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 constituency
tabling member printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member constituency answering member printed grouped question UIN question first answered answering member label attachment file name title previous answer version answering member constituency answering member printed answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

173366

	registered interest
	date	13/01/2015
	answering body	HM Treasury
	answering dept id	14
	answering dept short name	Treasury
	answering dept sort name	Treasury
	hansard heading	Public Expenditure
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what his Department's non-fiscal spend was in real terms in (a) 2009-10, (b) 2010-11, (c) 2011-12, (d) 2012-13, (e) 2013-14 and (f) 2014-15.
	tabling member constituency	Wakefield
	tabling member printed	Mary Creagh
	uin	220647
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/01/2015 answer text “Non-fiscal spend” is not a formal term in the UK National Accounting framework. It is sometimes used to refer to items of public expenditure, which although included in departmental budgets, are either not classified as spending in the National Accounts or use a different source.<p> </p> answering member constituency Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey answering member printed Danny Alexander grouped question UIN 220622 220808 question first answered 21/01/2015 17:22:14 answering member 1535 label Biography information for Danny Alexander
	tabling member	1579 label Biography information for Mary Creagh

172976

	registered interest
	date	12/01/2015
	answering body	HM Treasury
	answering dept id	14
	answering dept short name	Treasury
	answering dept sort name	Treasury
	hansard heading	Government Departments: Pensions
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Deighton on 6 January (HL3478) concerning the Government Employee Pensions liability, whether the £1,171.6 billion is part of, or additional to, the national debt.
	tabling member printed	Lord Stoddart of Swindon
	uin	HL4048
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 26/01/2015 answer text <p>We can confirm that the £1,171.6 billion Government Employees Pensions liability is additional to the national debt.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The WGA produce consolidated accounts of all public sector bodies based on internationally recognised accounting standards. The amount shown includes the pension liability for central government, local government, police, fire, teachers, NHS and Armed Forces staffs. It also includes public corporations.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>A reconciliation between the Public Sector Net Debt figure, and the WGA Public Sector Net Liabilities figure, can be found at Chapter 3 of the 2012-13 Whole of Government Accounts.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Deighton question first answered 26/01/2015 16:46:38 answering member 4262 label Biography information for Lord Deighton
	tabling member	950 label Biography information for Lord Stoddart of Swindon

172990

	registered interest
	date	12/01/2015
	answering body	Foreign and Commonwealth Office
	answering dept id	16
	answering dept short name	Foreign and Commonwealth Office
	answering dept sort name	Foreign and Commonwealth Office
	hansard heading	Saudi Arabia and Egypt
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what representations they have made to the government of Saudi Arabia about the public flogging of a citizen who professed his atheism, and to the government of Egypt about the imprisonment of a citizen for professing atheism; and what assessment they have made of how such punishments may be reconciled with Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
	tabling member printed	Lord Alton of Liverpool
	uin	HL4062
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 26/01/2015 answer text <p>We are seriously concerned by Raif Badawi’s case. The UK condemns the use of cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment in all circumstances. The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr Hammond) has raised the matter with the Saudi Ambassador. We have previously raised the case at a senior level with the Saudi authorities.</p><p>The UK is a strong supporter of freedom of expression around the world. We believe that people must be allowed to freely discuss and debate issues, peacefully challenge their governments, exercise the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, and speak out against violations of human rights wherever they occur.</p><p>In Egypt, our Embassy in Cairo closely monitors cases where freedom of expression is threatened. I met the Egyptian Deputy Assistant Minister for Human Rights on 14 January. Foreign and Commonwealth Office Ministers have been clear throughout recent events in Egypt that the freedom of religious belief needs to be protected. We deplore all discrimination against religious minorities and constraints on their freedom to practise what they believe. <br> <br>We believe, as article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, that everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion and that this right includes freedom to change one’s religion or belief. Any action to punish an individual for their faith or belief is not compatible with article 18.</p> answering member printed Baroness Anelay of St Johns question first answered 26/01/2015 17:14:07 answering member 3474 label Biography information for Baroness Anelay of St Johns
	tabling member	738 label Biography information for Lord Alton of Liverpool

172723

	registered interest
	date	08/01/2015
	answering body	Department of Health
	answering dept id	17
	answering dept short name	Health
	answering dept sort name	Health
	hansard heading	IVF
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Statement by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Public Health, Jane Ellison, on 17 December 2014 (HC Deb, col. 96WS), what concerns were raised by the expert panel convened by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) regarding the possibility of carryover of a small percentage of abnormal mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) from the affected oocyte or zygote as a result of close associations between mtDNA and the karyoplast; what additional consideration the HFEA’s expert panel gave to replicative advantage of some mtDNA variants skewing the proportions in subsequent development as a result of a mitochondrial bottleneck; whether they can therefore guarantee that no females born following spindle-chromosomal complex transfer or pronuclear transfer would ever transmit the disease to subsequent generations; if not, whether serial nuclear transfer would minimise this risk; and why serial nuclear transfer is precluded by Regulations 3(c) and 6(c) of the Draft Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Mitochondrial Donation) Regulations 2015, which prevent any further "alterations in the nuclear or mitochondrial DNA".
	tabling member printed	Lord Alton of Liverpool
	uin	HL4043
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 22/01/2015 answer text <p>We are advised by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) that the issues raised by the noble Lord are discussed at various points in the Expert Panel’s 2014 report, as follows:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>- mitochondrial DNA carryover at sections 3.7.2 to 3.7.11;</p><p> </p><p>- nuclear-mitochondrial interactions at sections 3.7.15 to 3.7.20; and</p><p> </p><p>- points relating to replicative advantage and mitochondrial bottleneck are widely discussed throughout section 3.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The Panel’s report is attached.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The HFEA has also advised that the Expert Panel it convened concluded that, following Maternal Spindle Transfer or Pronuclear Transfer, the risks of mitochondrial disease in the next generation will be low. Further details can be found in section 3 of the Panel’s 2014 report.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Serial nuclear transfer is not a term or process connected with mitochondrial donation. Therefore, serial transfer is not something the Expert Panel has considered.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Earl Howe question first answered 22/01/2015 16:49:38 answering member 2000 label Biography information for Earl Howe attachment 1 file name HFEA Panel's Report.pdf title HFEA's Panel Report
	tabling member	738 label Biography information for Lord Alton of Liverpool

173539

	registered interest
	date	13/01/2015
	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	Asylum: Females
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will publish their response to General Recommendation No. 32 from the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, published on 14 November 2014, in particular those recommendations concerning female interviewers and interpreters for women asylum-applicants, and those relating to legal representation.
	tabling member printed	Lord Hylton
	uin	HL4121
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 22/01/2015 answer text <p>Unlike the concluding observations which the CEDAW Committee issues to the UK specifically after each of our periodic examinations, General Recommendations are issued by the Committee to all 188 States which are party to the Convention. That means that not all the General Recommendations will actually be relevant to the UK's circumstances and policies, and it is not the normal practice of the Government to respond specifically to the publication of General Recommendations.</p><p> </p><p>If a General Recommendation is relevant to the UK, then the Committee will assess us against it during our periodic examination. We will receive their evaluation and we will have the opportunity to respond fully at that stage. The Government has, however, noted the publication of General Recommendation No. 32 on the gender-related dimensions of refugee status, asylum, nationality and statelessness of women by the Committee, and the content has been conveyed to the Home Office.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The Home Office will of course be able to answer any specific questions the noble Lord has on female interviewers and interpreters for women asylum applicants.</p> answering member printed Baroness Garden of Frognal question first answered 22/01/2015 17:08:22 answering member 3842 label Biography information for Baroness Garden of Frognal
	tabling member	2018 label Biography information for Lord Hylton

172702

	registered interest
	date	08/01/2015
	answering body	Department for International Development
	answering dept id	20
	answering dept short name	International Development
	answering dept sort name	International Development
	hansard heading	Palestinians
	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 Northover on 6 January (HL3815), what co-operation they have had from Hamas in the reconstruction of civilian property in Gaza.
	tabling member printed	Lord Turnberg
	uin	HL4022
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 22/01/2015 answer text <p>UK policy on Hamas is clear: we do not talk to Hamas and we have no plan to do so at present. At the Gaza Reconstruction Conference, the UK pledged £20 million for early recovery assistance. DFID has already disbursed £5 million and will provide the remainder in 2015/16. The UK was also the first donor to support the temporary tri-partite Gaza Reconstruction Mechanism (GRM) which is facilitating the import of construction materials into Gaza.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Baroness Northover question first answered 22/01/2015 17:09:13 answering member 2539 label Biography information for Baroness Northover
	tabling member	2537 label Biography information for Lord Turnberg

173023

	registered interest
	date	12/01/2015
	answering body	HM Treasury
	answering dept id	14
	answering dept short name	Treasury
	answering dept sort name	Treasury
	hansard heading	Private Equity
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have received any representations to change the tax advantages for the private equity industry on the treatment of "carry" as a capital gain; and if so, whether any of those representations have supported changes in the tax position to encourage longer-term funds with 10 year investment horizons.
	tabling member printed	Lord Mendelsohn
	uin	HL4095
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 26/01/2015 answer text <p>Treasury Ministers and officials meet with, and receive, representations from, a wide range of organisations and individuals in the public and private sectors, as part of the usual policy making process. As was the case with previous Administrations, it is not the Treasury’s practice to provide details of all such representations.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Deighton question first answered 26/01/2015 16:47:27 answering member 4262 label Biography information for Lord Deighton
	tabling member	4286 label Biography information for Lord Mendelsohn

173026

	registered interest
	date	12/01/2015
	answering body	HM Treasury
	answering dept id	14
	answering dept short name	Treasury
	answering dept sort name	Treasury
	hansard heading	Financial Services
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what representations they have made to the European Commission over the conclusion of the Financial Services User Group Report on the €10 trillion European asset management industry that "it does not appear to be producing good value for investors with higher fees not producing better performance".
	tabling member printed	Lord Mendelsohn
	uin	HL4098
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 26/01/2015 answer text <p>Treasury Ministers and officials make regular representations to the European Commission on a wide range of issues. We cannot disclose details of specific representations.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The government is committed to ensuring that investors are treated fairly when they make investment decisions and are able to get the best outcomes from their investments. Ensuring that investors can easily understand and compare products is an important part of this.</p><p> </p><p>The Government noted the Financial Services User Group’s contribution to the debate on these issues and will consider the recommendations made.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Deighton question first answered 26/01/2015 16:53:07 answering member 4262 label Biography information for Lord Deighton
	tabling member	4286 label Biography information for Lord Mendelsohn

173025

	registered interest
	date	12/01/2015
	answering body	HM Treasury
	answering dept id	14
	answering dept short name	Treasury
	answering dept sort name	Treasury
	hansard heading	Financial Services: Fines
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will list by year and by incident the fines levied by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Financial Services Authority.
	tabling member printed	Lord Mendelsohn
	uin	HL4097
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 26/01/2015 answer text <p>This is an operational matter for the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), who are operationally independent from Government.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The question has been passed on to the FCA. The FCA will reply directly to the Noble Lord by letter. A copy of the letter will be placed in the Library of the House.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Deighton question first answered 26/01/2015 16:46:57 answering member 4262 label Biography information for Lord Deighton
	tabling member	4286 label Biography information for Lord Mendelsohn

171543

	registered interest
	date	18/12/2014
	answering body	Department for Communities and Local Government
	answering dept id	7
	answering dept short name	Communities and Local Government
	answering dept sort name	Communities and Local Government
	hansard heading	Right to Buy Scheme
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, how much his Department has spent on marketing in relation to the Right to Buy scheme in London in each year since 2010.
	tabling member constituency	Tooting
	tabling member printed	Sadiq Khan
	uin	219547
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 22/01/2015 answer text <p>This Government is committed to supporting home ownership, and giving a helping hand to social tenants to move up the housing ladder. But our reinvigorated Right to Buy can only be exercised by eligible tenants if they know about it. It is also important that social tenants have sufficient information about their rights to make an informed decision, and to ensure that home ownership is the right choice for them in light of their financial circumstances.</p><p>Precise figures on spending in London cannot be disaggregated from the national Right to Buy campaign. We can identify £378,393 of spending in 2012-13 and £68,500 in 2013-14; there was no London-specific spending in 2010-11 or 2011-12. Figures for 2014-15 are not yet available.</p><p>I appreciate that the Labour Party in London has effectively called for the Right to Buy to be abolished, and will oppose social tenants being informed. Such are the enemies of aspiration. The Right to Buy improves social mobility and helps build mixed communities. As well as increasing home ownership and supporting new build construction (from replacement affordable homes), it gives something back to families who have worked hard, paid their rent and played by the rules. It allows buyers to do up their home, change their front door, improve their garden – without getting permission from the council. It gives people a sense of pride and ownership not just in their home, but in their street and neighbourhood.</p><p>Total national spending was £0 in 2010-11, £17,728 in 2011-12, £1.4 million in 2012-13 and £1.0 million in 2013-14. To place our information campaigns in context, DCLG has cut spending on marketing and advertising from £9.9 million in 2009-10 to £2.0 million in 2013-14.</p><p>The rt. hon. Member is a former Minister in this Department, so will be well acquainted with communications activity under the last Labour Government, such as departmental spending of:</p><p> </p><ul><li>£1.1 million a year on external public relations, despite having 103 in-house communications officers;</li><li>£15,000 on plugging the “Sustainable Communities summit” that was subsequently cancelled;</li><li>£1 million on marketing and public relations for eco-towns, despite the fact not a single house was ever built;</li><li>£3,520 on re-naming Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Fire Services to the Chief Fire and Rescue Adviser, during one of New Labour’s republican phases of purging public references to the Monarchy;</li><li>£38,200 on sock puppet lobbyists, LLM Communications, astro-turfing friends for the friendless Regional Spatial Strategies;</li><li>£1,371 on re-branding of John Prescott’s ‘Office of the Deputy Prime Minister’ to the cut-price and pointless ‘Deputy Prime Minister's Office’;</li><li>£3,830 on the subsequent logo for the new Department for Communities and Local Government, followed by burning a further £24,765 on dropping the “D” and renaming it “Communities and Local Government”, despite being neither, in a futile attempt to sound achingly trendy.</li></ul><p>We run a tighter ship. Right to Buy and the Fire Kills campaign are now the two primary campaigns we run, and both have a clear public benefit, in strong contrast to the culture of spin and excess in the spendthrift Labour years.</p> answering member constituency Great Yarmouth answering member printed Brandon Lewis question first answered 22/01/2015 16:18:54 answering member 4009 label Biography information for Sir Brandon Lewis previous answer version 36985 answering member constituency Great Yarmouth answering member printed Brandon Lewis answering member 4009 label Biography information for Sir Brandon Lewis
	tabling member	1577 label Biography information for Sadiq Khan