Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Jessica Morden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Jessica Morden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jessica Morden on 2016-01-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what assessment his Department has made of the cost and benefits of using (a) Green ISAs and Citizen Finance, (b) UK Pension Funds, (c) the European Investment Bank and (d) co-funding with devolved administrations as a means of increasing its capital base.

    Anna Soubry

    I assume that the Hon. Member’s question is referring to increasing the capital base of the UK Green Investment Bank (GIB), rather than increasing the capital base of the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills.

    The Government’s policy is to move the Green Investment Bank (GIB) into private ownership, minimising the Bank’s use of public funds, and where it will have the freedom to borrow and raise capital without impacting on public sector net debt.

    a) Green ISAs and Citizen Finance

    At present, GIB has insufficient track record for the retail market. Most of its portfolio is in relatively high risk construction projects that will not provide steady returns in the short term. More importantly, GIB’s current focus is growth, for which it will need to make regular cash calls on investors, which would be hard to meet in the public markets. However there is no reason why a privatised GIB could not raise capital through Green ISAs or other forms of citizen finance in the longer term.

    (b) UK Pension Funds

    Large scale institutional investors such as UK pension funds are likely to be interested in acquiring a stake in GIB, as part of the Government’s plans to move GIB into the private sector. GIB has already successfully attracted such investors into its managed fund for investment in Offshore Wind and other investments (e.g. Strathclyde local authority pension fund), many of whom are investing in green projects for the first time.

    (c) The European Investment Bank (EIB)

    The EIB’s focus is on providing debt products, rather than equity investment which is where GIB expects to concentrate. It is unlikely that the EIB would make an investment in GIB itself. However, GIB is already partnering with EIB as a co-investor (such as on the recent Galloper offshore wind investment) and it may continue to do so in future.

    (d) Co-funding with devolved administrations

    The Government’s policy is to move GIB into the private sector. Co-funding GIB with the devolved administrations would simply be another form of public sector funding.

  • Chris Davies – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Chris Davies – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chris Davies on 2016-02-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what steps the Government is taking to promote trade and diplomatic connections between the UK and other Commonwealth countries.

    Mr Hugo Swire

    The UK is committed to strengthening its engagement with the Commonwealth. The Prime Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Mr Cameron) led a strong delegation to the Commonwealth summit in November, where the Minister of State for Trade and Investment, my noble Friend, the right hon. Lord Maude and I promoted trade opportunities within the Commonwealth.

  • Lord Polak – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Lord Polak – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Polak on 2016-03-02.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they are aware of the work of Save a Child’s Heart in Holon, Israel, and whether they have any plans to support Save a Child’s Heart in Israel in particular by providing it with financial assistance.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    Our Embassy in Tel Aviv is aware of the work of Save a Child’s Heart. They do not currently have plans to provide financial assistance to this charity but have provided funding in the past, and hosted an event for the charity at the Ambassador’s Residence.

  • Sarah Wollaston – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Sarah Wollaston – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sarah Wollaston on 2016-04-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, whether Section 106 contributions for highways infrastructure works can be used to pay for (a) the costs of administrative, legal or design work or general highways maintenance works required prior to the installation of highways infrastructure works and (b) other associated overhead costs incurred by the local highways authority or its contractors.

    Brandon Lewis

    It is for the local planning authority to determine what is required and seek planning obligations through a Section 106 agreement in order to make a development acceptable in planning terms. There are three statutory tests that need to be applied when considering a planning obligation, that it is: necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms; directly related to the development; and fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.

    Developers may be asked to provide contributions for infrastructure in several ways. This may be by way of planning obligations in the form of Section 106 agreements but can also include contributions through payment of the Community Infrastructure Levy and Section 278 highway agreements.

    It is for local planning authorities to decide what provisions they make in Section 106 agreements, and agree these with the interested parties, and therefore any liabilities would depend on the individual agreement. Local authorities and developers can renegotiate planning obligations by mutual agreement at any time or under Section 106A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. However, Local planning authorities are expected to use all of the funding they receive through planning obligations in accordance with the terms of the individual planning obligation agreement. This is to ensure that new developments are acceptable in planning terms; benefit local communities and support the provision of local infrastructure.

  • David Lammy – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    David Lammy – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Lammy on 2016-05-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what UK Trade and Investment’s total (a) operating budget, (b) communications budget and (c) expenditure on third party communications consultancy and public relations agencies was in (i) 2014, (ii) 2015 and (iii) 2016.

    Anna Soubry

    UK Trade and Investment’s (UKTI) total (a1) operating budget, (b) communications budget and (c) expenditure on third party communications consultancy and public relations agencies in (i) 2014, (ii) 2015 and (iii) 2016 was as follows in the table below. We have also provided additional figures (a2) to reflect UKTI total associated operating costs which were allocated by parliament to UKTI’s parent departments, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills prior to 2015/16. These costs have been increasingly consolidated into UKTI operating budget over the last two years:

    2013/14(£m)

    2014/15(£m)

    2015/16 (£m)

    A1

    166.4

    271.9

    343.0

    A2

    209.6

    90.4

    –

    376.0

    362.3

    343.0

    B

    12.6

    4.1

    4.1

    C

    0.5

    3.8

    1.4
  • Callum McCaig – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Callum McCaig – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Callum McCaig on 2016-06-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, what progress her Department has made on identifying a site for the geological disposal facility for nuclear waste.

    Andrea Leadsom

    In the 2014 Implementing Geological Disposal White Paper [1] Government set out three initial actions which will provide greater clarity on issues such as geology, development impacts and community representation.

    Government and Radioactive Waste Management (the developer of a Geological Disposal Facility) are making good progress delivering these initial actions in the short term, with a clear long term goal of delivering safe and secure final disposal of all our radioactive waste.

    Formal engagement between the developer and potential host communities will start in due course once the Government and Radioactive Waste Management have delivered these initial actions.

    [1] Further information about the initial actions is in the 2014 Geological Disposal White paper: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/332890/GDF_White_Paper_FINAL.pdf

    “

  • Craig Tracey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Craig Tracey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Craig Tracey on 2016-09-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, if he will amend national planning policies so that development of land designated as Green Belt will be resisted until the implications of the UK exiting the EU, and its effect on population and household projections, have been fully assessed and new projections issued for the use of local planning authorities.

    Gavin Barwell

    In line with our manifesto commitment, the government is committed to strong protection of Green Belt land. Local authorities are responsible for designating Green Belt land, as explained in our National Planning Policy Framework. Only in exceptional circumstances may a local authority alter a Green Belt boundary. Applications for most types of development within the Green Belt are inappropriate and should be refused permission except in very special circumstances. Latest figures for 2015-16 show Green Belt continuing to cover around 13 per cent of England.

  • Emma Reynolds – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Emma Reynolds – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Emma Reynolds on 2015-11-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will require a UK Genetics Testing Network to audit Clinical Commissioning Policy: Genetic Testing for BRCA1/2 Mutations, published by NHS England in 2014.

    George Freeman

    NHS England published a new Clinical Commissioning Policy on Genetic Testing for BRCA1/2 mutations in July 2015, based on updated guidelines issued by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Subject to the need to appropriately handle patient identifiable data, NHS England would be willing to work with the UK Genetic Testing Network (UKGTN) to consider and monitor changes in uptake of BRCA testing following the publication of the 2015 Clinical Commissioning Policy.

  • James Cartlidge – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    James Cartlidge – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by James Cartlidge on 2015-12-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, if he will make an assessment of the implications for his policy and guidance of the 13 day closure of the Sudbury to Marks Tey railway line in November 2015 as a result of leaf damage to diesel rolling stock; and if he will make a statement.

    Claire Perry

    Together with Abellio Greater Anglia (AGA) and Network Rail, the Department is very disappointed with the train service that has been provided to passengers on a number of rural routes in Anglia this autumn. In particular, the level of cancellations on branch lines operated by diesel trains has been unacceptable.

    Network Rail and AGA have secured the services of John Curley, a respected railway industry professional, to hold an independent review of the factors and circumstances that conspired to affect services so badly. We expect this review to identify the root cause of failures and highlight lessons that need to be learned for the future. We expect corrective action to be taken wherever practicable to avoid recurrence in the future.

    I can confirm that the results of the review will be made available to the winning bidder of the current East Anglia franchise competition.

  • Graham Jones – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Graham Jones – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Graham Jones on 2016-01-19.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment he has made of the effect on waste operators of planned changes to the Landfill Communities Fund.

    Damian Hinds

    The LCF is a tax credit scheme into which landfill operators contribute voluntarily. The impact of the changes to the LCF announced at Autumn Statement 2015 is set out in Reform and value of the Landfill Communities Fund. This document can be found here:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/reform-and-value-of-the-landfill-communities-fund/reform-and-value-of-the-landfill-communities-fund

    “