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

100071

registered interest
date	21/10/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Asylum: Finance
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have assessed the effectiveness of the combination of the Azure payment card and support under section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 in enabling refused asylum seekers to meet their basic needs.
tabling member printed	Lord Roberts of Llandudno
uin	HL2277
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/10/2014 answer text <p>The Azure card is issued to destitute failed asylum seekers accommodated under section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 because they are temporarily unable to leave the United Kingdom. The card can be used at most of the main supermarket chains to purchase food and other essential items. The performance of the card is kept under regular review but the Government is satisfied that it is an effective way of ensuring that recipients are able to meet their essential living needs and are not left destitute.</p><p> </p><p>The Government therefore has no plans to abolish the card or change legislation to allow people supported under section 4 to receive cash instead.</p><p> </p><p>The total administrative costs of the card scheme since it was introduced in 2009 are approximately £1,515,000. Estimated administrative costs for the current financial year are £200,000.</p><p> </p><p>The Government published its response to the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee report about asylum procedures in December 2013 (cm 8769). A response to the Committee’s views on section 4 support was set out on page 18-19.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Bates grouped question UIN HL2278 HL2279 HL2280 HL2281 question first answered 28/10/2014 15:17:54 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
tabling member	3691 label Biography information for Lord Roberts of Llandudno

100072

registered interest
date	21/10/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Asylum: Finance
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have to abolish the Azure payment card and amend legislation to enable the provision of cash support for all refused asylum seekers until they are either given status in the United Kingdom or return to their country of origin.
tabling member printed	Lord Roberts of Llandudno
uin	HL2278
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/10/2014 answer text <p>The Azure card is issued to destitute failed asylum seekers accommodated under section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 because they are temporarily unable to leave the United Kingdom. The card can be used at most of the main supermarket chains to purchase food and other essential items. The performance of the card is kept under regular review but the Government is satisfied that it is an effective way of ensuring that recipients are able to meet their essential living needs and are not left destitute.</p><p> </p><p>The Government therefore has no plans to abolish the card or change legislation to allow people supported under section 4 to receive cash instead.</p><p> </p><p>The total administrative costs of the card scheme since it was introduced in 2009 are approximately £1,515,000. Estimated administrative costs for the current financial year are £200,000.</p><p> </p><p>The Government published its response to the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee report about asylum procedures in December 2013 (cm 8769). A response to the Committee’s views on section 4 support was set out on page 18-19.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Bates grouped question UIN HL2277 HL2279 HL2280 HL2281 question first answered 28/10/2014 15:17:55 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
tabling member	3691 label Biography information for Lord Roberts of Llandudno

100073

registered interest
date	21/10/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Asylum: Finance
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government how much they have spent on administering the Azure card system since its inception.
tabling member printed	Lord Roberts of Llandudno
uin	HL2279
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/10/2014 answer text <p>The Azure card is issued to destitute failed asylum seekers accommodated under section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 because they are temporarily unable to leave the United Kingdom. The card can be used at most of the main supermarket chains to purchase food and other essential items. The performance of the card is kept under regular review but the Government is satisfied that it is an effective way of ensuring that recipients are able to meet their essential living needs and are not left destitute.</p><p> </p><p>The Government therefore has no plans to abolish the card or change legislation to allow people supported under section 4 to receive cash instead.</p><p> </p><p>The total administrative costs of the card scheme since it was introduced in 2009 are approximately £1,515,000. Estimated administrative costs for the current financial year are £200,000.</p><p> </p><p>The Government published its response to the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee report about asylum procedures in December 2013 (cm 8769). A response to the Committee’s views on section 4 support was set out on page 18-19.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Bates grouped question UIN HL2277 HL2278 HL2280 HL2281 question first answered 28/10/2014 15:17:55 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
tabling member	3691 label Biography information for Lord Roberts of Llandudno

100074

registered interest
date	21/10/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Asylum: Finance
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their forecast annual cost for administering the Azure card payment scheme in the coming year.
tabling member printed	Lord Roberts of Llandudno
uin	HL2280
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/10/2014 answer text <p>The Azure card is issued to destitute failed asylum seekers accommodated under section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 because they are temporarily unable to leave the United Kingdom. The card can be used at most of the main supermarket chains to purchase food and other essential items. The performance of the card is kept under regular review but the Government is satisfied that it is an effective way of ensuring that recipients are able to meet their essential living needs and are not left destitute.</p><p> </p><p>The Government therefore has no plans to abolish the card or change legislation to allow people supported under section 4 to receive cash instead.</p><p> </p><p>The total administrative costs of the card scheme since it was introduced in 2009 are approximately £1,515,000. Estimated administrative costs for the current financial year are £200,000.</p><p> </p><p>The Government published its response to the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee report about asylum procedures in December 2013 (cm 8769). A response to the Committee’s views on section 4 support was set out on page 18-19.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Bates grouped question UIN HL2277 HL2278 HL2279 HL2281 question first answered 28/10/2014 15:17:56 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
tabling member	3691 label Biography information for Lord Roberts of Llandudno

100075

registered interest
date	21/10/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Asylum: Finance
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their response to the conclusion of the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee that "section 4 is not the solution for people who have been refused but cannot be returned" as stated in their report <i>Asylum</i> (7th Report of session 2013–14, HC 71).
tabling member printed	Lord Roberts of Llandudno
uin	HL2281
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/10/2014 answer text <p>The Azure card is issued to destitute failed asylum seekers accommodated under section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 because they are temporarily unable to leave the United Kingdom. The card can be used at most of the main supermarket chains to purchase food and other essential items. The performance of the card is kept under regular review but the Government is satisfied that it is an effective way of ensuring that recipients are able to meet their essential living needs and are not left destitute.</p><p> </p><p>The Government therefore has no plans to abolish the card or change legislation to allow people supported under section 4 to receive cash instead.</p><p> </p><p>The total administrative costs of the card scheme since it was introduced in 2009 are approximately £1,515,000. Estimated administrative costs for the current financial year are £200,000.</p><p> </p><p>The Government published its response to the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee report about asylum procedures in December 2013 (cm 8769). A response to the Committee’s views on section 4 support was set out on page 18-19.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Bates grouped question UIN HL2277 HL2278 HL2279 HL2280 question first answered 28/10/2014 15:17:56 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
tabling member	3691 label Biography information for Lord Roberts of Llandudno

100076

registered interest
date	21/10/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Free Movement of People: Republic of Ireland
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what role the free movement of people between the United Kingdom and Ireland, however defined, plays in the Anglo-Irish agreement and in the documents which underpin it.
tabling member printed	Lord Mawhinney
uin	HL2282
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/10/2014 answer text <p>Free movement of people between the United Kingdom and Ireland within the Common Travel Area has existed since 1923 and therefore predates both the Anglo-Irish Agreement and the subsequent British-Irish Agreement. The free movement of people between the two jurisdictions is not provided for by either Agreement.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Bates question first answered 28/10/2014 15:18:32 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
tabling member	121 label Biography information for Lord Mawhinney

100077

registered interest
date	21/10/2014
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	Pakistan
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their assessment of the position of Ms Asia Bibi, a Christian mother of four sentenced to death in Lahore under Pakistan's blasphemy laws; and whether they intend to make representations to the government of Pakistan.
tabling member printed	Lord Patten
uin	HL2283
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 04/11/2014 answer text We are concerned to hear that a Pakistan court has upheld the imposition of the death penalty in the case of Asia Bibi. We support the EU's recent statement of concern and hope that the verdict will be overturned on appeal. We regularly raise at the highest levels the misuse of blasphemy laws in Pakistan both against Muslims and against religious minorities. We have consistently pressed the Government of Pakistan on the issue of the death penalty and expressed our principled opposition to it in all cases. We will continue to raise these issues. answering member printed Baroness Anelay of St Johns question first answered 04/11/2014 17:14:45 answering member 3474 label Biography information for Baroness Anelay of St Johns
tabling member	1137 label Biography information for Lord Patten

100078

registered interest
date	21/10/2014
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
hansard heading	Floods: Somerset
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their assessment of (1) the feasibility of constructing a permanent flood defence barrage to protect the village of Westonzoyland in the Somerset Levels, and (2) the likely effectiveness of temporary demountable flood defences in the coming winter.
tabling member printed	Lord Patten
uin	HL2284
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 30/10/2014 answer text <p>1. The Environment Agency is constructing a permanent scheme to replace temporary defences. Steps are being taken so that protection is maintained should there be an increased flood risk during construction.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>2. Demountable defences were considered as an option. However, after consulting local residents the Environment Agency took the decision to construct a permanent solution.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord De Mauley question first answered 30/10/2014 14:33:05 answering member 2202 label Biography information for Lord De Mauley
tabling member	1137 label Biography information for Lord Patten

100079

registered interest
date	21/10/2014
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	Gibraltar: Spain
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 Anelay of St Johns (HL1709), how many incursions by Spanish state vessels into British Gibralter Territorial Waters there have been in 2014 to date and in each of the preceding five years; and, in the light of these numbers, what is their assessment of the efficacy of the defence of United Kingdom sovereignty over these waters using current methods.
tabling member printed	Lord Patten
uin	HL2285
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 29/10/2014 answer text <p>There were 247 unlawful incursions between January and September this year. There were 103 in 2010, 24 in 2011, 229 in 2012 and 496 in 2013, as stated in the reply of 17 June, Official Report, column WA38, given by the former Senior Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, the right hon. Baroness Warsi. The Government cannot readily provide statistics for incursions before 2010 as this could only be obtained at a disproportionate cost.</p><p>Incursions are a violation of sovereignty, not a threat to it. They do not change the fact of British sovereignty over British Gibraltar Territorial Waters. The Government challenges and protests all unlawful incursions and these actions effectively defend our sovereignty over British Gibraltar Territorial waters.</p> answering member printed Baroness Anelay of St Johns question first answered 29/10/2014 15:24:51 answering member 3474 label Biography information for Baroness Anelay of St Johns
tabling member	1137 label Biography information for Lord Patten

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