Show Search Form

Search Results

registered interest	true false
date	exactly: or between: and
answering body
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
hansard heading
house id
legislature	pref label
question text
tabling member constituency
tabling member printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member constituency answering member printed question first answered answering member label previous answer version answering member constituency answering member printed answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

422681

registered interest
date	20/10/2015
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Abortion
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what recent (a) meetings and (b) correspondence she has had on the setting up of buffer zones around abortion clinics; and if she will make a statement.
tabling member constituency	Lewisham, Deptford
tabling member printed	Vicky Foxcroft
uin	12603
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/10/2015 answer text <p>I refer the Hon Member to the answers I gave to 5385 and 7247 on 13 July and 22 July 2015. We have also received correspondence from Members of Parliament on behalf of their constituents on this issue. The Home Office has not issued guidance to the police on this matter.</p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning question first answered 28/10/2015 15:24:55 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	4491 label Biography information for Vicky Foxcroft

422683

registered interest
date	20/10/2015
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Migrant Workers: Deportation
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will estimate the cost to the public purse of deporting people who moved to the UK planning to work in the Scottish fishing industry.
tabling member constituency	Na h-Eileanan an Iar
tabling member printed	Angus Brendan MacNeil
uin	12638
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 30/10/2015 answer text <p>Border Force has not deported anyone working in the Scottish Fishing Industry at public expense within the last 5 years.</p><p>Immigration Enforcement cannot estimate the cost of deporting people who moved to the UK to work in the Scottish fishing industry as to do so would involve a manual search of records which could only be conducted at disproportionate cost.</p> answering member constituency Old Bexley and Sidcup answering member printed James Brokenshire question first answered 30/10/2015 13:57:21 answering member 1530 label Biography information for James Brokenshire
tabling member	1546 label Biography information for Angus Brendan MacNeil

422689

registered interest
date	20/10/2015
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Community Policing: Private Military and Security Companies
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps she is taking to encourage police forces to enable private security firms to provide community security services.
tabling member constituency	Clacton
tabling member printed	Mr Douglas Carswell
uin	12503
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 30/10/2015 answer text <p>The Community Safety Accreditation Scheme, established by the Police Reform Act 2002, seeks to engage those working in community safety, including private companies, to be involved in reducing crime and disorder alongside the police.</p><p>Chief constables may accredit employees of an organisation that provides community safety and security services with certain powers. Decisions about accreditation are for Chief Constables locally.</p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning question first answered 30/10/2015 14:54:07 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1527 label Biography information for Mr Douglas Carswell

422297

registered interest
date	19/10/2015
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Members: Surveillance
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether the Wilson Doctrine has been consistently applied to the communications of the hon. Member for Leeds North West; and whether that hon. Member or his staff have been subject to surveillance.
tabling member constituency	Leeds North West
tabling member printed	Greg Mulholland
uin	12374
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 16/11/2015 answer text <p>The Government’s position on the Wilson Doctrine was set out by the Prime Minister in a written ministerial statement made on 4 November 2015.</p><p>As the Prime Minister made clear, the Wilson Doctrine has never been an absolute bar to the targeted interception of the communications of Members of Parliament or an exemption from the legal regime governing interception. The Doctrine recognised that there could be instances where interception might be necessary.</p><p>The Prime Minister announced that as matter of policy the PM will be consulted should there ever be a proposal to target any UK Parliamentarian’s communications under a warrant issued by a Secretary of State. This applies to Members of Parliament, members of the House of Lords, the Scottish Parliament, the Northern Ireland Assembly, the Welsh Assembly and UK members of the European Parliament. It applies to all activity authorised by a warrant issued by a Secretary of State: any instance of targeted interception and, electronic surveillance and equipment interference, when undertaken by the Security and Intelligence Agencies. This is in addition to the rigorous safeguards already in the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) and the Code of Practice issued under it which set out a series of robust safeguards for any instance of interception.</p><p>It is long standing policy of successive Governments neither to confirm nor deny any specific activity by the Security and Intelligence Agencies. Under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 it is an offence for anyone to identify an individual interception warrant or an individual interception that takes place.</p> answering member constituency South Holland and The Deepings answering member printed Mr John Hayes question first answered 16/11/2015 17:34:08 answering member 350 label Biography information for Sir John Hayes previous answer version 25173 answering member constituency South Holland and The Deepings answering member printed Mr John Hayes answering member 350 label Biography information for Sir John Hayes
tabling member	1540 label Biography information for Greg Mulholland

422319

registered interest
date	19/10/2015
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Home Office: Legal Costs
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the cost to the public purse was of legal fees in the case of Bondada, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWHC 2661 (Admin) (15 October 2015).
tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
tabling member printed	Andy Slaughter
uin	12371
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 05/11/2015 answer text <p>Costs incurred are £48, 575.35, including applicant’s costs of £31, 118.79.</p> answering member constituency Old Bexley and Sidcup answering member printed James Brokenshire question first answered 05/11/2015 15:53:39 answering member 1530 label Biography information for James Brokenshire previous answer version 25168 answering member constituency Old Bexley and Sidcup answering member printed James Brokenshire answering member 1530 label Biography information for James Brokenshire
tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

422342

registered interest
date	19/10/2015
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Members: Surveillance
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether the Wilson Doctrine has been consistently applied to the communications of the hon. Member for Lincoln since his election; and whether that hon. Member has been subject to surveillance.
tabling member constituency	Lincoln
tabling member printed	Karl McCartney
uin	12436
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 16/11/2015 answer text <p>The Government’s position on the Wilson Doctrine was set out by the Prime Minister in a written ministerial statement made on 4 November 2015.</p><p>As the Prime Minister made clear, the Wilson Doctrine has never been an absolute bar to the targeted interception of the communications of Members of Parliament or an exemption from the legal regime governing interception. The Doctrine recognised that there could be instances where interception might be necessary.</p><p>The Prime Minister announced that as matter of policy the PM will be consulted should there ever be a proposal to target any UK Parliamentarian’s communications under a warrant issued by a Secretary of State. This applies to Members of Parliament, members of the House of Lords, the Scottish Parliament, the Northern Ireland Assembly, the Welsh Assembly and UK members of the European Parliament. It applies to all activity authorised by a warrant issued by a Secretary of State: any instance of targeted interception and, electronic surveillance and equipment interference, when undertaken by the Security and Intelligence Agencies. This is in addition to the rigorous safeguards already in the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) and the Code of Practice issued under it which set out a series of robust safeguards for any instance of interception.</p><p>It is long standing policy of successive Governments neither to confirm nor deny any specific activity by the Security and Intelligence Agencies. Under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 it is an offence for anyone to identify an individual interception warrant or an individual interception that takes place.</p> answering member constituency South Holland and The Deepings answering member printed Mr John Hayes question first answered 16/11/2015 17:35:11 answering member 350 label Biography information for Sir John Hayes previous answer version 25175 answering member constituency South Holland and The Deepings answering member printed Mr John Hayes answering member 350 label Biography information for Sir John Hayes
tabling member	4028 label Biography information for Karl McCartney

421706

registered interest
date	15/10/2015
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Members: Surveillance
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether the Wilson Doctrine has been consistently applied to the communications of the hon. Member for South Down; and whether that Member has been subject to surveillance.
tabling member constituency	South Down
tabling member printed	Ms Margaret Ritchie
uin	12067
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 16/11/2015 answer text <p>The Government’s position on the Wilson Doctrine was set out by the Prime Minister in a written ministerial statement made on 4 November 2015.</p><p>As the Prime Minister made clear, the Wilson Doctrine has never been an absolute bar to the targeted interception of the communications of Members of Parliament or an exemption from the legal regime governing interception. The Doctrine recognised that there could be instances where interception might be necessary.</p><p>The Prime Minister announced that as matter of policy the PM will be consulted should there ever be a proposal to target any UK Parliamentarian’s communications under a warrant issued by a Secretary of State. This applies to Members of Parliament, members of the House of Lords, the Scottish Parliament, the Northern Ireland Assembly, the Welsh Assembly and UK members of the European Parliament. It applies to all activity authorised by a warrant issued by a Secretary of State: any instance of targeted interception and, electronic surveillance and equipment interference, when undertaken by the Security and Intelligence Agencies. This is in addition to the rigorous safeguards already in the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) and the Code of Practice issued under it which set out a series of robust safeguards for any instance of interception.</p><p>It is long standing policy of successive Governments neither to confirm nor deny any specific activity by the Security and Intelligence Agencies. Under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 it is an offence for anyone to identify an individual interception warrant or an individual interception that takes place.</p> answering member constituency South Holland and The Deepings answering member printed Mr John Hayes question first answered 16/11/2015 17:27:43 answering member 350 label Biography information for Sir John Hayes previous answer version 25164 answering member constituency South Holland and The Deepings answering member printed Mr John Hayes answering member 350 label Biography information for Sir John Hayes
tabling member	4130 label Biography information for Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick