Skip to main content

Written Parliamentary Questions: 4th December 2006

Litigants in Person
To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs why the rate at which litigants in person can claim costs has not risen since 1995; what estimate she has made of the additional costs to the Government were this rate to rise; and if she will raise the rate at which litigants in person can claim costs.(John Hemming)

A:holding answer 23 November 2006

The hourly rate payable to litigants in person was reviewed in 2003 by the Civil Procedure Rule Committee, when it was decided that the rate should remain at the existing level. No estimate has been made of additional costs, should the rate be raised and there are no plans to raise the rate at present.

Civil Procedure Rule 48.6(2) provides that where the litigants in person can prove financial loss (greater than £9.25) has occurred due to time he has reasonably spent on doing the work, he is entitled to claim up to two thirds of the amount which would have been allowed if he had been legally represented.
(Vera Baird, Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs)

Gas Industry
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will assess the effects on UK gas prices of the storage practices of overseas gas companies which import gas into the UK; and if he will make a statement. (John Hemming)

A:holding answer 23 November 2006

Subject to their regulatory obligations, it is up to gas suppliers how they balance their supply-demand position. The European Commission has undertaken a sectoral inquiry, which has identified access to long-term downstream contracts, capacity on pipelines and gas storage as priorities for individual competition investigations. The commission aims to reach conclusions by January 2007, and will then pursue infringement of EU competition law as appropriate.

It is not practical to provide the particular estimates that the hon. Member requests, because that would require detailed market assessments against a hypothetical model of how the continental and GB gas storage markets might operate. However, Ofgem recently estimated that around an extra £1 billion could have been added to the cost of GB wholesale gas in winter 2005-06 as a result of gas flows from the Bacton-Zeebrugge Interconnector failing to respond to the relative UK and Continental gas prices. This can be found at:

http://www.ofgem.gov.uk/ofgem/press/fact-sheets.jsp.
(Malcolm Wicks, Minister for energy, Department of Trade and Industry)

Gas Industry
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what estimate he has made of how much more gas would enter the UK were Europe's gas markets to be liberalised. (John Hemming)

A:holding answer 21 November 2006

It is not practical to make an assessment of the level of gas that would flow into the UK as a result of European liberalisation. A liberalised market would lead to increased imports and exports of gas between the UK and Europe in turn leading to more efficient allocation of resources and potential benefits to consumers in both UK and continental Europe. In particular improved liquidity of gas in European markets could provide incremental gas in times of demand peaks and lead to a reduction in price volatility in the longer term.

(Malcolm Wicks, Minister for energy, Department of Trade and Industry)

Service Personnel (Remuneration)
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether (a) the families of members of the Armed Forces killed and (b) members of the Armed Forces injured in (i) Iraq and (ii) Afghanistan before the completion of six months service in that country receive additional remuneration to offset their tax liability. (John Hemming)

A:Service personnel who are killed or injured in Iraq or Afghanistan do not receive additional remuneration to offset their liability for tax. However, as I announced on 10 October, service personnel in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Balkans now receive a tax-free operational allowance that is paid as a lump sum at the end of their operational tour. The allowance is worth around £2,240 to personnel completing a six month operational tour, paid on a pro rata basis for longer or shorter tours, to ensure that the more junior personnel are compensated for their tax bill whilst deployed.

If a service person who is eligible for the operational allowance is injured and/or hospitalised, either overseas or in the UK, they will continue to be paid the allowance for the planned length of their deployment. Also, if a service person in receipt of the allowance is declared dead, their pay account will be credited with the amount of operational allowance that would otherwise have been paid had they completed their planned deployment. This has been explained in the new regulations for the operational allowance that were finalised on 3 November and published to the armed forces on the same day. A copy of the regulations has been placed in the Library of the House. (Des Browne, Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

I have only just found this one which I think is accurately reported below (but if it is not please give me an accurate report).

KING’S BENCH DIVISION

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

November 9 1923

Editor’s comments in bold.

Here, the magistrates’ clerk retired with the bench when they were considering a charge of dangerous driving. The clerk belonged to a firm of solicitors acting in civil proceedings for the other party to the accident. It was entirely irrelevant that there had been no evidence of actual influence brought to bear on the magistrates, and the conviction was duly quashed.

LORD HEWART CJ:
It is clear that the deputy clerk was a member of the firm of solicitors engaged in the conduct of proceedings for damages against the applicant in respect of the same collision as that which gave rise to the charge that the justices were considering. It is said, and, no doubt, truly, that when that gentleman retired in the usual way with the justices, taking with him the…

Statement re Police investigation into Harassment and Perverting the Course of Justice.

It was recently reported that the police were not investigating the allegations of Perverting the Course of Justice that I had made. This came as a surprise to me as I had been told for some time that my allegations were to be considered once the VRR had been rejected. I have now had a very constructive meeting with Staffordshire police on Friday 29th June 2018 and the misunderstandings have been resolved. At that meeting the evidence relating to the perversion of the course of justice and the harassment campaign against my family were discussed. The police have decided to investigate both the perversion of the course of justice and also the harassment campaign. I would like to thank them for changing their decision and I accept their apology for the way in which they did that. I am also in possession of written confirmation a police force would be investigating allegations that a vulnerable witness has been harassed for trying to expose the campaign against me. I hope that the aut…