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
answering body
question status
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
ddp modified
hansard heading
house id
identifier
legislature
parliament number
question first answered
question text
session
session number
tabling member constituency
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
tabling member	label

Search

1132830

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	20/06/2019
	date	18/06/2019
	date tabled	18/06/2019
	ddp created	18/06/2019 18:26:21
	answering body	Attorney General
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	ddp modified	19/06/2019 13:55:06 26/06/2019 10:56:05
	hansard heading	Prosecutions: South Yorkshire
	house id	1
	identifier	266094
	legislature	25259
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	26/06/2019 10:24:58
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, what the average number of days taken from the date of offence to a decision to charge an individual in South Yorkshire in each year since 2010 was.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Wentworth and Dearne
	tabling member printed	John Healey
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 266094
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	266094
	version	2
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) works closely with the Police to ensure that cases are thoroughly investigated before charges are brought. There has been an increase in the complexity of cases investigated by the police, with investigations often involving large amounts of electronic material (social media, emails, text messages, video and photographs) which needs to be reviewed by prosecutors before a charging decision can be made. This impacts on the average number of consultations and length of time taken for prosecutors to reach a charging decision.</p><p> </p><p>The CPS does not maintain a record of the average number of days taken from offence through to a decision to charge. However, data is held on the average number of days from submission of a case by the police to the CPS to the date of the CPS decision to charge.</p><p> </p><p>Data relating to to all cases in South Yorkshire, summary only cases in South Yorkshire, and indictable only cases in South Yorkshire is shown in Annex A.</p><p> </p><p>The data in Annex A relating to summary only cases provides figures for only a minority of summary only cases. This is because the CPS is only responsible for charging a small minority of summary only matters, with the majority charged by the police. In 2017-18 the police charged 75% of all summary only matters with only 25% charged by CPS, while for indicatable only offences the CPS charged 95% of these cases.</p><p> </p><p>There are a number of reasons for the steady increase in the average number of days and average number of consultations per case since 2010/11. Police are now more regularly encouraged to seek ‘early investigative advice’ to help determine what evidence is required for a charge. Early investigative advice helps to ensure that cases are thoroughly investigated and the evidence to be brought before the court is strong. As a result, the CPS is more often involved at an earlier stage in proceedings which impacts on the average number of consultations and overall timeliness.</p> question first answered 26/06/2019 10:24:58
	creator	400 label Biography information for John Healey
	publisher	25259
	tabling member	400 label Biography information for John Healey

1132831

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	20/06/2019
	date	18/06/2019
	date tabled	18/06/2019
	ddp created	18/06/2019 18:26:24
	answering body	Attorney General
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	ddp modified	19/06/2019 13:55:10 26/06/2019 10:56:03
	hansard heading	Prosecutions: South Yorkshire
	house id	1
	identifier	266095
	legislature	25259
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	26/06/2019 10:24:58
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, what the average number of days taken from the date of an offence to a decision to charge and individual for summary offences in South Yorkshire in each year since 2010 was.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Wentworth and Dearne
	tabling member printed	John Healey
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 266095
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	266095
	version	2
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) works closely with the Police to ensure that cases are thoroughly investigated before charges are brought. There has been an increase in the complexity of cases investigated by the police, with investigations often involving large amounts of electronic material (social media, emails, text messages, video and photographs) which needs to be reviewed by prosecutors before a charging decision can be made. This impacts on the average number of consultations and length of time taken for prosecutors to reach a charging decision.</p><p> </p><p>The CPS does not maintain a record of the average number of days taken from offence through to a decision to charge. However, data is held on the average number of days from submission of a case by the police to the CPS to the date of the CPS decision to charge.</p><p> </p><p>Data relating to to all cases in South Yorkshire, summary only cases in South Yorkshire, and indictable only cases in South Yorkshire is shown in Annex A.</p><p> </p><p>The data in Annex A relating to summary only cases provides figures for only a minority of summary only cases. This is because the CPS is only responsible for charging a small minority of summary only matters, with the majority charged by the police. In 2017-18 the police charged 75% of all summary only matters with only 25% charged by CPS, while for indicatable only offences the CPS charged 95% of these cases.</p><p> </p><p>There are a number of reasons for the steady increase in the average number of days and average number of consultations per case since 2010/11. Police are now more regularly encouraged to seek ‘early investigative advice’ to help determine what evidence is required for a charge. Early investigative advice helps to ensure that cases are thoroughly investigated and the evidence to be brought before the court is strong. As a result, the CPS is more often involved at an earlier stage in proceedings which impacts on the average number of consultations and overall timeliness.</p> question first answered 26/06/2019 10:24:58
	creator	400 label Biography information for John Healey
	publisher	25259
	tabling member	400 label Biography information for John Healey

1132834

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	20/06/2019
	date	18/06/2019
	date tabled	18/06/2019
	ddp created	18/06/2019 18:26:31
	answering body	Attorney General
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	ddp modified	19/06/2019 13:55:13 26/06/2019 10:56:02
	hansard heading	Prosecutions: South Yorkshire
	house id	1
	identifier	266096
	legislature	25259
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	26/06/2019 10:24:58
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, what the average number of days taken from the date of an offence to a decision to charge an individual for an indictable offence in South Yorkshire in each year since 2010 was.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Wentworth and Dearne
	tabling member printed	John Healey
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 266096
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	266096
	version	2
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) works closely with the Police to ensure that cases are thoroughly investigated before charges are brought. There has been an increase in the complexity of cases investigated by the police, with investigations often involving large amounts of electronic material (social media, emails, text messages, video and photographs) which needs to be reviewed by prosecutors before a charging decision can be made. This impacts on the average number of consultations and length of time taken for prosecutors to reach a charging decision.</p><p> </p><p>The CPS does not maintain a record of the average number of days taken from offence through to a decision to charge. However, data is held on the average number of days from submission of a case by the police to the CPS to the date of the CPS decision to charge.</p><p> </p><p>Data relating to to all cases in South Yorkshire, summary only cases in South Yorkshire, and indictable only cases in South Yorkshire is shown in Annex A.</p><p> </p><p>The data in Annex A relating to summary only cases provides figures for only a minority of summary only cases. This is because the CPS is only responsible for charging a small minority of summary only matters, with the majority charged by the police. In 2017-18 the police charged 75% of all summary only matters with only 25% charged by CPS, while for indicatable only offences the CPS charged 95% of these cases.</p><p> </p><p>There are a number of reasons for the steady increase in the average number of days and average number of consultations per case since 2010/11. Police are now more regularly encouraged to seek ‘early investigative advice’ to help determine what evidence is required for a charge. Early investigative advice helps to ensure that cases are thoroughly investigated and the evidence to be brought before the court is strong. As a result, the CPS is more often involved at an earlier stage in proceedings which impacts on the average number of consultations and overall timeliness.</p> question first answered 26/06/2019 10:24:58
	creator	400 label Biography information for John Healey
	publisher	25259
	tabling member	400 label Biography information for John Healey

1131652

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	17/06/2019
	date	12/06/2019
	date tabled	12/06/2019
	ddp created	12/06/2019 20:10:59
	answering body	Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	7
	answering dept short name	Housing, Communities and Local Government
	answering dept sort name	Housing, Communities and Local Government
	ddp modified	13/06/2019 14:25:19 21/06/2019 11:21:01
	hansard heading	Buildings: Insulation
	house id	1
	identifier	263715
	legislature	25259
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	21/06/2019 10:49:23
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, with reference to the Building Safety Programme monthly data release of 31 May 2019, what steps he is taking to ensure the remaining 163 private sector residential buildings identified as having ACM cladding complete remediation work.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Wentworth and Dearne
	tabling member printed	John Healey
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 263715
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	263715
	version	2
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>The private sector remediation fund, announced on 9 May, will remove the biggest block to progress on remediation in the private residential buildings. However, the time to complete work varies considerably depending on the factors such as structure, extent of cladding, and existing fire safety systems. For many buildings this is a complex job involving major construction work. We will be closely monitoring the work as it progresses. We are also supporting local authorities to take enforcement action where building owners are refusing to remediate, including through the Joint Inspection Team.</p> question first answered 21/06/2019 10:49:23
	creator	400 label Biography information for John Healey
	publisher	25259
	tabling member	400 label Biography information for John Healey

1128468

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	05/06/2019
	date	23/05/2019
	date tabled	23/05/2019
	ddp created	24/05/2019 09:06:22
	answering body	Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	7
	answering dept short name	Housing, Communities and Local Government
	answering dept sort name	Housing, Communities and Local Government
	ddp modified	24/05/2019 12:25:20 05/06/2019 16:59:02
	hansard heading	High Rise Flats: Insulation
	house id	1
	identifier	257647
	legislature	25259
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	05/06/2019 16:27:48
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, pursuant to his oral contribution of 9 May 2019, Official Report column 687, whether the policy and funding measures announced for residential tower blocks clad in ACM cladding will also apply to any blocks with non-ACM cladding found to be non-compliant with building regulations.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Wentworth and Dearne
	tabling member printed	John Healey
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 257647
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	257647
	version	2
	written parliamentary question type	NamedDay
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>The fund will cover reasonable costs associated with the removal and replacement of unsafe Aluminium Composite Material (ACM) cladding systems. This replicates the scope of the social sector fund that has been operational since last year. Non ACM cladding systems or other structural works not directly related to the remediation of ACM cladding systems will not be part of the fund. Government intervention to provide funding for the removal of unsafe ACM cladding is wholly exceptional. It is based on the unparalleled fire risk ACM poses and very real public safety concerns.</p> question first answered 05/06/2019 16:27:48
	creator	400 label Biography information for John Healey
	publisher	25259
	tabling member	400 label Biography information for John Healey

1123921

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	02/05/2019
	date	30/04/2019
	date tabled	30/04/2019
	ddp created	30/04/2019 17:13:23
	answering body	Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	7
	answering dept short name	Housing, Communities and Local Government
	answering dept sort name	Housing, Communities and Local Government
	ddp modified	01/05/2019 15:15:25 13/05/2019 13:58:02
	hansard heading	Buildings: Insulation
	house id	1
	identifier	249212
	legislature	25259
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	13/05/2019 13:26:52
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, with reference to the remediation of ACM cladding on privately-owned residential buildings, how many owners of such buildings (a) the Government has contacted directly to communicate the Government's expectation that leaseholders will be financially protected from the costs of such remediation, (b) have replied to that correspondence and (c) have said that they will financially protect leaseholders from the cost of such remediation.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Wentworth and Dearne
	tabling member printed	John Healey
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 249212
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	249212
	version	2
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>I have written to all private sector building owners who are currently committed to passing on costs to leaseholders to make clear my strong expectation that leaseholders should be protected from costs. However, too many building owners have failed to take responsibility for ensuring these buildings are permanently remediated swiftly, and at no cost to leaseholders. I have therefore concluded that it is imperative for the Government to act. On 9 May we announced a fund for the remediation of unsafe Aluminium Composite Material cladding on all high-rise (over 18 metres) residential private sector buildings in England. It will allow remediation to happen quickly, it will restore peace of mind and it will allow residents living in these blocks to get on with their lives.</p> question first answered 13/05/2019 13:26:52
	creator	400 label Biography information for John Healey
	publisher	25259
	tabling member	400 label Biography information for John Healey

1123924

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	02/05/2019
	date	30/04/2019
	date tabled	30/04/2019
	ddp created	30/04/2019 17:13:32
	answering body	Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	7
	answering dept short name	Housing, Communities and Local Government
	answering dept sort name	Housing, Communities and Local Government
	ddp modified	01/05/2019 15:15:27 13/05/2019 13:58:05
	hansard heading	Buildings: Insulation
	house id	1
	identifier	249215
	legislature	25259
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	13/05/2019 13:26:05
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, if he will publish the names of the (a) owners and (b) developers who (i) have and (ii) have not committed to ensuring that leaseholders do not pay for the remediation of ACM cladding materials used on their homes.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Wentworth and Dearne
	tabling member printed	John Healey
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 249215
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	249215
	version	2
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>I have written to all relevant building owners setting out my strong expectation that leaseholders should be protected from costs. We are not publishing details which could identify buildings because of the risk to public safety. On 9 May we announced a fund for the remediation of unsafe Aluminium Composite Material cladding on all high-rise (over 18 metres) residential private sector buildings in England. A number of owners and developers, including Taylor Wimpey, Legal and General, Mace Group, Lendlease, Barratt Developments and Aberdeen Standard Investments have agreed to maintain their commitments to fund remediation. I commend them for the responsible and moral position they have taken.</p> question first answered 13/05/2019 13:26:05
	creator	400 label Biography information for John Healey
	publisher	25259
	tabling member	400 label Biography information for John Healey

1123927

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	02/05/2019
	date	30/04/2019
	date tabled	30/04/2019
	ddp created	30/04/2019 17:13:40
	answering body	Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	7
	answering dept short name	Housing, Communities and Local Government
	answering dept sort name	Housing, Communities and Local Government
	ddp modified	01/05/2019 15:15:30 09/05/2019 16:40:02
	hansard heading	High Rise Flats: Insulation
	house id	1
	identifier	249217
	legislature	25259
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	09/05/2019 16:08:26
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, how much of the £400 million fund for the remediation of ACM cladding on social sector high-rise residential accommodation has been spent; and what the number of blocks is on which spending from that fund has been allocated.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Wentworth and Dearne
	tabling member printed	John Healey
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 249217
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	249217
	version	2
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>To date, we have allocated £259 million to replace cladding on 140 social sector buildings.</p> question first answered 09/05/2019 16:08:26
	creator	400 label Biography information for John Healey
	publisher	25259
	tabling member	400 label Biography information for John Healey

1122114

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	25/04/2019
	date	18/04/2019
	date tabled	18/04/2019
	ddp created	18/04/2019 15:43:41
	answering body	Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	7
	answering dept short name	Housing, Communities and Local Government
	answering dept sort name	Housing, Communities and Local Government
	ddp modified	23/04/2019 14:55:33 26/04/2019 14:10:02
	hansard heading	Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government: Carbon Emissions
	house id	1
	identifier	245616
	legislature	25259
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	26/04/2019 13:38:42
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, what step his Department is taking to help contribute to UK emissions targets.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Wentworth and Dearne
	tabling member printed	John Healey
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 245616
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	245616
	version	2
	written parliamentary question type	NamedDay
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>The Clean Growth Strategy sets out Government policy on meeting the UK’s emissions targets. The Department’s contribution to tackling emissions in England includes the National Planning Policy Framework, the Building Regulations, and the Decent Homes Standard.</p><p>The National Planning Policy Framework expects local planning authorities to take account of how new development will help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, such as through its location, orientation and design. Planning practice guidance provides advice for local authorities and applicants on implementing these policies.</p><p>In the Government’s Clean Growth Strategy we committed to reviewing the energy performance standards in the Building Regulations, including consulting on improving energy efficiency requirements in new and existing homes where the evidence suggests it is cost effective, affordable, practical and safe to do so. Further to this, Government committed to introducing a Future Homes Standard by 2025 for new build homes to be future-proofed with low carbon heating and world-leading levels of energy efficiency. We plan to consult on these matters in the coming months.</p><p>The Decent Homes Standard (DHS) requires that social homes provide residents with a reasonable degree of thermal comfort. All social landlords are required by the Regulator of Social Housing to meet the DHS. Homes for social housing are required to have efficient heating and effective insulation and be free of serious hazards that present a risk to residents, including excess cold. The Social Housing Green Paper asked whether there are changes to what constitutes a decent home that we should consider. The consultation closed in November 2018 and we are currently considering responses.</p> question first answered 26/04/2019 13:38:42
	creator	400 label Biography information for John Healey
	publisher	25259
	tabling member	400 label Biography information for John Healey

1110190

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	11/04/2019
	date	08/04/2019
	date tabled	08/04/2019
	ddp created	08/04/2019 23:05:20
	answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	29
	answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
	answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
	ddp modified	09/04/2019 12:20:35 11/04/2019 16:31:03
	hansard heading	Universal Credit: Housing
	house id	1
	identifier	242021
	legislature	25259
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	11/04/2019 15:59:06
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what estimate she has made of the number of tenants that will experience a financial shortfall as a result of 2019-20 being a 53-week rent year and universal Credit being a 52 week rent year.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Wentworth and Dearne
	tabling member printed	John Healey
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 242021
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	242021
	version	2
	written parliamentary question type	NamedDay
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>Neither tenants or landlords lose a week’s rent in a 53 weekly rent payment year as has been alleged; no year contains 53 weeks. The problem is alignment between weekly and monthly cycles. Each month the UC housing element is a constant figure but claimants with weekly tenancy agreements will be required to make either four or five rent payments within this period. If the claimant always pays their rent on time, in five payment months they are effectively making payment for part of the following month. That month will always be a four rent payment month, so the combination of the advance payment and the ‘overpayment’ of housing support during that month will get the claimant back on track</p><p> </p><p>Where a landlord charges rent weekly on a Monday, because of the way the calendar falls every 5 or 6 years, they will seek 53 rent payments in a year, with the 53rd payment in part covering the tenancy for the first few days of the following year. The effect of this is that, over the course of the next housing association rental year, a tenant’s UC payments will accurately reflect their liability, irrespective of the 53 payment weeks.</p><p> </p><p>There is a separate issue with respect to the way the calculation in the Universal Credit regulations converts a weekly liability into a monthly allowance. The conversion is achieved by multiplying the weekly rent by 52 and then dividing by 12. This effectively means one day’s rent a year (two days in a leap years) are not covered by UC. We are currently considering whether this formulation around weekly rents, and potentially other weekly amounts in the UC calculation, should be amended.</p> question first answered 11/04/2019 15:59:06
	creator	400 label Biography information for John Healey
	publisher	25259
	tabling member	400 label Biography information for John Healey