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
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

43928

registered interest
date	19/03/2014
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, on how many occasions and for what offences each Crown Prosecution Service business area has recommended that an offence be taken into consideration instead of charged separately in each of the last three years and in 2013-14 to date.
tabling member constituency	Islington South and Finsbury
tabling member printed	Emily Thornberry
uin	192878
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p>The Crown Prosecution Service holds no central records of the number of occasions, and for what offence(s), it has recommended that an offence is suitable to be taken into consideration. To obtain details would require a manual exercise of reviewing individual case files to be undertaken at a disproportionate cost.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North East Hertfordshire answering member printed Oliver Heald question first answered 01/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 69 label Biography information for Sir Oliver Heald
tabling member	1536 label Biography information for Emily Thornberry

43933

registered interest
date	19/03/2014
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, against what corporate defendants the Serious Fraud Office has brought enforcement actions in the last 10 years; what the outcome of each such action was; what civil recovery was ordered in each successful case; what criminal fines were imposed in each successful case; and under what primary legislation each case was brought.
tabling member constituency	Islington South and Finsbury
tabling member printed	Emily Thornberry
uin	192848
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p>The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has brought enforcement actions against 11 corporate defendants in the last ten years, as set out in the table below.</p><p>Before 2008, all successful SFO prosecutions were of individuals. The following table shows the fines and civil recovery orders (CROs) in SFO cases involving corporates since then.</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="2"> </td><td><p><em>Case</em></p></td><td colspan="2"><p><em>Penalty</em><sup>(<em>1</em>)</sup></p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><p>2008</p></td><td><p>Balfour Beatty plc</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>£2.25 million CRO</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><p>2008</p></td><td><p>Severn Trent Water Ltd</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>£2 million fine</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><p>2009</p></td><td><p>AMEC plc</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>£4.94 million CRO</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><p>2009</p></td><td><p>Mabey and Johnson Ltd</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>£3.5 million fine</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><p>2010</p></td><td><p>BAE Systems plc</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>£500,000 fine</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><p>2010</p></td><td><p>Innospec Ltd</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>$12.7 million fine</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><p>2011</p></td><td><p>De Puy International Ltd</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>£4.8 million CRO</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><p>2011</p></td><td><p>MacMillan Publishers Ltd</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>£11.3 million CRO</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><p>2011</p></td><td><p>M W Kellogg Ltd</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>£7 million CRO</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><p>2012</p></td><td><p>Mabey Engineering (Holdings) Ltd</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>£131,000 CRO</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><p>2012</p></td><td><p>Oxford Publishing Ltd</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>£1.9 million CRO</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="3"><p><sup> (1)</sup> Figures are rounded</p></td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr></tbody></table><p>The above proceedings marked “CRO” were commenced in accordance with Chapter 2 of Part 5 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.</p><p>Severn Trent Water Ltd pleaded guilty to an offence under the Water Industry Act 1991.</p><p>Mabey and Johnson Ltd pleaded guilty to offences under the Criminal Law Act 1977, the Prevention of Corruption Act 1906 and United Nations Act 1946.</p><p>BAE Systems plc pleaded guilty to an offence of failing to maintain adequate accounting records under the Companies Act 1985.</p><p>Innospec Ltd pleaded guilty to an offence under the Criminal Law Act 1977.</p><p>In 2006, the SFO brought charges against five companies in relation to alleged price fixing of pharmaceutical products. The five companies were Kent Pharmaceuticals, Norton Healthcare Ltd, Generics (UK) Ltd, Ranbaxy (UK) Ltd, and Goldshield Group plc. In 2008, a judge ordered the acquittal of all five companies.</p><p>If a company is to be prosecuted, it is usually necessary cases to demonstrate that the controlling minds of a company were knowing participants in the criminality being alleged. This can be difficult to prove, especially in complex cases, and so most SFO prosecutions have been of individuals rather than companies. Other outcomes are also possible. In 2010, BAE Systems plc agreed to make a £29.5 million payment for the benefit of the people of Tanzania, following a settlement with the SFO and the US Department of Justice. Last year, Oxford University Press (owners of Oxford Publishing Ltd) unilaterally offered to contribute £2,000,000 to not-for-profit organisations for teacher training and other educational purposes in sub-Saharan Africa.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North East Hertfordshire answering member printed Oliver Heald question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 69 label Biography information for Sir Oliver Heald
tabling member	1536 label Biography information for Emily Thornberry

43992

registered interest
date	19/03/2014
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
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 paid Sir Ken Knight in (a) salary, (b) fees and (c) expenses for the independent review of efficiency and operations in fire and rescue authorities in England.
tabling member constituency	North Tyneside
tabling member printed	Mrs Mary Glindon
uin	192775
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/05/2014 answer text <p> </p><p><em>[Holding Reply: Monday 24 March 2014]</em></p><p>Sir Ken Knight worked on his independent review between 1 January and 22 June 2013. He was paid £53,635 during this period. Between 1 January and 28 January 2013, Sir Ken was also the Government's Chief Fire and Rescue Adviser in addition to conducting initial fieldwork for his review. His salary rate whilst working on the Knight Review was in line with his previous salary rate when he was Chief Fire and Rescue Adviser.</p><p>Sir Ken's review found huge variations in the way the 46 fire and rescue authorities in England operate and highlighted the scope for the services to find £200 million in savings whilst safeguarding emergency operations and protecting public safety. His report highlighted the importance of collaboration with other local services in helping fire and rescue authorities to transform the way they run to meet the changing needs of communities. The Government will be publishing a formal response to the report in due course. The best fire and rescue authorities are already beginning to collaborate with police and ambulance services and local authorities – through co-location of stations and services, through sharing back office functions, including sharing senior staff, and through co-responding and joining up on service delivery.</p><p> </p><p><strong> </strong></p><p> </p> answering member constituency Great Yarmouth answering member printed Brandon Lewis question first answered 09/05/2014 12:00:00 answering member 4009 label Biography information for Sir Brandon Lewis
tabling member	4126 label Biography information for Mary Glindon

44018

registered interest
date	19/03/2014
answering body	Ministry of Defence
answering dept id	11
answering dept short name	Defence
answering dept sort name	Defence
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many visits Ministers in his Department have made to the bases of regiments which returned from operational duties in Afghanistan in the last three years.
tabling member constituency	Belfast North
tabling member printed	Mr Nigel Dodds
uin	192863
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 03/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p>Ministers, and the Prime Minister, travel on a regular basis to visit personnel deployed in Afghanistan and has done so for a number of years. Ministers also attend the Task Force Helmand homecoming parades in London, which include representatives of all the units that deployed. The Prime Minister hosted members of 1st Mechanised Brigade in the Palace of Westminster following their parade in October last year.</p><p> </p><p>In February 2013, the Minister for Defence Personnel, Welfare and Veterans (Anna Soubry) visited Aldershot to visit 1st Battalion, Irish Guards following their return from operational duties in Afghanistan. In addition, in December last year the Minister for Defence Equipment, Support and Technology (Philip Dunne) attended the thanksgiving and memorial service in Salisbury Cathedral for 1st Mechanised Brigade.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Rayleigh and Wickford answering member printed Mr Mark Francois question first answered 03/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1444 label Biography information for Mr Mark Francois
tabling member	1388 label Biography information for Lord Dodds of Duncairn

44036

registered interest
date	19/03/2014
answering body	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
answering dept id	13
answering dept short name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
answering dept sort name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, for what reasons his Department supported an officer in the Falkland Islands responsible for implementing the Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels on behalf of the Overseas Territories.
tabling member constituency	Hendon
tabling member printed	Dr Matthew Offord
uin	192763
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p>Joint UK and South Atlantic Overseas Territories funding has supported a co-ordinating post based in the Falkland Islands since 2008 to, among other things, help meet obligations arising from the Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP), a daughter agreement to the Convention on Migratory Species. ACAP has been extended to the UK's South Atlantic Territories. Defra currently contributes £20,000 per year.</p><p>ACAP seeks to conserve albatrosses and petrels by co-ordinating international activity to mitigate known threats. Collectively, the UK's South Atlantic Overseas Territories are breeding range states for 12 of the 30 species currently listed by the Agreement. The ACAP co-ordination project was established to ensure coherence of action between the Territories, assist with the planning and implementation of albatross and petrel conservation work, take responsibility for the reporting requirements and lead on critical seabird by-catch mitigation work in international fisheries fora.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Camborne and Redruth answering member printed George Eustice question first answered 01/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 3934 label Biography information for George Eustice
tabling member	4006 label Biography information for Dr Matthew Offord

44091

registered interest
date	19/03/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many illegal workers whose employment has been the subject of penalties pursuant to section 15 of the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006 (a) have been deported and (b) are still in the UK.
tabling member constituency	Christchurch
tabling member printed	Mr Christopher Chope
uin	192960
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 07/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p>We are better placed than ever to identify and charge those working illegally.<br><br>We are increasing our multi agency taskforces, improving our intelligence sharing between Departments and creating a strategic intelligence picture and structure. Through the Immigration Bill we are simplifying the existing illegal working penalty regime making it easier to enforce payment in the civil courts.<br><br>It would not be possible to provide the information requested without linking immigration case outcomes to our data on civil penalties issued on employers. This would incur disproportionate costs.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Old Bexley and Sidcup answering member printed James Brokenshire question first answered 07/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1530 label Biography information for James Brokenshire
tabling member	242 label Biography information for Sir Christopher Chope

44102

registered interest
date	19/03/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what total amount of fines has been (a) levied and (b) collected under the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006 for employment of illegal workers in each year since 2010.
tabling member constituency	Delyn
tabling member printed	Mr David Hanson
uin	192805
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 23/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>The civil penalty scheme to prevent illegal working was introduced in the Immigration Asylum and Nationality Act 2006 (2006 Act), and came into effect in February 2008. <br><br>Before 2010, the average value of penalties collected under the scheme was 14%. Since 2010, the average value of penalties collected has been 45%. The information requested is in the table attached. The figures are based on the number of civil penalties served at visited business addresses.<br><br>Please note the figures are for penalties levied at the initial decision stage which may be reduced, cancelled, increased or reissued at the objection or appeal stage. <br><br>Please also note that the collection figures are not cohort based statistics and therefore do not represent payment against penalties issued in a particular year.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td>Financial Years</td><td>Value of initial penalties issued</td><td>Value of penalties collected</td></tr><tr><td>2008-2009</td><td>£16.7m</td><td>£1.3m</td></tr><tr><td>2009-2010</td><td>£23.2m</td><td>£4.4m</td></tr><tr><td>2010-2011</td><td>£17.1m</td><td>£6.9m</td></tr><tr><td>2011-2012</td><td>£11.4m</td><td>£6.5m</td></tr><tr><td>2012-2013</td><td>£10.8m</td><td>£6.3m</td></tr><tr><td>2013-2014 up to 28 February 2014</td><td>£15.6m</td><td>£5.2m</td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency Old Bexley and Sidcup answering member printed James Brokenshire question first answered 23/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1530 label Biography information for James Brokenshire
tabling member	533 label Biography information for David Hanson

44103

registered interest
date	19/03/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many individual prosecutions for employing an illegal worker under the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006 have been (a) brought and (b) successful in each year since 2010.
tabling member constituency	Delyn
tabling member printed	Mr David Hanson
uin	192793
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/04/2014 answer text <p> </p><p>Employers have a responsibility to check that their employees have the right to <br>work in the United Kingdom and this duty is underpinned by criminal and civil <br>sanctions. <br><br>The Home Office only holds data on individual prosecutions on its National <br>Operations Database from 2012. <br><br>(a) Five employers were charged in 2012 and five employers were charged in 2013 <br>for an offence of knowingly employing illegal workers under section 21 of the <br>Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006. <br><br>(1) The figures quoted have been derived from management information and are <br>therefore provisional and subject to change. This information has not been <br>quality assured under National Statistics protocols.<br>(2) Figures relate to employers charged (offence recorded as IAN 2006 S21) <br>between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2013 recorded on the National Operations <br>Database (NODMMX).<br>(3) Figures relate to individuals who may have been charged for more than one <br>offence under section 21. <br>(4) Figures rounded to nearest 5. In compliance with legislation such as the <br>Data Protection Act 1998 and Principle 5 of the Code of Practice for Official <br>Statistics, we are required to preserve the confidentiality of the data we <br>collect, process and disseminate. In order to prevent the disclosure of <br>personal information counts of individuals are rounded to the nearest multiple <br>of 5.<br>(5) Data extracted on 20 March 2014.<br><br>(b) Under section 21 of the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006, fewer <br>than five employers were successfully prosecuted in 2012 and five employers <br>were successfully prosecuted in 2013.<br><br>(1) The figures quoted have been derived from management information and are <br>therefore provisional and subject to change. This information has not been <br>quality assured under National Statistics protocols.<br>(2) Figures relate to employers successfully prosecuted (offence recorded as <br>IAN 2006 S21) between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2013 recorded on the <br>National Operations Database (NODMMX).<br>(3) Figures relate to individuals.<br>(4) Years refer to date of prosecution and charges may have been laid in the <br>same or a previous year. <br>(5) In compliance with legislation such as the Data Protection Act 1998 and <br>Principle 5 of the Code of Practice for Official Statistics, we are required to <br>preserve the confidentiality of the data we collect, process and disseminate. <br>In order to prevent the disclosure of personal information counts of <br>individuals are rounded to the nearest multiple of 5.<br><br>(6) Data extracted on 20 March 2014.<br><br>The Civil Penalty Notices in the table below were issued to employers for <br>breaching the illegal working provisions in Section 15 of the Immigration, <br>Asylum and Nationality Act 2006 in each year since 2010.<br><br>The figures are based on the number of civil penalties served at visited <br>business addresses.<br><br>Please note the figures are for penalties levied at the initial decision stage <br>which may be reduced, cancelled, increased or reissued at the objection or <br>appeal stage.</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td>Year</td><td>Number of civil penalties issued</td></tr><tr><td>01/01/2010 to 31/12/2010</td><td>2092</td></tr><tr><td>01/01/2011 to 31/12/2011</td><td>1424</td></tr><tr><td>01/01/2012 to 31/12/2012</td><td>1215</td></tr><tr><td>01/01/2013 to 31/12/2013</td><td>1823</td></tr></tbody></table> answering member constituency Old Bexley and Sidcup answering member printed James Brokenshire question first answered 28/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1530 label Biography information for James Brokenshire
tabling member	533 label Biography information for David Hanson