The below Parliamentary question was asked by Virendra Sharma on 2016-01-05.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the effect of delays in the publication of the hepatitis C framework on (a) all people and (b) members of the South Asian population in England with hepatitis C.
Jane Ellison
No such assessment has been made.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tim Loughton on 2016-01-29.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, if he will take steps to maintain core funding for British schools and institutes abroad which promote UK higher education and research and the international reputation of the UK.
Joseph Johnson
The Department for Business Innovation and Skills does not provide direct funding for British schools and institutes abroad which promote UK higher education and research and the international reputation of the UK. Core funding to some overseas research institutes such as the BASIS institutes sponsored by the British Academy, is provided through the science budget. The Government has protected the science budget in real terms to the end of the Parliament. The allocation for the National Academies for 2016-17 to 2019-20 provides for real terms protection for the British Academy’s BASIS programme, enabling the Academy to continue to provide the BASIS Institutes with substantial block grant support throughout this period.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tristram Hunt on 2016-02-24.
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, how many and which local authorities have notified her Department about plans to dispose of grant-funded assets through the (a) sale, (b) transfer and (c) change of use of children’s centres under the requirements of the Sure Start Early Years and Childcare Grant.
Mr Sam Gyimah
Where local authorities dispose of or change the use of buildings or other assets funded wholly or partly through Sure Start capital grants, they must repay the money through the claw-back process.
The Department for Education has a thorough set of monitoring arrangements in place regarding claw-back rules. Local authorities are required to notify the department of each and every proposed change of services and provide details about the level of early years services that are to continue. The department then considers if the local authority has continued to offer a sufficient level of early years services for children and their families from the building in question to meet the original aims of the grant.
If the department is satisfied that the funding for the asset will continue to be used for purposes consistent with the grant, the department may defer claw-back. Deferring claw-back means that we accept the change of usage at that time, however, the department retains its interest in the asset and if in the future the asset has its usage changed, is transferred or otherwise disposed of, and does not continue to meet the purposes of the grant the local authority must inform the department and we will claw-back the funding. The department’s interest in an asset funded by Sure Start capital grants is 25 years from designation of the building. If the grant was used to purchase capital items or re-furbish an existing asset, the length of time and value of any claw-back depends on the depreciation value of the items, according to local authority depreciation rules.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Norman Lamb on 2016-03-17.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the effect of Crown immunity on the ability to bring legal action on liability for the infection of patients with contaminated NHS blood.
Jane Ellison
The Department’s assessment is that Crown immunity does not limit an individual’s right to redress via legal action. Crown immunity does not protect from civil suit, but only from criminal prosecution. Indeed, some affected persons did bring an action in 1988, which was settled out of court, without establishment of liability.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hylton on 2016-04-25.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government who will represent the UK at the World Humanitarian Summit meeting to be held in Istanbul.
Baroness Verma
Preparations for the Summit are proceeding and a final decision on who will be in the UK delegation will be taken nearer the time.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Donoughue on 2016-06-07.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the Clean Technology Funds financial eligibility threshold of $200 per tonne of CO2 equivalent abated represents good value for UK taxpayers in the context of global mitigation effects.
Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth
In order to ensure value for money, the Clean Technology Fund (CTF) Investment Criteria (2009) has six objectives, of which cost-effectiveness is one. The other objectives are Potential for GHG Emissions Savings, Demonstration Potential at Scale, Development Impact, Implementation Potential and Additional Costs and Risk Premium.
The financial eligibility threshold of $200 per tonne of CO2 equivalent is in place to safeguard value for money. This threshold was based on the International Energy Agency’s Energy Technology Perspectives 2008 Report, as the lower-end estimate of the marginal incentive needed to achieve a reduction of global GHG emissions to 50% by 2050. The average total investment cost per tonne achieved in the CTF is $39.60 (£26.40), which is significantly below this threshold.
More information is available in the document Climate Investment Funds (2009), Clean Technology Fund Investment Criteria for public sector operations.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Frank Field on 2016-07-20.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, how many people working for his Department or its executive agencies on a (a) directly employed, (b) agency or (c) outsourced basis are paid less than the living wage as defined by the Living Wage Foundation; and how many of those people are employed on zero-hours contracts.
Mr John Hayes
My Department does not hold information on the earnings or contracts of staff where work is outsourced. The Department for Transport pays its directly employed and agency staff at least the Living Wage however, both in the central Department and its executive agencies.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Shannon on 2016-10-11.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he take steps to raise awareness among pregnant women of the (a) risks of alcohol consumption and (b) benefits of zero alcohol consumption.
Nicola Blackwood
The new United Kingdom Chief Medical Officers’ (CMO) low risk drinking guidelines provide the public with the most up to date scientific information to help people make informed decisions about their own drinking.
The guideline for women who are pregnant or think they could become pregnant, is that the safest approach is not to drink alcohol at all, to reduce risks to the baby to a minimum.
The UK CMOs’ low risk drinking guidelines can be found at Gov.uk at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/alcohol-consumption-advice-on-low-risk-drinking
“
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2015-11-02.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what estimate he has made of the value of stationery that has been (a) lost and (b) stolen from his Department in each of the last five fiscal years; and what the cost was of replacing such stationery.
Jane Ellison
The Department does not hold details centrally of lost stationery items nor does it collect details of the cost to replace lost or stolen items.
The Department’s official Losses and Special Payments Register has confirmed that there have been no cases of ‘stolen’ stationery reported in the last five fiscal years.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Bob Blackman on 2015-11-23.
To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, if his Department will undertake an analysis of the feasibility of further financial devolution to London.
Greg Hands
The government is strongly committed to devolving powers and responsibilities to the local level. The Chancellor has announced details of the reform to Business Rates nationally whereby Local Government will be able to retain 100% of Business Rates. The government will set out in due course the implications of this reform for London