DOCSLIB.ORG

Parliamentary Debates (Hansard)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Wednesday Volume 561 24 April 2013 No. 145 HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) Wednesday 24 April 2013 £5·00 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2013 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/. 867 24 APRIL 2013 868 people as possible to come to Blantyre in my House of Commons constituency and visit the centre there and take part in the celebrations? Wednesday 24 April 2013 David Mundell: I thank the hon. Gentleman for noting the work the UK Government, and indeed the The House met at half-past Eleven o’clock Scottish Government, have done on the matter. He, too, is to be commended for the part he has played in PRAYERS promoting the David Livingstone bicentenary. He is correct: there are a number of continuing events, [MR SPEAKER in the Chair] and all those who wish to do so should take the opportunity to take part in them. BUSINESS BEFORE QUESTIONS Mr James Gray (North Wiltshire) (Con): I very much welcome the various celebrations that the Minister has HUMBER BRIDGE BILL announced today. Does he agree that there could be no Bill, as amended, considered. finer commemoration of that magnificent missionary, scientist, statesman and explorer than his gravestone in Westminster Abbey? It does not list any honours, or Oral Answers to Questions even his dates of birth and death or his parenthood; on a piece of Scottish granite, it simply says the magnificent words “David Livingstone.” Scotland Office David Mundell: Indeed, that is a poignant memorial The Secretary of State was asked— to Dr Livingstone. It was particularly memorable to see members of his family laying a wreath on the gravestone, David Livingstone: Anniversary along with President Banda, at the commemorative 1. Mrs Eleanor Laing (Epping Forest) (Con): What service. steps his Department has taken to commemorate the Mr Brian H. Donohoe (Central Ayrshire) (Lab): I 200th anniversary of the birth of David Livingstone. presume that Dr Livingstone was a great educationalist, [150798] who believed in education. What has the Minister’s right hon. Friend the Secretary of State done to set up The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland the school-industry liaison committees that he promised (David Mundell): The Scotland Office is working closely me some months ago? with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Department for International Development and the David Livingstone Mr Speaker: Order. That is very tangentially related 200 partnership on the programme of celebrations to to the 200th anniversary of the birth of David Livingstone. mark the 200th anniversary of the birth of Dr David The hon. Gentleman should not speculate about what Livingstone. On 19 March, the Scotland Office hosted a Dr Livingstone would have said, because the fact is that reception at Dover House following the commemorative he did not—he was not in a position to do so and he service at Westminster Abbey in the presence of President cannot do so now. I think we had better move on. I call Joyce Banda of Malawi. Iain Stewart. Mrs Laing: I am sure the whole House will be Caledonian Sleeper Train pleased to hear what the Scotland Office is doing. It is 2. Iain Stewart (Milton Keynes South) (Con): What fitting, especially to those of us who well remember discussions he has had with the Scottish Government childhood trips to Blantyre, the birthplace of David on the future of the Caledonian sleeper train. [150799] Livingstone, that tribute should be paid to him here in Parliament. Does my right hon. Friend agree that The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland although a minority of Scots want to put artificial (David Mundell): The UK Government provided £50 million barriers around Scotland, the vast majority of Scots to safeguard and improve the Caledonian sleeper service believe in the pioneering, enterprising spirit of David in 2011. Responsibility for taking the project forward is Livingstone, and want Scotland to play its full part now with the Scottish Government. We look forward in the United Kingdom, and indeed in the world in general? finally to seeing some progress. David Mundell: I could not agree more. David Iain Stewart: I am pleased that the Government have Livingstone was both a great Scot and a great Briton, invested in the future of the Caledonian sleeper, which who had an outward, progressive-looking attitude to is a vital transport link for business and tourism alike, the world, which exemplifies why Scotland and Britain but does my right hon. Friend share my disappointment are better together. that the Scottish Government have not shown the same urgency on upgrading that vital link? Tom Greatrex (Rutherglen and Hamilton West) (Lab/Co-op): I place on record my thanks to the David Mundell: I agree with my hon. Friend. He Scotland Office and the Foreign Office for ensuring might be aware that, since the spending review, the that President Joyce Banda was able to visit Scotland, Scottish Government have received over £1 billion in particularly Blantyre in my constituency, to mark the additional funding for what they said were shovel-ready start of the celebrations. May I draw the attention of projects, but the only shovelling of which they seem the Minister and the House to the wide range of events capable is digging the sort of hole that we saw yesterday happening through the year, and encourage as many regarding the currency. 869 Oral Answers24 APRIL 2013 Oral Answers 870 Mr Angus Brendan MacNeil (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) Jim Sheridan: I thank the Minister for that response. (SNP): The Scottish National party Government have Does he agree that having to pay to volunteer is a in fact invested £130 million in the sleeper service— contradiction in terms, and that that debars many people [Interruption.] If the hon. Member for Glasgow South from participating in a sport such as golf? Will he make West (Mr Davidson) wants to be quiet, he can be. The further representations to the Ryder cup’s organisers SNP Government understand the importance of linking that they should follow the lead of Glasgow city council mega-regions, which has been identified by Professor by creating genuine volunteers? Richard Florida as a win-win for all concerned. In Spain, the linking of Seville to Madrid has benefited David Mundell: I understand the hon. Gentleman’s not only Seville as intended, but Madrid far more. With concerns, which I will take forward with EventScotland the sleeper service maintained to Inverness and Fort and Shona Robison, the Scottish Government Minister William, when will the UK Government ensure that with responsibility for the Ryder cup. there are high-speed links and landing slots at Heathrow to maintain full connectivity between mega-regions, Mr Michael McCann (East Kilbride, Strathaven and because we want England, in particular, to keep pace Lesmahagow) (Lab): The Ryder cup is a unique golf with Scottish prosperity post independence? tournament, because the competitors compete not for cash prizes but for the pride of representing their country David Mundell: The Government are committed to or continent, so it is perverse that volunteers will be ensuring that there is connectivity within the United asked to pay to deliver their services. Will the Minister Kingdom, just as they are committed to ensuring that add that point to his representations when he meets the we stay a United Kingdom. event’s organisers? Sir Menzies Campbell (North East Fife) (LD): Has David Mundell: I will certainly be happy to add my right hon. Friend considered that the sleeper service the hon. Gentleman’s concerns to those expressed by might be better served if there were electrification of the hon. Member for Paisley and Renfrewshire North the east coast main line between Edinburgh and Aberdeen? (Jim Sheridan). Coincidentally, that passes through my constituency, and the project would provide a better service for the Welfare Reform stations of Ladybank, Cupar and Leuchars. David Mundell: The right hon. and learned Gentleman 4. Pete Wishart (Perth and North Perthshire) (SNP): is rightly always keen to promote his constituency interests, What discussions he has had with the Secretary of but he will be aware that that was one of the many State for Work and Pensions and the Chancellor of the projects that the Scottish National party said in opposition Exchequer on the Government’s welfare benefit it would deliver—yet it does not seem to be on the reforms in Scotland. [150801] agenda any more. 5. Fiona O’Donnell (East Lothian) (Lab): When he Mr Ian Davidson (Glasgow South West) (Lab/Co-op): last met the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Does the Minister accept that the Caledonian sleeper is to discuss the effects of welfare reform in Scotland. a vital link between the Ministry of Defence in London [150802] and the shipyards on the Clyde? Does he accept that trade on the Caledonian sleeper will drastically reduce The Secretary of State for Scotland (Michael Moore): in the event that we have separation and the Clyde My right hon. Friend the Under-Secretary and I are in shipyards close? regular contact with ministerial colleagues in the Treasury and the Department for Work and Pensions on matters David Mundell: What I accept is that if we were to relating to welfare reform in Scotland. have separation, there would be a great deal of uncertainty, and not just for the operators of the Caledonian sleeper Pete Wishart: We now know that more than 100,000 Scots service. As we saw yesterday, for example, those promoting will be affected by the Government’s bedroom tax, independence have no idea what currency would be which is opposed by over 90% of Scottish MPs and has used in an independent Scotland, which will be a significant appalled civic Scotland.
Recommended publications
  • The Referendum on Separation for Scotland

    The Referendum on Separation for Scotland

    House of Commons Scottish Affairs Committee The Referendum on Separation for Scotland Written evidence Only those submissions written specifically for the Committee and accepted by the Committee as evidence for the inquiry into the referendum on separation for Scotland are included. List of written evidence Page 1 Professor Bernard Ryan, Law School, University of Kent 1 2 Francis Tusa, Editor, Defence Analysis 8 3 Professor Jo Shaw, University of Edinburgh 14 4 Dr Phillips O’Brien, Scottish Centre for War Studies, University of Glasgow 21 5 Electoral Commission 24 6 Rt Hon Michael Moore MP, Secretary of State for Scotland 28 7 Ministry of Defence 29 8 Brian Buchan, Chief Executive, Scottish Engineering 46 9 Babcock 47 Written evidence from Professor Bernard Ryan, Law School, University of Kent Introduction If Scotland were to become independent, its relationship with the United Kingdom would have to be defined in the fields of nationality law and immigration law and policy. This note offers a summary of the relationship between the Irish state1 and the United Kingdom in those fields, and some thoughts on possible implications for Scottish independence. 1. Nationality Law 1.1 The Irish case A new nationality The nationality law of a new state must necessarily provide for two matters: an initial population of nationals on the date of independence, and the acquisition and loss of nationality on an ongoing basis. In the case of the Irish state, the initial population was defined by Article 3 of the Irish Free State Constitution of 1922. Article 3 conferred Irish Free State citizenship upon a person if they were domiciled in the “area of the jurisdiction of the Irish Free State” on the date the state was founded (6 December 1922), provided (a) they had been resident in that area for the previous seven years, or (b) they or one of their parents had been born in “Ireland”.2 A full framework of nationality law, covering all aspects of acquisition and loss of nationality, was not then adopted until the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1935.
  • Earthquake Effects on Nuclear Safety-Related Large Floating Structures

    Earthquake Effects on Nuclear Safety-Related Large Floating Structures

    Transactions , SMiRT-23 Manchester, United Kingdom - August 10-14, 2015 Division IV , Paper ID 355 EARTHQUAKE EFFECTS ON NUCLEAR SAFETY-RELATED LARGE FLOATING STRUCTURES Ross Mackenzie 1, and Dimitrios Kourepinis 2 1 Nuclear Engineer, Mott MacDonald, UK 2 Principal Nuclear Engineer, Mott MacDonald, UK ABSTRACT Large floating structures are of interest in several fields including nuclear power generation, defence, oil and gas extraction and transportation. In each area safety is a key concern, but none more so than in nuclear safety-related structures. The design of large floating structures must take into consideration several sources of dynamic loading, such as wind, water currents and any associated fluid-structure interaction effects. However, little attention may be given to seismic effects due to limited guidance in relevant engineering codes and standards. During earthquake events, the vertical seismic demand can be amplified at the level of the floating structure thereby introducing a risk with potentially detrimental effects. There is growing evidence that subsea earthquake ground motions amplify the characteristics of the fluid medium, resulting in an increased dynamic loading on the structure. Even in shallow water depths, the water column directly beneath the structure can amplify the vertical component of the earthquake significantly. In slightly deeper water, cavitation becomes an additional issue due to pressures from incident and reflecting waves. This paper presents an overview of the issues associated with seismically induced loading on large floating structures, illustrated with examples and followed by recommendations for seismic analysis. INTRODUCTION Current standards recognise the need for consideration of additional loading due to undersea earthquakes but provide no guidance as how to calculate and apply these loads.
  • Al-Azhar University- Gaza Faculty of Economics and Administrative Science Department of Political Science

    Al-Azhar University- Gaza Faculty of Economics and Administrative Science Department of Political Science

    Al-Azhar University- Gaza Faculty of Economics and Administrative Science Department of Political Science MA. Program of Political Science Peace and Settlement in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, and Northern Ireland: A Comparative Study اﻟﺴﻼم واﻻﺴﺘ�طﺎن ﻓﻲ ﻗطﺎع ﻏزة واﻟﻀﻔﺔ اﻟﻐر��ﺔ، ٕواﯿرﻟﻨدا اﻟﺸﻤﺎﻟ�ﺔ دراﺴﺔ ﻤﻘﺎرﻨﺔ by: Reem Motlaq Wishah-Othman Supervised by Dr. Mkhaimar Abusada Associate Professor of Political Science Al-Azhar University- Gaza Gaza- Palestine 1436 Hijra- 2015 Affirmation It is hereby affirmed that this M.A. research in Politics entitled: Peace and Settlement in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, and Northern Ireland: A Comparative Study is my own original contribution which has not been submitted-wholly or partially-for any degree to any other educational or research institution. I hereby declare that appropriate credit has been paid where reference has been made to the works of others. Moreover, I fully shoulder the responsibility-legal and academic-for any real contradiction to this “Affirmation” may emerge. Researcher’s Name: Reem Motlaq Ibrahim Wishah-Othman Researcher’s Signature: Date: 5 November 2015 إﻗــــــــــــ را ر �ﻤوﺠب ﻫذا، أﻗر أﻨﺎ اﻟﻤوﻗﻌﺔ أدﻨﺎﻩ، ﻤﻘدﻤﺔ ﻫذﻩ اﻷطروﺤﺔ ﻟﻨﯿﻞ درﺠﺔ اﻟﻤﺎﺠﺴﺘﯿر ﻓﻲ اﻟﻌﻠوم اﻟﺴ�ﺎﺴ�ﺔ �ﻌﻨوان: Peace and Settlement in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, and Northern Ireland A Comparative Study اﻟﺴﻼم واﻻﺴﺘ�طﺎن ﻓﻲ ﻗطﺎع ﻏزة واﻟﻀﻔﺔ اﻟﻐر��ﺔ، ٕواﯿرﻟﻨدا اﻟﺸﻤﺎﻟ�ﺔ: دراﺴﺔ ﻤﻘﺎرﻨﺔ. �ﺄن ﻤﺎ اﺸﺘﻤﻠت ﻋﻠ�ﻪ ﻫذﻩ اﻷطروﺤﺔ، إﻨﻤﺎ ﻫو ﻨﺘﺎج ﺠﻬدي ٕواﺴﻬﺎﻤﻲ، �ﺎﺴﺘﺜﻨﺎء ﻤﺎ أﺸرت إﻟ�ﻪ ﺤﯿﺜﻤﺎ ورد، وأن ﻫذﻩ اﻷطروﺤﺔ، أو أي ﺠزء ﻤﻨﻬﺎ، ﻟم �ﻘدم ﻤن ﻗﺒﻞ ﻟﻨﯿﻞ أي درﺠﺔ ﻋﻠﻤ�ﺔ أو أي ﻟﻘب ﻋﻠﻤﻲ ﻟدى أي ﻤؤﺴﺴﺔ ﺘﻌﻠ�ﻤ�ﺔ أو �ﺤﺜ�ﺔ أﺨرى.
  • Northern Ireland) Health System Review

    Northern Ireland) Health System Review

    Health Systems in Transition Vol. 14 No. 10 2012 United Kingdom (Northern Ireland) Health system review Ciaran O’Neill Pat McGregor Sherry Merkur Sherry Merkur (Editor) and Sarah Thomson were responsible for this HiT Editorial Board Editor in chief Elias Mossialos, London School of Economics and Political Science, United Kingdom Series editors Reinhard Busse, Berlin University of Technology, Germany Josep Figueras, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Martin McKee, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, United Kingdom Richard Saltman, Emory University, United States Editorial team Jonathan Cylus, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Cristina Hernández-Quevedo, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Marina Karanikolos, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Anna Maresso, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies David McDaid, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Sherry Merkur, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Philipa Mladovsky, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Dimitra Panteli, Berlin University of Technology, Germany Wilm Quentin, Berlin University of Technology, Germany Bernd Rechel, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Erica Richardson, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Anna Sagan, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Sarah Thomson, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Ewout van Ginneken, Berlin University of Technology, Germany International advisory
  • Daily Report Thursday, 29 April 2021 CONTENTS

    Daily Report Thursday, 29 April 2021 CONTENTS

    Daily Report Thursday, 29 April 2021 This report shows written answers and statements provided on 29 April 2021 and the information is correct at the time of publication (04:42 P.M., 29 April 2021). For the latest information on written questions and answers, ministerial corrections, and written statements, please visit: http://www.parliament.uk/writtenanswers/ CONTENTS ANSWERS 11 Energy Intensive Industries: ATTORNEY GENERAL 11 Biofuels 18 Crown Prosecution Service: Environment Protection: Job Training 11 Creation 19 Sentencing: Appeals 11 EU Grants and Loans: Iron and Steel 19 BUSINESS, ENERGY AND INDUSTRIAL STRATEGY 12 Facebook: Advertising 20 Aviation and Shipping: Carbon Foreign Investment in UK: Budgets 12 National Security 20 Bereavement Leave 12 Help to Grow Scheme 20 Business Premises: Horizon Europe: Quantum Coronavirus 12 Technology and Space 21 Carbon Emissions 13 Horticulture: Job Creation 21 Clean Technology Fund 13 Housing: Natural Gas 21 Companies: West Midlands 13 Local Government Finance: Job Creation 22 Coronavirus: Vaccination 13 Members: Correspondence 22 Deep Sea Mining: Reviews 14 Modern Working Practices Economic Situation: Holiday Review 22 Leave 14 Overseas Aid: China 23 Electric Vehicles: Batteries 15 Park Homes: Energy Supply 23 Electricity: Billing 15 Ports: Scotland 24 Employment Agencies 16 Post Offices: ICT 24 Employment Agencies: Pay 16 Remote Working: Coronavirus 24 Employment Agency Standards Inspectorate and Renewable Energy: Finance 24 National Minimum Wage Research: Africa 25 Enforcement Unit 17 Summertime
  • 60 Years of Marine Nuclear Power: 1955

    60 Years of Marine Nuclear Power: 1955

    Marine Nuclear Power: 1939 - 2018 Part 4: Europe & Canada Peter Lobner July 2018 1 Foreword In 2015, I compiled the first edition of this resource document to support a presentation I made in August 2015 to The Lyncean Group of San Diego (www.lynceans.org) commemorating the 60th anniversary of the world’s first “underway on nuclear power” by USS Nautilus on 17 January 1955. That presentation to the Lyncean Group, “60 years of Marine Nuclear Power: 1955 – 2015,” was my attempt to tell a complex story, starting from the early origins of the US Navy’s interest in marine nuclear propulsion in 1939, resetting the clock on 17 January 1955 with USS Nautilus’ historic first voyage, and then tracing the development and exploitation of marine nuclear power over the next 60 years in a remarkable variety of military and civilian vessels created by eight nations. In July 2018, I finished a complete update of the resource document and changed the title to, “Marine Nuclear Power: 1939 – 2018.” What you have here is Part 4: Europe & Canada. The other parts are: Part 1: Introduction Part 2A: United States - Submarines Part 2B: United States - Surface Ships Part 3A: Russia - Submarines Part 3B: Russia - Surface Ships & Non-propulsion Marine Nuclear Applications Part 5: China, India, Japan and Other Nations Part 6: Arctic Operations 2 Foreword This resource document was compiled from unclassified, open sources in the public domain. I acknowledge the great amount of work done by others who have published material in print or posted information on the internet pertaining to international marine nuclear propulsion programs, naval and civilian nuclear powered vessels, naval weapons systems, and other marine nuclear applications.
  • Radiological Habits Survey: HMNB Clyde (Faslane and Coulport)

    Radiological Habits Survey: HMNB Clyde (Faslane and Coulport)

    Radiological Habits Survey: HMNB Clyde (Faslane & Coulport) 2016 Public Report Radiological Habits Survey: HMNB Clyde (Faslane & Coulport) 2016 FF i ii Radiological Habits Survey: HMNB Clyde (Faslane & Coulport) 2016 Authors and Contributors: I. Dale, P. Smith, A. Tyler, A. Watterson, D. Copplestone, A. Varley, S. Bradley, L. Evans, P Bartie, M. Clarke, M. Blake, P. Hunter and R. Jepson External Reviewer: A. Elliott iii Environmental Radioactivity Laboratory & Occupational and Environmental Health Group Contents List of abbreviations and definitions .................................................................................................... viii Units ..................................................................................................................................................... viii Summary ................................................................................................................................................ ix 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Regulatory Context ................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Definition of the Representative Person ................................................................................ 2 1.3 Dose Limits and Constraints .................................................................................................... 2 1.4 Habits Survey Aim ..................................................................................................................
  • Report on the Insolvency (Amendment) Bill (NIA Bill 39/11-16)

    Report on the Insolvency (Amendment) Bill (NIA Bill 39/11-16)

    Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment Report on the Insolvency (Amendment) Bill (NIA Bill 39/11-16) Together with the Minutes of Proceedings of the Committee relating to the Report and the Minutes of Evidence Ordered by the Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment to be printed on 3 March 2015 Mandate 2011/16 Fifth Report - NIA 227/11-16 Membership and Powers Membership and Powers Powers The Committee for Enterprise, Trade & Investment is a Statutory Committee established in accordance with paragraphs 8 and 9 of the Belfast Agreement, Section 29 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 and under Assembly Standing Order 46. The Committee has a scrutiny, policy development and consultation role with respect to the Department of Enterprise, Trade & Investment and has a role in the initiation of legislation. The Committee has power to: ■ Consider and advise on Departmental Budgets and Annual Plans in the context of the overall budget allocation; ■ Approve relevant secondary legislation and take the Committee stage of relevant primary legislation; ■ Call for persons and papers; ■ Initiate inquiries and make reports; and ■ Consider and advise on matters brought to the Committee by the Minister of Enterprise, Trade & Investment. Membership The Committee has 11 members, including a Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson, and a quorum of five members. The membership of the Committee is as follows: Democratic Unionist Party Paul Givan1 William Humphrey2 Gordon Dunne Paul Frew3 Green Party Steven Agnew Sinn Féin Phil Flanagan (Deputy Chairperson)4 Megan Fearon5 Máirtín Ó Muilleoir6 Social Democratic & Labour Party Patsy McGlone (Chairperson)7 Fearghal McKinney8 Ulster Unionist Party Danny Kinahan9 1 With effect from 16th September 2013 Mr Sydney Anderson replaced Mr Stephen Moutray.
  • Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami: Implications for the UK Defence Nuclear Programme

    Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami: Implications for the UK Defence Nuclear Programme

    Not Protectively Marked Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami: Implications for the UK Defence Nuclear Programme A Regulatory Assessment by the Defence Nuclear Safety Regulator July 2012 Page 1 of 65 Not Protectively Marked Not Protectively Marked This page is deliberately blank Page 2 of 65 Not Protectively Marked Not Protectively Marked Executive Summary Following the events at Fukushima, Japan, on 11 March 2011, the nuclear industry throughout the UK responded quickly to review both its civil and defence facilities against seismic and flooding hazards, under the direction of the respective Regulators for these sectors. The Defence Nuclear Safety Regulator (DNSR), as the MOD regulator for both the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Programme and the Nuclear Weapon Programme, has a key role in regulating nuclear safety at UK defence sites and for defence assets and is the competent regulatory authority for the design of both naval reactor plant and nuclear weapon. As a first response within the UK's Defence Nuclear Programmes (DNP), DNSR sought reassurance that operations remained safe, and requested Authorisees1 to respond to the same initial four questions that the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) asked of the UK's nuclear licensees. The responses provided by authorisees allowed DNSR to advise in May 2011, that there was no evidence to undermine the continued safe operation of the nuclear powered (and including nuclear armed) submarine fleet, or land-based nuclear activities supporting the DNP in the UK. In the subsequent months, DNSR continued to work with Authorisees, and alongside ONR, to ensure that the DNP’s response was consistent with that in the civil sector in the UK, in accordance with Secretary of State for Defence’s policy requiring “equivalent arrangements”.
  • Northern Ireland): Health System Review

    Northern Ireland): Health System Review

    Ciaran O'Neill, Pat McGregor and Sherry Merkur United Kingdom (Northern Ireland): health system review Report Original citation: O'Neill, Ciaran, McGregor, Pat and Merkur, Sherry (2012) United Kingdom (Northern Ireland): health system review. Health systems in transition, 14 (10). This version available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/50037/ Originally available from World Health Organization Available in LSE Research Online: May 2013 © 2012 World Health Organization LSE has developed LSE Research Online so that users may access research output of the School. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in LSE Research Online to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute the URL (http://eprints.lse.ac.uk) of the LSE Research Online website. Health Systems in Transition Vol. 14 No. 10 2012 United Kingdom (Northern Ireland) Health system review Ciaran O’Neill Pat McGregor Sherry Merkur Sherry Merkur (Editor) and Sarah Thomson were responsible for this HiT Editorial Board Editor in chief Elias Mossialos, London School of Economics and Political Science, United Kingdom Series editors Reinhard Busse, Berlin University of Technology, Germany Josep Figueras, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Martin McKee, London School
  • SELLING to the Mod

    SELLING to the Mod

    S2MoD_Edition 16 17/9/08 4:51 pm Page 1 SELLING TO THE MoD EDITION 16 S2MoD_Edition 16 17/9/08 3:13 pm Page 2 Defense Contracts International DCI Delivering Precision Intelligence Leading the way in global defense contract opportunities and market intelligence The new, dynamic and improved Defense Contracts International (DCI) service has arrived! Subscribe to the new and improved Defense Contracts International service today and gain access to the global defense marketplace and the market intelligence you need to win new national and international business as well as a unique leading edge over your competitors. One-month FREE trial available Defense Contracts International My DCI My DCI allows you to effectively SAVE £200 manage all your contract opportunities, meaning you prioritise on your first year those which are most important and of subscription avoid missing vital deadlines (second year price £960 plus VAT) As a DCI subscriber you will also have access to a brand-new ‘My DCI’ area where you can benefit Including: from exciting new features, including: Viewing and analysing statistics on contracts Daily Email Contract Alert service with a returned in your Daily Email Contract Alert new and improved dynamic format Flagging contract opportunities and market Unique Contracts Online search facility allowing you to search intelligence that is of particular interest to you for defense contracts 24 hours a day, seven days a week Saving time by storing specific searches Market Monitor intelligence service Accessing and viewing previous
  • Determination of the Off-Site Emergency Planning and Prior Information Areas for HM Naval Base Clyde

    Determination of the Off-Site Emergency Planning and Prior Information Areas for HM Naval Base Clyde

    [Type text] Commodore M E Gayfer ADC Royal Navy Naval Base Commander (Clyde) Lomond Building Her Majesty’s Naval Base Clyde Redgrave Court Merton Road Helensburgh Bootle Argyll and Bute Merseyside L20 7HS G84 8HL Telephone: Email: Our Reference: TRIM Ref: 2017/22786 Unique Number: CNB70128 Date: 28th February 2017 RADIATION (EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS AND PUBLIC INFORMATION) REGULATIONS 2001 (REPPIR) – HMNB CLYDE (RNAD COULPORT) EMERGENCY PLANNING AND PRIOR INFORMATION AREAS Dear Commodore Gayfer, As you are aware, ONR has been re-determining the REPPIR off-site emergency planning area(1) and the area within which prior information shall be provided to the public(2) around the HMNB Clyde (RNAD Coulport) DNSR Authorised Site as prescribed in REPPIR regulations 9(1) and 16(1) respectively. On behalf of the Ministry of Defence (MOD), Naval Base Commander (Clyde) (NBC) has made a declaration to ONR that there is no change to the circumstances that might affect its Report of Assessment (RoA) for the naval submarine reactor plant. Our re-determination has been made in accordance with ONR’s principles and guidance for the determination(3) of such areas and this letter is to inform Navy Command, as the MOD duty-holder with responsibility under REPPIR for supplying prior information to members of the public around the HMNB Clyde (RNAD Coulport) DNSR Authorised Site, of the following: 1. ONR notes that, in accordance with the requirements of regulations 5 and 6, NBC has reviewed its Hazard Identification and Risk Evaluation (HIRE) and Report of Assessment (RoA) for the naval submarine reactor plant, and has submitted to ONR a declaration of no change of circumstances, as provided for under regulation 5(2).