1-20 of 24 results for subject:Ilkley
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.293 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.002 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Ilkley
- We searched for
- subject_t:Ilkley OR subject_ses:555661
Type
+
Members' contributions (12)
-
Business questions (1)
-
Oral answers to questions (5)
-
Oral questions (5)
-
Proceeding contributions (2)
+
Parliamentary committees (1)
+
Committee proceedings (1)
-
Select Committee oral evidence (1)
+
Parliamentary papers (1)
-
House of Commons papers (1)
+
Parliamentary proceedings (2)
+
Debates (2)
-
Adjournment debates (1)
+
Committee proceedings (1)
-
Select Committee oral evidence (1)
+
Parliamentary questions (16)
-
Business questions (1)
-
Oral questions (5)
-
Written questions (10)
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
Primary member
Answering member
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
To ask Her Majesty's Government when they expect to be able to respond to the application by river users and residents to turn part of the River Wharfe in Ilkley into a bathing water area; and by what process they are considering that application.
To ask Her Majesty's Government when they expect to be able to respond to the application by river users and residents to turn part of the River Wharfe in Ilkley into a bathing water area; and by what process they are considering that application.
Asked by
Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle
(Green Party)
Answered by
Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park
(Conservative)
Answering body
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
20 July 2020
For answer on
3 August 2020
Answered on
3 August 2020
We received an application from the Ilkley Clean River Group in October 2019 for a stretch of the River Wharfe to be designated as a bathing water area. After reviewing further evidence, we are now preparing to proceed to a public consultation. Given the ongoing situation with Covid-19, we will schedule a date to begin the consultation as soon as it is appropriate to do so. This was confirmed by Minister Pow in a letter to the Ilkley Clean River Group on 13 May, following a meeting with Robbie Moore MP to discuss the application.
We have considered the application in line with our usual process for applications for bathing water designation, the details of which are available on the GOV.UK website.
Subjects
Swimming; River Wharfe; Ilkley
Date
3 August 2020
Reference
HL7019
House
House of Lords
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, how many bus journeys operated out of (a) Keighley and (b) Ilkley bus station in each year from 2010.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, how many bus journeys operated out of (a) Keighley and (b) Ilkley bus station in each year from 2010.
Asked by
John Grogan
(Labour)
Answered by
Jesse Norman
(Conservative)
Answering body
Department for Transport
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
4 September 2017
For answer on
6 September 2017
Answered on
11 September 2017
The Department does not hold information on the number of bus journeys operated out of Keighley and Ilkley bus stations.
Subjects
Bus services; Keighley; Ilkley
Date
11 September 2017
Reference
7862
House
House of Commons
Type
House of Commons papers; Select Committee oral evidence;
Parliamentary committees
Committee
Education Committee
Subjects
Assessments; Administration; Secondary education; British Chambers of Commerce; University of Bristol; Bournemouth University; Abingdon and Witney College; St Mary's College Ilkley; Lieven, Nick; Gutierrez, Ana; St John's School Leatherhead; St Michael's School Liverpool
Date
29 November 2011
Reference
HC 1671-i 2010-12
House
House of Commons
Ilkley business forum in my constituency has established a new scheme to protect local independent traders and to save the town centre. May we have a statement making clear the Government's support for small traders and outlining what they are doing to protect such traders from national chains and internet...
Ilkley business forum in my constituency has established a new scheme to protect local independent traders and to save the town centre. May we have a statement making clear the Government's support for small traders and outlining what they are doing to protect such traders from national chains and internet...
Member
Kris Hopkins
(Conservative)
Type
Business questions
Subjects
Business; Government assistance; Urban areas; Ilkley
Date
3 November 2011
Reference
534 c1114-5
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
I am interested to hear what my hon. Friend's local authority has done. I believe that our planning proposals will give more weight to local authorities to take the sort of initiative that he has just touched on to protect independent stores and local traders. So far as protecting them...
I am interested to hear what my hon. Friend's local authority has done. I believe that our planning proposals will give more weight to local authorities to take the sort of initiative that he has just touched on to protect independent stores and local traders. So far as protecting them...
Member
Lord Young of Cookham
(Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Subjects
Business; Government assistance; Urban areas; Ilkley
Date
3 November 2011
Reference
534 c1114-5
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Education when he plans to visit Ilkley grammar school in Keighley constituency.
To ask the Secretary of State for Education when he plans to visit Ilkley grammar school in Keighley constituency.
Asked by
Kris Hopkins
(Conservative)
Answered by
Nick Gibb
(Conservative)
Answering body
Department for Education
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
26 January 2011
For answer on
31 January 2011
Answered on
14 March 2011
An official will contact Ilkley grammar school with a suggested date in due course.
Subjects
Ilkley School
Date
14 March 2011
Reference
37258; 525 c52W
House
House of Commons
For what reasons he has ended the Building Schools for the Future programme for Ilkley and Bingley grammar schools.
For what reasons he has ended the Building Schools for the Future programme for Ilkley and Bingley grammar schools.
Asked by
Philip Davies
(Conservative)
Answered by
Lord Gove
(Conservative)
Answering body
Department for Education
Oral questions - Lead
Status
Answered
Tabled on
6 July 2010
For answer on
12 July 2010
Answered on
12 July 2010
As I set out in my statement last week, the Building Schools for the Future programme has been over-bureaucratic and inefficient. I therefore decided that where financial close had not been reached, future projects provided under BSF could not go ahead. Ilkley and Bingley grammar school projects have not reached financial close, and BSF plans for those two schools have therefore stopped. However, we will continue to invest in schools capital projects.
Subjects
Building schools for the future programme; Bingley; Ilkley
Date
12 July 2010
Reference
6956; 513 c639
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
The right hon. Gentleman cannot give a straight answer to a straight question. The people of Bingley and Ilkley will not be satisfied by that answer, and nor are we. Interestingly, his letter today says very clearly that his fifth list has been validated by local authorities—presumably a clear admission that the information should have been validated before the list was published in the first place, including by Bradford authority, in which the schools of Bingley and Ilkley are situated.
Let me ask the right hon. Gentleman another straight question. Is it not the case that he was advised of the risk of legal challenge from private contractors, but that he personally decided to ignore that advice and take that risk with taxpayers' money? That is a very simple question. We all know that he is on shaky ground, and that he is fast losing the confidence of pupils, parents and teachers. If he had any sense, he would end this shambles, withdraw these error-strewn lists, and let our communities have new schools.
The right hon. Gentleman cannot give a straight answer to a straight question. The people of Bingley and Ilkley will not be satisfied by that answer, and nor are we. Interestingly, his letter today says very clearly that his fifth list has been validated by local authorities—presumably a clear admission that the information should have been validated before the list was published in the first place, including by Bradford authority, in which the schools of Bingley and Ilkley are situated.
Let me ask the right hon. Gentleman another straight question. Is it not the case that he was advised of the risk of legal challenge from private contractors, but that he personally decided to ignore that advice and take that risk with taxpayers' money? That is a very simple question. We all know that he is on shaky ground, and that he is fast losing the confidence of pupils, parents and teachers. If he had any sense, he would end this shambles, withdraw these error-strewn lists, and let our communities have new schools.
Asked by
Ed Balls
(Labour; Co-operative Party)
Answering body
Department for Education
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
12 July 2010
I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for once again stretching so far the geographical definition of Bingley and Ilkley. Let me point out that under him the cost of setting up the procurement vehicle for Building Schools for the Future was £10 million, before a single brick was laid. The taxpayers of Bingley and Ilkley have re-elected a Conservative MP because they are disgusted with the waste and squander of the right hon. Gentleman. There is a dividing line between this side of the House and that side of the House: when mistakes are made, we apologise and we take responsibility. The right hon. Gentleman has never apologised for a single mistake in his life; that is why he is on that side of the House and we are on this side of the House clearing up his mess.
Subjects
Building schools for the future programme; Bingley; Ilkley
Date
12 July 2010
Reference
513 c640-1
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
In the catchment areas for both Ilkley and Bingley grammar schools, there has been excessive house building, so there is no longer sufficient capacity on their existing sites to meet local demand. Can my right hon. Friend ensure that those schools that need new build to increase capacity to meet local demand will still receive capital expenditure?
In the catchment areas for both Ilkley and Bingley grammar schools, there has been excessive house building, so there is no longer sufficient capacity on their existing sites to meet local demand. Can my right hon. Friend ensure that those schools that need new build to increase capacity to meet local demand will still receive capital expenditure?
Asked by
Philip Davies
(Conservative)
Answering body
Department for Education
Oral questions - 1st Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
12 July 2010
I very much take the point made by my hon. Friend. One of the defects of the BSF scheme was that, in many parts of the country where there was real need as a result of a growing population, the money was not there to provide new school places. As a result of our capital review, we will ensure that where there is additional population pressure and additional basic need, particularly in primary schools, which BSF did not cover, we will provide the support that is necessary. I look forward to working with my hon. Friend to help the parents and teachers in those two great schools.
Subjects
Building schools for the future programme; Bingley; Ilkley
Date
12 July 2010
Reference
513 c639
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
For parents, children and teachers in Ilkley and Bingley, the initial shock of learning that their new school building has been cancelled will have turned to outrage at the seemingly arbitrary and chaotic way in which the Secretary of State has made and announced his decisions. The right hon. Gentleman must now know that there is widespread anger in all parts of the House. Following weekend reports that he was advised by his officials not to publish a list of schools at all, I wrote to him yesterday to request answers in advance of today's oral questions. I have received a reply that does not answer any of my questions: it merely attaches a new list—list No. 5—containing 20 additional cancelled schools compared with a week ago.
I shall ask the right hon. Gentleman for a straight answer to a specific question. Did he at any point receive written or oral advice from departmental officials or Partnerships for Schools urging him not to publish a list of schools until after he had consulted local authorities, to make sure that his criteria were sound and his facts were right?
For parents, children and teachers in Ilkley and Bingley, the initial shock of learning that their new school building has been cancelled will have turned to outrage at the seemingly arbitrary and chaotic way in which the Secretary of State has made and announced his decisions. The right hon. Gentleman must now know that there is widespread anger in all parts of the House. Following weekend reports that he was advised by his officials not to publish a list of schools at all, I wrote to him yesterday to request answers in advance of today's oral questions. I have received a reply that does not answer any of my questions: it merely attaches a new list—list No. 5—containing 20 additional cancelled schools compared with a week ago.
I shall ask the right hon. Gentleman for a straight answer to a specific question. Did he at any point receive written or oral advice from departmental officials or Partnerships for Schools urging him not to publish a list of schools until after he had consulted local authorities, to make sure that his criteria were sound and his facts were right?
Asked by
Ed Balls
(Labour; Co-operative Party)
Answering body
Department for Education
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
12 July 2010
The right hon. Gentleman says that there was anger across the House. There was—at the way in which the BSF project had been run by the right hon. Gentleman. There was justifiable anger at the way in which a project that was originally supposed to cost £45 billion ended up costing £55 billion, and it was shared by those who were shocked that under the previous Government, one individual received £1.35 million in consultancy fees—money that should have gone to the front line. From the moment that I took office, everyone involved in this process said to me, "Make sure that you ensure that this faltering and failing project ends." That is what I have done. I inherited a mess from the right hon. Gentleman, and we are clearing it up.
Subjects
Building schools for the future programme; Bingley; Ilkley
Date
12 July 2010
Reference
513 c639-40
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
As I set out in my statement last week, the Building Schools for the Future programme has been over-bureaucratic and inefficient. I therefore decided that where financial close had not been reached, future projects provided under BSF could not go ahead. Ilkley and Bingley grammar school projects have not reached financial close, and BSF plans for those two schools have therefore stopped. However, we will continue to invest in schools capital projects.
As I set out in my statement last week, the Building Schools for the Future programme has been over-bureaucratic and inefficient. I therefore decided that where financial close had not been reached, future projects provided under BSF could not go ahead. Ilkley and Bingley grammar school projects have not reached financial close, and BSF plans for those two schools have therefore stopped. However, we will continue to invest in schools capital projects.
Answered by
Lord Gove
(Conservative)
Answering body
Department for Education
Type
Oral answers to questions
Subjects
Building schools for the future programme; Bingley; Ilkley
Date
12 July 2010
Reference
513 c639
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
The right hon. Gentleman says that there was anger across the House. There was—at the way in which the BSF project had been run by the right hon. Gentleman. There was justifiable anger at the way in which a project that was originally supposed to cost £45 billion ended up costing £55 billion, and it was shared by those who were shocked that under the previous Government, one individual received £1.35 million in consultancy fees—money that should have gone to the front line. From the moment that I took office, everyone involved in this process said to me, "Make sure that you ensure that this faltering and failing project ends." That is what I have done. I inherited a mess from the right hon. Gentleman, and we are clearing it up.
The right hon. Gentleman says that there was anger across the House. There was—at the way in which the BSF project had been run by the right hon. Gentleman. There was justifiable anger at the way in which a project that was originally supposed to cost £45 billion ended up costing £55 billion, and it was shared by those who were shocked that under the previous Government, one individual received £1.35 million in consultancy fees—money that should have gone to the front line. From the moment that I took office, everyone involved in this process said to me, "Make sure that you ensure that this faltering and failing project ends." That is what I have done. I inherited a mess from the right hon. Gentleman, and we are clearing it up.
Answered by
Lord Gove
(Conservative)
Asked by
Ed Balls
(Labour)
Answering body
Department for Education
Type
Oral answers to questions
For parents, children and teachers in Ilkley and Bingley, the initial shock of learning that their new school building has been cancelled will have turned to outrage at the seemingly arbitrary and chaotic way in which the Secretary of State has made and announced his decisions. The right hon. Gentleman must now know that there is widespread anger in all parts of the House. Following weekend reports that he was advised by his officials not to publish a list of schools at all, I wrote to him yesterday to request answers in advance of today's oral questions. I have received a reply that does not answer any of my questions: it merely attaches a new list—list No. 5—containing 20 additional cancelled schools compared with a week ago.
I shall ask the right hon. Gentleman for a straight answer to a specific question. Did he at any point receive written or oral advice from departmental officials or Partnerships for Schools urging him not to publish a list of schools until after he had consulted local authorities, to make sure that his criteria were sound and his facts were right?
Subjects
Building schools for the future programme; Bingley; Ilkley
Date
12 July 2010
Reference
513 c639-40
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for once again stretching so far the geographical definition of Bingley and Ilkley. Let me point out that under him the cost of setting up the procurement vehicle for Building Schools for the Future was £10 million, before a single brick was laid. The taxpayers of Bingley and Ilkley have re-elected a Conservative MP because they are disgusted with the waste and squander of the right hon. Gentleman. There is a dividing line between this side of the House and that side of the House: when mistakes are made, we apologise and we take responsibility. The right hon. Gentleman has never apologised for a single mistake in his life; that is why he is on that side of the House and we are on this side of the House clearing up his mess.
I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for once again stretching so far the geographical definition of Bingley and Ilkley. Let me point out that under him the cost of setting up the procurement vehicle for Building Schools for the Future was £10 million, before a single brick was laid. The taxpayers of Bingley and Ilkley have re-elected a Conservative MP because they are disgusted with the waste and squander of the right hon. Gentleman. There is a dividing line between this side of the House and that side of the House: when mistakes are made, we apologise and we take responsibility. The right hon. Gentleman has never apologised for a single mistake in his life; that is why he is on that side of the House and we are on this side of the House clearing up his mess.
Answered by
Lord Gove
(Conservative)
Asked by
Ed Balls
(Labour)
Answering body
Department for Education
Type
Oral answers to questions
The right hon. Gentleman cannot give a straight answer to a straight question. The people of Bingley and Ilkley will not be satisfied by that answer, and nor are we. Interestingly, his letter today says very clearly that his fifth list has been validated by local authorities—presumably a clear admission that the information should have been validated before the list was published in the first place, including by Bradford authority, in which the schools of Bingley and Ilkley are situated.
Let me ask the right hon. Gentleman another straight question. Is it not the case that he was advised of the risk of legal challenge from private contractors, but that he personally decided to ignore that advice and take that risk with taxpayers' money? That is a very simple question. We all know that he is on shaky ground, and that he is fast losing the confidence of pupils, parents and teachers. If he had any sense, he would end this shambles, withdraw these error-strewn lists, and let our communities have new schools.
Subjects
Building schools for the future programme; Bingley; Ilkley
Date
12 July 2010
Reference
513 c640-1
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
I very much take the point made by my hon. Friend. One of the defects of the BSF scheme was that, in many parts of the country where there was real need as a result of a growing population, the money was not there to provide new school places. As a result of our capital review, we will ensure that where there is additional population pressure and additional basic need, particularly in primary schools, which BSF did not cover, we will provide the support that is necessary. I look forward to working with my hon. Friend to help the parents and teachers in those two great schools.
I very much take the point made by my hon. Friend. One of the defects of the BSF scheme was that, in many parts of the country where there was real need as a result of a growing population, the money was not there to provide new school places. As a result of our capital review, we will ensure that where there is additional population pressure and additional basic need, particularly in primary schools, which BSF did not cover, we will provide the support that is necessary. I look forward to working with my hon. Friend to help the parents and teachers in those two great schools.
Answered by
Lord Gove
(Conservative)
Asked by
Philip Davies
(Conservative)
Answering body
Department for Education
Type
Oral answers to questions
In the catchment areas for both Ilkley and Bingley grammar schools, there has been excessive house building, so there is no longer sufficient capacity on their existing sites to meet local demand. Can my right hon. Friend ensure that those schools that need new build to increase capacity to meet local demand will still receive capital expenditure?
Subjects
Building schools for the future programme; Bingley; Ilkley
Date
12 July 2010
Reference
513 c639
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Answered by
Baroness Primarolo
(Labour)
Answering body
Treasury
Type
Oral answers to questions
Subjects
Buildings; Taxation; Ilkley
Date
29 March 2001
Reference
365 c1103
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Supplementary on VAT on residential conversion works and taxation on building a bandstand in Ilkley.
Supplementary on VAT on residential conversion works and taxation on building a bandstand in Ilkley.
Asked by
Ann Cryer
(Labour)
Answering body
Treasury
Oral questions - 1st Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
29 March 2001
Subjects
Buildings; Taxation; Ilkley
Date
29 March 2001
Reference
365 c1103
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Adjournment debate on convalescent care in Ilkley.
Adjournment debate on convalescent care in Ilkley.
Lead member
Gary Waller
Answering member
Tom Sackville
Department
Department of Health
Type
Adjournment debates
Subjects
Care homes; Closures; Hospitals; Airedale NHS Trust; Grove Hospital Ilkley
Date
25 January 1993
Reference
217 c845-52;217 c847-54
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
When he expects to announce the preferred route for the proposed A65 Ilkley bypass. - I hope to be able to do so very shortly.
When he expects to announce the preferred route for the proposed A65 Ilkley bypass. - I hope to be able to do so very shortly.
Asked by
Gary Waller
(Conservative)
Answered by
Kenneth Carlisle
(Conservative)
Answering body
Department of Transport
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
For answer on
9 December 1992
Answered on
9 December 1992
Subjects
Bypasses; Ilkley; A65
Date
9 December 1992
Reference
215 c700W;215 c695W
House
House of Commons
When he expects to make a further announcement about the proposed A65 Ilkley bypass.
When he expects to make a further announcement about the proposed A65 Ilkley bypass.
Asked by
Gary Waller
(Conservative)
Answered by
Kenneth Carlisle
(Conservative)
Answering body
Department of Transport
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
For answer on
16 July 1992
Answered on
16 July 1992
Subjects
Bypasses; Ilkley; A65
Date
16 July 1992
Reference
211 c859W
House
House of Commons
What account he has taken of the effect on the proposed Nidderdale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty when considering the alignment of the proposed A65 Ilkley bypass.
What account he has taken of the effect on the proposed Nidderdale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty when considering the alignment of the proposed A65 Ilkley bypass.
Asked by
Lord Fearn
(Liberal Democrat)
Answered by
Christopher Chope
(Conservative)
Answering body
Department of Transport
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
For answer on
16 December 1991
Answered on
16 December 1991
Subjects
National landscapes; Environment protection; Bypasses; Ilkley; A65
Date
16 December 1991
Reference
201 c48-9W;201 c48W
House
House of Commons