Asked by: Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Labour - Life peer)
Question
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker, further to his Written Answer on 9 March (HL5913), what legislation gives the Clerk of Parliaments and the Clerk of the House the legal responsibility for safety on the Parliamentary Estate.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
Under the powers conferred on the Clerk of the Parliaments by the Clerk of the Parliaments Act 1824 and the Parliamentary Corporate Bodies Act 1992, the Clerk of the Parliaments is the Corporate Officer of the House of Lords and acts as the employer of the great majority of staff in the House of Lords Administration. As such he meets the various health and safety duties imposed on employers under the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 and regulations made under it (including the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012). The Clerk of the Parliaments also has safety-related duties under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 and, in relation to visitors, the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957.
The Clerk of the House of Commons, who is the Corporate Officer of that House by virtue of the Parliamentary Corporate Bodies Act 1992, has very similar powers, although he is not the employer of House of Commons staff. He shares the responsibility for the physical premises under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 and the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957 with the Clerk of the Parliaments.
Asked by: Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Labour - Life peer)
Question
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker what is the latest estimate of the cost of the work currently underway at Peers' Entrance; by whom this expenditure was authorised; and what was the cost of the works that required the temporary closure of Peers' Entrance in August and September 2022.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
The work at Peers’ Entrance during August and September 2022 was part of the same project as the work currently underway at Peers’ Entrance. For security reasons the Houses do not publish capital expenditure on security mitigating projects as providing this level of detail could enable an individual to infer the extent and nature of the works, and thus the vulnerabilities which they were intended to mitigate.
The Clerk of the Parliaments and Clerk of the House, as Accounting and Corporate Officers, have responsibility for approving final business cases for security projects across the Parliamentary Estate, subject to advice from the Finance Directors and other relevant officials. The Clerk of the Parliaments’ decisions on security projects are informed by consultation with the House of Lords Commission, which ensures that the impact on Members is taken into account, and by the Finance Committee which receives regular reports regarding security expenditure. The Clerk of the House is informed by the equivalent groups and individuals in the House of Commons. Ultimately it is not the House that makes the final decision because security is a bicameral issue, and legal responsibility for safety sits with the Clerk of the Parliaments and Clerk of the House.
Asked by: Lord Pearson of Rannoch (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker whether £7 million is to be spent on the security works project at Peers' Entrance; why such expenditure is necessary; and who authorised it.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
For security reasons, the Houses do not publish capital expenditure on security mitigating projects as providing this level of detail could enable an individual to infer the extent and nature of the works, and thus the vulnerabilities which they were intended to mitigate.
The necessity and cost of the works at Peers’ Entrance have been the subject of rigorous internal assessment through the usual business case process. The plans have also been validated by external experts. Members are always welcome to contact the Director of Security to discuss any security-related concerns privately.
The Clerk of the Parliaments and Clerk of the House, as Accounting and Corporate Officers, have responsibility for approving final business cases for security projects across the Parliamentary Estate, subject to advice from the Finance Directors and other relevant officials. The Clerk of the Parliaments’ decisions on security projects are informed by consultation with the House of Lords Commission, which ensures that the impact on Members is taken into account, and by the Finance Committee which receives regular reports regarding security expenditure. The Clerk of the House is informed by the equivalent groups and individuals in the House of Commons. Ultimately it is not the House that makes the final decision because security is a bicameral issue, and legal responsibility for safety sits with the Clerk of the Parliaments and Clerk of the House.
Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, whether he has held recent discussions with representatives from BP on (a) corporate social responsibility or (b) the role of energy companies in achieving net zero.
Answered by Graham Stuart
My Rt. Hon. Friend the Secretary of State met BP with my Rt. Hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 9 January and discussed security of energy supply, including the company’s planned investments in the UK to 2030, covering oil and gas, CCUS, hydrogen, wind and electric vehicle charging projects.
Asked by: Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Conservative - Life peer)
Question
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker, further to the Written Answer by Lord Gardiner of Kimble on 1 February (HL4851), who he consulted when preparing his answer; and what oversight mechanisms exist to scrutinise the design and cost of security projects for the House of Lords.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
The Parliamentary Security Department and Strategic Estates teams were consulted when preparing the answer to HL4851, along with House of Lords Administration officials.
The design and cost of security projects for Parliament go through rigorous internal scrutiny. The Clerk of the Parliaments and Clerk of the House, as Accounting and Corporate Officers, have responsibility for approving final business cases for security projects across the Parliamentary Estate, subject to advice from the Finance Directors and other relevant officials.
The Clerk of the Parliaments’ decisions on security projects are informed by consultation with the House of Lords Commission, which ensures that the impact on Members is taken into account, and by the Finance Committee which receives regular reports regarding security expenditure. There is also significant oversight by the Finance Director. The Clerk of the House is informed by the equivalent groups and individuals in the House of Commons. Ultimately it is not the House that makes the final decision because security is a bicameral issue, and legal responsibility for safety sits with the Clerk of the Parliaments and Clerk of the House.
Governance of the Security Programme for Parliament is provided by the Quarterly Review Group (QRG). Membership includes the Clerk of the House of Commons and Clerk of the Parliaments, the Finance Directors of both Houses, the Chief Operating Officer of the House of Lords and DG Operations of the House of Commons, and a non-executive external advisor (the Director of Property for the Royal Household).
The Parliamentary Security Department and Strategic Estates also consult external experts, including the Metropolitan Police Service, the Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure, and Historic England to inform the Security Programme.
Asked by: Lord Balfe (Conservative - Life peer)
Question
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker whether, in view of the disquiet over the cost and other aspects of the Peers' Entrance works, any way exists for the issue to be brought to the floor of the House for debate, with a possibility of cancelling or referring back for further consideration these proposals.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
The strong advice to all members is that debating the drivers behind specific security projects, and the plans to address security weaknesses, should not be raised in any public forum as to do so may heighten the security threat.
Members are always welcome to contact the Director of Security to discuss any security-related concerns privately.
The Peers’ Portico project has been approved by the Clerk of the Parliaments and Clerk of the House who, as Accounting Officers and Corporate Officers, are legally accountable for ensuring the safety of all members, staff and visitors on the Parliamentary Estate as a whole. Before coming to their decision, they considered professional security advice, the external professional security validation of that advice, and the views of members on the Commission, the Services Committee, the Finance Committee and members more widely. Ultimately it is not the House that makes the final decision because security is a bicameral issue, and legal responsibility for safety sits with the Clerk of the Parliaments and Clerk of the House.
Asked by: Caroline Lucas (Green Party - Brighton, Pavilion)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to the oral contribution of the Minister for Immigration to the urgent question on Unaccompanied Asylum-seeking Children on 24 January 2023, Official Report, column 877, when her Department began its consideration of who has corporate legal responsibility for children living in bridging hotels; and when she plans to make a decision on this point.
Answered by Robert Jenrick
The Home Office has always taken the view that these children should be in local authority care.
The Home Office does not have, and therefore cannot discharge, duties under Part 3 of the Children Act 1989. It is for the local authority where an unaccompanied child is located to consider its duties under the Children’s Act 1989.
Asked by: Rachael Maskell (Labour (Co-op) - York Central)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, how many children are supported by a Virtual school head (a) nationally and (b) in York; and what recent assessment she has made of trends in the level of demand for Virtual school heads.
Answered by Nick Gibb
In 2022, the number of children supported by a Virtual School Head in York and nationally were as follows:
| Looked-after children | Previously looked-after children | Children in Need |
York | 277 | 240 | 1,140 |
National | 82,170 | 63,039 | 404,310 |
Virtual School Heads have a statutory duty to promote the educational attainment of all children in their Local Authority’s care, wherever the child lives or is educated there. They act as the child’s corporate parent, ensuring all children in care receive the support they need to succeed in education.
Since September 2018, Virtual School Heads also have responsibility to promote the educational achievement of pupils who are no longer looked after because they are the subject of an adoption, special guardianship, or child arrangement order. For these previously looked-after children, Virtual School Heads can provide advice and information to parents, educators, and others, upon request. In June 2021, the department extended the role of Virtual School Heads further to provide strategic leadership to champion the outcomes for children in need.
The Department works closely with the National Association of Virtual School Heads and with regional virtual school networks, to ensure there is a good understanding of the challenges that Virtual School Heads face. The Department has provided additional funding to ensure Virtual School Heads have the resources in place to meet their additional duties.
Asked by: Julian Sturdy (Conservative - York Outer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, if his Department will take steps to require companies to adopt a more compassionate corporate social responsibility for their operations overseas.
Answered by Andrew Mitchell - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) (Minister for Development)
The UK has consistently supported the UN Guiding Principles (UNGPs) on business and human rights, an international framework which encourage businesses to voluntarily conduct due diligence approaches to respecting human rights.
The Government is clear that it expects all UK businesses to respect human rights throughout their operations, in line with the UNGPs and use responsible business conduct guided by international frameworks and domestic legislation. We will continue to work with our international partners and UK & multinational businesses to seek positive change in responsible business conduct. By doing so, this will expand global prosperity and further UK values and influence.
Asked by: Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party - Glasgow North East)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, when he will respond to the correspondence of 14 November 2022 from the hon. Member for Glasgow North East.
Answered by Kevin Hollinrake - Minister of State (Department for Business and Trade)
My noble Friend, the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Corporate Responsibility, Lord Callanan, wrote to the hon. Member on 11 January about Green Deal mis-selling.