The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chris Stephens on 2016-03-24.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, when he plans to Answer Question 26990, tabled on 11 February 2016 by the hon. Member for Glasgow South West.
Nick Boles
I apologise to the hon Member for the delay. I will reply as soon as possible.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Rosindell on 2016-05-04.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what provisions are in place to ensure that the jurisdiction of Investor State Dispute Settlement tribunal hearings remains restricted to its current mandate under the terms of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.
Anna Soubry
Investment protection provisions in trade and investment treaties such as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) aim to protect international investors from discriminatory or unfair treatment by a state. Their investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) provisions allow international investors to bring claims if they think the obligations set out in the treaty have been breached by the host state. As such, Governments cannot initiate claims against investors. Under the European Commission’s proposals for TTIP, in line with normal investment treaty practice, UK investors would be able to bring ISDS claims against the US Government.
The jurisdiction of any ISDS tribunal established in TTIP will be set out in the investment protection and ISDS provisions of the agreement. The aim of the European Commission’s proposals for investment protection provisions in TTIP is to clearly define the scope for ISDS claims and tribunal jurisdiction, including protecting the right of governments to regulate lawfully in the public interest. If an ISDS tribunal did exceed its jurisdiction in making an award, typically those elements of the resulting award would not be enforceable.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Clive Lewis on 2016-06-08.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what resources his Department has allocated to the Regulatory Delivery Directorate for enforcement of part G of the Building Regulations 2010 in domestic properties.
Anna Soubry
My Department has no direct responsibility for Building Regulations Part G as this falls to the Department for Communities and Local Government and is enforced through local authorities who have a general duty to enforce Building Regulations in their area.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Michael Fabricant on 2016-09-06.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what progress his Department has made on delivering the UK’s contribution to NATO’s enhanced forward presence in eastern Europe; and if he will make a statement.
Michael Fallon
The UK will be the Framework Nation for NATO’s enhanced Forward Presence in Estonia. Detailed planning is now underway with NATO and our Estonian hosts, and with the Governments of France and Denmark, who have indicated that they will deploy forces alongside us.
As agreed at the Warsaw Summit, our enhance Forward Presence forces will deploy in Spring 2017.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Lexden on 2016-10-21.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their estimate of the total amount of land that has been disposed of by schools which have sold their playing fields since 2010.
Lord Nash
Local authorities and schools must by law seek consent from the Secretary of State to dispose of playing field land. The department has a strong policy presumption against the disposal of school playing fields and only provides consent to dispose of playing field land if the criteria set out in the departmental guidance are met; which includes an expectation that proceeds from sales are reinvested in sports and education facilities. The department publishes a list of department decisions on applications for consent to dispose of school playing field land.
It would neither be practical or desirable to artificially curb the sale of school playing fields, when such disposals may represent the most effective use of public assets. Often changes are made to education provision, such as school closures or mergers, which mean it is no longer necessary to retain playing fields for school use. In such cases it is only right that local communities are able to benefit from space that otherwise would not be used. Converting surplus or unwanted assets to invest in school grounds has benefits that extend far beyond the school gates. No operating school has disposed of its entire playing field.
It is therefore right that schools should continue to determine what is suitable for their individual circumstances; subject to strong statutory protections including the Secretary of State’s consent and the application of rigorous criteria for what is best for pupils’ education and wider school and community life.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gordon Marsden on 2015-11-09.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what assessment he has made of the likely impact of proposed changes to student loan repayment thresholds on repayment regimes for students who take out 24+ Advanced Learner Loan and who study for a Level 3 qualification who then study for and complete an HE qualification.
Nick Boles
The impact of freezing the threshold for students who take out 24+ Advanced Learning Loans to study Level 3 qualification who then complete an HE qualification will be similar to the impact for all HE borrowers.
Estimates of the impact of freezing the repayment thresholds for HE borrowers are illustrated in the consultation document, which has been published here:
https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/freezing-the-student-loan-repayment-threshold
“
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Rosindell on 2015-12-02.
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what recent steps the Government has taken to resolve the migration situation at Calais.
Mrs Theresa May
The UK Government recognises the exceptional pressures on the French Government and its citizens caused by the migrant situation in the Calais region.
In particular, the French police face a difficult challenge in dealing with the increasingly violent migrants, who are damaging property and vehicles and attacking officers around the juxtaposed ports in their attempts to reach the UK illegally.
The UK welcomes the continued efforts by the French Government to address the situation, in particular the significant commitment of additional French police officers deployed in Calais.
We also welcome the progress made by the French to move migrants away from Calais to suitable facilities in alternative sites in France, and to increase the number of migrants claiming asylum in the country.
These French efforts, combined with the additional British personnel at the ports, the priority fencing and enhancements to security infrastructure, and the work to tackle organised crime that our two countries have progressed jointly over recent months, sends a clear message: we will continue to work together to keep our borders secure; migrants should not head to Calais, and those in Calais intending to seek asylum should do so in France.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Shannon on 2016-01-13.
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps her Department is taking to reduce the hate mail and verbal attacks on people who are overweight.
Karen Bradley
Weight is not a protected characteristic under discrimination or hate crime legislation. However, there are protections in place for all citizens against hatred and verbal abuse.
The Government is absolutely clear that abusive and threatening behaviour – in whatever form and whoever the target – is totally unacceptable. This includes harassment committed in person, or using phones or the internet. The Protection from Harassment Act 1997 has provisions for prosecution where harassment has taken place on two or more occasions. Harassment involves improper, oppressive and unreasonable conduct that is targeted at an individual and calculated to alarm them or cause them distress.
The Malicious Communications Act 1988 prohibits sending letters or emails which are grossly offensive, threatening or known or believed to be false by the sender, within England and Wales.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-02-05.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what criteria his Department uses to determine whether public health issues require a national strategy to tackle them.
Jane Ellison
We take account of a wide range of factors in determining the best approach to different public health issues. This includes consideration of the available evidence on the nature of the need or problem. The Department may take expert advice from Public Health England and other sources on these issues.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Douglas Chapman on 2016-03-02.
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, whether his Department has made an assessment of the Russian government’s position on the UK leaving the EU.
Mr David Lidington
A strong, unified European Union has a critical role to play in responding to Russian aggression in Ukraine, which has challenged stability and security on the continent. The UK has played a leading role in pressing for tough EU sanctions, delivering a cost to Russia for its actions and supporting the full implementation of the Minsk agreements. It is likely that Russia would seek to exploit the UK leaving the EU in order to sow disunity amongst Member States and weaken their resolve. This reinforces the Government’s view that the UK will be stronger, safer and better off remaining in a reformed EU.