1-20 of 519 results for primarymember:"Lord Prescott"
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.803 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.003 seconds
- Search query
- primarymember:"Lord Prescott"
- We searched for
- primaryMember_ses:303051
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
More
Member
More
Primary member
Answering member
More
Legislative stage
Legislation
More
Subject
More
Publisher
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Gardiner of Kimble on 25 July (WA 235), whether they will now arrange for the list of members to be published in the Official Report; and if not, why not.[HL2086]
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Gardiner of Kimble on 25 July (WA 235), whether they will now arrange for the list of members to be published in the Official Report; and if not, why not.[HL2086]
Details of Committee membership have been published on the Privy Council website:
http://privycouncil.independent.gov.uk/royal-charters/petitions-for-royal-charters/
To ask Her Majesty’s Government who are the members of the Privy Council considering the draft Royal Charter on press regulation.[HL1728]
To ask Her Majesty’s Government who are the members of the Privy Council considering the draft Royal Charter on press regulation.[HL1728]
Membership of the Privy Council Committee which will be considering the PressBoF Royal Charter is published on the Privy Council website: http://privycouncil.independent. gov.uk/royal-charters/petitions-for-royal-charters/
To ask Her Majesty’s Government when they propose to present to the Privy Council the all-party Royal Charter on press regulation; and whether they will do so before the completion of the consideration of the draft Royal Charter on that subject now before the Privy Council.[HL1727]
To ask Her Majesty’s Government when they propose to present to the Privy Council the all-party Royal Charter on press regulation; and whether they will do so before the completion of the consideration of the draft Royal Charter on that subject now before the Privy Council.[HL1727]
It has been widely known that the Press Charter will be considered and a decision taken before the cross party charter is submitted to the Privy Council. In considering the PressBoF Charter, the Government is following a robust procedure, in line with usual Privy Council processes. We want to see a tough new system of press self-regulation implemented swiftly,
My Lords, the agenda, the rules of decisions, the timing and attendance are determined by Cabinet Members. They have decided to give the press charter greater priority. Is the Minister aware that there is division on the press charter as a number of the papers do not support it? It is not consistent with Leveson’s request for independence—free of government, free of Parliament and free of the press. In giving priority to this they have chosen to make a controversial political decision inside the Privy Council. That may inevitably mean a division of opinion between Parliament and the monarchy.
My Lords, the agenda, the rules of decisions, the timing and attendance are determined by Cabinet Members. They have decided to give the press charter greater priority. Is the Minister aware that there is division on the press charter as a number of the papers do not support it? It is not consistent with Leveson’s request for independence—free of government, free of Parliament and free of the press. In giving priority to this they have chosen to make a controversial political decision inside the Privy Council. That may inevitably mean a division of opinion between Parliament and the monarchy.
I do not agree, although I can understand the noble Lord’s point about priority. There are due processes and legal opinion, so we have had to consider the PressBoF charter first.
My Lords, I confess not to being a full supporter of the royal charter, although I was quite prepared to accept it if all three parties got together, and it embodied the Leveson proposals. I am pleased to hear that that is now going ahead. Will the Minister confirm that, even under those proposals, there will have to be legislation before these Houses to determine the issue on damages and costs for those editors and papers that refuse to co-operate with any form of charter? Can he confirm that there will be legislation here? If that is the Government’s policy, why was it not in the Queen’s Speech, which we are now debating?
My Lords, I confess not to being a full supporter of the royal charter, although I was quite prepared to accept it if all three parties got together, and it embodied the Leveson proposals. I am pleased to hear that that is now going ahead. Will the Minister confirm that, even under those proposals, there will have to be legislation before these Houses to determine the issue on damages and costs for those editors and papers that refuse to co-operate with any form of charter? Can he confirm that there will be legislation here? If that is the Government’s policy, why was it not in the Queen’s Speech, which we are now debating?
My Lords, my understanding is that all outstanding matters were dealt with in discussions not only of the royal charter but of the
Crime and Courts Bill before the House rose for prorogation. So my understanding is that all outstanding matters vis-à-vis the matters that the noble Lord has raised have already been handled.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord McNally on 23 July (WA 109), what financial assistance has been given to the Isle of Sark in fulfilling its constitutional obligations on behalf of the Crown for each year since 2008.[HL2054]
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord McNally on 23 July (WA 109), what financial assistance has been given to the Isle of Sark in fulfilling its constitutional obligations on behalf of the Crown for each year since 2008.[HL2054]
The UK Government have given no financial assistance to Sark in fulfilling its constitutional obligations on behalf of the Crown. Costs have, however, been incurred by the UK Government in defending applications for judicial review in the courts of the United Kingdom, challenging specific decisions to recommend that legislation passed by the Chief Pleas of Sark should receive the Royal Assent which is necessary for that legislation to come into force. Information is not available broken down by year, but the costs incurred by the UK Government since 2008 in such cases, including those presently under way, amount to approximately £199,000, of which £44,000 has been recovered by the UK Government under costs orders made by the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what correspondence took place between the Department for Communities and Local Government and the Cabinet Office arising out of the letter from Lord Prescott to the Cabinet Secretary of 31 October 2011; what changes were made to the draft of the Cabinet Secretary’s response on...
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what correspondence took place between the Department for Communities and Local Government and the Cabinet Office arising out of the letter from Lord Prescott to the Cabinet Secretary of 31 October 2011; what changes were made to the draft of the Cabinet Secretary’s response on...
A factual error in the Cabinet Office reply of 18 November 2011, incorrectly suggesting that departmental civil servants had been disciplined for the use of the Government Procurement Card under the previous Administration, was removed from the version of 21 November. In fact, the fraud stemmed from seven transactions on a cloned credit card. A second paragraph was also deleted from the version of 18 November in error. The Cabinet Secretary has written to the noble Lord to explain the background.
More broadly, online transparency has enabled robust public accountability and parliamentary scrutiny about departmental spending to help protect taxpayers’ money.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether any private company other than G4S contracted to provide trained security personnel for the Olympic Games by the London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games is failing to deliver its contractual obligations.[HL1611]
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether any private company other than G4S contracted to provide trained security personnel for the Olympic Games by the London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games is failing to deliver its contractual obligations.[HL1611]
The principal contract for trained security personnel for the London 2012 Games is between the London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games (LOCOG) and G4S. LOCOG has confirmed it has no other contracts with private companies in this area.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is the estimated cost of the provision of extra troops to meet the failure of the G4S Olympic Games contract to deliver agreed numbers of trained security personnel; and whether that cost will be met from any penalties or fines imposed pursuant to the...
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is the estimated cost of the provision of extra troops to meet the failure of the G4S Olympic Games contract to deliver agreed numbers of trained security personnel; and whether that cost will be met from any penalties or fines imposed pursuant to the...
No firm estimate is yet agreed for the cost of providing additional military personnel to carry out venue security roles at the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games. G4S has made it clear that it will bear any additional military and policing costs arising from failure to meet its contractual obligations.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what financial assistance they provided to the Isle of Sark in each year since 2008 and whether any of that assistance involved payment for litigation on the Isle.[HL1615]
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what financial assistance they provided to the Isle of Sark in each year since 2008 and whether any of that assistance involved payment for litigation on the Isle.[HL1615]
The constitutional relationship between the UK and the Crown Dependencies does not provide for direct financial assistance. However, the UK Government can incur costs in fulfilling their constitutional obligations on behalf of the Crown, for example, in defending applications in the UK courts for judicial review of recommendations that Island legislation should receive Royal Assent. Such costs have been incurred since 2008 in respect of Sark.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what conclusions they have drawn from the visit of Lord McNally, Minister of State for Justice, to the Isle of Sark. [HL1613]
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what conclusions they have drawn from the visit of Lord McNally, Minister of State for Justice, to the Isle of Sark. [HL1613]
My open letter of 3 July 2012 to the Chief Pleas of Sark explains the UK Government’s position in respect of the actions they are taking to reform their governance structures and develop a more sustainable future. My letter makes clear my view that Sark needs to adapt and change and that the UK stands ready to provide practical advice and assistance. I will arrange for a copy of this letter to be deposited in the House Library.
My Lords, this policy will reduce the amounts of money for the Humberside police by £30 million and hundreds of front-line police. Is the Minister aware that the number of criminal incidents and those of anti-social behaviour has been reduced considerably by the present force? In those circumstances, does he not accept the charge laid against the Home Secretary last week that a 20% cut is criminal? Is it not now true that, as with the health service, law and order is no longer safe in the hands of this Government?
My Lords, this policy will reduce the amounts of money for the Humberside police by £30 million and hundreds of front-line police. Is the Minister aware that the number of criminal incidents and those of anti-social behaviour has been reduced considerably by the present force? In those circumstances, does he not accept the charge laid against the Home Secretary last week that a 20% cut is criminal? Is it not now true that, as with the health service, law and order is no longer safe in the hands of this Government?
My Lords, my understanding is that the noble Lord is thinking of standing as police and crime commissioner for Humberside, and we wish him well in that job. He will then no doubt make the right decisions for that force. He knows, I know and the House knows that simple matters of numbers and the amounts of money spent are not the right thing. The important thing is to make sure that the right people are doing the right job at the right time, and that is what we want to make sure is happening. I am sure that that is what the noble Lord will want to make sure is happening should he manage to be elected as police and crime commissioner for Humberside.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what action was taken by the Department for Communities and Local Government when it discovered that in the period 2004-06 the departmental government procurement card for the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister had been cloned, resulting in charges from seven transactions totalling £2,000; and...
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what action was taken by the Department for Communities and Local Government when it discovered that in the period 2004-06 the departmental government procurement card for the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister had been cloned, resulting in charges from seven transactions totalling £2,000; and...
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in respect of purchases made using the government procurement card by the Department for Communities and Local Government, what were the date of purchase, amount, and supplier, in each financial year since 2006–07.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in respect of purchases made using the government procurement card by the Department for Communities and Local Government, what were the date of purchase, amount, and supplier, in each financial year since 2006–07.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the (1) date of purchase, (2) amount, (3) supplier and (4) level 3 or enhanced transaction entry of each transaction undertaken by the Department for Transport using the Government Procurement Card in (a) 2006–07, (b) 2007–08, (c) 2008–09, (d) 2009–10, and (e) 2010–11.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the (1) date of purchase, (2) amount, (3) supplier and (4) level 3 or enhanced transaction entry of each transaction undertaken by the Department for Transport using the Government Procurement Card in (a) 2006–07, (b) 2007–08, (c) 2008–09, (d) 2009–10, and (e) 2010–11.