UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Gordon Marsden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Gordon Marsden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gordon Marsden on 2016-02-04.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what progress officials in his Department have made on incorporating the proceeds of the £227 million fine imposed on Deutsche Bank in relation to their Libor activities into a new three-year fund to create 50,000 apprenticeships.

    Greg Hands

    This government will be spending twice as much in cash terms on apprenticeships by 2020 compared to 2010. Spending on apprenticeships in England will be £2.5bn in 2019-20. The BIS spending review settlement for apprenticeships reflects the government’s commitment regarding the proceeds of the Libor fine the FCA announced in April 2015. Further announcements that support the government’s commitment to delivering employment opportunities for young people will be announced in due course.

  • Chris Heaton-Harris – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Chris Heaton-Harris – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chris Heaton-Harris on 2016-03-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether all payments of universal credit to newly-arrived EU nationals will be covered by the scheme set out in Section D of the Decision of the Heads of State or Government meeting within the European Council on 18 and 19 February 2016.

    Priti Patel

    As Universal Credit will replace our existing system of non-contributory in-work benefits, it will of course be covered by the scope of our new settlement in a reformed European Union.

  • Seema Malhotra – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Seema Malhotra – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Seema Malhotra on 2016-03-23.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to paragraph 2.228 of Budget 2016, when he expects the new money guidance body to be established.

    Harriett Baldwin

    At Budget 2016, the government published its response to the Public Financial Guidance Review and launched a consultation seeking views on the government’s plans to restructure the statutory financial guidance providers – the Money Advice Service, The Pensions Advisory Service and Pension Wise. This paper, which closes on 8 June 2016, sets out a new delivery model for public financial guidance and seeks views on how, within this model, the proposed services could best be offered. The new delivery model is designed to better complement the financial guidance provided by the third sector and the industry and provide more targeted support for consumers.

    The government will consider the responses to this consultation over the summer, and in parallel, work closely with the affected organisations to finalise the delivery structure. A detailed timetable will be set out with the final response, which will be published in the autumn. The government has been clear that the three affected organisations will continue to provide guidance to consumers until at least 2018.

  • Bob Blackman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Bob Blackman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Bob Blackman on 2016-05-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what progress has been made on approving the business case for rebuilding the Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital.

    George Freeman

    A Full Business Case for the new inpatient ward at the Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital was submitted to NHS Improvement for review on 6 April 2016 and is due for consideration in June 2016. This remains a priority project for the Department and NHS Improvement.

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

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

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Patten on 2016-06-20.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Anelay of St Johns on 6 June (HL320), what assessment they have made of the effects on Turkey’s candidate status for accession to the EU of the recent resolution of the German Parliament declaring the killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks in 1915 and 1916 an act of genocide.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    The Government recognises the horrific suffering inflicted on the Armenian people and other groups living in the Ottoman Empire in the early 20th Century. The Government’s policy is that the recognition of genocide is a matter for judicial decision, rather than for governments or non-judicial bodies. The Government believes that the priority today should be to promote reconciliation between the peoples and Governments of Turkey and Armenia.

  • Flick Drummond – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Flick Drummond – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Flick Drummond on 2016-09-05.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what assessment she has made of the adequacy of wheelchair access at sports venues.

    Tracey Crouch

    I refer my honourable friend to my answer to question 44837, answered on 7th September.

  • Anne Main – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Anne Main – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Anne Main on 2016-10-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps he has taken to improve the service quality provided by call handlers who respond to NHS 111 and 999 calls; and what funding he plans to allocate to those services in the next five years.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    The service quality provided by call handlers who respond to 999 and 111 calls is the responsibility of local providers of these services.

    Computer-aided dispatch and clinical decision support systems are used to guide call handers through 999 and 111 calls. These systems have embedded clinical governance processes which keep them under continual internal evidence based review.

    In the future, the 111 phone number will be the “front door” to a 24/7 integrated urgent care service. It will provide access to a ‘clinical hub’ which offers patients access to a wide range of clinicians supported by access to clinical records.

    National Health Service ambulance trusts (who operate 999 call handling services) and providers of NHS111 services are commissioned and funded locally by NHS clinical commissioning groups (CCGs). CCGs work with these providers to take decisions on funding on a yearly basis.

  • Louise Haigh – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Louise Haigh – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Louise Haigh on 2015-11-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what recent discussions he has held with the government of Nigeria on the situation in Biafra.

    James Duddridge

    The UK fully supports the territorial integrity of Nigeria and President Buhari’s commitment to work for a secure and prosperous Nigeria for all Nigerians. President Buhari has recently concluded the appointment of a new Government. We will continue to underline the importance of freedom of expression and acting in accordance with the rule of law with all parties, including the new Nigerian government.

  • Jim Shannon – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Jim Shannon – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Shannon on 2015-12-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment she has made of the reasons in the discrepancy between the proportion of granted asylum claims which are made to people from Pakistan and the proportion of applicants under the detained fast-track procedure who are from that country.

    James Brokenshire

    The basis of an individual’s asylum claim is not recorded on Home Office systems. It is not therefore possible to differentiate Pakistani applicants claiming for reasons of religious persecution and discrimination from Pakistani applicants claiming for one or more other reasons in the Detained Fast Track (DFT) or the non-detained process.

    Certification under section 94 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 is not requested by an applicant. It is applied by the Secretary of State in circumstances where the applicant’s claim is refused and considered to be so lacking in merit as to be clearly unfounded.

    The number of initial certified refusals for Pakistan main asylum applicants, from year ending September 2013 to year ending September 2015, was 604. The Home Office publishes data on asylum applications and decisions on a quarterly and annual basis. The information supplied on certified refusals is based on initial decisions which do not necessarily relate to applications made in the same period.

    No assessment has been made of any difference that might exist between grant rates in respect of Pakistani applicants in the DFT process when it operated, and cases entering the non-detained process at the same time. However, as the DFT process avoided claims involving particular complexity and/or vulnerability, and prioritised cases which appeared to be late or opportunistic, it is to be expected that the DFT would have fewer grants than the non-detained process.

  • Lord Lester of Herne Hill – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Lord Lester of Herne Hill – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Lester of Herne Hill on 2016-01-18.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will make provision to apply fixed recoverable costs across the range of fast-track cases, and in the lower reaches of the multi-track, as recommended by the judiciary and referred to in the Lord Chief Justice’s Review of the Administration of Justice in the Courts of 2015.

    Lord Faulks

    The Government remains supportive of the principle of extending fixed recoverable costs and we continue to consider areas in which implementation might be appropriate and workable.