Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Royston Smith – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Royston Smith – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Royston Smith on 2016-04-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what steps will be taken to ensure the safety of driverless cars.

    Andrew Jones

    We have developed ‘Pathway to Driverless Cars: a Code of Practice for testing’ to promote the safe and responsible testing of automated vehicle technology on UK roads. It clearly and simply sets out that testers must obey all relevant road traffic laws and that test vehicles must be roadworthy; a suitably trained driver or operator must be ready, able, and willing to take control if necessary; and appropriate insurance must be in place. Alongside this we are funding research and demonstration projects and working with international regulatory bodies to develop an appropriate framework for the safe sale and use of automated vehicle technology.

  • Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-05-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, with reference to the report of Ofsted on its inspection of Audenshaw School Academy Trust which took place on 23 and 24 February 2016, if she will make an assessment of the effect on the students for whom pupil premium funding was intended of that funding being saved for a capital project.

    Mr Sam Gyimah

    The conditions of grant for the pupil premium make clear that its purpose is to raise the attainment of disadvantaged pupils. School leaders are best placed to decide how to spend the pupil premium in line with this policy and the needs of their pupils. Schools are not prevented from using the pupil premium to fund capital projects or from carrying over funding between years.

    The Department for Education supports schools to make evidence-based decisions through the work of the Education Endowment Foundation, established to identify and promote effective practice in raising the attainment of disadvantaged pupils. The Department does not monitor how Academies and maintained schools spend the pupil premium but instead holds them to account for the outcomes of eligible pupils through the publication of data in performance tables and Ofsted inspection.

    Where concerns are raised about the performance of an academy then they are addressed by the Regional School Commissioner with responsibility for that area. The Department also takes seriously any concerns about the financial management of a school. We are aware of the findings of the Ofsted report on Audenshaw School relating to its use of the pupil premium, following an inspection in February 2016. We are also aware that the Hon. Member, Andrew Gwynne, has met the Regional Schools Commissioner for Lancashire and West Yorkshire, Vicky Beer, on a number of occasions to discuss his concerns about Audenshaw School Academy Trust. The Department has carefully reviewed all the information provided on this matter and has identified no grounds to take further action.

  • Cheryl Gillan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Cheryl Gillan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Cheryl Gillan on 2016-07-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, how many children and young people who are either educated at home or not in employment, education or training are recorded within the statistics and analysis on statements of special educational needs and education, health and care plans in England published on 26 May 2016; and under which categories such children and young people are recorded.

    Edward Timpson

    The number of children and young people with a statement or education, health and care (EHC) plan who are educated at home is not specifically collected in the ‘Statements and EHC plans England: 2016’ publication[1]. However, as these children and young people will be included in the total number of children and young people with statements and EHC plans, local authorities are likely to have included these children and young people in the ‘other arrangements made by the local authority’ or ‘other arrangements made by the parent’ category.

    The number of children and young people with statements or EHC plans who are not in employment, education or training (NEET) is not specifically collected in this statistical first release. Where young people have a statement or EHC plan and are NEET, they will be included in one of the other categories, e.g. ‘other arrangements made by local authority’ or ‘awaiting provision’.

    There is not an exhaustive list of arrangements included in the category of ‘Other – arrangements made by the local authority in accordance with Section 319 of the Education Act 1996 or Section 61 of the Children and Families Act 2014’. The published SEN 2016 guide for local authorities[2] completing this part of the collection is as follows:

    ‘Section 319 of the Education Act 1996 empowers an authority to provide education for children with special educational needs “other than in school”. This may include education in centres run by social services or at home. Children would not normally be on another school register.

    ‘Section 61 of the Children and Families Act 2014 empowers an authority to provide education for children and young people with special educational needs “other than in school, post-16 institutions, etc”. This may include education in centres run by social services or where the local authority has named home education on an EHC plan.’

    [1] https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/statements-of-sen-and-ehc-plans-england-2016

    [2] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/special-educational-needs-survey-2016-guide

    “

  • Tom Blenkinsop – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Tom Blenkinsop – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tom Blenkinsop on 2016-09-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to the Answer of 7 September 2016 to Question 44365, what assessment the Health and Safety Executive has made on the effect of long shift patterns on the incidence of (a) errors, (b) accidents and (c) injuries in (i) all sectors of the workforce and (ii) the mining industry.

    Penny Mordaunt

    The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) does not hold this information. However, HSE recognises that poorly designed shift-working arrangements and long working hours can result in fatigue, accidents, injuries and ill health and has produced guidance for employers on designing and implementing shift-working arrangements:

    (http://www.hse.gov.uk/humanfactors/topics/fatigue.htm).

    “

  • Stephen Timms – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Stephen Timms – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Timms on 2015-11-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many convictions there have been relating to forced marriage under the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014.

    Karen Bradley

    We made forced marriage a criminal offence last year to better protect victims and send a clear message that this abhorrent practice is totally unacceptable and will not be tolerated in the UK.

    Data on convictions is not collated centrally. However, the first successful prosecution under the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 was secured in June 2015, and the Crown Prosecution Service’s (CPS) most recent violence against women and girls report shows that the volume of forced marriage prosecutions completed in 2014-15 rose to 46 from 45 in 2013-14, the highest volume ever. 63% of those prosecutions were successful.

    In addition, to date, over 800 civil Forced Marriage Protection Orders have been made to prevent people from being forced into a marriage and to assist in repatriating victims.

  • Rehman Chishti – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Rehman Chishti – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Rehman Chishti on 2015-11-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what the Government is doing to assist small businesses to recover debts.

    Anna Soubry

    Late payment remains an important issue for small businesses in the UK. The Government is taking significant steps to assist small businesses to recover late payment debts.

    Through the Enterprise Bill, currently before Parliament, we will legislate to establish a Small Business Commissioner to help small business resolve disputes with large companies, tackling, in particular, late payment. The Commissioner will act as a disincentive to unfavourable payment practices, and build the confidence and capabilities of small businesses to help them to assert themselves in contractual disputes and negotiate more effectively with larger businesses.

    This is part of a package of measures to tackle late payment. We have also legislated for new transparency measures in the public and private sectors. This will allow full public scrutiny of payment performance.

    We have also strengthened the Prompt Payment Code to ensure it is a recognised and demonstrated beacon of best practice, and we recently consulted on proposals to give representative bodies wider powers to challenge grossly unfair payment practices.

    Tackling late payment is about creating a responsible payment culture where larger companies recognise the benefit of having a sustainable and robust supply chain, and smaller businesses feel able to challenge poor behaviour. Once implemented, the Government is confident that these measures will lead to significant changes in the UK’s payment culture.

  • Fiona Bruce – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Fiona Bruce – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Fiona Bruce on 2016-01-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether her Department plans to consult faith groups on the criteria and processes for decisions that will be made on whether expressions of belief are considered extreme for the purposes of its counter-extremism strategy and policies resulting from that strategy.

    Karen Bradley

    The Government definition of extremism is ‘vocal or active opposition to our fundamental values, including democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and the mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs.’ We have been consistent on this since 2011 and have reaffirmed this definition in the Counter-Extremism Strategy.

    Vocal or active opposition to our fundamental values, in particular mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs within the Counter-Extremism Strategy definition of extremism is consistent with the incitement provisions within the Public Order Act 1986, in particular Part 3 aimed at those who stir up racial or religious hatred.

    We are clear that Government should not restrict anyone’s freedom of speech or right to practise a faith. These are core values. But we shouldn’t allow the extremist voice to go unchallenged, causing harm to our society and promoting hatred and division.

    Government has engaged widely on the Counter-Extremism Strategy, and continues to engage with partners – including faith groups and communities on the implementation of the Strategy’s measures.

  • Gregory Campbell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Gregory Campbell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gregory Campbell on 2016-01-28.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, within what timescale she expects the Common Fisheries Policy objectives to be met.

    George Eustice

    On the Common Fisheries Policy’s principal objectives with deadlines, the UK is committed to implementing the landing obligation on all quota species by 2019, and to be fishing all stocks at Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) by 2020 at the latest.

  • Kate Hoey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Kate Hoey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kate Hoey on 2016-02-23.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, how many and what proportion of members in Northern Ireland of each trade union opted to pay the political levy; and which of those trade unions’ headquarters are in (a) Great Britain and (b) Northern Ireland.

    Nick Boles

    The latest Annual Report of the Certification Officer shows that 4,954,606 union members in Great Britain paid the political levy in the period 2013-2014. This represents 70.67% of the total number of individuals who were union members in the same period.[1]

    Employment law is a devolved matter in Northern Ireland and I am not able to respond to the questions relating to Northern Ireland.

    [1] Political Funds of Trade Unions, 2013-2014, Annual Report 2015/2016 of the Certification Officer, page 68-69, available at https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/449387/CO_Annual_Report__2014-2015_.pdf

    “

  • Royston Smith – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Royston Smith – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Royston Smith on 2016-03-23.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, whether his Department has made an assessment of the potential for driverless cars to reduce motorway collisions.

    Andrew Jones

    The Department for Transport has not yet made an assessment of the potential for connected and autonomous vehicles to reduce motorway collisions. Research suggests that connected and autonomous vehicles will have a positive impact on safety – systems such as Advanced Emergency Braking are already acknowledged by some insurers to reduce collisions. However research in this area is limited by the extent of real world testing. The Government recognises the need to ensure that the implications of these technologies on safety are well-understood, and they can be introduced safely onto public roads. That is why the Department for Transport plans to conduct trials of driverless vehicles on the Strategic Road Network by the end of 2017, which will be delivered by Highways England. The Centre for Connected and Autonomous Vehicles also plans to do further research in this area, as part of a much wider programme of research and development that the Government is supporting to examine the issues associated with these technologies.