Blog

  • Ben Bradshaw – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Ben Bradshaw – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ben Bradshaw on 2016-05-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of whether UK citizens would retain the automatic right to hold the European Health Insurance Card during the period prior to the completion of Article 50 negotiations relating to the Lisbon Treaty in the event of the UK voting to leave the EU.

    Alistair Burt

    The procedure governing a country’s departure from the European Union is set out in Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union. This provides for a period of two years for the negotiation of exit terms. EU law would continue to apply to the departing Member State until the Article 50 agreement had entered into force, or for two years if no agreement had been reached and no extension to the two year period had been granted. A request for an extension could only be granted with the unanimous agreement of the remaining Member States. The Government’s position is that the United Kingdom will be stronger, safer and better off remaining in a reformed EU.

  • Neil Coyle – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Neil Coyle – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Neil Coyle on 2016-05-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the potential effect of his proposals for the future of community pharmacy on care for vulnerable patients.

    Alistair Burt

    Community pharmacy is a vital part of the National Health Service. We want to see a high quality community pharmacy service that is properly integrated into primary care and public health in line with the Five Year Forward View.

    We want to make pharmacists a pivotal part of primary care for all patient groups, including the elderly and vulnerable, by increasing the number who bring their skills to general practitioner (GP) practices, care homes, urgent care and public health settings. We have consulted on how best to introduce a Pharmacy Integration Fund to help transform how pharmacists, their teams and community pharmacy will operate in the NHS, bringing clear benefits to patients and the public.

    Our aim is to ensure that those community pharmacies upon which people depend continue to thrive. We are consulting on the introduction of a Pharmacy Access Scheme, which will provide more NHS funds to certain pharmacies compared with others, considering factors such as location and the health needs of the local population.

    The community pharmacy proposals for 2016/17 and beyond, on which we have consulted, are being considered in respect to the public sector equality duty, the family test and relevant duties of the Secretary of State under the NHS Act 2006.

    An impact assessment will be completed to inform final decisions and published in due course.

  • Neil Coyle – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Neil Coyle – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Neil Coyle on 2016-05-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the potential effect of his proposals for the future of community pharmacy on care for elderly people.

    Alistair Burt

    Community pharmacy is a vital part of the National Health Service. We want to see a high quality community pharmacy service that is properly integrated into primary care and public health in line with the Five Year Forward View.

    We want to make pharmacists a pivotal part of primary care for all patient groups, including the elderly and vulnerable, by increasing the number who bring their skills to general practitioner (GP) practices, care homes, urgent care and public health settings. We have consulted on how best to introduce a Pharmacy Integration Fund to help transform how pharmacists, their teams and community pharmacy will operate in the NHS, bringing clear benefits to patients and the public.

    Our aim is to ensure that those community pharmacies upon which people depend continue to thrive. We are consulting on the introduction of a Pharmacy Access Scheme, which will provide more NHS funds to certain pharmacies compared with others, considering factors such as location and the health needs of the local population.

    The community pharmacy proposals for 2016/17 and beyond, on which we have consulted, are being considered in respect to the public sector equality duty, the family test and relevant duties of the Secretary of State under the NHS Act 2006.

    An impact assessment will be completed to inform final decisions and published in due course.

  • Bridget Phillipson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Bridget Phillipson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Bridget Phillipson on 2016-05-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what plans he has for the future level of funding for researching the causes of and treatments for endometriosis.

    George Freeman

    The usual practice of the Department’s National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) and of the Medical Research Council is not to ring-fence funds for expenditure on particular topics: research proposals in all areas compete for the funding available.

    The Department’s NIHR welcomes funding applications for research into any aspect of human health, including endometriosis. These applications are subject to peer review and judged in open competition, with awards being made on the basis of the importance of the topic to patients and health and care services, value for money and scientific quality. In all disease areas, the amount of NIHR funding depends on the volume and quality of scientific activity. The NIHR has funded a number of studies relevant to the condition.

  • Bridget Phillipson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Bridget Phillipson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Bridget Phillipson on 2016-05-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many women have been diagnosed with endometriosis in (a) Sunderland, (b) the North East and (c) England.

    Jane Ellison

    The number of people who have been diagnosed with endometriosis is not collected centrally.

    The table below shows finished hospital admission episodes (FAEs) with a primary diagnosis of endometriosis, for the year 2014-15. The data only include diagnoses of endometriosis where there was a hospital admission. There may be further cases of the condition that were diagnosed and treated in another healthcare setting, including hospital outpatient services.

    These data are not counts of people, as the same person may have been admitted to hospital on more than one occasion. These data are based on the patient’s normal home address.

    Count of FAEs for female patients with a primary diagnosis of endometriosis, for Sunderland Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG), North East England Government Office Region (GOR), and England in 2014-15:

    Region of residence

    FAEs

    Sunderland CCG

    109

    North East GOR

    718

    England

    18,011
  • Joan Ryan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Joan Ryan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Joan Ryan on 2016-05-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, how much funding the Government provided to each (a) Israeli and (b) Palestinian non-governmental organisation through the (i) Conflict Security and Stability Fund and (ii) bilateral programme budget in the most recent year for which figures are available.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    (a)The provisional project spend for 2015/16 for non-governmental organisations registered in Israel provided through: (i) the Conflict, Stability and Security Fund is: The Peres Centre for Peace – £44,592; Injaz – Centre for Professional Arab Local Governance – £60,608; Kids Creating Peace – £40,000; Yesh Din – £196,084; Gisha – £53,126; Peace Now – £124,361; Terrestrial Jerusalem – £51,040; The International Peace and Cooperation Centre – £232,933; and Rabbis for Human Rights – £101,441; (ii) the Bilateral Programme Budget is: none.

    (b)The provisional project spend for 2015/16 for non-governmental organisations registered with the Palestinian Authority provided through: (i) the Conflict, Stability and Security Fund is: Jerusalem Community Advocacy Network (also registered in Israel) – £141,679 (ii) the Bilateral Programme Budget is: Society for the care of Disabled People – £9,117; Nawa Association for Culture and Arts Association – £7,111; Al Aqsa Sports and Social Club- £9,602; Society for Physically Handicapped People – £9,602; Ibda’a for children development and institutional cultural exchange – £5,062; Idna Cooperation – Women Capacity Building- £6,658; Sourif Association for Higher Education – £2,920; Iman and Baraem Kindergartens – £4,865 ; ADWAR Association for Social Change – £5,516; Assembly of Benevolent Operation – £7,061; Atwar centre – £1,282; Diyar Sports school for Girls – £6,328; Saint Nicolas Home for the Elderly – £5,183; Hebron Rehabilitation Committee – £5,010; Ashtar Theatre – £2,127; The Arab Chamber of Commerce and Industry – £9,963; Aqaba Club for Unity and Hope – £5,169; Burj Al Luqluq Youth Centre (also registered in Israel) – £19,297; and Silwan Youth Centre (also registered in Israel) – £7,173

  • Anne Main – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Anne Main – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Anne Main on 2016-05-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, with reference to the Answer of 4 May 2016 to Question 33530, on EU law, if he will place in the Library a list of those proposals on which texts have been agreed at COREPER level and which are waiting full council consideration.

    Mr David Lidington

    The Committee of Permanent Representatives (COREPER) prepares items for agreement by Ministers attending the Council of the European Union, in line with the UK negotiating position agreed by HMG Ministers. Legislative proposals are subject to scrutiny by Parliament in accordance with the Scrutiny Reserve Resolutions prior to adoption at Council. Council meetings are reported to both Houses by Written or, in exceptional cases, Oral Statements, with letters sent to the European Select Committees in recess. Provisional agendas for Council and COREPER meetings can be accessed through the website of the Council of the European Union: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/documents-publications/

    “

  • Steve McCabe – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Steve McCabe – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steve McCabe on 2016-05-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, with reference to the Answer of 18 April 2016 to Question 32639, how much of the investment in energy efficiency measures referred to in (a) the 2010 to 2015 Parliament and (b) the current Parliament is classified as direct government investment.

    Andrea Leadsom

    The vast majority of spending on energy efficiency is delivered through Government obligations on energy suppliers and is thus not classified as direct Government investment.

    Of the £7.4bn estimated spend last parliament, around £150m is classified as direct Government investment [1] (around 2% of the total); this parliament around £100m of the £3.6bn spend (also around 2%) falls into this category.

    [1] Green Deal Home Improvement Fund, Cashback and Green Deal Communities

  • Steve McCabe – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Steve McCabe – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steve McCabe on 2016-05-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, with reference to the Answer of 18 April 2016 to Question 32639, how much of the investment in energy efficiency measures referred to was spent on (a) administrative costs and (b) targeted energy efficiency schemes; and what estimate she has made of the amount that will be spent on administrative costs relating to such planned investment in the current Parliament.

    Andrea Leadsom

    Of the £7.4bn spend last parliament, around £350m was spent by energy suppliers on administration and the remainder (around £7bn) spent on delivery.

    Of the £1.8bn estimated to have spent between May 2015 and the end of March 2017 (when ECO is due to end), around £160m is expected to be spent on administration, with the remaining £1.6bn spent on delivery.

    The Government has yet to consult on the design of the future supplier obligation replacing ECO, so it is not possible to estimate the administration costs beyond March 2017. However, the consultation is expected to include provisions designed to reduce the cost of administration relative to ECO, freeing up more of the estimated £1.9bn for delivery.

    The administration costs are proportionately higher under this parliament, as ECO strengthened the monitoring and reporting requirements for suppliers relative to those under CERT and CESP (which were in operation during the last parliament), to allow more detailed and timely monitoring of suppliers’ progress against their obligations.

  • Steve McCabe – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Steve McCabe – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steve McCabe on 2016-05-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, with reference to the Answer of 18 April 2016 to Question 32639, how she ensures that those most in need benefit from the Energy Company Obligation and Warm Home Discount; and whether she plans to change how households in fuel poverty are identified.

    Andrea Leadsom

    Currently, the Warm Home Discount and the Affordable Warmth Group under the Energy Company Obligation are targeted at low income households, using means-tested benefits as the basis for eligibility.

    In April this year, Government consulted on plans to enable data sharing between government departments, specified public authorities and energy suppliers with the specific purpose of identifying and targeting assistance at fuel poor households. If successful, these proposals would allow DECC to use government-held data to identify more accurately low income households with high energy costs. This capability could then be used under a future Warm Home Discount.

    There will be a reformed domestic supplier obligation (Energy Company Obligation) from April 2017, which will run for 5 years. It will upgrade the energy efficiency of homes and tackle the root cause of fuel poverty. Government will be consulting shortly on proposals for the 2017/18 scheme, including how households in fuel poverty would be identified.