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 grouped question UIN question first answered answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

1111054

	registered interest
	date	10/04/2019
	answering body	Department for Transport
	answering dept id	27
	answering dept short name	Transport
	answering dept sort name	Transport
	hansard heading	Midland Main Line: Electrification
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government how much has been spent on remodelling bridges in Leicestershire to accommodate the overhead cabling required for electrification along the parts of the Midland Main Line which are not now to be electrified.
	tabling member printed	Baroness Randerson
	uin	HL15188
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 26/04/2019 answer text <p>Approximately £12m has been spent on remodelling bridges in Leicestershire as part of the Midland Main Line upgrade. These works have delivered benefits including extension of the life of the bridges, improved safety both at trackside and on highways above the bridges, improved access for maintenance and examination, and enhanced gauge clearance allowing larger freight trains to use the line.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Baroness Vere of Norbiton question first answered 26/04/2019 13:14:42 answering member 4580 label Biography information for Baroness Vere of Norbiton
	tabling member	4230 label Biography information for Baroness Randerson

1111059

	registered interest
	date	10/04/2019
	answering body	Department for Transport
	answering dept id	27
	answering dept short name	Transport
	answering dept sort name	Transport
	hansard heading	South Eastern Rail Franchise
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the specification they have issued for the South Eastern franchise ensures at least as many high speed trains from Maidstone West to London St Pancras as are provided during the current franchise; and what provisions will be included to ensure that the new operator provides a more reliable and punctual service.
	tabling member printed	Baroness Randerson
	uin	HL15191
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 26/04/2019 answer text <p>The franchise specification requires a minimum of two morning and evening peak high speed services, while today there are three. However, this is the minimum requirement of the Invitation to Tender, which bidders are incentivised to exceed.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Regarding a punctual and reliable service, the successful bidder will need to meet stringent contractual targets for operational performance in the life of the franchise. Where targets are not met, the franchisee will face financial penalties.</p> answering member printed Baroness Vere of Norbiton question first answered 26/04/2019 13:19:52 answering member 4580 label Biography information for Baroness Vere of Norbiton
	tabling member	4230 label Biography information for Baroness Randerson

1122883

	registered interest
	date	24/04/2019
	answering body	Department for Transport
	answering dept id	27
	answering dept short name	Transport
	answering dept sort name	Transport
	hansard heading	High Speed 2 Line: Railway Stations
	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 Sugg on 10 April (HL14857), whether the proposed height of station platforms above rail for dedicated HS2 train platforms complies with the EU Technical Standards for Interoperability; and if not, whether the Department for Transport has (1) applied for, and (2) received, a derogation for non-compliance.
	tabling member printed	Lord Berkeley
	uin	HL15274
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/05/2019 answer text <p>The proposed height of station platforms above rail for dedicated HS2 train platforms has been designed to ensure level access for all passengers. It does not comply with the current EU Technical Specification for Interoperability regarding platform heights. However, the HS2 network does comply with the relevant EU (‘GC’) loading gauge. No derogation has been applied for as this is not needed at this stage. Further consideration will be given to whether it is necessary to apply for a derogation, depending on the extent to which EU legislation applies in the UK at the point when the platforms are put into use.</p> answering member printed Baroness Vere of Norbiton question first answered 09/05/2019 13:06:09 answering member 4580 label Biography information for Baroness Vere of Norbiton
	tabling member	3526 label Biography information for Lord Berkeley

1122892

	registered interest
	date	24/04/2019
	answering body	Department for Transport
	answering dept id	27
	answering dept short name	Transport
	answering dept sort name	Transport
	hansard heading	Monarch Airlines: Insolvency
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government when they last talked with Greybull Capital about it contributing to the costs incurred by the Government in repatriating Monarch passengers after the airline collapsed.
	tabling member printed	Lord Myners
	uin	HL15283
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/05/2019 answer text <p>Greybull Capital is not itself a shareholder in Monarch Airlines but it does perform an advisory and management role for the principal shareholder, Petrol Jersey Limited. There is no formal legal mechanism we can use to oblige Greybull to contribute towards the cost of repatriating passengers.</p><p> </p><p>However Marc Meyohas, partner at Greybull, wrote to the Transport Select Committee acknowledging a moral obligation (if they make a profit) to contribute and help to defray the costs incurred by the Government in repatriating Monarch customers.</p><p> </p><p>Discussions with Greybull in relation to recovering the costs of the repatriation operation have been in writing. Ministers last wrote to Greybull on this matter on 5 December 2018.</p><p> </p><p>The extent of any profit or loss from Greybull Capital and Petrol Jersey Limited’s investment in Monarch Airlines will depend on the outcome of the administration process, which is not due to conclude until October 2020.</p><p> </p><p>I refer to the Written Ministerial Statement made by the Secretary of State on 9 May 2019, which reported that the final cost to the taxpayer from the Monarch repatriation have been assessed to be £40.5m. This does not include any contribution from Greybull Capital or the principal shareholder, Petrol Jersey Limited. We do not expect any material change to the final cost to the taxpayer.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member printed Baroness Vere of Norbiton grouped question UIN HL15293 question first answered 09/05/2019 14:24:37 answering member 4580 label Biography information for Baroness Vere of Norbiton
	tabling member	3869 label Biography information for Lord Myners

1122900

	registered interest
	date	24/04/2019
	answering body	Department for Transport
	answering dept id	27
	answering dept short name	Transport
	answering dept sort name	Transport
	hansard heading	West Coast Partnership Rail Franchise
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government what priority they give to at least one of the shortlisted bidders for the West Coast rail franchise being a British company; and what steps, if any, they have taken to achieve this.
	tabling member printed	Lord Greaves
	uin	HL15291
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/05/2019 answer text <p>The key aspect of competition is that it is fair and open to all companies. This approach has been followed throughout the West Coast Partnership competition and all bidders have been, and continue to be, treated equally. This allows for the greatest level of competition, which will contribute to us securing both the best value for money for the taxpayer and benefits for the passenger from the franchise.</p> answering member printed Baroness Vere of Norbiton question first answered 01/05/2019 11:42:29 answering member 4580 label Biography information for Baroness Vere of Norbiton
	tabling member	2569 label Biography information for Lord Greaves

1122901

	registered interest
	date	24/04/2019
	answering body	Department for Transport
	answering dept id	27
	answering dept short name	Transport
	answering dept sort name	Transport
	hansard heading	Railways: Franchises
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the likelihood of all the rail franchises in England and Wales being held by companies owned and controlled in other countries; and whether they consider such a situation to be desirable.
	tabling member printed	Lord Greaves
	uin	HL15292
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/05/2019 answer text <p>Ownership by non-UK governments accounts for 29% of the DfT-managed franchise market (based on notional share of passenger revenues during 2017/18). This calculation excludes train operators other than DfT-managed franchisees.</p><p> </p><p>All franchise bidders and operators are required to be UK tax registered firms, registered with Companies House and at arms-length from owners. Train operating companies pay tax here in the UK and, most importantly, have been awarded franchises through open competitions precisely because they offer the best deal for UK passengers and taxpayers. Private sector franchisees continue to support key investments to improve services to passengers, including expanded car parking provision, station upgrades, and major new train fleets.</p> answering member printed Baroness Vere of Norbiton grouped question UIN HL15294 question first answered 09/05/2019 13:00:41 answering member 4580 label Biography information for Baroness Vere of Norbiton
	tabling member	2569 label Biography information for Lord Greaves

1122902

	registered interest
	date	24/04/2019
	answering body	Department for Transport
	answering dept id	27
	answering dept short name	Transport
	answering dept sort name	Transport
	hansard heading	Monarch Airlines: Insolvency
	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 Sugg on 12 March (HL14267), whether the contribution promised by Greybull to meet part of the cost incurred by taxpayers in repatriating customers of Monarch Airlines is dependent on the completion of the administration of the Monarch group of companies; and when ministers last met Greybull in connection with Greybull's contribution to costs.
	tabling member printed	Lord Myners
	uin	HL15293
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/05/2019 answer text <p>Greybull Capital is not itself a shareholder in Monarch Airlines but it does perform an advisory and management role for the principal shareholder, Petrol Jersey Limited. There is no formal legal mechanism we can use to oblige Greybull to contribute towards the cost of repatriating passengers.</p><p> </p><p>However Marc Meyohas, partner at Greybull, wrote to the Transport Select Committee acknowledging a moral obligation (if they make a profit) to contribute and help to defray the costs incurred by the Government in repatriating Monarch customers.</p><p> </p><p>Discussions with Greybull in relation to recovering the costs of the repatriation operation have been in writing. Ministers last wrote to Greybull on this matter on 5 December 2018.</p><p> </p><p>The extent of any profit or loss from Greybull Capital and Petrol Jersey Limited’s investment in Monarch Airlines will depend on the outcome of the administration process, which is not due to conclude until October 2020.</p><p> </p><p>I refer to the Written Ministerial Statement made by the Secretary of State on 9 May 2019, which reported that the final cost to the taxpayer from the Monarch repatriation have been assessed to be £40.5m. This does not include any contribution from Greybull Capital or the principal shareholder, Petrol Jersey Limited. We do not expect any material change to the final cost to the taxpayer.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member printed Baroness Vere of Norbiton grouped question UIN HL15283 question first answered 09/05/2019 14:24:38 answering member 4580 label Biography information for Baroness Vere of Norbiton
	tabling member	3869 label Biography information for Lord Myners

1122903

	registered interest
	date	24/04/2019
	answering body	Department for Transport
	answering dept id	27
	answering dept short name	Transport
	answering dept sort name	Transport
	hansard heading	Railways: Franchises
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government what proportion of rail franchises currently in operation are held, in whole or in part, by companies wholly or partly owned by foreign governments; and what percentage of total ownership of rail franchises this represents.
	tabling member printed	Lord Greaves
	uin	HL15294
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/05/2019 answer text <p>Ownership by non-UK governments accounts for 29% of the DfT-managed franchise market (based on notional share of passenger revenues during 2017/18). This calculation excludes train operators other than DfT-managed franchisees.</p><p> </p><p>All franchise bidders and operators are required to be UK tax registered firms, registered with Companies House and at arms-length from owners. Train operating companies pay tax here in the UK and, most importantly, have been awarded franchises through open competitions precisely because they offer the best deal for UK passengers and taxpayers. Private sector franchisees continue to support key investments to improve services to passengers, including expanded car parking provision, station upgrades, and major new train fleets.</p> answering member printed Baroness Vere of Norbiton grouped question UIN HL15292 question first answered 09/05/2019 13:00:41 answering member 4580 label Biography information for Baroness Vere of Norbiton
	tabling member	2569 label Biography information for Lord Greaves

1123281

	registered interest
	date	25/04/2019
	answering body	Department for Transport
	answering dept id	27
	answering dept short name	Transport
	answering dept sort name	Transport
	hansard heading	Driving under Influence
	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 Sugg on 2 April (HL14846), whether they will also monitor the results of the December 2014 reduction in the legal blood alcohol limit for motorists in Scotland from 80 milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood to 50 milligrams; and what assessment they have made of the possible effects of introducing such a reduction for motorists in the rest of the UK.
	tabling member printed	Earl Attlee
	uin	HL15337
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/05/2019 answer text <p>An independent report of the impact of the Scottish limit reduction, led by the University of Glasgow, was published on 12 December 2018. The study found that lowering the drink drive limit was not associated with any reduction in total road traffic accident rates or serious and fatal road traffic accident rates.</p><p> </p><p>There are no current plans to lower the drink drive limit in England and Wales. The Government believes that rigorous enforcement and serious penalties for drink drivers are a more effective deterrent than changing the drink driving limit.</p> answering member printed Baroness Vere of Norbiton question first answered 08/05/2019 15:09:37 answering member 4580 label Biography information for Baroness Vere of Norbiton
	tabling member	3425 label Biography information for Earl Attlee

1123283

	registered interest
	date	25/04/2019
	answering body	Department for Transport
	answering dept id	27
	answering dept short name	Transport
	answering dept sort name	Transport
	hansard heading	Road Traffic Offences: Mobile Phones
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government how many drivers using mobile phones while driving have been convicted of causing death or serious injury in the last five years; and what assessment they have made of whether drivers using hands-free or other mobile devices have a greater risk of causing an accident.
	tabling member printed	Lord Berkeley
	uin	HL15339
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/05/2019 answer text <p>The Ministry of Justice court proceedings database does not distinguish convictions involving mobile phone use from the broader offences of causing death/serious injury by dangerous driving.</p><p> </p><p>The Department for Transport has not carried out an assessment of hands-free mobile phone use, or use of other mobile devices such as satellite navigation equipment, while driving. The Highway Code stresses the importance of proper concentration while driving. If someone drives poorly because they are distracted by a phone conversation, for example, even if using hands-free, then the police can take enforcement action for failing to have proper control of the vehicle.</p> answering member printed Baroness Vere of Norbiton question first answered 08/05/2019 13:28:38 answering member 4580 label Biography information for Baroness Vere of Norbiton
	tabling member	3526 label Biography information for Lord Berkeley