Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Gavin Robinson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Gavin Robinson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gavin Robinson on 2016-02-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what information his Department holds on whether there is a causal link between a mother suffering from post-natal depression and the number of children aged up to three years old taken into care.

    Alistair Burt

    Neither the Department of Health nor the Department for Education holds the information requested.

    The latest statistics on looked-after children at both national and local authority levels for the financial year 2013 to 2014 can be found at:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/children-looked-after-in-england-including-adoption–2

    Table A1 (National Tables) gives a breakdown of the primary reasons for children becoming looked after.

    “

  • Paul Monaghan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Paul Monaghan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Paul Monaghan on 2016-02-29.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, how many applications for consent have been refused by the Maritime and Coastguard Agency since 2010.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The Maritime and Coastguard Agency has not refused any applications for consent to date in relation to Oil Transfer Licences, and has refused 16 applications for consent, since 2010, in relation to Ship-to-Ship Transfers in the Southwold area.

  • Douglas Carswell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Douglas Carswell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Douglas Carswell on 2016-04-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what representations he has made to the World Trade Organisation to request that anti-dumping measures are taken against the People’s Republic of China.

    Anna Soubry

    The World Trade Organisation does not have a role in conducting anti-dumping investigations. Responsibility for anti-dumping investigations and imposing anti-dumping measures against imports into the EU and the UK lies with the European Commission. These investigations are driven by requests from EU producers.

    The Government makes regular representations to the Commission concerning allegations of dumping of steel. My Rt Hon Friend the Prime Minister pressed for more action on dumping of steel at European Council on 17 and 18 March. The government judges each anti-dumping case on its merits, based on the evidence presented by the Commission and on representations from interested parties, including producers, users and importers, but is strongly in favour of effective trade defences to tackle unfair trade practices where justified. We have voted in favour of anti-dumping measures on several steel products since July, including the imposition of provisional anti-dumping measures on reinforcing bar in January, an investigation for which we lobbied the Commission successfully, and on cold-rolled flat steel products in February.

    We have supported industry calls for higher duties on specific cases where this is justified by the evidence. For example, in the reinforcing bar case we have raised the steel industry’s concerns that the provisional duties were too low with the Commission. My Rt Hon Friend the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills spoke with Trade Commissioner Malmström about this and received assurances that the Commission will reconsider this during the definitive stage of the investigation, if industry can provide the necessary evidence.

    We also welcomed the opening of four new anti-dumping investigations involving steel products earlier this year.

    The Government continues to push the Commission for faster, more effective action to deal with dumping of steel. This was one of the conclusions of the Extraordinary Competitiveness Council on Steel in November, a meeting which my Rt Hon Friend the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills was instrumental in convening. In advance of the Commission’s energy-intensive industry stakeholder’s summit on 15 February – another key action from the Competitiveness Council – the government and several other EU Member States sent a joint letter to the Commission, pressing it to make full and timely use of all trade defence instruments to tackle unfair trade. I played an active role at this summit. My Rt Hon Friend the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills has also raised these issues in discussions with Commissioner Malmström, most recently at the OECD conference on the challenges facing the steel industry on 18 April. My noble Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Business, Innovation and Skills) (Intellectual Property) reiterated the need for faster and more effective action on dumping at the Competitiveness Council held on 29 February and the Presidency conclusions of that Council reflected this message. I did likewise at the European Steel Day on 21 April. Officials also have regular discussions about anti-dumping cases with Commission officials and officials from other EU Member States.

    The Government is also supporting a robust discussion of the issue of overcapacity through the EU’s ongoing dialogue with the Chinese and other governments, including at the OECD conference. My Rt Hon Friend the Prime Minister has discussed this issue directly with President Xi and was told that China will take steps to reduce its overcapacity. My Rt Hon Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer also raised it during his visit to China in February and my Rt Hon Friend the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills raised it with his counterpart in February. Similarly, my Rt Hon Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs raised it during his visit to China in April.

  • Mark Menzies – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Mark Menzies – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mark Menzies on 2016-06-03.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, for what reason the British Virgin Islands were not invited to the UK Anti-Corruption Summit on 12 May 2016.

    Matthew Hancock

    The Government invited leaders from those Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories that had agreed to the recent initiative on automatic exchange of beneficial ownership information.

  • Brendan O’Hara – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Brendan O’Hara – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Brendan O’Hara on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what the cost was of the operation (a) in August and September 2014 in which RAF Hercules dropped food and other humanitarian supplies to civilians trapped on Mount Sinjar, Iraq and (b) on 30 and 31 August 2014 in which two RAF Hercules dropped food and aid to the town of Amerli, near Kirkuk.

    Mike Penning

    The cost of the operation to deliver food and other humanitarian supplies to civilians trapped on Mt Sinjar and Amerli in Iraq was £3.50 million. £1.97 million of this was charged to Department for International Development on a marginal cost basis and £1.5 million was covered by Operation SHADER. The costs cannot be split between individual locations as both used common air assets that were deployed under Operation SHADER.

  • Ian Austin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Ian Austin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Austin on 2016-10-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps her Department is taking to increase public awareness of the Community Trigger for reviewing anti-social behaviour complaints.

    Sarah Newton

    The Home Office does not collect or hold information on anti-social behaviour case reviews undertaken by local agencies using the Community Trigger process. The Government issued statutory guidance for frontline professionals in July 2014 on the use of powers to tackle anti-social behaviour introduced by the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014.

    This included information on the Community Trigger, including setting an appropriate threshold, publishing the procedure to be followed when making an application, and relevant data relating to use of the Trigger. We are currently reviewing the statutory guidance and we will publish revised guidance in due course if changes are required.

  • Natalie McGarry – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Natalie McGarry – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Natalie McGarry on 2015-11-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many people in (a) the UK, (b) Scotland, (c) Glasgow and (d) Glasgow East constituency are in receipt of both the state pension and carer’s allowance in the 2015-16 financial year.

    Justin Tomlinson

    The information as requested for 2015/16 is not available.

    However information on the number of people in receipt of both the State Pension and Carer’s Allowance is published by the Department on a quarterly basis. The latest data available is February 2015 which can be found at:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/dwp-statistics-tabulation-tool

    Information for Northern Ireland is the responsibility of the Department for Social Development. Northern Ireland statistics can be found at:

    http://www.dsdni.gov.uk/index/stats_and_research/benefit_publications.htm

    “

  • Lord Rana – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Lord Rana – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Rana on 2015-12-02.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how they plan to spend the £1 billion pledged for post-war reconstruction in Syria.

    Baroness Verma

    The UK has been at the forefront of the international response to the humanitarian crisis in Syria. We have committed over £1.1 billion to date, making us the second largest bilateral donor to the international response.

    We have planned for the endgame since the beginning of the conflict and during the Geneva process. We are now updating our planning to reflect the timeline envisaged in the Vienna process and are asking others to do the same. The initial priorities for Syria post-conflict will be protection, security, stabilisation and confidence building measures, including meeting basic needs and helping displaced people to return. Over time the focus will shift to longer-term re-building of Syria’s shattered infrastructure, harnessing the expertise of the UN, International Financial Institutions and the private sector. On 26 November, the Prime Minister announced at least £1 billion for Syria’s reconstruction. We anticipate that we would allocate reconstruction funds against a plan agreed between a new, inclusive Syrian government and the international community, once the conflict has ended.

  • Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chi Onwurah on 2016-01-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, how many (a) homes and (b) businesses he expects to receive a rural satellite broadband voucher in the next 12 months.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    Up to 300,000 premises are currently eligible for support under the Universal Service Commitment.

  • Ian Austin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Ian Austin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Austin on 2016-02-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the potential effect on (a) overall levels of available compensation and (b) confidence in the NHS of fixed recoverable costs in clinical negligence cases for patients who are (i) over the age of 60 and (ii) female.

    Ben Gummer

    The Department has established a working group to look at the impact of the proposal on equalities, health inequalities and families. The consultation stage assessment for the introduction of fixed recoverable costs for clinical negligence is work in progress and we will seek views on the impact of the policy on equalities, health inequalities and families within the consultation. We can confirm that age and gender, along with the other protected characteristics named within the Equality Act 2010, will be considered. The policy is not seeking to reduce the amount of damages but to reduce the levels of recoverable legal costs and to make claimant legal costs more proportionate to damages and defence costs.