Category: Speeches

  • Julie Elliott – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Julie Elliott – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julie Elliott on 2016-07-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if her Department will introduce a new programme to replace the EU School Milk Scheme after the UK’s exit from the EU.

    George Eustice

    Until exit negotiations are concluded, the UK remains a full member of the EU and current EU funding arrangements will continue unchanged. The Government will work with industry and the public to develop any new proposals that support our agricultural industry as we leave the EU.

  • Mark Menzies – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Mark Menzies – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mark Menzies on 2016-10-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to paragraph 3.103 of the Spending Review and Autumn Statement 2015, when her Department plans to launch the consultation on increasing the small claims limit from £1,000 to £5,000.

    Sir Oliver Heald

    Ministers are considering this issue and the Government will bring forward proposals in the coming months.

  • Margaret Ritchie – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Margaret Ritchie – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Ritchie on 2015-11-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 22 October 2015 to Question 11834 to the hon. Member for Salford and Eccles, on what date he plans to announce the consultation on reform of the scheme for support for people affected by contaminated blood products.

    Jane Ellison

    The Department is currently awaiting the conclusion of the Spending Review and so we cannot provide a date for the full consultation at this time. However, it remains a priority and will be publicly announced.

    The consultation will allow individuals who are affected by this tragedy the opportunity to express their views on what support they would value in a reformed scheme. The details of the consultation will be published on the Government’s website, including details of how those who are interested can respond.

  • Sadiq Khan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Sadiq Khan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sadiq Khan on 2016-01-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many patients waited four weeks or longer for discharge from hospital after being declared fit to leave in (a) England, (b) London and (c) each health trust in London in each year since 2010.

    Alistair Burt

    This information is not available in the format requested.

    Official statistics for NHS trusts in England are published by NHS England on the number of patients delayed on the last Thursday of each month and the total delayed days during the month for all patients delayed throughout the month. The latest publication of this data was for delays occurring in October 2015 and was published on 10 December 2015.

    It is not possible to calculate a montly average or the longest waits from these data. Health is a devolved matter in Wales.

  • Catherine West – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Catherine West – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Catherine West on 2016-01-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, whether any person or body has sought disclosure of documents relevant to the decision to target Reyaad Khan by drone strike in Syria on 21 August 2015 for purposes related to the inquiry by the Intelligence and Security Committee into that matter.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    I refer the hon. Member to the answer the Prime Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Mr Cameron) gave to the hon. Member for Blaydon (Mr. Anderson) on Monday 25 January 2016, UIN23433.

  • Nicholas Brown – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Nicholas Brown – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nicholas Brown on 2016-02-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what assessment he has made of the effect of gambling on vulnerable people; and what provisions are in place to assist people who have gambling problems.

    David Evennett

    One of the three key licensing objectives set out in the Gambling Act 2005 is that vulnerable people should be protected from harm. All betting shop operators are required by the Gambling Commission’s Licence Conditions and Code of Practice (LCCP) to have policies and processes in place to meet this objective. In addition, the industry trade body, the Association of British Bookmakers (ABB), has a mandatory code of conduct which places additional social responsibility requirements on all of its members.

    The rate of problem gambling is at 0.6% of the adult population, which is lower than comparable jurisdictions (USA, South Africa or Australia). However we recognise that rates are significantly higher among some sections of the population, such as young men, and that gambling-related harm is a real and significant problem. The majority of current provision for treatment of problem gamblers is through the Responsible Gambling Trust’s funding of organisations such as GamCare, who provide a helpline and counselling services, and the Gordon Moody Association, which provides specialist residential treatment. Local treatment can be found through GPs and NHS addiction clinics, there is also a specialist NHS service treating gambling disorder, based in London.

    The Government is committed to ensuring that people are protected from being harmed or exploited by gambling. The Minister for Sport and Tourism has explained to the gambling industry that they are expected to demonstrate that they are improving existing player protection initiatives and evaluating the effects of previous initiatives. As the Minister said at the recent RGT harm minimisation conference, government and industry should never feel that there is an end point to social responsibility.

  • Maria Eagle – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Maria Eagle – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Maria Eagle on 2016-03-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, on what date his Department plans to host a round table on ad blocking; who he plans to invite to that event; and what outcomes he expects from that event.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    There are currently plans to host a roundtable with representatives from all sides of the argument to discuss ad blocking in the coming weeks. Once we have heard their views, we will consider what role there is for Government.

  • Ruth Smeeth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Ruth Smeeth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ruth Smeeth on 2016-04-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what information her Department holds on whether any failure of IT systems on UK-based airlines has allowed any individual on her Department’s no fly list to travel in the last 12 months.

    James Brokenshire

    The Government works closely with all carriers, not just British registered carriers, to connect their systems to the Government’s border systems to ensure those connections are operating properly and to ensure that any IT problems are identified and resolved. Should any circumstance arise where a carrier should have refused authority to carry an individual to the UK, that individual will be met on arrival. Border Force also conducts 100% checks at passport control on all passengers arriving in the UK by commercial air, rail or maritime services at passport controls. This includes screening against watch lists.

  • Stewart Malcolm McDonald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Stewart Malcolm McDonald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stewart Malcolm McDonald on 2016-05-23.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what representations his Department have received from the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) on the list of addresses of British entities registered with the Mossack Fonseca law firm in Panama published by the ICIJ on their website on 9 May 2016.

    Mr David Gauke

    We welcome the statement from the source of the Panama Papers that they are willing to speak to law enforcement bodies. Tax evasion and money laundering are global issues, which is why the HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) and National Crime Agency (NCA) taskforce is working with international tax and law enforcement partners to take up this offer, and develop as many leads as possible from the data that is currently available.

    HMRC has been in regular contact with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), who have refused to share their full data with HMRC, stating that their policy is not to hand over such material. While we welcome the steps the ICIJ has taken in exposing this issue, its decision not to release the full set of information is disappointing.

    HMRC has begun analytical work on all the data published by the ICIJ, in addition to a wide range of other intelligence. As a result of this, the HMRC and NCA taskforce has opened a number of detailed and forensic enquiries.

  • Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-07-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how long his Department estimates the Commissioning through Evaluation analysis phase will last for (a) selective dorsal rhizotomy, (b) patent foramen ovale closure, (c) left atrial appendage closure, (d) percutaneous mitral valve leaflet repair, (e) selective internal radiation therapy and (f) stereotactic ablative radiotherapy.

    David Mowat

    Commissioning through Evaluation (CtE) is an innovative £25 million programme introduced by NHS England in 2013. It specifically aims to generate valuable new evaluation data in promising areas of specialised care where the current evidence base of cost and clinical effectiveness is insufficient to support routine National Health Service commissioning, and where further formal research trials are thought to be less likely.

    Each scheme – put forward by senior clinicians and other stakeholders – is funded on a time limited basis in a small number of selected centres, and then evaluated by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.

    Once the planned number of patients has been recruited across the participating centres, each scheme closes to new patients and analysis begins. This means that the funding identified for each scheme can then be reinvested into the evaluation of additional potentially life changing specialised treatments to maximise the value and impact of the overall evaluation fund for patients. As an example, routinely funding Selective Dorsal Rhizotomy contrary to the currently published clinical commissioning policy and in advance of a formal review of any new evidence would mean that between £2 million and £4 million per year (covering the surgical costs and immediate follow up only) would then be unavailable to support the evaluation of other promising treatments.

    The analysis phase for each CtE scheme will typically take between one and two years depending on how long we need to follow up patients after their treatment to identify its effectiveness. The three cardiology based CtE schemes are currently scheduled for a 15 month analysis and reporting phase, after which the data can be used by NHS England to support policy review.

    However, CtE is only one form of data that might be put forward in considering a new (or revision to an existing) policy and clinicians do not need to await the final report from CtE schemes if they feel that other new substantive data becomes available more quickly.

    NHS England’s published clinical commissioning policies (which set out eligibility for NHS funded specialised care on the basis of the available evidence) can be reviewed at any time where there is thought to be substantive new evidence available, and around 100 such proposals were developed and considered by NHS England during 2016/17.

    The policy development process is subject to both informal stakeholder testing and formal public consultation, including the opportunity for patients, clinicians and industry representatives to review and comment on the evidence base considered and the assessed impact on patients, existing services and cost.

    Where a new service is routinely commissioned as a result of a policy review, NHS England works with commissioned providers to ensure that sufficient clinical expertise and supporting infrastructure is in place to provide a safe service to patients in line with nationally set requirements.