Category: Speeches

  • David Burrowes – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    David Burrowes – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Burrowes on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many times ambulances have been required to attend prisons as a result of emergency call-outs relating to (a) illegal drugs, (b) prescribed drugs and (c) psychoactive substances in the last 12 months.

    Ben Gummer

    Information about the frequency of emergency ambulance call-outs to prisons is not collected centrally by the Department or NHS England.

    In February 2013, the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) issued guidance to prisons and immigration removal centres operated by NOMS concerning emergency ambulance call-outs. This guidance, Prison Service Instruction (PSI) 03/2013 Medical Emergency Response Codes outlines the medical symptoms in a prisoner, but not behaviours such as drug misuse, for which a prison must always call out an emergency ambulance. This PSI is mandatory in all prisons in England.

    A copy of the guidance is available at:

    http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/offenders/psipso/psi-2013/psi-03-2013-medical-emergency-response-codes.doc

    “

  • Greg Mulholland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Greg Mulholland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Greg Mulholland on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to the Answer of 1 July 2015 to Question 4425, when he expects Network Rail to publish an update to its industry electrification strategy.

    Claire Perry

    The Department expects that the industry electrification strategy will be published by Network Rail as a draft for consultation in early 2016, taking into account the outcome of the review by Sir Peter Hendy of Network Rail’s programme of rail investment.

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

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

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Hammond on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what steps his Department has taken to prepare for the implementation of the proposed General Data Protection Regulation; which non-departmental public bodies (NDPBs) and agencies overseen by his Department will be affected by that Regulation; and what estimate he has made of the potential liability of his Department, its agencies and NDPBs in connection with that proposed Regulation.

    Justin Tomlinson

    Negotiations on the proposed General Data Protection Regulation are still continuing and our negotiating position has taken into account the likely impact on Government Departments, NDPBs and agencies. Once the outcome of trilogue negotiations between the Council of the European Union, the European Parliament and the Commission are complete, and the Regulation has been adopted, the liabilities will be further assessed. There will then follow a maximum implementation period of two years. Between now and then, Government departments who will be affected by the Regulation are closely involved in work led by the Department for Culture, Media & Sport to consider the implications of the text as it develops through the negotiating process.

  • David Warburton – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    David Warburton – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Warburton on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what his policy is on the digital single market.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    The Department for Business and the Cabinet Office have overall policy responsibility for the Digital Single Market. The Department for Culture Media and Sport leads on telecoms, audio visual policy, IT Security and now Data Protection. The Digital Single Market is a key priority for the UK Government and we welcome its ambition. It offers huge potential for jobs and growth and could increase UK GDP by up to 2%, and it can also benefit citizens, as shown by our recent deal within the European Council on roaming.

  • Andrew Rosindell – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Andrew Rosindell – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Rosindell on 2015-10-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to the memorandum from the Director of the US Office of the Secretary of Defense on Observations on the Marine Corps F-35B Demonstration on USS Wasp, published by Project on Government Oversight on 14 September 2015, what assessment he has made of the implications for his policy on procurement of the F-35 of that memorandum’s finding on that aircraft’s reliability and combat readiness.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    The trial aboard the USS Wasp was an operational test for the United States Marine Corps (USMC) F-35B, with much of the data produced being used to inform the USMC’s declaration of initial operating capability. This achievement was a significant milestone for the USMC and for the wider Joint Strike Fighter programme, particularly for the UK which operates the same Short Take-Off Vertical Landing variant.

    UK personnel were fully embedded in the USS Wasp trial and we will use the data gathered from this event, future trials and operational deployments to support our own flying trials aboard HMS Queen Elizabeth in 2018 as we re-generate the UK’s Carrier Strike capability.

  • Andrew Rosindell – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Andrew Rosindell – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Rosindell on 2015-10-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what assessment he has made of the implications for the Israeli/Palestine peace process of Mahmoud Abbas’s speech at the United Nations on 30 September 2015.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    President Abbas’ speech at the 2015 UN General Assembly underlines the urgent need for progress towards a two state solution. We urge Israel and the Palestinian Authority to work together to meet their obligations under the Oslo Accords. We also encourage Israel and the Palestinian Authority to continue with their existing security cooperation. I was encouraged to hear that President Abbas reiterated his commitment to this cooperation when he spoke, on 9 October, to the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for Runnymead and Weybridge (Mr Hammond).

  • Poulter – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Poulter – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Poulter on 2015-10-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will include in the next Health Education England mandate a commitment that all foundation year doctors must undertake a rotation in psychiatry.

    Ben Gummer

    Delivering high quality, effective, compassionate care: Developing the right people with the right skills and the right values – a mandate from the Government to Health Education England: April 2015 to March 2016, asks Health Education England (HEE) to continue to work to increase the numbers of doctors in foundation training undertaking placements in psychiatry. The content of the next mandate from the Government to HEE will be determined following the Government’s Spending Review which is due to complete on 25 November 2015.

    Separately, we are due to consult on how we set the mandate to NHS England for 2016-17 prior to publication of the mandate itself. The mandate will be published following the Government’s Spending Review which is due to complete on 25 November 2015.

  • Hilary Benn – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Hilary Benn – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Hilary Benn on 2015-10-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, pursuant to the Answer of 12 October 2015 to Question 11278, who is currently responsible for impeding humanitarian access to people in need in Yemen.

    Mr Desmond Swayne

    All parties to the conflict are responsible for impeding humanitarian access to people in need in Yemen. Intense fighting on the ground is making it increasingly hard for agencies to reach those in need within Yemen. This is compounded by restrictions on imports of commercial and humanitarian supplies into the country, including fuel. This in turn is hampering the distribution of humanitarian supplies within country, including essential food and medicines.

    The UK continues to call on all parties to facilitate rapid, safe and unhindered access to all people in need in Yemen. The UK is one of the largest donors to the crisis and has announced £75m to respond to the crisis in Yemen. UK aid is providing vital medical supplies, water, food and emergency shelter, working with trusted and impartial actors who have a strong track record in delivering assistance in difficult and dangerous places. We also support a UN-led process on access negotiations and the establishment of the Access Working Group where partners report cases of obstruction and accessible routes.

  • Sarah Champion – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Sarah Champion – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sarah Champion on 2015-10-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether the Wilson Doctrine has been consistently applied to the communications of the hon. Member for Rotherham; and whether that hon. Member has been subject to surveillance.

    Mr John Hayes

    The Government’s position on the Wilson Doctrine was set out by the Prime Minister in a written ministerial statement made on 4 November 2015.

    As the Prime Minister made clear, the Wilson Doctrine has never been an absolute bar to the targeted interception of the communications of Members of Parliament or an exemption from the legal regime governing interception. The Doctrine recognised that there could be instances where interception might be necessary.

    The Prime Minister announced that as matter of policy the PM will be consulted should there ever be a proposal to target any UK Parliamentarian’s communications under a warrant issued by a Secretary of State. This applies to Members of Parliament, members of the House of Lords, the Scottish Parliament, the Northern Ireland Assembly, the Welsh Assembly and UK members of the European Parliament. It applies to all activity authorised by a warrant issued by a Secretary of State: any instance of targeted interception and, electronic surveillance and equipment interference, when undertaken by the Security and Intelligence Agencies. This is in addition to the rigorous safeguards already in the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) and the Code of Practice issued under it which set out a series of robust safeguards for any instance of interception.

    It is long standing policy of successive Governments neither to confirm nor deny any specific activity by the Security and Intelligence Agencies. Under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 it is an offence for anyone to identify an individual interception warrant or an individual interception that takes place.

  • Jamie Reed – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Jamie Reed – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jamie Reed on 2015-10-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many requests he has received for an inquiry into benefit sanctions.

    Priti Patel

    We have interpreted this question to mean how many requests the Secretary of State has received for an inquiry into benefit sanctions since taking post.

    The information requested is not readily available and to provide it would incur disproportionate cost.