The below Parliamentary question was asked by Karl McCartney on 2016-02-24.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, for what reasons the Government has not yet published its analysis of responses to its consultation, Sunday Trading, published in August 2015.
Anna Soubry
The Government published its response to the consultation on 9 February, in which it sets out its analysis of responses.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2016-02-24.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, how many officials of his Department were employed specifically to assist with negotiations on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership agreement in each of the last three years; and if he will make a statement
Anna Soubry
Prior to 1 April 2014 the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership was handled alongside a number of other trade negotiations. On 1 April 2014 my Department established a Unit whose primary purpose is to assist with the negotiation of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership but which also handles certain other international matters. In April 2014 this Unit comprised 8 staff primarily working on TTIP and 4 working on other international matters. It currently comprises 10 staff working primarily of TTIP and 6 working on other international matters. Staff expenditure for this Unit in 14/15 was £793313, and in 15/16 is projected to be £916007. Total expenditure for this Unit in 14/15 was £886813 and in 15/16 is projected to be £926774.
.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Karl McCartney on 2016-02-24.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what steps the Government took to ensure that its response to its consultation, Sunday Trading, published in August 2015, took substantive account of the range of responses to that consultation.
Anna Soubry
The Government has conscientiously taken into account all the responses and evidence submitted during the consultation in formulating our proposals.
.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Luciana Berger on 2016-02-24.
To ask the Attorney General, what account the CPS takes of mental health conditions when deciding whether to prosecute people under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.
Robert Buckland
The Crown Prosecution Service is committed to taking into account the mental health condition of an offender when considering bringing a prosecution. Each case is considered on its merits, taking into account all available information about any mental health issues, and their relevance to the offence, in accordance with the principles set out in the Code for Crown Prosecutors (the Code).
The Code explains that there is a balance to be struck between the public interest in diverting a defendant with significant mental illness from the criminal justice system and other public interest factors in favour of prosecution, including the need to safeguard the public.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Laird on 2016-02-24.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answers by Lord Dunlop on 24 February (HL5739 and HL5740) concerning the Belfast Agreement 1998, why they did not answer the question about the agenda for discussion with the Republic of Ireland, and who checks that those involved in discussions are entitled to be involved.
Lord Dunlop
I have previously responded to the Noble Lord’s question by explaining that discussions with the Irish Government are in accordance with the established three-stranded approach to Northern Ireland affairs which is reflected in the Belfast Agreement. I have nothing to add to this.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Laird on 2016-02-24.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Dunlop on 24 February (HL5812) concerning the Belfast Agreement 1998, why they did not answer the question and whether equality between those islands” includes parity of esteem for all on those islands.”
Lord Dunlop
I have previously responded to the Noble Lord’s question by explaining that paragraph three of the Declaration of Support in the Belfast Agreement commits the participants involved in the multi-party negotiations that led to the Agreement ‘to partnership, equality and mutual respect as the basis of relationships within Northern Ireland, between North and South, and between these islands’. I also explained that the United Kingdom Government is committed to affording due respect and parity of esteem to all the people in Northern Ireland as underpinned by the Agreement and in accordance with the obligations on the Government to promote equality and prevent discrimination across the United Kingdom. I have nothing to add to this.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Laird on 2016-02-24.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have an agreement or understanding with Sinn Fein (1) not to bring to court republicans on charges relating to tax fraud in South Armagh, or (2) to bring to court members of the Army who were on duty on Bloody Sunday and who now live in Great Britain.
Lord Keen of Elie
The government does not have any such agreements or understandings in place with Sinn Fein.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Laird on 2016-02-24.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Dunlop on 28 January (HL5591) concerning the Belfast Agreement 1998, why they have not answered the question, and whether the Belfast Agreement applies to members of the British Security Forces.
Lord Dunlop
My previous replies to the Noble Lord on questions about the application of the Belfast Agreement to specific groups explain that the Agreement, with its three-stranded approach, paved the way for power sharing in Northern Ireland and provides the basis for devolved government there. The three-stranded approach is:
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Laird on 2016-02-24.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answers by Lord Dunlop on 23 February (HL5589 and HL5590) concerning the Belfast Agreement 1998, why they have not answered the question, and whether the Agreement applies to all residents of the UK and Republic of Ireland.
Lord Dunlop
My previous replies to the Noble Lord on questions about the application of the Belfast Agreement to specific groups explain that the Agreement, with its three-stranded approach, paved the way for power sharing in Northern Ireland and provides the basis for devolved government there. The three-stranded approach is:
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Clement-Jones on 2016-02-24.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the decision that any overspend in the Cancer Drugs Fund is subsequently paid for entirely by the pharmaceutical industry and not shared between industry and the NHS.
Lord Prior of Brampton
NHS England plans to invest in a new £340 million Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF) to provide early access to cancer drug indications. Under the new process, any drugs that receive either a draft recommendation for routine commissioning or, where uncertainty exists, a recommendation for use within the CDF, will receive interim funding from the CDF from the point of marketing authorisation.
This earlier access to cancer drugs will benefit both patients and the pharmaceutical industry and NHS England believes it is only fair that the pharmaceutical industry makes a contribution if any overspend occurs.
NHS England’s impact assessment will not be completed until the detailed outcomes from the current consultation on the future of the CDF are confirmed.