Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Steven Paterson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Steven Paterson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steven Paterson on 2016-06-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether the Mk4A upgrade is expected to increase the yield of the warhead.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    The UK currently fields the Trident Mk4 warhead as part of the Trident Strategic Weapons System. In order to ensure continuity of the Mk4-based capability, the Mk4A Arming, Fuzing and Firing system is a non-nuclear component being introduced into the UK Trident warhead to replace a similar component. The Mk4A programme will not increase the destructive power of the warhead.

    Approval to procure the new Arming, Firing and Fuzing mechanisms, to manage obsolescence in Mk4 and to adopt a Mk4A component was given in January 2006. I am withholding further details of the date of the Mk4A component’s entry into service, the cost of the Mk4A programme and the extension in operational life expected for the purposes of safeguarding national security.

  • Neil Coyle – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Neil Coyle – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Neil Coyle on 2016-09-06.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what the timetable for publication is of the Freud Review into housing benefit changes and their impact on supported accommodation.

    Caroline Nokes

    The Secretary of State has confirmed that the Government expects to make an announcement on the way forward for supported housing in early autumn.

  • David Winnick – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    David Winnick – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Winnick on 2016-10-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, when his Department plans to reply to the letter from the hon. Member for Walsall North of 20 September 2016 on behalf of a constituent relating to nuisance telephone calls.

    Margot James

    The Department for Culture, Media & Sport (DCMS) is responsible for the Government’s policy on nuisance telephone calls. The hon. Member’s letter of 20 September 2016 has been passed to DCMS and that Department will reply directly to the hon Member.

  • 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.

  • Sammy Wilson – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Sammy Wilson – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sammy Wilson on 2015-11-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what proportion of animals that had been used in experiments and were classed as re-homed in government statistics in the last three years were sent to laboratories outside the UK.

    Mike Penning

    The Home Office does not collect data regarding the number of animals, used in scientific procedures, which are subsequently re-homed. Establishments are required to keep information of the source, use and final disposal of protected animals, bred kept or used at the establishment for any regulated activities, which would include whether an animal used was re-homed.

  • Liz Kendall – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Wales Office

    Liz Kendall – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Wales Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Liz Kendall on 2016-01-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Wales, how many people of each gender work in his Department.

    Stephen Crabb

    There are currently 23 women and 23 men working at the Wales Office.

  • David Hanson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    David Hanson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Hanson on 2016-02-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to the Answer of 1 February 2016 to Question 22835, in what months the biometric passport chip reading facilities were deactivated in (a) 2013, (b) 2014 and (c) 2015.

    James Brokenshire

    For the period for which figures are available, biometric chip reading facilities were deactivated 7 times in 2013 and these occurred during the months of February, March, May & June. In 2014 chip reading facilities were deactivated 3 times and these occurred during the months of September, October and December. In 2015, chip reading facilities were deactivated 3 times and occurred during the months of February, April, and June.

    These figures should be considered against the background of the overall volume of transactions which are currently running at over 100 million per year and each of the instances has been thoroughly investigated and we are satisfied that there has been no risk to the border as a result.

  • Virendra Sharma – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Virendra Sharma – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Virendra Sharma on 2016-02-23.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the (a) policy and (b) other responsibilities are of each special adviser in her Department.

    Karen Bradley

    The Code of Conduct for Special Advisers sets out the role of special advisers and describes the range of activities they may undertake. Copies of the Code of Conduct are available in the Libraries of the House and on-line at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/468340/CODE_OF_CONDUCT_FOR_SPECIAL_ADVISERS_-_15_OCTOBER_2015_FINAL.pdf

  • Gavin Robinson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Gavin Robinson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gavin Robinson on 2016-03-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether a ban on travelling to the UK still applies to US citizen Mr Robert Spencer.

    Mr John Hayes

    The Government does not routinely comment on individual immigration cases. As certain information on this particular case has been publicly disclosed, however, I can confirm that on 25 June 2013 the Home Secretary personally directed that Robert Spencer should be excluded from the UK on the grounds that his presence here would not be conducive to the public good.

    The Home Secretary considered that Mr Spencer brought himself within scope of the unacceptable behaviours policy by making statements that may foster hatred which might lead to inter-community violence in the UK.

  • Christopher Pincher – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Christopher Pincher – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Christopher Pincher on 2016-03-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, upon what criteria she plans to decide whether to remove the derogation in the Waste Framework Directive which currently allows air pollution control residues, which have been recovered from municipal waste to energy incineration facilities, to be treated and disposed to hazardous landfill sites.

    Rory Stewart

    The derogation to allow the landfilling of air pollution control residues that are three times above normal waste acceptance criteria was originally granted because there was a lack of alternative treatment capacity at the time to either treat certain wastes to levels meeting normal waste acceptance limits, to treat the wastes via alternative treatment technologies or to recycle or recover the residues. The availability of sufficient alternative treatment capacity and the costs of that treatment are therefore the two central criteria that the government will use to decide whether or not to remove the derogation.

    The Government is making an assessment of the quantity of air pollution control residues produced at energy from waste facilities to inform its decision on whether or not to remove the derogation to allow the landfilling of air pollution control residues that are three times above normal waste acceptance criteria. These figures will be available following the announcement of that decision.

    The Government is making an assessment of the costs of the different forms of treatment for air pollution control residues, including their mixing into concrete blocks and their disposal to hazardous waste landfill, to inform its decision on whether or not to remove the derogation to allow the landfilling of air pollution control residues that are three times above normal waste acceptance criteria. These figures will be available following the announcement of that decision.