The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-04-13.
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what the net earnings were from direct investment in UK companies in each year since 2010.
Mr Rob Wilson
The information requested falls within the responsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I have asked the Authority to reply.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-04-19.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, whether employers who pay the proposed apprenticeship levy and provide training will be able to use levy vouchers in their own organisations.
Nick Boles
Employers will be free to spend levy money on apprenticeships training which they judge best meets their needs. If the employer is a registered training provider, they could use the levy money on in-house training which meets the required quality standards for an apprenticeship.
Where an employer wishes to provide their own in-house training, they must be registered on the Skills Funding Agency’s Register of Training Organisations. All providers are subject to inspection and reports by Ofsted on apprenticeship training provision.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-05-18.
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, how many Renewables Obligation Certificates have been issued to steel producers who have recycled energy in their steel plants.
Andrea Leadsom
The Renewable Obligation is designed to support investment in renewable electricity to meet our EU renewables target and contribute towards our wider low carbon goals. It only supports electricity generated from renewable non-fossil sources. This definition is taken from the EU’s Renewable Energy Directive 2009/28/EC and is set out in the Renewables Obligation Order 2015.
To date, no steel producer has accredited under the Renewable Obligation and so no Renewable Obligation Certificates have been issued to steel producers.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-05-25.
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the average fine is for people found guilty of breaking the law by not allowing the transport of blind people and their guide dogs in licensed taxis under the Equality Act 2010.
Dominic Raab
It is an offence under section 168 of the Equalities Act 2010 to refuse to take an assistance dog in a taxi or private hire vehicle. The maximum penalty is a level 3 fine (up to £1,000).
The number of offenders sentenced at all courts (with fines and average fines specifically identified) for failure to comply with a section 168 duty in relation to an assistance dog for a disabled person, in England and Wales, from 2011 (earliest separately identifiable information available) to 2015 can be viewed in table 1.
The number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts for failure to comply with a section 168 duty in relation to an assistance dog for a disabled person, listed by local authority prosecuting the case in England and Wales, from 2011 (earliest separately identifiable information available) to 2015 can be viewed in table 2.
Centrally held data by the Ministry of Justice includes information on defendants proceeded against, found guilty and sentenced for criminal offences in England and Wales. Data on whether a guide dog for the blind or a different type of assistance dog was involved in such a case is not held centrally, or reliably recorded where there is no operational reason to do so.
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 he plans for the size of the stake which the Government will retain in the Green Investment Bank to be after that bank’s privatisation.
Anna Soubry
Decisions on the size of stake retained in the Green Investment Bank will be taken on the basis of what achieves best value for money for the taxpayer.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2015-12-14.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, if he will make an assessment of the potential effect on the growth of small and medium-sized enterprises of the closure of the Business Growth Service.
Anna Soubry
We do not expect closure of the Business Growth Service to have an impact on the growth of Small and Medium sized Enterprises or the Northern Powerhouse.
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, which projects are part of the Green Investment Bank’s forward business plan; what the (a) stage of completion and (b) amount of funding given is for each of those projects; and what guarantees are in place to ensure that these schemes are completed by any new owners of the Green Investment Bank.
Anna Soubry
Potential investment opportunities identified in the forward business plan of UK Green Investment Bank (GIB), and the company’s estimates of what level of financing it might commit to these, are commercially sensitive matters and are not made public. Potential investors in GIB will be invited to consider the company’s business plan in accordance with appropriate confidentiality agreements.
Irrespective of whether GIB remains in Government ownership or is moved into the private sector, there is no way to guarantee that any of the projects identified in GIB’s business plan will in fact proceed nor any certainty that GIB will be involved in their financing if they do – they remain only potential investment opportunities.
Details of the commitments GIB has entered into to date can be found on the company’s website at: http://www.greeninvestmentbank.com/our-investments/.
“
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-01-21.
To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many responses his Department received to the consultation on the exit payments cap for public sector workers; and how long his Department took to analyse and respond to those responses.
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.
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 recent assessment he has made of differences in the ability of the Green Investment Bank to promote the (a) reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, (b) advance of efficiency in the use of natural resources, (c) protection or enhancement of the natural environment, (d) protection of enhancement of biodiversity and (e) promotion of environmental sustainability as a (i) public and (ii) private sector organisation.
Anna Soubry
The Green Investment Bank (GIB) contributes to UK green policy objectives by mobilising much needed private capital into green sectors, demonstrating that green investment can be profitable.
GIB will continue to perform that role in private ownership – increasing investment and making profits from green sectors that are relatively mature but nevertheless suffer from a lack of investment.
In private hands, GIB will have access to much more capital than if it remained in Government hands and will be able to have a bigger impact.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-01-29.
To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, for what reasons Bradford and Bingley, the Royal Bank of Scotland and Northern Rock as publicly-funded banks are exempted from the public sector exit payments cap in the provisions of the Enterprise Bill.
Greg Hands
The Government’s partial ownership of Bradford and Bingley, the Royal Bank of Scotland and Northern Rock as is a temporary measure following the financial crisis and they will be returned to the private sector in due course. The Government believes this is fundamentally different to public sector bodies that receive ongoing funding from the taxpayer.