pay arrears of wages at current minimum wage rates but also face financial penalties of up to £20,000 per underpaid worker. A further increase in penalties will come into force in April 2016 and will increase the penalty percentage from 100% to 200% of the underpayments owed to each worker, up to the existing maximum.

    In 2014/15, HMRC issued 705 penalties totalling £934,660. I refer the honourable member to the answer provided at UIN 205613 for information on previous years.

  • Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-03-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, how much his Department owed in late payments to small and medium-sized enterprises in each year for which data is available.

    Anna Soubry

    When making payments, the core Department does not differentiate between small, medium and large enterprises as many small and medium sized businesses can be found at various tiers of the procurement chain.

    The Department takes prompt payment very seriously and records show that in the current financial year to the end of February 2016, 96.4% of all valid invoices (by volume) were paid within 5 working days. When looking at the overall value, this equates to 99.8% paid within 5 working days and 99.99% of invoices were paid within the 30 day standard contractual terms.