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 question first ministerially corrected answering member label previous answer version answering member printed answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

178345

	registered interest
	date	06/02/2015
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Hunting: Prosecutions
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have any plans to investigate the basis on which the Crown Prosecution Service brought forward a prosecution against Terrence Potter and Paul Whitehead of the Lunesdale Hunt.
	tabling member printed	Lord Blencathra
	uin	HL4733
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/02/2015 answer text <p>There is no plan to investigate the basis upon which this prosecution was brought.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The prosecution was brought following an investigation by North Yorkshire Police into the alleged commission of a wildlife crime. The two defendants were originally charged by the police to appear in Court on 5 September 2014. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) subsequently undertook a review of the case, in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors, and determined, firstly, that there was a realistic prospect of conviction and, secondly, that it was in the public interest to prosecute.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>As the allegations were denied, the case was listed for trial before York Magistrates’ Court on 21 January 2015. On the day of trial, two key prosecution witnesses who produced video evidence of the offence were unavailable to attend court. The CPS had previously made an application to adjourn and reschedule the trial. Due to an administrative failing this application was made very close to the trial date and it was refused by the court. The trial then took place in the absence of these two witnesses and without their evidence being heard. The Court found no case to answer against each defendant.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Wallace of Tankerness question first answered 19/02/2015 09:34:31 answering member 630 label Biography information for Lord Wallace of Tankerness
	tabling member	497 label Biography information for Lord Blencathra

178346

	registered interest
	date	06/02/2015
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Hunting: Prosecutions
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what scrutiny the Crown Prosecution Service makes of any evidence presented to them by the League Against Cruel Sports alleging breaches of the Hunting Act 2004 before deciding to prosecute.
	tabling member printed	Lord Blencathra
	uin	HL4734
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/02/2015 answer text <p>The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) prosecutes following an investigation and referral of a case by the police. If the police charge an offence under the Hunting Act 2004 without a request for advice, a crown prosecutor reviews the case following charge. Each case will be reviewed in accordance with the Full Code Test set out in the Code for Crown Prosecutors. Where the evidential and public interest stages of the Full Code Test are met, then the CPS will robustly prosecute.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The prosecutor must consider whether each piece of evidence is admissible, reliable and credible – this would include being satisfied that it was lawfully obtained. Evidence provided by the League against Cruel Sports would be looked at in the same way as any other evidence.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Wallace of Tankerness question first answered 19/02/2015 09:35:00 answering member 630 label Biography information for Lord Wallace of Tankerness
	tabling member	497 label Biography information for Lord Blencathra

178347

	registered interest
	date	06/02/2015
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Hunting: Prosecutions
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have any plans to investigate the basis on which the Crown Prosecution Service brought charges against Mr Liddle of the Melbreak Hunt, charges which were then dropped.
	tabling member printed	Lord Blencathra
	uin	HL4735
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/02/2015 answer text <p>Cumbria Constabulary charged Mr Liddle with hunting a wild mammal with dogs (contrary to Sections 1 and 6 of the Hunting Act 2004) and allowing dogs to be dangerously out of control (contrary to Section 3 of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991). This followed an incident on 9 March 2014 when members of the public witnessed a fox being killed by a pack of hounds on land near Buttermere. The police were satisfied that there was sufficient evidence to charge Mr Liddle and issued a postal requisition on 6 June 2014. These offences fall within the category of offences where the charging decision rests with the police. Mr Liddle appeared at Workington Magistrates Court on 27 June 2014 and pleaded not guilty to all charges. Following receipt of all the evidential material from the police, the case was reviewed by the Crown Prosecution Service’s North West Area Wildlife Crime Lead. He applied the Code for Crown Prosecutors and determined that there was insufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction having considered all of the required elements of the offence. Following consultation with Cumbria Constabulary the case was discontinued on 10 September 2014. The Crown Prosecution Service did not, therefore, bring charges against Mr Liddle. The case was brought to an end after the full evidential material was reviewed.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Wallace of Tankerness question first answered 19/02/2015 09:34:10 answering member 630 label Biography information for Lord Wallace of Tankerness
	tabling member	497 label Biography information for Lord Blencathra

178691

	registered interest
	date	09/02/2015
	answering body	Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
	answering dept id	26
	answering dept short name	Business, Innovation and Skills
	answering dept sort name	Business, Innovation and Skills
	hansard heading	European Union
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the total cost of the Review of the Balance of Competences between the United Kingdom and the European Union to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and its associated agencies, broken down by (1) staff time, (2) printing costs, (3) running of engagement events, (4) witness expenses, (5) publicity of the reports, and (6) any and all other associated costs.
	tabling member printed	Baroness Quin
	uin	HL4840
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/02/2015 answer text <p>As you will be aware, the Balance of Competences Review concluded in December. It was the most comprehensive analysis of the UK’s relationship with the EU ever undertaken. The review involved a large number of Departments across Whitehall to produce 32 reports. The Review was based on the evidence and views received through widespread consultation with interested parties from across society. Across the whole review, departments received close to 2,300 evidence submissions. Departments held over 250 events, attended by around 2,100 stakeholders.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>It was important that what is an unprecedented examination of EU membership was done with appropriate time and care. But the government is also very conscious of the need to ensure value for money in everything it does.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>(1) Staff time</p><p> </p><p><strong>Between 2012-2013, the Balance of Competences Review Team in the Department was staffed by the equivalent of one Grade 7 (salary range £47, 545 - £55,882), and one intern (salary range £23,869 – £27, 281) dedicating 100% of their time to the review to project manage 7 BIS led reports and 1 joint report. Between 2013 – 2014 this was reduced to one Grade 7. Between 2012 – 2014 one Deputy Director (salary range £62,000 - £117,800) dedicated 20% of their time as the senior reporting officer for the review. All other work on the review was allocated, according to need, to existing staff within the Department. Therefore, providing a full breakdown of staff time and costs would exceed the disproportionate cost threshold.</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>(2) Printing costs</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>Printing and publication for the 8 Departmental reports, was coordinated centrally but paid for by the Department, with the exception of the Single Market Report which was printed in-house. Printing and publication costs for all 8 reports totalled £32,821.94. The costs for all 32 reports was £133, 053 </strong><ins class="ministerial"> This figure was a partial figure, covering the printing of some, but not all, reports across the whole review.</ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>(3) Running of Engagement events</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>Each policy team in the Department held a wide range of engagement events over the 2 years; the department did not incur any costs for the running of these events. The facilities for hosting these events were either provided by other Government Departments or by business partners or were held on department premises at no extra cost to the department. </strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>(4) Witness </strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>From centrally held figures, we understand that across the whole of the Balance of Competences Review witness expenses amounted to approximately £2,255.00.</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>(5) Publicity</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>The Department did not incur any publicity costs as we published the reports and the call for evidence via email, social media and the Government website.</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>(6) All other associated costs</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>Between 2012 – 2014 the Department commissioned research and analysis to form part of the literature review to provide the reports with legal analysis to ensure the reports were neither too analytical or too speculative and political, but instead adhere to the agreed treaties. The cost for all 8 reports was £108, 738.28. </strong></p><p> </p><p><strong><br /> Department officials incurred some additional associated costs due to travel to meetings and stakeholder events in the UK. Some officials also incurred costs related to events in Brussels. We estimate that the additional travel costs incurred amounted to less than £300.</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member printed Baroness Neville-Rolfe question first answered 19/02/2015 16:48:27 question first ministerially corrected 10/03/2015 16:18:58 answering member 4284 label Biography information for Baroness Neville-Rolfe previous answer version 45530 answering member printed Baroness Neville-Rolfe answering member 4284 label Biography information for Baroness Neville-Rolfe
	tabling member	518 label Biography information for Baroness Quin

178697

	registered interest
	date	09/02/2015
	answering body	Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
	answering dept id	26
	answering dept short name	Business, Innovation and Skills
	answering dept sort name	Business, Innovation and Skills
	hansard heading	European Union
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the total cost of the Review of the Balance of Competences between the United Kingdom and the European Union to UK Export Finance and its associated agencies, broken down by (1) staff time, (2) printing costs, (3) running of engagement events, (4) witness expenses, (5) publicity of the reports, and (6) any and all other associated costs.
	tabling member printed	Lord Tugendhat
	uin	HL4846
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/02/2015 answer text <p><del class="ministerial">I refer my Noble Lord to the answer as given for <strong>HL4840</strong></del></p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial">I refer the noble Lord to HL4847 for the combined answer.</ins></p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member printed Baroness Neville-Rolfe question first answered 19/02/2015 16:52:19 question first ministerially corrected 23/02/2015 15:09:02 answering member 4284 label Biography information for Baroness Neville-Rolfe previous answer version 45531 answering member printed Baroness Neville-Rolfe answering member 4284 label Biography information for Baroness Neville-Rolfe
	tabling member	1705 label Biography information for Lord Tugendhat

178698

	registered interest
	date	09/02/2015
	answering body	Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
	answering dept id	26
	answering dept short name	Business, Innovation and Skills
	answering dept sort name	Business, Innovation and Skills
	hansard heading	European Union
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the total cost of the Review of the Balance of Competences between the United Kingdom and the European Union to UK Trade and Investment and its associated agencies, broken down by (1) staff time, (2) printing costs, (3) running of engagement events, (4) witness expenses, (5) publicity of the reports, and (6) any and all other associated costs.
	tabling member printed	Lord Tugendhat
	uin	HL4847
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/02/2015 answer text <p><del class="ministerial">I refer my Noble Lord to the answer as given for <strong>HL4840</strong></del></p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial">As you will be aware, the Balance of Competences Review concluded in December. It was the most comprehensive analysis of the UK’s relationship with the EU ever undertaken. The review involved a large number of Departments across Whitehall to produce 32 reports. The Review was based on the evidence and views received through widespread consultation with interested parties from across society. Across the whole review, departments received close to 2,300 evidence submissions. Departments held over 250 events, attended by around 2,100 stakeholders.</ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial">It was important that what is an unprecedented examination of EU membership was done with appropriate time and care. But the government is also very conscious of the need to ensure value for money in everything it does.</ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial">(1) Staff time</ins></p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>Between 2012-2013, the Balance of Competences Review Team in the Department was staffed by the equivalent of one Grade 7 (salary range £47, 545 - £55,882), and one intern (salary range £23,869 – £27, 281) dedicating 100% of their time to the review to project manage 7 BIS led reports and 1 joint report. Between 2013 – 2014 this was reduced to one Grade 7. Between 2012 – 2014 one Deputy Director (salary range £62,000 - £117,800) dedicated 20% of their time as the senior reporting officer for the review. All other work on the review was allocated, according to need, to existing staff within the Department. Therefore, providing a full breakdown of staff time and costs would exceed the disproportionate cost threshold.</strong></ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>(2) Printing costs</strong></ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>Printing and publication for the 8 Departmental reports, was coordinated centrally but paid for by the Department, with the exception of the Single Market Report which was printed in-house. Printing and publication costs for all 8 reports totalled £32,821.94. The costs for all 32 reports was £133, 053. This figure was a partial figure, covering the printing of some, but not all, reports across the whole review. </strong></ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>(3) Running of Engagement events</strong></ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>Each policy team in the Department held a wide range of engagement events over the 2 years; the department did not incur any costs for the running of these events. The facilities for hosting these events were either provided by other Government Departments or by business partners or were held on department premises at no extra cost to the department. </strong></ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>(4) Witness </strong></ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>From centrally held figures, we understand that across the whole of the Balance of Competences Review witness expenses amounted to approximately £2,255.00.</strong></ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>(5) Publicity</strong></ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>The Department did not incur any publicity costs as we published the reports and the call for evidence via email, social media and the Government website.</strong></ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>(6) All other associated costs</strong></ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>Between 2012 – 2014 the Department commissioned research and analysis to form part of the literature review to provide the reports with legal analysis to ensure the reports were neither too analytical or too speculative and political, but instead adhere to the agreed treaties. The cost for all 8 reports was £108, 738.28. </strong></ins></p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong><br /> Department officials incurred some additional associated costs due to travel to meetings and stakeholder events in the UK. Some officials also incurred costs related to events in Brussels. We estimate that the additional travel costs incurred amounted to less than £300.</strong></ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member printed Baroness Neville-Rolfe question first answered 19/02/2015 16:52:27 question first ministerially corrected 23/02/2015 15:08:40 answering member 4284 label Biography information for Baroness Neville-Rolfe previous answer version 45532 answering member printed Baroness Neville-Rolfe answering member 4284 label Biography information for Baroness Neville-Rolfe
	tabling member	1705 label Biography information for Lord Tugendhat

178690

	registered interest
	date	09/02/2015
	answering body	Department for Culture Media and Sport
	answering dept id	10
	answering dept short name	Culture, Media and Sport
	answering dept sort name	Culture, Media and Sport
	hansard heading	European Union
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the total cost of the Review of the Balance of Competences between the United Kingdom and the European Union to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and its associated agencies, broken down by (1) staff time, (2) printing costs, (3) running of engagement events, (4) witness expenses, (5) publicity of the reports, and (6) any and all other associated costs.
	tabling member printed	Baroness Quin
	uin	HL4839
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/02/2015 answer text <p>As you will be aware, the Balance of Competences Review concluded in December. It was the most comprehensive analysis of the UK’s relationship with the EU ever undertaken. The Review involved a large number of Departments across Whitehall to produce the 32 reports. The Review was based on the evidence and views received through widespread consultation with interested parties from across society. Across the whole review, departments received close to 2,300 evidence submissions. Departments held over 250 events, attended by around 2,100 stakeholders.</p><p>It was important that what is an unprecedented examination of EU membership was done with appropriate time and care. But the government is also very conscious of the need to ensure value for money in everything that it does.</p><p>Work on the Review was allocated according to need to existing staff within the Department. Providing a full breakdown of staff time and costs would exceed the disproportionate cost threshold.</p><p>The Department of Culture, Media and Sport paid £3,321.15 for printing and publication of the Culture, Tourism and Sport report.</p><p>One engagement event for the Culture, Tourism and Sport report was held in Brussels and cost approximately £500. Other engagement events were held within the Department at no extra material cost.</p><p>Across the whole of the Balance of Competences Review witness expenses amounted to approximately £2,255.00.</p><p> </p><p>There was no cost for the publicity of the Culture, Tourism and Sport report, which utilised existing free social media and internet channels. There were no other associated costs.</p> answering member printed Lord Wallace of Saltaire question first answered 19/02/2015 15:33:23 answering member 1816 label Biography information for Lord Wallace of Saltaire
	tabling member	518 label Biography information for Baroness Quin

178944

	registered interest
	date	10/02/2015
	answering body	Department for Culture Media and Sport
	answering dept id	10
	answering dept short name	Culture, Media and Sport
	answering dept sort name	Culture, Media and Sport
	hansard heading	LGBT+ People
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what discussions they have had with British-based banks and other major companies which have outsourced customer services to overseas countries about the way in which enquiries from United Kingdom citizens who have entered into a civil partnership or same-sex marriage are handled.
	tabling member printed	Lord Smith of Finsbury
	uin	HL4924
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/02/2015 answer text <p>The Government has had no discussions with businesses on this specific issue. The Equality Act 2010 provides that service providers are not allowed to discriminate, harass or victimise service users because they have a ‘protected characteristic’ – which includes sex and sexual orientation, amongst others. The Act provides that, in some circumstances, employers can be liable for the acts of their employees or agents. Businesses are required to comply with the relevant provision of the Act applicable to them unless an exception in the Act applies.</p> answering member printed Lord Wallace of Saltaire question first answered 19/02/2015 14:36:40 answering member 1816 label Biography information for Lord Wallace of Saltaire
	tabling member	186 label Biography information for Lord Smith of Finsbury

178958

	registered interest
	date	10/02/2015
	answering body	Department for Education
	answering dept id	60
	answering dept short name	Education
	answering dept sort name	Education
	hansard heading	Schools: Defibrillators
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Earl Howe on 3 February (HL4358), what assessment they have made of the placement of defibrillators in schools in Liverpool; and whether there are plans to increase the number of defibrillators in schools across the country.
	tabling member printed	Lord Storey
	uin	HL4931
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/02/2015 answer text <p>The Department for Education is encouraging schools to purchase automated external defibrillators (AEDs) as part of their first aid equipment. To help them do this, on 26 November 2014, we announced new arrangements to allow schools to purchase AEDs at a competitive price. This is the result of a unique agreement between the Department for Education and the Department of Health, enabling NHS Supply Chain to purchase devices in batches from approved framework suppliers via a reverse auction process. The discount achieved on each batch is then passed on to schools through a reduced unit price.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The Department for Education does not collect information about the placement of defibrillators in schools but is able to provide details of which schools have purchased an AED under the arrangements described above.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>To help schools in considering whether to purchase a defibrillator, the Department has also published advice on installing and maintaining AEDs on school premises. This has been developed drawing on the expertise of NHS ambulance services and voluntary and community sector organisations.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Nash question first answered 19/02/2015 14:27:35 answering member 4270 label Biography information for Lord Nash
	tabling member	4238 label Biography information for Lord Storey

178960

	registered interest
	date	10/02/2015
	answering body	Department for Education
	answering dept id	60
	answering dept short name	Education
	answering dept sort name	Education
	hansard heading	Relationships and Sex Education
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they have taken to ensure that consent and emotional safety in relationships are given enough emphasis with sexual and relationship education.
	tabling member printed	Lord Storey
	uin	HL4932
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/02/2015 answer text <p>Education has an important role to play in encouraging young people to build healthy relationships, and to identify those relationships which are unhealthy. The statutory sex and relationships education (SRE) guidance, which schools must have regard to when teaching SRE, makes clear that teaching should ensure young people develop positive values and a moral framework that will guide their decisions, judgments and behaviour. This is particularly relevant to sexual consent and the guidance makes clear that all young people should understand how the law applies to sexual relationships.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>We have commissioned the PSHE Association to produce guidance for teachers on teaching about consent, which will be published shortly.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Nash question first answered 19/02/2015 14:15:41 answering member 4270 label Biography information for Lord Nash
	tabling member	4238 label Biography information for Lord Storey