UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Peter Bottomley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    Peter Bottomley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Peter Bottomley on 2016-06-09.

    To ask the Attorney General, what the cost is to the Crown Prosecution Service of obtaining a transcript of the Southwark Crown Court trial of charges against Gurpal Virdi.

    Jeremy Wright

    The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has requested an estimate of the cost of obtaining a transcript and has been informed that it will take 10 days for this to be supplied. Once the estimate is received the CPS will write to the Honorable Member to inform him of the figure.

  • Barry Sheerman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Barry Sheerman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Barry Sheerman on 2016-09-06.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what her policy is on the implementation of Part 2 of the Leveson inquiry.

    Matt Hancock

    Criminal proceedings connected to the subject matter of the Leveson Inquiry, including the appeals process, have not yet completed. We‎ have always been clear that these cases must conclude before we consider Part 2 of the Inquiry.

  • Baroness Tonge – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Baroness Tonge – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Tonge on 2016-10-17.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what distinction they draw in issuing visas between Israeli citizens who live in Israel and those who live in illegal settlements in the West Bank.

    Baroness Williams of Trafford

    All applications for visas, entry clearances and leave to enter at the border are considered against the criteria set out in the published Immigration Rules (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/immigration-rules) regardless of the applicant’s nationality or where they live.

    A variety of factors may be taken into account when considering the application, but that would depend upon the applicant’s personal circumstances and what they had applied to do in the UK.

  • Natalie McGarry – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Natalie McGarry – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Natalie McGarry on 2015-11-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many men in (a) the UK, (b) Scotland, (c) Glasgow and (d) Glasgow East constituency who are aged (i) 60, (ii) 61, (iii) 62, (iv) 63, (v) 64, (vi) 65, (vii) 66, and (viii) 67 are in receipt of pension credit in the 2015-16 financial year.

    Justin Tomlinson

    The information as requested for 2015/16 is not available.

    Information for Northern Ireland is the responsibility of the Department for Social Development. Northern Ireland statistics can be found at:

    http://www.dsdni.gov.uk/index/stats_and_research/benefit_publications.htm

    “

  • – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by on 2015-12-02.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon on 2 November (HL3216), whether that answer takes into account that EH40/2005 Workplace Exposure Limits states that workplace exposure limits (WELs) are British exposure limits and are set in order to help to protect the health of workers and apply only to people at work, and that the final report of the Cranfield cabin air study of 2011 stated that WELs are appropriate for the protection of the health of a working adult exposed in a workplace and are not applicable to other groups such as children or elderly persons or to other environments that are not workplaces”; and if not

    Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

    The previous answer (HL3216) took account of the relevant national and international guidelines and the relevance of various chemicals to human health. For example, two of the substances measured (tolulene and carbon monoxide) are the subject of a European standard for safety, health and comfort limits (BS EN 4618:2009). In addition to this, for the substances that do not have a European standard, other limits and guidelines have been considered in assessing the significance of any health risk of exposure to the concentrations measured in cabin air. Several of the substances monitored during the research, for example TBP, TOCP and tetrachloroethylene, have workplace exposure limits (WEL). For substances that do not have a WEL, a number of guidelines were used that have been recommended by the World Health Organisation as well as different groups in the UK and EU. These groups include Kotzias et al, Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) and the Committee on the Medical Effect of Air Pollutants (COMEAP).

  • Ruth Smeeth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Ruth Smeeth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ruth Smeeth on 2016-01-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, when he plans to publish the recommendations of the Gambling Commission in response to his Department’s call for evidence on the National Lottery and raising funds for good causes, launched in December 2014.

    David Evennett

    The responses to the Government’s Call for Evidence on the National Lottery, society lotteries and competing gambling products in raising funds for good causes will be published, excepting those that are commercially sensitive, in due course.

    The Gambling Commission is also providing advice to Government on society lotteries in response to the CMS Select Committee report and we understand they will make this public in due course.

  • David Amess – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    David Amess – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Amess on 2016-02-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps his Department is taking to encourage GPs to undertake out-of-hours shifts in primary care.

    Alistair Burt

    The Department and NHS England are committed to addressing the issue of increasing medical indemnity costs for general practitioners (GPs), including those working out of hours.

    Increasing costs of indemnity cover associated with out of hours work may discourage GPs from undertaking out-of-hours shifts in primary care.

    The Department was represented at a roundtable event held by NHS England on 17 November 2015 to develop a shared understanding of how to address rising medical indemnity costs. A range of stakeholders, including the British Medical Association and Medical Defence Organisations, also attended.

    On 9 December 2015, NHS England announced a winter indemnity scheme to offset the additional indemnity premium for GPs who wish to work additional sessions for their out-of-hours providers.

    Discussions are ongoing between the Department and NHS England on a long-term solution.

  • Ben Howlett – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Ben Howlett – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ben Howlett on 2016-02-29.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what plans he has to improve waiting times at driving test centres in (a) Bristol, (b) Chippenham, (c) Trowbridge and (d) Westbury.

    Andrew Jones

    The Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA) is committed to reducing waiting times at Bristol, Chippenham, Trowbridge and Westbury and all other testing sites, and maintaining them at a lower level than currently seen across the UK, this is a priority for DVSA.

    DVSA has run several recruitment campaigns during 2015, and continues to do so in 2016. However, due to the critical roles a driving examiner has to play in road safety, the process to recruit the right people
    does take time. As a result of the campaigns, 139 new examiners have started work with DVSA and it has made offers of employment to another 115 people, who are currently undertaking training or waiting to attend it.

  • Kevin Hollinrake – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Kevin Hollinrake – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Hollinrake on 2016-03-24.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether the proposed 36 month stamp duty grace period for people transitioning from one property to another will apply retrospectively.

    Mr David Gauke

    The Government appreciates that there may be circumstances where an individual sells a property which was a main residence and then experiences a delay before purchasing a new main residence. Where an individual is replacing a main residence, the higher rates of Stamp Duty Land Tax should not apply to the purchase of a new main residence within 36 months of the disposal of a previous main residence.

    In addition to this, the 36 month time period will commence from 25 November 2015 for those who had sold a previous main residence prior to the Spending Review and Autumn Statement 2015, in order to provide additional transitional support.

  • Tulip Siddiq – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Tulip Siddiq – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tulip Siddiq on 2016-04-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 13 January 2016 to Question 21676, whether the new junior doctors’ contract would be an improvement on the pay structure previously developed without the addition of transition protection.

    Ben Gummer

    The new Junior Doctor contract is an improvement on the current contract in the pay structure. All doctors will get equal pay for equal work, rather than being paid for time served, to create a genuinely level playing field for men and women. The contract remains within a cost-neutral envelope excluding any workforce growth and the cost of protection sits outside that; this has not changed. There are a number of improvements in the final contract from the November 2015 offer. Some were agreed with the British Medical Association during negotiations in December 2015 and January 2016 and are reflected in the summary offer of 12 February 2016 – for example, restructuring of the nodal pay points with larger basic pay increases occurring earlier in career progression. Some were as a result of the Secretary of State’s consideration of the draft final contract, as set out in the Equality Analysis, and include improvements to the transitional protection arrangements themselves, providing that the three years of pay protection be extended to six years for those working at 0.5 of whole time.