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 printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member printed question first answered answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

1051945

registered interest
date	30/01/2019
answering body	Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
answering dept id	201
answering dept short name	Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
answering dept sort name	Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
hansard heading	Company Accounts
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government whether, and if so why, there is a difference between the statutory definition of a liability required for companies accounts as set out in Part 18 and Part 23 of the Companies Act 2006 and the Large and Medium-sized Companies and Groups (Accounts and Reports) Regulations 2008, compared with the definition of a liability required in FRS102, set by the Financial Reporting Council; and what authority, if any, the Financial Reporting Council has to set standards with requirements that run contrary to requirements set out in statute.
tabling member printed	Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted
uin	HL13280
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 05/02/2019 answer text <p>The Government considers that there is no difference between the meaning of a liability, as recorded in companies’ accounts, in Parts 18 and 23 of the Companies Act 2006, compared with the definition of a liability in The Financial Reporting Standard (FRS) 102, which may be applied in accordance with Part 15 of the Act.</p><p> </p><p>The FRC issues the standards for the purposes of section 464 of the Companies Act 2006, having been prescribed as the standard issuing body by the Statutory Auditors (Amendment of Companies Act 2006 and Delegation of Functions etc) Order 2012 (SI 2012/1741). In doing so the FRC must adhere to the requirements set out in statute. Unquoted companies are required to use accounting standards issued by the FRC, including FRS 102, when preparing their accounts under the Companies Act, except where they choose to use International Accounting Standards.</p> answering member printed Lord Henley question first answered 05/02/2019 16:18:18 answering member 2616 label Biography information for Lord Henley
tabling member	4562 label Biography information for Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted

1051968

registered interest
date	30/01/2019
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Female Genital Mutilation: Prosecutions
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Manzoor on 29 January (HL12848), how many successful prosecutions there have been in the UK for female genital mutiliation; and how many prosecutions are pending.
tabling member printed	Lord Pearson of Rannoch
uin	HL13299
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 06/02/2019 answer text <p>Up until 31 December 2017, there have been two prosecutions in England and Wales (one in 2014, and one in 2016) but no convictions for the principal offence of female genital mutilation under the Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003. Data for 2018 will be published in May 2019.</p><p>Whilst not yet recorded in the official statistics, a jury convicted the first defendant of an FGM offence on 1 February 2019.</p><p>Information around pending prosecutions is held by the Crown Prosecution Service.</p> answering member printed Lord Keen of Elie question first answered 06/02/2019 12:34:27 answering member 4538 label Biography information for Lord Keen of Elie
tabling member	3153 label Biography information for Lord Pearson of Rannoch

1051989

registered interest
date	30/01/2019
answering body	The Senior Deputy Speaker
answering dept id	204
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name	Senior Deputy Speaker (HoL)
hansard heading	Parliamentary Estate: Proof of Identity
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker what consideration has been given to requiring all visitors to the Parliamentary estate to present photo identification before entry.
tabling member printed	Viscount Waverley
uin	HL13316
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 07/02/2019 answer text <p>There are over one million visitors to Parliament each year. Visitors access the estate for many reasons. These include: to meet with a Member or a member of staff; to attend a Member-sponsored meeting or meetings at official level; to give evidence to a Committee; to lobby; to attend debates in both Houses (in the Chambers and Committees); to attend functions and banqueting events; to take a tour (both paid-for and democratic free tours); or as part of an Education Service visit. Many visits do not need to be pre-booked. In order to promote open access to Parliament controls are kept proportionate to the security risk. Photo identification by visitors is not currently deemed proportionate and if introduced would need to be verified, significantly delaying the admission of visitors to Parliament and resulting in lengthy queues at peak times.</p><p>All non-passholders are subject to search and screening measures before entering the estate. The Parliamentary Security Department do not comment publicly on the details of security measures.</p><p>The Director of Security for Parliament is content to meet with any members who wish to discuss specific concerns.</p> answering member printed Lord McFall of Alcluith question first answered 07/02/2019 12:41:04 answering member 4148 label Biography information for Lord McFall of Alcluith
tabling member	1744 label Biography information for Viscount Waverley