Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Lord Campbell of Pittenweem – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Lord Campbell of Pittenweem – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Campbell of Pittenweem on 2016-02-25.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what priority they attach to acquiring and deploying unmanned carrier-launched surveillance and strike aircraft.

    Earl Howe

    The Queen Elizabeth Class carriers will have an extensive flight deck with hangar and engineering support facilities, which can be utilised to operate and sustain autonomous systems. The Royal Navy recognises that such systems offer a unique opportunity to maintain its operational advantage and it continues to explore how they could augment its capabilities in the future.

  • Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-03-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the cost of online retail fraud was to retailers in each year for which data is available.

    Karen Bradley

    The Home Office does not hold the information requested.

    The Home Office runs an annual Commercial Victimisation Survey (CVS) which asks business premises in different sectors about their experience of various crime types, including fraud, in the latest year.

    In order to keep the length of the survey, and hence the burden on respondents, to a minimum, businesses are only asked about the cost of the latest incident of each crime type experienced in the year. Therefore, it is not possible to provide an aggregate cost of fraud or overall crime to businesses in the retail sector.

  • Emily Thornberry – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Emily Thornberry – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Emily Thornberry on 2016-04-26.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many full-time equivalent staff currently work in (a) the Joint Intelligence Organisation’s Assessments Staff and (b) the National Security Secretariat; and how many such staff have not previously been employed as civil servants.

    Mr Oliver Letwin

    Staff in the JIO are drawn from the Cabinet Office and across Government including the MOD, FCO, and Armed Forces. They are employed on a range of terms and conditions including formal and informal, short and long term secondments. In 2004 the Rt Hon The Lord Butler of Brockwell reported that its size was “some 30 senior and middle-ranking officials”; it is currently larger than that but, given the nature of the work that they do, I am unable, for security reasons, to give further detail. There are about 200 people in the National Security Secretariat, similarly drawn from a range of Departments and employed on a range of terms and conditions. Again, for security reasons, I am unable to give details on the previous employment of staff in either organisation, but both draw on external experts in their business.

  • Rushanara Ali – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Rushanara Ali – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Rushanara Ali on 2016-06-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, with reference to the Answer of 12 May 2016 to Question 36790, what plans his Department has to review progress under its voluntary agreement with the National Housing Federation and housing associations on replacing homes sold under right-to-buy with new affordable homes.

    Brandon Lewis

    The Government is working with the National Housing Federation and housing associations on the detailed design of the scheme, including data collection necessary for reviewing progress.

  • Roger Godsiff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Roger Godsiff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, in which countries UK citizens are not able to transfer pension rights accrued in that country upon return to the UK.

    Richard Harrington

    We do not keep information on other nations’ transfer policies. State pension rights accrued elsewhere cannot be transferred to the UK. There is no bar to private pension savings accrued elsewhere being transferred to the UK.

  • Diana Johnson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Diana Johnson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Diana Johnson on 2016-10-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether her Department plans to implement the recommendations of the Review of the National Referral Mechanism (NRM) for victims of human trafficking, published in November 2014, on (a) requiring providers of housing of people going through the NRM to an audit process, (b) ensuring closer working between her Department, housing providers and local councils and (c) gathering data on the outcomes of people going through the NRM for two years after a conclusive grounds decision.

    Sarah Newton

    We are committed to doing all we can to identify and support UK-based victims of modern slavery. Following a review of the NRM, and in consultation with law enforcement and NGOs, we are piloting ways of improving the efficacy and efficiency of existing arrangements in two regions. The pilot will be evaluated and the findings will inform any reforms that we decide to roll out. Putting the NRM on a statutory footing would require secondary legislation and we will consider whether there is a need do so at the end of the pilot.

  • Kelvin Hopkins – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Kelvin Hopkins – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kelvin Hopkins on 2015-11-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what procedures her Department has in place to ensure that researchers assessing the expected severity level of animal experiments when applying for project licences do so objectively and thoroughly.

    Mike Penning

    The Home Office has published detailed guidance (see: Guidance on the Operation of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986), which describes how severity categories are to be defined. Each protocol set out in a project licence application is assigned a severity category, which is assessed in by the applicant usually in collaboration with the establishment’s Named Animal Care and Welfare Officer, the Named Veterinary Surgeon and the Animal Welfare and Ethical Review Body. It is then submitted to the Home Office for assessment by the Home Office Inspectorate who will make a recommendation to the Secretary of State. In addition, where special species or projects with major animal welfare or ethical implications or any applications raising novel or contentious issues, the application will be provided to the Animals in Science Committee (ASC) for advice to the Secretary of State. Under section 5 of the Act, the Secretary of State considers advice from Inspectors and from the ASC, and classifies the likely severity of each of the regulated procedures specified in the licence.

  • Rebecca Long Bailey – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Rebecca Long Bailey – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Rebecca Long Bailey on 2015-12-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, with reference to paragraph 1.125 of the Spending Review and Autumn Statement 2015, what estimate he has made of the number of single claimants under 35 without dependent children living in social housing who are receiving more than the local housing allowance in housing benefit in (a) total and (b) each local authority.

    Justin Tomlinson

    We estimate that there are approximately 80,000 single claimants under 35 without dependent children living in the social sector who currently receive more than the relevant local housing allowance rate. However, not all claimants in this category will be affected by the announced policy as it will only apply from April 2018, where a new tenancy is taken out or a tenancy is renewed after April 2016.

    Tenants who take on a new tenancy or renew a tenancy will have the opportunity to consider whether they can afford to take on the property before committing to it. As such it is not possible to accurately estimate the proportion of single people without children that will be affected by this policy in 2018.

    As the overall estimate is based on survey data, it is not possible to provide an estimate by Local Authority due to sample size issues.

  • Chris Stephens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Chris Stephens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chris Stephens on 2016-01-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what impact assessment his Department has carried out on the effects of reductions in universal credit work allowance on workers under the age of 25.

    Priti Patel

    The impact of the work allowance change cannot be considered in isolation – it is part of a broader package of measures announced at the Summer Budget, such as the increase to the personal tax allowance and introduction of the national living wage, which strengthens incentives to find work and better paid jobs.

  • Lord Berkeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Lord Berkeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Berkeley on 2016-02-01.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what (1) proportion, and (2) volume, of excavated spoil from each of the Thames Tideway Tunnel construction sites will be transported from them by river.

    Lord Gardiner of Kimble

    The Development Consent Order for the Thames Tideway Tunnel (TTT) requires 100% of the specified materials to be transported by river for construction sites on the Thames foreshore, unless an approved derogation is in place. Derogations could include periods when it is not possible to use river transport due to factors such as river closures, incidents, weather and supply chain failures, and for material not suitable for river transport such as contaminated material that needs specialist disposal or material that is too wet for safe transit without specialist vessels.

    The commitment to transportation by river from the construction sites was secured through the River Transport Strategy, which was included in Thames Water’s application for Development Consent for the Tunnel, although it only applies to specific material listed in the Strategy (including excavated material from the main tunnel at main tunnel drive sites and material excavated from the shafts at foreshore sites).

    Bazalgette Tunnel Limited (operating as Tideway), the company appointed to design, finance, build and operate the TTT, has estimated the proportion and volume of excavated spoil that will be transported by river from each of the TTT construction foreshore sites (see Table 1 below). The percentages shown for each site demonstrate the anticipated effect of derogations on the amounts of excavated spoil they will be able to transport by river.

    However, Tideway and appointed mains works contractors have made commitments to maximise their use of river transport and are therefore working on opportunities to increase the extent of river transport further in liaison with the Local Authorities, Greater London Authority, Port of London Authority and Transport for London.

    Table 1 – Excavated specified material percentage and volume by river transport

    SITE

    % of all excavated specified material transported by river

    Volume to be transported by river (m3)

    Putney Bridge Foreshore

    90%

    14,000

    Carnwath Road Riverside

    90%

    353,400

    Cremorne Wharf Depot

    90%

    9,000

    Chelsea Embankment

    90%

    44,400

    Kirtling Street

    81%

    693,600 *

    Heathwall Pumping Station

    82%

    16,300**

    Albert Embankment

    90%

    56,300

    Victoria Embankment

    90%

    27,900

    Blackfriars Bridge

    90%

    72,100

    Chambers Wharf

    90%

    416,100

    King Edward Memorial Park

    90%

    57,500

    *excludes shaft and excavated material from ‘other’ minor structures, due to restricted river frontage

    **excludes ‘excavated material from ‘other’ minor structures’, due to site constraints