1-20 of 215 results for answeredby:"Geoffrey Cox"
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.457 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.004 seconds
- Search query
- answeredby:"Geoffrey Cox"
- We searched for
- answeringMember_ses:299905 OR answeringDept_ses:299905 OR askedToReplyAuthor_ses:299905
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
More
Primary member
More
Answering member
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what plans her Department has to tackle the unconsented sharing of intimate and sexual images.
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what plans her Department has to tackle the unconsented sharing of intimate and sexual images.
he Government is committed to ensuring that the honours system is fully representative of UK society. The proportion of women and people from ethnic minorities receiving recognition on each honours list is available on GOV.UK as is a breakdown of ethnicities of recipients is published on the Ethnicity Facts and Figures website at https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/honours-recipients-by-ethnicity.
Information on ages is not correlated with other diversity factors. We also publish the proportion of honours by independent committee on GOV.UK. The numbers of honours recipients in the Attorney General’s Office are very small and vary from year to year. Releasing the requested data would identify the individuals and they have given permission for their data to be used for statistical purposes only.
To ask the Attorney General, whether the provisions in the EU (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill will enable the UK to determine the circumstances in which lower courts will have regard to rulings of the European Court of Justice in relation to retained EU case law.
To ask the Attorney General, whether the provisions in the EU (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill will enable the UK to determine the circumstances in which lower courts will have regard to rulings of the European Court of Justice in relation to retained EU case law.
Section 26 of the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020 provides a power for Ministers to make regulations to determine which Courts may depart from judgments handed down by the Court of Justice of the European Union before the end of the implementation period and in what circumstances. This will ensure UK courts are not inappropriately bound by retained EU case law after the UK has left the EU.
To ask the Attorney General, whether the UK will remain a party to the European Convention on Human Rights after the UK leaves the EU.
To ask the Attorney General, whether the UK will remain a party to the European Convention on Human Rights after the UK leaves the EU.
The UK will remain party to the ECHR after it has left the EU. The UK has strong human rights protections within a comprehensive and well-established constitutional and legal system and the decision to leave the EU does not change this.
To ask the Attorney General, what assessment he has made of the potential effect of the UK leaving the EU on the protection of human rights in the UK.
To ask the Attorney General, what assessment he has made of the potential effect of the UK leaving the EU on the protection of human rights in the UK.
The United Kingdom has a long tradition of ensuring rights and liberties are protected domestically and of fulfilling its international human rights obligations. The decision to leave the European Union does not change this. We fully intend to maintain our leading role in the promotion and protection of human rights, democracy, and the rule of law.
What discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the legal implications of Clause 37 of the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill.
What discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the legal implications of Clause 37 of the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill.
I cannot comment on Cabinet discussions, or on whether or not I have given legal advice.
What I can say is that the Government remains fully committed to the principle of family reunion and supporting the most vulnerable children. Clause 37 of the Withdrawal Agreement Bill does not represent a change of government policy in that regard. It simply removes the statutory requirement to negotiate.
What assessment he has made of the potential effect on the protection of human rights of the UK leaving the EU.
What assessment he has made of the potential effect on the protection of human rights of the UK leaving the EU.
The United Kingdom has a long tradition of ensuring that rights and liberties are protected domestically and of fulfilling its international human rights obligations. Our departure from the European Union will not change that.
If he will hold discussions with the Home Secretary on defining the term Reasonable Excuse for missing the deadline for applications to the EU Settlement Scheme.
If he will hold discussions with the Home Secretary on defining the term Reasonable Excuse for missing the deadline for applications to the EU Settlement Scheme.
I regularly meet ministerial colleagues to discuss important issues of common interest, including of course on matters relating to the UK’s exit from the EU. It would be inappropriate for me to comment on the detail of those discussions.
The question of the deadline for the EU Settlement Scheme is a matter for the Home Secretary, but I can assure the Member for Edinburgh North and Leith that the Home Office will publish guidance on what will constitue ‘reasonable grounds’ for missing the deadline for the EU Settlement Scheme.
The United Kingdom has a long tradition of ensuring that rights and liberties are protected domestically and of fulfilling its international human rights obligations. Our departure from the European Union will not change that.
The United Kingdom has a long tradition of ensuring that rights and liberties are protected domestically and of fulfilling its international human rights obligations. Our departure from the European Union will not change that.
What assessment he has made of the potential effect on the protection of human rights of the UK leaving the EU.
I am grateful for this opportunity to reassert the Government’s complete commitment to our membership of and subscription to the European convention on human rights.
I am grateful for this opportunity to reassert the Government’s complete commitment to our membership of and subscription to the European convention on human rights.
There are real concerns about whether the UK will remain a signatory to the European convention on human rights as we leave the European Union. The convention has led to changes in UK law that protect victims of trafficking, tackle workplace discrimination and ensure the rights of disabled people. Can the Attorney General guarantee that this Government will never withdraw from the convention in any circumstance?
I am most grateful to my hon. Friend and, if I may, I offer him a word of congratulation on his recent knighthood. I am delighted to welcome him in his new incarnation as Sir Bob.
My hon. Friend will know I agree with him that, as we leave the European Union, the country and the world should know that this nation stands for liberty, freedom and human rights. One mark of our standing for those values will be our continued vigorous participation in the Council of Europe and our subscription to the convention on human rights. That should not mean
that we do not turn a critical eye to elements of the human rights structures in our country, and we will look at those in the time to come.
I am most grateful to my hon. Friend and, if I may, I offer him a word of congratulation on his recent knighthood. I am delighted to welcome him in his new incarnation as Sir Bob.
My hon. Friend will know I agree with him that, as we leave the European Union, the country and the world should know that this nation stands for liberty, freedom and human rights. One mark of our standing for those values will be our continued vigorous participation in the Council of Europe and our subscription to the convention on human rights. That should not mean
that we do not turn a critical eye to elements of the human rights structures in our country, and we will look at those in the time to come.
I welcome what the Attorney General has just said. Will he take the opportunity to remind many people that the United Kingdom is one of the founding fathers of the convention that gave rise to the ECHR—not least in the person of Sir David Maxwell Fyfe, a distinguished Conservative lawyer-politician? I know my right hon. and learned Friend will want to continue in that tradition.
It has been an enormous pleasure to appear opposite the hon. Gentleman. He is a distinguished historian, a distinguished politician and an experienced barrister.
It has been an enormous pleasure to appear opposite the hon. Gentleman. He is a distinguished historian, a distinguished politician and an experienced barrister.
Although I welcome most of what the Attorney General has just said, the Tory manifesto says:
“We will update the Human Rights Act and administrative law”.
Yesterday, at Prime Minister’s questions, the Prime Minister said that judicial review should not be
“abused to conduct politics by another means or to create needless delays.”—[Official Report, 15 January 2020; Vol. 669, c. 1019.]
Can the Attorney General tell us which recent court decisions have been about conducting politics or causing needless delays?
Of course it will.
The hon. Member for Torfaen (Nick Thomas-Symonds) knows I will not be drawn into commenting on individual cases, but what I can say is that there are widespread concerns throughout our society and throughout this House as to whether judicial review is sometimes being used in a manner, often through frivolous applications, that needs better focus and care in its procedures and tests. We will have a look at that to see whether the elements of judicial review could be better designed to serve its purpose of holding the Government to account for their administrative decisions.
Of course it will.
The hon. Member for Torfaen (Nick Thomas-Symonds) knows I will not be drawn into commenting on individual cases, but what I can say is that there are widespread concerns throughout our society and throughout this House as to whether judicial review is sometimes being used in a manner, often through frivolous applications, that needs better focus and care in its procedures and tests. We will have a look at that to see whether the elements of judicial review could be better designed to serve its purpose of holding the Government to account for their administrative decisions.
Although I welcome most of what the Attorney General has just said, the Tory manifesto says:
“We will update the Human Rights Act and administrative law”.
Yesterday, at Prime Minister’s questions, the Prime Minister said that judicial review should not be
“abused to conduct politics by another means or to create needless delays.”—[Official Report, 15 January 2020; Vol. 669, c. 1019.]
Can the Attorney General tell us which recent court decisions have been about conducting politics or causing needless delays?
There is no question of weakening judicial review. The question is whether we can make it more efficient and streamlined, and more focused on the purpose: holding the Government to account for their administrative decisions. Even the hon. Gentleman will have to accept that some judicial review cases have been brought that should perhaps never have been started—often they are indeed thrown out by the courts—and we can prevent the courts being clogged up with those applications. So I say to him: let us wait and see. The Government are looking at this extremely carefully,
but I want him to understand one thing: there is no question of backsliding upon the fundamental principle of the independence of the judiciary.
There is no question of weakening judicial review. The question is whether we can make it more efficient and streamlined, and more focused on the purpose: holding the Government to account for their administrative decisions. Even the hon. Gentleman will have to accept that some judicial review cases have been brought that should perhaps never have been started—often they are indeed thrown out by the courts—and we can prevent the courts being clogged up with those applications. So I say to him: let us wait and see. The Government are looking at this extremely carefully,
but I want him to understand one thing: there is no question of backsliding upon the fundamental principle of the independence of the judiciary.
I always welcome compliments, but I did not detect an answer to the question from the Attorney General. He often says that he is a lawyer first and a politician second. He knows that Governments are sometimes vindicated in the courts and that they also face decisions from the courts that are uncomfortable. The answer is never to attack the independence of our judiciary or our courts system. There is a real worry that the Prime Minister is seeking some sort of vengeance because he did not like the Supreme Court’s decision that his prorogation of Parliament was unlawful. Does the Attorney General agree that if we are to weaken judicial review, it will be not the Prime Minister who loses out, but all our constituents whose rights to hold public authorities to account are watered down?
We are not seeking to repeal this; we are simply removing the statutory requirement to negotiate it. The Government wrote in October last year seeking commencement of negotiation on family reunification. The principle is fundamental and one to which the Government are committed: vulnerable, unaccompanied children must be able to reunite with their family members in this country.
We are not seeking to repeal this; we are simply removing the statutory requirement to negotiate it. The Government wrote in October last year seeking commencement of negotiation on family reunification. The principle is fundamental and one to which the Government are committed: vulnerable, unaccompanied children must be able to reunite with their family members in this country.
I welcome the Attorney General back to his place on the Government Bench, but it was from the Back Benches, in February 2017, that he made a superb speech on the human rights of unaccompanied asylum seeking children, calling on the Government not just to pay “lip service” to those rights, but to make them “practical and effective”. So if the Government are genuinely committed to making those Dublin rights effective post-Brexit, why do they not just unilaterally decide to continue to accept unaccompanied children with family members here? Why are the Government seeking to repeal even the modest obligations to negotiate their rights under the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018?
To ask the Attorney General, if he will provide additional staff training resources for criminal cases involving large volumes of electronic evidence.
To ask the Attorney General, if he will provide additional staff training resources for criminal cases involving large volumes of electronic evidence.
The government is committed to investing in tools and training that can help to mitigate the challenges posed by large volumes of electronic evidence. The CPS provides extensive disclosure training for all prosecutors to ensure they are properly equipped to handle these challenges. The College of Policing figures, published last August, show that over 100,000 police officers and staff across England and Wales have completed all modules of disclosure training, and further advanced training packages are being developed by the CPS.
To ask the Attorney General, what recent assessment he has made of how (a) material evidence brought forward by the prosecution and (b) unused material that fails to be disclosed to the defence is processed by the (i) police and (ii) Crown Prosecution Service.
To ask the Attorney General, what recent assessment he has made of how (a) material evidence brought forward by the prosecution and (b) unused material that fails to be disclosed to the defence is processed by the (i) police and (ii) Crown Prosecution Service.
There has been unprecedented joint commitment and focus from the police and the CPS to finding solutions to the problem of getting the provision of material evidence and disclosure right. Her Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Inspectorate (HMCPSI) recently published a report on disclosure in the Crown Court, which shows that CPS and the police have made improvements in almost all areas. However, as the report notes, these improvements are from a low baseline and it is therefore crucial that lasting improvements continue to be made. I am working to update my Guidelines on Disclosure in order to provide clear guidance to all practitioners, and embed the recommendations I made in my 2018 Review.
To ask the Attorney General, what proportion of staff in his Department in receipt of each category of Honour in (a) December 2018 and (b) June 2019 were (i) from ethnic minority backgrounds and (ii) female aged (A) under 30, (B) 31 to 40, (C) 41 to 50 and (D)...
To ask the Attorney General, what proportion of staff in his Department in receipt of each category of Honour in (a) December 2018 and (b) June 2019 were (i) from ethnic minority backgrounds and (ii) female aged (A) under 30, (B) 31 to 40, (C) 41 to 50 and (D)...
he Government is committed to ensuring that the honours system is fully representative of UK society. The proportion of women and people from ethnic minorities receiving recognition on each honours list is available on GOV.UK as is a breakdown of ethnicities of recipients is published on the Ethnicity Facts and Figures website at https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/honours-recipients-by-ethnicity.
Information on ages is not correlated with other diversity factors. We also publish the proportion of honours by independent committee on GOV.UK. The numbers of honours recipients in the Attorney General’s Office are very small and vary from year to year. Releasing the requested data would identify the individuals and they have given permission for their data to be used for statistical purposes only.
To ask the Attorney General, what progress he has made on his plans to take forward a prosecution for bribery and corruption in the case of GPT Special Project Management Ltd.
To ask the Attorney General, what progress he has made on his plans to take forward a prosecution for bribery and corruption in the case of GPT Special Project Management Ltd.
This case is being investigated by the Serious Fraud Office which investigates and prosecutes allegations of the most serious or complex fraud, bribery and corruption. These allegations are challenging to investigate. Their investigation is handled with great care and this necessarily takes time. This case is particularly complex and the investigation is still ongoing. For this reason, it would not be appropriate for me to comment on it.
I cannot, as the hon. Lady will know, comment on the content of Cabinet discussions, but she will understand that I regularly meet ministerial colleagues to discuss important issues of common interest. It would be inappropriate for me to comment on the detail of those discussions, and I am bound by the convention that neither the fact nor content of Law Officers’ advice is disclosed outside of the Government. I make it clear to the hon. Lady that the Government will obey the law, the Prime Minister is subject to the law, and this Government will comply with it.
I cannot, as the hon. Lady will know, comment on the content of Cabinet discussions, but she will understand that I regularly meet ministerial colleagues to discuss important issues of common interest. It would be inappropriate for me to comment on the detail of those discussions, and I am bound by the convention that neither the fact nor content of Law Officers’ advice is disclosed outside of the Government. I make it clear to the hon. Lady that the Government will obey the law, the Prime Minister is subject to the law, and this Government will comply with it.
What discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the implementation of the European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 2) Act 2019.
What I can confirm to the hon. Lady is that the Government will obey the law.
What I can confirm to the hon. Lady is that the Government will obey the law.
Notwithstanding all that, I am going to ask the Attorney General a nice yes-no question. The Act requires the Prime Minister to ask for an extension unless Parliament has agreed a withdrawal agreement or agreed to leave without one, so will the Attorney General confirm that, if Parliament has not done either of those things, the Prime Minister would be acting unlawfully if he nevertheless took us out of the EU on 31 October? Yes or no?