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 Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Kevin Brennan – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2015-10-29.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what discussions he, his ministers and his officials have had with the European Commission on the situation in the steel industry.

    Anna Soubry

    My Rt hon Friend the Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills has engaged with the European Commission and our European partners. He has spoken with a number of European Commissioners in Brussels; Commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom (Trade), Commissioner Elzbieta Bienkowska (Internal Market) and Vice President Jyrki Katainen (Jobs and Competitiveness), and stressed the importance of this issue. He has had positive talks with the Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager on progressing the approval of the UK’s Energy Intensive Industries compensation scheme.

    I raised the issue with Matthias Machnig, State Secretary for the German Ministry of Economic Affairs and Energy. In addition, the Secretary of State hasraised the issue with his EU counterparts, including those in Luxembourg, France, Italy and Spain. ​Hecalled for an urgent EU Council meeting on steel, and I am pleased that the Luxembourg Presidency has scheduled a Competitiveness Council on9 November specifically to discuss the EU steel industry.

  • Kevin Brennan – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Kevin Brennan – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2015-12-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, when he plans to respond to Question 18667, tabled on 3 December 2015.

    Nick Boles

    The proposals in the Bill are not about party funding. The Trade Union Bill is about employment and industrial relations. We are introducing a greater level of transparency into union activities by requiring union members to make an active decision to contribute to a union’s political fund.

    If union members want a political fund, this will not necessarily lead to a reduction in the funds available. Therefore no assessment has been made in relation to the impact on the finances of any political party.

  • 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 2016-01-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, pursuant to the Answer of 30 November 2015 to Question 14108, if he will place in the Library a copy of the preliminary feedback on his announcement of the privatisation of the Green Investment Bank.

    Anna Soubry

    The preliminary feedback to which my earlier answer refers is the outcome of private informal conversations that the Green Investment Bank (GIB) and our financial advisers have had with a number of potential investors on an in‑confidence basis to help gauge market appetite for acquiring a stake in GIB. The substance of these conversations is commercially sensitive and not for publication. The Government does, though, intend to report to Parliament setting out our detailed plans for a sale and to provide a further report following completion of a transaction and any subsequent transactions.

  • 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 2016-01-21.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether he has undertaken an impact assessment under section 149 of the Equalities Act 2010 of the Government’s proposals relating to exit payments for public sector workers in respect of older workers.

    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 the potential impacts of the cap and sets out which organisations the Government intends to capture within scope of the public sector exit payment cap. The final policy is in line with the Government’s manifesto commitment to end tax payer funded six figure payoffs for public sector workers.

    The consultation ran from 31 July to 27 August 2015. Over 4000 responses were received. These representations were considered during and after the consultation to inform the Government response that was published on 16 September 2015.

    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

    An impact analysis was published within the exit payment cap consultation document which respondents had an opportunity to comment on. Further, the Government worked with departments and took into account consultation responses received after the official deadline to inform the impact of a public sector exit payment cap set at £95,000 in different sectors and for different categories of workers. This assessment gave due regard to the Public Sector Equality Duty.

    The exit payment cap is intended to capture organisations classified as public sector by the Office for National Statistics with few exceptions as identified in the consultation response.

    The Government does not expect the cap to have a widespread impact on the take-up of voluntary redundancy.

    At the 2015 Spending Review the Government announced it will consult on further cross public sector action on exit payment terms. This consultation will provide a good opportunity to collect further information on the trends in the level of exit payments between the private and public sector.

  • 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 2016-01-27.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether his Department has carried out benchmarking of the public sector exit payment cap against comparable private sector roles.

    Greg Hands

    At the 2015 Spending Review the Government announced it will consult on further cross public sector action on exit payment terms. This consultation will provide a good opportunity to collect further information on the trends in the level of exit payments between the private and public sector.

    Exit payment terms vary significantly across the private sector, and there will be examples of terms that match or even exceed those in the public sector. However, the Government has seen no evidence that redundancy terms such as employer-funded early retirement, which are widely available across the public sector and often cost employers tens, or even hundreds of thousands of pounds per person, are replicated to anything like the same extent in the private sector.

    The precise number of those affected by the public sector exit payment cap will depend on the number and type of exits in coming years.

    However, as the average cost of an exit in the public sector in recent years has been around £25,000 the vast majority of exits are below the level of the cap. For example, less than 2% of recent exits in local government were above the level of the cap.

  • 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, whether academy schools will be covered under the public sector exit payment cap proposed 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 2016-02-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, whether (a) his Department and (b) another department has commissioned independent research on the economic effects of extending Sunday trading hours.

    Anna Soubry

    In 2006 Indepen were commissioned by the Department for Trade and Industry 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.

    Neither my Department nor another Department has commissioned independent research since then on the economic effects of extending Sunday trading hours, although, we are aware of recent independent research from the London School of Economics that found evidence of positive impacts in retail on employment and expenditure.

  • 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 2016-03-15.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what estimate his Department has made of the amount of tax revenue lost due to the illicit trade in tobacco in each year for which data is available.

    Damian Hinds

    Estimates of tax revenue losses associated with illicit tobacco are published every year. The latest estimates, for the years 2006/7 to 2014/15, are published in ‘Tobacco Tax Gap estimates 2014-15’.

    This can be accessed via the GOV.UK website:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/tobacco-tax-gap-estimates

    HM Revenue and Customs makes no other estimate of the value of the illicit tobacco trade.

  • 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 2016-03-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, how much the Student Loans Company and HM Revenue and Customs spent on maintaining and collecting student loan repayments in each year for which data is available.

    Joseph Johnson

    The Student Loans Company (SLC) and HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) have spent the following on maintaining and collecting income contingent repayments since the financial year 2011-12:

    Student Loans Company

    HM Revenue and Customs

    FY 2011-12

    £15.7m

    £5.6m

    FY 2012-13

    £15.6m

    £6.4m

    FY 2013-14

    £18.6m

    £5.5m

    FY 2014-15

    £18.5m

    £5.8m

    FY 2015-16

    £20.9m (forecast)

    £6.3m (forecast)

    The figures in the table above include both the direct costs and associated ICT and back office overheads incurred by SLC and HMRC in maintaining and collecting income contingent repayments.