Category: Speeches

  • Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-02-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, how many Post Office Crown branches have closed or merged since the end of the last formal Crown Transformation Programme.

    George Freeman

    Provision of its Crown branches is the operational responsibility of Post Office Limited.

    I have therefore asked Paula Vennells, the Chief Executive of Post Office Limited, to write to the hon Member on this matter. A copy of her reply will be placed in the libraries of the House.

  • Ian Murray – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Scotland Office

    Ian Murray – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Scotland Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Murray on 2016-03-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland, with reference to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation report, Uneven Growth: Tackling City Decline, published in February 2016, what assessment he has made of the implications for his policies of the findings of that report in Dundee.

    David Mundell

    I refer the hon Gentleman to my answer of 4 March 2016.

  • Andy McDonald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    Andy McDonald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andy McDonald on 2016-04-11.

    To ask the Attorney General, what recent steps the Government has taken to promote human rights in the UK and abroad.

    Jeremy Wright

    The Government has a strong record on human rights here and abroad. As examples, it brought forward the Modern Slavery Act seeking to protect some of the most vulnerable and exploited people in our society. It is one of the leading members of the UN Human Rights Council, tackling in particular sexual violence in conflict and we will support £10.6 million worth of human rights projects globally this financial year.

  • Jonathan Ashworth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Jonathan Ashworth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jonathan Ashworth on 2016-05-03.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, pursuant to answer of 25 February 2016 to Question HL6120, which political parties have been invited to attend the Anti-Corruption Summit on 12 May 2016.

    Matthew Hancock

    The summit is a Government, not a party political matter.

  • Andrew Rosindell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Andrew Rosindell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Rosindell on 2016-06-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what involvement UK armed forces have had with EU battle groups in the last three years; and how many UK armed forces personnel the Government has pledged to commit to those groups.

    Mr Julian Brazier

    The EU Battlegroup concept has Lead Nations on standby for six month periods. The UK was an EU Battlegroup Lead Nation from July to December 2013, and will be again from July to December 2016. The total number of UK personnel involved is 2,330. They remain under national control and direction at all times.

  • Geoffrey Cox – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Geoffrey Cox – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Geoffrey Cox on 2016-09-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what steps the Government is taking to encourage BT to increase its commercial investments.

    Matt Hancock

    Nine out of ten homes and businesses now have access to superfast broadband, but our goal is to make sure the UK builds the right infrastructure to maintain our position as a world-leading digital nation. BT has a big part to play in this.

    The government supports Ofcom in the changes that it wants to see in relation to Openreach. A more independent Openreach is needed to benefit consumers and boost investment in the UK’s digital infrastructure.

    We are encouraging BT to invest in high-quality broadband infrastructure and have brokered a deal between Openreach and the Home Builders Federation that will see fibre-based broadband offered to all new developments either for free or as part of a co-funded initiative. Additionally, Virgin and GTC have recently signed new deals in this area.

    We are creating a favourable regulatory environment to incentivise commercial investment for BT and all Communications Providers. For example: we will reform the Electronic Communications Code, to support faster and more efficient infrastructure rollout and to encourage investment and growth in the UK digital industry; and we are making permanent a relaxation of the rules for deploying fixed broadband infrastructure originally introduced in 2013.

  • Gareth Thomas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Gareth Thomas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gareth Thomas on 2016-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what assessment he has made of the adequacy of current levels of local authority funding to meet the demands for local authority services.

    Mr Marcus Jones

    The Government has provided a long-term funding settlement, including a £3.5 billion social care package, over the lifetime of this parliament. Councils have continued to balance their budgets while reducing council tax in real terms and maintaining public satisfaction with services.

  • Graham Jones – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Graham Jones – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Graham Jones on 2015-11-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what support the UK is offering to Yazidi people.

    Mr Desmond Swayne

    UK aid is reaching hundreds of thousands of people across Iraq, including the most vulnerable groups, such as Yazidis. All UK-funded aid is distributed on the basis of need to ensure that no-one is discriminated against on the grounds of race, religion or ethnicity. The UK works with the Government of Iraq, Kurdish Regional Government, the UN and the international community to support the rights of all minorities and to ensure our aid reaches those in greatest need.

    To date, the UK has committed £79.5 million to the humanitarian crisis in Iraq.

  • Lord Freyberg – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Freyberg – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Freyberg on 2015-11-30.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the performance of the NHS England cancer genetic testing service compared to the French system run by the Institute Nationale du Cancer in terms of equality of access as measured by the percentage of eligible patients who actually receive tests for (1) breast cancer, (2) lung cancer, (3) colorectal cancer, and (4) melanoma.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    NHS England has not, to date, undertaken a direct comparison of the English and French health systems in respect of genetic testing practice for cancer.

    NHS England does not hold data on the percentage of stage 2b, or higher, cancer patients in secondary and tertiary centres who were genetically tested. Detailed information on the clinical circumstances, or reasons, for referral for genetic testing for individual patients is not currently collated on a national basis.

    NHS England does not consider business cases from individual National Health Service trusts in relation to the adoption of new genetic tests. Instead, NHS England considers national clinical commissioning policy proposals on the eligibility of a particular test, or treatments to be made available in the presence of particular genetic markers. These are considered and where agreed, funded consistently across England for services falling within NHS England’s direct commissioning responsibilities.

    Examples include the separate policies (published in July 2015) confirming eligibility for Ivacaftor for the treatment of cystic fibrosis in the presence of certain gene mutations, and confirming eligibility for testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations, respectively. Copies of the policies are attached.

    In addition, the UK Genetic Testing Network currently presents new genetic testing proposals to NHS England for funding consideration based on the conclusions of their assurance programme. These are considered, alongside other new policy proposals, as part of the annual funding prioritisation process, where there is a net annual investment to be made to support their adoption.

    Information on the average turnaround time for cancer genetic tests is not currently collated, or analysed, nationally. However, NHS England will be undertaking a procurement exercise in the coming months to support the strengthened provision of genetic testing across England. This includes more consistent reporting of activity and other performance indicators, including the timeliness of reporting on receipt on referrals. The supporting national service specification, setting out the standards required of commissioned providers, has been the subject of a recent public consultation.

  • Andy Slaughter – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Andy Slaughter – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andy Slaughter on 2015-12-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what information his Department holds on the number of occasions when due to the loss or theft of keys, a prison has had to be relocked between (a) May 2010 and May 2011, (b) May 2011 and May 2012, (c) May 2012 and May 2013, (d) May 2013 and May 2014, (e) May 2014 and May 2015 and (f) after May 2015 to date; and what the cost to the public purse was of each such incident.

    Andrew Selous

    Security is paramount within prisons and it is important that the risk of any potential key compromise is addressed as quickly as possible to protect the public. When a key/lock incident is reported an immediate investigation is undertaken to assess the risk and unless it is clear that security has not been compromised, locking mechanisms and keys will be replaced and/or other necessary remedial action will be taken.

    Between 2005 and May 2010 there were 16 relocks which resulted in costs of £1,280,234. Since May 2010 there have been 8 relocks, at a cost of £529,973.

    The table below shows the number of incidents and cost to the public purse of re-lock within prisons in England and Wales due to loss or theft of keys and for the time periods requested.

    Time Period

    No of Incidents

    Total Cost (excluding VAT)

    1 May 2010 – 1 May 2011

    3

    £337,553

    2 May 2011 – 1 May 2012

    1

    Nil cost

    2 May 2012 – 1 May 2013

    0

    0

    2 May 2013 – 1 May 2014

    1

    £28,812

    2 May 2014 – 1 May 2015

    2

    £46,396

    2 May 2015 – 9 Dec 2015

    1

    £117,212

    Notes:

    1. Figures exclude VAT.
    2. The 2011/12 incident involved a privately operated prison and the cost of re-lock was met by the private contractor in full at nil cost to the public purse.
    3. Prisons are also responsible for re-locks of crown court cells. Figures exclude re-lock of cells in two crown courts during the period.
    4. The figures quoted have been drawn from live administrative databases and may subsequently be amended. Due care is taken during processing and analysis, but the detail is subject to inaccuracies inherent in any large scale recording system.