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 question first answered answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

1036932

	registered interest
	date	07/01/2019
	answering body	Leader of the House of Lords
	answering dept id	92
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name	Leader of the House of Lords
	hansard heading	Trade Bill
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask the Leader of the House why dates for the committee stage of the Trade Bill in the House of Lords were not scheduled more quickly after the bill's second reading.
	tabling member printed	Baroness McDonagh
	uin	HL12574
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/01/2019 answer text <p>The committee stage of the Trade bill has been arranged in the usual way, having been subject to ongoing discussions in the Usual Channels. So far the three of an anticipated four dates for Committee stage are 21, 23 and 30 January and they have been advertised in Forthcoming Business. The remaining day will be rescheduled as a day had to be set aside for for the House to have a further debate under section 13 of the EU (Withdrawal) Act, which is now scheduled for 28 January. The recommended intervals between Bill stages are minimums, and it is not unusual for there to be a longer pause between stages than the recommended minimum interval.</p> answering member printed Baroness Evans of Bowes Park question first answered 21/01/2019 15:48:32 answering member 4329 label Biography information for Baroness Evans of Bowes Park
	tabling member	3701 label Biography information for Baroness McDonagh

1037583

	registered interest
	date	08/01/2019
	answering body	Leader of the House of Lords
	answering dept id	92
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name	Leader of the House of Lords
	hansard heading	Brexit: Parliamentary Scrutiny
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask the Leader of the House what estimate she has made of the parliamentary time required in the House of Lords to complete the remaining Brexit related bills before 29 March 2019; and whether the time available allows for the usual minimum intervals.
	tabling member printed	Lord Bassam of Brighton
	uin	HL12642
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/01/2019 answer text <p>It is my intention that we should create the time to do our business properly. I note that so far all bills associated with Brexit have been scheduled in accordance with the minimum intervals recommended in The Companion. As the Noble Lord will recall, from time to time the recommended minimum intervals have, with Usual Channels agreement, been dispensed with when it has been necessary for the House to do so. I undertake to work with my counterparts in the usual channels to ensure that business continues to be scheduled in a way which allows proper scrutiny.</p> answering member printed Baroness Evans of Bowes Park question first answered 21/01/2019 15:46:36 answering member 4329 label Biography information for Baroness Evans of Bowes Park
	tabling member	3504 label Biography information for Lord Bassam of Brighton

1036939

	registered interest
	date	07/01/2019
	answering body	Leader of the House of Lords
	answering dept id	92
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name	Leader of the House of Lords
	hansard heading	Trade Bill
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask the Leader of the House how many days of committee stage she estimates will be required for the Trade Bill; and when she anticipates the committee stage being completed.
	tabling member printed	Lord Triesman
	uin	HL12581
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/01/2019 answer text <p>So far three of an anticipated four days have been scheduled and advertised (21, 23 and 30 January). The remaining day will be rescheduled as a day had to be set aside for the House to have a further debate under section 13 of the EU (Withdrawal) Act which is now scheduled for 28 January. The progress of all business is, as always, in the hands of the House. But the Usual Channels have agreed to those dates on the assumption that they should allow Committee Stage to be completed inside four days and the Usual Channels are working to get the remaining day scheduled within the first week of February.</p> answering member printed Baroness Evans of Bowes Park question first answered 21/01/2019 15:59:23 answering member 4329 label Biography information for Baroness Evans of Bowes Park
	tabling member	3651 label Biography information for Lord Triesman

1036934

	registered interest
	date	07/01/2019
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	hansard heading	Islam: Legal Systems
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the ruling by the Grand Committee of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Molla Sali v. Greece on the application of sharia law, issued on 19 December 2018; what plans, if any, they have to (1) provide support to women and girls in the UK who suffer as a result of the application of sharia law, and (2) ensure that relevant vulnerable people are made aware of their rights in relation to the application of sharia law within the UK judicial system.
	tabling member printed	Baroness Cox
	uin	HL12576
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/01/2019 answer text <p>The Grand Chamber found that the difference of treatment suffered by the applicant, as a beneficiary of a will drawn up in accordance with the Greek Civil Code by a testator of Muslim faith, as compared to a beneficiary of a will drawn up in accordance with the Civil Code by a non-Muslim testator, had no objective and reasonable justification, contrary to the applicant’s rights under Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights read in conjunction with Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention. The Government’s initial assessment is that the judgment does not affect inheritance law in England and Wales. Inheritance law in Scotland and Northern Ireland is a devolved matter.</p><p> </p><p>People may choose to abide by the interpretation and application of Sharia principles if they wish to do so, provided their actions do not conflict with the national law. All individuals retain the right to seek a remedy through the English and Welsh courts in the event of a dispute, and the law of England and Wales in relation to the inheritance of property prevails.</p><p> </p><p>The independent Sharia review was published in February 2018. The Government’s commitments in response, including supporting awareness raising campaigns with voluntary organisations, can be found in the Integrated Communities Strategy green paper published in March 2018.</p> answering member printed Lord Keen of Elie question first answered 21/01/2019 17:23:48 answering member 4538 label Biography information for Lord Keen of Elie
	tabling member	3364 label Biography information for Baroness Cox

1038015

	registered interest
	date	08/01/2019
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	hansard heading	Immigration: Appeals
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the average duration of the appeal procedure in 2018 against first-instance decisions was for (a) all nationalities, (b) Syrian appellants, (c) Afghan appellants and (d) Iraqi appellants.
	tabling member constituency	Brighton, Pavilion
	tabling member printed	Caroline Lucas
	uin	206300
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/01/2019 answer text <p>The average clearance time, in weeks, from receipt to disposal of an appeal in the First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) between January and September 2018, the latest period for which data are available, was:</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p>All nationalities</p></td><td><p>42 weeks</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Syrian nationals<sup>1</sup></p></td><td><p>38 weeks</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Afghan nationals<sup>1</sup></p></td><td><p>32 weeks</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Iraqi nationals<sup>1</sup></p></td><td><p>22 weeks</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p><sup>1</sup>These data are Management Information taken from the tribunal’s case management system. They do not form part of the published statistics.</p><p> </p><p>Listing and case management of appeals is a function of the independent judiciary and each appeal is dealt with based on its own individual facts .</p><p> </p><p>There are a number of issues that can influence overall case length and these include adjournments and postponements, evidential factors (which may vary according to the country to which the application relates), the ease of gathering evidence, time taken to obtain expert reports where required and availability of up to date country guidance where relevant.</p><p> </p><p>Tribunal statistics are published on a quarterly basis and are available at: <a href="http://www.gov.uk/government/collections/tribunals-statistics" target="_blank">www.gov.uk/government/collections/tribunals-statistics</a></p><p> </p><p>HM Courts &amp; Tribunals Service has worked extensively to reduce the outstanding caseload and improve timeliness in the Immigration and Asylum Chamber. This has seen the live caseload in the First-tier Tribunal more than halve from 64,800 to 31,500 between July 2016 and September 2018. The average duration has also improved from 52 weeks in the period July to September 2017 to 39 weeks in the period July to September 2018.</p> answering member constituency South East Cambridgeshire answering member printed Lucy Frazer question first answered 21/01/2019 18:14:34 answering member 4517 label Biography information for Lucy Frazer
	tabling member	3930 label Biography information for Caroline Lucas

1035025

	registered interest
	date	04/01/2019
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	hansard heading	Prison Officers: Cameras
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the effect on health and safety conditions at HMP Grendon of the decision by HMPPS not to require at least two staff per work area to be issued with body-worn video cameras; and if he will make a statement.
	tabling member constituency	North Tyneside
	tabling member printed	Mary Glindon
	uin	205268
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/01/2019 answer text <p>HMP Grendon is dedicated to providing all prisoners accredited therapy in one of five democratic therapeutic communities. HMP Grendon has a low level of violence and assaults. Theuse of Body Worn Video Cameras was considered carefully and there was belief that this may have a negative impact on therapeutic work that takes place.</p><p> </p><p>Body worn video cameras were introduced alongside a range of other measures to improve safety. The cameras are intended to support staff interpersonal skills and provide evidential information if an incident occurs. They are not mandatory, it is for each Governor to make an assessment of how they are deployed.</p><p> </p><p>Whilst PSI 14/2017 does not specify how many cameras should be on each residential unit, an instruction was given from HMPPS Headquarters requesting that two staff in each residential units during the hours of unlock wearing BWVC. It is for each prison to consider and determine how they satisfy this instruction whilst taking into account information such as levels of violence and how effectively safety is being managed. In the case of HMP Grendon it is dedicated to providing accredited interventions in therapeutic communities, and promoting rehabilitation and safety. The assessment on level of camera requirement is therefore based on this.</p> answering member constituency Penrith and The Border answering member printed Rory Stewart question first answered 21/01/2019 18:12:27 answering member 4137 label Biography information for Rory Stewart
	tabling member	4126 label Biography information for Mary Glindon

1036896

	registered interest
	date	07/01/2019
	answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
	answering dept id	29
	answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
	answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
	hansard heading	Universal Credit
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government what is the (1) percentage, and (2) number of Universal Credit claims that have not been paid in full within five weeks.
	tabling member printed	Lord McNicol of West Kilbride
	uin	HL12538
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/01/2019 answer text <p>The information requested for the percentage of Universal Credit claims not paid in full on time is in the table below and was taken from statistics we published on payment timeliness in November 2018.</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p>-</p></td><td><p><strong>August 2018</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><p><strong> </strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Proportion of paid Universal Credit claims that were not paid in full on time (all claims)</strong><strong>*</strong></p></td><td><p>6 per cent</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><p><strong> </strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Proportion of paid Universal Credit claims that were not paid in full on time (new claims)</strong><strong>*</strong></p></td><td><p>16 per cent</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p><strong>*</strong> Universal Credit entitlement is calculated over monthly Assessment Periods. Claims which are paid on time will receive payment by the payment due date, which is 7 days after an Assessment Period ends.</p><p> </p><p>In many cases where full payment is not made on time, it is due to unresolved issues such as: claimants not accepting their Claimant Commitment or passing identity checks, satisfying the Habitual Residency Test, or having outstanding verification issues, such as housing costs and self-employed earnings.</p><p><strong> </strong></p><p>We plan to publish updated official statistics on the number of Universal Credit claims that have been paid on time. This data is currently going through quality assurance clearance procedures in line with the Official Statistics publication standard.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Baroness Buscombe question first answered 21/01/2019 16:49:00 answering member 3349 label Biography information for Baroness Buscombe
	tabling member	4702 label Biography information for Lord McNicol of West Kilbride

1036897

	registered interest
	date	07/01/2019
	answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
	answering dept id	29
	answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
	answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
	hansard heading	Universal Credit
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government how many, and what percentage of, Universal Credit claimants are on alternative payments arrangements.
	tabling member printed	Lord McNicol of West Kilbride
	uin	HL12539
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/01/2019 answer text <p>Alternative Payment Arrangements for Universal Credit are only available at Household level and can be found in the tables below.</p><p> </p><p>UC households claiming Housing Entitlement split by those receiving Managed Payment to Landlord by Month</p><table><tbody><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>August 2018 (p)</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>Percentage of relevant claims</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Number of Households receiving Managed Payments to Landlords</p></td><td><p>106,538</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>18%</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Total UC households claiming Housing Entitlement</p></td><td><p>582,859</p></td><td colspan="2"><p> </p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p>UC households in payment split by those receiving More Frequent Payments by Month</p><table><tbody><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td colspan="2"><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td colspan="2"><p>August 2018 (p)</p></td><td><p>Percentage of relevant claims</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Number of Households receiving More Frequent Payments</p></td><td><p>8,235</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>1%</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Total UC Households in payment</p></td><td><p>850,172</p></td><td colspan="2"><p> </p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p>UC Couple Households split by those receiving Split Payments by Month</p><table><tbody><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td colspan="2"><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td colspan="2"><p>August 2018 (p)</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>Percentage of relevant claims</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Number of Households receiving split payments</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>20</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>less than 1%</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Total UC Couple Households</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>126,889</p></td><td colspan="2"><p> </p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>Source: Stat-Xplore, Department for Work and Pensions</p><p> </p><ol><li>Figures marked &quot;p&quot; are provisional. These figures will be subject to revision in subsequent releases. It is expected that overall provisional figures will be within two per cent of their revised figure in future releases.</li><li>Percentages may not add up due to rounding.</li><li>Statistical disclosure control has been applied to this table to avoid the release of confidential data. As such totals may not sum.</li><li>The figures for More Frequent Payments and Managed Payments to Landlords exclude those under Scottish Choices.</li></ol> answering member printed Baroness Buscombe question first answered 21/01/2019 17:07:25 answering member 3349 label Biography information for Baroness Buscombe
	tabling member	4702 label Biography information for Lord McNicol of West Kilbride

1036930

	registered interest
	date	07/01/2019
	answering body	Department for Transport
	answering dept id	27
	answering dept short name	Transport
	answering dept sort name	Transport
	hansard heading	Airports
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to paragraph 4.3 of their consultation Aviation 2050—the future of UK aviation (Cm 9714), published on 17 December, whether (1) a third runway at Heathrow airport is exempt from further consideration of its environmental and economic impacts, and (2) there is a presumption that no airports other than Heathrow may have new or extended runways.
	tabling member printed	Lord Berkeley
	uin	HL12572
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/01/2019 answer text <p>The Government has set out its preferred option for one new runway in the South East by 2030. This is being taken forward through the Airports National Policy Statement, which was designated by the Secretary of State on 26 June 2018. It provides the primary basis for decision making on an application for development consent for a Northwest runway at Heathrow Airport, which includes the strict environmental requirements that any applicant will have to meet.</p><p> </p><p>In June 2018, the Department released its policy to provide support for all airports across the UK with the exception of Heathrow to make best use of their existing runways subject to relevant environmental considerations being addressed. Airports that wish to increase either the passenger or air traffic movement cap to allow them to make best use of their existing runways will need to submit applications to the relevant planning authority.</p><p><strong> </strong></p> answering member printed Baroness Sugg question first answered 21/01/2019 16:40:05 answering member 4584 label Biography information for Baroness Sugg
	tabling member	3526 label Biography information for Lord Berkeley

1036981

	registered interest
	date	07/01/2019
	answering body	Department for Transport
	answering dept id	27
	answering dept short name	Transport
	answering dept sort name	Transport
	hansard heading	Gatwick Airport Station
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Sugg on 11 December 2018 (HL11834), in view of the proportion of airport passengers using Gatwick Airport railway station, what assessment they have made of requesting Gatwick Airport Limited to make a greater contribution to the costs of improving the station.
	tabling member printed	Lord Bradshaw
	uin	HL12623
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/01/2019 answer text <p>The Department for Transport has been seeking to agree Gatwick Airport Limited’s contribution to the costs of enhancement works at Gatwick Airport Station through a process of negotiation.</p><p> </p><p>The objective of these negotiations has been to secure an appropriate level of contribution from the airport, which also recognises that the enhancement works are designed to improve passenger journeys for airport and non-airport users.</p><p> </p><p>Negotiations with Gatwick Airport Limited are still ongoing.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Baroness Sugg question first answered 21/01/2019 16:31:03 answering member 4584 label Biography information for Baroness Sugg
	tabling member	2483 label Biography information for Lord Bradshaw