The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-05-18.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many times the Mental Capacity Act 2005 has been found to have been wrongly applied to exclude a relative of a resident from visiting a care home.
Alistair Burt
The information requested is not collected centrally.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Daniel Zeichner on 2016-07-07.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, what assessment he has made of the immediate effect of the vote to leave the EU on UK research (a) in general and (b) funding.
Joseph Johnson
As my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has made clear, while the UK remains a member of the EU, current EU funding and collaboration arrangements continue unchanged, including those that apply to students, researchers, and businesses. I am in close contact with Commissioner Moedas on the topic of Horizon 2020 funding, and I met with the Italian Minister for Education, Universities and Research on 11 July.
The UK is world-class in research and innovation and we play a leading role in major European and international collaboration, including ESA and CERN.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Alex Cunningham on 2016-10-07.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of introducing an approach to carbon reduction other than emissions trading after the UK leaves the EU.
Jesse Norman
The Government remains committed to ensuring secure, affordable and clean energy, now and in future. The result of the referendum offers an opportunity to examine UK policies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and the Government will consider the UK’s future participation in the EU Emissions Trading System as part of the wider negotiation on leaving the EU, in consultation with stakeholders.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Helen Jones on 2015-11-13.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many one-stop shops of medical experts for the assessment of children with disabilities are in place; and where those one-stop shops are located.
Jane Ellison
We are not aware of any one-stop shops for the clinical assessment of children with disabilities. Every local authority will have a published local offer of services for children and young people with disabilities, but these are information hubs, rather than clinical services.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Keith Vaz on 2015-12-14.
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what proportion of the number of lorries travelling through Calais to the UK were scanned by lorry body scanners in each month of 2015.
James Brokenshire
To ensure the integrity and security of the UK border, Her Majesty’s Government cannot provide port specific statistics.
Border Force operates a multi-layered search regime using a range of interventions to screen all freight vehicles entering the UK through the juxtaposed ports. This includes the use of specialist technologies such as Passive Millimetre Wave Imaging devices, heartbeat monitors and carbon dioxide detectors as well as physical searches by sniffer dogs, Border Force staff and specialist search contractors.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Timms on 2016-01-19.
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether he has met with representatives of the Citizens Advice Bureau to discuss feedback they have received from universal credit claimants.
Priti Patel
Senior officials regularly meet with representatives from Citizens Advice to discuss Universal Credit on behalf of the Secretary of State.
Citizens Advice staff are also actively engaged with the Universal Credit programme to feed their claimant insight into work on Universal Credit claimant orientation.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Louise Haigh on 2016-02-10.
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to the correction of 9 February 2016 to Question 13206, what the cause was of the error in information on former unaccompanied minors removed between 2007 and 31 December 2015; and what steps she is taking to ensure that correct information is collected and published in future.
James Brokenshire
The mistake given in the original response to Question 13206 resulted from two errors in the query for extracting information from the relevant database. One error involved the use of an incorrect definition which excluded former unaccompanied asylum seeking children who now had linked dependants. The other was an error in the computer code which extracted the data. In this instance, the code for the query was mistyped and so the data returned was incorrect. These errors have now been resolved and a correction issued. Such mistakes are rare and when they occur they are taken very seriously.
It is regrettable that human error caused the original response to this Parliamentary Question to be incorrect and improvements have been put in place. The appropriate definition has been reviewed and confirmed. This definition, and the correct approach on careful coding, have been made clear to the officials involved. We are reviewing other Parliamentary Answers about unaccompanied asylum seeking children to see if these were affected by similar issues. While these respond to different specific questions, we wish to review the methodology used thoroughly. We are also reviewing whether additional processes are needed for Parliamentary Questions that require complex data queries.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Richard Fuller on 2016-03-08.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, whether he has agreed the terms of the Remedial Plan with Govia Thameslink Railway since the issue of a Remedial Plan Notice in December 2015; and if he will publish that plan.
Claire Perry
The Secretary of State has accepted Govia Thameslink Railway’s Remedial Plan that sets out the steps the operator is taking to improve their performance and it will shortly be published on the Government’s website. The plan covers the period to September 2018.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Donaghy on 2016-04-13.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government to what extent they will take account of (1) value for money, and (2) the impact on established training providers, when they accredit new school-centred initial teacher training providers, as envisaged in the Education and excellence everywhere White Paper.
Lord Nash
It is the Government’s priority to secure the sufficient supply of high quality new teachers to the school system. We are committed to increasing the proportion of Initial Teacher Training (ITT) offered by the best schools, while strengthening both university and school-led teacher training, so that ITT provision is properly configured to deliver the quality and quantity of new teachers that schools need.
All accredited ITT providers are required to demonstrate how they will deliver, within the funding available, high quality provision that meets the Teachers’ Standards and is compliant with the Secretary of State’s ITT criteria. In order to secure further value for money, we are expanding school-centred ITT (SCITT) provision with a particular focus on delivering training in priority subjects such as mathematics, physics, chemistry and modern foreign languages, and in areas of the country where recruitment is proving to be most difficult . We will prioritise new SCITT provision that commits to helping meet the supply needs of both the local partnership and the wider national system, such as through multi-academy trusts.
In considering the impact on existing provision, we will prioritise and incentivise the growth of new provision in areas of the country which need it most. We will continue to require potential new providers to consider and take account of the local ITT market, and to demonstrate how the proposed new provision will add to existing supply. We will continue to require careful consideration by new providers of the likely financial viability of their proposed provision, and continue to require clear evidence it will be sustainable in the longer term.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steve McCabe on 2016-05-18.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the extent of the practice among clinical commissioning groups in England of offering only one fresh cycle of IVF treatment.
Jane Ellison
The Government has not made an assessment of the annual cost to the National Health Service of high risk pregnancies caused by patients going abroad for in vitro fertilisation (IVF).
Multiple births are the single biggest risk to the health and welfare of children born following fertility treatment and present significant health risks to mothers and babies. Over recent years, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has worked to drive down multiple birth rates whilst maintaining consistent treatment success rates.
To minimise the risk of multiple pregnancies, there has been a growing trend for IVF providers to only transfer one embryo, even when more are available, in patients who have a good chance of successful treatment. Elective single embryo transfer is the most effective way of reducing multiple pregnancies. The HFEA has advised that most clinics have shown significant progress in reducing multiple births without compromising pregnancy rates. In 2008 nearly one in four IVF births resulted in a multiple birth but now, with a concerted multiple births reduction policy, this number is one in six.
Although progress has been made, this number is still higher than the rate in conceptions that do not involve assisted reproduction treatment. The overall goal is to reduce multiple births to one in ten.
The level of provision of infertility treatment, as for all health services they commission, is decided by local clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) and will take into account the needs of the population overall. The CCG’s decisions are underpinned by clinical insight and knowledge of local healthcare needs. As such, provision of services will vary in response to local needs.
Information about CCGs approach to commissioning or compliance with the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence guidelines regarding IVF services is not collected centrally.