Show Search Form

Search Results

registered interest	true false
date	exactly: or between: and
answering body
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
hansard heading
house id
legislature	pref label
question text
tabling member printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member printed grouped question UIN question first answered answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

164226

registered interest
date	21/11/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	European Arrest Warrants
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they agree with the proposals by Fair Trials International for reform of the European Arrest Warrant; and what is their assessment of the prospect for reaching agreement on those reforms in Brussels.
tabling member printed	Lord Avebury
uin	HL3056
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/12/2014 answer text <p>The Government agrees with the proposals of Fair Trials International (FTI) in their May 2011 report on the Arrest Warrant insofar as it agrees that appropriate safeguards should be in place for those subject to extradition proceedings.</p><p>In particular, the Government agrees with FTI that both the issuing and the executing authorities should consider seriously the question of proportionality as it relates to the Arrest Warrant. That is why this year the Government made significant reforms to the Extradition Act 2003 in the Anti-social Behaviour Crime and Policing Act 2014 to ensure that a UK judge must consider whether the alleged conduct and likely sentence a person will receive if extradited and convicted is sufficiently serious to make the person’s extradition proportionate. This is complemented by an administrative proportionality check, undertaken by the National Crime Agency (NCA), which identifies the most trivial requests when they are first received and refuses to certify them.</p><p>Since the measures were commenced on 21 July 2014, 21 Arrest Warrants have been refused by the NCA on proportionality grounds.</p><p>These changes are all designed to ensure that UK citizens benefit from adequate protections whilst allowing our police and prosecutors to benefit from the Arrest Warrant in the fight against crime.</p><p>It should also be noted that the Second Generation of the Schengen Information System (SIS II) requires Member States to consider the question of proportionality before uploading an Arrest Warrant to that system for transmission. Therefore, when the UK connects to SIS II there will be a legal requirement on all other Member States operating SIS II to consider proportionality before transmitting an Arrest Warrant to the UK. The Government expects to connect to SIS II in the coming months.</p><p>The Government also agrees with FTI that, in general, where an executing authority has refused an Arrest Warrant the issuing authority should withdraw the Arrest Warrant if it has also been sent to other Member States. SIS II will allow refused Arrest Warrants to be ‘flagged’ on this system, notifying other Member States that a case has been refused. Thus, if a UK court refuses an Arrest Warrant all other Member States using SIS II will be made aware of this fact.</p><p>The Government also agrees with FTI that the executing States should seek from issuing States further information and guarantees, before deciding whether to execute Arrest Warrants in cases where evidence has been adduced of a serious risk of infringement of fundamental rights. UK courts can and do seek such guarantees (e.g. assurances as to prison conditions).</p><p>The Government also agrees with FTI that those subject to Arrest Warrants should receive legal representation in the executing State, if they so wish. Where the individual concerned seeks legal advice and representation for proceedings in the issuing State, any application should be made in accordance with the rules governing the provision of such services in the issuing State.</p><p>On 6 October 2014, new EU Justice Commissioner, Vera Jourová, said, &quot;re-opening the [Arrest Warrant] at this point in time could be counter-productive, given</p><p>the divergent views which could be expressed in the Council. I am of the opinion that we should focus on implementing already adopted legislation, on getting the instruments still on the table adopted as soon as possible and on improving cooperation between national authorities&quot;. As such, it seems unlikely the Commission intends to bring forward any proposals in the short-term.</p><p>That is why we have put in place new safeguards in UK law.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Bates question first answered 08/12/2014 15:41:02 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
tabling member	1665 label Biography information for Lord Avebury

164230

registered interest
date	21/11/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Child Sexual Abuse Independent Panel Inquiry
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have made a decision on the possible inclusion of issues relating to Kincora Boy's Home in East Belfast in the inquiry into the exploitation of children in the United Kingdom.
tabling member printed	Lord Eames
uin	HL3060
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 11/12/2014 answer text <p>The Terms of Reference for the Independent Panel Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse have been published and the geographic scope is limited to England and Wales. The protection of children is a devolved matter, and it would be inappropriate for the inquiry panel to make recommendations for Northern Ireland concerning the running of the child protection system there.</p><p>However, as the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland set out in her statement to Parliament on 21 October, the Government is determined that no stone should be left unturned to investigate serious allegations of institutional failure. She has also made clear that the Government, Ministry of Defence and the Security Services will give the Inquiry the fullest possible co-operation. We currently believe that the Historical Institutional Abuse Inquiry is the best place to do that in respect of Kincora and we will work closely with, the Chairman of the Inquiry, Sir Anthony Hart to help to achieve that.</p><p>We will monitor carefully the extent to which the Inquiry is able to make progress in respect of material relevant to Kincora and we will look at the situation again if the Inquiry tells us it is unable to determine the facts.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Bates question first answered 11/12/2014 14:40:53 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
tabling member	2793 label Biography information for Lord Eames

164238

registered interest
date	21/11/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Alcoholic Drinks: Children
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the remarks by Lord Wallace of Saltaire on 20 November (HL Deb, col GC 231), which and how many businesses lobbied them to repeal restrictions on the sale of liqueur confectionary to children under the age of 16, and when such discussions took place.
tabling member printed	Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe
uin	HL3068
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/12/2014 answer text <p>The Government was not lobbied for the repeal of age-restricted sales of liqueur confectionery to children. The proposal to repeal the offence of selling liqueur confectionery to those under 16 years of age was developed following the Red Tape Challenge consultation which was led jointly by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and the Cabinet Office. A simplification of age-restricted sales was identified as a strong theme amongst responses, however no responses</p><p>specifically asked for this repeal. This repeal was developed as one of a number of proposals in the Deregulation Bill aimed at simplifying legislation related to age-restricted sales.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Bates question first answered 02/12/2014 15:23:25 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
tabling member	3335 label Biography information for Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe

164239

registered interest
date	21/11/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Alcoholic Drinks: Children
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what were the arguments advanced by industry interests for the repeal of restrictions on the sale of liqueur confectionary to children under the age of 16; and what benefits they foresee will accrue for children from taking such actions.
tabling member printed	Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe
uin	HL3069
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/12/2014 answer text <p>The proposal to repeal the offence of selling liqueur confectionery to those under the age of 16 was developed following the Government’s consultation on the Red Tape Challenge.</p><p>Under the ‘Dangerous and restricted goods’ strand of the Retail Theme respondents were asked to comment on possible areas of deregulation in 24 separate acts, of which the Licensing Act 2003 was one. The desire for a simplification of age restricted sales was identified as a strong theme amongst responses, though the proposal to deregulate the sale of liqueur confectionery was not specifically referenced in the consultation. Retailers currently have to comply with a variety of regulations across a range of age-restricted products, and this proposal is one of a number of proposals in the Deregulation Bill aimed at simplifying legislation related to age-restricted sales.</p><p>The purpose of this repeal is to remove unnecessary burdens from businesses. There is no evidence to suggest that children consume liqueur confectionery for the purposes of intoxication and we do not expect this to change as a result of this repeal.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Bates question first answered 02/12/2014 15:26:32 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
tabling member	3335 label Biography information for Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe

164240

registered interest
date	21/11/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Alcoholic Drinks: Children
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government why clause 55 of the Deregulation Bill was not subject to or part of the public consultation on the Bill as reported by the Cabinet Office in its published guide to the Bill.
tabling member printed	Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe
uin	HL3070
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/12/2014 answer text <p>The Cabinet Office published a guide titled ‘Policy Guide to the Deregulation Bill’. The document states that the proposal to repeal the offence of selling liqueur confectionery to those under the age of 16 was not part of the Government’s public consultation on the Alcohol Strategy which took place from November 2012 to February 2013.</p><p>The proposal to repeal the offence of selling liqueur confectionery to those under the age of 16 was developed following the Government’s consultation on the Red Tape Challenge. The method of crowd sourcing was used to generate the Red Tape Challenge proposals; this involved a public consultation led jointly by the department for Business Innovation and Skills and the Cabinet Office, to ask businesses and members of the public for their views on deregulating in a wide range of areas of regulated activity.</p><p>Under the ‘Dangerous and restricted goods’ strand of the Retail Theme respondents were asked to comment on possible areas of deregulation in 24 separate acts, including the Licensing Act 2003. Whilst the policy proposal to deregulate the sale of liqueur confectionery was not specifically referenced in the consultation, the deregulation of age-restricted items was identified as a strong theme.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Bates question first answered 01/12/2014 12:44:12 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
tabling member	3335 label Biography information for Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe

164241

registered interest
date	21/11/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Alcoholic Drinks: Children
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will hold a public consultation on clause 55 of the Deregulation Bill and also publish the views on it of the Chief Medical Officer, Public Health England, the British Medical Association and the Children's Commissioner for England and Wales.
tabling member printed	Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe
uin	HL3071
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/12/2014 answer text <p>The Government maintains a close dialogue with a range of stakeholders on a range of alcohol issues. We have not received direct representations from the Chief Medical Officer, Public Health England, the British Medical Association and the Children’s Commissioner for England and Wales on the issue of liqueur confectionery. We welcome input from all interested stakeholders on an ongoing basis.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Bates question first answered 01/12/2014 12:44:45 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
tabling member	3335 label Biography information for Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe

157069

registered interest
date	20/11/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Gangmasters
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the average fine levied by the Gangmasters Licensing Authority in each of the last five years in (1) the United Kingdom, and (2) each region of the United Kingdom.
tabling member printed	Baroness Suttie
uin	HL3014
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 27/11/2014 answer text <p>The Gangmasters Licensing Authority, which operates in accordance with the Gangmasters (Licensing) Act 2004, has no legal power to impose fines. That power rests with the courts.</p> answering member printed Lord Bates grouped question UIN HL3015 HL3016 question first answered 27/11/2014 12:55:55 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
tabling member	4298 label Biography information for Baroness Suttie

157070

registered interest
date	20/11/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Gangmasters
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the total amount of fines levied by the Gangmasters Licensing Authority in each of the last five years.
tabling member printed	Baroness Suttie
uin	HL3015
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 27/11/2014 answer text <p>The Gangmasters Licensing Authority, which operates in accordance with the Gangmasters (Licensing) Act 2004, has no legal power to impose fines. That power rests with the courts.</p> answering member printed Lord Bates grouped question UIN HL3014 HL3016 question first answered 27/11/2014 12:55:55 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
tabling member	4298 label Biography information for Baroness Suttie

157071

registered interest
date	20/11/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Gangmasters
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many fines were levied by the Gangmasters Licensing Authority in each of the last five years in (1) the United Kingdom, and (2) each region of the United Kingdom.
tabling member printed	Baroness Suttie
uin	HL3016
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 27/11/2014 answer text <p>The Gangmasters Licensing Authority, which operates in accordance with the Gangmasters (Licensing) Act 2004, has no legal power to impose fines. That power rests with the courts.</p> answering member printed Lord Bates grouped question UIN HL3014 HL3015 question first answered 27/11/2014 12:55:54 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
tabling member	4298 label Biography information for Baroness Suttie

157081

registered interest
date	20/11/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Bail: Greater London
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many individuals were placed on police bail by the Metropolitan Police Service in each year between 1997 and 2013.
tabling member printed	Lord Black of Brentwood
uin	HL3026
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 27/11/2014 answer text <p>This information is not held centrally by the Home Office. In the past the Metropolitan Police Service has provided some data on police bail numbers in response to freedom of information requests.</p> answering member printed Lord Bates question first answered 27/11/2014 12:56:16 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
tabling member	4171 label Biography information for Lord Black of Brentwood