Asked by: Lord Black of Brentwood (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to ask Ofcom to conduct a review in accordance with section 34(1) or section 44(1) of the Postal Services Act 2011, before moving to amend the statutory minimum requirements of the universal postal service.
Answered by Lord Callanan - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
The Government has no current plans to change the statutory minimum requirements of the universal postal service, set out in the Postal Services Act 2011, which requires letter deliveries to every UK address, six days a week at standard price.
Asked by: Lord Black of Brentwood (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact on the magazine industry of amending the Postal Services Act 2011 to move to a five-day letter delivery.
Answered by Lord Callanan - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
The Government has no current plans to change the statutory minimum requirements of the universal postal service, set out in the Postal Services Act 2011, which requires letter deliveries to every UK address, six days a week at standard price.
Asked by: Lord Black of Brentwood (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the financial impact on the UK news media sector of the decision to expand the text and data mining copyright exception.
Answered by Lord Callanan - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
The Government asked specific questions about impact in the consultation on AI and IP, but received very limited quantitative evidence. An impact assessment will be published alongside the legislation when laid. The proposed exception will be targeted to limit negative impacts, and the government welcomes further evidence from rights holders on how to best achieve this.
Asked by: Lord Black of Brentwood (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the financial impact on the UK professional photography sector of the decision to expand the text and data mining copyright exception.
Answered by Lord Callanan - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
The Government asked specific questions about impact in the consultation on AI and IP, but received very limited quantitative evidence. An impact assessment will be published alongside the legislation when laid. The proposed exception will be targeted to limit negative impacts, and the government welcomes further evidence from rights holders on how to best achieve this.
Asked by: Lord Black of Brentwood (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the financial impact on the UK professional publishing industry of the decision to expand the text and data mining copyright exception.
Answered by Lord Callanan - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
The Government asked specific questions about impact in the consultation on AI and IP, but received very limited quantitative evidence. An impact assessment will be published alongside the legislation when laid. The proposed exception will be targeted to limit negative impacts, and the government welcomes further evidence from rights holders on how to best achieve this.
Asked by: Lord Black of Brentwood (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will review the economic incentive for employers and agencies to furlough casual workers in cases where (1) employers and agencies do not have any contractual obligations to provide workers with work and no correlative duty to pay, and (2) employers may have potential future liability to pay casual workers with redundancy pay after undertaking a fair redundancy procedure.
Answered by Lord Callanan - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
The Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme is designed to help employers whose operations have been severely affected by coronavirus (COVID-19) to retain their employees and protect the UK economy. Employers can claim for employees on any type of employment contract, including full-time, part-time, agency, flexible or zero hours contracts.
In this unprecedented time, we would urge employers and agencies to take socially responsible decisions and listen to the concerns of their workforce. Employers and employees, including casual workers, should come to a pragmatic agreement about these arrangements. We have been clear that employers should carefully consider the guidance.
However, the scheme is not an employment right and it is up to the employer to decide who to furlough.
Normal redundancy rules and payments apply while an employee is furloughed. The employee will maintain rights to redundancy payments and against unfair dismissal during the period of furlough. Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme grants cannot be used to substitute redundancy payments.
Asked by: Lord Black of Brentwood (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have for the UK patent sector after Britain’s withdrawal from the EU, in particular in the light of their decision to ratify the Unified Patent Court Agreement.
Answered by Lord Prior of Brampton
On 28 November, the Government confirmed its intention to continue with the process of ratifying the Unified Patent Court Agreement. The EU is not a party to that agreement and ratification should not be seen as pre-empting the UK's position in the forthcoming negotiations with the EU.
The options for the UK's intellectual property regime after EU exit, including the UK's future relationship with the Unified Patent Court, are being considered carefully.
The Government has engaged and will continue to engage with industry, intellectual property practitioners and other stakeholders to understand what leaving the EU means for all aspects of intellectual property, including patents and the Unified Patent Court.
Asked by: Lord Black of Brentwood (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will consult businesses and organisations involved in the use of patents on the ratification of the Unified Patent Court Agreement, in particular asking for views on UK participation in the agreement for up to two years from ratification until leaving the EU; and if so, whether they will complete those consultations before ratification takes place.
Answered by Lord Prior of Brampton
On 28 November, the Government confirmed its intention to continue with the process of ratifying the Unified Patent Court Agreement. The EU is not a party to that agreement and ratification should not be seen as pre-empting the UK's position in the forthcoming negotiations with the EU.
The options for the UK's intellectual property regime after EU exit, including the UK's future relationship with the Unified Patent Court, are being considered carefully.
The Government has engaged and will continue to engage with industry, intellectual property practitioners and other stakeholders to understand what leaving the EU means for all aspects of intellectual property, including patents and the Unified Patent Court.
Asked by: Lord Black of Brentwood (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what responsibilities Ofgem has in relation to consumer protection for customers of district heating networks.
Answered by Baroness Neville-Rolfe - Minister of State (Cabinet Office)
Ofgem is responsible for the regulation of the gas and electricity markets. Its remit does not cover district heating networks or protection for heat network customers.
Asked by: Lord Black of Brentwood (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what consumer protection exists in relation to energy pricing for customers of district heating networks.
Answered by Baroness Neville-Rolfe - Minister of State (Cabinet Office)
There are provisions relating to price transparency, metering and billing of district heating networks in the Heat Network (Metering and Billing) Regulations 2014. There is also a requirement for energy costs to be provided in a format which enables customers to compare the charges of different energy suppliers. A voluntary code called HeatTrust was established last year by the industry trade association, with the support of Government, to improve customer protection in this sector. HeatTrust has recently launched an on-line price comparator tool for heat network customers.
Heat network customers are covered by general consumer protection, competition and contract law as well as tenancy law where relevant.