Category: Speeches

  • Baroness Masham of Ilton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Baroness Masham of Ilton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Masham of Ilton on 2016-04-12.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the associated health benefits of some sweetened fruit juices, and of the impact of the sugar levy on sweetened fruit juices with such associated health benefits.

    Lord O’Neill of Gatley

    The new soft drinks industry levy does not target pure fruit juices where no sugar is added. Fruit juices are part of the 5-a-day message as they have intrinsic nutrients and other health benefits.

    Juice drinks with added sugar are in the scope of the levy because they can be reformulated and/or sweetened with less caloric sweeteners providing the same vitamins and health benefits without the added sugar.

  • Cat Smith – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Cat Smith – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Cat Smith on 2016-05-05.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps he is taking to monitor the effectiveness of the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency toolkit on the risks of valproate medicines in female patients in ensuring that female patients are better informed about the risks of taking valproate medicines during pregnancy.

    George Freeman

    Valproate is an effective treatment for epilepsy and bipolar disorder but should only be used in girls and women of childbearing potential if other treatments are ineffective or not tolerated. For some women there may be no other treatment option. Since it was authorised, valproate was known to have risks in pregnancy. Because of ongoing concerns about women’s awareness of the risks, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) has worked with professional bodies, voluntary organisations and patient groups to develop a set of materials to aid communication between health professionals and women and girls.

    The valproate toolkit comprises booklets for healthcare professionals, a reminder card and a guide for women, a checklist for prescribers and clear package labelling carrying a prominent warning about use in pregnancy. It was widely disseminated on 8 February 2016 through a Central Alerting System (a web based cascade system for issuing alerts to the National Health Service) and the MHRA’s Drug Safety Update bulletin. Electronic copies of the toolkit are hosted on several websites including the Electronic Medicines Compendium. Letters and hard copies of the toolkit were sent by the marketing authorisation holder directly to general practitioners (GPs), pharmacists and relevant specialists. This included 400,000 patient cards, 81,000 patient guides and 22,000 healthcare professional booklets.

    In order to monitor the effectiveness of the valproate toolkit, the MHRA has sought feedback from all stakeholders and will continue to work with the Royal Colleges, professional bodies including the Royal Pharmaceutical Society, patient groups and relevant charities to increase awareness of the toolkit among GPs, pharmacists and patients.This work will include exploring how clinical commissioning groups can help ensure the toolkit materials are being used.

    So far, the MHRA has worked with voluntary organisations and patient groups to produce online patient surveys to measure awareness of the risks among patients. Furthermore, MHRA is conducting a study using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink to track changes in prescribing of valproate to women and girls following the communications to healthcare professionals and patients on the risks of valproate in pregnancy. The marketing authorisation holder is conducting Europe-wide studies to measure the changes in patterns of prescribing and awareness of the healthcare professionals of the risks. The available data will be brought together in a regularly updated dashboard that will be used to track the impact of the communications on patient and professional awareness over time.

    The Government has great sympathy for those families who have been affected by the use of valproate in pregnancy. There is support available for families with children born with a disability. For many people this will involve an early intervention programme from health visitors and midwives, to help a child develop, as well as provide support to the family. This might include: speech and language therapy – to help with any problems communicating or feeding; physiotherapy – to help with any muscle weakness or movement difficulties, and individual home teaching programmes.

    Where a child has a special educational need the local authority must make support available to ensure the child had access to the same educational opportunities as a child without such a need. The Children and Families Act 2014 introduced a new statutory framework for local authorities and to work together to secure services for children and young people – up to the age of 25 – who have special educational needs or disability, across education, health and social care.

    The MHRA’s current priority is to work to ensure that women taking valproate are fully aware of the risks in pregnancy. Once this is achieved we will look into the history of the episode and see what lessons have been or could be usefully learnt by examining events.

  • Roger Godsiff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Roger Godsiff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2016-06-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what estimate her Department has made of the potential costs of compliance with measures contained in the Investigatory Powers Bill to (a) the public purse and (b) private companies.

    Mr John Hayes

    The majority of the powers in the Investigatory Powers Bill already exist and will not incur additional costs. The Bill makes a new provision for the retention of additional data, known as internet connection records, by domestic Communications Service Providers who are under a data retention notice, to ensure that law enforcement continue to have the powers they need to acquire communications data as threats change and technology develops.

    The Government’s overall published estimate of the costs associated with the Investigatory Powers Bill is £247 million. This includes costs associated with increased compliance and authorisation of warrantry and costs to the justice system for offences and changes to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal. These are set out in the Overarching Impact Assessment published on 4 November.

  • Lord Mawhinney – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Exiting the European Union

    Lord Mawhinney – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Exiting the European Union

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Mawhinney on 2016-09-14.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they envisage any form of public consultation before they decide their negotiating position, once Article 50 has been invoked, on those relationships with Ireland that fall outside EU competence.

    Lord Bridges of Headley

    The Department for Exiting the EU will be conducting the UK’s negotiations to leave the European Union in support of the Prime Minister. We will be working closely with Parliament, devolved administrations, and a wide range of other interested parties.

    Our relationship with Ireland is unique and we have already engaged extensively with Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. The Prime Minister and the Taoiseach met in London on 26 July and the Secretary of State for Exiting the EU visited both Belfast and Dublin in early September to engage with government and business stakeholders.

    We look forward to working closely with the Irish Government and other key stakeholders as we develop our approach, and to make the most of the opportunities for both countries.

  • Baroness Kennedy of Cradley – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Baroness Kennedy of Cradley – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Kennedy of Cradley on 2015-11-17.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what are the rates of flu vaccination so far this winter, and how that compares to previous years.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    Flu vaccine uptake rates for groups recommended to be immunised as part of the national flu immunisation programme as at 26 November are shown in the table below for this season and the two previous years. The figures for 2015/16 are provisional and from a sample of about three-quarters of participating general practitioner practices in England.

    Flu vaccine uptake rates

    Eligible groups

    2015/16 (%)

    2014/15 (%)

    2013/14 (%)

    Adults aged 65 years or older

    64.6

    66.7

    67.0

    At risk groups aged six months to under 65 years (excluding pregnant women without other risk factors)

    36.4

    42.4

    43.6

    Pregnant women (including those in risk groups)

    35.6

    36.6

    34.0

    Children aged two years old (including those in risk groups)

    25.9

    28.5

    34.1

    Children aged three years old (including those in risk groups)

    26.9

    30.5

    30.6

    Children aged four years old (including those in risk groups)

    21.9

    23.9

    N/A

    Data source: PHE ImmForm weekly sentinel influenza vaccine uptake data collection.

    For two to four year olds, vaccine was available about one week later than last year and this seems to be the main explanation for the apparent lower uptake. Communications activity to promote flu immunisation continues – this includes Stay Well This Winter roadshows visiting 67 locations across the country providing advice on flu vaccinations.

  • John Healey – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    John Healey – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by John Healey on 2015-12-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what the average weekly rent and service charge for supported accommodation including (a) foyers, (b) direct access hostels, (c) supported housing for older people and (d) other supported housing has been in each (i) region and (ii) local authority area in the last three years.

    Brandon Lewis

    Average rents for supported housing are provided by private registered providers to the Homes and Communities Agency’s Statistical Data Return. This is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/statistical-data-return-statistical-releases

    “

  • Richard Burden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Richard Burden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Richard Burden on 2016-01-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, which (a) ministers attended and (b) departments are represented on the Government’s working group on drones; when that group was formed; and what its schedule of meetings is.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The Cross Government Working Group on Drones is a group of officials tasked with developing policy on drones. Ministers do not attend. Participation is from the following Departments and agencies:

    Department for Transport

    Home Office

    Ministry of Defence

    Department of Energy and Climate Change

    Cabinet Office

    Department for Food, Environment and Rural Affairs

    Business Innovation and Skills

    Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure

    Civil Aviation Authority

    Information Commissioner’s Office

    Maritime and Coastguard Agency

    Department for Communities and Local Government

    The group was formed in March 2013 and it meets quarterly. The schedule of meetings for 2016 is February; May; September and December.

  • Dan Jarvis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Dan Jarvis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Dan Jarvis on 2016-02-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what the average pay is of (a) men and (b) women working in his Department.

    Joseph Johnson

    This information is published by the Office for National Statistics for all departments on an annual basis. The latest publication date was 8 October 2015.

    Detailed breakdowns of mean and median salaries for both men and women (including within BIS) are contained in the Civil Service Statistics 2015 Statistical Bulletin Tables (tables 24 to 35), available here:

    http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/publications/re-reference-tables.html?edition=tcm%3A77-414427

    “

  • Frank Field – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Frank Field – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Frank Field on 2016-03-03.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, if he will place in the public domain the complete set of submissions that were made to the Boundary Commission’s review of parliamentary constituency boundaries in the previous Parliament.

    John Penrose

    This is a matter for the independent Boundary Commissions.

    All the representations that the Boundary Commissions for Scotland and Northern Ireland received at the boundary review in the previous Parliament are available on their websites, and the representations that the Boundary Commission for Wales received on its initial proposals and during the secondary consultation period at that review are available on its website. The Boundary Commission for England makes available on its website the representations received for the review ongoing at the time only.

  • Lord Myners – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Lord Myners – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Myners on 2016-04-12.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what actions they will take to ensure that arrangements for post-trade collateral management consequent on the takeover of the London Stock Exchange by Deutsche Börse does not increase risks to financial stability.

    Lord O’Neill of Gatley

    I refer the noble Lord to the investor relations section of the London Stock Exchange Group website, which contains information about the proposed merger, including some information on the combined group’s proposed structure. I also refer the noble Lord to my previous written answer HL7153.

    Once formally notified of the proposed merger, the Bank of England and the Financial Conduct Authority (as supervisors of the London Stock Exchange Group’s UK-authorised subsidiaries) must assess the proposal from a regulatory standpoint.

    In addition the proposed merger must be approved by competition authorities and is subject to a range of other assessments including those of overseas regulators and shareholders.

    European Regulation No 648/2012 (EMIR) sets out detailed standards on the quality of collateral that a central counterparty (CCP) can accept, and includes a general requirement that the CCP can demonstrate to its supervisor that the form of collateral in question does not present unmanageable risk to the CCP. Furthermore, CCPs are permitted under EMIR to invest their collateral “only in cash or in highly liquid financial instruments with minimal market and credit risk.”

    Any proposals for inter-CCP links would need to be assessed against relevant parts of EMIR by the Bank of England, as supervisor of LCH. EMIR requires that models used to set CCP margin requirements (and any changes to them) are validated by the CCP’s supervisor. EMIR also requires that a CCP wishing to extend its business to additional products or services must obtain the authorisation of its supervisor.