Asked by: Lord Smith of Finsbury (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Viscount Camrose on 31 January (HL1716), why the choice of geographical coverage for the Shared Rural Network of telephone masts includes areas in the Highland region of Scotland where coverage can reach no house or community.
Answered by Viscount Camrose - Shadow Minister (Science, Innovation and Technology)
4G Mobile coverage already reaches 99% of premises in the UK. The Shared Rural Network is focused on delivering connectivity not just where people live but where they work, travel and visit. In the Highlands and other areas of Scotland, whether you are a farmer wishing to utilise new technology or a visitor to one of the National Parks, digital connectivity is vital. People must be able to build lives, grow families and sustain businesses, otherwise the communities that keep a place’s culture and history alive will simply dwindle.
To minimise the impact on the environment, publicly funded masts will be shared by all four mobile network operators and existing infrastructure will be utilised wherever possible. At each potential location, an individual assessment takes account of a wide range of factors, including complying with strict planning rules for areas of natural beauty making sure we strike the right balance between connectivity and preserving the preciousness of unique landscapes.
The mobile network operators are required to work closely with local communities to ensure concerns are heard through the planning process, and local planning authorities are then responsible for approving applications.
Asked by: Lord Smith of Finsbury (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answers by Viscount Camrose of 19 December 2023 (HL1000, HL1001), whether they can explain why geographical coverage was chosen as the goal for the Shared Rural Network of telephone masts, instead of population coverage.
Answered by Viscount Camrose - Shadow Minister (Science, Innovation and Technology)
The decision to choose geographic coverage as the preferred target for the Shared Rural Network (SRN) programme reflects the longstanding commitment from the government to improve geographic mobile coverage. This includes a commitment to extend mobile coverage to 95% of the UK landmass in the 2017 manifesto.
Specifying a geographic target for the SRN recognises the need for people to be connected whilst they are on the move, and reflects our desire to end the digital divide between urban and rural areas. It ensures that the programme remains focused on delivering benefits to the most rural parts of the country.
There are a number of expected benefits of improving mobile coverage in rural areas which have often been left behind. Masts in rural areas will improve the safety of those living, working and visiting the area, enabling 4G to facilitate 999 calls for the first time. Other benefits include economic and productivity growth, as well as wider social benefits including improved consumer choice, tourism benefits and rural/urban equity.
Asked by: Lord Smith of Finsbury (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what discussions they have had with the Governor of the British Virgin Islands in relation to the proposed referendum on same-sex marriage and partnerships; and whether they plan to instruct the Governor to intervene to ensure that international legal obligations are upheld.
Answered by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
As separate, largely self-governing jurisdictions with their own democratically-elected representatives, the British Overseas Territories are responsible for their own legislation regarding marriage and civil partnerships.
The UK Government has had several discussions with the Governor of the British Virgin Islands (BVI) about the Premier's plans for a referendum on same sex marriage and civil partnerships.
We continue to encourage the Overseas Territories to ensure their legislation delivers greater equality and is compliant with international human rights obligations.
Asked by: Lord Smith of Finsbury (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:
To ask His Majesty's Government what consideration they have given to the potential impact of telecommunications masts erected under the Shared Rural Network programme on wild land in remote areas of the Scottish Highlands.
Answered by Viscount Camrose - Shadow Minister (Science, Innovation and Technology)
This Government has a responsibility to ensure all parts of the country are able to benefit from the opportunities provided by digital connectivity. The Shared Rural Network (SRN) intentionally has geographic targets in order to tackle this challenge, and ensure the programme remains focused on the most rural parts of the country.
The exact site deployment plans for new masts under the SRN will be managed by the Mobile Network Operators (MNOs) themselves in order for them to best deliver the agreed coverage targets for the programme.
The MNOs continue to work closely with local communities and planning authorities to ensure new masts go through the proper planning process and are considerate to areas of natural beauty. Planning authorities are responsible for approving applications which form part of the SRN programme and publicly funded masts will be shared by all four MNOs to minimise the impact on the environment.
Asked by: Lord Smith of Finsbury (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:
To ask His Majesty's Government what criteria they have established for the siting of telecommunications masts across the Highlands of Scotland under the Shared Rural Network programme.
Answered by Viscount Camrose - Shadow Minister (Science, Innovation and Technology)
This Government has a responsibility to ensure all parts of the country are able to benefit from the opportunities provided by digital connectivity. The Shared Rural Network (SRN) intentionally has geographic targets in order to tackle this challenge, and ensure the programme remains focused on the most rural parts of the country.
The exact site deployment plans for new masts under the SRN will be managed by the Mobile Network Operators (MNOs) themselves in order for them to best deliver the agreed coverage targets for the programme.
The MNOs continue to work closely with local communities and planning authorities to ensure new masts go through the proper planning process and are considerate to areas of natural beauty. Planning authorities are responsible for approving applications which form part of the SRN programme and publicly funded masts will be shared by all four MNOs to minimise the impact on the environment.
Asked by: Lord Smith of Finsbury (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have, if any, to review the sentencing of those currently in the prison system serving a sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection.
Answered by Lord Bellamy
Following their inquiry into the continued existence of Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentences, the Justice Select Committee (JSC) published their report which included a recommendation that the Government conduct a resentencing exercise of all remaining IPP sentences. The Government is carefully considering all the recommendations in the JSC report and will respond shortly.
The Government is focused on the successful rehabilitation of IPP prisoners and is working jointly with the Parole Board to realise this goal via the IPP Action Plan. This approach is working; the number of IPP prisoners who have never been released stood at 1,437 in September 2022, down from over 6,000 at its peak in 2012. The JSC also recommended that HMPPS review and update the IPP Action Plan; this work is now underway.
Asked by: Lord Smith of Finsbury (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they have taken (1) to progress plans to introduce mandatory recycling labelling on packaging, and (2) to ensure businesses are able to implement these reforms effectively and at reasonable costs.
Answered by Lord Benyon - Lord Chamberlain (HM Household)
We confirmed our intention to require recycling labelling on packaging in March 2022 in the Government's Packaging Extended Producer Responsibility consultation response. We continue to engage with stakeholders as we develop these requirements, the approach to assessing recyclability and the regulations to introduce mandatory labelling.
Labelling will be required by 31 st March 2026 for all packaging except plastic films and flexibles which will be required to be labelled by 31 st March 2027. This should provide sufficient time for business to adopt labelling as part of typical business cycles and to avoid unnecessary costs. It will also allow time for collection services to develop such that all local authorities collect the same packaging materials for recycling.
Asked by: Lord Smith of Finsbury (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to ensure that the Office for Product Safety and Standards is sufficiently staffed and skilled to enforce the new regulations on mandatory recycling labelling.
Answered by Lord Callanan - Shadow Minister (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
The Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS) has agreed, in principle, to act as a National Regulator for the new regulations on mandatory recycling labelling, which form part of proposed Producer Responsibility Obligations under the Environment Act 2021. No final decision has been made that OPSS shall adopt this enforcement role, but should OPSS become the regulator it will be funded to ensure the necessary resources, including suitably qualified staff, are available.
Asked by: Lord Smith of Finsbury (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:
To ask His Majesty's Government what discussions they have had, or plan to have, with Arts Council England to understand their decision to withdraw all national programme funding from English National Opera; and what plans they have to ask the Arts Council to reconsider this decision.
Answered by Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay - Shadow Minister (Culture, Media and Sport)
The Secretary of State, other Ministers, and officials from DCMS all regularly meet Arts Council England – which is an arms-length body of the Department – to discuss all aspects of its work. This includes meetings to discuss Arts Council England’s 2023–26 Investment Programme.
All decisions on which organisations to fund through the 2023–26 Investment Programme, and by how much, have been taken by Arts Council England. In line with the long-standing principle that the Arts Council makes such decisions at arm’s length from Government, there are no plans to ask it to reconsider these decisions. The Department is keen that Arts Council England and English National Opera work together on the future of the organisation.
Asked by: Lord Smith of Finsbury (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the letter from the Deputy Director of the Department of Education’s Disadvantage and International Directorate dated 24 October, what consideration they have given to replacing “does not include” with “includes” in section 7 of the European University Institute (EU Exit) Regulations 2022.
Answered by Baroness Barran - Shadow Minister (Education)
While the UK’s membership of the European University Institute (EUI) convention ceased on exit of the EU, the department put in place an extension of its previous arrangements with the EUI beyond the end of the transition period, until 31 December 2022. This was to protect the status of UK-linked staff and students at the EUI, so that they could continue in their posts and with their studies while options for a future relationship with the EUI were considered.
Long standing government policy is to only grant privileges and immunities where there is a demonstrated and robust functional need for the running of the institution and never solely for personal benefit. In this case, in the absence of a negotiated international treaty compelling the government to do so, the department is unable to continue to grant privileges and immunities to EUI staff and students, including the UK linked ones.
The saving of the income tax privilege and the legal proceedings immunity for current staff is as considered appropriate and/or intended to give a reasonable period for those staff at the EUI to adjust, and they will be saved in relation to the current term of the staff member’s employment contract without extension.