Tag: Steve McCabe

  • Steve McCabe – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Steve McCabe – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steve McCabe on 2014-06-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what official agreements were made between her Department and the Afghan Investment Support Agency for any work relating to the (a) Bost Agri Industrial Park and (b) Bost Airfield.

    Justine Greening

    The Bost industrial business park proposal was originally approved by officials in 2009 at a time when Ministers did not approve spend under £40m. In 2012 it became clear that the project could no longer be completed within the original timeframe and in good order. To avoid wasting taxpayers’ money I decided that UK funding for the project should be cancelled. The completed park designs have been handed over to the Afghan authorities to enable them to pursue the project over a revised time frame. DFID’s work on Bost Airfield was completed in November 2013.

    DFID put a Memorandum of Understanding in place with AISA and the Helmand Provincial Government in April 2012, focusing solely on the development of the Bost Agri Business Park. AISA was not engaged on the Bost Airfield.

  • Steve McCabe – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Steve McCabe – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steve McCabe on 2014-03-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will review the current requirements for seizing property or cash under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 to bring those requirements into line with the new powers of HM Revenue and Customs to seize money from an individual’s bank account without a warrant.

    Karen Bradley

    The Government’s Serious and Organised Crime Strategy clearly sets out our
    plans to attack criminal finances by making it harder to move, hide and use the
    proceeds of crime. These include measures to enable assets to be frozen more
    quickly and earlier in investigations, reduce the time that courts give
    offenders to pay confiscation orders, and make it easier for magistrates to
    confiscate cash held in bank accounts.

  • Steve McCabe – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Steve McCabe – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steve McCabe on 2014-04-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, pursuant to the Answer of 3 February 2014, Official Report, column 57W, on special educational needs, which organisations and charities have been consulted on the Special Educational Needs Code of Practice.

    Mr Edward Timpson

    The consultation on a draft Special Educational Needs Code of Practice was an open consultation and any organisations or individuals could respond. The Department for Education received over 700 responses from a wide range of organisations and individuals including parents; young people; early years; schools; further education professionals; local authorities; health sector professionals and voluntary and community sector organisations, including many from the special educational needs and disability fields.

    A short, focused consultation is now being carried out on a revised draft, which takes account of responses to the public consultation and amendments to the Children and Families Bill during its passage through Parliament. A full response to the consultations on the Code of Practice will be published in the next few weeks and this will give details of organisations and charities who responded.

  • Steve McCabe – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Steve McCabe – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steve McCabe on 2014-05-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what information-sharing systems his Department recommends agencies to use in respect of sharing information regarding vulnerable children and children at risk.

    Mr Edward Timpson

    The Government believes it is for local areas to determine the most appropriate way to record and share information to meet local needs.

  • Steve McCabe – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Steve McCabe – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steve McCabe on 2014-06-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, with reference to the Answer of 5 September 2013, Official Report, column 461W, on Afghanistan, what works at the Bost Agri Park and Bost Airfield were left by USAID upon her Department taking control of the project in 2009.

    Justine Greening

    The Bost industrial business park proposal was originally approved by officials in 2009 at a time when Ministers did not approve spend under £40m. In 2012 it became clear that the project could no longer be completed within the original timeframe and in good order. To avoid wasting taxpayers’ money I decided that UK funding for the project should be cancelled. The completed park designs have been handed over to the Afghan authorities to enable them to pursue the project over a revised time frame. DFID’s work on Bost Airfield was completed in November 2013.

    The information required to answer the honourable member’s question is not available in the form requested.

  • Steve McCabe – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Steve McCabe – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steve McCabe on 2014-03-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 3 December 2013, Official Report, columns 652-3W, on special educational needs, whether his Department has any plans in future to commence publishing figures on the proportion of hearings where (a) local authorities and (b) parents were legally represented.

    Mr Shailesh Vara

    The Ministry of Justice and HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) publish data on the First-tier Tribunal Special Educational Needs & Disability (FtT SEND) regularly in a quarterly internet publication which includes data on a number of other Tribunals. Data for the academic year September 2012 to August 2013 were published in December 2013 and can be found at:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/tribunal-statistics-quarterly-july-to-september-2013

    The published data do not provide information on representation at hearings because. The current IT system does not have the facility to record details of legal representation at the actual hearing. To change this position would incur cost which could not be justified by any benefit to HMCTS. Therefore, there are no plans to collect this information.

  • Steve McCabe – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Steve McCabe – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steve McCabe on 2014-04-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what discussions Ministers in his Department have had with representatives of sixth form colleges on the effect of recent changes to sixth form funding for students who have severe or complex disabilities.

    Matthew Hancock

    Last year’s funding changes for students with severe and complex needs were introduced following extensive consultation with local authorities and all types of institutions, including sixth-form colleges.

  • Steve McCabe – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Steve McCabe – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steve McCabe on 2014-05-06.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what steps he has taken to ensure that unemployed people who volunteer for the Help to Work Scheme do not do the same work as offenders on community service orders.

    Esther McVey

    These are two entirely different schemes and we would expect the requirements of placements for offenders to be very different. The welfare to work companies we have contracted to provide Community Work Placements are experienced at delivering different programmes across different areas of Government.

  • Steve McCabe – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Steve McCabe – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steve McCabe on 2014-06-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what records his Department maintains of instances where a teacher has had a sexual relationship with a student under the age of 16 years in (a) maintained schools and (b) independent schools.

    Mr Edward Timpson

    Since April 2012, where a teacher has been dismissed, or resigned in the face of dismissal, as a result of serious misconduct all schools have had a statutory duty to consider referring the matter to the National College for Teaching and Leadership (NCTL). The NCTL acts as the regulator of the teaching profession on behalf of the Secretary of State. It is responsible for determining whether the referred individual should be prohibited from teaching on the grounds of unacceptable professional conduct, conduct that might bring the profession into disrepute and/or conviction of a relevant offence. Information about cases considered by NCTL is not held in the format requested and to obtain the information requested would incur disproportionate cost.

    In addition to the NCTL process for regulating teachers, the Department’s Independent Education and Boarding Team (IEBT) administer the wider regulatory system for independent schools. This team can receive information about allegations of abuse from a variety of sources, including Ofsted, local authorities, parents and the police. The Department’s records show that there have been 5 referrals since April 2012 and 2 from January 2009 to March 2012 where sexual abuse of a pupil by an adult working at the school was a factor. When such referrals are received, the Department’s role is not to investigate the allegations, which are a matter for the local authority and the police, but to determine whether the school is meeting the independent school standards, and take action to ensure it does so.

  • Steve McCabe – 2022 Speech on Iran’s Nuclear Programme

    Steve McCabe – 2022 Speech on Iran’s Nuclear Programme

    The speech made by Steve McCabe, the Labour MP for Birmingham Selly Oak, in the House of Commons on 30 June 2022.

    I thank the right hon. Member for Newark (Robert Jenrick) for securing the debate and congratulate him on an excellent speech. In the interest of transparency, I am the chair of Labour Friends of Israel and a member of the British Committee for Iran Freedom.

    I suspect that the outcome of the talks in Vienna will be crucial in shaping the future of the international community’s relations with Iran. Whatever that outcome, however, we must develop a clear-sighted and comprehensive strategy to tackle the challenges we face, including the many that the current talks are unlikely to resolve. As we have heard, the malign activities of those who control the Iranian regime extend far beyond its nuclear ambitions and include: its ballistic missile programme; support for terrorist proxies across the middle east; the dangerous influence and activities of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps; Tehran’s insidious disinformation campaigns; its policy of state hostage taking; and the suffering of the Iranian people over four decades.

    In the face of those challenges, the JCPOA, which was negotiated in 2015, looks pretty limited. Despite the name, as the right hon. Gentleman pointed out, it is clearly not comprehensive and, as we heard, it actually exacerbated certain problems by freeing up extra resources for the mullahs. The Trump Administration’s unilateral withdrawal in 2018 dealt a severe blow to the deal, but Iran’s record of systematically violating the agreement had already highlighted its inadequacy.

    Those violations include, as we have heard, the decision to enrich uranium beyond the agreed cap and the deliberate obstruction of the IAEA inspectors. Iran had already made clear its contempt for the agreement by turning off some of the inspectors’ monitoring equipment. Officials said a couple of weeks ago that they expect to lose any continuity of knowledge regarding the progress of Iran’s activity because of the obstruction they are facing from it. Even if we had a deal up and running, the inspectors would not be able to do their job.

    Some believe that a new agreement might provide a measure of medium-term restraint on Iran’s nuclear programme; others have their doubts. As we have heard, the Institute for Science and International Security has concluded that it is on the verge of obtaining the bomb. The appointment of Mohammad Eslami, the main liaison with Pakistani freelance nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan, as the new head of Tehran’s Atomic Energy Organisation is the clearest signal we could have of Iran’s real intentions. That is why I am sceptical of the idea that those people will negotiate in good faith and keep their word.

    As the LFI argues in its recent pamphlet on the subject, the UK needs to develop realistic strategies to address the nuclear threat and the other Iranian issues. Iran’s ballistic missile programme is the biggest in the middle east and makes it the first country to develop a missile with a 2,000 km range without having first developed nuclear capability. It is also the only country that routinely threatens to wipe another nation off the face of the map—the destruction of the state of Israel is the official policy of Iran’s leaders.

    As we have heard, as well as threatening Israel’s existence, Iran is responsible for waging war, terrorism and violence—mostly through its proxies—in Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, Iraq and the Palestinian territories. The UK has rightly banned some of those proxies, but not all their front organisations. The Government should do more and look at proscribing Hezbollah and Hamas.

    As we have also heard, Iran’s terrorist activities are supported by the regime’s ideological army, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which not only leads on meddling in the region but brutally represses ordinary Iranians. Its influence has expanded rapidly in recent years, including over a variety of operations across Europe. I believe, as others do, that the UK should join our allies the United States and proscribe the IRGC for the dangerous terrorist group it is.

    Iranian disinformation efforts, run by the IRGC, have significantly expanded since 2015. There is mounting evidence of interference in UK domestic politics, including last year’s Scottish Parliament elections. The UK Government should urgently draw up proposals for how they intend to combat and disrupt that interference.

    Iran’s policy of arbitrarily detaining foreign nationals, most prominently Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, demands co-ordinated international action. The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office must be bold enough to call this activity what it is—state hostage taking. We should use the UK’s position at the UN to lead and develop a proper response from the international community.

    We should also never forget that the Iranian regime’s most long-standing and long-suffering victims are the Iranian people themselves. We can and should do more to support the victims of some of the most unimaginable human rights abuses. I think it is both curious and shocking that, nearly two years since it was established, the Magnitsky Act is yet to be applied to a single Iranian individual or entity. There are many Iranian politicians and officials guilty of human rights abuses, including prison governors, military personnel, regional governors and others. Ebrahim Raisi himself stands accused of being responsible for a programme of mass killings in Iran.

    Whatever the outcome of the nuclear talks in Vienna, the threats posed by this regime to the Iranian people, the peoples of the middle east, our own country and democracies around the world will not go away. UK foreign policy should reflect the reality of the situation. Any revived JCPOA that only deals with the nuclear programme is probably not worth the paper it is written on. The desire of those who wish to resurrect the JCPOA should not detract from the urgent need to recognise and develop a smart, proportionate and comprehensive strategy to resist Iran’s terrorist activity around the globe.

    Should it prove impossible to secure a satisfactory deal, which I think is pretty inevitable, I concur with the right hon. Member for Clwyd West (Mr Jones) that the UK and other western participants should refer the regime’s nuclear activities to the UN Security Council, and we should immediately seek to reinstate the six resolutions that were suspended in good faith because of the JCPOA.