Asked by: Lord Marlesford (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what public funds have been made available, through the aid budget, to the Gaza Strip in each of the last three years; what safeguards they have put in place to ensure that such funds were not diverted to military purposes by Hamas; and whether such safeguards were applied.
Answered by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
FCDO delivers its aid in Gaza through trusted partners with a proven record of delivery. Thorough due diligence assessment of all aid donations is carried out and the FCDO ensures partners have procedures in place to manage the main risks of aid diversion from activities it funds, including specific controls to ensure that cash/food assistance goes direct to the intended beneficiaries. Additionally, FCDO humanitarian assistance in the Occupied Palestinian Territories operates with an enhanced sensitivity and existing additional safeguards to protect against any possibility of aid diversion. These safeguards include measures on verification and mapping of downstream partners, non-payment of local taxes and enhanced due diligence processes. The Actual Spend for Occupied Palestinian Territories for the last three financial years:
2020/2021 - £79.7 million
2021/2022 - £29.8 million
2022/2023 - £25.7 million.
Asked by: Lord Marlesford (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:
To ask His Majesty's Government what public funds they have committed for the construction by EDF of nuclear power stations at Hinkley Point and Sizewell, respectively; and from what other sources, including a levy on consumers for sales of electricity, funding has been offered for each.
Answered by Lord Callanan - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
In 2016, the Government negotiated the Contract for Difference for Hinkley Point C which fixes the cost of electricity provided by Hinkley Point C. There is no cost to the consumer until Hinkley Point C starts to produce electricity. The strike price is £92.50 per Megawatt-hour. The household bill impact depends on a variety of factors such as the future electricity generation mix, wholesale gas price, wholesale electricity price and decarbonisation pathway.
The Government is a co-shareholder in the Sizewell C project company with EDF. The Government has committed to invest c.£1.2bn in Sizewell C’s development. The project has been designated to benefit from the new Regulated Asset Base (RAB) model for nuclear, which will entail a levy on all licensed electricity suppliers in Great Britain; suppliers may choose to pass those costs to their consumers. The RAB model will include incentives on cost and schedule control, with the exact details finalised at the project’s Final Investment Decision.
The capital costs for Sizewell C are commercially sensitive, and subject to ongoing development and a live equity raise. We are therefore unable to discuss this further at this time.
Asked by: Lord Marlesford (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the projected cost of £20 billion for the construction of the Sizewell C nuclear power station; and what is the likelihood of that figure being exceeded.
Answered by Lord Callanan - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
In 2016, the Government negotiated the Contract for Difference for Hinkley Point C which fixes the cost of electricity provided by Hinkley Point C. There is no cost to the consumer until Hinkley Point C starts to produce electricity. The strike price is £92.50 per Megawatt-hour. The household bill impact depends on a variety of factors such as the future electricity generation mix, wholesale gas price, wholesale electricity price and decarbonisation pathway.
The Government is a co-shareholder in the Sizewell C project company with EDF. The Government has committed to invest c.£1.2bn in Sizewell C’s development. The project has been designated to benefit from the new Regulated Asset Base (RAB) model for nuclear, which will entail a levy on all licensed electricity suppliers in Great Britain; suppliers may choose to pass those costs to their consumers. The RAB model will include incentives on cost and schedule control, with the exact details finalised at the project’s Final Investment Decision.
The capital costs for Sizewell C are commercially sensitive, and subject to ongoing development and a live equity raise. We are therefore unable to discuss this further at this time.
Asked by: Lord Marlesford (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government how Rwanda compares in population density with (1) China, (2) Russia, (3) the USA, (4) Australia, (5) Libya, (6) France, (7) Spain, (8) Germany, (9) the UK, and (10) Greece; and how relevant they regard that measure in their policy for transporting migrants from the UK to Rwanda.
Answered by Lord Sharpe of Epsom - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)
The table below shows the estimated population density (the number of people per square kilometre) of the countries listed based on UN statistics published in October 20231. The countries are ordered as in the question plus Rwanda at 11:
| Country | Population density |
1 | China2 | 148.5 |
2 | Russia | 8.8 |
3 | United States of America | 37.0 |
4 | Australia | 3.4 |
5 | Libya | 4.1 |
6 | France | 117.2 |
7 | Spain | 94.7 |
8 | Germany | 239.2 |
9 | United Kingdom | 278.1 |
10 | Greece | 79.4 |
11 | Rwanda | 569.1 |
1 UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, ‘Statistical Yearbook 2023, Sixty-sixth issue’ (pages 15 to 35), October 2023
2 For statistical purposes, the UN data for China do not include the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, the Macao Special Administrative Region and Taiwan
Population was one of a range of factors that was considered when entering into the Migration and Economic Development Partnership with Rwanda.
Asked by: Lord Marlesford (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask His Majesty's Government what major roadworks are in progress on (1) the A12 Trunk Road between the M25 and Ipswich, and (2) the A14 between Cambridge and Ipswich; when each such undertaking is expected to be completed; and what further major roadworks are expected to start within the next 12 months.
Answered by Lord Davies of Gower - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)
The A12 Trunk Road between the M25 and Ipswich
National Highways is currently working through an extensive programme to rebuild concrete roads which have come to the end of their serviceable life, and which require high levels of intervention to maintain them. National Highways will be reconstructing the carriageway and replacing it with a modern asphalt surface. This will improve safety, create smoother quieter journeys and extend the life of the A12 to make it fit for the future. There are two such schemes currently underway on the A12:
A12 Margaretting Bypass (junctions 13 to 15) a £65million concrete road reconstruction scheme – expected completion by summer 2024.
A12 Marks Tey (junction 25) to Stanway (junction 26) a £37milllion concrete road reconstruction scheme – expected completion by summer 2024.
National Highways is also delivering major improvements to increase capacity, reduce congestion and improve safety at M25 junction 28. This circa £160million junctions enhancement scheme is expected to complete by summer 2025.
The A14 between Cambridge and Ipswich
There are ongoing road works on the A14 Haughley (junction 47a) to Tothill (junction 49) as part of a £37 million concrete road reconstruction scheme expected to be completed by summer 2024. National Highways is currently reconstructing the carriageway and replacing it with a modern asphalt surface.
Asked by: Lord Marlesford (Conservative - Life peer)
Question
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker what was the cost to public funds of replacing the Siemens telephone system on the parliamentary estate with the Microsoft Polycom system; and what plans they have to replace the standard desk telephone sets with ones which are easier to use by those with impaired visual capability.
Answered by Baroness McIntosh of Hudnall
The Senior Deputy Speaker has asked me, as Chair of the Services Committee, to respond on his behalf. The cost of the original programme that replaced Parliament’s copper wire telephone system with voice over internet protocol (VoIP) telephony, including the Microsoft Polycom handsets, was £8.3 million. It was necessary to update the telephony as the previous telephone system was end of life and can no longer be supported or maintained.
Members and other Parliamentary users with visual impairments can use speech recognition software to use Teams. Support is available from the Parliamentary Digital Service for anyone requiring help to use the system. As part of implementation of a new telephony solution for Parliament in the first half of 2024 the Voice Programme team is exploring options for more user-friendly telephone handsets including accessible solutions for visually impaired users.
Asked by: Lord Marlesford (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government to give the names and pay grades of each politically appointed senior special adviser to each Minister.
Answered by Baroness Neville-Rolfe - Minister of State (Cabinet Office)
Information on all Special Advisers, including names and pay bands, is published annually in the Annual Report on Special Advisers, as required by the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010.
The latest iteration of the report is scheduled to be published in the Summer.
Asked by: Lord Marlesford (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask His Majesty's Government what is their assessment of the potential impact of the use of digital evidence in the enforcement around insecure roads of litter laws upon (a) road safety, and (b) the Highways Agency litter performance indicator.
Answered by Baroness Vere of Norbiton - Parliamentary Secretary (HM Treasury)
Under Section 8 of the Road Traffic Act (1991), a person is guilty of an offence if they use, or permit or cause another person to use, a motor vehicle or trailer on a road when the condition of the motor vehicle or trailer or of its accessories or equipment, or the weight, position or distribution of its load or the manner in which it is secured, is such that the use of the motor vehicle or trailer involves a danger of injury to any person. Enforcement in this area is conducted by the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency’s enforcement officers and the police.
National Highways engages with organisations who have the necessary powers to take enforcement action. Commercial operators and drivers are legally obliged to ensure their loads are effectively secured, and risk finding themselves subject to disciplinary action by the Traffic Commissioner responsible for the issue of heavy goods operator licences, if found to be littering with an unsecure load.
National Highways are currently working with a local authority to trial the use of Artificial Intelligence and camera technology to provide evidence of littering to support local authority enforcement. This trial forms part of National Highways’ approach to reduce littering and litter on the strategic road network, thus increasing performance against its litter performance metric. If the trial is successful, National Highways will consider potential future roll out.
Asked by: Lord Marlesford (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask His Majesty's Government what is their assessment of the effectiveness of current litter performance indicators pertaining to value for money and customer satisfaction with highway maintenance; and, if they do not have one, whether they will make one.
Answered by Baroness Vere of Norbiton - Parliamentary Secretary (HM Treasury)
In the second Road Investment Strategy (2020-25) National Highways were allocated £6.5bn for the operation and maintenance of the Strategic Road Network (SRN). A proportion of this funding will be allocated within National Highways to carry out its litter clearance duties. For 2021/22 National Highways reported that 60.8% of its network was predominately free of litter, refuse or detritus apart from some small items, in line with the Code of practice on litter and refuse published by Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. This was an improvement from 49.2% reported for 2020/21. The performance for 2022/23 will be published later this summer.
Customer satisfaction of the SRN is provided through the Strategic Road User Survey (SRUS) which is undertaken by Transport Focus, the independent watchdog for transport users. For period April 22 to March 23, 73% of those surveyed were either very satisfied or fairly satisfied with the overall safety, condition and management of the road network.
Asked by: Lord Marlesford (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to enforce legislation pertaining to littering on slip roads off roads managed by National Highways.
Answered by Baroness Vere of Norbiton - Parliamentary Secretary (HM Treasury)
The responsibility for clearing highway litter and sweeping carriageways is governed by the Environmental Protection Act (1990); Section 89(1) places a duty on National Highways to ensure that the motorways and some trunk roads, so far as is practicable, is kept clear of litter and refuse. The relevant district or Local Authority manages litter collection on the rest of the roads in England.
The Department and the Highways Monitor challenge National Highways on litter performance. National Highways is committed to reporting annually on the percentage of the Strategic Road Network which is predominately free of litter, refuse or detritus apart from some small items, in line with the Code of practice on litter and refuse published by Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
National Highways does not have litter enforcement powers on the strategic road network, Local Authorities do have the powers to take forward civil and criminal prosecutions if they have sufficient evidence to do so.