Category: Speeches

  • Julian Knight – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Julian Knight – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julian Knight on 2016-03-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what measures are in place to ensure that child support awarded by tribunals under the pre-2012 Child Support Agency system are upheld under the post-2012 system.

    Priti Patel

    Tribunals do not award Child Maintenance, they direct on individual decisions.

    If an individual chooses to apply to the new 2012 scheme after their case on one of the legacy schemes is closed, the rules of the 2012 scheme will apply. Clients are able to provide evidence of prior Tribunal decisions when requesting, or contesting, a new decision which will be taken into consideration where appropriate.

  • Jim Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Jim Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2016-03-23.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to the Answer of 23 March 2016 to Question 31494, what recent discussions he has had with the Home Secretary on immigration policy; and if he will make a statement.

    Greg Hands

    Treasury Ministers have regular discussions with Ministers from other departments on a range of different policies as part of collective decision making.

  • Lucy Allan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lucy Allan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lucy Allan on 2016-05-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what plans the Government has for future changes in doctors’ remuneration.

    Ben Gummer

    It is the responsibility of the Review Body on Doctors’ and Dentists’ Remuneration (DDRB) to make recommendations to government on the remuneration of doctors and dentists working in the National Health Service. We are also taking forward contract reform for consultants and junior doctors. The General Practitioner (GP) contract for 2016/17 will see an investment of £220 million for 2016/17 – part of this will provide a pay uplift of 1% for GPs.

  • 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 2016-06-20.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answers by Lord O’Neill of Gatley on 6 June (HL348 and HL349), whether the Bank of England will have regulatory responsibility for the subsidiary clearing house of Deutsche Börse incorporated in Germany; and, if it will not, which regulator would have responsibility in the event of a dispute between the clearing house based in the UK and the one based in Germany.

    Lord O’Neill of Gatley

    As announced by the companies in February 2016, the existing regulatory framework of all regulated entities within the combined group would remain unchanged. This is subject to the regulatory review which will take place once the regulators are notified by the companies.

    European Regulation No 648/2012 (EMIR) requires coordination amongst regulators for supervisory and authorisation matters with regards to CCPs.

  • Justin Madders – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Justin Madders – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Justin Madders on 2016-09-05.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, how many social houses were (a) built and (b) sold under the Right to Buy scheme in (i) Ellesmere Port and Neston constituency, (ii) Cheshire West and Chester and (iii) England in each of the last five years for which figures are available.

    Gavin Barwell

    The 2012 reinvigorated Right to Buy scheme increased maximum discounts and, for the first time ever, introduced a requirement to replace every additional sale (i.e. one that has come about as a result of the increased discounts) nationally with another property through acquisition or new supply. There is a rolling 3 years deadline for local authorities to use the receipts from additional Right to Buy sales for new affordable housing – and councils are delivering, replacing more than one for one within the deadline.

    Right to Buy sales by local authority (Table 691) and local authority starts and acquisitions (Table 693) can be accessed at the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/live-tables-on-social-housingsales

    Figures are not available at a constituency level.

    “

  • George Howarth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    George Howarth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by George Howarth on 2016-10-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps his Department is taking to increase the provision of (a) medical and (b) nursing training in hepatology.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    It is the responsibility of the professional regulators such as the General Medical Council or the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) to set the standards and outcomes for education and training and approve training curricula to ensure newly qualified healthcare professionals are equipped with the knowledge, skills and attitudes to provide high quality patient care.

    Hepatology is a medical sub-specialty of gastroenterology. In Health Education England’s 2016/17 Workforce Plan for England, there are 450 training commissions proposed for gastroenterology, an increase from 431 in 2015/16.

    Whilst the NMC does not recognise hepatology in its standards for specialist education and practice, the Royal College of Nursing has written a comprehensive competence framework which outlines the training, skills and competence required to develop and maintain a special interest in hepatology:

    https://www2.rcn.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/641425/004-983_WEB.pdf

    “

  • Stephen Phillips – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Stephen Phillips – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Phillips on 2015-11-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, how much Ministry of Defence expenditure her Department considered to be spending on international development in each year from 2006 to 2014.

    Grant Shapps

    The Ministry of Defence did not spend any Official Development Assistance during the years 2006-2010. Figures for 2011-2014 are shown in the table below.

    MoD Spend on ODA (£m)

    2011

    2012

    2013

    2014

    5

    5

    3

    3*

    *2014 data is provisional. Final figures for 2014 will be published on the DFID website on Thursday 3rd December 2015.

    “

  • Martyn Day – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Martyn Day – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Martyn Day on 2015-12-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether Parliament will be asked to vote on a decision to replace the warheads used for the successor nuclear weapon programme.

    Michael Fallon

    As stated in paragraph 4.72 of the 2015 Strategic Defence and Security Review: "Work continues to determine the optimum life of the UK’s existing nuclear warhead stockpile and the range of replacement options. A replacement warhead is not required until at least the late 2030s, possibly later. Given lead times, however, a decision on replacing the warhead may be required in this Parliament or early in the next." The Government will inform Parliament of its intended approach in due course.

  • Robert Flello – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Robert Flello – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Robert Flello on 2016-01-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, with reference to paragraph 2.1 of the briefing by the National Audit Office entitled Delivering major projects in government, published on 6 January 2016, what assessment his Department has made of the effectiveness of its monitoring the benefits of (a) ongoing and (b) complete infrastructure projects.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The Department for Transport (DfT) accounts for a whole life value of £92bn within the Government Major Projects Portfolio (GMPP).

    The DfT follows the Cabinet Office transparency policy by publishing the Department’s data in line with requirements, including the annual publication of GMPP data, SRO appointment letters and individual project cases.

    The Department continually assures project delivery in relation to costs, timings and benefits through clear governance and project and programme management (PPM) requirements, which must be satisfied throughout the life cycle of a project. This includes investment board endorsement at key project planning and delivery stages, and independent assurance within the Department. Further external assurance is provided for example by the Infrastructure and Project Authority (IPA). The department uses a widely understood and highly regarded economic tool, known as WebTAG, for calculating costs.

    In addition to individual project assurance, the Department works with the IPA on both GMPP and its own portfolio reporting requirements. The Department has been actively involved in work to improve the collection, collation and analysis of key areas of project delivery, including costs and benefits, in line with the recent IPA review and refresh of GMPP data collection.

    As part of the Department’s internal governance, regular portfolio reporting on the aggregated performance and health of major projects is presented to the Department’s investment board. The Department has recently assessed the maturity of its portfolio reporting and has an action plan to further develop its capability in key areas.

    The Department reports infrastructure projects that are £50m or more on the National Infrastructure Pipeline (NIP) which details public and private infrastructure investment which is either forecast, being delivered, or completed. It is published on the Treasury’s website (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-infrastructure-pipeline-july-2015).

    “

  • Alex Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Alex Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Alex Cunningham on 2016-02-05.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many children and women were seriously injured by a perpetrator of domestic violence after a Family Court decision to allow child access for a perpetrator of that crime in each of the last five years.

    Mike Penning

    Every family court has a system to support vulnerable court users. Protective measures are put in place whenever a court is aware that an individual involved in a case may be violent. These can include separate waiting areas, additional security and the use of separate entrances where appropriate.

    Information on the number of children or women injured by a perpetrator of domestic violence after a Family Court decision relating to child contact is not held centrally and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost by manually checking case files in criminal and family courts and matching records.

    The family court takes the issue of domestic violence extremely seriously. Where domestic violence or abuse is admitted or proven, any child arrangements order put in place must protect the safety and wellbeing of the child and the parent with whom the child is living, and not expose them to the risk of further harm. In particular, the court must be satisfied that any contact ordered with a parent who has perpetrated violence or abuse is safe and in the best interests of the child.

    Where the court does conclude that direct contact is safe and beneficial for the child, it can impose conditions such as supervised contact to protect the child.