Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Baroness Young of Hornsey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Baroness Young of Hornsey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Young of Hornsey on 2016-06-13.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the financial implications of changing taxation requirements to replace permanent branding on corporate uniforms with non-permanent branding.

    Lord O’Neill of Gatley

    There is an income tax deduction available where an employer provides corporate uniforms, or where an employee must purchase such clothing. To be considered a uniform clothing must meet certain criteria. The clothing must be: specialised, recognisable as a uniform and intended to identify its wearer as having a particular occupation. These requirements ensure that the tax deduction is used as intended.

    No assessment has been made of how many corporate uniforms in the UK could be diverted from landfill or incineration if these tax rules were changed. No assessment has been made of the financial implications of changing these taxation requirements.

  • Steve McCabe – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Steve McCabe – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steve McCabe on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what recent steps his Department has taken to encourage local authorities to consider minor and major planning applications with equal priority.

    Gavin Barwell

    Every planning application should be determined in a timely and efficient manner, irrespective of the scale of the proposed development. We took powers in the Housing and Planning Act 2016 to enable us to extend to non-major planning applications the successful performance regime for major applications that has been running, which has seen the proportion of major applications determined on time rising from 57 per cent in July to September 2012, the quarter in which the performance regime was first announced, to 82 per cent in the most recent quarter. We have also announced our intention to tighten the Planning Guarantee for minor applications, with the applicant being eligible for a refund of their fee after 13 weeks instead of the current 26 weeks.

  • Kevan Jones – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Kevan Jones – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevan Jones on 2016-10-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many Defence Equipment and Support employees are over the age of 45.

    Harriett Baldwin

    Defence Equipment and Support currently employs 5,497 civilian staff and 604 military personnel over the age of 45.

  • Stephen Timms – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Stephen Timms – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Timms on 2015-11-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what programmes being taken forward by his Department are subject to Project Assessment Reviews instead of Gateway Reviews.

    Justin Tomlinson

    DWP Projects on the Government Major Project Portfolio (GMPP) follow the procedures outlined in the ‘HM Treasury and Cabinet Office, Major Project Approval and Assurance guidance’ introduced from April 2011. All DWP GMPP projects can therefore potentially have both Project Assessment Reviews and Gateway Reviews during their delivery lifecycle.

  • Luciana Berger – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Luciana Berger – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Luciana Berger on 2015-12-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what discussions he has had with mental health charities on the sections of the Editors’ Code of Practice that cover reporting on mental health and suicide.

    Alistair Burt

    I meet regularly with a number of mental health charities to discuss a range of issues, including suicide prevention.

    Departmental officials work closely with the Samaritans on suicide prevention and support the excellent work they do on advising the media on adhering to the Ofcom Broadcasting Code and the Independent Press Standards Organisation’s Code of Practice. The Samaritans also publishes guidance to the media on its website on the sensitive reporting of suicide.

  • Lord Stoddart of Swindon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Lord Stoddart of Swindon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Stoddart of Swindon on 2016-01-19.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their assessment of the European Parliament’s report that 50 per cent of the EU £23 billion aid budget has been delayed or not used, and whether they plan to take steps to terminate the policy of delivering part of the UK overseas aid budget through the EU.

    Baroness Verma

    The report concerned was compiled by an individual Member of the European Parliament and was not an analysis representing the views of the European Parliament as a whole. It was based on a reading of reports by EU offices in non-EU countries, intended to identify potential problems at an early stage, so that things can be put right in time. In the event that it is proven that money has been wasted, we expect the EU and its audit institutions to take swift and decisive action to recoup funds and to carry out a thorough review of all its programmes to provide a clear set of actions to stop this happening again.

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

    Paul Blomfield – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Paul Blomfield on 2016-02-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what information his Department holds on the estimated difference in cost between locating the Sheffield High Speed 2 station in the city centre and locating it in Meadowhall.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    Analysis of the Sheffield City Region station options was published in the ‘Engineering options report; West Midlands to Leeds’ dated March 2012. This included analysis of several station sites around the city centre.

    The current estimated difference in cost between locating a High Speed station at Victoria and Meadowhall is £680m. Previous work on the cost of options at Victoria and other city centre sites are not comparable to the current estimate given above. With regards to the Meadowhall station, following the 2013 public consultation, no significant changes have been made to the original station design therefore there have not been any changes in cost.

    When recommending a station location HS2 Ltd. uses a number of criteria, including;

    1. engineering and construction feasibility;
    2. sustainability;
    3. demand considerations, including journey times;
    4. cost; and
    5. wider impacts

    Potential options were sifted by HS2 Ltd. according to these criteria. To support and challenge this approach, external stakeholders and advisors from the Department’s Project Representative Team were involved in reviewing the process and outcomes where appropriate. Further information about the appraisal process can be found in the 2012 ‘Options for phase two of the high speed rail network’ report and 2013 ‘Appraisal of Sustainability’ report. Both of these documents are available on the government website.

    Analysis undertaken by HS2 shows that the introduction of the Sheffield Meadowhall HS2 station could support up to 5,400 jobs and up to 300 residential units, while a HS2 station at Victoria could support an estimated 9,000 jobs and 900 housing units.

    Finally, I can confirm that Department for Transport officials have received a copy of Sheffield City Region’s study into connectivity for a city centre High Speed 2 station at Victoria which Network Rail was involved in.

  • Ian C. Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Ian C. Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian C. Lucas on 2016-03-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, whether his Department plans to close the driving test centre in Wrexham.

    Andrew Jones

    The Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA) has no plans to close the driving test centre at Birchall House, Wrexham Technology Park, Wrexham that provides car practical tests. The DVSA currently provides LGV vocational testing at our site at Llay Road, Wrexham. The DVSA is looking to move testing from this site. The site will not be closed until a suitable alternative for the delivery of LGV vocational testing in the Wrexham area has been secured.

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

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

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Tebbit on 2016-03-23.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the levels of pollution in (1) drinking water, (2) river water, and (3) coastal waters, caused by chemicals used in medications which are resistant to present purification techniques

    Lord Gardiner of Kimble

    The Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI) published research in 2012 to assess the levels of pollution caused by a range of pharmaceuticals and illicit drugs found in source waters, such as rivers, abstracted for drinking water and the comparative levels after water treatment. Over a year, substances were measured at four sites. Results agreed with similar studies and concentrations in English surface waters are generally low and below 1 microgramme per litre (1 μg/L). Levels of pharmaceuticals and drugs in drinking waters after treatment were generally significantly lower than those found in surface waters. This indicates that the drinking water treatment systems used in England and Wales are effective at removing these contaminants. The study concluded that the presence of low levels of pharmaceuticals and illicit drugs in drinking waters in England and Wales do not pose an appreciable risk to human health.

    There is evidence that widely used pharmaceuticals are detected at low concentrations in sewage effluent and receiving surface waters. Due to a lack of good quality toxicity data for many of these substances to assess reliably risks to aquatic wildlife that may be exposed to them, research is underway in the UK, at European level and by the pharmaceutical industry to characterise the risks better. This includes a Chemical Investigations Programme, undertaken by England’s water companies, where significant investment is being made to investigate around 20 substances from 2015-2017. Reported data will improve our understanding of the contamination of surface waters due to these chemicals and information will contribute to assessment of the risk posed to, or via the aquatic environment.

    In addition, the UK is participating in a European monitoring network of surface water sites on a ‘watch list’ of contaminants and pharmaceuticals, including the active ingredient of the contraceptive pill, EE2. The Devolved Administrations are doing something similar. Data will inform the Commission’s selection of future priority substances requiring control, and the chemical status of the EU’s surface waters with respect to these chemicals.

  • Karl McCartney – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Karl McCartney – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Karl McCartney on 2016-04-28.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he will make it his policy to exempt telematics car insurance policies from insurance premium tax or reduce that tax for those policies.

    Harriett Baldwin

    Insurance Premium Tax is a tax on insurance companies and it is up to them how they choose to pass it on to their customers.