Blog

  • Tom Brake – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Tom Brake – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tom Brake on 2016-02-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment the Government has made of trends and development in the quality of care given by NHS trusts to people with rheumatoid arthritis in each year from 2010 to 2015.

    Jane Ellison

    Since 1 April 2013, the Government has set out high level strategic ambitions for the National Health Service through the Mandate. For patients with long term conditions (LTCs), including musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions, we have asked the NHS to improve the care and support of patients, helping them to live healthily and independently, with much better control over the care they receive.

    In response, NHS England has set out a range of actions designed to deliver this, central to which was implementation of the House of Care model, which is designed to support the delivery of person-centred, coordinated care. The House of Care enables individuals to make informed decisions about their treatment and empowers them to self-manage their LTCs in partnership with health and care professionals. NHS England has provided data, tools and guidance to support local services in identifying those most likely to benefit from a care planning approach. Specifically on MSK conditions, the National Clinical Director for MSK, Peter Kay, has been working in partnership with the Arthritis and Musculoskeletal Alliance, to develop new MSK clinical networks across England to build consensus on the way forward for models of care.

    In terms of assessment, the first annual report of the National Clinical Audit of Rheumatoid and Early Inflammatory Arthritis, commissioned on behalf of NHS England by the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership (HQIP), was published on 22 January 2016. This report, which includes data from 1 February 2014 to 30 April 2015, assesses the quality of care by specialist rheumatology services using criteria derived from sources such as the Rheumatoid Arthritis Quality Standard, published by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence in June 2013. The report identifies that although most services offer prompt educational support and agree targets for treatment with their patients, performance against criteria for referral and assessment could be improved. Since the audit, HQIP has reported that a number of trusts have successfully reconfigured their services in order to improve patient care. More information can be found at the following link:

    www.hqip.org.uk/national-programmes/a-z-of-nca/arthritis-rheumatoid-and-early-inflammatory

    “

  • Tom Brake – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Tom Brake – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tom Brake on 2016-02-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment the Government has made of the extent to which NHS providers have met NICE quality standard on rheumatoid arthritis since 2013.

    Jane Ellison

    Since 1 April 2013, the Government has set out high level strategic ambitions for the National Health Service through the Mandate. For patients with long term conditions (LTCs), including musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions, we have asked the NHS to improve the care and support of patients, helping them to live healthily and independently, with much better control over the care they receive.

    In response, NHS England has set out a range of actions designed to deliver this, central to which was implementation of the House of Care model, which is designed to support the delivery of person-centred, coordinated care. The House of Care enables individuals to make informed decisions about their treatment and empowers them to self-manage their LTCs in partnership with health and care professionals. NHS England has provided data, tools and guidance to support local services in identifying those most likely to benefit from a care planning approach. Specifically on MSK conditions, the National Clinical Director for MSK, Peter Kay, has been working in partnership with the Arthritis and Musculoskeletal Alliance, to develop new MSK clinical networks across England to build consensus on the way forward for models of care.

    In terms of assessment, the first annual report of the National Clinical Audit of Rheumatoid and Early Inflammatory Arthritis, commissioned on behalf of NHS England by the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership (HQIP), was published on 22 January 2016. This report, which includes data from 1 February 2014 to 30 April 2015, assesses the quality of care by specialist rheumatology services using criteria derived from sources such as the Rheumatoid Arthritis Quality Standard, published by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence in June 2013. The report identifies that although most services offer prompt educational support and agree targets for treatment with their patients, performance against criteria for referral and assessment could be improved. Since the audit, HQIP has reported that a number of trusts have successfully reconfigured their services in order to improve patient care. More information can be found at the following link:

    www.hqip.org.uk/national-programmes/a-z-of-nca/arthritis-rheumatoid-and-early-inflammatory

    “

  • Jim Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Jim Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2016-02-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, how much UK embassies spent on official hospitality in 2014-15; and what estimate he has made of the level of such spending in 2015-16.

    Mr David Lidington

    Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) staff in London and in more than 260 embassies and consulates around the world organise events and other forms of official hospitality to support the UK’s foreign policy interests, promote British business; attract foreign investment and to celebrate the Queen’s Birthday.

    In 2014-15 the FCO spent £806,000 on official hospitality. In 2013-14 the FCO spent £1,164,000 on official hospitality. Figures for 2015-16 will be reported in the next FCO Annual Report and Accounts, which will be published in June 2016.

    All hospitality spend is kept under close scrutiny to ensure it is effective and gives value for money.

  • Julian Knight – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Julian Knight – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julian Knight on 2016-02-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what reports he has received on the installation by China of missile launchers on Woody Island in the South China Sea; what representations he has made to China on that matter; and if he will discuss with his Japanese counterpart what steps the UK and Japan can take to oppose the militarisation of the South China Sea.

    Mr Hugo Swire

    We are very concerned about Chinese missile deployments on Woody Island in the Paracel Islands as reported in the media on 17 February. We oppose any actions which are likely to increase tensions in the South China Sea, including militarisation. We urge all parties to exercise restraint, to pursue the settlement of disputes peacefully in accordance with international law, and to uphold freedom of navigation and freedom of overflight.

    The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right Hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr Hammond) has held detailed discussions with his Japanese counterpart about the South China Sea, most recently, during his visit to Japan in January for the annual UK-Japan Foreign and Defence Ministerial talks. Following those meetings the UK and Japan released a joint statement setting out our shared concerns about the situation in the South China Sea, calling on all parties to refrain from activities that increase tension and to pursue urgently the settlement of the maritime disputes peacefully in accordance with international law.

  • Hilary Benn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Hilary Benn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Hilary Benn on 2016-02-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, how many UK staff worked at the Permanent Representation to NATO in (a) 2012-13, (b) 2013-14, (c) 2014-15 and (d) the latest date for which figures are available.

    Mr Philip Hammond

    The figures for UK staff, both from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Ministry of Defence, working at the UK Joint Delegation to NATO in Brussels during this time period are as follows: For 2014 to 2015 there were 38 UK staff members. For 2013 to 2014 there were 36 UK staff members. For 2012 to 2013 there were 39 UK staff members. As of 31 January this year there are 36 UK members of staff working at the UK’s Joint delegation to NATO.

  • Neil Coyle – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Neil Coyle – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Neil Coyle on 2016-02-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what steps his Department is taking to ensure there are sufficient safeguards to respect individual privacy in place in respect of intelligence gathered by GCHQ.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    GCHQ’s intelligence gathering powers are authorised under legislation, including the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014, and the Intelligence Services Act 1994. Its work, including its respect for privacy, is scrutinised by the Intelligence and Security Committee, the Interception of Communications Commissioner and the Intelligence Services Commissioner.

  • Fiona Bruce – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Fiona Bruce – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Fiona Bruce on 2016-02-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, which elements of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea government fund or participate in that country’s nuclear and missile programmes.

    Mr Hugo Swire

    This information can be obtained at the following web address: https://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/tg840.aspx

  • Fiona Bruce – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Fiona Bruce – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Fiona Bruce on 2016-02-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, whether UK-owned tour companies that operate in North Korea contribute financially to that country’s nuclear and missile programmes or to elements of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea government responsible for human rights violations.

    Mr Hugo Swire

    We are aware of UK tour companies who operate in the North Korea. Given the closed nature of the regime there is very limited financial information from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s (DPRK) government on how their nuclear and ballistic missile programme or elements of the regime responsible for human rights violations are funded.

  • Fiona Bruce – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Fiona Bruce – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Fiona Bruce on 2016-02-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, with reference to the Answer of 5 January 2015 to Question 219046, what response his Department has received from Democratic People’s Republic of Korea authorities; and whether progress has been made on improving North Korean women’s rights in China.

    Mr Hugo Swire

    We continue to urge the DPRK authorities, through both our Embassy in Pyongyang and the DPRK Embassy in London, to respond in detail to the contents of the Commission of Inquiry report, including the violence and exploitation of women that it documents. The DPRK continues to reject the Commission’s findings and will not engage on the detail of the Commission’s report.

    Women trafficked out of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) are among the most vulnerable of those who flee the country. We call on the DPRK to improve its appalling human rights record and create better conditions for its women. We regularly discuss our concerns about the DPRK with China, as I did with the Vice-Minister of the Chinese Communist Party, Chen Fengxiang, in December 2015. We will seek to include this issue in the next UK-China Human Rights Dialogue due to be held in April. We also work directly with the Chinese authorities on a number of projects to counter human trafficking, which seek to protect the most vulnerable from exploitation, abuse, neglect and violence.

  • Hilary Benn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Hilary Benn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Hilary Benn on 2016-02-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to the Government’s response to the Foreign Affairs Committee’s First Special Report of Session 2015-16, published on 11 February 2016, HC816, when he expects the internal review of his Department to be completed; what the key priorities of his Department are on which that review will be focussed; and if he will publish the conclusions of that review.

    Mr Philip Hammond

    The internal review is expected to be completed in the Spring. Its remit is to advise on how the FCO can be more expert, agile and focused on the Department’s key priorities. I expect the review to set out a vision of the organisation the FCO should be by 2020. The review is internal. No decision has yet been taken on publication.