UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Paul Flynn – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Paul Flynn – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Paul Flynn on 2015-12-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to the Prime Minister’s oral contribution of 2 December 2015 on ISIL in Syria, Official Report, column 323, what the seven locations are in the UK where the security services have stopped terrorist attacks; and in which months each such attempted attack was stopped.

    Mr John Hayes

    In line with our longstanding practice, it would be inappropriate to comment further on operational matters.

  • Pauline Latham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Pauline Latham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Pauline Latham on 2016-01-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 9 December 2015 to Question 18808, what assessment he made of the conclusion by the Independent Cancer Taskforce in its 2015 report entitled Achieving world class outcomes for cancer: A strategy for England 2015-2020 that faecal immunochemical testing has extremely poor rates of detection for precancerous polyps.

    Jane Ellison

    The UK National Screening Committee (UK NSC) recently consulted on the use of Faecal Immunochemical testing (FIT) as an alternative screen test for bowel cancer. Both the UK NSC and the Independent Cancer Taskforce are supportive of the initial results of the FIT pilot, which indicates that this test is more acceptable to the screened population with a significant increase in participation (10%). The UK NSC has published its minutes from the November meeting and recommends a change to use FIT as the primary test to be used in the National Health Service Bowel Cancer Screening Programme.

    We are considering the UK NSC’s recommendation.

  • Lord Storey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Lord Storey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

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

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of which national sporting events are listed for terrestrial broadcasting, and whether they plan to take steps to help expand that list to enable those who cannot afford or access cable or satellite television to view them.

    Baroness Neville-Rolfe

    Our recently published Sports Strategy made clear that the Government doesn’t propose to reopen discussion on the Ofcom Code on Listed Events. It is for national governing bodies and other rights holders to strike the right balance between reaching a wide audience and generating revenue. However, we encourage as many national govering bodies and other rights holders as possible to sign up to the accessibility principle of the Sport and Recreation Alliance’s Voluntary Code of Conduct on the Broadcasting of Major Sporting Events.

  • Lord Roberts of Llandudno – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Lord Roberts of Llandudno – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Roberts of Llandudno on 2016-02-29.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what aid has been given to Greece to assist that country in supporting migrants and refugees.

    Baroness Verma

    Since the start of the Mediterranean migration crisis, the Department for International Development has provided £55 million in response, including over £19 million in Greece. Assistance through the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and non-governmental organisations has provided life-saving aid to migrants and refugees to support reception, protection, accommodation, and meet basic needs. We are monitoring the situation closely. We stand ready to meet additional priority needs and are sending a team to Greece to assess the situation.

  • 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.

  • Jim Cunningham – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Jim Cunningham – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2015-11-05.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what assessment her Department has made of the adequacy of supply teacher recruitment in each of the last five years; and if she will make a statement.

    Nick Gibb

    Schools, academies and local authorities (LAs) are responsible for the recruitment and management of their supply teachers. This allows them to manage their resources and staffing structures in a way that meets local needs and priorities without central prescription from government.

    Information published from the School Workforce Census does not identify supply teachers specifically.

  • Ian Mearns – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Ian Mearns – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Mearns on 2015-12-03.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many (a) company groups and (b) vessels qualified for the tonnage tax scheme in each year since 2008-09.

    Mr David Gauke

    The table below shows the number of tonnage tax groups and vessels that have reported tonnage tax profits in each year since 2008. The latest data available are for 2013.

    Year

    Tonnage tax groups

    Vessels

    2008

    80

    1,190

    2009

    80

    1,070

    2010

    80

    1,080

    2011

    75

    1,050

    2012

    75

    1,140

    2013

    70

    1,080

    Notes:

    1. Numbers have been rounded to the nearest 10.