Blog

  • Baroness Masham of Ilton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Baroness Masham of Ilton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Masham of Ilton on 2016-02-29.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their assessment of the impact of the price of five per cent coal tar ointment on the NHS Drug Tariff for England and Wales on Clinical Commissioning Groups’ decision to pay for that treatment.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    We have made no such assessment.

    In primary care, the prescribing decision rests with the patient’s general practitioner. The cost of any medicine has to be balanced against the importance of meeting the individual treatment needs of patients and potential adverse consequences for patients and additional costs to the National Health Service if supply is interrupted, for example the re-emergence of symptoms or relapse of the condition on stopping treatment.

    Clinical commissioning groups can issue prescribing advice taking into account the cost of medicine.

  • Lord Lexden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the The Lord Chairman of Committees

    Lord Lexden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the The Lord Chairman of Committees

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Lexden on 2016-02-29.

    To ask the Chairman of Committees, further to his Written Answer on 25 February (HL6181), whether he plans to reconsider the decision to cease using vellum for Public Acts.

    Lord Laming

    As the House Committee was content that we were seeking to take forward the House’s 1999 decision and the House of Commons has indicated that this is a matter for the Lords, I have no such plans.

  • Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead on 2016-02-29.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their assessment of the current implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1325 and of criticism by the Institute of Global and International Studies, and others, that there has been too much focus on addressing sexual violence rather than on gender equality and women’s empowerment.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    The British Government is fully committed to the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1325 in its entirety. The prevention of sexual violence in conflict is an important part of this. We will continue our work on this issue as part of a comprehensive programme of work. At last year’s High Level Review of UNSCR 1325, the Government announced a package of eight ambitious new commitments, which included increasing women’s meaningful participation in peace processes and wider peacebuilding efforts and ensuring that women’s rights are fully taken into account in our overseas counter-extremism work, in humanitarian emergencies, in our early warning and conflict analysis and in our military doctrine.

    There is still much that the international community needs to do to deliver the commitments enshrined in UNSCR 1325. Despite clear evidence of the links between women’s participation and the success and sustainability of a peace process, all too often women remain excluded. Women and girls continue to suffer disproportionate levels of violence in conflict situations. The international community must do more to address the full range of human rights abuses that women experience in conflict. The Government will continue to prioritise this work as part of our diplomatic, development and defence work.

  • Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead on 2016-02-29.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their assessment of the World Bank gender policy, and of whether the bank’s inspection panel has ever been guided by a gender safeguard.

    Baroness Verma

    The World Bank Gender Policy sets out how Bank staff should assess the gender dimensions of development in their work and is an important part of Bank’s commitment to drive progress on gender equality. The Inspection Panel assesses compliance with Bank policy including not only the Gender Policy but also with the Environmental and Social Safeguards, which includes requirements for a social assessment that may cover gender.

  • Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead on 2016-02-29.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their assessment of the evidence that recent attacks on the north-east Borna State in Nigeria, and attacks in neighbouring Chad and Cameroon, are being carried out by Boko Haram.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    Boko Haram usually do not claim responsibility for individual attacks, which often take place in remote areas with no international presence. However, they are the only terrorist organisation conducting this type and scale of attack in North East Nigeria and the wider Lake Chad Basin region, including in Chad and Cameroon. This assessment is shared by Nigerian National and State-level authorities as well as civil society across the region.

  • Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead on 2016-02-29.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what discussions they have had with the Nigerian authorities about any action being taken to support the integration of traumatised women and girls who are freed from Boko Haram and face mistrust and suspicion when they return home.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    We are pleased that a number of women and children have been rescued, and regularly stress to the Nigerian authorities the importance that they are provided with appropriate support to deal with the trauma they have faced, including to reintegrate into their communities. I personally raised the importance of challenging the social stigma faced by women and girls freed from Boko Haram with Nigerian ministers and military officials during my visit to Nigeria last month. Challenging negative attitudes on sexual violence is a key element of this.

  • Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead on 2016-02-29.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of whether action on the promotion of women’s rights and social justice has been made central to the Post-2015 Development Agenda, and of whether women, as key stakeholders, are able to promote and negotiate their own development goals.

    Baroness Verma

    The UK was a leading voice in the Global Goals for Sustainable Development negotiations and insisted that that that these goals must start by empowering girls and women, and tackling discrimination. A key priority was to ensure a strong and explicit commitment to gender equality through a standalone goal, and further gender mainstreaming throughout the framework. These were both successfully included in the final set of global goals.

  • Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb on 2016-02-29.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the total budget for the National Benefit Fraud Hotline in 2014–15; how many allegations of suspected benefit fraud were reported via that hotline or the online reporting form in 2014–15; what was the total cost of investigating those allegations; and how much was identified in recoverable overpayments by those investigations.

    Lord Freud

    The Fraud and Error Service (FES), part of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) is responsible for the prevention, detection and where appropriate, investigation of Fraud and Error against all benefits administered by and on behalf of DWP.

    The National Benefit Fraud Hotline (NBFH) is outsourced; therefore there is a yearly cost for outsourcing as opposed to a budget. The total outsourcing cost the NBFH for 2014/15 is £303,480. This figure covers the 52 week period commencing 31 March 2014.

    The available data on allegations of benefit fraud reported via the NBFD or online only covers incidents recorded on the internal FES Fraud Referral and Information Management System (FRAIMS.) It does not give the total volume of enquiries and calls made to NBFH, only those that were entered onto FRAIMS. There are various reasons for allegations not being entered onto FRAIMS, including the fact that not all enquiries and calls are of an appropriate nature. In 2014/15 there were 207,600 cases of suspected benefit fraud reported via the NBFH that were entered onto FRAIMS or reported online.

    We are unable to provide a precise response on the cost of investigating these allegations because some of the investigations from the allegations made in 2014/15 are still on going. We are able to provide an estimate of the cost of investigations that achieved an outcome in 2014/15 which were initially triggered by an allegation made through the hotline or online reporting. We cannot distinguish the exact costs of investigating NBFH allegations from the total cost of investigating all allegations and so this figure is an estimate, calculated by apportioning total costs of Local Service that were undertaken in 2014/15 on the basis of Positive Outcomes as this is the main cost driver. This was estimated to be £16.9m. This figure only includes direct costs of Investigations – there are no overheads included.

    As with the cost of investigation, we are unable to provide a precise response on the amount identified in recoverable overpayments because some of the investigations from the allegations made in 2014/15 are still ongoing. We have instead provided the value of overpayments that achieved an outcome in 2014/15 which were initially triggered by an allegation made through the hotline or online reporting. £46,068,848 was identified as recoverable.

    Note that identifying overpayments also prevents a significant amount of future losses which are not included in the value of recoverable overpayments identified shown here. Referrals from members of the public therefore provide good value for money.

  • Lord Hylton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Lord Hylton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hylton on 2016-02-29.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their assessment of the proposals contained in Separation: Putting a Border on the Conflict published on 29 February by the Chairman of the Zionist Union and of the Israeli Labour Party.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    We have not made any assessment of the proposals contained in the document ‘Separation: Putting a Border on the Conflict’. We will judge any proposals on the basis of whether we assess they support progress towards the two-state solution.

  • Lord Hylton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lord Hylton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hylton on 2016-02-29.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many miles of public road in central London for which they are responsible are (1) completely closed, and (2) only partially open, to vehicles due to roadworks; on whose authority those roadworks are being conducted; what is the estimated total cost of those roadworks; and when they expect those roadworks to be completed.

    Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

    The Government is not directly responsible for any roads in central London, and does not therefore hold this information. London’s roads fall into three main categories; the Transport for London Road Network (TLRN), known as red routes, which are managed by Transport for London (TfL); the Borough Principal Road Network (BPRN) managed by the individual London boroughs; and a small number of motorways forming part of the Strategic Road Network (SRN) managed by Highways England. All of the above are subject to the London Permit Scheme (LoPS) which was brought in to minimise the disruption caused by roadworks and streetworks across London. Each borough and TfL have their own schemes, ensuring local control of conditions on local roads. The Transport for London Lane Rental Scheme (TLRS) also helps manage works on the TLRN at traffic-sensitive locations. A daily charge of £800 or £2500 per day is applied, depending upon the sensitivity of the location. This scheme has helped to reduce traffic disruption by changing the behaviour of utility companies and other contractors.