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 question first ministerially corrected answering member label previous answer version answering member constituency answering member printed answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

168136

	registered interest
	date	05/12/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Driving Offences: Prosecutions
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many people were prosecuted for driving cars while (a) disqualified from driving and (b) uninsured in each police force area in the UK in each year since 2010.
	tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
	tabling member printed	Mr Andy Slaughter
	uin	217583
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 10/12/2014 answer text <p>The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) does not centrally record the total number of people prosecuted for driving whilst disqualified or driving whilst uninsured. To obtain details of the number of defendants prosecuted for these offences, would require a manual review of individual case files to be undertaken at a disproportionate cost.</p><p>Driving motor vehicles while uninsured are specified proceedings. These are offences that are prosecuted by the police rather than the CPS in order to reduce unnecessary bureaucracy and ensure swifter justice. The CPS will only prosecute a specified offence in cases where a not guilty plea has been entered or when the defendant is charged with other associated offences such as driving with excess alcohol.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland question first answered 10/12/2014 12:53:20 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

172867

	registered interest
	date	09/01/2015
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Government Departments: Judicial Review
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, what amount each Government department has spent on external legal fees relating to each case involving substantive judicial review hearings since May 2010; and what the outcome of the proceedings was in each such case.
	tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
	tabling member printed	Mr Andy Slaughter
	uin	220247
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 14/01/2015 answer text <p>The Treasury Solicitor conducts most, but not all, litigation on behalf of government departments. For example, Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs normally conducts its own litigation. In 2014 the Treasury Solicitor acted in about 17846 judicial reviews.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The Treasury Solicitor’s Department does not hold central records on the external legal fees paid in each individual case or on the outcome of each such case. Such information could not be created without examining every case file and thus incurring disproportionate costs.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>In relation to external fees, the Attorney General maintains five panels of junior counsel to undertake civil and EC work for all Government Departments. There are three London panels (an A panel for senior juniors, a B panel for middle juniors and a C panel for junior juniors) together with a Regional panel and a Public International Law panel. This is in addition to First Treasury Counsel (FTC) who exclusively does Government work, and to the Standing Counsel to certain Departments. <br></p><p> </p><p>The hourly rates for panel counsel are as follows:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>First Treasury Counsel - £230</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>A panel - £120</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>B panel - £80</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>C panel - £60 if under 5 years call and £80 if over 5 years call.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>In relation to outcomes, the Ministry of Justice publish figures on the number of Judicial Reviews by each Department up to 2012:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>See Table 4.3 at the link below:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/267408/additional-court-tables-2012.xls" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/267408/additional-court-tables-2012.xls</a></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>This shows the number of cases each year where Government departments were named as first defendant and where the judicial review was granted following a substantive hearing.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland question first answered 14/01/2015 17:46:29 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

100080

	registered interest
	date	21/10/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Judicial Review
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many judicial reviews there were involving Government departments according to records held by the (a) Treasury Solicitor and (b) Administrative Court Office in each of the last four years; and how many such reviews were upheld in whole or in part in each such year.
	tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
	tabling member printed	Mr Andy Slaughter
	uin	211271
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/10/2014 answer text <p>The Treasury Solicitor’s Department holds records relating only to those cases in which it has acted. The Treasury Solicitor represents most, but not all, government departments in litigation. For example, Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs normally conducts its own litigation. According to records held by the Treasury Solicitor, the number of judicial reviews involving government departments in which it has acted in each of the last four years is as follows:</p><p>2010 – 8,566</p><p>2011 – 9,603</p><p>2012 – 10,274</p><p>2013 – 16,449</p><p>Information relating to how many of those reviews were upheld in whole or in part in each year is not held centrally and could not be created without incurring disproportionate cost.</p><p><del class="ministerial">The Administrative Court Office does not collate the information requested centrally and determining the number of reviews and how many such reviews were upheld in whole or in part would incur a disproportionate cost.</del></p><p><ins class="ministerial">The information requested in respect of the Administrative Court Office is published online at <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/267408/additional-court-tables-2012.xls" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/267408/additional-court-tables-2012.xls</a> . The 2013 data is not currently available.</ins></p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland question first answered 28/10/2014 15:10:43 question first ministerially corrected 05/01/2015 17:35:17 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland previous answer version 24759 answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

173371

	registered interest
	date	13/01/2015
	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: Hammersmith and Fulham
	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 for the Right to Buy scheme in (a) Hammersmith and Fulham and (b) Hammersmith constituency in each year since 2010.
	tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
	tabling member printed	Mr Andy Slaughter
	uin	220529
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 22/01/2015 answer text <p>I refer the hon. Member to my answer today to Question UIN 219547. Identifiable spending in the local authority area was £9,986 in 2012-13 and £1,461 in 2013-14. Further information cannot be disaggregated . Figures are not available at a constituency level.</p> answering member constituency Great Yarmouth answering member printed Brandon Lewis question first answered 22/01/2015 16:21:02 answering member 4009 label Biography information for Sir Brandon Lewis previous answer version 38852 answering member constituency Great Yarmouth answering member printed Brandon Lewis answering member 4009 label Biography information for Sir Brandon Lewis
	tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

168620

	registered interest
	date	08/12/2014
	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	Department for Communities and Local Government: Written Questions
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, when he plans to Answer Question 205289 tabled on 11 July 2014.
	tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
	tabling member printed	Mr Andy Slaughter
	uin	217718
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 16/12/2014 answer text <p>PQ 205289 has been answered today.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Keighley answering member printed Kris Hopkins question first answered 16/12/2014 17:26:20 answering member 4043 label Biography information for Kris Hopkins
	tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

175010

	registered interest
	date	21/01/2015
	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	Legal Costs
	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 the Government spent on legal fees in the case of Moore and Coates v the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, in which ruling was made on 21 January 2015.
	tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
	tabling member printed	Mr Andy Slaughter
	uin	221613
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 23/02/2015 answer text <p>Planning casework is a quasi-judicial function of the Department, and as was the case under the last Administration, it attracts a high volume of legal challenges which end up in the courts. This is particularly the case in light of the long-term growth of judicial review and the growing creep of European Union directives, regulations and case law; equality law and human rights law.</p><p> </p><p>Costs to date in these two claims are £68,825 excluding VAT.</p><p> </p><p>The Government makes no apologies for seeking to safeguard Green Belt protection and trying to bring a sense of fair play to the planning system. The Government’s planning policy is clear that both temporary and permanent traveller sites are inappropriate development in the Green Belt. The judgment does not question that principle.</p><p> </p><p>Indeed, there have been a number of recent legal cases where the planning appeal decisions of the Secretary of State have succeeded in relation to traveller development in the Green Belt and awarded costs in favour of DCLG, including:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Mulvenna v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government</li><li>Barney-Smith v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government</li><li>Dear v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government</li><li>Connors, Connors, Sines, Lee, and Doran v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government – five separate claims heard together.</li></ul><p> </p><p>Hence, any payment of costs in Moore vs Coates needs to be seen in this context as my Department has successfully defended the eight claims above and costs are due to my Department.</p><p> </p><p>To place the Department’s spending in context more broadly, I would observe that the Department spent £1.7 million in external lawyers’ fees in 2009-10 (excluding Treasury Solicitors), in 2013-14, the figure had fallen to £699,000.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency Great Yarmouth answering member printed Brandon Lewis question first answered 23/02/2015 17:09:33 answering member 4009 label Biography information for Sir Brandon Lewis previous answer version 41181 answering member constituency Great Yarmouth answering member printed Brandon Lewis answering member 4009 label Biography information for Sir Brandon Lewis
	tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

177796

	registered interest
	date	04/02/2015
	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	Compulsory Purchase
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what the circumstances were of each occasion when his Department went against the advice of its independent inspector when approving a compulsory purchase order in the last four years.
	tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
	tabling member printed	Mr Andy Slaughter
	uin	223452
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 23/02/2015 answer text <p>Since the Department’s National Planning Casework Unit took over responsibility for issuing Compulsory Purchase Order decisions in May 2012, the Secretary of State has issued decisions on 76 opposed Compulsory Purchase Orders. 73 decisions went along with the Inspector’s recommendation, and 3 did not.</p><p> </p><p>In the case of Liverpool City Council and Welsh Streets, the Secretary of State disagreed with the Inspector’s report that recommended confirming the Order. The reasoning is summarised in the Written Ministerial Statement of 16 January 2015, <em>Official Report</em>, Column 35WS.</p><p> </p><p>In the case of the Northumberland Development Project the Inspector recommended that the Order should not be confirmed or that, in the event that the Secretary of State is minded to confirm the Order, he should confirm the Order with modifications subject to receipt of a satisfactory Section 106 agreement. Following receipt of the Inspector’s Report the Secretary of State deferred his decision on the Order and in accordance with the Inspector’s recommendation wrote to all parties seeking representations. The Secretary of State subsequently confirmed the Order with modifications on 11 July 2014.</p><p> </p><p>In the case of the Shepherd’s Bush Market area the Inspector recommended that the Order should not be confirmed or, if the Secretary of State is minded to confirm the Order, it should be modified by deleting some of the Order lands. In confirming the Order the Secretary of State considered that the proposed purpose of the Order would significantly contribute to the wellbeing of the area and fitted in with the adopted planning framework for the area. He was satisfied that sufficient safeguards were in place to protect traders and shopkeepers and that the potential financial viability of the scheme had been demonstrated, and that no adequate alternatives existed in terms of achieving the purpose of the proposal, particularly in light of the urgent need to redevelop the Market. The Secretary of State confirmed the Order with modifications on 10 October 2014.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Each case is considered on its individual merits, with due process.</p><p> </p><p>Copies of the Secretary of State’s decision letter and the Inspector’s Report in each case have been placed in the Library of the House.</p> answering member constituency Great Yarmouth answering member printed Brandon Lewis grouped question UIN 223453 question first answered 23/02/2015 17:34:32 answering member 4009 label Biography information for Sir Brandon Lewis previous answer version 43619 answering member constituency Great Yarmouth answering member printed Brandon Lewis answering member 4009 label Biography information for Sir Brandon Lewis
	tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

177797

	registered interest
	date	04/02/2015
	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	Compulsory Purchase
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, on how many occasions his Department has gone against the advice of its independent inspector when approving a compulsory purchase order.
	tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
	tabling member printed	Mr Andy Slaughter
	uin	223453
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 23/02/2015 answer text <p>Since the Department’s National Planning Casework Unit took over responsibility for issuing Compulsory Purchase Order decisions in May 2012, the Secretary of State has issued decisions on 76 opposed Compulsory Purchase Orders. 73 decisions went along with the Inspector’s recommendation, and 3 did not.</p><p> </p><p>In the case of Liverpool City Council and Welsh Streets, the Secretary of State disagreed with the Inspector’s report that recommended confirming the Order. The reasoning is summarised in the Written Ministerial Statement of 16 January 2015, <em>Official Report</em>, Column 35WS.</p><p> </p><p>In the case of the Northumberland Development Project the Inspector recommended that the Order should not be confirmed or that, in the event that the Secretary of State is minded to confirm the Order, he should confirm the Order with modifications subject to receipt of a satisfactory Section 106 agreement. Following receipt of the Inspector’s Report the Secretary of State deferred his decision on the Order and in accordance with the Inspector’s recommendation wrote to all parties seeking representations. The Secretary of State subsequently confirmed the Order with modifications on 11 July 2014.</p><p> </p><p>In the case of the Shepherd’s Bush Market area the Inspector recommended that the Order should not be confirmed or, if the Secretary of State is minded to confirm the Order, it should be modified by deleting some of the Order lands. In confirming the Order the Secretary of State considered that the proposed purpose of the Order would significantly contribute to the wellbeing of the area and fitted in with the adopted planning framework for the area. He was satisfied that sufficient safeguards were in place to protect traders and shopkeepers and that the potential financial viability of the scheme had been demonstrated, and that no adequate alternatives existed in terms of achieving the purpose of the proposal, particularly in light of the urgent need to redevelop the Market. The Secretary of State confirmed the Order with modifications on 10 October 2014.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Each case is considered on its individual merits, with due process.</p><p> </p><p>Copies of the Secretary of State’s decision letter and the Inspector’s Report in each case have been placed in the Library of the House.</p> answering member constituency Great Yarmouth answering member printed Brandon Lewis grouped question UIN 223452 question first answered 23/02/2015 17:34:32 answering member 4009 label Biography information for Sir Brandon Lewis previous answer version 43620 answering member constituency Great Yarmouth answering member printed Brandon Lewis answering member 4009 label Biography information for Sir Brandon Lewis
	tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

176737

	registered interest
	date	29/01/2015
	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	Regional Planning and Development: Greater London
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, how many applicants there were for the Mayoral Development Corporation Old Oak Director position.
	tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
	tabling member printed	Mr Andy Slaughter
	uin	222747
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 03/02/2015 answer text <p>The Department does not hold this information. <br><br>The Mayor of London is responsible for Mayoral Development Corporations and will be able to answer any questions relating to these bodies, including staffing matters.</p> answering member constituency Keighley answering member printed Kris Hopkins question first answered 03/02/2015 16:31:08 answering member 4043 label Biography information for Kris Hopkins
	tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

142142

	registered interest
	date	06/11/2014
	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	Welfare Assistance Schemes
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, how many hon. Members have written to him to express concern about the future funding of local welfare assistance schemes.
	tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
	tabling member printed	Mr Andy Slaughter
	uin	213717
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 18/11/2014 answer text <p>The Department receives correspondence on a wide range of matters, typically handling in the region of 10,000 letters a year from hon. Members.</p><p> </p><p>On 10 October, the Government published a consultation on local welfare provision in 2015-16, to which hon. Members are very welcome to respond to if they wish.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Keighley answering member printed Kris Hopkins grouped question UIN 213706 question first answered 18/11/2014 16:54:32 answering member 4043 label Biography information for Kris Hopkins
	tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter