UKPOL.CO.UK

Category: Speeches

  • Daniel Zeichner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Daniel Zeichner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Daniel Zeichner on 2016-01-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, with reference to his Department’s press release of 13 January 2016, entitled Transport sector all geared up for winter weather, what plans his Department has to ensure safety of cyclists in the event of bad weather.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    We would advise all road users including cyclists to take extra care when cycling in wet or icy conditions. In particular when it is icy, cyclists should to stick to treated roads wherever possible.

    The responsibility for the treatment and maintenance of the road network rests with the relevant highway authority. Section 41a of the Transport Act 1980 as amended, places highway authorities “under a duty to ensure as far as is reasonably practicable, that safe passage along a highway is not endangered by snow and ice”.

    In this respect, in October last year I wrote to the leaders of all local highway authorities reminding them of their responsibilities regarding preparation for winter and the need for robust contingency plans in place to mitigate against any significant weather we may encounter over the winter period.

    The Department for Transport (DfT) also continues to play its part to ensure we stay through the 2015/16 winter season well prepared. This includes continuing to maintain a substantial national emergency salt reserve, first set up by the Coalition government, and having a robust distribution process in place, if for any reason this salt of last resort is needed to be allocated.

    The Department has also published a small amount of additional guidance for highway authorities in Local Transport Note 1/12 “Shared Use Routes for Cyclists and Pedestrians”.

  • Lord Mawson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Lord Mawson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Mawson on 2016-02-11.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of the decision to cancel the transfer of police custody healthcare services to the NHS, what assessment they have made of the minimum standards of training, skills and competence for healthcare professionals working in a police custody setting; and what steps they have taken to advise Police and Crime Commissioners about the need to adhere to such minimum standards for all healthcare professionals, as recommended by the Faculty of Forensic and Legal Medicine, the UK Association of Forensic Nurses, and the College of Paramedics.

    Lord Bates

    The decision not to pursue the transfer of custody healthcare commissioning from Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) to NHS England was taken in the context of wider decisions about the Provisional Police Funding Settlement for 2016/17, details of which were announced to Parliament in a written statement by the Minister of State for Policing, Crime and Criminal Justice and Victims on 17 December.

    The Government is clear that Police and Crime Commissioners should retain full flexibility to be able to prioritise resources towards police custody healthcare functions based on their local needs.

    A number of sources of information and guidance are available to PCCs to inform their commissioning of custody healthcare services.

    The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1983 (PACE) sets out the statutory framework for custodial care and the rights and entitlements of a detainee in police custody. The College of Policing, as the professional body for policing, has published Approved Professional Practice (APP) on custody and detention. Police officers and staff are expected to have regard to the APP in discharging their responsibilities.The APP references wider guidance published by professional medical bodies including the Faculty of Forensic and Legal Medicine. In addition there is a NHS England national service specification setting out clinical standards for the commissioning and provision of police custody healthcare functions. This is currently being reviewed and updated.

    In many police force areas the close ties which PCCs have established to local NHS England commissioners over recent years have already helped to drive up the standards and quality of provision. On 11 February my Rt Hon Friend the Home Secretary and my Right Honourable Friend the Secretary of State for Health wrote to Police and Crime Commissioners and NHS England Commissioners encouraging them to continue to build upon this work to further improve healthcare service delivery.

    Any recommendations made by the forthcoming independent review of deaths and serious incidents in police custody will be carefully considered in due course.

  • Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chi Onwurah on 2016-03-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, if he will make an assessment of the potential effect on the UK tourism sector of the French ban on parity clauses for online travel agents.

    Nick Boles

    My Department has no plans to make such an assessment.

    Any assessment of the impact of parity clauses on competition and consumers falls within the remit of the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), which is the UK’s primary competition and consumer authority.

    One of the CMA’s predecessors, the Office of Fair Trading, launched an investigation into alleged resale price maintenance in arrangements between a hotel group and two online travel agents, though this ultimately led to no action being taken. The CMA keeps these issues under review and is working closely with other national competition authorities and the European Commission to do this.

  • Julie Cooper – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Julie Cooper – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julie Cooper on 2016-04-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, how many times she has attended public meetings of the Education Committee since her appointment.

    Nick Gibb

    My Rt Hon Friend the Secretary of State for Education has given evidence to the Education Select Committee six times since she was appointed in July 2014.

  • Ian Blackford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Ian Blackford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Blackford on 2016-05-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what discussions he has had with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on funding the uprating of pensions that are frozen for people living overseas.

    Justin Tomlinson

    The Secretary of State is in regular contact with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on pensions issues. UK State Pensions are payable worldwide and are uprated overseas where we have a legal requirement to do so – for example in the European Economic Area or in countries where there is a reciprocal agreement in place which allows for uprating. There are no plans to change this policy.

  • Rosie Cooper – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Rosie Cooper – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Rosie Cooper on 2016-07-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to correspondence with her from the hon. Member for West Lancashire, for what reasons the Disclosure and Barring Service took from 8 October 2015 to 18 April 2016 to process the certificate application of a West Lancashire constituent.

    Mike Penning

    The Disclosure and Barring Service is responsible for issuing criminal record certificates and the maintenance of children’s and adults’ barred lists. The Disclosure and Barring Service has a target of processing 85% of all disclosure applications within 21 days. In the vast majority of cases (95%), disclosure certificates are issued within 8 weeks (2015/16).

    Criminal record certificates issued by the Disclosure and Barring Service do not expire after a specific period of time and do not include a renewal date. A certificate has no set period of validity. Information revealed through a Disclosure and Barring Service check reflects the information that was available at the time of its issue. Disclosure certificates are primarily designed to be used by an employer at the point of recruitment for a particular position.

    Some roles and some employers require the person concerned to “renew” their Disclosure and Barring Service check at specific intervals. The person can do that either by applying for a new certificate or by using the Disclosure and Barring Service Update Service.

    It would not be appropriate to comment on specific cases, but there are a number of factors which can affect the timely completion of checks. These include the length of time if can take for an employer to deal with the initial application, the accurate completion of the application form, the clarity of the information provided, the existence of conviction or non-conviction information, legal challenges and the operational effectiveness of the disclosure units of the police forces involved, if any, in the enhanced process. In some cases, forces will ask Disclosure and Barring Service to clarify some details provided by the applicant which requires further investigation and this can cause further delays.

  • Paul Monaghan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Paul Monaghan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Paul Monaghan on 2016-10-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment she has made of the potential effect of the UK’s decision to leave the EU on the rural economy.

    Dr Thérèse Coffey

    The UK is still a member of the EU and we will continue to engage with EU business as normal and be engaged in EU decision-making in the usual way.

    Once Article 50 is invoked, we will remain bound by EU law until the withdrawal agreement comes into force.

    We now have a historic opportunity to deliver an environment for future generations to be proud of, grow our world-leading food and farming industry that continues to attract significant global investment and harness the enormous economic potential of our rural communities.

  • Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2015-11-17.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the investigation by The Times and the British Medical Journal into conflicts of interest caused by Clinical Commissioning Groups entering into contracts with companies in which one or more of their board members has a financial interest.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    Clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) have legal duties under the Health and Social Care Act 2012 to manage conflicts of interests when deciding which health services to procure. CCGs must manage any actual or perceived conflicts in a way that is transparent, fair, and protects the integrity of their decision making.

    NHS England publishes guidance for CCGs on their responsibility to manage conflicts of interest. CCGs must have regard to this.

    Monitor must ensure that CCGs follow National Health Service regulations on procurement, patient choice and competition, and have powers of investigation if these are not followed.

    In their recent report ‘Managing conflicts of interest in NHS clinical commissioning groups’ the National Audit Office (NAO) found that CCGs generally had arrangements in place to manage conflicts of interest to reduce the risk of commissioners’ decisions being improperly influenced. A copy of the NAO’s report is attached.

    The NAO made recommendations to the Department, NHS England, Monitor and CCGs to strengthen current arrangements and we would expect the bodies concerned to consider these carefully and take appropriate action in response.

    Action is already being taken by NHS England including:

    – strengthening its CCG assurance processes;

    – commissioning an independent audit of conflicts of interest management in ten primary care co-commissioning arrangements, with a review to using the learning to strengthen current arrangements;

    – providing training to CCG lay members on management of conflicts of interest in 2015, with more training planned for next year; and,

    – reviewing its own internal rules on conflicts of interest and the statutory guidance it issues to CCGs on management of conflicts of interest to ensure that arrangements are robust.

  • Lord Harrison – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Harrison – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Harrison on 2015-12-15.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Prior of Brampton on 26 November (HL3958), what plans they have to ensure that podiatric services are available to diabetics who need them; and what criteria they are recommending that Clinical Commissioning Groups use to differentiate between those diabetics who will continue to require podiatric services and those who will not.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    Podiatry services are commissioned locally by clinical commissioning groups working with local partners and based on the need of the local population, resources available and evidence based practice. Treatment decisions should always be made by doctors based on a patient’s individual clinical needs.

    Preventing diabetes and promoting the best possible care for people with diabetes is a key priority for this Government and is part of the 2016/17 Mandate to NHS England. Building on the NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme, the Department of Health and NHS England are exploring options for ensuring a sustained focus on improving the management and care of people with diabetes.

    The new National Diabetes Foot Care Audit, a module of the National Diabetes Audit, aims to establish the extent to which national guidelines on the management of diabetic foot disease are being met. The audit will provide local teams with the evidence needed to tackle any identified differences in practice which will lead to an overall improvement in management and outcomes for patients. Local and national level results will be available in March 2016. However, we do know that there has been an increase in the proportion of Trusts with multidisciplinary diabetic foot care teams, from around 60% in 2011 to over 70% in 2013.

  • Jess Phillips – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Jess Phillips – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jess Phillips on 2016-01-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, which categories of young people it is his policy will be exempt from the new restrictions to housing benefit eligibility.

    Justin Tomlinson

    Removal of automatic housing support for 18 – 21 year olds, announced in the Summer Budget 2015, will be introduced in April 2017. The Department is liaising with a range of key stakeholders as we develop the detail of the policy. Once this work has been completed we will bring forward detailed proposals.