Category: Speeches

  • Chi Onwurah – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Chi Onwurah – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chi Onwurah on 2015-11-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what assessment she has made of the effect on the financial sustainability of sixth form colleges of (a) VAT and (b) pension costs; and if she will estimate the average proportion of a sixth form college’s budget which is spent on those costs.

    Mr Sam Gyimah

    The Education Funding Agency (EFA) regularly assesses the financial viability of sixth-form colleges on behalf of the department. Those assessments take account of all income and costs for colleges, including costs relating to VAT and pension liabilities.

    The department estimates that VAT accounts for about 3% of sixth form colleges’ expenditure each year.

    With regards to pension costs, sixth-form colleges may contribute to a number of pension schemes. The SFC financial returns are available online at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/sfa-financial-management-college-accounts and show employer contributions to pensions. The EFA does not routinely collect data on the cost of other pension schemes through financial returns.

    “

  • Henry Smith – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Henry Smith – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Henry Smith on 2015-12-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps he is taking to ensure that the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma is not affected by the (a) delisting of treatments from the Cancer Drugs Fund and (b) ongoing consultation on that Fund’s future.

    George Freeman

    NHS England has advised that a draft treatment pathway for patients with multiple myeloma, which takes into account the potential impact of treatments removed from the Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF), is currently being finalised. It is likely to be published early in 2016.

    The Government remains committed to the Fund. NHS England and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence are currently consulting on draft proposals on the future direction of the CDF. The consultation is open until 11 February 2016 and further information is available at:

    www.engage.england.nhs.uk/consultation/cdf-consultation

  • Roger Godsiff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Roger Godsiff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2016-01-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to the Answer of 14 January 2016 to Question 21764, whether the government of Saudi Arabia (a) responded formally, (b) responded informally or (c) did not respond when the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State and the UK Ambassador raised the UK’s concerns about the recent mass executions; on what date the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State and the Ambassador raised those concerns; and whether the exchange referred to in that Answer took place by telephone, in person, or in writing.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    We have raised our objections to executions, and the use of the death penalty on numerous occasions since 2 January, both in person and over the phone. I most recently raised the issue with the Government of Saudi Arabia on 12 January over the phone and in person on 14 January. The Saudi Government is aware of our position.

  • Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-02-02.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the number of students at university who are prescribed medical treatment for mental health issues.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    We have made no assessment of the number of students at university who are prescribed medical treatment for mental health issues as this information is not collected centrally.

  • Karen Lumley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Karen Lumley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Karen Lumley on 2016-02-29.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the effect of the recent increase in probate fees on the number of people who seek to avoid such fees by moving property into joint names to remove the need for a grant of probate.

    Mr Shailesh Vara

    The Government published a consultation on proposals to reform fees for applications for a grant of probate on 18 February. Alongside the consultation, an impact assessment was published which included a sensitivity analysis that accounted for a range of fee avoidance behaviours. This will be reviewed again in the Government response. The consultation will run for six weeks, closing on 1 April.

  • Owen Smith – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Owen Smith – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Owen Smith on 2016-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether the Lifetime ISA will be included in assessments of savings under universal credit.

    Priti Patel

    Further details about how the Lifetime ISA will work will be announced in the autumn. Following this the Government will confirm how it will be treated for Universal Credit purposes.

  • Kirsten Oswald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Kirsten Oswald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kirsten Oswald on 2016-04-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what criteria his Department uses to determine links between cancer experienced by a current or former member of the armed forces and exposure to chemicals during periods of service.

    Mark Lancaster

    The Ministry of Defence (MOD) provides no-fault compensation for members of the Armed Forces where illness, injury or death is caused by service from 6 April 2005 under the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme (AFCS) and, before that date, under the War Pensions Scheme (WPS).

    Any disablement, injury or illness, including cancer, can be claimed with awards made where the claimed disorder is accepted as being due to service. Lay and scheme medical advisers work together and decisions are evidence based, reflecting the individual case facts, contemporary medical understanding of causation and the relevant law.

    Awards under the WPS depend on the assessed level of disablement with the method of assessment set out in the legislation and expressed as a percentage. The AFCS is tariff based. The legislation includes nine tables of injuries and disorders with associated tariff levels, relevant to military service. A lump sum is paid for pain and suffering taking account of the likely progress of the condition over the person’s lifetime. There are fifteen tariff levels and, for the more serious disorders like cancer, a Guaranteed Income Payment to cover reduced civilian employability is paid, in addition, from the date of claim for life.

    Where negligence exists on the part of the MOD, Service personnel may make a claim for damages under common law for service after May 1987. Awards are determined by common law principles which, broadly, take into account, as appropriate, an individual’s pain and suffering, degree of injury, past and future financial losses and level of care required. Levels of compensation which include these elements can vary depending on an individual’s circumstances.

  • Jess Phillips – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Jess Phillips – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jess Phillips on 2016-06-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, pursuant to the Answer of 8 June 2016 to Question 38739, whether her Department has made an estimate of the number of children who were receiving School Action or School Action Plus who subsequently would not be expected to meet the criteria for an Education, Health and Care plan.

    Edward Timpson

    Where a pupil is identified as having Special Educational Needs (SEN), schools should take action to remove barriers to learning and put effective special educational provision in place. This system of ‘SEN Support’ has replaced the School Action and School Action Plus categories. We expect schools to make robust judgements about who should receive SEN Support; and that these judgements should be informed by an understanding of good practice.

    Different arrangements apply where a child has more complex SEN. Under the Children and Families Act 2014, the legal test of when a child requires an Education, Health and Care (EHC) plan remains the same as that for a statement of SEN under the Education Act 1996. The EHC assessment and planning process allows for closer inter-agency working and greater involvement for the child and their family. This helps the local authority to identify and put in place the most effective provision for the child.

  • Nigel Evans – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Nigel Evans – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nigel Evans on 2016-09-06.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what plans his Department has further to centralise the delivery of acute stroke services in metropolitan areas.

    David Mowat

    NHS England’s National Clinical Director (NCD) for stroke is leading work to develop a full proposal which will consider the evidence and logistical issues involved in delivering mechanical thrombectomy to stroke patients across the country. This includes working with the relevant specialist societies, Royal Colleges and Health Education England to consider the workforce implications. Once the proposal has been developed, NHS England will decide whether the procedure should be made widely available.

    To ensure there is equitable access to high quality hyper acute stroke care regardless of time of stroke or where a patient has their stroke, NHS England’s NCD for stroke continues to work with Clinical Networks, Urgent and Emergency Care Networks, clinical commissioning groups and the Sustainability and Transformation Plan footprints on how stroke care is best delivered to their local communities.

    In some places, this is ‘the London type model’ of focussing care in a small number of centres and equipping these to be able to deliver specialist care 24/7. In other parts of the country, centralisation of care into specialist centres is not feasible for geographical reasons. In these cases, alternative solutions (such as the use of telemedicine) have to be considered. Whatever the scenario, NHS England is fully committed to ensuring that all patients receive the best quality of care and the most up to date treatments.

  • Lord Harris of Haringey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Lord Harris of Haringey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Harris of Haringey on 2016-10-18.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they intend to opt in to the new Europol regulation; and if so, when.

    Baroness Williams of Trafford

    The UK remains a full member of Europol, and because of our Justice and Home Affairs opt-in, we have the option to seek to opt-in to Europol’s new legislative framework that comes into force on 1st May 2017. This option remains open to us while we are a member of the EU. The Government is actively considering whether to opt-in to the new Europol Regulation. We will inform Parliament of our decision in due course in the usual way.