The government has launched a call for evidence and is seeking views on the impact of the regulatory objectives introduced for the insolvency profession in 2015.

Stakeholders are also being asked to assess whether there would be potential benefits in making changes to the current system, including establishing a single regulator for insolvency practitioners.

Responses are welcome from insolvency practitioners, Recognised Professional Bodies, trade bodies, creditors and their representatives, debt charities, and other interested parties.

Any proposals emerging from this call for evidence would be subject to further consultation.

Sarah Albon, Chief Executive of the Insolvency Service, said:

Insolvency is an important part of a dynamic economy and having an accountable and well regulated insolvency profession is absolutely vital to ensure creditors and members of the public have confidence in the system.

We welcome responses that can give us evidence on how the current system is working, including any suggestions stakeholders may have on how we can improve the regulatory framework.

The authorisation regime for IPs (insolvency practitioners) in Great Britain & Northern Ireland is set out in Part XIII of the Insolvency Act 1986.

Insolvency Practitioners are currently regulated by one of five Recognised Professional Bodies (RPBs):

• Association of Charted Certified Accountants (ACCA)
• Chartered Accountants Ireland (CAI)
• Insolvency Practitioner Association (IPA)
• Institute of Chartered Accountants England and Wales (ICAEW)
• Institute of Charted Accountants Scotland (ICAS)

The Insolvency Service’s Insolvency Practitioner Regulation Section (IPRS) acts as the oversight regulator of RPBs in Great Britain on behalf of the Secretary of State. IPRS monitors the regulatory activities of the RPB’s and the Insolvency Service’s Annual Review of Insolvency Practitioner Regulation provides a summary each year of the work undertaken.

The vital work of HM Coastguard at one of the UK’s busiest search and rescue helicopter bases has been praised by Cabinet Office Minister Brandon Lewis today.

Mr Lewis visited the Inverness Coastguard to see how the helicopter crews and ground staff train for and carry out life-saving missions, ranging from mountain rescues and aiding ships stranded at sea to missing person searches.

Latest statistics show that of the 1,606 rescue operations carried out in the UK during the past year, 40% were undertaken in Scotland by the coastguards at Inverness and three other Scottish bases.

Cabinet Office Minister Brandon Lewis said:

HM Coastguard is the only UK-wide emergency service. Working as a national network highlights how the scale and size of our Union’s infrastructure helps to keep people safe all across the UK.

Our Coastguard helicopter teams provide a brilliant service to protect everyone who visits or works in our coastal and mountain regions, no matter where they are in the UK.

Mr Lewis was given a first-hand look at 2 new state-of-the-art helicopters, which cost a combined £40m. They are helping rescuers get to injured climbers and walkers quicker and to take on an ever-growing range of missions.

The new helicopters are part of a £1.9bn investment by the UK Government in search and rescue helicopter infrastructure to make sure all of the UK’s bases have everything they need to keep the nation’s coastlines safe.

Kevin Drodge, a Captain at the HM Coastguard Inverness helicopter base, said:

We are pleased to welcome Brandon Lewis MP today and to give him an insight into the base’s facilities, in terms of being prepared to undertake the crucial, life-saving work we do to keep people safe in Scotland.

Our priority is getting someone home safely from a search and rescue operation, whether that be at sea or in the mountains. Our base not only has state-of-the-art helicopters, but also the facilities and support we need to ensure HM Coastguard’s world class search and rescue standards.

The UK reaffirmed support for the Independent Expert’s mandate and explained how they fully backed the resolution and opposed any amendments.

Published 12 July 2019 From: UK Mission to the United Nations Geneva

Thank you, Mr President,

The UK attaches great importance to the enjoyment of universal rights by all people, on a free and equal basis.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is the benchmark: human rights apply equally to all people, at all times, in all places. The resolution under consideration is a powerful reminder of this truth.

It is a fact that no state has perfected the promotion and protection of these universal rights. My own country has worked hard, and continues to work hard, to play a leading role on LGBT rights – and yet we know that there is still much more for us to do. We are working hard to deliver our domestic LGBT Action Plan to improve rights in our own country. And as the co-chair of the Equal Rights Coalition, alongside Argentina, we are working with the Coalition’s growing membership to achieve LGBT equality.

This resolution to renew the mandate of the Independent Expert on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity by this Human Rights Council represents a landmark moment – almost as much as it was three years ago. Its renewal will send a message that will resonate and amplify far beyond this chamber.

It will send a crucial message of support to those living in the 69 countries where people live in fear of arrest, prosecution and imprisonment because it remains a punishable offence to be Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual or Transgender. Laws that criminalise sexual orientation or gender identity are unjust, and serve no acceptable purpose. Criminalisation creates a vicious cycle, creating a climate of intolerance that fosters violence and stigmatisation, discrimination and division.

The UK strongly supports the efforts of the core group of Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Mexico and Uruguay to ensure that the work of the Independent Expert will continue. It is with deep – and colourful – pride that we remain a committed and strong partner to the core group, and will work with the Independent Expert for as long as it takes to create a world where his mandate is no longer needed.

The United Kingdom supports this resolution in the strongest terms and opposes all the amendments to it.

Thank you, Mr President.

An overview of the work of the Council for Science and Technology. Published 12 July 2019

From: Council for Science and Technology

Since it was established in 1993, the Council for Science and Technology (CST) has written more than 50 reports for the Prime Minister and senior officials. These reports have covered a wide range of topics from science funding, infrastructure and governance to robotics, automation and artificial intelligence. Their most recent advice on International Research and Innovation Collaboration helped inform the development of the International Research and Innovation Strategy.

Some of the Council’s most high-profile impacts include:

• encouraging the establishment of a national institute to promote advanced research and translational work in algorithms and the application of data science. This has now been set up as The Alan Turing Institute, linking over 400 researchers and 13 university partners.
• the 100,000 Genomes project to help diagnose and treat over 100 rare diseases and cancers through genome sequencing, which was inspired by CST’s advice on the NHS and innovation on the NHS and innovation describing developments in genome science and human genetics and the opportunity to deliver new diagnostic methods and innovative products.
• CST proposed a review of long term investment environment after looking into factors that help UK science and technology companies to grow. The Patient Capital review, concluded in 2017, led to the launch of the £2.5 billion British Patient Capital programme to enable long term investment in innovative UK companies.

The Council for Science and Technology is the Prime Minister’s independent advisory body on cross-cutting science and technology issues. It is chaired by the Government Chief Scientific Adviser and an independent co-chair, currently Professor Dame Nancy Rothwell, President and Vice-Chancellor of Manchester University. Members are leading figures in the science and technology community, including presidents from the other national academies and UKRI (ex officio), and representation from academia and key high-tech businesses. Senior officials from BEIS and HM Treasury attend as observers.

A full list of Members’ biographies and recent reports are available.

Members serve 3 year terms and are recruited via open competition via the public appointments website.

The UK stated the reasons why it would vote against Russia’s proposed amendment and encouraged other members to do the same.

Published 12 July 2019 From: UK Mission to the United Nations Geneva

Thank you Mr President

The United Kingdom rejects the Amendment proposed by the Russian Federation contained in document L.43.

This amendment contains numerous changes, additions, caveats and deletions, all of which were raised over the course of a number of open and transparent informal meetings. As with the other amendments presented today, they failed to garner support from the delegations participating in these informal meetings, or from the main sponsors of this resolution, and were therefore not incorporated.

We are particularly concerned that this amendment seeks to strike references to girls’ participation in society, the economy, and in both political and individual decision-making. Over the course of this Council, we have seen consistent efforts by the Russian Federation to erase girls from texts that seek to promote and protect their human rights, to empower them and to give them voice and control over their own lives. This does not do justice to the millions of young women and girls around the world who actively participate and contribute, day in and day out, to every aspect of life.

To suggest that girls are not capable of participating in the elaboration of solutions to their own concerns is absurd. For too long, girls have been written out of history; this Council has a responsibility to do better.

This resolution seeks to eliminate violence against women and girls in the context of the workplace; this resolution certainly does not endorse children in the workplace, but it recognises that in the real world, girls do engage in the workplace, and when they do, they should not face violence.

Furthermore, the passage of this amendment would set a bad precedent for the working of this Council. At this stage in our deliberations, as I said yesterday, Council Members should be considering thoughtful and well-articulated amendments that reflect concerns and issues of specific importance to delegations. This amendment does not meet that criteria.

For these reasons, we will vote against this amendment and we call on all other Members of the Human Rights Council to do the same.

Thank you, Mr President.