To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the direct refund mechanism, provided for
in section 41(3) of the VAT Act 1994, applies to wholly owned companies of NHS Trusts
and Foundation Trusts which provide services to the NHS Trust or Foundation Trust that
owns them.
<p>The VAT refund mechanism provided in section 41(3) of the VAT Act 1994 applies
to government departments and NHS authorities when they are acting in their legal
capacity as a functionary of the Crown. Wholly owned companies of NHS Trusts and Foundation
Trusts are not eligible to receive such refunds.</p>
To ask Her Majesty’s Government how they intend to evaluate the use of €46 million
earmarked for the Khartoum Process; what benchmarks and agreed criteria have been
developed to guide the Process; and what procedures have been put in place to monitor,
audit, and review the efficacy of the Process.
<p>The Khartoum Process does not have a defined single fund, but draws from several
different sources of EU funding; including the Better Migration Management Fund and
the EU Emergency Trust Fund for Africa.</p><p>The UK, as the current Chair of the
Khartoum Process, works closely with the Secretariat to maintain a map of current
and proposed projects, and ensure effective coordination and monitoring. The European
Commission has responsibility for assessing implementation against the Valetta benchmarks
and outcomes, and conducting the full audit and review of the EU funding programmes.</p>
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether, in considering whether to call in planning
applications for schemes involving hydraulic fracturing that have taken longer than
16 weeks to be decided upon, they will count the 16 weeks from (1) the date the application
was first received by the Minerals Planning Authority or (2) the date the application
was registered; and whether, in either case, they will take into account (a) the timetable
agreed between the applicant and the planning authority, even if that is for longer
than 16 weeks, (b) delays caused by the failure of the applicant to provide the necessary
information, (c) delays caused by defects in the application, (d) delays caused by
amendments to the application, (e) an estimate of the additional costs likely to result
from calling in the application, and (f) whether a call-in will result in a greater
delay than allowing the planning authority to continue to deal with it.
<p>I refer the noble Lord to the written ministerial statements of 16 September, HLWS194
and HLWS195, which set out a number of measures to enable planning applications and
appeals relating to shale gas and oil to be dealt with as quickly as possible.</p><p>
</p><p>These include a commitment by the Secretary of State to actively consider calling-in
shale planning applications. Separately, a scheme has been put in place to identify
local planning authority underperformance in respect of their determination of oil
and gas planning applications. The scheme uses the same threshold of underperformance
set out in the document ‘Improving planning performance – Criteria for designation’,
of 50% or fewer applications being made within the relevant statutory time limit,
or such extended period as has been agreed in writing by the applicant. The statutory
time limit applies once an application has been validated by the local planning authority.
Where an authority is identified as underperforming under the scheme, the Secretary
of State for Communities and Local Government will actively consider calling-in for
his determination oil and gas planning applications that are validated by that authority,
in accordance with existing policy.</p><p> </p><p>The decision on whether to call-in
any application will be taken in line with current call-in policy. Any applications
relating to shale gas that are called-in would be prioritised for urgent resolution.</p><p>
</p><p>If the Secretary of State were to grant a planning permission in respect of
a called-in application, then any details of the scheme that are the subject of planning
conditions would need to be submitted to and approved by the relevant local planning
authority.</p>
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they plan to send observers to the imminent
trials in Azerbaijan of (1) Mr Arif and Ms Leyla Yunus of the Peace and Democracy
Institute, (2) Mr Intigam Aliyev, and (3) Mr Rasul Jafarov; and whether they will
propose that their trials are fully covered by European Union diplomats.
<p>The British Government has publicly expressed its concern surrounding the arrests
of Mr Arif and Ms Leyla Yunus and Mr Rasul Jafarav amongst others, and supports the
EU statement of 14 August 2014 regarding the recent deterioration of the human rights
situation in Azerbaijan. As has been the case in recent high profile trials, the British
Government expects to make representation in coordination with its EU partners.</p>
