Category: Speeches

  • Lord Judd – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Lord Judd – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Judd on 2016-07-06.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what they are doing to preserve and enhance the international character and international standing of British universities and their research.

    Baroness Neville-Rolfe

    The Government is determined to ensure that the UK continues to play a leading role in European and international research and innovation. It is promoting the international success of UK universities through bilateral engagement with overseas partners, the Britain is GREAT marketing campaign which has education and science pillars, and through the Chevening and Commonwealth scholarship schemes.

    For example, in November 2015, the Indian and UK Prime Ministers jointly announced the ‘2016 UK-India Year of Education, Research and Innovation’. This was immediately followed by a major education visit to India, including 28 vice-chancellors to increase higher education partnerships.

    Programmes such as the UK China Partners in Education programme and the UK India Education Research Initiative bring long term international collaboration.

    Our international research is being enhanced through the Government’s Newton Fund, a £735 million UK investment matched by partner countries, linking our universities with researchers in 16 major emerging economies. Our Global Challenge Research Fund, £1.5 billion and Ross Fund, £1bn., support universities engaging in global challenges including health, agritech and water research.

    British universities have a world-class reputation for both education and research. Globally the UK has four universities in the top ten and ten in the top fifty in the QS rankings, a 10% share of the international student recruitment market, and 15.9% per cent of the world’s most highly-cited research articles.

  • Alison Thewliss – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Alison Thewliss – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Alison Thewliss on 2016-09-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many Brimstone missiles have been used in Syria and Iraq to date as part of Operation SHADER; and what the cost of the use of those weapons has been to the public purse.

    Mike Penning

    Between November 2014 and 16 September 2016 there have been 230 Brimstone missiles used in Iraq and Syria as part of Operation SHADER. The estimated cost of the use of these missiles is £18.7million.

  • Poulter – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Poulter – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Poulter on 2015-11-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what estimate he has made of the proportion of junior doctors not rostered on at evenings and weekends as a result of the terms of the current junior doctor contract.

    Ben Gummer

    NHS Employers’ evidence to the Review Body on Doctors’ and Dentists’ Remuneration – “Reform of national contracts for consultant doctors and doctors and dentists in training”1 – published in December 2014 during the hon. Member’s tenure as a Minister, included a profile of how the hours worked by doctors in training were spread across the week.

    We have evidence that hospital leaders consider the junior doctors’ contract to be a significant barrier to delivering more seven-day services. NHS Providers’ written evidence to the Review Body on Doctors’ and Dentists’ Remuneration on contract reform for consultants and doctors and dentists in training2 stated that the junior doctor contract is still a significant source of barriers to seven day working and reform of the junior doctor contract is also required to support trusts to deliver more seven-day services. In particular, the pay banding system for junior doctors needs to be reviewed. There were concerns from employers that the banding system is too complicated, can create “perverse incentives” for junior doctors and hospital management, and means that providing more seven-day services is unfeasible, since more junior doctors would be working outside core hours and receive premiums under the current banding system. NHS Providers also believe that more hours in a day and more days of the week need to be defined as core hours, as the current arrangement does not support the delivery of more seven-day services or reflect the needs and expectations of today’s patients.

    Future working patterns are for individual employers to determine. The evidence on doctors’ working patterns has not altered since the hon. Member was a Minister for Health.

    1 http://www.nhsemployers.org/your-workforce/pay-and-reward/pay/medical-pay/ddrb-evidence—in-detail/consultants-and-junior-doctors-contract-reform-submission-of-evidence-to-the-ddrb

    2 http://www.nhsproviders.org/resource-library/written-evidence-ddrb-special-remit/

    “

  • Lord Kilclooney – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Lord Kilclooney – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Kilclooney on 2015-12-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether it is their intention that, in the event of the UK ceasing to be a member of the EU, citizens of the Republic of Ireland who live in the UK would cease to qualify to register as electors in the UK.

    Lord Bridges of Headley

    The Prime Minister believes Britain’s best future lies within a reformed European Union. He is focused on addressing the concerns of the British people and is confident that the right agreement can be reached.

  • Julie Cooper – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Julie Cooper – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julie Cooper on 2016-01-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what measures and regulations are in place to ensure that clinical drug tests are low-risk and safe.

    George Freeman

    Clinical trials of medicinal products in the United Kingdom are strictly regulated by European Union and UK legislation in order to ensure that the studies achieve their scientific targets while safeguarding the trial participants. Before any trial of a new medicine is initiated in humans, the medicinal product will have undergone extensive non-clinical testing, both in the laboratory and in animals as appropriate. The organisation responsible for proposing the trial (the Sponsor) will submit a Clinical Trial Authorisation application that will be reviewed by both the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and a research ethics committee.

    The MHRA assesses the safety and scientific value of the trial. A team of assessors will review the pharmaceutical quality of the medicinal product, the supporting data from pre-clinical testing and the details of the trial design and methodology, along with all available clinical data. The research ethics committee will ensure that the participant has been fully informed of all the necessary information about the trial, including information on potential risks and side effects.

    All Phase I trials in healthy volunteers are assessed taking into account European guidelines on strategies to identify and mitigate risks for first in human (FIH) trials. In the UK, trials that are identified as being higher risk are referred by the MHRA to an Expert Advisory Group of the Commission on Human Medicines for advice.

    The MHRA has instituted a Phase I accreditation scheme for organisations conducting phase I trials, in particular for those conducting FIH trials. MHRA Inspectors will grant Phase I accreditation only to those research units that exceed the basic regulatory Good Clinical Practice standards by having additional procedures that include the highest standards for avoiding harm to trial subjects and for handling any medical emergencies.

  • Roger Godsiff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Roger Godsiff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2016-02-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, if her Department will hold a consultation on changing the School Admissions Code to require religiously selective schools to prioritise all looked-after children and previously looked-after children in their admission arrangements in addition to such children of the same denomination of such schools.

    Nick Gibb

    Admission authorities for all state-funded schools, including schools with a religious character, are required to comply with the School Admissions Code. This includes a requirement that ‘parents should be able to look at a set of arrangements and understand easily how places for that school will be allocated’.

    We support the right of schools with a religious designation to prioritise children of their faith. The code requires such schools, as a minimum, to prioritise looked after and previously looked after children of their faith ahead of other children. We have no plans to change this requirement.

    The code can only be applied to bodies within the education sector. It cannot place requirements upon religious bodies. It does, however, require that when schools with a religious designation adopt admission criteria which prioritise children based on their faith, the schools must take account of religious activities as laid out by their religious authority.

    Compliance with the code is enforced by the Schools Adjudicator. Where an objection is made and the adjudicator finds that the arrangements are unclear, unfair, or that they otherwise fail to comply with the code, the admission authority is required by law to change the policy.

    The Government will shortly consult on a package of changes to the code which will both respond to the findings within the Chief Adjudicator’s Annual Reports and concerns raised by parents. That package will include measures to improve fairness and transparency.

  • Nicholas Brown – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Nicholas Brown – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nicholas Brown on 2016-03-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what assessment the Government has made of the threat posed to minority religious groups with refugee camps Syria within refugee camps; and what steps the Government has taken to protect such groups from persecution.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    Assad’s actions have fuelled sectarian violence and his regime is ultimately responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians. The UK, as part of the International Syria Support Group, has agreed that protecting the rights of all Syrians, regardless of ethnicity or religious denomination, is fundamental. This means that Syrian minorities will be included and safeguarded as the political process progresses.

    We are supporting non-governmental efforts to promote dialogue between different ethnic and sectarian groups in Syria, as we seek further progress on a political settlement. The UK is working with the United Nations High Commissioner For Refugees (UNHCR) to intensify their outreach and identification activities in the region; and to encourage and invite all unregistered populations to avail themselves of UNHCR’s assistance and protection services. This includes resettlement where eligible, either by directly approaching UNHCR to register with them or by referral via a third organisation.

    Through the Syrian Vulnerable Persons Relocation scheme, the UK is helping some of the most vulnerable refugees based on need. The scheme is open to all eligible persons regardless of ethnicity or religious denomination, and prioritises the most vulnerable.

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

    Andrew Rosindell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Rosindell on 2016-04-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 9 March 2016 to Questions 30551 and 30552, on UK membership of EU: Crown Dependencies, what his Department’s policy is on the future of the principles enshrined in Protocol 3 should the UK vote to leave the EU.

    Dominic Raab

    The Channel Islands and the Isle of Man enjoy special arrangements for access to the EU, provided under Protocol 3 to the UK’s Treaty of Accession to the European Community. As set out in the Government’s White Paper: ‘The process for withdrawing from the European Union’, published on 29 February, the withdrawal process is unprecedented. There is uncertainty about how it would work. There would be no requirement under EU law for these arrangements to be maintained if the UK left the EU.

    The Government respects and values the constitutional relationship between the UK and the Crown Dependencies, and will continue to engage constructively with them to address issues and areas of concern.

  • Liz Kendall – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Liz Kendall – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Liz Kendall on 2016-05-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many people with a health condition affecting their hearing have received support from Access to Work grants to (a) start work, (b) stay in work and (c) move into self-employment.

    Justin Tomlinson

    Access to Work is available to individuals who are in or about to start paid employment and whose disability or health condition affects the way they do their job. The Department does not distinguish between those helped into new employment opportunities, including self-employment, and those helped to retain existing work.

    5,580 people whose primary medical condition is listed as ‘Deaf and hard of hearing’ were helped by Access to Work in the period 2014/15.

    This figure is taken from the latest statistics for Access to Work, which show figures for people helped by the scheme going back to 2007 and are published quarterly here: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/514468/access-to-work-statistics-to-dec-2015.pdf

    “

  • Lord Mawhinney – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Mawhinney – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Mawhinney on 2016-07-06.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many, and what percentage of, NHS providers have signed up to the first round of proposed control totals; and how they plan to respond to those providers who (1) have not signed up, or (2) refuse to do so.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    NHS Improvement continues to work with those providers who have not been able to agree control totals by the end of July. At present, 213 of 238 providers (89.5%) have an agreed a control total. Those providers who have been unable to agree a control total will not be able to access the sustainability and transformation fund.

    NHS Improvement is currently consulting on a new oversight regime, which details proposals on how providers will be monitored in future and this will set out how variance from financial plan or control total will be managed.

    NHS Improvement does not intend to replace the boards of those providers who do not achieve financial balance by the end of 2016/17. The organisation’s new oversight regime also sets out in detail how it proposes to monitor and support providers.

    The Government’s Mandate to the NHS 2016-17, a copy of which is attached, confirms that the National Health Service must ensure that it balances its budget, including commissioners and providers living within their budgets. To support this, £1.8 billion of NHS England’s budget for 2016-17 will be allocated through the Sustainability and Transformation Fund to support providers, in particular emergency services, payable through commissioning or as other support.