Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Gordon Marsden – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Gordon Marsden – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gordon Marsden on 2014-06-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what assessment he has made of the (a) availability and (b) effectiveness of scrubber technology on maritime vessels.

    Stephen Hammond

    In October 2012, and again in March 2013, I chaired ‘round table’ meetings of industry stakeholders (from the shipping, ports, exhaust gas cleaning system technology, oil refining and logistics sectors) to consider the best way forward for compliance with the new international and EU sulphur requirements. The potential for reverse modal shift, the maturity and efficacy of scrubber technology and the scope for financial assistance to industry were all key to those discussions. The report commissioned by the UK Chamber of Shipping was produced as a result of those meetings, and officials have taken it into account in producing the Government’s Impact Assessment on the draft UK Regulations to implement the sulphur limits in national law.

    The Government went out to an eight-week public consultation on 29 April 2014 on those draft UK Regulations. Meanwhile, Government officials continue to work closely with the industry and to explore the scope for securing EU finance, possibly under the Trans-European Network (commonly known as TEN-T) programme and affordable capital from the European Investment Bank, for shipowners and ports who wish to invest in scrubber technology or in technology associated with the use of an alternative fuel, such as liquefied natural gas, to comply with the new limits.

    The UK Regulations will be reviewed in accordance with normal Government practice and consistent with the principles of better regulation.

  • Frank Field – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Frank Field – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Frank Field on 2014-06-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what estimate he has made of the proportion of jobseeker’s allowance claims processed within (a) 10, (b) 20, (c) 30, (d) 40, (e) 60 and (f) more than 60 working days.

    Esther McVey

    The information requested is not available.

  • Frank Field – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Frank Field – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Frank Field on 2014-06-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, when he intends to respond to the recommendations made by the Social Security Advisory Committee in Occasional Paper 12 published in April 2014; and if he will make a statement.

    Steve Webb

    The Department is currently considering its response to the Social Security Advisory Committee’s recent study “The Cumulative Impact of Welfare Reform: a Commentary“. A response will be published in due course.

  • Andrew Gwynne – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Andrew Gwynne – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2014-06-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, which GP practices have been identified by NHS England as potentially losing more than £3 per patient in 2014-15 following the withdrawal of the Minimum Practice Income Guarantee.

    Dr Daniel Poulter

    NHS England has published an anonymised list of ‘outliers’ which can be found at:

    www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/gp-gms-practices.pdf

    Because the information is commercially sensitive, details that could identify individual practices have not been released.

    The Minimum Practice Income Guarantee is being phased out over a period of seven years because it is inequitable, and the money released will be reinvested into basic payments made to all General Medical Services practices.

    NHS England is supporting the most affected practices.

  • Greg Knight – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Greg Knight – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Greg Knight on 2014-06-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what guidance he has given local authorities on ensuring that road safety is not compromised by street lighting being switched off; and if he will make a statement.

    Brandon Lewis

    Street lighting plays an important role in road safety, as well as ensuring the personal safety of pedestrians.

    As I stated in my answer to the rt. hon. Member for Leeds Central, (Hilary Benn), on 13 May 2014, Official Report, Column 535-536W, there is no prescriptive Whitehall guidance on street lighting, and any assessment will depend on local circumstances and local views. In addition, Manual for Streets, while out of date in certain areas (e.g. on parking and density), contains some useful guidance on getting the balance right when providing street lighting, taking into account the different issues around safety, crime prevention, street clutter and light pollution. It can be found at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/manual-for-streets.

    “

  • Jason McCartney – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Jason McCartney – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jason McCartney on 2014-06-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many patients have not received homecare medicines and products on time for treatment of (a) cystic fibrosis, (b) HIV and (c) rheumatoid arthritis in the last year.

    Norman Lamb

    This information is not collected by the Department or NHS England.

  • Jonathan Edwards – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Jonathan Edwards – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jonathan Edwards on 2014-06-11.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment his Department has made of the ability of Thames Water to service the costs of building the proposed Thames Tideway Tunnel.

    Danny Alexander

    The Government’s Reasons for Specification Notice, published on 5 June 2014, explains in detail why the Government believes that the project is of a scale and complexity that would threaten Thames Water’s ability to provide services to its customers. Paragraphs 21 to 35 provide this explanation.

    The Reasons Notice is available from the following link:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/thames-tideway-tunnel-project-specification-and-preparatory-work-notices

    “

  • David Winnick – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    David Winnick – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Winnick on 2014-06-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, pursuant to the Answer of 10 June 2014 Official Report, column 74W, on Members: Correspondence, when he expects to send a substantive reply to the letter of 30 April 2014 from the hon. Member for Walsall North about admissions to Walsall Academy which was separate from the letter sent to the Chief Executive of the Education Funding Agency; and for what reason that Answer does not mention that there was separate correspondence on the subject.

    Mr Edward Timpson

    My noble Friend, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Schools, responded to the hon. Member’s other letter of 30 April about admission arrangements at Walsall academy on 16 June. On behalf of the Department I would like to apologise for the delay in answering this letter.

    My reply of 10 June related to the letter with the reference (2014/0036207) quoted in the question.

  • Ian Austin – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Ian Austin – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Austin on 2014-06-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many people have waited longer than the advised waiting times for (a) new passport applications and (b) passport renewals in the last year.

    James Brokenshire

    The information is not available in the format requested. Information can be
    provided for UK straightforward and non-straightforward applications as set out
    below for 2013-14

    Total number of UK applications received 2013-14 5,818,272

    Processed outside published turnaround times
    Straightforward (within 3
    weeks)
    401 (0.007% of applications received)

    Non-straightforward (within 6 weeks)
    29,331 (0.5% of applications received)

  • Liam Byrne – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Liam Byrne – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Liam Byrne on 2014-06-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what projections his Department has made of the future (a) face value and (b) carrying value of the student loan book.

    Mr David Willetts

    (a) We estimate the cash, or face, value of ICR student loans to follow approximately this profile going forwards.

    Value of loan book in real terms

    2014-15

    2015-16

    2016-17

    2017-18

    2018-19

    2019-20

    2020-21

    2021-22

    2022-23

    2023-24

    £70bn

    £80bn

    £90bn

    £100bn

    £110bn

    £120bn

    £130bn

    £140bn

    £150bn

    £160bn

    2024-25

    2025-26

    2026-27

    2027-28

    2028-29

    2029-30

    2030-31

    2031-32

    2032-33

    2033-34

    £170bn

    £180bn

    £190bn

    £200bn

    £210bn

    £220bn

    £230bn

    £240bn

    £250bn

    £260bn

    2034-35

    2035-36

    2036-37

    2037-38

    2038-39

    2039-40

    2040-41

    2041-42

    2042-43

    2043-44

    £260bn

    £270bn

    £280bn

    £280bn

    £290bn

    £300bn

    £300bn

    £310bn

    £320bn

    £320bn

    2044-45

    2045-46

    2046-47

    2047-48

    2048-49

    2049-50

    £330bn

    £330bn

    £330bn

    £330bn

    £330bn

    £330bn

    Value of loan book in nominal terms

    2014-15

    2015-16

    2016-17

    2017-18

    2018-19

    2019-20

    2020-21

    2021-22

    2022-23

    2023-24

    £70bn

    £80bn

    £100bn

    £110bn

    £130bn

    £150bn

    £170bn

    £190bn

    £210bn

    £230bn

    2024-25

    2025-26

    2026-27

    2027-28

    2028-29

    2029-30

    2030-31

    2031-32

    2032-33

    2033-34

    £250bn

    £270bn

    £300bn

    £320bn

    £350bn

    £380bn

    £410bn

    £440bn

    £470bn

    £500bn

    2034-35

    2035-36

    2036-37

    2037-38

    2038-39

    2039-40

    2040-41

    2041-42

    2042-43

    2043-44

    £530bn

    £570bn

    £600bn

    £640bn

    £670bn

    £710bn

    £750bn

    £790bn

    £830bn

    £870bn

    2044-45

    2045-46

    2046-47

    2047-48

    2048-49

    2049-50

    £920bn

    £960bn

    £1,000bn

    £1,030bn

    £1,070bn

    £1,100bn

    These estimates assume that fees will increase in line with inflation from 2016 onwards. These forecasts also take account of the freeing up of student number controls in the Autumn Statement, increases in loan take-up rates, demographic changes over time and updated earnings modelling.

    (b) We estimate the current carrying value of the student loan book, which is used in the BIS accounts. However, we do not forecast the future carrying value of the loan book, as this is not required for the purposes of accounting or budgeting. Our estimate of the carrying value for loans when they are issued is based on the RAB charge, which we currently estimate is around 45%.