Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Helen Goodman – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Helen Goodman – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Helen Goodman on 2015-11-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what (a) targets and (b) goals the Bahraini authorities have been asked to work towards in the reform programmes in that country funded by his Department; and what progress has been made towards achieving those goals.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    The Government of Bahrain set out its own programme of reforms to implement the recommendations of Bahrain’s Independent Commission of Inquiry in 2011 and to respond to recommendations made at the UN Universal Periodic Review of Bahrain’s human rights situation. Our assistance supports Bahrain’s reform programme and is focussed on strengthening human rights and the rule of law. We welcome progress made in areas including: youth justice; the establishment and increasing effectiveness of the Ombudsman’s office, the Prisoner and Detainees’ Rights Commission and the reformed National Institute of Human Rights. We continue to work with the Government of Bahrain to ensure momentum and progress on its reforms, for the benefit of all Bahrainis.

  • Jamie Reed – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Prime Minister

    Jamie Reed – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Prime Minister

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jamie Reed on 2015-11-27.

    To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his Oral Statement of 26 November 2015, Official Report, columns 1489-94, what representations he has received from members of the International Syria Support Group on his proposed strategy for tackling ISIL.

    Mr David Cameron

    We have regular discussions with fellow members of the International Syria Support Group (ISSG), which includes the US, France and regional partners, about our strategy for tackling Daesh. The most recent ministerial meeting of the ISSG took place in Vienna on 14 November. We expect that a further meeting will take place in December. Such fora are an important means making steps towards the common goal of achieving a political solution to the Syria crisis and the defeat of ISIL. We will continue to play a leading, active role as a member of the ISSG.

  • Paul Blomfield – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Paul Blomfield – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Paul Blomfield on 2016-01-04.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what proportion of tax credit recipients had their credits withdrawn when their children progressed into post-16 education in each of the last five financial years.

    Damian Hinds

    No Child Tax Credit (CTC) claimants should have had their award ended as a consequence of their child progressing into post-16 education provided they continue to meet the qualifying conditions for CTC and their child is in full-time, non-advanced education, as prescribed in the relevant regulations.

  • Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-01-28.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether academy schools will be covered under the public sector exit payment cap proposed in the Enterprise Bill.

    Greg Hands

    The Government consulted on implementing a public sector exit payment cap in July 2015. The Government response to this consultation was published on 16 September 2015. This response provides detail on which organisations and types of payments the Government intends to capture within the scope of the public sector exit payment cap. This accords with the Government’s manifesto commitment to end tax payer funded six figure payoffs for public sector workers.

    The response document can be found at the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/464367/Public_sector_exit_payments_response.pdf

    The exit payment cap will apply to payments made as a result of an employee leaving their employment. It will not affect any pension a person has earned through their years of service or have any impact on accrued pension rights or pension lump sum entitlements on retirement. It will capture contributions, made by the employer, to fund early access to an unreduced or partially reduced pension. This is because such costs are ultimately funded by the tax payer.

    The Government has been clear that early retirements relating to ill health are outside the scope of the cap and will not be affected. Additionally, any payments directed by a Court or Tribunal will not be included in the scope of the cap.

    Exits on compassionate grounds are not such a clearly defined concept as exits related to ill health or redundancy. There will generally be a large degree of employer discretion on the terms of such exits, and on any payments. In these cases there will be discretion available to relax the cap in individual cases, subject to relevant Ministerial or local council approval, as will be set out in further detail in forthcoming Treasury guidance and directions.

  • Paul Flynn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Paul Flynn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Paul Flynn on 2016-02-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what the cost was of maintaining the defence attaché network in (a) 2013-14 and (b) 2014-15; and what proportion of the cost of that network was attributable to support for defence and security exports.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    The following information shows Ministry of Defence funding for the Defence Attaché and Advisor Network for financial year (FY) 2013-14 and FY 2014-15.

    FY 2013-14

    FY 2014-15

    Attaché Costs

    £31,864,185

    £31,635,761

    FCO Platform Charges

    £9,919,278

    £13,302,918

    Total Cost

    £41,783,463

    £44,938,679

    Support for exports is one of the many roles carried out by Defence Attachés as part of the International Defence Engagement Strategy. The Defence Attaché network has no specific budget or post allocated to this task.

  • Lord Shinkwin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Shinkwin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Shinkwin on 2016-03-17.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to fulfil their obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and in particular Article 23, subsection 3.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    There is a long established Fetal Anomaly Screening Programme that prospective parents can choose whether to participate in. The United Kingdom National Screening Committee recommendation on non-invasive prenatal testing does not change the choices available to prospective parents within the programme. We are satisfied that the UK is compliant with its obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and that the Programme is compliant with all obligations under the Equality Act 2010. We would also note that English law does not recognise a foetus as a separate legal person.

  • Anne-Marie Trevelyan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Anne-Marie Trevelyan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Anne-Marie Trevelyan on 2016-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 17 March 2016 to the hon. Member for St Albans to Question 30492, on maternity services: EU nationals, if he will take steps to collect and publish before 23 June 2016 estimates of the numbers of nationals of other EU member states who have used NHS maternity services in each of the last 10 years.

    Alistair Burt

    There are no plans to collect, estimate or publish this information.

  • Jonathan Ashworth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Jonathan Ashworth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jonathan Ashworth on 2016-05-09.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what the budget is for the Inter-Ministerial Group on Corruption.

    Matthew Hancock

    Budget for work to tackle corruption are held by departments. The work of the Inter-Ministerial Group is to co-ordinate and lead departmental activity.

  • The Countess of Mar – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The Countess of Mar – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by The Countess of Mar on 2016-06-29.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Altmann on 16 June (HL502), what provision is made for claimants suffering severe myalgic encephalomyelitis or chronic fatigue syndrome who are housebound or bedbound and who are unable to attend a face-to-face consultation.

    Baroness Altmann

    A home consultation can be offered where a claimant is unable to travel to a consultation as a result of their health condition or impairment.

    Situations where a claimant may need a home consultation can include where a person’s diagnosis suggests a significant disability that may make travel extremely difficult or the claimant provides evidence from a health professional that they are unable to travel due to their health condition or impairment.

  • Baroness Jones of Whitchurch – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Baroness Jones of Whitchurch – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Jones of Whitchurch on 2016-09-09.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what criteria they will use to decide whether the National Food Crime Unit should have direct enforcement powers.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The review of the National Food Crime Unit (NFCU) will consider the following issues:

    – Current and likely future reactive demand from food crime;

    – Current and likely future proactive opportunities to disrupt and prevent food crime;

    – Gaps between reactive/proactive demand and current response;

    – The current and future role of local authorities, the police service, other government departments/agencies and the wider food crime response landscape, including the international response and cross border collaboration post European Union exit;

    – Value for money of current and potential responses; and

    – The current form and function of the NFCU, and whether this meets current and future demand.

    In the first Food Crime Annual Strategic Assessment, the NFCU highlighted the limitations of current intelligence and reporting, and the difficulties in estimating the scale and impact of food crime. The review will therefore take these limitations into account when considering the current and future demands and opportunities, and make reasonable judgements where evidence is incomplete or lacking.