Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Jim Shannon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Jim Shannon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Shannon on 2016-03-01.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what steps he is taking to improve spousal employment for service personnel posted in Cyprus.

    Mark Lancaster

    There are a limited number of employment opportunities for family members of deployed personnel within British Forces Cyprus (BFC). Spousal employment is restricted by the 1960 Treaty of Establishment between the UK and the Republic of Cyprus (RoC), which states that service organisations shall, ‘so far as is practicable, employ only Cypriot staff’. To help mitigate this restriction, the Partner Employment Programme (PEP) under the New Employment Model (NEM) facilitates courses and training to assist with employability on return to the UK. BFC is also facilitating Business Start-up courses run by Wolverhampton University. There are no restrictions on spouses seeking employment in the RoC; by way of an example it is known that some spouses are employed locally in international schools.

  • Hilary Benn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Hilary Benn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Hilary Benn on 2016-03-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what recent assessment she has made of barriers to humanitarian agencies reaching people in need in Yemen.

    Mr Desmond Swayne

    Conflict is making humanitarian access within Yemen extremely difficult. Humanitarian agencies report that they are constrained in reaching areas of greatest humanitarian need and delivering assistance for a number of reasons including bureaucratic requirements imposed by the authorities, access challenges for international staff, insecurity in a number of districts, and a proliferation of checkpoints across the country.

    We continue to urge all parties to the conflict to take all reasonable steps to facilitate rapid, safe and unhindered humanitarian access. We work with trusted and impartial partners such as UN agencies and NGOs who have good access and a strong track record of delivering and monitoring assistance in difficult and dangerous places.

  • The Earl of Clancarty – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The Earl of Clancarty – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by The Earl of Clancarty on 2016-04-28.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have carried out research to ascertain the degree of awareness of small businesses about intellectual property rights.

    Baroness Neville-Rolfe

    The Intellectual Property Office (IPO) IP Awareness Survey was first conducted in 2006 and was rerun in 2010 and early 2015. The survey establishes a sense of understanding of IP and IP rights across all sizes of UK firms and all sectors of UK industry. The most recent survey contained 3 sections: an IP knowledge section which tested the respondent’s familiarity with IP, a management section which sought to discover how firms were administering IP within their organisation and a final section which focussed on where IP information and advice was sourced from.

    Key findings include:

    • 94% of respondents thought that it was important for businesses to understand how to protect their IP.
    • 52% of responding firms had protected some sort of IP (either through a single right or a combination).
    • 65% of respondents thought that confidentiality agreements are important to protecting their IP. This method of protection was the most popular.
    • The majority of surveyed firms have not been involved in a dispute around IP, (over 75%).
    • 96% of firms have not valued their IP.
    • 79% of firms did not know that telling people about an invention before applying for a patent could lead to an unsuccessful application.
    • 28% of firms check they are not infringing other people’s IP, the most popular IP management activity amongst respondents.
    • 20% of firms indicated that they license their IP, allowing others to use it for a fee.

    In addition to this formal piece of research the IPO routinely surveys businesses in the course of designing and delivering its business support and outreach activities. This is intended to help to monitor and assess the effectiveness of these activities to ensure they are fit for purpose and if necessary improve, develop and even cease them for alternative approaches.

    The IPO is using findings from its own and other business surveys to inform its approach to business outreach and the creation of IP advisory and support tools.

  • Alex Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Alex Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Alex Cunningham on 2016-06-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, if he will make an assessment of workforce confidence in the safe operation of commercial helicopter transport in the North Sea oil and gas industry.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The UK’s independent safety regulator, the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) takes seriously concerns raised in the safe operation of commercial helicopter transport.

    The CAA currently leads the Offshore Helicopter Safety Action Group (OHSAG) which seeks to drive through safety improvements.

    The Group is represented across industry and includes pilot and workforce representatives from key organisations to facilitate dialogue between helicopter operators, workforce representatives, manufacturers and regulators.

    The OHSAG has made significant safety improvements, including prohibiting helicopter flights in the most severe sea conditions.

  • Margaret Hodge – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    Margaret Hodge – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Attorney General, how many times the Law Officers’ Departments have used the services of (a) PwC, (b) Deloitte, (c) Ernst and Young, (d) KPMG and (e) other consulting firms in the last three financial years; and what (i) work was undertaken and (ii) the cost to the public purse was on each such occasion.

    Jeremy Wright

    The Government Legal Department (GLD) and the Attorney General’s Office have not procured any consultancy advice or support in the last three years.

    GLD has used two of the firms specified to provide support to litigation cases involving the Ministry of Defence and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. The table below shows the amount spent with PwC and KPMG.

    Supplier

    2013/14 Total Value (Net)

    2014/15 Total Value (Net)

    2015/16 Total Value (Net)

    PwC

    £1,187,975

    £1,221,674

    £603,938

    KPMG

    £241,920

    £308,576

    £208,364

    Over the past three financial years Her Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service (HCMPSI) has spent £47,440 on consultancy services to provide general advice and support to the Chief Inspector and £6,662 to assist with a review of the shape and size of HMCPSI.

    The table below sets out payments made for the past three financial years by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) to the above firms and the reason for payment. None of these payments were for consultancy services. The SFO have engaged some other firms who provide consultancy services but in all cases this was for forensic accounting or expert witness services in support of our investigations rather than consultancy.

    Supplier

    2013/14 Total Value (Net)

    2014/15 Total Value (Net)

    2015/16 Total Value (Net)

    Deloitte

    –

    £8,732

    –

    PwC

    £12,500

    £1,259

    £8,262

    KPMG

    –

    £4,800

    –

    The Deloitte spending related to data recovery. PwC and Ernst & Young expenditure related to payment to an expert witness for an SFO case.

    The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has not incurred any expenditure with PwC, Ernst and Young or KPMG in the last three financial years.

    he CPS has incurred expenditure with Deloitte. However, records of each separate engagement are not maintained and the department is therefore unable to confirm the number of times Deloitte’s have been engaged.

    Central records of total CPS expenditure are maintained and expenditure with Deloitte’s for each of last financial years is shown in the table below.

    Deloitte LLP Milton Keynes

    Year

    £’s

    2013/14

    9,661

    2014/15

    20,952

    2015/16

    26,347

    Total

    56,960

    The payments relate to building works and associated services in respect of three offices the CPS has lease agreements on and where Deloitte’s act on behalf of the properties landlords.

  • Catherine West – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Catherine West – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Catherine West on 2016-10-18.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many applications HM Revenue and Customs has processed under the NHS Widening Access Training Scheme for each year in which that Scheme has been active.

    Jane Ellison

    HM Revenue and Customs only hold records of the number of NHS applications under the widening access fund for the tax year 2013/14 onwards. As at 19 October a total of 16,762 applications have been processed as follows:

    Year

    Number of applications

    2013/14

    253

    2014/15

    1,116

    2015/16

    4,175

    2016/17

    11,218
  • Alan Whitehead – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Alan Whitehead – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Alan Whitehead on 2015-11-06.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, whether she plans to bring forward legislative proposals that hydraulic fracturing cannot be conducted from wells that are drilled at the surface of sensitive areas.

    Andrea Leadsom

    On 4 November 2015, the Government set out proposals to ensure that hydraulic fracturing cannot be conducted from wells drilled at the surface of specified protected areas.1 The proposed restrictions would be delivered through the inclusion of a licence condition in new Petroleum Exploration and Development Licences (PEDLs) and the development of a policy statement designed to inform the approval process for programmes submitted for approval under existing PEDLs.

    The proposals are now subject to consultation with key stakeholders, including the industry and non-governmental organisations.

    [1] https://www.gov.uk/guidance/oil-and-gas-licensing-rounds#surface-development-restrictions

    “

  • Kevan Jones – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Kevan Jones – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevan Jones on 2015-12-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what expenditure has been allocated to the Ministry of Defence Police in (a) 2015-16, (b) 2016-17, (c) 2017-18, (d) 2018-19 and (e) 2019-20.

    Mr Julian Brazier

    The Budget for the Ministry of Defence Police is as follows:

    Financial Year

    2015-16

    2016-17

    2017-18

    2018-19

    2019-20

    Budget £ millions

    132.536

    138.367

    137.161

    136.960

    138.126

    Notes

    Budget figure for 2015-16 includes In-Year Savings adjustment

    Figures for 2016-17 onwards are provisional control totals until the implications of the Strategic Defence and Security Review have been worked through

  • Heidi Alexander – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Heidi Alexander – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Heidi Alexander on 2016-01-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, on what dates ACAS conciliation talks between his Department and the BMA on the junior doctors’ dispute have taken place; at what time each such meeting started and finished; and for what dates future such meetings are planned.

    Ben Gummer

    The first round of ACAS meetings took place on 26 to 30 November 2015 and resulted in strike action being postponed. Following the ACAS meetings, the Department, NHS Employers and the British Medical Association (BMA) continued to discuss proposed changes to the junior doctor contract.

    Constructive talks ran until 4 January when the BMA announced that, contrary to the understanding of the management side negotiators, they did not feel that enough progress had been made and announced further dates for industrial action in January and February.

    The Department and NHS Employers asked the BMA to agree to ask ACAS to return to the talks. Meetings were held with ACAS on the 8, 14 and 15 of January. Further meetings were scheduled this week.

    We are pleased that on 19 January 2016 the BMA agreed to suspend further action planned for 48 hours from 26 to 28 January, with cover for emergency care. However, they have not agreed to suspend action planned for 10 February when junior doctors will withdraw their labour, including from providing any emergency care.

    The Government and junior doctors want to do the same thing by improving patient care at weekends and we look forward to further constructive discussions.

  • Richard Burden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Richard Burden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Richard Burden on 2016-02-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what assessment he has made of the effect of the legal requirement for drivers in France to carry a breathalyser and its effect on road safety in that country in order to inform his policies.

    Andrew Jones

    We know that the number of people killed in drink drive collisions remains significantly higher in France than in Great Britain despite the introduction of the legal requirement to carry a breathalyser in 2012. In 2014 Trading Standards in Great Britain looked at the self-testing devices available and concluded that the majority of these were unreliable and may give anyone using them a dangerously false sense of security. We therefore have no plans to introduce any such requirement in Great Britain.