1-20 of 286 results for subject:Privatisation
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.303 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.01 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Privatisation
- We searched for
- subject_t:Privatisation OR subject_t:Denationalisation OR subject_ses:92601
Type
House
Session
Month
Department
Member
More
Primary member
Answering member
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
It is a pleasure to follow my Friend the Member for Derby North (Chris Williamson). I pay tribute to him for the incredible campaign he has run in support of the workers in his constituency and the skills that have been brought to the country by the decades—over a century—of...
It is a pleasure to follow my Friend the Member for Derby North (Chris Williamson). I pay tribute to him for the incredible campaign he has run in support of the workers in his constituency and the skills that have been brought to the country by the decades—over a century—of...
If privatisation has been as bad as the hon. Gentleman describes, why, since privatisation, have the number of journeys taken and the number passengers doubled, and why, in 13 years in government, did Labour not seek to reverse it?
If privatisation has been as bad as the hon. Gentleman describes, why, since privatisation, have the number of journeys taken and the number passengers doubled, and why, in 13 years in government, did Labour not seek to reverse it?
May I ask the Leader of the House for an urgent statement or debate on the privatisation of Greater Manchester ambulance service? As he may know, the contract to run part of this important service was recently awarded to Arriva—yes, that is the bus and train company—despite the NHS bid...
May I ask the Leader of the House for an urgent statement or debate on the privatisation of Greater Manchester ambulance service? As he may know, the contract to run part of this important service was recently awarded to Arriva—yes, that is the bus and train company—despite the NHS bid...
I am sure the House will wish to welcome the hon. Lady to her place. Decisions on contracts of that kind are made locally within the national health service, not centrally by the Secretary of State, but I will ask my ministerial friends in the Department of Health
to write...
I am sure the House will wish to welcome the hon. Lady to her place. Decisions on contracts of that kind are made locally within the national health service, not centrally by the Secretary of State, but I will ask my ministerial friends in the Department of Health
to write...
The Government listed that there would be a written ministerial statement today on the future of the Prison Service. They trailed that it would mark the start of the wholesale
privatisation of the Prison Service, which would have enormous consequences for the large number of our constituents who work in...
The Government listed that there would be a written ministerial statement today on the future of the Prison Service. They trailed that it would mark the start of the wholesale
privatisation of the Prison Service, which would have enormous consequences for the large number of our constituents who work in...
I will, of course, check that that written ministerial statement has been laid, and I have no doubt that it will make clear to the hon. Gentleman and the House the nature of what it is announcing. If outstanding issues arise from its contents, the hon. Gentleman will note that...
I will, of course, check that that written ministerial statement has been laid, and I have no doubt that it will make clear to the hon. Gentleman and the House the nature of what it is announcing. If outstanding issues arise from its contents, the hon. Gentleman will note that...
Following the tabling of this question, I considered what the hon. Lady is asking me to do, but I have decided to follow the policy set by the previous Government, who believed in franchising.
Following the tabling of this question, I considered what the hon. Lady is asking me to do, but I have decided to follow the policy set by the previous Government, who believed in franchising.
Since 1997 we have seen Great North Eastern Railway fail and National Express fail, but now we have East Coast trains returning £187 million to the
taxpayer. Why on earth would the Minister want to swap that for the unmitigated disaster of the west coast tender? Is not that free-marketism gone mad?
Since 1997 we have seen Great North Eastern Railway fail and National Express fail, but now we have East Coast trains returning £187 million to the
taxpayer. Why on earth would the Minister want to swap that for the unmitigated disaster of the west coast tender? Is not that free-marketism gone mad?
I draw on what the shadow Lord Chancellor, the right hon. Member for Tooting (Sadiq Khan), said when he was a Transport Minister:
“The rail franchising system was examined by the National Audit Office last year, and was found to deliver good value for money”
and “steadily improving” services. He continued:
“Passenger numbers are at their highest levels since the 1940s,”
and
“punctuality is more than 90 per cent.”—[Official Report, 1 July 2009; Vol. 495, c. 425-6.]
I agree with what the right hon. Gentleman said then, and I think it is the right way forward.
I draw on what the shadow Lord Chancellor, the right hon. Member for Tooting (Sadiq Khan), said when he was a Transport Minister:
“The rail franchising system was examined by the National Audit Office last year, and was found to deliver good value for money”
and “steadily improving” services. He continued:
“Passenger numbers are at their highest levels since the 1940s,”
and
“punctuality is more than 90 per cent.”—[Official Report, 1 July 2009; Vol. 495, c. 425-6.]
I agree with what the right hon. Gentleman said then, and I think it is the right way forward.
I draw on what the shadow Lord Chancellor, the right hon. Member for Tooting (Sadiq Khan), said when he was a Transport Minister:
“The rail franchising system was examined by the National Audit Office last year, and was found to deliver good value for money”
and “steadily improving” services. He continued:
“Passenger numbers are at their highest levels since the 1940s,”
and
“punctuality is more than 90 per cent.”—[Official Report, 1 July 2009; Vol. 495, c. 425-6.]
I agree with what the right hon. Gentleman said then, and I think it is the right way forward.
Since 1997 we have seen Great North Eastern Railway fail and National Express fail, but now we have East Coast trains returning £187 million to the
taxpayer. Why on earth would the Minister want to swap that for the unmitigated disaster of the west coast tender? Is not that free-marketism gone mad?
I congratulate my right hon. Friend on continuing the policies of this Government as well as the last, but there are lessons to be learned for both the east coast and the west coast franchise. Will he ensure that the product of the east coast main line service will remain the premier service in the land?
I congratulate my right hon. Friend on continuing the policies of this Government as well as the last, but there are lessons to be learned for both the east coast and the west coast franchise. Will he ensure that the product of the east coast main line service will remain the premier service in the land?
I want all services to be good services and to serve hon. Members’ constituents, but of course we have lessons to learn—lessons from the way in which certain franchises were unable to continue under the previous Government. I made a statement to the House on Monday in which I said that we would learn those lessons. Two reviews are being undertaken, and I look forward to receiving their representations.
I want all services to be good services and to serve hon. Members’ constituents, but of course we have lessons to learn—lessons from the way in which certain franchises were unable to continue under the previous Government. I made a statement to the House on Monday in which I said that we would learn those lessons. Two reviews are being undertaken, and I look forward to receiving their representations.
I want all services to be good services and to serve hon. Members’ constituents, but of course we have lessons to learn—lessons from the way in which certain franchises were unable to continue under the previous Government. I made a statement to the House on Monday in which I said that we would learn those lessons. Two reviews are being undertaken, and I look forward to receiving their representations.
I congratulate my right hon. Friend on continuing the policies of this Government as well as the last, but there are lessons to be learned for both the east coast and the west coast franchise. Will he ensure that the product of the east coast main line service will remain the premier service in the land?
The Secretary of State continues to claim that privatising the east coast rail service is necessary to deliver new investment, but he knows full well that both the planned improvements for the line and the new generation of inter-city trains are being funded by the taxpayer. In the light of the west coast fiasco, will he rethink his opposition to allowing the east coast line to be run as a not-for-private-profit service, not least since, as my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne Central (Chi Onwurah) said, it returned £187 million to taxpayers last year—money that, from next year, will have to be split with shareholders?
The Secretary of State continues to claim that privatising the east coast rail service is necessary to deliver new investment, but he knows full well that both the planned improvements for the line and the new generation of inter-city trains are being funded by the taxpayer. In the light of the west coast fiasco, will he rethink his opposition to allowing the east coast line to be run as a not-for-private-profit service, not least since, as my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne Central (Chi Onwurah) said, it returned £187 million to taxpayers last year—money that, from next year, will have to be split with shareholders?
The hon. Lady is rewriting history: the simple fact is that the previous Government were committed to franchising on the east coast main line—[Interruption.] The hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr Skinner) says he is not bothered about that any more; I shall remind him of things that he supported in the past but now attacks.
The hon. Lady is rewriting history: the simple fact is that the previous Government were committed to franchising on the east coast main line—[Interruption.] The hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr Skinner) says he is not bothered about that any more; I shall remind him of things that he supported in the past but now attacks.
The hon. Lady is rewriting history: the simple fact is that the previous Government were committed to franchising on the east coast main line—[Interruption.] The hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr Skinner) says he is not bothered about that any more; I shall remind him of things that he supported in the past but now attacks.
The Secretary of State continues to claim that privatising the east coast rail service is necessary to deliver new investment, but he knows full well that both the planned improvements for the line and the new generation of inter-city trains are being funded by the taxpayer. In the light of the west coast fiasco, will he rethink his opposition to allowing the east coast line to be run as a not-for-private-profit service, not least since, as my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne Central (Chi Onwurah) said, it returned £187 million to taxpayers last year—money that, from next year, will have to be split with shareholders?
Who supported the nationalisation of rail?
Who supported the nationalisation of rail?
Following the tabling of this question, I considered what the hon. Lady is asking me to do, but I have decided to follow the policy set by the previous Government, who believed in franchising.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps he plans to take in the event that the consultation on the proposal to privatise pharmacy services in the Gus and St Thomas' Foundation Trust is opposed by the public.
[112820]
To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps he plans to take in the event that the consultation on the proposal to privatise pharmacy services in the Gus and St Thomas' Foundation Trust is opposed by the public.
[112820]
This is a matter for the trust, its board of directors and governors to determine. However, we are advised that the trust is only proposing to outsource its out-patient dispensing and distribution of drugs to patients at home and that it has no plans to change the in-patient or pharmacy manufacturing services. As this represents a change of provider and not a change to services, there is no requirement for public consultation. We understand that the small number of staff potentially affected by the change will be consulted.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health what requirements there are for public and patient consultation before a patient service can be privatised within an NHS hospital.
[112804]
To ask the Secretary of State for Health what requirements there are for public and patient consultation before a patient service can be privatised within an NHS hospital.
[112804]
Charges for any NHS service cannot be levied without the express permission of Parliament.
National health service organisations are obliged, under section 242 of the NHS Act 2006, to involve patients and the public in the planning of service provision, the development and consideration of proposals for changes in the way those services are provided, and decisions affecting the operation of those services where such proposals impact on the manner in which services are provided or the range of services available to patients.
Where only the provider of NHS services is changing and there is no impact on services available to the public, there are no requirements for public and patient consultation.
Many NHS services are not provided by the public sector.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what impact assessment her Department carried out on the privatisation of Dover Port; and whether that assessment considered the potential effect of privatisation on ferry berth tariffs.
[109750]
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what impact assessment her Department carried out on the privatisation of Dover Port; and whether that assessment considered the potential effect of privatisation on ferry berth tariffs.
[109750]
Any proposal for a sale of the trust port of Dover would be assessed against the criteria published in August 2011 (15 September 2011, Official Report, columns 65-66WS). These include fair competition, whereby the Secretary of State will not approve an application that is likely to deliver an ownership model which results in unsatisfactory levels of competition in the relevant sector.