UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-01-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, pursuant to the Answer of 19 January 2016 to Question 22689, when his Department plans to report to Parliament its detailed plans for the sale of the Green Investment Bank.

    Anna Soubry

    The Government has introduced provisions to the Enterprise Bill which require a report to be laid before Parliament once a decision to undertake a sale has been made. The report must set out the type of sale, the expected timescale, and the Government’s objectives for the sale.

  • Alex Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Alex Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Alex Cunningham on 2016-02-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, if his Department will review planning permissions granted to developments that are yet to be started on floodplains that have been affected by recent flooding.

    Brandon Lewis

    It is primarily the responsibility of local planning authorities to determine applications for planning permission. The National Planning Policy Framework is clear that local planning authorities should avoid inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding by directing development away from areas at highest risk, including floodplains. If there are better sites in terms of flood risk, or a proposed development cannot be made safe, it should not be permitted. Any new buildings that are permitted in flood risk areas should be appropriately flood resistant and resilient.

    Local planning authorities and developers are best-placed to understand the details of the development proposed and the local circumstances and risks to determine if a review is needed. It is in the interest of both the local planning authority and the developer to review a planning permission that has yet to be implemented in an area affected by the recent flooding. This can lead to an entirely new planning application being submitted by the developer to deal with the flooding issues now known. If adjustments can be made to the development, an application to make a non-material amendment under section 96A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 may follow. This would allow the local planning authority to impose new conditions and remove or vary conditions attached to an existing planning permission, and may include a requirement to submit an updated flood risk assessment.

    If needed, local planning authorities also have powers under section 97 of the 1990 Act to make an order revoking or modifying a planning permission, prior to completion of the development.

  • Barry Sheerman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Barry Sheerman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Barry Sheerman on 2016-03-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what transitional arrangements her Department has made for learners currently on the Youth Contract which is set to come to an end in March 2016.

    Nick Boles

    Recruitment of new participants to the Youth Contract programme for 16 and 17 year olds closed on 31 March 2015, with the programme ending on 31 March 2016.

    In exceptional circumstances, where young people have not achieved this outcome before the programme closes, Youth Contract providers will direct them to other re-engagement provision or to their home local authority for appropriate support.

    Overall responsibility for supporting and encouraging young people, including the most vulnerable, rests with local authorities.

  • Stephen Timms – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Stephen Timms – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Timms on 2016-04-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the cost to the public purse has been of removing to India by sea those people who have been refused leave to remain in each of the last five years.

    James Brokenshire

    The mode of transport for persons for persons subject to enforced removal from the UK is not published within official national migration statistics. To establish this figure over a 5 year period would require a manual examination of records within the Home Office Case Information Database (CID) which could only be done at disproportionate cost.

  • Louise Haigh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Louise Haigh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Louise Haigh on 2016-06-06.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how much was spent on non-payroll staff in his Department in 2015-16.

    Matthew Hancock

    The published Cabinet Office Annual Report and Accounts (ARA) contains both the proportion of staff in the Cabinet Office that are (a) payroll and (b) non-payroll staff and the associated spend. The ARA for each financial year from 2010-11 to 2014-15 are available on gov.uk.

    The 2015-16 will be published in due course.

  • Frank Field – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Frank Field – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Frank Field on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many border staff were employed exclusively on checking the immigration status of beggars in (a) Westminster and (b) the UK; and how many of those checked were (i) illegal immigrants, (ii) committing criminal acts and (iii) deported in each of the last six months for which figures are available.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    This information is not held on Home Office systems.

  • Seema Malhotra – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Seema Malhotra – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Seema Malhotra on 2016-10-11.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what his plans are for the UK’s future relationship with the European Investment Bank.

    Mr David Gauke

    While the UK remains a full member of the European Union it retains all of the rights, obligations and benefits that membership brings. The long-term relationship between the UK and the EIB will need to be resolved as part of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU.

    The Chancellor of the Exchequer is the UK Governor of the European Investment Bank and continues to fulfil his governance duties. The Chancellor continues to meet his European counterparts on a regular basis to discuss a range of issues.

    The EIB publish all loans made to UK borrowers as well as details on all future projects yet to be financed. Between 2013 and 2015, the UK received €20.7bn in EIB financing. The link below provides full details on EIB lending to the UK.

    http://www.eib.org/projects/regions/european-union/united-kingdom/index.htm

  • Andrew Smith – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Andrew Smith – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Smith on 2015-11-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many decisions on further submissions related to asylum claims that are outstanding have been waiting for longer than (a) one year, (b) two years and (c) three years for a decision.

    James Brokenshire

    There is not a formal service standard for deciding further submissions from failed asylum seekers. The Home Office is balancing resource between those failed asylum seekers with no leave to remain who have made further submissions on the one hand and, on the other, those who were granted a limited period of leave following the refusal of their application who have outstanding applications for Further Leave.

    With regard to further submissions lodged by failed asylum seekers, there is dedicated resource in place to decide cases in the existing stock of further submissions and to also decide new submissions quickly, wherever possible within 5 days of their being lodged. With regard to cases in the stock of further submissions, the Home Office is prioritising cases where applicants are in receipt of asylum support and cases where the applicant may be removed from the United Kingdom in the eventuality their submission is refused. The Home Office will also give priority to further submissions case that have been outstanding for the longest period of time.

    The figures in the below table relate to failed asylum seekers who had outstanding further submissions as of 30 June 2015:

    Timescale (Years) Total

    1 – 2 2383

    2 – 3 1426

    3 or more 1267

    Total 5076

  • Lord Kennedy of Southwark – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lord Kennedy of Southwark – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Kennedy of Southwark on 2015-12-11.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government when they expect to make a final decision about airport expansion in the South East.

    Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

    On 10 December, the Government accepted the Airports Commission’s case for expansion in the South East. We agree with the Commission’s shortlist of three options, all of which it concluded were viable. The Government will now conclude a package of further work by the summer, and will ensure that the timetable for delivering additional capacity set out by the Commission does not alter.

  • Harriet Harman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Harriet Harman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Harriet Harman on 2016-01-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the (a) timing of the consultation on the proposed Bill of Rights and associated measures and (b) effect of the purdah of the Scottish Government and dissolution of the Scottish Parliament on that timing.

    Dominic Raab

    We are committed to consulting fully on our proposals prior to the introduction of any legislation and will announce further details in due course.

    We will adhere to any guidance published by the Cabinet Office in respect of the pre-election periods. We have and will continue to seek to work with the devolved administrations to deliver a modernised and reformed human rights framework for all of the United Kingdom.