Category: Speeches

  • Ronnie Cowan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Ronnie Cowan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ronnie Cowan on 2015-12-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what process his Department uses to estimate the number of civilians killed by the UK’s bombing programme in Syria since 3 December 2015.

    Penny Mordaunt

    Every strike is subjected to careful post-mission scrutiny to confirm the aircrew’s assessment.

  • David Hanson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    David Hanson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Hanson on 2016-01-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what targets his Department has for the transfer of documents between GP surgeries when a patient moves to a different area.

    Alistair Burt

    The Department does not collect information on the time taken to transfer documents between general practitioner (GP) surgeries.

    The GP contract requires GP practices to use the electronic facility known as “GP2GP” for the safe and effective transfer of any computerised patient records where they have access to this system. As at end September 2015, 97.2% of GP practices were using GP2GP. 5,859,890 patient electronic health records have been transferred by GP2GP to the patient’s new GP since 2007.

  • Barry Gardiner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Barry Gardiner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Barry Gardiner on 2016-02-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, which organisations have received public grant funding from her Department in each of the last three years; and what the purposes of each grant were.

    Andrea Leadsom

    The organisations that have received grant funding from DECC in FY2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15 are summarised in the attached.

  • Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-03-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment his Department has made of the performance of the current data collection infrastructure and its capability to collect real world data in the way outlined in NHS England’s plans for a new Cancer Drugs Fund; and if he will make a statement.

    George Freeman

    Public Health England’s (PHE) National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service is the only national patient-level data source that collects data including outcomes on the whole care pathway on all patients diagnosed with cancer in England. Data are collected from all National Health Service trusts include information on Systemic Anti-Cancer Therapy.

    There is presently no agreement between NHS England and PHE to provide outcome information on patients receiving Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF) funded treatments, on a regular basis. However, PHE and NHS England are currently in discussion to establish a dedicated resource to provide routine and bespoke information and analysis, and this could include defined outcome analyses on the CDF.

    The Accelerated Access Review (AAR) is also looking at ways to better harness data to support the assessment, adoption and reimbursement of innovative treatments, and discussions are ongoing around the scope for aligning the revised CDF with the AAR recommendations.

  • Ben Bradshaw – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Ben Bradshaw – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ben Bradshaw on 2016-04-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 23 March 2016 to Question 31117, what assessment he has made of the implications for his Department’s policies of the findings from the 2014 paper by Kavanagh and others, Introduction and sustained high coverage of the HPV bivalent vaccine leads to a reduction in prevalence of HPV 16/18 and closely related HPV types; and whether such findings have been taken into account when assessing the differential impact of the bivalent and quadrivalent HPV vaccines on genital wart incidence.

    Jane Ellison

    The findings of Kavanagh and others, 2014, and of Mesher and others, 2016, are consistent with the reductions in human papillomavirus (HPV) 16/18 that were expected in the assessments that informed the Department’s policies. Neither of these papers report findings about genital warts incidence, both report no decrease in HPV types 6 and 11; this is also consistent with expectations in assessments that informed the Department’s policies.

    The answer of 23 March 2016 stated, ‘data reported to Public Health England (PHE) from genitourinary medicine (GUM) clinics shows a reduction in rates of genital warts diagnoses at GUM clinics between 2009 and 2014.’ This analysis has been updated with data for 2013 and 2014. The reductions reported were in patients aged 15 years and older. As the introduction of the quadrivalent vaccine was in 2012, to 12 year olds, no impact on genital warts in 15+ year olds within this time period was expected due to this introduction. Use of the quadrivalent vaccine within this age group prior to its introduction in the national immunisation programme was assessed as a possible but highly unlikely cause of the reductions seen.

    The latest data from PHE showing reductions in genital warts diagnoses in GUM clinics amongst ages offered the bivalent vaccine are data for 2014: the future duration of any protection from genital warts associated with the bivalent vaccine has not been (and cannot be) inferred.

  • Deidre  Brock – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Deidre Brock – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Deidre Brock on 2016-05-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, when his Department plans to publish its response to its consultation on Section 75 employer debt in non-associated multi-employer defined benefit pension schemes which closed in May 2015.

    Justin Tomlinson

    Following a Call for Evidence on Section 75 employer debt in non-associated multi-employer schemes, my Department is currently considering further changes to employer debt legislation. Alternative methods to help employers in multi-employer schemes manage an employer debt following an employer cessation event are currently being explored; we will consult on any specific proposals later in due course.

  • Kirsten  Oswald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Kirsten Oswald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kirsten Oswald on 2016-07-21.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what comparative assessment he has made of the (a) short-term and (b) long-term economic effect on households of (i) multiple births and (ii) single births; and whether any difference in cost is reflected in the provision of support for families.

    Jane Ellison

    No assessment has been made on the short and long-term economic effect of single and multiple births.

    Child Benefit can be claimed by an eligible person responsible for a child under the age of 16, or a 16-19 year old in approved education or training. Child Benefit is not a means tested benefit and is currently paid at a rate of £20.70 per week for the first child and £13.70 per week for any subsequent children.

    Child Tax Credit is made up of four elements which determine how much a claimant can receive. The Family Element entitles all Child Tax Credit claimants to a basic amount of up to £545 a year. The Child Element currently pays up to £2,780 for each child. Then on top of this, the Disabled Child element pays up to an additional £3,140 and the Severely Disabled Child element pays up to a further £1,275 on top for each qualifying disabled or severely disabled child in the household.

  • Daniel Kawczynski – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Daniel Kawczynski – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Daniel Kawczynski on 2016-10-07.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what fiscal steps his Department is taking to encourage the exploration of natural gas in the North Sea.

    Jane Ellison

    To support exploration activity, the Government has significantly cut tax rates for the oil and gas sector and introduced the Investment and Cluster Area Allowances to reduce the effective rate of tax paid by producers. Lower tax rates will encourage exploration by improving the economics of new discoveries.

    Over the last two years the Government has also funded a £40 million programme of seismic surveys. This will boost offshore exploration in under-explored areas of the UK Continental Shelf.

  • Lord Naseby – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Lord Naseby – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Naseby on 2015-10-28.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will publish annually a list of Alternative Investment Market companies that qualify for Inheritance Tax relief.

    Lord O’Neill of Gatley

    HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) do not have a list of Alternative Investment Market companies that qualify for Business Property Relief.

    The claim to the relief will depend on the circumstances of each case. Shares in a company might no longer qualify for Business Property Relief if the company went into liquidation or moved to a full listing on the UK Stock Exchange after publication. Any information provided by HMRC about a company may become out of date quickly raising the risk that relief is claimed incorrectly.

  • Lucy Frazer – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lucy Frazer – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lucy Frazer on 2015-11-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the potential savings to the public purse offered by biosimilars.

    George Freeman

    A biosimilar sub group of the Pharmaceutical Market Support Group is working to help the National Health Service achieve benefits from the new biosimilar molecules and to encourage uptake. This work is supported by other activity including the Hospital Pharmacy and Medicines Optimisation Project work stream of the Lord Carter NHS Productivity & Efficiency Programme and initiatives from NHS England, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and manufacturers. Work has focused on identifying efficiency opportunities for specific molecules and as a result a collective assessment of potential savings to the public purse has not been compiled.

    In an era of significant economic, demographic and technological challenge it is crucial that patients get the best quality outcomes from medicines. Recent research has given clear evidence that competition between different biological medicines, including biosimilar medicines, creates increased choice for patients and clinicians, and enhanced value propositions for individual medicines. As the range of biosimilar medicines increases, it is important that the NHS plans for their timely, appropriate and cost effective introduction. NHS England in its role as system leader is undertaking a programme of work to support decision makers, such as commissioners, clinicians, pharmacists, patients and others in their consideration of the optimal use of biosimilar medicines.