Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Tulip Siddiq – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Tulip Siddiq – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tulip Siddiq on 2016-04-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, whether the statutory duties imposed on the independent regulator will ensure that fees for (a) statutory functions and (b) non-statutory functions of the Land Registry will (i) not increase above operating costs and (ii) not increase above inflation in the event that the Land Registry is privatised under the Government’s alternative model of privatisation with economic regulation.

    Anna Soubry

    Under a contract-based approach, fees would still be prescribed in fee orders made by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills and set before Parliament. Under a regulator-based approach, fees would be controlled by the regulator.

  • Neil Gray – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Neil Gray – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Neil Gray on 2016-05-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how much funding his Department (a) has allocated since 2011 and (b) plans to allocate by 2020 to the Work Programme.

    Priti Patel

    The Departmental Annual Report for 2014/2015 includes the final outturn numbers for Employment Programmes from 2011/12 to 2014/15 (page 181 of the report). These figures have been audited.

    2011/12

    2012/13

    2013/14

    2014/15

    Outturn

    Outturn

    Outturn

    Outturn

    £m

    £m

    £m

    £m

    876

    802

    1,037

    950

    The Annual Report also includes separately published values for the Work Programme for the years 2011/2012 (£283m), 2012/2013 (£453m) and 2013/2014 (£636m). Work Programme spend has not been separately published beyond 2013/2014.

    Figures for the year 2015/2016 and beyond cannot be provided as they are subject to change and have not been published.

    Sources:

    2011/12 to 2014/15: DWP Departmental Annual Report 2014/2015: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/445950/dwp-annual-report-and-accounts-2014-to-2015.pdf

    “

  • Peter Bottomley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Peter Bottomley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Peter Bottomley on 2016-07-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, with reference to the employment of Mr Aditya Agrawal at East Lancashire Hospitals Trust, (a) what mediation has been offered by the Trust, (b) when (i) Mr Watson, (ii) Mr Chang and (iii) Mr Harris will cease to be full-time NHS consultants, (c) whether one of those three consultants was the originator or conveyor of the false, fabricated or misattributed clinical accusation to the GMC on clinical care provided by Mr Agrawal, (d) whether the Trust has withdrawn in writing any wrong accusation concerning clinical care provided by Mr Agrawal and (e) who was responsible for arranging the revalidation of Mr Agrawal with the GMC (i) up to and (ii) after October 2015; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr Jeremy Hunt

    This is an employer and employee matter between the East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust and Mr Aditya Agrawal respectively. The Department cannot comment on individual employment matters that are the responsibility of independent organisations, and that are subject to ongoing legal proceedings or on matters relating to individual clinical cases or other personal information. We understand that the cost to East Lancashire Trust of legal proceedings concerning Mr Agrawal is £296,848.42 to date, and that the Trust does not have insurance costs for legal awards in the event of the Trust or one of its employees being subject to legal action for defamation.

  • Bridget Phillipson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Bridget Phillipson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Bridget Phillipson on 2016-10-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what funding the Government has committed to the Global Fund Investment Case, Fifth Replenishment 2017-19 for fighting infections.

    James Wharton

    The Fifth Replenishment Conference for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria took place on 15 and 16 September in Montreal, Canada.

    At the conference, the Secretary of State announced an investment of £1.1billion in the Global Fund, including a commitment to double private sector contributions for tackling malaria, up to a maximum of £200million, and £90million linked to successful delivery against a performance agreement.

    The UK’s investment will help to fund 40million bednets to tackle malaria; provide enough lifesaving anti-retroviral therapy for 1.3million people with HIV; and support the treatment of 800,000 people with tuberculosis. Overall, our investment will help the Global Fund to save 8million lives, avert 300million infections and help build resilient and sustainable systems for health.

  • Liz McInnes – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Liz McInnes – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Liz McInnes on 2015-11-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what the change was in the number of firefighter posts in the Cumbria Fire and Rescue Service in 2013-14.

    Greg Clark

    I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave her on 6 November 2015, PQ 13946.

  • Ian Lavery – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Ian Lavery – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Lavery on 2015-12-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, if he will bring forward legislative proposals to introduce a statutory duty for the fire and rescue service to respond to a major flooding incident; and if he will make a statement.

    Mike Penning

    I have been asked to reply on behalf of the Home Office.

    Both the Civil Contingencies Act 2004 and the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004 detail the roles and powers of fire and rescue authorities, in respect of both emergency response and rescue in a wide range of situations, including from flooding. Fire and rescue authorities are expected to undertake integrated risk management planning, dovetailed with the community risk register overseen by the Local Resilience Forum (a multi-agency grouping of which fire and rescue authorities are key members). Integrated Risk Management Plans identify the full range of risks that an authority’s service is expected to respond to and are subject to consultation. The National Fire Framework published in July 2012 and given statutory effect in August 2012 makes this clear and I believe that fire and rescue authorities are fully competent to deliver on this.

    The Government has had no recent representations on this arrangement and in light of how well fire services have responded to recent flooding suggests there is no need for review.

  • Barbara Keeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Barbara Keeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Barbara Keeley on 2016-01-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 22 January 2016 to Question 25215, if he will estimate the difference between the additional cost to social care providers of paying the new national living wage and the amount available to local authorities through the social care precept and the Better Care Fund in (a) 2016-17, (b) 2017-18 and (c) 2018-19.

    Alistair Burt

    It is the decision of local councils whether to raise the adult social care precept in order to pay for adult social care in their local area. The precept gives local areas who are best placed to respond to local needs and pressures the flexibility to be able to do so.

    The additional amount available to local authorities for adult social care through the social care precept and the Better Care Fund are as follows:

    2016/17

    2017/18

    2018/19

    Additional Better Care Fund

    0

    105

    825

    Adult Social Care precept

    393

    821

    1,290
  • Roger Godsiff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Roger Godsiff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2016-02-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what assessment he has made of the benefits to passengers with sight problems of requiring all new buses to have audio-visual next stop and final destination announcements.

    Andrew Jones

    Accessible on-board information has the potential to give a range of passengers, including those who are visually impaired, greater confidence in using bus services. Traditionally audio/visual systems have been expensive to fit and maintain, however innovative and low cost solutions are making the technology more affordable. I encourage bus operators to consider the benefits to all of their customers of providing it on their vehicles and progress continues to be made. For example recently several operators across the country have invested in new buses with audio-visual announcements on their major bus routes. The Department is also aware that at least five local authorities are increasing the number of buses with audio-visual announcements funded through the Department’s £70 million ‘Better Bus Area’ fund.

  • Baroness Doocey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Baroness Doocey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Doocey on 2016-03-08.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many child victims of modern slavery referred to the National Referral Mechanism have passed through Calais.

    Lord Bates

    National Referral Mechanism (NRM) data on the number of child victims of modern slavery who have passed through Calais is not specifically recorded. NRM data includes the location of exploitation and the location of where the potential victim was first encountered. Border Force will refuse entry to the UK for any child presenting at Calais where they have concerns about their welfare. Such children are referred to and placed in the care of the French authorities. These children are not referred into the NRM as they are not present in the UK. Care and support for children who are suspected of having been trafficked or enslaved, under these circumstances, would fall to the French Authorities.

    The UK has funded a project run by a French non-governmental organisation, France Terre D’Asile, to identify potential victims of trafficking and exploitation (including children) in the camps in Calais and to direct them to appropriate support services in France. The Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner, Kevin Hyland, has been fully involved in the project by Terre D’Asile.

  • Jim Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Jim Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2016-04-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, how much EU (a) 7th Framework Programme and (b) Horizon 2020 funding has been provided to (i) universities, (ii) other research institutions and (iii) small businesses in the West Midlands in each of the last five years.

    Joseph Johnson

    The figures for organisations in the West Midlands are set out below. These reflect the full value of grant agreements signed in each calendar year, not the money received in that year.

    Higher and Secondary Education Organisations (HES) agreed funding (€):

    2011

    2012

    2013

    2014

    2015

    FP7

    34,512,638

    65,197,543

    62,376,751

    23,703,605

    Horizon 2020

    10,025,431

    64,947,891

    Non-profit Research organisations (REC) agreed funding (€):

    2011

    2012

    2013

    2014

    2015

    FP7

    459,795

    1,873,085

    946,077

    2,102,799

    Horizon 2020

    819,340

    2,297,233

    All Small and Medium sized Enterprises (SME) agreed funding (€):

    2011

    2012

    2013

    2014

    2015

    FP7

    7,861,934

    11,503,709

    11,193,539

    2,773,696

    Horizon 2020

    3,471,182

    14,249,221

    Please note that the SME figures may include some HES or REC organisations.

    The variation in the figures across the years in part reflects the fact that calls are competitively bid for and vary in the amount of funding available; and in part the fact that the FP7 budget was back-loaded, with increasing amounts of money available to award as grants in the final two years of the programme (2012-2013). In contrast, relatively few grants were awarded in the first year of Horizon 2020 (2014), which thereafter is due to run with annual budgets larger than those available to FP7.

    Overall, the UK was the second biggest recipient of EU research funding under FP7, and remains so under Horizon 2020.