Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Alex Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Alex Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Alex Cunningham on 2016-03-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what work has been carried out under the National Flood Resilience Review on the costs of protecting the UK from future flooding and extreme weather events.

    Rory Stewart

    The National Flood Resilience Review, led by the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, is making good progress. It is gathering evidence and using extreme flood modelling to stress-test the resilience of Core Cities and key infrastructure. This work will inform future options on the investment needed to secure the resilence of the country against such flood events. Our call for evidence closed on 4 March and we are now reviewing the 66 responses received.

  • Douglas Carswell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Douglas Carswell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Douglas Carswell on 2016-04-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what representations he has made to the World Trade Organisation to request that anti-dumping measures are taken against the People’s Republic of China.

    Anna Soubry

    The World Trade Organisation does not have a role in conducting anti-dumping investigations. Responsibility for anti-dumping investigations and imposing anti-dumping measures against imports into the EU and the UK lies with the European Commission. These investigations are driven by requests from EU producers.

    The Government makes regular representations to the Commission concerning allegations of dumping of steel. My Rt Hon Friend the Prime Minister pressed for more action on dumping of steel at European Council on 17 and 18 March. The government judges each anti-dumping case on its merits, based on the evidence presented by the Commission and on representations from interested parties, including producers, users and importers, but is strongly in favour of effective trade defences to tackle unfair trade practices where justified. We have voted in favour of anti-dumping measures on several steel products since July, including the imposition of provisional anti-dumping measures on reinforcing bar in January, an investigation for which we lobbied the Commission successfully, and on cold-rolled flat steel products in February.

    We have supported industry calls for higher duties on specific cases where this is justified by the evidence. For example, in the reinforcing bar case we have raised the steel industry’s concerns that the provisional duties were too low with the Commission. My Rt Hon Friend the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills spoke with Trade Commissioner Malmström about this and received assurances that the Commission will reconsider this during the definitive stage of the investigation, if industry can provide the necessary evidence.

    We also welcomed the opening of four new anti-dumping investigations involving steel products earlier this year.

    The Government continues to push the Commission for faster, more effective action to deal with dumping of steel. This was one of the conclusions of the Extraordinary Competitiveness Council on Steel in November, a meeting which my Rt Hon Friend the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills was instrumental in convening. In advance of the Commission’s energy-intensive industry stakeholder’s summit on 15 February – another key action from the Competitiveness Council – the government and several other EU Member States sent a joint letter to the Commission, pressing it to make full and timely use of all trade defence instruments to tackle unfair trade. I played an active role at this summit. My Rt Hon Friend the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills has also raised these issues in discussions with Commissioner Malmström, most recently at the OECD conference on the challenges facing the steel industry on 18 April. My noble Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Business, Innovation and Skills) (Intellectual Property) reiterated the need for faster and more effective action on dumping at the Competitiveness Council held on 29 February and the Presidency conclusions of that Council reflected this message. I did likewise at the European Steel Day on 21 April. Officials also have regular discussions about anti-dumping cases with Commission officials and officials from other EU Member States.

    The Government is also supporting a robust discussion of the issue of overcapacity through the EU’s ongoing dialogue with the Chinese and other governments, including at the OECD conference. My Rt Hon Friend the Prime Minister has discussed this issue directly with President Xi and was told that China will take steps to reduce its overcapacity. My Rt Hon Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer also raised it during his visit to China in February and my Rt Hon Friend the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills raised it with his counterpart in February. Similarly, my Rt Hon Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs raised it during his visit to China in April.

  • Mark Menzies – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Mark Menzies – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mark Menzies on 2016-06-03.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, for what reason the British Virgin Islands were not invited to the UK Anti-Corruption Summit on 12 May 2016.

    Matthew Hancock

    The Government invited leaders from those Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories that had agreed to the recent initiative on automatic exchange of beneficial ownership information.

  • Brendan O’Hara – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Brendan O’Hara – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Brendan O’Hara on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what the cost was of the operation (a) in August and September 2014 in which RAF Hercules dropped food and other humanitarian supplies to civilians trapped on Mount Sinjar, Iraq and (b) on 30 and 31 August 2014 in which two RAF Hercules dropped food and aid to the town of Amerli, near Kirkuk.

    Mike Penning

    The cost of the operation to deliver food and other humanitarian supplies to civilians trapped on Mt Sinjar and Amerli in Iraq was £3.50 million. £1.97 million of this was charged to Department for International Development on a marginal cost basis and £1.5 million was covered by Operation SHADER. The costs cannot be split between individual locations as both used common air assets that were deployed under Operation SHADER.

  • Ian Austin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Ian Austin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Austin on 2016-10-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps her Department is taking to increase public awareness of the Community Trigger for reviewing anti-social behaviour complaints.

    Sarah Newton

    The Home Office does not collect or hold information on anti-social behaviour case reviews undertaken by local agencies using the Community Trigger process. The Government issued statutory guidance for frontline professionals in July 2014 on the use of powers to tackle anti-social behaviour introduced by the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014.

    This included information on the Community Trigger, including setting an appropriate threshold, publishing the procedure to be followed when making an application, and relevant data relating to use of the Trigger. We are currently reviewing the statutory guidance and we will publish revised guidance in due course if changes are required.

  • Stephen McPartland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Stephen McPartland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen McPartland on 2015-11-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what plans she has to (a) regulate freelance sports coaches (b) ensure that such coaches have an enhanced DBS check in order to safeguard children.

    Edward Timpson

    It is the responsibility of a parent to assure themselves that they are entirely satisfied as to the suitability of any freelance coach they might choose to employ before they engage them. Private tutors and coaches have several options open to them to enable them to obtain appropriate checks in order to provide employers with the assurances they might need. For example, employment agencies are required to process DBS checks for all tutors working with children

    It is of course a serious criminal offence to seek to work with children in regulated activity after having been barred from doing so.

  • Peter Kyle – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Peter Kyle – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Peter Kyle on 2015-11-25.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what estimate he has made of the number of people aged (a) 16, (b) 17 and (c) 18 there will be in England in (i) 2016, (ii) 2017, (iii) 2018, (iv) 2019 and (v) 2020.

    Mr Rob Wilson

    The information requested falls within the responsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I have asked the Authority to reply.

  • Christian Matheson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Christian Matheson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Christian Matheson on 2016-01-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many terrorism-offence related suspects on police bail are understood by her Department to have broken bail and left the UK since January 2013.

    Mr John Hayes

    Individuals suspected of terrorism-related offences can be arrested under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) or the Terrorism Act 2000 (TACT). The decision on which power of arrest to use is an operational judgement for police, and will depend on the circumstances of the case.

    Individuals arrested under TACT cannot be released on police bail. By contrast, those suspected of terrorism-related offences arrested under PACE must be bailed once the grounds for detention no longer apply. Figures for the number of terrorism-related suspects on police bail that have been ordered to relinquish their passports, or have relinquished their passports, are not collected.

    As the Secretary of State for the Home Department said in the House on 05 January 2016, figures for the number of people who have absconded whilst on police bail for terrorism offences are also not collected.

    Figures for those who fail to surrender to bail are collected, but these figures are not separated into categories of offence. These figures are publically available and can be found as follows: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/criminal-justice-system-statistics-quarterly-december-2014

  • Ann Clwyd – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Wales Office

    Ann Clwyd – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Wales Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ann Clwyd on 2016-02-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Wales, if he will release all departmental papers relating to the role his Department allegedly played in co-ordinating and facilitating strike breaking activities during the miners’ strike in 1984.

    Stephen Crabb

    The Wales Office holds no records of the papers referred to.

    When the National Assembly for Wales was established in 1999, all documents held by the Welsh Office at that point were transferred to the Assembly.

  • Lord Browne of Belmont – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Lord Browne of Belmont – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Browne of Belmont on 2016-02-25.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what estimate they have made of the average change in annual household energy consumption after the installation of a smart meter.

    Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth

    Our central estimate of energy savings to domestic consumers as a result of smart metering is 2.8% for electricity (prepayment and credit) and 2% for gas (credit) and 0.5% for gas (prepayment).