Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Ian C. Lucas – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Ian C. Lucas – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian C. Lucas on 2015-11-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what meetings he has had with Ministers from the Cabinet Office at which the privatisation of Channel 4 was discussed in August and September 2015.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    The Secretary of State meets regularly with Ministers from the Cabinet Office to discuss matters relating to DCMS policy. The government has made no decisions regarding reform of Channel 4. The government is considering a range of options as to how best to ensure Channel 4’s future sustainability while maintaining its ability to deliver against its remit, including options put forward by Channel 4.

  • Alison McGovern – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Alison McGovern – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Alison McGovern on 2015-12-01.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assistance and advice her Department is providing to UK volunteers offering assistance to refugees in Calais.

    James Brokenshire

    The Home Office is in regular discussions with French counterparts at ministerial and official level on all aspects of the migrant situation in Calais. The French Government is responsible for the care of migrants in Calais, including support over the winter. However, both governments are committed to finding a sustainable solution to the situation in Calais. One aspect of the UK-France Joint Declaration of 20 August, committed the UK to providing a £3.6 million (or €5 million) per year for two years to help support a range of work to manage the migrant population in Calais, in particular to provide support and facilities elsewhere in France. Additionally, the UK has provided £530,000 (€750,000) to fund a project to identify those in the camps at risk of trafficking and exploitation, to transfer them to places of safety; and to provide them with appropriate support within the French system.

    The UK and French Governments are unified in their response to the migratory phenomenon and both governments recognise the importance of close partnership and collaboration to reach a long-term solution. This is a global challenge, and we will also work together to ensure that other EU states, as well as source and transit countries outside Europe, are doing everything they ought to be to stop people making these dangerous journeys in the first place.

  • Kirsten Oswald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Kirsten Oswald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kirsten Oswald on 2016-01-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, if he will make representations to the UN and the International Criminal Court to ensure they take action in cases in which civilian populations are besieged and deprived of food and medicines as a method of waging war.

    James Duddridge

    The United Kingdom has co-sponsored resolutions at the United Nations Security Council that call for an end to indiscriminate attacks on civilians, including illegal siege tactics and obstructing the flow of humanitarian aid. The International Criminal Court can take action when a war crime or crime against humanity is suspected to have been committed in or by a country which is party to the Rome Statute, or when a situation is referred to them by the UN Security Council. The starvation of civilians as a method of warfare is prohibited in international and internal conflicts. We will continue to work with our international partners to look at every available option to ensure all State and non-state actors engaged in armed conflict respect International Humanitarian Law and act in accordance with their obligations there under.

  • Emily Thornberry – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Emily Thornberry – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Emily Thornberry on 2016-02-01.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 29 January 2016 to Question 24141, what assessment he has made of the reasons for the increase in the number of (a) unauthorised entries to military bases and (b) thefts or losses of classified material between 2014 and 2015.

    Mark Lancaster

    The apparent increase in incidents is attributed to security awareness programmes and a strengthened reporting regime. These have led to an increasing readiness to report even minor breaches and do not represent systematic failings in security protection.

  • Jonathan Ashworth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Jonathan Ashworth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jonathan Ashworth on 2016-02-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, how much his Department spent from the public purse on industrial tribunals in the last 12 months.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    The Foreign and Commonwealth Office’s (FCO) legal fees for employment tribunals for the last twelve months, where invoices have so far been received (January 2015 – December 2015), total £46,385.52. The FCO is in the process of recovering £3,000 of this following a Costs Order in our favour.

  • Roger Mullin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Roger Mullin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Mullin on 2016-03-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what steps he has taken to promote the take-up of employee ownership schemes by small and medium-sized businesses in each nation of the UK.

    Anna Soubry

    In 2012, the previous Government asked Graeme Nuttall to advise on what more could be done to increase the number of businesses with employee ownership. The Nuttall Review identified 28 recommendations to address three main constraints: lack of awareness of the concept; lack of resources to support the model; and actual or perceived legal, tax and other regulatory barriers. The action taken to address the recommendations is explained in the ‘The Nuttall Review of Employee Ownership – One Year On’ report published in November 2013 and available on the gov.uk website.

    The Government now expects the private sector to make the business case for this model through organisations such as the Employee Ownership Association – the representative body for employee-owned businesses.

    Ongoing encouragement for employee ownership is provided through four approved share schemes which have tax-advantages for both employees and employers. These are the Company Share Option Plan (CSOP), Enterprise Management Incentives (EMI), Save As You Earn (SAYE) and Share Incentive Plan (SIP) which are administered by HMRC. In 2013-14 the total value of shares and options awarded under these schemes was around £3.45bn with over £1bn of income tax and national insurance relief given.

  • Baroness Lister of Burtersett – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Baroness Lister of Burtersett – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Lister of Burtersett on 2016-03-23.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they have taken to ensure there is adequate funding for children with special educational needs in early years education.

    Lord Nash

    We have already announced over £1bn more for the early years entitlements within the ring-fenced Dedicated Schools Grant by 2019-20, which includes £300m per year to uplift the average funding rate to providers. We are also providing protection for high needs funding that will make sure that the level of funding rises in proportion to the number of children, including those under 5. This will make sure that local authorities continue to have the flexibility to target funding where it is most needed to help children with special educational needs and disabilities and their families, including the youngest children. Further consideration will be given to funding for children with special educational needs in early years education as part of a consultation later this year.

    Local authorities are required by law to secure free entitlement places for parents that want their child to take them up. The Government is committed to ensuring that all families have access to high quality, flexible and affordable childcare and parents with children with special educational needs should have the same opportunities as other parents through access to high quality childcare. The Children and Families Act requires local authorities to have a ‘local offer’ which includes a statement on how they intend to tailor the childcare on offer for children with special educational needs and disabilities.

    Early implementation of 30 hours from September 2016 provides a real opportunity to develop innovative approaches to providing flexible childcare for working parents whose children are disabled or have special educational needs. Through Early Implementation, York, Northumberland, Newham and Wigan are among 8 LAs delivering the 30 hours entitlement from September 2016, a year earlier than planned. This will include delivering targeted places focusing on children with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities.

    They will also be supported by Early Implementer Innovator areas including Brighton and Hove, Hampshire and Trafford, who will test the offer and how it works under specific circumstances, including developing approaches to support children with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities.

  • Karl McCartney – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Karl McCartney – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Karl McCartney on 2016-04-28.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what information the Government collects on the reasons for clubs leaving the community amateur sports club scheme.

    Damian Hinds

    The new regulations for CASCs were introduced on 1 April 2015. All the changes made were necessary to reinforce the original spirit of the scheme requiring clubs to be open to the whole community, with the promotion of participation in sport as their main purpose.

    The Government consulted widely with the sector on all the changes to the scheme. It was aware that there was confusion about the meaning of participation prior to the consultation period for the new regulations. Responses to the consultation were mostly supportive of the 12 times a year rule for participation.

    The scheme does not permit clubs to impose fees which are a significant obstacle to membership. The vast majority of CASCs charge less than £520 for annual membership. To make membership more accessible, clubs with higher costs associated with membership are required to make provisions for those who can’t afford to pay more than £520 a year. If no suitable arrangements are made this club is not able to be a CASC because it is not considered to be open to the whole community.

    During the development of the new CASC regulations the Government was aware of State aid complaint SA.38208 (2014/NN). At the time, the Government was only asked to provide a response to the complaint. The Government provided this response, explaining why the CASC scheme was not State aid. The Commission’s subsequent ruling confirmed this view.

    Since the introduction of the new regulations all CASCs were given a 12-month period of grace to make any necessary changes to remain in the scheme. The Government wrote to all registered CASCs explaining the new regulations and asked clubs to complete a self-assessment checklist on income, membership and participation levels. They were also asked to contact HMRC if they did not meet the new requirements.

    From 1 April 2016, 500 clubs have been deregistered as CASCs, affecting some 35 different types of sport.

    Since 2010 there has been a steady increase in the numbers of CASCs registered in the scheme. Although the Government does not yet have figures for clubs registered as at 5 April 2016, the breakdown of figures since 2010 is:

    5630 – 5 April 2010

    5976 – 5 April 2011

    6165 – 5 April 2012

    6334 – 5 April 2013

    6571 – 5 April 2014

    6715 – 5 April 2015.

  • Jonathan Ashworth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Jonathan Ashworth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jonathan Ashworth on 2016-06-13.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, where the planned International Anti-Corruption Coordination Centre will be based.

    Matthew Hancock

    The proposal is for the Centre to be located in a major international financial centre such as London.

  • Anne-Marie Trevelyan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Anne-Marie Trevelyan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Anne-Marie Trevelyan on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many children in the UK have at least one parent serving in the armed forces.

    Mark Lancaster

    This information is not held in the format requested