Blog

  • Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-03-07.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what discussions they have had with the Disasters Emergency Committee regarding openness and transparency in using public donations, in the light of the earthquakes in Nepal in 2015 and previous disasters.

    Baroness Verma

    Funds raised by the British public for the DEC appeal have already reached over £85 million, which includes £5 million in matched funding provided by DFID. UK Government representatives in Nepal’s meet regularly with Disaster Emergency Committee (DEC) members to discuss the ongoing earthquake response, recovery and reconstruction efforts.

    The DEC publishes regular updates on the Nepal response on their website and through social media. Information on how funds are being used is also shared directly to donors via email and post. The DEC has also commissioned and published an independent evaluation of the work, which I have attached for ease, of members in Nepal which particularly focuses on the emergency response phase.

    The DEC is planning on producing a ‘one year on’ report which will be published on the anniversary of the earthquake. This will give details of how funds were raised, how they were disbursed to member agencies, how they have been spent and what has been achieved.

  • Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-03-07.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the level of engagement by the Disasters Emergency Committee, and other international donors, with representatives of Nepal’s civil society and charities such as Childreach Nepal.

    Baroness Verma

    The role of national Nepali civil society after the earthquake has been key to the emergency response, and will be important into the recovery and reconstruction phases. International humanitarian organisations who acted as part of the earthquake response, such as the UK Disaster Emergency Committee (DEC) members, have partnered with Nepal civil society organisations to deliver assistance to those most in need. These partnerships have combined international funding flows with local knowledge and expertise.

    Over the course of the humanitarian response UK government representatives in Nepal have met regularly with DEC members and other international donors in order to share situation analysis and learning, as well as jointly advocate on collective issues. The UK has supported over 20 trusted partners as part of its own Nepal earthquake response, including the UN, INGOs and the Red Cross. All have worked in partnership with Nepali civil society organisations on the ground. We have conducted three rounds of field-based monitoring, meet regularly with our partners, and receive frequent reporting, which has enabled us to assess with confidence the effectiveness of our direct partners and their Nepali civil society partners.

  • Alison McGovern – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Alison McGovern – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Alison McGovern on 2016-03-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment his Department has made of the effect of recent changes to benefits on levels of child poverty.

    Priti Patel

    The intended impact of the tax and benefit reforms introduced in the Summer Budget and Autumn Statement is to incentivise work, ensure work always pays, and to allow people to keep more of what they earn.

    The Government is committed to working to eliminate child poverty and improving life chances for children.

    Our new Life Chances measures will drive continued action on work and education, which will make the biggest difference to disadvantaged children, now and in the future.

  • Robert Syms – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Robert Syms – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Robert Syms on 2016-03-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what progress his Department has made on reducing the number of workless households.

    Priti Patel

    Since 2010 the number of workless households has fallen by over 680,000 to its lowest level since records began.

  • Stephen Hepburn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Stephen Hepburn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Hepburn on 2016-03-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment he has made of the effect of changes to housing benefit eligibility in respect of under-occupancy in the social rented sector on low-income families.

    Justin Tomlinson

    This measure puts social sector tenants on a par with their counterparts in the private rented sector who receive Housing Benefit based on household need rather than the full rental costs. Affected claimants can mitigate the impact by entering work, increasing their working hours or downsizing to a smaller property.

  • Lord Stevenson of Balmacara – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Lord Stevenson of Balmacara – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Stevenson of Balmacara on 2016-03-08.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they plan to permit exemptions to the proposed immigration skills charge for companies in the creative industries where such companies contribute through voluntary levies to the Creative Skillset Skills Investment Fund, or to the collective arrangements to fund training that are currently in force.

    Baroness Neville-Rolfe

    The Government is considering carefully the Migration Advisory Committee’s recommendations on the rate and scope of the Immigration Skills Charge. This includes considering the impact on sectors with other skills levies or charges in place. In advance of finalising the regulations that will introduce the charge from April 2017, we will take account of evidence about the likely impact on different types of organisation.

  • Lord MacKenzie of Culkein – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Lord MacKenzie of Culkein – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord MacKenzie of Culkein on 2016-03-08.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government which institutions and authorities have been served with improvement notices since the introduction of the Health and Safety (Sharp Instruments in Healthcare) Regulations 2013.

    Baroness Altmann

    Since the introduction of the Health and Safety (Sharp Instruments in Healthcare) Regulations 2013, twenty-six institutions across England, Scotland and Wales have received improvement notices up to December 2015. Before an improvement notice is served the inspector will discuss the breaches of law with the duty holder and explain why a notice is being served. The inspector will also ensure that the duty holder understands what they need to do to comply, and has the opportunity to explore alternatives. A timescale for compliance will also be agreed. The institutions are:

    1

    Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Health Board

    2

    Akari Care Limited

    3

    Birmingham Women’s NHS Foundation Trust

    4

    BUPA Care Homes (CFG) PLC

    5

    Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

    6

    Cardiff and Vale University Health Board

    7

    Cwm Taf Health Board (2 notices served)

    8

    HC-One Limited (2 notices served)

    9

    Hillingdon Hospital NHS Trust

    10

    Luton & Dunstable University Hospital

    11

    Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust

    12

    Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust

    13

    North East Ambulance Service NHS Trust

    14

    North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust

    15

    North West Ambulance Service NHS Trust

    16

    Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust

    17

    Poole Hospital NHS Foundation Trust

    18

    Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust

    19

    Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust

    20

    South Tyneside NHS Foundation Trust

    21

    Tayside Health Board (3 notices served)

    22

    The Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust

    23

    University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust

    24

    University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust

    25

    University Hospitals Of Morecambe Bay NHS Trust ( 2 notices served)

    26

    Western Sussex Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (2 notices served)

  • Lord MacKenzie of Culkein – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Lord MacKenzie of Culkein – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord MacKenzie of Culkein on 2016-03-08.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many improvement notices have been served by the Health and Safety Executive in relation to the failure of healthcare institutions and authorities to ensure that safer sharps are used so far as is reasonably practicable.

    Baroness Altmann

    There have been thirty-two improvement notices served ( up to December 2015) to healthcare institutions in England, Scotland and Wales since the Health and Safety (Sharp Instruments in Healthcare) Regulations 2013 came into effect in May 2013. Of these, twenty-six were specifically for the failure to use or provide safer medical sharps where reasonably practicable, three were for failure to provide appropriate training, two were for failure to take specific actions in the event of a sharps injury and one addressed all of these failings.

    Before an improvement notice is served the inspector will discuss the breaches of law with the duty holder and explain why a notice is being served. The inspector will also ensure that the duty holder understands what they need to do to comply, and has the opportunity to explore alternative approaches. A timescale for compliance will also be agreed.

  • Lord MacKenzie of Culkein – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord MacKenzie of Culkein – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord MacKenzie of Culkein on 2016-03-08.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether, in the light of the report produced by MindMetre Research How Sharp Are We On Safety?, they will take further steps to improve the mandatory compliance with EU Council Directive 2010/32/EU and the Health and Safety (Sharp Instruments in Healthcare) Regulations 2013.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    It is for individual National Health Service provider organisations to ensure that policies, procedures and practices in the affected clinical areas are consistent with current regulations and that requisitions for sharps clearly stipulate the requirement for safer sharps.

    We are not aware of any restriction in the availability of products that comply with the Health and Safety (Sharps Instruments in Healthcare) Regulations 2013 for the areas of care as outlined within the ‘How Sharp are we on Safety’ report, published in October 2015.

  • Lord MacKenzie of Culkein – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Lord MacKenzie of Culkein – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord MacKenzie of Culkein on 2016-03-08.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Earl Howe on 22 October 2015 (HL2638), whether the study into the remuneration package for officers has been completed, and if so, whether they will publish the findings.

    Earl Howe

    The process of stakeholder engagement to support the study into the remuneration package for the Royal Fleet Auxiliary and wider Royal Naval engineering officers is complete. The study report is now being finalised. Once the report is accepted, consideration will be given to its publication, in part or in full.