Category: Speeches

  • Lucy Powell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Lucy Powell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lucy Powell on 2016-10-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, if she will take steps to include training on selective mutism and other speech, language and communication needs in initial teacher training.

    Nick Gibb

    All initial teacher training (ITT) courses must ensure that trainee teachers can meet the Teachers’ Standards in full. The standards require trainees to have a clear understanding of the needs of all pupils, including those with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND). Teachers must also be able to adapt teaching to the needs of all pupils, and have an understanding of the factors that can inhibit learning and how to overcome them.

    In July 2016, the Government published a new framework of core content for ITT, developed by an expert group chaired by Stephen Munday CBE. The new framework includes detailed content on SEND training, with emphasis on speech language and communication needs (SLCN). It specifies that: “Providers should ensure that trainees understand the principles of the SEND Code of Practice, are confident working with the four broad areas of need it identifies, and are able to adapt teaching strategies to ensure that pupils with SEND (including, but not limited to, autism, dyslexia, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), sensory impairment or speech, and language and communication needs (SLCN)) can access and progress within the curriculum.”

    The new framework of content will help to ensure that all trainee teachers are equipped with the skills and knowledge they need to meet the Teachers’ Standards at the appropriate level.

    The new framework of core content for ITT can be found here:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/536890/Framework_Report_11_July_2016_Final.pdf.

    “

  • Patrick Grady – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Patrick Grady – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Patrick Grady on 2015-11-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will issue a response to Early Day Motion (a) 162, Closures of abortion clinics and (b) 172, Buffer zones around abortion centres.

    Mike Penning

    I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to 5385 on 13 July 2015.

  • Chris Stephens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Chris Stephens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chris Stephens on 2016-01-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what impact assessment his Department has carried out on the effects of reductions in universal credit work allowance on (a) incentives to work and (b) the number of hours worked.

    Priti Patel

    The impact of the work allowance change cannot be considered in isolation – it is part of a broader package of measures announced at the Summer Budget, such as the increase to the personal tax allowance and introduction of the national living wage, which strengthens incentives to find work and better paid jobs.

  • Lord Berkeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Lord Berkeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Berkeley on 2016-02-01.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what economic benefits are attributed in the Department for Environment and Rural Affairs document of October 2015 Creating a River Thames fit for our future: An updated strategic and economic case for the Thames Tideway Tunnel to (1) the Lee Tunnel, and (2) the Thames Tideway Tunnel.

    Lord Gardiner of Kimble

    The Lee Tunnel and the Thames Tideway Tunnel (TTT) are key aspects of a wider improvement scheme for the Thames Tideway designed to meet the environmental standards set for the Tideway and achieve the environmental requirements of the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive.

    The updated assessment of October 2015 provided a cost-benefit analysis focused on the TTT in isolation, to inform Government’s decision on whether to proceed with that project as the last major phase of the wider Tideway environmental improvement works. Research set out in this assessment showed that the Lee Tunnel, while having significant local benefit, would not in itself deliver the wider environmental outcomes sought from the overall Tideway improvement scheme. The 2015 assessment therefore assumed no benefits are secured by the Lee Tunnel on its own. It demonstrated the benefits of the TTT, based on an assessment of people’s willingness to pay, to be in the region of £7.4 billion to £12.7 billion (at 2014 prices).

    Defra carried out two sensitivity tests on this assumption (published alongside the main results in the cost-benefit annex to the Strategic and Economic case), to ensure the robustness of that decision. One test factored in the cost of the Lee Tunnel to the cost-benefit analysis for the TTT, and the second assumed that the Lee Tunnel reduced the benefit attributed to the TTT by 40%. In neither test did the economic case for the TTT become unfavourable.

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

    Lord Mawson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Mawson on 2016-02-25.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they or NHS England have made of the effectiveness of minor ailments services provided by community pharmacies in reducing pressure on GP practices and other parts of the NHS, and what assessment they have made of the impact of their planned pharmacy cuts on such services.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    NHS England has taken account of the potential impact of a pharmacy minor ailments service on general practitioner services and other parts of the National Health Service. The findings of the Minor Ailment Study (MINA), conducted by the University of Aberdeen, in collaboration with NHS Grampian and the University of East Anglia, on behalf of Pharmacy Research UK in 2014, were considered. The study’s main conclusions were:

    – consultations for minor ailments continue to be a burden on high cost service providers but there needs to be consensus amongst healthcare professionals regarding what constitutes a minor ailment suitable for treatment in the community pharmacy setting;

    – the evidence considered suggests that community pharmacy-based minor ailment schemes are an effective and cost-effective strategy for managing patients;

    – health professionals and patients need to be confident in the ability of pharmacists and their staff to manage minor ailments; and

    – future initiatives to shift demand from high cost settings to community pharmacy should adopt an interdisciplinary approach to explore and address patient decision-making behaviour.

    In addition, evaluations of local minor ailments schemes have continued to inform decision-making about local commissioning of such schemes.

    Community pharmacy is a vital part of the NHS and can play an even greater role. In the Spending Review the Government re-affirmed the need for the NHS to deliver £22 billion in efficiency savings by 2020/21 as set out in the NHS’s own plan, the Five Year Forward View. Community pharmacy is a core part of NHS primary care and has an important contribution to make as the NHS rises to these challenges. The Government believes efficiencies can be made without compromising the quality of services or public access to them. Our aim is to ensure that those community pharmacies upon which people depend continue to thrive and so we are consulting on the introduction of a Pharmacy Access Scheme, which will provide more NHS funds to certain pharmacies compared to others, considering factors such as location and the health needs of the local population.

    The Government’s vision is for a more efficient, modern system that will free up pharmacists to spend more time delivering clinical and public health services to the benefit of patients and the public.

    We are consulting the Pharmaceutical Services Negotiating Committee, other pharmacy bodies and patient and public representatives on our proposals. An impact assessment will be completed to inform final decisions and published in due course.

    Local commissioning and funding of services from community pharmacies, such as minor ailment services, will be unaffected by these proposals.

  • Paul Blomfield – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Paul Blomfield – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Paul Blomfield on 2016-03-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many claims for underpayment of the national minimum wage have been brought before employment tribunals in each of the last five years; how many such claims were successful; and how much was awarded to claimants in claims related to underpayment of the national minimum wage in that period.

    Andrew Selous

    The number of National Minimum Wage claims accepted by the Employment Tribunal in each of the last five years, including those accepted by the Tribunal since 1 July 2015, are published in the Tribunal and Gender Recognition Certificate Statistics Quarterly. The number of successful National Minimum Wage claims are also published in the quarterly statistics. The most recent report, for the period October to December 2015, published on 10 March 2016, can be viewed at:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/tribunal-and-gender-recognition-statistics-quarterly-october-to-december-2015

    The Tribunal only records and publishes awards made to claimants in discrimination cases. The amount awarded in National Minimum Wage claims in each of the last five years can only be obtained at a disproportionate cost.

    Information relating to the period of time an Employment Tribunal claim refers to underpayment of the National Minimum Wage for a period of more than (a) two and (b) six years is not recorded by the Tribunal and can only be obtained at a disproportionate cost.

    “

  • Lord Taylor of Warwick – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Lord Taylor of Warwick – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Taylor of Warwick on 2016-04-26.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the recent claims by the President of the United States that the UK leaving the EU could cause severe consequences to UK and US trade.

    Lord Price

    The Government has assessed that the total volume of UK trade with the world would be between 9% and 24% lower after 15 years if the UK left the EU.

    If the UK withdrew from the EU we would no longer benefit from the trade agreement the EU is negotiating with the US. Negotiating a replacement agreement would take years as the US would almost certainly want to conclude its negotiations with the EU first before deciding whether to enter into separate negotiations with the UK.

  • Jim Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Jim Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2016-06-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what assessment he has made of the adequacy of existing public transport infrastructure for people with sight and hearing loss; and if he will make a statement.

    Andrew Jones

    Accessible public transport is vital in enabling people who are visually or hearing impaired, as well as other disabled people, to live and work with independence and dignity.

    The Department has committed to publishing an accessibility action plan to improve access to public transport and contribute to halving the employment gap between non-disabled and disabled people.

    Throughout its development we are working with the Disabled Persons’ Transport Advisory Committee (DPTAC) and organisations representing the interests of disabled people, including those who are visually and hearing impaired, helping us to understand what works well, and what barriers still remain.

  • Andy Slaughter – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Trade

    Andy Slaughter – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Trade

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andy Slaughter on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Trade, what steps he is taking to retain current inward investors in the UK after the UK leaves the EU.

    Greg Hands

    The UK remains the most attractive place in Europe to invest in. As well as attracting new projects, this Department already focuses substantial effort on retention of our existing investors and supporting them to grow and remain in the UK to maximise wealth creation. On 5th September 2016, the Directorate General within DIT responsible for inward investment moved to a new, more focussed operating model to deliver inward investment, which will push this agenda and provide more focussed support than ever before to retain our inward investors.

  • Louise Ellman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Louise Ellman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Louise Ellman on 2016-10-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, whether he plans to alter the terms of reference of the Expert Working Panel Group Inquiry into Primodos.

    Nicola Blackwood

    The terms of reference of the Commission on Human Medicines’ Expert Working Group on Hormone Pregnancy Tests were reviewed by the Group at their first meeting on 14 October 2015, endorsed by the Commission on Human Medicines and formally adopted by all members, invited experts and observers of the Expert Working Group at their second meeting on 4 December 2015.

    On 13 October 2016 at a Backbench Business Committee debate secured by the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Hormone Pregnancy Tests, the Government committed to respond in detail to the concerns raised by the APPG, which include the terms of reference of the Expert Working Group on Hormone Pregnancy Tests, and to then meet with the APPG to discuss these concerns.