Tag: Ruth Cadbury

  • Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ruth Cadbury on 2016-01-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether the Government plans to review legislation on joint enterprise.

    Mike Penning

    Joint enterprise law has enabled some of the most serious offenders to be brought to justice. It ensures that if a crime is committed by two or more people, all those involved can potentially be charged and convicted of that offence.

    The Justice Committee made recommendations for a review of the law during the last Parliament, which the Government has been considering carefully.

    Ministers are also mindful that the Supreme Court is looking at a case which might change the way the law in this area is applied. The Government will decide how to proceed after the Court has delivered its judgment.

  • Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ruth Cadbury on 2016-01-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment she has made of the effect Tier 2 migration is having on the (a) pay and (b) terms and conditions of UK employees.

    James Brokenshire

    Tier 2, the skilled worker route, is designed to fill roles which cannot be filled by a suitable resident worker. The immigration rules, and UK employment law, do not allow workers to be made redundant and directly replaced.

    It is a decision for businesses whether to outsource certain functions. We are, however, mindful of concerns that use of the Intra-Company Transfer (ICT) category for third party contracting may undercut or displace resident workers.

    That is why, in June last year, we commissioned the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) to examine the ICT category as part of its wider review on Tier 2. The MAC published its report on 19 January and it can be found on the gov.uk website at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/migration-advisory-committee-mac-review-tier-2-migration

    Chapter 6 of the report sets out the MAC’s findings on the ICT category, including its use for third party contracting, the salaries paid to IT workers and the impacts on the resident labour market. The MAC found that salaries for these transferees were clustered around the 25th percentile of earnings for resident workers in IT occupations (the current minimum permitted under the immigration rules).

    The Government is currently considering the MAC’s findings carefully and will announce any changes in due course.

  • Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ruth Cadbury on 2016-03-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, with reference to paragraph 8.18 of the Airports Commission Final Report, July 2015, what the estimated cost is of the tunnelling work required for the M25; and whether that cost would be incurred by the public purse or Heathrow Airport Limited.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    Alongside its Final Report in July 2015, the Airports Commission published a range of supporting analysis and assessments. The Cost and Commercial Viability: Financial Modelling Input Costs Update report included estimated costs for the surface access proposals for each of the Commission’s three short-listed options for airport expansion.

    The report set out the estimated capital expenditure costs for the works associated with M25 tunnelling (south of junction 15) as £576m for the Heathrow Airport North West runway option and £864m for the Heathrow Airport Extended Northern runway option.

    The Airports Commission made clear in its Final Report (paragraph 16.33) that Government would need to agree the nature, scale and financing of the surface access transport improvements associated with expansion, and the Government has been clear that it expects the scheme promoter to meet the costs of any surface access proposals that are required as a direct result of airport expansion and from which they will directly benefit.

  • Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ruth Cadbury on 2016-03-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, how many emergency landings there have been at Heathrow Airport in the last five years.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The Department does not collect data on how many emergency landings there have been at Heathrow Airport. However if serious enough, such incidents would be counted amongst data for safety related events. These are defined as an event which endanger or which, if not corrected or addressed, could endanger an aircraft, its occupants or any other person. They have to be reported to the Civil Aviation Authority as part of the Mandatory Occurrence Reporting Scheme (MORS).

    Occurrence reporting is now covered by (EU) Regulation No 376/2014. The Regulation requires that the reporting, analysis and follow-up to such occurrences remain confidential. However, the Regulation does permit information to be released on request to interested parties that have a genuine safety related need for the information. An application can be made at www.caa.co.uk.

  • Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ruth Cadbury on 2016-04-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what information he holds on the number of women in England who were diagnosed with fibroadenomas in each of the last five years.

    Jane Ellison

    The number of women who were diagnosed with fibroadenomas in each of the last five years, and the proportion of women with fribroadenomas who went on to develop breast cancer in 2015, is not held.

    In addition, information on the number of women who had fibroadenomas surgically removed in each of the last five years is not held.

    There are several types of benign breast lump, including fibroadenomas. Although most lumps are not breast cancer, any unusual changes to the breasts should be checked by a general practitioner (GP) as soon as possible. If a GP finds a lump on examination, they will routinely refer the patient to be seen by a hospital specialist.

  • Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ruth Cadbury on 2016-07-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, if he will estimate the contribution to the UK economy of airline passengers who have transferred through Heathrow Airport in each of the last three years.

    Mr John Hayes

    The Department has no plans to undertake such analysis of the specific contribution.

    However, transfer passengers benefit the UK economy primarily through increased connectivity – their demand has helped to make more flights and routes viable, generating connectivity benefits to UK residents. In addition, they have directly contributed to revenue and employment for UK airlines and Heathrow airport.

  • Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ruth Cadbury on 2016-01-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, whether his Department has conducted a comparative assessment of the loss of life as a result of an aircraft crashing on approach or arrival at Heathrow and Gatwick airports.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    I refer the Honourable Member to my answer of 11th January 2016 (UIN 20996) http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-questions-answers/?page=1&max=20&questiontype=QuestionsWithAnswersOnly&house=commons%2clords&uin=20996.

  • Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ruth Cadbury on 2016-01-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what information her Department holds on what the average salary of a Tier 2 worker on an Intra Company Transfer visa is in the IT industry; and how this compares to the industry average.

    James Brokenshire

    Tier 2, the skilled worker route, is designed to fill roles which cannot be filled by a suitable resident worker. The immigration rules, and UK employment law, do not allow workers to be made redundant and directly replaced.

    It is a decision for businesses whether to outsource certain functions. We are, however, mindful of concerns that use of the Intra-Company Transfer (ICT) category for third party contracting may undercut or displace resident workers.

    That is why, in June last year, we commissioned the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) to examine the ICT category as part of its wider review on Tier 2. The MAC published its report on 19 January and it can be found on the gov.uk website at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/migration-advisory-committee-mac-review-tier-2-migration

    Chapter 6 of the report sets out the MAC’s findings on the ICT category, including its use for third party contracting, the salaries paid to IT workers and the impacts on the resident labour market. The MAC found that salaries for these transferees were clustered around the 25th percentile of earnings for resident workers in IT occupations (the current minimum permitted under the immigration rules).

    The Government is currently considering the MAC’s findings carefully and will announce any changes in due course.

  • Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ruth Cadbury on 2016-03-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, with reference to paragraph 5.13 of the Airports Commission: Final Report, published in July 2015, what assessment he has made of the implications for his policies of the finding that 431 hectares of green belt designated land would be required for the proposed third runway at Heathrow.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    In December 2015, the Government announced that it would start preparing the building blocks for an Airports National Policy Statement. The National Policy statement will be informed by an Appraisal of Sustainability which will look at all relevant social, economic and environmental impacts of airport expansion.

  • Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ruth Cadbury on 2016-03-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what plans his Department has to increase capacity on public transport links to Heathrow Airport from central London.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The Elizabeth line will replace the existing two train per hour Heathrow Connect service from May 2018 providing a 4 train per hour service to Terminals 1 to 4, operating alongside the existing 4 train per hour Heathrow Express service. This will offer significant improvements in connectivity from and to Heathrow, particularly from the West End, the City and Canary Wharf.

    Heathrow is also served by regular Piccadilly line services from central London. Upgrading this line is a matter for the Mayor and Transport for London who plan to introduce new modern signalling systems and new trains to provide 60% more capacity (the equivalent of up to 21,000 customers per hour).

    For any improvements associated with airport expansion, the Government will agree the nature and scale of the surface access transport as part of its decision on its preferred scheme for additional airport capacity in the South East. The Government has also been clear that it expects the scheme promoter to meet the costs of any surface access proposals that are required as a direct result of airport expansion and from which they will directly benefit.