Blog

  • Ian Mearns – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Ian Mearns – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Mearns on 2015-12-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether the National Maritime Information Centre holds live records on the range of merchant shipping that is UK-owned.

    James Brokenshire

    The National Maritime Information Centre (NMIC) plays an integral role in the delivery of the UK National Strategy for Maritime Security. One of the NMIC’s roles is to monitor and track maritime activity around the UK and in areas of national interest around the globe in response to taskings from Government departments or agencies. This is achieved by using a variety of systems which include the interpretation of Automatic Identification System (AIS) transponder data which enables the NMIC to identify and monitor all vessels transmitting on the AIS system. The systems available to the NMIC can identify all Red Ensign Group vessels using AIS, that is vessels registered on one of the international shipping registries operated by the UK (including a Crown Dependency or an Overseas Territory). There are vessels owned by UK entities that are registered in other states and therefore fly the flag of that state. It may not be immediately apparent that such vessels have a UK owner, however, they will still appear on the NMIC systems.

  • Mark Hendrick – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Mark Hendrick – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mark Hendrick on 2015-12-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many (a) boys and (b) girls aged (i) 11, (ii) 12, (iii) 13, (iv) 14, (v) 15, (vi) 16 and (vii) 17 were held overnight in police cells in each police station in Lancashire in each month between 1 January 2014 and 30 November 2015.

    Mike Penning

    The Home Office does not hold this information centrally. It may be held by the individual police force.

  • Stephen Timms – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Stephen Timms – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Timms on 2015-12-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the average time was for a Disclosure and Barring Service check at (a) standard, (b) enhanced and (c) enhanced with list checks level to be conducted in each year since 2010.

    Karen Bradley

    The Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) is funded through fees charged for disclosure certificates and from subscriptions to the DBS disclosure update service. DBS operates on a full cost recovery basis. There has not been a fee increase in four years and volunteers receive free checks.

    The table below sets out the average time taken to process all three types of checks.

    Timeframe

    Standard Disclosures

    Enhanced Disclosures

    Enhanced Disclosures with List Checks

    01st Nov 2010 to 31st Oct 2011

    5.21

    16.84

    16.81

    01st Nov 2011 to 31st Oct 2012

    5.34

    11.24

    11.25

    01st Nov 2012 to 31st Oct 2013

    4.57

    10.60

    10.63

    01st Nov 2013 to 31st Oct 2014

    6.37

    14.12

    14.17

    01st Nov 2014 to 31st Oct 2015

    5.97

    14.92

    14.94

    The fluctuations in processing times over the years relate to a number of factors, including changes in demand and demand forecasting, changes to IT systems and the performance of police forces for enhanced disclosures.

  • Mims Davies – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Mims Davies – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mims Davies on 2015-12-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment she has made of the effectiveness of the drugs advice provided by FRANK in tackling use of illegal drugs.

    Mike Penning

    FRANK, the Government’s drugs information and advice service, is run by Public Health England. It provides impartial, reliable and confidential information and advice about drugs. It can be used in both specific drug prevention activities and in general health and wellbeing activities which are designed to help individuals to build and develop the skills they need to be able to actively choose not to use drugs.

    The last assessment of the website was run by the Home Office through the website user survey between 20 February – 11 March 2013. Key findings included:

    • 85% said they are very/fairly likely to visit the FRANK website in the future if needed

    • in total, 69% claimed that their visit to the FRANK website had a positive effect on their attitudes and/or behaviours in at least one way

    FRANK continues to be updated to reflect new and emerging patterns of drug use, remain in line with young people’s media habits and strengthen situational advice and support. FRANK is just one part of our approach to reducing the demand for drugs. For example, Public Health England has launched a new online resilience building resource, ‘Rise Above’, aimed at 11- to 16-year-olds, which provides tools to help develop skills to make positive choices for their health, including avoiding drug use.

  • Mims Davies – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Mims Davies – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mims Davies on 2015-12-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, how many fatalities were caused by traffic collisions involving persons under the influence of (a) cannabis and (b) illegal drugs in each of the last five years.

    Andrew Jones

    The statistical data that the police provide to the Department about personal-injury road traffic accidents does not include explicit information on the use of illegal drugs. The data do not attribute blame or responsibility for the cause of the accident either.

    However, the records do include information on what factors police officers thought had contributed to the accident. The contributory factor ‘Impaired by drugs (illicit or medicinal)’ is recorded when a police officer thought that a driver or rider was affected by drugs. This factor not only includes the use of illegal drugs but also medicinal drugs, whether prescription or ‘over the counter’, which could have had an effect on someone’s driving. No split between illegal and medicinal drugs is available.

    The number of fatalities in reported road accidents in Great Britain in which the contributory factor ‘Impaired by drugs (illicit or medicinal)’ was reported for 2010 to 2014 can be found in the table below.

    2010

    42

    2011

    54

    2012

    32

    2013

    36

    2014

    55

    It should be noted that contributory factors are only recorded when police officers attended the scene of the accidents; this should be the case for the majority of fatal accidents. The factors are based on police officers’ judgements at the scene and may not include factors that were only discovered after a full investigation of the accident was carried out.

    Drug driving is a menace which is why the Coalition government created a new offence of driving with a specified controlled drug in the body above the specified limit for that drug, with the aim of making it easier for the police to tackle those who drive after taking illegal drugs.

  • Nia Griffith – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Nia Griffith – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nia Griffith on 2015-12-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what proportion of the forms on her Department’s website is available in Welsh.

    James Brokenshire

    The Home Office currently provides 336 forms in total on GOV.UK, of which 5 are published in the Welsh language, representing 1.5% of the total.

  • Stephen Timms – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Stephen Timms – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Timms on 2015-12-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps her Department is taking to reduce the cost of Disclosure and Barring Service checks.

    Karen Bradley

    The Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) is funded through fees charged for disclosure certificates and from subscriptions to the DBS disclosure update service. DBS operates on a full cost recovery basis. There has not been a fee increase in four years and volunteers receive free checks.

    The table below sets out the average time taken to process all three types of checks.

    Timeframe

    Standard Disclosures

    Enhanced Disclosures

    Enhanced Disclosures with List Checks

    01st Nov 2010 to 31st Oct 2011

    5.21

    16.84

    16.81

    01st Nov 2011 to 31st Oct 2012

    5.34

    11.24

    11.25

    01st Nov 2012 to 31st Oct 2013

    4.57

    10.60

    10.63

    01st Nov 2013 to 31st Oct 2014

    6.37

    14.12

    14.17

    01st Nov 2014 to 31st Oct 2015

    5.97

    14.92

    14.94

    The fluctuations in processing times over the years relate to a number of factors, including changes in demand and demand forecasting, changes to IT systems and the performance of police forces for enhanced disclosures.

  • Henry Smith – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Henry Smith – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Henry Smith on 2015-12-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps he is taking to ensure the outcome of the consultation on the future of the Cancer Drugs Fund is co-ordinated with and complements the recommendations of the Accelerated Access Review to ensure improved patient access to innovative treatments.

    George Freeman

    NHS England and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence are currently consulting on draft proposals on the future direction of the Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF). The consultation is open until 11 February 2016 and further information is available at:

    www.engage.england.nhs.uk/consultation/cdf-consultation

    The Accelerated Access Review independently chaired by Sir Hugh Taylor, is working with key stakeholders on a range of options for accelerating patient access to innovative products, as set out in the interim report. This includes consideration of the impact of managed access schemes such as proposed in the CDF consultation.

  • Henry Smith – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Henry Smith – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Henry Smith on 2015-12-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps he is taking to ensure that the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma is not affected by the (a) delisting of treatments from the Cancer Drugs Fund and (b) ongoing consultation on that Fund’s future.

    George Freeman

    NHS England has advised that a draft treatment pathway for patients with multiple myeloma, which takes into account the potential impact of treatments removed from the Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF), is currently being finalised. It is likely to be published early in 2016.

    The Government remains committed to the Fund. NHS England and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence are currently consulting on draft proposals on the future direction of the CDF. The consultation is open until 11 February 2016 and further information is available at:

    www.engage.england.nhs.uk/consultation/cdf-consultation

  • Justin Madders – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Justin Madders – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Justin Madders on 2015-12-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to his oral contribution of 30 November 2015, Official Report, column 33, on the estimated number of patients who may have had a vital operation cancelled, how many patients who had such an operation cancelled had it rescheduled to a time within 24 hours of the original scheduled operation.

    Ben Gummer

    On 30 November, based on information provided by hospital trusts, NHS England estimated that around 3,000 procedures that were due to take place on 1 December 2015 were planned to be rescheduled. It has not collected information or estimated how many of these could not be rebooked for 1 December 2015 once the proposed industrial action was suspended. There has been no estimate of how many vital procedures that were cancelled were rescheduled within 24 hours. These are operational matters for hospital trusts.