Blog

  • Lord Rooker – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Lord Rooker – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Rooker on 2016-02-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government when the consultation promised by the Prime Minister in his speech of 28 July 2015 at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy in Singapore regarding property ownership and extending what we currently ask of UK companies to foreign companies” will commence.”

    Baroness Neville-Rolfe

    I refer the hon. Member to my recent answer (HL5950) to him on the same issue, to which I have nothing further to add.

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

    Lord Rea – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Rea on 2016-02-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of recent studies of driver impairment after drinking alcohol, and whether those studies support the current alcohol limit for drivers.

    Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

    Sir Peter North’s 2010 Review of drink and drug driving made an assessment of various studies. The Coalition Government responded in March 2011 by setting out its position on maintaining the current limit. This Government agrees with that assessment and we do not believe any further studies have provided sufficient evidence to change that position. There are therefore no plans to change the current laws.

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

    Lord Rea – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Rea on 2016-02-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to advise drivers of the risks involved in driving after drinking alcohol.

    Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

    The Government advise drivers of the risks involved in driving after drinking alcohol in a number of ways.

    The Department for Transport’s THINK! drink drive campaign raises awareness of the risks and consequences of drink driving. The campaign aims to reinforce the social unacceptability of drink driving and achieve positive behaviour change amongst drivers.

    In December 2015, THINK! ran a £2.9 million drink drive campaign. This campaign targeted males aged 17-34, who are disproportionately represented in drink drive killed and seriously injured (KSI) casualty statistics. We advertised this campaign on TV, online video and radio, and supported this with wider PR and social media activity.

    In addition we work with partners including Coca-Cola, Budweiser and Johnnie Walker to provide incentives to drivers (such as buy one get one free soft drinks) to avoid drink driving.

    THINK! also provide materials to road safety professionals to run campaigns and provide information on the risks of drink driving to drivers locally.

    The driving theory test addresses the subject of drink driving and the topic is covered extensively in driving learning materials.

    The Government also works with organisations to provide Drink Drive Rehabilitation Schemes (DDRS) for first time offenders. The courses aim to allow reflection of behaviour and achieve behaviour change.

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

    Lord Rea – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Rea on 2016-02-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the risk of a driver’s involvement in a collision involving injuries or death when they have a blood alcohol concentration of 80 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood or more; and how that assessment of risk compares with that made when the alcohol limit for drivers was set in 1967.

    Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

    Sir Peter North’s 2010 Review of drink and drug driving made an assessment of various studies. The Coalition Government responded in March 2011 by setting out its position on maintaining the current limit. This Government agrees with that assessment and we do not believe any further studies have provided sufficient evidence to change that position. There are therefore no plans to change the current laws.

  • Lord Naseby – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Naseby – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Naseby on 2016-02-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they plan to review the grant awarded to the organisation Action on Smoking and Health in the current financial year in the light of the announcement by the Cabinet Office on 6 February in relation to charity funding.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The conditions applicable to grants awarded to Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) are set out in the grant award letters, including a specific clause in the grant award letter which makes explicit that the award has been made under the provisions of Section 64 and may not be used for lobbying.

    ASH’s compliance with the conditions of the grant is assessed at the grant monitoring meetings held between the Deputy Director of tobacco control and representatives from ASH as well as in the final full year grant monitoring and governance reports.

  • Lord Naseby – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Naseby – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Naseby on 2016-02-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps the Department of Health plans to take to ensure that it complies with the announcement of the Cabinet Office on 6 February that no payments or grants awarded to organisations should be used for the influencing or attempted influencing of (1) Parliament, government or political parties, (2) the awarding or renewal of contracts and grants, or (3) legislative or regulatory action.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The Department will review the terms of its grant awards and associated grant monitoring processes in line with guidance issued by the Cabinet Office on the 6 February 2016.

  • The Countess of Mar – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The Countess of Mar – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by The Countess of Mar on 2016-02-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they intend to relocate testing for Lyme borreliosis away from the Rare and Imported Pathogens Laboratory; and if so, when they expect the move to take place, and whether the new laboratory will be ISO 15189 accredited at the time of the transfer.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The Department of Health, Public Health England (PHE) or NHS England do not hold information about which laboratories are and are not International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 15189 accredited. A list of accredited laboratories is held on the United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS) website and is the definitive list of accredited laboratories to which the Department, PHE and the NHS refer. Accreditation is covered by the Clinical Pathology Accreditation (CPA) company until recently, and is now part of the UKAS scheme.

    There is no intention to transfer the Lyme disease testing service from the Rare & Imported Pathogens Laboratory (RIPL) to another laboratory. RIPL as a department will move from the Porton site as part of the PHE relocation scheduled to commence in 2018 but no decision on the exact date has been made. RIPL is scheduled to transfer to ISO 15189 in late summer 2016, when the ISO inspection team review the tests offered by the laboratory under ISO 15189. Until that time, the laboratory is operating under CPA in accordance with the transition process laid down by ISO.

  • The Countess of Mar – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The Countess of Mar – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by The Countess of Mar on 2016-02-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many NHS and Public Health England laboratories that carry out Lyme borreliosis testing (1) are, and (2) are not, ISO 15189 accredited; and when they expect the Rare and Imported Pathogens Laboratory to be so accredited.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The Department of Health, Public Health England (PHE) or NHS England do not hold information about which laboratories are and are not International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 15189 accredited. A list of accredited laboratories is held on the United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS) website and is the definitive list of accredited laboratories to which the Department, PHE and the NHS refer. Accreditation is covered by the Clinical Pathology Accreditation (CPA) company until recently, and is now part of the UKAS scheme.

    There is no intention to transfer the Lyme disease testing service from the Rare & Imported Pathogens Laboratory (RIPL) to another laboratory. RIPL as a department will move from the Porton site as part of the PHE relocation scheduled to commence in 2018 but no decision on the exact date has been made. RIPL is scheduled to transfer to ISO 15189 in late summer 2016, when the ISO inspection team review the tests offered by the laboratory under ISO 15189. Until that time, the laboratory is operating under CPA in accordance with the transition process laid down by ISO.

  • The Countess of Mar – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The Countess of Mar – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by The Countess of Mar on 2016-02-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many NHS and Public Health England (PHE) medical or microbiology laboratories (1) are, and (2) are not, currently ISO 15189 accredited; and what is the schedule for such accreditation of NHS and PHE laboratories.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The Department of Health, Public Health England (PHE) or NHS England do not hold information about which laboratories are and are not International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 15189 accredited. A list of accredited laboratories is held on the United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS) website and is the definitive list of accredited laboratories to which the Department, PHE and the NHS refer. Accreditation is covered by the Clinical Pathology Accreditation (CPA) company until recently, and is now part of the UKAS scheme.

    There is no intention to transfer the Lyme disease testing service from the Rare & Imported Pathogens Laboratory (RIPL) to another laboratory. RIPL as a department will move from the Porton site as part of the PHE relocation scheduled to commence in 2018 but no decision on the exact date has been made. RIPL is scheduled to transfer to ISO 15189 in late summer 2016, when the ISO inspection team review the tests offered by the laboratory under ISO 15189. Until that time, the laboratory is operating under CPA in accordance with the transition process laid down by ISO.

  • Lord Maginnis of Drumglass – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Lord Maginnis of Drumglass – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Maginnis of Drumglass on 2016-02-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what stage they have reached in their consideration of amending legislation in order to ensure that convicted murderers who persist in refusing to reveal the location of bodies of victims are prevented from being released on parole; and when they expect to introduce legislation to that effect.

    Lord Faulks

    I can sympathise with the anguish caused to the families of victims where the whereabouts of their loved one is unknown and the offender wilfully fails to co-operate. Such behaviour is already taken into account by the court when sentencing the offender, and by the independent Parole Board when assessing an offender’s eligibility for possible release. The Prisons Minister has written to the Parole Board asking it to consider reviewing its guidelines on this issue.