Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Thangam Debbonaire – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Thangam Debbonaire – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Thangam Debbonaire on 2016-05-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what recent discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government about the effect on arts and culture of changes to local government funding from central government; and what further such discussions are planned on this issue.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    DCMS and DCLG Ministers and officials regularly discuss matters of shared interest including arts, culture and public libraries.The Culture White Paper which was published in March reflects the close working between the two Departments​.​

  • Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-06-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to the Answer of 13 June 2016 to Question 40383, whether the Government has the power under current delay repay infrastructure to allow people to claim compensation for 15-minute delays before it makes other planned improvements to compensation arrangements; and if he will make a statement.

    Claire Perry

    All franchised Train Operating Companies (TOCs) are required under their franchise agreement to have in place a Passenger’s Charter which will include arrangements for compensation for passengers. TOCs can, at their discretion, go beyond the commitments in their Passenger’s Charter including on compensation on an ex gratia basis.

  • Kate Osamor – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Kate Osamor – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kate Osamor on 2016-09-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment she has made of the effect of narrowing the defintion of torture in the draft guidance on adults at risk on the ability of her Department to meet Stephen Shaw’s recommendation to adopt a wider definition of those at risk.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    For the purposes of the Government’s “adults at risk in immigration detention” policy, which was implemented on 12 September, the Government has adopted a definition of torture in line with that set out in the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT). This covers acts of torture carried out by, or on behalf of state authorities and, in guidance issued to Home Office staff, to doctors working in immigration removal centres, and to other staff, it has been made clear that the definition also covers acts of torture or ill-treatment carried out by groups exploiting instability and civil war to hold territory. It does not, however, cover acts of violence carried out in the course of, for example, neighbourhood disputes. The definition employed most accurately reflects the need to protect those who are most likely to be deleteriously affected by detention – that is, those who have been harmed by the state (or by an organisation exercising similar control) and for whom detention is most likely to be redolent of the harm they have suffered. In addition, individuals will fall within the scope of the adults at risk policy if the harm to which they have been subjected causes them to suffer from a condition which also falls within the “indicators of risk” set out in the policy, regardless of whether it falls within the strict definition of “torture” and regardless of the perpetrator of the violence. The policy recognises a broad range of groups of individuals as those likely to be particularly vulnerable to harm in detention without necessarily having to define them as victims of torture.

    In making the decision to employ the UNCAT definition of torture, the Government took into account a range of considerations, including the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees guidelines, but concluded that the UNCAT definition provided the appropriate level of protection. The Government believes that this approach is fully in line with Stephen Shaw’s recommendations in respect of vulnerable people. The adults at risk policy as a whole represents a broadening of the scope of individuals considered vulnerable, by virtue of the inclusion within the list of indicators of risk set out in the policy of, for example, victims of sexual or gender based violence (including female genital mutilation), transsexual individuals, and those suffering from post traumatic stress disorder. Overall, the impact of the adoption of the UNCAT definition on different groups of vulnerable individuals will depend on the circumstances of the particular case. The Government does not anticipate that it will have a disproportionate impact on any specific group. In particular, the Government does not see that there are contradictions in applying the new definition of torture alongside the inclusion in the policy, as an indicator of risk, being a victim of sexual or gender based violence. Although the perpetrator of the violence is, by necessity, a key part of the definition of torture, the adults at risk policy focuses as a whole on the impact on the individual and on whether detention is appropriate in their particular case. Home Office caseworkers have been provided with training and communications on the new adults at risk policy, including in respect of the definition of torture. Guidance on the adults at risk policy has been issued, including to the commissioners of healthcare in Immigration Removal Centres.

  • Andrew Stephenson – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Andrew Stephenson – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Stephenson on 2015-11-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the quality of educational facilities in HM Prison Holloway; and if he will make a statement.

    Andrew Selous

    At HMP Holloway there are currently approximately 120 places in a morning session and the same in an afternoon session for women to attend education courses. Women may attend in one or two sessions each day depending on the type of course they are on. In addition there are approximately 40 places available to attend Physical Education provision and approximately 60 places in vocational training areas.

    The Secretary of State for Justice announced on 8th September a review of the quality of education in prisons, chaired by Dame Sally Coates. The review will examine the scope, quality and effectiveness of current provision. It will consider the scope and range of the current curricula and identify the most effective teaching and delivery models. Stakeholders are being consulted and a Call for Evidence has been issued. The review is expected to report in the spring of 2016. A copy of the terms of reference are lodged in the library of the House and at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/review-of-prison-education-terms-of-reference

  • Chris Bryant – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Chris Bryant – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chris Bryant on 2015-12-08.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what the cost is of special advisers in each Department.

    Matthew Hancock

    Information about the number, pay bands, and cost of special advisers will be published shortly in the normal way.

  • Natalie McGarry – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Natalie McGarry – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Natalie McGarry on 2016-01-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what recent assessment he has made of the effect on the prospects for peace in predominately Kurdish areas of Turkey of the imprisonment and enforced suspension of moderate politicians in that region.

    Mr David Lidington

    The ongoing violence in the predominantly Kurdish areas of south east Turkey is extremely concerning. The Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) continues to kill members of the Turkish police service and security forces in violent terrorist attacks. The Turkish Government has responded by striking PKK targets in Turkey and Northern Iraq. They have also launched large-scale security operations involving curfews in some towns and cities in order to clear them of suspected terrorists.

    We are aware of reports of civilian casualties in the region, and a worsening humanitarian situation in certain areas in south east Turkey. The Turkish Government have said that 48 civilians lost their lives in clashes between 23 July and 23 December 2015. They also said that 93,000 people have fled their homes. We also understand that there have been investigations launched against elected officials and politicians. Any such investigations should be undertaken transparently and fully respect the rule of law.

    We believe Turkey has a legitimate right to defend itself against the PKK, whose attacks we condemn as we condemn all terrorism. Our thoughts are with the victims of these attacks, and the civilians who have been caught up in the violence. As in any conflict, civilian casualties should be avoided and human rights need to be fully protected. We have been clear, in public and private, that PKK violence must end and we support a return to the peace process, in the interests of Turkey and the region. We stand ready to help in any way we can.

    We continue to monitor the situation closely. The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge and our Ambassador to Turkey have emphasised to the Turkish government the need to respect human rights, avoid civilian casualties and return to the peace process. I raised these issues with my Turkish counterpart the last time we met in August 2015.

  • Emily Thornberry – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Emily Thornberry – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Emily Thornberry on 2016-02-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many (a) Sea King HC4, (b) Wildcat, (c) Gazelle, (d) Apache, (e) Chinook HC2/3, (f) Puma HC2 and (g) Merlin Mk 3/3A helicopters are (i) in the Forward Available Fleet, (ii) in the Sustainment Fleet and (iii) classed as Short-Term Unserviceable.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    The Forward Fleet comprises aircraft which are serviceable and those which are short-term unserviceable.

    The Sustainment Fleet numbers represent those aircraft in our Depth Fleet, which comprises aircraft which are undergoing planned depth maintenance or upgrade programmes.

    Short-term unserviceable aircraft are undergoing minor works, forward maintenance or any other unforeseen rectification or technical inspection work that can arise on a day-to-day basis. Figures shown are the average for December 2015, the most recent data available.

    Query

    Sea King HC4

    Wildcat BRH Mk1

    Wildcat HMA Mk2

    Gazelle

    Apache

    Chinook HC2/3 Note 1

    Puma HC2

    Merlin Mk 3/3A

    Forward Available Fleet

    7

    19

    14

    19

    32

    0

    13

    17

    Sustainment Fleet

    0

    8

    3

    7

    18

    0

    10

    8

    Short-Term Unserviceable

    2

    12

    7

    12

    13

    0

    4

    10

    Note 1:

    All Chinook HC2/2a aircraft have undergone modification with new cockpit avionics and are now HC4 variants. In December 2015 there were 26 HC4 aircraft in the forward fleet and 12 in sustainment.

    The (eight) Chinook HC3 were all removed from the forward fleet last year and are undergoing modification with new cockpit avionics and a new digital automatic flight control system. Once modified, these aircraft become Chinook HC5 variants.

  • Andrew Bingham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Andrew Bingham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Bingham on 2016-03-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what progress has been made on implementation of the recommendations of the Bonfield report on public procurement of food; and if she will make a statement.

    George Eustice

    The Government is committed to providing food produced to British standards or their equivalent in all its canteens, restaurants and cafeterias by the end of this Parliament. Defra is working closely with other Departments and businesses to implement Dr Peter Bonfield’s Plan for Public Procurement of Food, including a balanced scorecard. The Ministry of Justice recently launched a tender for supplying food to prisons, worth £500m, which requires bids to use the balanced scorecard. Their current supplier has agreed that the 30 million portions of UHT milk served in prisons each year will be sourced from UK producers. All new Central Government food and catering contracts will use the balanced scorecard approach.

  • Mike Kane – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Mike Kane – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mike Kane on 2016-04-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what requirements NHS England has placed on Manchester Mental Health and Social Care Trust to provide alternative services to replace services which are to be closed.

    Alistair Burt

    We are advised that NHS England has placed no such requirements. These are matters for the Manchester Mental Health and Social Care NHS Trust and its commissioners.

    We expect all National Health Service trusts to use their resources wisely and within their statutory responsibilities, while delivering high quality, sustainable services to patients. It is for the local NHS to determine the provision of local health services.

  • Emily Thornberry – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Emily Thornberry – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Emily Thornberry on 2016-05-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many UK military personnel are currently deployed to NATO force integration units in (a) Bulgaria, (b) Estonia, (c) Latvia, (d) Lithuania, (e) Poland and (f) Romania.

    Penny Mordaunt

    The UK has one officer in each of the six NATO Force Integration Units.