Category: Speeches

  • Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-06-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to the Answer of 13 June 2016 to Question 40383, whether the Government has the power under current delay repay infrastructure to allow people to claim compensation for 15-minute delays before it makes other planned improvements to compensation arrangements; and if he will make a statement.

    Claire Perry

    All franchised Train Operating Companies (TOCs) are required under their franchise agreement to have in place a Passenger’s Charter which will include arrangements for compensation for passengers. TOCs can, at their discretion, go beyond the commitments in their Passenger’s Charter including on compensation on an ex gratia basis.

  • Kate Osamor – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Kate Osamor – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kate Osamor on 2016-09-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment she has made of the effect of narrowing the defintion of torture in the draft guidance on adults at risk on the ability of her Department to meet Stephen Shaw’s recommendation to adopt a wider definition of those at risk.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    For the purposes of the Government’s “adults at risk in immigration detention” policy, which was implemented on 12 September, the Government has adopted a definition of torture in line with that set out in the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT). This covers acts of torture carried out by, or on behalf of state authorities and, in guidance issued to Home Office staff, to doctors working in immigration removal centres, and to other staff, it has been made clear that the definition also covers acts of torture or ill-treatment carried out by groups exploiting instability and civil war to hold territory. It does not, however, cover acts of violence carried out in the course of, for example, neighbourhood disputes. The definition employed most accurately reflects the need to protect those who are most likely to be deleteriously affected by detention – that is, those who have been harmed by the state (or by an organisation exercising similar control) and for whom detention is most likely to be redolent of the harm they have suffered. In addition, individuals will fall within the scope of the adults at risk policy if the harm to which they have been subjected causes them to suffer from a condition which also falls within the “indicators of risk” set out in the policy, regardless of whether it falls within the strict definition of “torture” and regardless of the perpetrator of the violence. The policy recognises a broad range of groups of individuals as those likely to be particularly vulnerable to harm in detention without necessarily having to define them as victims of torture.

    In making the decision to employ the UNCAT definition of torture, the Government took into account a range of considerations, including the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees guidelines, but concluded that the UNCAT definition provided the appropriate level of protection. The Government believes that this approach is fully in line with Stephen Shaw’s recommendations in respect of vulnerable people. The adults at risk policy as a whole represents a broadening of the scope of individuals considered vulnerable, by virtue of the inclusion within the list of indicators of risk set out in the policy of, for example, victims of sexual or gender based violence (including female genital mutilation), transsexual individuals, and those suffering from post traumatic stress disorder. Overall, the impact of the adoption of the UNCAT definition on different groups of vulnerable individuals will depend on the circumstances of the particular case. The Government does not anticipate that it will have a disproportionate impact on any specific group. In particular, the Government does not see that there are contradictions in applying the new definition of torture alongside the inclusion in the policy, as an indicator of risk, being a victim of sexual or gender based violence. Although the perpetrator of the violence is, by necessity, a key part of the definition of torture, the adults at risk policy focuses as a whole on the impact on the individual and on whether detention is appropriate in their particular case. Home Office caseworkers have been provided with training and communications on the new adults at risk policy, including in respect of the definition of torture. Guidance on the adults at risk policy has been issued, including to the commissioners of healthcare in Immigration Removal Centres.

  • Mary Glindon – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Mary Glindon – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mary Glindon on 2015-11-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many and what proportion of child maintenance cases in the 1993 and 2003 legacy schemes which were in receipt of regular ongoing maintenance being paid to the non-resident or receiving parent and which were subject to forced closure did not migrate to the 2012 Child Maintenance Scheme.

    Priti Patel

    Child Support Agency (CSA) cases from the 1993 and 2003 schemes are not automatically transferred / migrated to the Child Maintenance Service (CMS) 2012 Scheme. All existing CSA cases are being closed gradually as part of the CSA Case Closure process.

    Before an application can be made to the CMS, they must speak with the Child Maintenance Options Service where they are encouraged to make their own family based arrangement. Where this is not possible, or appropriate, they are able to apply to the CMS.

  • Stephen Timms – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Stephen Timms – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Timms on 2015-12-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment he has made of the implications for his policies of the finding of the report, Halving the Gap, published by Mencap in December 2015, that the proposed change in employment and support allowance to claimants in the work-related activity group is likely to move those claimants further away from the labour market rather than closer.

    Priti Patel

    The Government set out its assessment of the impacts of the policies in Bill on 20th July and we will review all reports which relate to the Welfare Reform and Work Bill.

  • Lord Willis of Knaresborough – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Willis of Knaresborough – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Willis of Knaresborough on 2016-01-19.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government  what are the criteria for safe staffing levels for qualified nurses in (1) EU countries, (2) the US, and (3) Australia, and what discussions UK officials have had about comparing patient outcomes in those countries with those in England.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The Government is committed to supporting National Health Service trusts to put in place sustained safe staffing by using their resources as effectively as possible for patients.

    Hospitals should be able to demonstrate that they are able to ensure safe, quality care for patients and that they are making the best use of resources. This should take account of patient acuity and dependency, time of day and local factors. It is therefore important for providers to take a rounded view, looking at staffing in a flexible way which is focused on the quality of care, patient safety and efficiency rather than just numbers and ratios of staff.

    The responsibility for both safe staffing and efficiency rests, as it has always done, with provider Boards.

    Comprehensive lists of research commissioned and published, of criteria in all European Union countries, Australia and the United States, each of which have a variety of systems in operation, and of discussions held by United Kingdom officials to compare patient outcomes in those countries with outcomes in England, could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

    However, the 2013 National Quality Board (NQB) guidance on safe staffing issued in 2013 How to ensure the right people, with the right skills, are in the right place at the right time: A guide to nursing, midwifery and care staffing capacity and capability, referred to a number of sources of evidence on this issue. The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) safe staffing guideline Safe staffing for nursing in adult inpatient wards in acute hospitals, July 2014 set out the evidence and expert papers, including international evidence, that was considered in preparing the guideline. A copy of the NQB guidance and the NICE guideline are attached.

    In addition, The Department’s National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) commissions research evidence to improve the quality, accessibility and organisation of health services through the NIHR Health Services and Delivery Research programme. Current research of particular relevance to the relationship between nurse staffing levels and patient outcomes and mortality includes:

    – a study on nurse staffing levels, missed vital signs observations and mortality in hospital wards; and

    – a study on the future of 24/7 care: investigating the links between staffing levels, patient access and inequalities in health outcomes.

    As announced by the Secretary of State on 16 July 2015, Dr Mike Durkin, National Director for Patient Safety, is working with the Chief Nursing Officer to complete the work started by NICE on safe staffing levels. Their work will draw on evidence and expert advice from England and internationally, and will be reviewed independently by NICE, the Chief Inspector of hospitals, and Sir Robert Francis to ensure it meets the high standards of care the NHS aspires to.

    The programme includes revision of the NQB 2013 guidance to take account of further developments in the evidence base, the need to look beyond acute settings, new models of care leading from the Five Year Forward View and the need for providers to secure both safe staffing and greater efficiency.

  • Roger Godsiff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Roger Godsiff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2016-02-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, if he will make an assessment for his policies of the findings of the National Federation of ALMOs Welfare reform survey relating to universal credit.

    Priti Patel

    DWP is currently considering the report from the National Federations of ALMOs and the Minister of State for Welfare Reform will be meeting to discuss their findings in due course.

  • Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-03-02.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the televised public confession of Kai Zhang prior to formal arrest, indictment or trial; what assessment they have made of what legal assistance he is receiving and what contact he has been permitted to have with his family; what contact the UK authorities have had with him; and what representations they have made to the government of China on his behalf.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    We remain concerned that a number of Chinese lawyers and human rights defenders, such as Zhang Kai, have been arrested, detained, or have simply disappeared since last July. We have raised the cases regularly with the Chinese authorities. In January, the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right Hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr Hammond), raised our concerns directly with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi in Beijing. We supported a public statement by the Delegation of the EU in Beijing on 29 January, expressing concerns about the human rights situation in China, which included the detention of lawyers.

    We urge the Chinese authorities to release the detained lawyers, including Zhang Kai, and ensure all detainees have access to legal counsel of their choice.

  • Mike Kane – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Mike Kane – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mike Kane on 2016-04-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what requirements NHS England has placed on Manchester Mental Health and Social Care Trust to provide alternative services to replace services which are to be closed.

    Alistair Burt

    We are advised that NHS England has placed no such requirements. These are matters for the Manchester Mental Health and Social Care NHS Trust and its commissioners.

    We expect all National Health Service trusts to use their resources wisely and within their statutory responsibilities, while delivering high quality, sustainable services to patients. It is for the local NHS to determine the provision of local health services.

  • Emily Thornberry – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Emily Thornberry – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Emily Thornberry on 2016-05-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many UK military personnel are currently deployed to NATO force integration units in (a) Bulgaria, (b) Estonia, (c) Latvia, (d) Lithuania, (e) Poland and (f) Romania.

    Penny Mordaunt

    The UK has one officer in each of the six NATO Force Integration Units.

  • Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-06-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what recent representations he has received on the potential merits of establishing a materials catapult for manufacturing.

    Joseph Johnson

    The Department refers proposals for new Catapults to Innovate UK, who have an established process for considering the case for new Catapult Centres. This includes proposals for Materials Centres. Innovate UK currently consider the broad materials needs of the manufacturing sector are well served by existing Catapults and Research and Technology Organisations (RTOs).