Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Jeremy Lefroy – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Jeremy Lefroy – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jeremy Lefroy on 2015-09-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, what the total renewable installed capacity was on 30 June 2015.

    Andrea Leadsom

    At the end of March 2015, total renewable electricity installed capacity in the UK was 26.4 GW. Figures as at end of June 2015 will be available on 24 September 2015.

    Source:

    Table 6.1, Energy Trends section 6: renewables, available at:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/energy-trends-section-6-renewables.

  • Philip Davies – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Philip Davies – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Philip Davies on 2015-09-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 26 June 2015 to Question 2761, if he will place in the Library a copy of the grant application received by his Department from Action on Smoking and Health.

    Jane Ellison

    The Department has received a request for grant funding from Action on Smoking and Health for the 2015-16 financial year. This proposal is currently under assessment and a decision on funding has not yet been made.

  • Greg Mulholland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Greg Mulholland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Greg Mulholland on 2015-09-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what proportion of asylum seeker applications made by Syrian nationals in each of the last five years received a decision in (a) three, (b) six and (c) 12 months.

    Mr John Hayes

    The tables below shows the proportion of asylum claims from Syrian nationals which received an initial decision within 3 months, 6 months and 12 months from 2010 to 2013. This data is based on main asylum claimants who made a claim for asylum from 1 October 2010 to 31 December 2014. We aim to decide all straightforward asylum claims within six months. We recognise that asylum cases are often complex and require our full and thorough consideration, meaning that some decisions will take longer than six months. Those cases that do take longer than six months are actively managed to ensure they are concluded as promptly as possible.

    Year Application made

    Time from Application to Date of Decision

    Decision made within 3 Months

    Within 6 Months

    Within 1 Year

    More than 1 Year

    No Decision made

    2010

    117

    5

    5

    1

    0

    Grand Total

    117

    5

    5

    1

    0

    2011

    273

    36

    20

    23

    0

    Grand Total

    273

    36

    20

    23

    0

    2012

    819

    77

    64

    21

    1

    Grand Total

    819

    77

    64

    21

    1

    2013

    1130

    157

    203

    97

    29

    Grand Total

    1130

    157

    203

    97

    29

    2014

    603

    1036

    177

    34

    143

    Grand Total

    603

    1036

    177

    34

    143

  • David Burrowes – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    David Burrowes – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Burrowes on 2015-09-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to her Department’s assessment of the risk of prosecution to Christians in Pakistan in its publication, Country Information and Guidance, Pakistan: Christians and Christian converts, published in February 2015, what assessment she has made of the implications for her policies of the finding of the report commissioned by the British Pakistan Christian Association, entitled Education, Human Rights Violations in Pakistan and the Scandal Involving UNHRC and Asylum Seekers in Thailand, published in February 2015.

    James Brokenshire

    The Home Office will be considering the report commissioned by the British Pakistani Christian Association alongside a range of other material to make a full assessment of the situation of Christians in Pakistan, and will revise its country information and guidance if necessary.

    The Home Office considers that the treatment of asylum seekers in Thailand is primarily a matter for the Thai authorities.

  • Kate Hollern – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Kate Hollern – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kate Hollern on 2015-09-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what progress he has made with the insurance industry on (a) identifying products that might be offered to drivers of mobility scooters and (b) how such products could be used to promote safety.

    Andrew Jones

    The Government is currently considering mobility scooters in the context of a European Court of Justice ruling about motor insurance known as “the Vnuk judgment”. The effect of this judgment is to broaden the circumstances in which third party insurance is required; and the range of vehicles subject to insurance requirements. We will need to amend our domestic legislation to comply with the judgment.

    In March 2015 we held a workshop to help us understand the particular issues that apply to mobility scooters and reach a decision on the position of these vehicles in the context of the Motor Insurance Directive.

    Officials are currently preparing an impact assessment which will consider, amongst other things, whether to impose compulsory insurance or derogate from insurance requirements, certain categories of vehicle. We will, of course, consult before making any changes to the legislation.

  • Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Hilary Benn on 2014-06-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what statistics his Department holds on the use of fixed penalty notices in each local authority area.

    Brandon Lewis

    The most recent official statistics (for 2009-10) show that 9 million parking fines were issued a year by local authorities in England. From 1997-98 to 2010-11, local authority total income from sales, fees and charges in England from parking rose from £608 million to £1.25 billion; net profits from parking rose from £223 million to £512 million in the same period. A survey by LV= car insurance last year estimated that councils hand out 10.7 million fines a year across the UK, and British motorists pay out over £30 million each month in parking fines.

    Councils in England were forecast to make £635 million net profit from parking charges fines in 2013-14. Yet legislation passed by Parliament is clear that parking charges and fines should not be used to raise general revenue. However, some councils are raising money illegally from parking.

    Last July, the High Court ruled that one London borough had illegally hiked parking charges to raise general revenue. The BBC television programme, Inside Out, also drew to my attention parking contracts signed by local authorities where outsourced parking wardens are rewarded for issuing more fines – in flagrant breach of the Government’s operational guidance to councils. The Local Government Association’s own participatory budgeting tool has also encouraged councils to raise parking charges and fines as a source of general revenue.

    Such practices are a breach of fundamental constitutional principles from Magna Carta, the Petition of Right and the Bill of Rights: taxes should not be levied without recourse to Parliament, and the justice system should not be corrupted to raise money.

    Higher parking charges and more parking fines were the explicit policy of the Labour Government. Labour DCLG Ministers called for councils to charge for more services, including parking, bemoaned that: ‘Only one in five councils are using charging to the full potential… [such as for] reducing congestion’ (Speech to the Local Government Association, 2 July 2008). Planning guidance issued by the Labour Government in 2001 (so-called PPG13) told councils to hike parking charges and adopt aggressive enforcement to discourage drivers.

    My Department holds information on councils’ income from penalty charge notices. In my answer of 12 March 2014, Official Report, Column 260W, I placed in the Library a table showing the amount of money raised in parking fines in each local authority in England over time, which illustrates the need to reverse Labour’s approach.

    Since 2010, this Government has already:

    · Scrapped Labour’s Whitehall policy that pressured councils to hike car parking charges as a ‘demand management measure’ to discourage car use (PPG13).

    · Removed Whitehall restrictions which restricted the provision of off-street parking spaces;

    · Abolished Labour’s Whitehall policy which inhibited parking charge competition between council areas, and instead introduced a new policy that says parking charges should not undermine the vitality of town centres;

    · Introduced a policy that parking enforcement should be proportionate;

    · Issued new planning practice guidance on removing street clutter and encouraging the provision of shopper-friendly parking space provision; and

    · Introduced the local retention of business rates, which means that councils benefit from business and retail growth in town centres, rather than just hiking parking charges.

    In addition, the Government recently announced a further series of reforms:

    · Stopping the abuse or misuse of on-street parking CCTV on an industrial scale. Parking CCTV spy cars were introduced by the last Labour Government.

    · Reforming operational parking guidance so it is less heavy handed with motorists, prevents over-aggressive action by bailiffs, positively supports local shops and clearly reinforces the prohibition against parking being used to generate profit;

    · Introducing mandatory 10 minute “grace periods” at the end of on-street paid and free parking, and off-street municipal parking;

    · Implementing a new right to allow local residents and local firms to demand a review of parking in their area, including charges and the use of yellow lines;

    · Proposing a widening of the powers of parking adjudicators, and updating guidance so the public know when they can be awarded costs at tribunals;

    · Trialling a 25% discount for drivers at appeal stage, reversing the current disincentive for drivers with a legitimate case to appeal;

    · Changing guidance so drivers parking at an out-of-order meter are not fined if there are no alternative ways to pay;

    · Maintaining a freeze on parking penalty charges for the remainder of this Parliament; and

    · Updating the local government Transparency Code to increase information about local parking charges and the number of parking spaces.

    Unreasonable parking charges and fines push up hard-working people’s cost of living. If parking is too expensive or difficult, shoppers will simply drive to out of town supermarkets or just shop online, undermining the vitality of town centres and leading to ‘ghost town’ high streets. But, by rejecting Labour’s approach, this Government is standing up for hard-working people and local shops.

  • Angus Robertson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Angus Robertson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Angus Robertson on 2014-06-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, when the Shallow Water Influence Minesweeping System was purchased; on what vessels it operated from; whether it is still operational; and what the total cost of the system has been.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    The Shallow Water Influence Minesweeping System was purchased as an urgent operational requirement in financial year 2002-03 to be operated remotely from Mine Countermeasures Vessels in the Gulf for 12 months, at a cost of approximately £3.5 million. It has been non-operational since 2004.

  • Helen Jones – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Helen Jones – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Helen Jones on 2014-06-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, when he last discussed violence against women and girls with representatives of the Indian government; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr Hugo Swire

    We are committed to working with the Indian government and international partners to address the problems of gender-based violence, human trafficking and child exploitation and regularly discuss these issues with the Indian authorities. Our High Commissioner Sir James Bevan recently met India’s Minister for Women and Child Development, Maneka Gandhi on 17 June to discuss a range of issues, including gender-based violence and the UK’s plans to host the 2014 Girls Summit aimed at tackling female genital mutilation (FGM) and early and forced marriage. The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for Richmond (Yorks) (Mr Hague), has also discussed the Prevention of Sexual Violence in Conflict Initiative and its efforts to prevent violence against women and girls, with India’s new Foreign Minister, Sushma Swaraj.

    Through the Department for International Development (DFID) the UK supports measures in India’s 120 poorest districts to promote the empowerment and access to benefits and services of excluded groups. DFID India also provides support to national and state governments in India, which includes helping girls to complete basic education and further tackling violence against women and girls.

  • Charlotte Leslie – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Charlotte Leslie – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Charlotte Leslie on 2014-06-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many clinical commissioning groups are running financial deficits requiring financial support from neighbouring clinical commissioning groups.

    Dr Daniel Poulter

    NHS England has responsibility for clinical commissioning group (CCG) funding.

    We are informed by NHS England that there is no provision for financial support between CCGs, and therefore no regime for repayment and/or interest.

    CCGs are expected to live within the resources allocated to them, but in rare cases where this is not possible, and subject to detailed assurance by NHS England Area Teams, a deficit plan is agreed and centrally funded. CCGs are expected to repay such funding over an agreed timescale in accordance with an approved recovery plan. The same applies if a CCG with a planned surplus records a deficit in year.

    In some cases, neighbouring CCGs have opted to enter into risk sharing or investment pooling arrangements, for example, in the context of shared commissioning arrangements or to facilitate wider health economy transformation programmes. The precise arrangements for such risk sharing are a matter for local determination by the governing bodies concerned, and they would be expected to ensure that these agreements were transparently documented and did not impact adversely on patient services.

  • Richard Harrington – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Richard Harrington – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Richard Harrington on 2014-06-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps UK Visas and Immigration can take to prevent no cases of Ebola reaching the UK.

    James Brokenshire

    The UK does not specifically screen pre or at entry for Ebola.

    Public Health England has assessed the risk of importation of Ebola in the UK
    as very low. It is extremely unlikely that an outbreak of Ebola would occur in
    the UK even if there was to be an imported case, as there are factors operating
    in West Africa which would not be seen in the UK. The outbreak in West Africa
    is driven by person to person spread in the absence of any infection control
    precautions. Human cases of Ebola virus disease have never yet been exported
    from an outbreak zone to a European country.

    All UK ports have systems and plans for dealing with issues of public health
    concern. However, they all require that the public health system is firstly
    notified of the arrival of someone with a suspected disease of concern. Crew
    are trained to do this by their respective companies and an example of the type
    of guidance that they work towards can be found on the International Air
    Transport Association (the international airline trade body) website at:

    https://www.iata.org/whatwedo/safety/health/Documents/health-guidelines-cabin-cr
    ew-2011.pdf .

    At all UK ports, there is a system for routing reports, produced by the
    commander of a craft, to a local health protection team who are available on a
    24/7 basis throughout the year. Health protection teams have generic
    responsibility for managing incidents of public health concern in all settings
    including our ports. They will then take the lead in managing the incident from
    a public health perspective with the NHS being responsible for the provision of
    healthcare.

    The International Health Regulations (IHR), which entered into force on 15 June
    2007, require countries to report certain disease outbreaks and public health
    events to WHO, including Ebola.