Show Search Form

Search Results

human indexable	true false
published	true false
registered interest	true false
answer date	exactly: or between: and
date	exactly: or between: and
date tabled	exactly: or between: and
ddp created	exactly: or between: and
ddp modified	exactly: or between: and
answering body
question status
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
hansard heading
house id
identifier
legislature	pref label
parliament number
question first answered
question text
session
session number
tabling member printed
title
type
uin
version
written parliamentary question type
answer	is ministerial correction true false answer text question first answered
creator	label
publisher	pref label
tabling member	label

Search

77258

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	24/07/2014
	date	10/07/2014
	date tabled	10/07/2014
	ddp created	10/07/2014 21:29:43
	ddp modified	06/02/2015 18:36:54
	answering body	Department for Culture Media and Sport
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	10
	answering dept short name	Culture, Media and Sport
	answering dept sort name	Culture, Media and Sport
	hansard heading	Gambling
	house id	2
	identifier	HL992
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	parliament number	55
	question first answered	17/07/2014 14:20:10
	question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government what work they have undertaken to quantify the costs of following the regulatory process for businesses applying for a United Kingdom gambling licence; and what assessment they have made of its impact on the competitiveness of new entrants to the online gambling sector.
	session	2014/15
	session number	4
	tabling member printed	Lord Mancroft
	title	House of Lords Tabled Parliamentary Question 2014/15 HL992
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	HL992
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>The Gambling Commission is responsible for ensuring that the costs of applying for a Commission licence, and the regulatory burden of complying with it, are the minimum necessary to ensure compatibility with the licensing objectives.</p><p> </p><p>The Commission keeps its licensing arrangements and licence conditions and codes (LCCP) under review. Recently it consulted on improved licensing processes for moving to an online licence application process, and introducing a multi-jurisdictional form to reduce the costs for applicants applying for licences in more than one jurisdiction.</p><p> </p><p>In advance of the Gambling (Licensing and Advertising) Act 2014 coming into force on 1<sup>st</sup> October, the Commission has been working with operators and overseas regulators to avoid duplication and undue regulatory burden wherever possible – for example, minimising the need for operators to duplicate material or assurances that can be obtained from an operator's host nation regulator. These consultations have enabled the Commission to take into account the impact on the relative attractiveness of operating legally in a regulated market compared to the risks of operating illegally.</p> question first answered 17/07/2014 14:20:10
	creator	1833 label Biography information for Lord Mancroft
	publisher	25277 pref label House of Lords
	tabling member	1833 label Biography information for Lord Mancroft

77259

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	24/07/2014
	date	10/07/2014
	date tabled	10/07/2014
	ddp created	10/07/2014 21:29:44
	ddp modified	06/02/2015 18:36:56
	answering body	Department for Culture Media and Sport
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	10
	answering dept short name	Culture, Media and Sport
	answering dept sort name	Culture, Media and Sport
	hansard heading	Gambling
	house id	2
	identifier	HL993
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	parliament number	55
	question first answered	17/07/2014 14:20:11
	question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they have undertaken any work to quantify the impact that the cost of regulatory compliance would have on the ability of licensed gambling operators to compete against unlicensed operators in the United Kingdom market.
	session	2014/15
	session number	4
	tabling member printed	Lord Mancroft
	title	House of Lords Tabled Parliamentary Question 2014/15 HL993
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	HL993
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>The Gambling Commission is responsible for ensuring that the costs of applying for a Commission licence, and the regulatory burden of complying with it, are the minimum necessary to ensure compatibility with the licensing objectives.</p><p> </p><p>The Commission keeps its licensing arrangements and licence conditions and codes (LCCP) under review. Recently it consulted on improved licensing processes for moving to an online licence application process, and introducing a multi-jurisdictional form to reduce the costs for applicants applying for licences in more than one jurisdiction.</p><p> </p><p>In advance of the Gambling (Licensing and Advertising) Act 2014 coming into force on 1<sup>st</sup> October, the Commission has been working with operators and overseas regulators to avoid duplication and undue regulatory burden wherever possible – for example, minimising the need for operators to duplicate material or assurances that can be obtained from an operator's host nation regulator. These consultations have enabled the Commission to take into account the impact on the relative attractiveness of operating legally in a regulated market compared to the risks of operating illegally.</p> question first answered 17/07/2014 14:20:11
	creator	1833 label Biography information for Lord Mancroft
	publisher	25277 pref label House of Lords
	tabling member	1833 label Biography information for Lord Mancroft

77260

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	24/07/2014
	date	10/07/2014
	date tabled	10/07/2014
	ddp created	10/07/2014 21:29:44
	ddp modified	06/02/2015 18:36:57
	answering body	Department for Culture Media and Sport
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	10
	answering dept short name	Culture, Media and Sport
	answering dept sort name	Culture, Media and Sport
	hansard heading	Gambling
	house id	2
	identifier	HL994
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	parliament number	55
	question first answered	17/07/2014 14:20:11
	question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government what work they have undertaken to ensure that the burden on companies applying for a gambling licence is minimised in line with their priorities to reduce red tape; and whether they considered the ability of such companies to compete against unlicensed operators in any such work.
	session	2014/15
	session number	4
	tabling member printed	Lord Mancroft
	title	House of Lords Tabled Parliamentary Question 2014/15 HL994
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	HL994
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>The Gambling Commission is responsible for ensuring that the costs of applying for a Commission licence, and the regulatory burden of complying with it, are the minimum necessary to ensure compatibility with the licensing objectives.</p><p> </p><p>The Commission keeps its licensing arrangements and licence conditions and codes (LCCP) under review. Recently it consulted on improved licensing processes for moving to an online licence application process, and introducing a multi-jurisdictional form to reduce the costs for applicants applying for licences in more than one jurisdiction.</p><p> </p><p>In advance of the Gambling (Licensing and Advertising) Act 2014 coming into force on 1<sup>st</sup> October, the Commission has been working with operators and overseas regulators to avoid duplication and undue regulatory burden wherever possible – for example, minimising the need for operators to duplicate material or assurances that can be obtained from an operator's host nation regulator. These consultations have enabled the Commission to take into account the impact on the relative attractiveness of operating legally in a regulated market compared to the risks of operating illegally.</p> question first answered 17/07/2014 14:20:11
	creator	1833 label Biography information for Lord Mancroft
	publisher	25277 pref label House of Lords
	tabling member	1833 label Biography information for Lord Mancroft

76643

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	23/07/2014
	date	09/07/2014
	date tabled	09/07/2014
	ddp created	09/07/2014 21:19:45
	ddp modified	06/02/2015 18:36:34
	answering body	Department for Culture Media and Sport
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	10
	answering dept short name	Culture, Media and Sport
	answering dept sort name	Culture, Media and Sport
	hansard heading	Broadcasting Programmes
	house id	2
	identifier	HL985
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	parliament number	55
	question first answered	17/07/2014 14:21:14
	question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government what is their policy in relation to television programmes in the United Kingdom depicting rape as a form of torture.
	session	2014/15
	session number	4
	tabling member printed	Lord Carlile of Berriew
	title	House of Lords Tabled Parliamentary Question 2014/15 HL985
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	HL985
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>Section 2.3 of Ofcom's broadcasting code states that: “…broadcasters must ensure that material which may cause offence is justified by the context…such material may include, but is not limited to, offensive language, violence, sex, sexual violence, humiliation, distress, violation of human dignity, discriminatory treatment or language (for example on the grounds of age, disability, gender, race, religion, beliefs and sexual orientation)”.</p><p>In respect of ‘adult sex material' – which contains images and/or language of a strong sexual nature, and which is broadcast primarily for the purposes of sexual arousal – this must not be broadcast at any time, other than on access-restricted services between 22.00 and 05.30. The most extreme material, equivalent to the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) R-18 rating must not be broadcast at any time.</p> question first answered 17/07/2014 14:21:14
	creator	1138 label Biography information for Lord Carlile of Berriew
	publisher	25277 pref label House of Lords
	tabling member	1138 label Biography information for Lord Carlile of Berriew

100642

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	06/11/2014
	date	23/10/2014
	date tabled	23/10/2014
	ddp created	23/10/2014 19:36:20
	ddp modified	01/06/2015 12:31:44
	answering body	Department of Health
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	17
	answering dept short name	Health
	answering dept sort name	Health
	hansard heading	Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership
	house id	2
	identifier	HL2373
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	parliament number	55
	question first answered	29/10/2014 12:27:46
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have undertaken an impact assessment of the potential impacts on the National Health Service of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership which is being negotiated between the European Union and the United States.
	session	2014/15
	session number	4
	tabling member printed	Baroness Manzoor
	title	House of Lords Tabled Parliamentary Question 2014/15 HL2373
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	HL2373
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) will not affect the way the United Kingdom Government runs the National Health Service. It has been made clear by negotiators from both the United States and the European Union that it is up to the UK alone to decide how the NHS is run and any assertion that TTIP will undermine the Government’s control of the NHS is a red herring.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The TTIP could offer great benefits to British business and for British jobs. Greater consistency in existing and new regulatory requirements would make it easier for companies - especially small and medium enterprises - to access markets and, for patients, potentially help to increase access to new medicines and medical devices.</p><p> </p> question first answered 29/10/2014 12:27:46
	creator	4289 label Biography information for Baroness Manzoor
	publisher	25277 pref label House of Lords
	tabling member	4289 label Biography information for Baroness Manzoor

100643

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	06/11/2014
	date	23/10/2014
	date tabled	23/10/2014
	ddp created	23/10/2014 19:36:20
	ddp modified	02/09/2015 14:13:05
	answering body	Department of Health
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	17
	answering dept short name	Health
	answering dept sort name	Health
	hansard heading	Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership
	house id	2
	identifier	HL2374
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	parliament number	55
	question first answered	29/10/2014 12:27:47
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what are the implications for the National Health Service and the staff who work in the National Health Service if the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership is agreed.
	session	2014/15
	session number	4
	tabling member printed	Baroness Manzoor
	title	House of Lords Tabled Parliamentary Question 2014/15 HL2374
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	HL2374
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) will not affect the way the United Kingdom Government runs the National Health Service. It has been made clear by negotiators from both the United States and the European Union that it is up to the UK alone to decide how the NHS is run and any assertion that TTIP will undermine the Government’s control of the NHS is a red herring.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The TTIP could offer great benefits to British business and for British jobs. Greater consistency in existing and new regulatory requirements would make it easier for companies - especially small and medium enterprises - to access markets and, for patients, potentially help to increase access to new medicines and medical devices.</p><p> </p> question first answered 29/10/2014 12:27:47
	creator	4289 label Biography information for Baroness Manzoor
	publisher	25277 pref label House of Lords
	tabling member	4289 label Biography information for Baroness Manzoor

100644

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	06/11/2014
	date	23/10/2014
	date tabled	23/10/2014
	ddp created	23/10/2014 19:36:20
	ddp modified	02/09/2015 14:13:09
	answering body	Department of Health
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	17
	answering dept short name	Health
	answering dept sort name	Health
	hansard heading	NHS: Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership
	house id	2
	identifier	HL2375
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	parliament number	55
	question first answered	29/10/2014 12:27:46
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what are the implications for hospitals and foundation trusts if the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership is agreed.
	session	2014/15
	session number	4
	tabling member printed	Baroness Manzoor
	title	House of Lords Tabled Parliamentary Question 2014/15 HL2375
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	HL2375
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) will not affect the way the United Kingdom Government runs the National Health Service. It has been made clear by negotiators from both the United States and the European Union that it is up to the UK alone to decide how the NHS is run and any assertion that TTIP will undermine the Government’s control of the NHS is a red herring.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The TTIP could offer great benefits to British business and for British jobs. Greater consistency in existing and new regulatory requirements would make it easier for companies - especially small and medium enterprises - to access markets and, for patients, potentially help to increase access to new medicines and medical devices.</p><p> </p> question first answered 29/10/2014 12:27:46
	creator	4289 label Biography information for Baroness Manzoor
	publisher	25277 pref label House of Lords
	tabling member	4289 label Biography information for Baroness Manzoor

100071

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	04/11/2014
	date	21/10/2014
	date tabled	21/10/2014
	ddp created	21/10/2014 20:53:43
	ddp modified	06/02/2015 19:14:51
	answering body	Home Office
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	1
	answering dept short name	Home Office
	answering dept sort name	Home Office
	hansard heading	Asylum: Finance
	house id	2
	identifier	HL2277
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	parliament number	55
	question first answered	28/10/2014 15:17:54
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have assessed the effectiveness of the combination of the Azure payment card and support under section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 in enabling refused asylum seekers to meet their basic needs.
	session	2014/15
	session number	4
	tabling member printed	Lord Roberts of Llandudno
	title	House of Lords Tabled Parliamentary Question 2014/15 HL2277
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	HL2277
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>The Azure card is issued to destitute failed asylum seekers accommodated under section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 because they are temporarily unable to leave the United Kingdom. The card can be used at most of the main supermarket chains to purchase food and other essential items. The performance of the card is kept under regular review but the Government is satisfied that it is an effective way of ensuring that recipients are able to meet their essential living needs and are not left destitute.</p><p> </p><p>The Government therefore has no plans to abolish the card or change legislation to allow people supported under section 4 to receive cash instead.</p><p> </p><p>The total administrative costs of the card scheme since it was introduced in 2009 are approximately £1,515,000. Estimated administrative costs for the current financial year are £200,000.</p><p> </p><p>The Government published its response to the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee report about asylum procedures in December 2013 (cm 8769). A response to the Committee’s views on section 4 support was set out on page 18-19.</p><p> </p> question first answered 28/10/2014 15:17:54
	creator	3691 label Biography information for Lord Roberts of Llandudno
	publisher	25277 pref label House of Lords
	tabling member	3691 label Biography information for Lord Roberts of Llandudno

100072

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	04/11/2014
	date	21/10/2014
	date tabled	21/10/2014
	ddp created	21/10/2014 20:53:43
	ddp modified	06/02/2015 19:14:52
	answering body	Home Office
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	1
	answering dept short name	Home Office
	answering dept sort name	Home Office
	hansard heading	Asylum: Finance
	house id	2
	identifier	HL2278
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	parliament number	55
	question first answered	28/10/2014 15:17:55
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have to abolish the Azure payment card and amend legislation to enable the provision of cash support for all refused asylum seekers until they are either given status in the United Kingdom or return to their country of origin.
	session	2014/15
	session number	4
	tabling member printed	Lord Roberts of Llandudno
	title	House of Lords Tabled Parliamentary Question 2014/15 HL2278
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	HL2278
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>The Azure card is issued to destitute failed asylum seekers accommodated under section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 because they are temporarily unable to leave the United Kingdom. The card can be used at most of the main supermarket chains to purchase food and other essential items. The performance of the card is kept under regular review but the Government is satisfied that it is an effective way of ensuring that recipients are able to meet their essential living needs and are not left destitute.</p><p> </p><p>The Government therefore has no plans to abolish the card or change legislation to allow people supported under section 4 to receive cash instead.</p><p> </p><p>The total administrative costs of the card scheme since it was introduced in 2009 are approximately £1,515,000. Estimated administrative costs for the current financial year are £200,000.</p><p> </p><p>The Government published its response to the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee report about asylum procedures in December 2013 (cm 8769). A response to the Committee’s views on section 4 support was set out on page 18-19.</p><p> </p> question first answered 28/10/2014 15:17:55
	creator	3691 label Biography information for Lord Roberts of Llandudno
	publisher	25277 pref label House of Lords
	tabling member	3691 label Biography information for Lord Roberts of Llandudno

100073

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	04/11/2014
	date	21/10/2014
	date tabled	21/10/2014
	ddp created	21/10/2014 20:53:43
	ddp modified	06/02/2015 19:15:12
	answering body	Home Office
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	1
	answering dept short name	Home Office
	answering dept sort name	Home Office
	hansard heading	Asylum: Finance
	house id	2
	identifier	HL2279
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	parliament number	55
	question first answered	28/10/2014 15:17:55
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government how much they have spent on administering the Azure card system since its inception.
	session	2014/15
	session number	4
	tabling member printed	Lord Roberts of Llandudno
	title	House of Lords Tabled Parliamentary Question 2014/15 HL2279
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	HL2279
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>The Azure card is issued to destitute failed asylum seekers accommodated under section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 because they are temporarily unable to leave the United Kingdom. The card can be used at most of the main supermarket chains to purchase food and other essential items. The performance of the card is kept under regular review but the Government is satisfied that it is an effective way of ensuring that recipients are able to meet their essential living needs and are not left destitute.</p><p> </p><p>The Government therefore has no plans to abolish the card or change legislation to allow people supported under section 4 to receive cash instead.</p><p> </p><p>The total administrative costs of the card scheme since it was introduced in 2009 are approximately £1,515,000. Estimated administrative costs for the current financial year are £200,000.</p><p> </p><p>The Government published its response to the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee report about asylum procedures in December 2013 (cm 8769). A response to the Committee’s views on section 4 support was set out on page 18-19.</p><p> </p> question first answered 28/10/2014 15:17:55
	creator	3691 label Biography information for Lord Roberts of Llandudno
	publisher	25277 pref label House of Lords
	tabling member	3691 label Biography information for Lord Roberts of Llandudno