Category: Speeches

  • Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-01-29.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, for what reasons Bradford and Bingley, the Royal Bank of Scotland and Northern Rock as publicly-funded banks are exempted from the public sector exit payments cap in the provisions of the Enterprise Bill.

    Greg Hands

    The Government’s partial ownership of Bradford and Bingley, the Royal Bank of Scotland and Northern Rock as is a temporary measure following the financial crisis and they will be returned to the private sector in due course. The Government believes this is fundamentally different to public sector bodies that receive ongoing funding from the taxpayer.

  • Mark Williams – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Mark Williams – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mark Williams on 2016-02-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, how many applications for emergency authorisation for the use of neonicotinoids have been received in 2016; and how many of those applications have been granted.

    George Eustice

    No applications have been received in 2016 for the emergency authorisation of neonicotinoids.

  • Oliver Dowden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Oliver Dowden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Oliver Dowden on 2016-03-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how the Government is monitoring the effects of the £1.25 billion funding for child and adolescent mental health services.

    Alistair Burt

    Following the March Budget 2015 announcement of £1.25 billion additional funding for children and young people’s mental health services being available over the following five years, £143 million has been allocated for 2015-16. From this, £75 million has been allocated to clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) to work intensively with key partner agencies to transform local services through delivery of their Local Transformation Plans (LTPs) to improve children and young people’s mental health and wellbeing, and £68 million is being spent centrally on workforce and system development to support local transformation. For 2016-17, £119 million has been included in CCG baseline allocations. The profile of spending for future years has not yet been fully determined.

    The guidance for LTPs issued in August 2015, specified that plans had to be signed off by Health and Wellbeing Boards to ensure a shared ambition across all local partners, and included details of a robust bespoke assurance process for 2015-16, put in place by NHS England. This included the completion of detailed financial tracking templates, backed by a programme of regional and national support, to ensure that the additional money was spent for the purposes intended and that locally determined key performance indicators are being met. The intention from 2016-17 is to mainstream children and young people’s mental health as part of the normal NHS England planning cycle and to integrate LTPs into the new Sustainability and Transformation Plan.

  • Baroness Tonge – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Baroness Tonge – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Tonge on 2016-04-25.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what action they intend to take to enable UNRWA to deliver urgent aid to Palestinian refugees trapped in Yarmouk camp in Damascus.

    Baroness Verma

    The UK is extremely concerned about the situation in Yarmouk camp in Syria, especially given intense fighting between Daesh and Al-Nusra Front in recent weeks. According to UNRWA, the intensified fighting has acutely aggravated shortages of food and clean water for the approximately 6000 civilians residing inside Yarmouk. We condemn in the strongest terms the grave crimes committed by Daesh and Al-Nusra Front against civilians in the camp, and continue to call on all parties to the conflict to protect civilians, ensure humanitarian access to the area, and allow the safe passage and evacuation of civilians.

    We welcome UNRWA’s efforts in protecting and assisting vulnerable Palestinian refugees. To date, the UK has allocated over £59 million to UNRWA to provide assistance for Palestinian refugees affected by the violence in Syria and the region.

    The UK has given support to the UN and international NGOs since the start of the conflict to deliver aid to besieged and hard to reach areas and continue to use our position in the UN Security Council to push for humanitarian access to be granted to these areas. We are also part pf the International Syria Support Group that agreed at its meeting on 11 February that humanitarian access would be opened to a number of priority areas, including Yarmouk, as a first step to accelerating full and sustained access across Syria. Since then, UNRWA has delivered 21 convoys with multi-sectoral assistance to 19,000 people in Yalda, Babella, Beit-Sahm, including thousands of residents in and from Yarmouk.

  • would have a less than one in five chance of being detected despite potentially causing more than 10 – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    would have a less than one in five chance of being detected despite potentially causing more than 10 – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by would have a less than one in five chance of being detected despite potentially causing more than 10 on 2016-06-06.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of the statement in the Executive Summary of the Water fluoridation: Health monitoring report for England 2014 that there is no evidence of a difference in the rate of hip fractures between fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas”

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The possible effects of fluoride in water have been extensively studied and reviewed over the last 50 years. In the United Kingdom the most recent review prior to the publication of Public Health England’s (PHE) Health Monitoring Report was undertaken by the National Health Service Centre for Reviews and Dissemination based at the University of York and published in 2000. The Medical Research Council subsequently, in 2002, reported to the Department of Health its advice on future research priorities. The US National Research Council reported in 2006 and the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council reported in 2007. PHE drew on these authoritative sources in selecting a number of indicators of health conditions for inclusion in the 2014 water fluoridation health monitoring report.

    The chosen indicators of various health conditions were selected based on the evidence base, theoretical plausibility, potential impact on population health, the quality and availability of data, and the validity of the indicator. The selected indicators will be reviewed for future reports in the light of emerging evidence.

    The article by KK Cheng et al did not provide any new evidence regarding hip fractures, but comments on the chance of detecting an increased risk of hip fracture for a speculated odds ratio of 1.2 in a previous study by Hiller et al. 2000. This only refers to a single study and it is important to consider the overall weight of evidence.

    The overall weight of evidence and the consensus of opinion from authoritative reviews do not indicate that a drinking water concentration of 1 part fluoride per million parts of water presents an increased risk of hip fracture.

    A more recent review of potential health effects from water fluoridation was published in 2015 by the Irish Research Board. The report concluded that a summary of the existing literature indicates that the relationship between fluoride in drinking water and bone health is inconsistent, with no definitive proof of protective or harmful effects.

  • Barry Gardiner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    Barry Gardiner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Barry Gardiner on 2016-07-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, when he plans to lay an explanatory memorandum before Parliament on the ratification of the Paris Agreement on climate change.

    Mr Nick Hurd

    The UK’s commitment to the Paris Agreement and to climate action is firm. An explanatory memorandum initiating the UK’s domestic approval of the Agreement was laid on 7th October 2016 with a view to completing domestic procedures before the end of the year.

  • John Glen – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    John Glen – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by John Glen on 2016-10-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, whether he plans to appeal NICE’s draft guidance on asfotase alfa for treating paediatric-onset hypophosphatasia, issued in September 2016.

    Nicola Blackwood

    The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) is currently evaluating the costs and benefits of asfotase alfa (Strensiq) for treating paediatric-onset hypophosphatasia to determine whether it can be recommended for national commissioning by NHS England.

    There has not yet been an opportunity for stakeholders to appeal NICE’s recommendations on the use of asfotase alfa for treating paediatric-onset hypophosphatasia. NICE published a second iteration of draft guidance for consultation on 22 September 2016 and the closing date for comments was 13 October 2016. NICE’s independent Evaluation Committee will now consider the comments received in response to the consultation before deciding on the next steps for the evaluation.

  • Imran Hussain – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Imran Hussain – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Imran Hussain on 2015-11-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment he has made of the withdrawal of ESOL funding on levels of poverty.

    Priti Patel

    We are committed to supporting those who are unemployed to finding and keeping employment. In doing so, we ensure that any learning provision is delivered in the context of local employment and labour market demand. Data shows that the numbers of learners in England previously being referred to ESOL Plus (Mandation) provision was significantly lower than originally anticipated and the ESOL Plus (Mandation) budget was underspent in 2014/15.

    The decision to remove the specific English Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) Plus (Mandation) funding for 2015/16 enables providers, as independent organisations which manage their own budgets, to have the flexibility to use their adult skills budget more effectively to support jobseekers. They are able to continue to provide ESOL training for jobseekers where it is likely to result in the most effective labour market outcome, and jobseekers with poor English language skills can still be mandated to this training. All new claimants are screened for spoken English at their first interview and if below entry level 2, they are referred for a more detailed assessment and, if appropriate, training provision.

  • Tulip Siddiq – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Tulip Siddiq – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tulip Siddiq on 2016-01-05.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, for how many asylum applications initially rejected by UK Visas and Immigration did applicants subsequently make further submissions which were more than 12 months old; how many such applicants submitted a request to be allowed to work in the UK; how many of those requests to work were rejected; and how long, on average, did it take for those accepted to be given documents confirming their right to work in each year since 2009-10.

    James Brokenshire

    The Home Office holds reportable information on the number of failed asylum seekers who submit a further submission and how long their case remained outstanding. Permission to work requests are documented on the immigration casework database, but the information is not extractable without interrogating thousands of individual records. Therefore, the information is not readily available and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

  • Chris Stephens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Chris Stephens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chris Stephens on 2016-01-29.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, when his Department’s discussions with Capgemini and Fujitsu began on the replacement of the HM Revenue and Customs IT Aspire contract.

    Mr David Gauke

    HM Revenue and Customs’ discussions with its IT partners have taken place on a regular basis since the Aspire contract began in 2004. The Department created the Aspire Replacement Programme in 2013 to manage discussions with its partners, following the Memorandum of Understanding in 2012 which led to the adaption of the Aspire contract.