Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Douglas Chapman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Douglas Chapman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Douglas Chapman on 2016-04-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, when a Wire Strike Protection system will be fitted to the Puma helicopter; and when (a) Initial Gate and (b) Final Gate approval was granted for that project.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    The Helicopter Safety Enhancements Programme has been coordinating provision of Wire Strike Protection Systems (WSPS) across the UK military helicopter fleet. Initial Gate approval was granted in August 2012 and Final Gate approval was granted in March 2013. The Puma Mk2 WSPS entered service in June 2015; fleet embodiment of WSPS continues and is expected to be complete by the second quarter of 2017.

  • Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chi Onwurah on 2016-05-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, with reference to the Answer of 9 May 2016 to Question 36437, if he will publish a list of cultural events and organisations located (a) north of Leeds and (b) elsewhere directly funded by his Department, outside of funding for the Arts Councils in (i) the last three years and (ii) the next three years.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    The Northern Powerhouse is a priority for Government, and through projects like The Great Exhibition of the North, we will look to showcase the innovation and imagination of the region, give a real boost to local tourism, and provide an important creative legacy. The information you have requested is published annually in the Department’s report and accounts. It lists all cultural events and organisations throughout the country that are directly funded by the Department. In the last three years we have provided direct funding to a number of institutions, including the Royal Armouries, Leeds (£24.3 million), while the National Railway Museum in York receives annual funding via the Science Museums Group* who have distributed approximately £128 Million to their eight bodies between 2012/13 and 2014/15. Elsewhere in England the Government funds a number of cultural organisations directly, including the Peoples Museum in Manchester (£484,760 between 2012/13 and 2013/15) and National Museums Liverpool (£63.5 million between 2012/13 and 2014/15).​In addition, a number of the Department’s Arm’s Length Bodies such as the BFI, Tate,​and Heritage Lottery Fund have financed a number of cultural events and projects throughout England. The next three years’ funding will be published in future reports and will include current projects such as the Great Exhibition of the North​, Hull City of Culture 2017​ and the Factory in Manchester​; where the Government has announced £78 million of funding.

  • Ian Lavery – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Ian Lavery – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Lavery on 2016-07-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, when his Department plans to publish the business case relating to the tender of the CSIIP contract within Defence Business Services; and if he will make a statement.

    Mark Lancaster

    The Ministry of Defence has no plans to publish the business case relating to the future arrangements for Defence Business Services (DBS). Details of the any proposals will be shared with staff and other key stakeholders once a final decision concerning the way forward for DBS is made.

  • Yasmin Qureshi – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Yasmin Qureshi – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Yasmin Qureshi on 2016-09-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, with reference to written statement WS154 of 15 September 2016, what assessment he has made of the potential effect of the 1 per cent reduction for supported housing on providers of that housing.

    Gavin Barwell

    The Government is committed to protecting the most vulnerable through our welfare reforms. That is why we have exempted supported housing from the Local Housing Allowance cap until 2019/20, from which point we will bring in a new funding model which will ensure that the sector continues to be funded at current levels, taking into account the effect of Government policy on social sector rents. We will apply the rent reduction to supported housing, with the exception of domestic violence refuges, with rents in these properties decreasing by 1% a year for 3 years, up to and including 2019/20.

    Our social rent reduction policy was based on the need to put welfare spending on a sustainable footing whilst protecting the most vulnerable. It is right that supported housing providers make the efficiency savings we are asking of the whole social housing sector, and that’s why the 1% rent reduction will apply to the majority of them. In exceptional circumstances, supported housing providers (as for general needs social sector providers affected by the policy) who feel that compliance with the social rent reduction policy would result in serious financial difficulty or jeopardise their financial viability, can apply for an exemption from the requirement.

  • Angela Smith – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Angela Smith – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Angela Smith on 2015-11-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what the prevalence of bovine TB was in each (a) month and (b) county from 1996 to 2008.

    George Eustice

    The Department publishes data back to 1996 for England, Wales and Scotland and at a GB level.

    Monthly statistics at a county level on bovine TB since 1996 will be published in December.

  • Lord Norton of Louth – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Lord Norton of Louth – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Norton of Louth on 2015-12-16.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many members of the Senior Civil Service have taken courses provided by Civil Service Learning that are intended to enhance their understanding of the role of the House of Lords, in (1) 2014, and (2) 2015.

    Lord Bridges of Headley

    Civil Service Learning provide two e-learning courses that address this subject area – “Induction: An introduction to Parliament” and “Parliamentary processes”. They also provide face to face training on taking a Bill through Parliament, however on this training attendees are not required to provide information on their grades. Civil Service Learning also endorse and promote two relevant external courses to the Senior Civil Service – “Supporting Ministers” and “Civil Service Attachment Scheme” both provided by the Industry and Parliament Trust.

    In total 80 Senior Civil Servants accessed this learning in 2014. In 2015 this number rose to 90. All numbers have been rounded to the nearest ten.

  • Greg Mulholland – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Greg Mulholland – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Greg Mulholland on 2016-01-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, pursuant to the Answers of 11 January 2016 to Question 21375 and of 18 January 2016 to Question 22215 on flood control: per capita costs, what steps she took to ensure that the geographical boundaries of Environment Agency areas and census regions matched for the purposes of those calculations.

    Rory Stewart

    Public facing Environment Agency Areas match local council boundaries used by the Office of National Statistics (with the exception of ‘Central Bedfordshire’) and so census figures can be scaled to the Environment Agency Areas that the flood risk management Grant in Aid allocations were taken from. As Central Bedfordshire is wholly within the Areas that make up our eastern hub this does not change the per capita calculation.

  • Lord Hain – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Lord Hain – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hain on 2016-02-11.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what discussions they have had with Welsh Government about its position that a number of clauses of the Trade Union Bill relate to devolved issues, and in particular regarding its position that (1) provisions in clause 3 regarding the 40 per cent threshold, (2) provisions in clauses 12 and 13 regarding facility time, and (3) provisions in clause 14 regarding check-off, relate to devolved issues.

    Baroness Neville-Rolfe

    Ministers have engaged with the Devolved Administrations on the Trade Union Bill.

    As part of our engagement, Nick Boles, the lead Minister for the Trade Union Bill, has received four letters from Leighton Andrews, Minister for Public Services in the Welsh Government on 20 November 2015, 18 January 2016, 27 January 2016, and 9 February 2016. These letters related to specific aspects of the Bill and on the Welsh Government position on their applicability in Wales. On 5th February 2016 Nick Boles had a telephone conversation with Leighton Andrews on the Bill; and on 4 March, he replied to the letters and has placed a copy of the correspondence in the Library.

    The Trade Union Bill relates to employment rights, duties and industrial relations, all of which are reserved.

  • Tulip Siddiq – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Tulip Siddiq – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tulip Siddiq on 2016-03-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, how many referrals Acas made to each public body relating to each (a) employment sector and (b) topic on its database in each year since 2009-10.

    Nick Boles

    The only referrals recorded by Acas are those made to the various enforcement bodies that have been set up to protect vulnerable workers. Acas has made these referrals since taking over the Pay and Work Rights Helpline in April 2015. The number of referrals made to each enforcement body since April 2015 is set out in the following table:

    HMRC

    EAS

    HSE

    GLA

    Total

    April to Feb Total

    1,667

    229

    111

    11

    2,018

    Source: Acas

    • HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) – calls on potential enforcement of the National Minimum Wage
    • Employment Agency Standards Inspectorate – calls on potential enforcement of employment agency legislation (except Agency Worker Regulations)
    • Gangmasters Licensing Authority (GLA) – calls relating to agency workers in agriculture, horticulture, shellfish gathering or associated processing and packaging
    • Health and Safety Executive (HSE) – calls on potential enforcement of working time issues, including enforcement of maximum weekly working hours
  • Charles Walker – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Charles Walker – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Charles Walker on 2016-04-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, if he will identify for the purpose of Article 3(9)(F) of the Fourth EU Money Laundering Directive which ranks in the armed services will be classed as high-ranking.

    Mark Lancaster

    The Fourth EU Money Laundering Directive seeks to prevent the financial and certain non-financial sectors from being used for money laundering (the conversion, by various means, of the proceeds of crime into apparently ‘clean money’) and terrorist financing (the provision or collection of funds used to carry out any terrorist offences).

    In addition to the financial sector, the directive applies to certain non-financial sectors including lawyers, notaries, accountants, estate agents, providers of gambling services, trust and company service providers, and to all providers of goods when payments are made in cash in excess of €15,000.

    The directive introduces additional requirements and safeguards (‘enhanced due diligence’) for situations posing a higher risk of money laundering and terrorist financing, for example, trading with correspondent banks situated outside the EU. Amongst those additional requirements is a broader definition of Politically Exposed Persons (PEPs).

    Those subject to the directive are required to:

    Identify and verify the identity of their customer (‘customer due diligence’) and of the beneficial owner (person(s) who ultimately owns or controls the customer on whose behalf a transaction is being carried out, e.g. in the case of a company, the owner of a sufficient percentage of the shares or votes), and to monitor their business relationship with the customer,

    Report suspicions of money laundering or terrorist financing to the public authorities

    Ensure that personnel are properly trained and that appropriate internal preventive policies and procedures are set up.

    The Ministry of Defence (MOD) is not a financial institution nor does it fall into the non-financial sector organisations identified by the Directive, and it is not a provider of goods where payments are made in cash in excess of €15,000.

    The responsibility of implementing the requirements of the Directive is for the financial sector and the non-financial sectors identified by the Directive and not the MOD.

    The new Directive gives additional guidance in dealing with those risks and issues relating to corrupt activities. As with all legislation it cannot differentiate between those nations, sectors and institutions that are more or in the UK’s case, less corrupt. What this Directive attempts to do is give those organisations and sectors at risk of money laundering and terrorist finances the ability to make their own judgements as to what they deem as a high risk person (PEP) or transaction. Whilst ambassadors, chargés d’affaires and high-ranking officers in the Armed Forces are included in the Directive as PEP’s, the financial institutions in particular will assess their individual risk. In some countries the military are involved and in some cases run the political and governing systems, this makes them a significant corruption risk. The UK, its ambassadors, chargés d’affaires and high-ranking officers carry a lesser risk than some others; it is therefore unlikely that the extended Directive will affect them. But the interpretation of the Directive is for the financial and certain non-financial sectors to interpret.

    The MOD takes its responsibility to prevent, detect, deter and investigate fraud (including corruption, money laundering and terrorist financing) very seriously and has undertaken detailed risk assessments to identify its risks, where needed implementing additional preventative and detective controls and undertakes due diligence on its suppliers.

    Transparency International publishes a Government Defence Anti-Corruption Index based on 77 indicators which assesses the existence, effectiveness and enforcement of a nation’s ability to manage the risk of corruption including money laundering.

    The UK MOD scored an ‘A’ (very low corruption risk) in the 2015 index, the only country to achieve this in the G20 and NATO as well as being one of only two in the world to achieve this.

    Transparency International attributed the ‘A’ to the UK MOD having strong anti-corruption systems underpinned by effective independent oversight mechanisms.