Blog

  • Sadiq Khan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Sadiq Khan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sadiq Khan on 2016-02-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how much was spent on child and adolescent mental health services in (a) England, (b) London, (c) each London boroughs and (d) each London health trust in each year since 2010.

    Alistair Burt

    The information is not available in the format requested. The following table presents the available information which is taken from reference costs – the average unit cost to National Health Service trusts and foundation trusts of providing defined services to NHS patients.

    Estimated costs to NHS trusts and foundation trusts1 of providing child and adolescent mental health services2, 2010-11 to 2014-15

    Name

    2010-11

    2011-12

    2012-13

    2013-14

    2014-15

    England

    371.0

    450.2

    486.7

    539.4

    611.6

    London

    104.9

    118.3

    112.2

    133.5

    135.3

    Barnet, Enfield and Haringey Mental Health NHS Trust

    4.1

    14.2

    11.0

    12.7

    11.4

    Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust

    14.9

    13.2

    14.0

    18.1

    16.6

    East London NHS Foundation Trust

    11.7

    14.7

    12.9

    17.5

    17.2

    Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust

    –

    –

    –

    0.6

    0.6

    Hounslow and Richmond Community Healthcare NHS Trust

    –

    0.3

    –

    –

    –

    Islington Primary Care Trust

    4.1

    –

    –

    –

    –

    North East London NHS Foundation Trust

    14.5

    16.3

    13.1

    17.1

    15.7

    North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust

    0.2

    0.3

    0.3

    0.3

    0.3

    Oxleas NHS Foundation Trust

    9.3

    7.6

    6.9

    7.0

    7.6

    Richmond and Twickenham Primary Care Trust

    0.2

    –

    –

    –

    –

    Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust

    1.0

    1.6

    1.9

    2.3

    0.6

    South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust

    22.4

    27.2

    26.8

    30.7

    29.4

    South West London and St George’s Mental Health NHS Trust

    9.8

    8.5

    8.6

    10.7

    11.9

    Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust

    6.2

    5.9

    5.0

    4.9

    10.4

    The Whittington Hospital NHS Trust

    –

    5.9

    2.7

    5.2

    3.6

    West London Mental Health NHS Trust

    6.6

    2.6

    9.0

    6.3

    10.1

    Source: Reference costs, Department of Health

    Notes:

    1. Reference costs were also collected from primary care trusts before 2011-12, after which they transferred their provider functions. Primary care trusts were abolished on 31 March 2013.
    2. The costs of providing child and adolescent mental health services in admitted, day care, outpatient and community settings for children and young people who have difficulties with their emotional or behavioural wellbeing are included. The costs of providing other specialist services to children and young people, such as drug and alcohol, or eating disorder services, are excluded.
    3. It is not possible to provide the information by London borough.
  • Richard Burden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Richard Burden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Richard Burden on 2016-02-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what representations he has (a) received and (b) made on the demolition of structures in the South Hebron Hills on 2 February 2016.

    Mr David Lidington

    We have not received any representations on this issue. An official from our Embassy in Tel Aviv raised our concerns about the demolition of structures in the South Hebron Hills with the Israeli Office for the Coordination of Government Activities in the Territories on 3 February.

  • Richard Burden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Richard Burden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Richard Burden on 2016-02-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what assessment he has made of the effects of the demolition of structures in the South Hebron Hills on 2 February 2016 on (a) future compliance with UN resolutions and (b) the peace process; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    The UK position on demolitions is clear: demolitions cause unnecessary suffering to ordinary Palestinians; are harmful to the peace process; and are, in all but the most exceptional of cases, contrary to international humanitarian law. The Fourth Geneva Convention is clear that the destruction of any real or personal property in Occupied Territory is not justified unless it is rendered absolutely necessary by military operations.

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

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

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Shannon on 2016-02-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what assessment he has made of the likelihood of a bilateral ceasefire in Colombia as a result of a final peace agreement being signed; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr Hugo Swire

    President Juan Manuel Santos announced in October 2015, that the Government was prepared to declare a bilateral ceasefire on completion of point 5 of the agenda ‘end of conflict’, which is still being negotiated in Havana. However, he said repeatedly that the FARC must first agree to lay down their weapons and give up their armed struggle before a ceasefire is declared.

    On 25 January, the United Nations Security Council unanimously adopted resolution 2261, drafted by the United Kingdom. The resolution establishes a Special Political Mission, to monitor and verify the ceasefire between the Government of Colombia and the FARC.

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

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

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Shannon on 2016-02-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what assessment he has made of the likelihood of the Colombia Peace Agreement being reached on 23 March 2016; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr Hugo Swire

    Talks continue in Havana and both sides are working to meet the 23 March deadline. However, the priority is reaching a sustainable agreement, not the exact date. As President Santos himself has said “If it’s two days after, or one day before, or a week later, it doesn’t matter.”

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

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

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Shannon on 2016-02-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, if he will make representations to the Colombian government on steps to tackle paramilitary groups in the Nariño region of the country.

    Mr Hugo Swire

    I am concerned about the continued negative influence of organised criminal gangs and resulting violence in Colombia, which challenges the implementation of the peace process. I am pleased to see that the Colombian Minister of Defence announced that tackling organised crime is a top priority for the Government of Colombia in 2016.

    British Embassy officials in Bogota regularly discuss the challenges posed by armed criminal groups (so called ‘Bandas Criminales’ or BACRIM) in their meetings with the Colombian government. Our Ambassador to Colombia met the Minister of Interior on 1 February when they discussed security challenges, including those posed by the BACRIM. In forthcoming meetings with the Minister of Defence and Minister of Post-Conflict, the Ambassador will seek to raise these issues again. We are also contributing £1m to the MAPP-OAS (the Organisation of American States’ Peace mission) which is monitoring demobilisation.

    On 1 February, President Santos created a committee to tackle organised criminal groups. He has ordered the military to intensify operations to prevent criminal groups stepping into a vacuum created by demobilising FARC units. He also stated that new ‘special forces’ will be created, including joint operations and intelligence. This new strategy will be accompanied by social programmes and aims to benefit communities in Colombia.

  • Patrick Grady – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Patrick Grady – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Patrick Grady on 2016-02-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what support the Government has provided to witnesses, survivors and the families of victims of the terrorist attack in Sousse, Tunisia, on 26 June 2015.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    Immediately after the terrorist attack in Sousse, a helpline was set up to provide advice to British nationals in the area. At the height of the crisis there were 140 FCO, Police, MoD and DfT staff in Tunisia. Rapid Deployment Teams comprising of consular staff and Red Cross psychosocial experts were sent to Tunisia to assist those affected. We worked with the tour operators to help those families who wished to return to the UK. Some of the injured and the 30 deceased were repatriated back to the UK using military assets. The next of kin were offered support via Police Family Liaison Officers. This support was offered through our Exceptional Assistance Measures policy (EAM) which we have the discretion to use in extremis after a terrorist attack.

    The Prime Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Mr Cameron) established an ad hoc Ministerial Committee, supported by a Joint Unit based in the FCO, to coordinate Government assistance to British nationals affected over the longer term. The Committee has oversight of arrangements for a fitting memorial service, a physical memorial, compensation and a programme to provide support for those experiencing difficulties with mental health. We have partnerships with victim support organisations in England, Wales and Scotland to refer bereaved families to specialist support, and have a dedicated support page with further information on GOV.UK.

  • Patrick Grady – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Patrick Grady – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Patrick Grady on 2016-02-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what protocols his Department has in place for supporting and communicating with UK citizens who (a) survive and (b) witness terrorist attacks overseas.

    James Duddridge

    The Foreign and Commonwealth Office’s crisis response mechanisms aim to ensure British nationals affected by a crisis overseas receive rapid and professional assistance. During crises, we communicate with affected British nationals through Travel advice and via consular officials in country and in London. Alongside the support offered to all British nationals overseas during a crisis, victims of terrorism may be offered additional assistance according to the circumstances of each situation through our Exceptional Assistance Measures policy. Consular officers work closely with police family liaison officers and overseas authorities to provide support, assistance and information to bereaved families. Through our partnerships with victim support organisations in England, Wales and Scotland we can refer bereaved families to specialist support on return to the UK.

  • Tim Loughton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Tim Loughton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tim Loughton on 2016-02-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what guidance her Department has issued to its officials to support implementation of the Family Test.

    George Eustice

    The Family Test was announced by the Prime Minister in August 2014 and introduced in October 2014. Produced in collaboration with third sector partners from the Relationship Alliance, the guidance outlines the basis for the Family Test and provides policy officials with information on how the test should be applied when formulating policy and my Department follows that guidance – Family Test Guidance. Defra has a team leading on the Family Test who collaborate with the Department for Work and Pensions.

    Defra is following the guidance to embed and implement the test in the policymaking process and where the test identifies impacts on the family it will be evidenced as part of the formal Impact Assessment.

  • Khalid Mahmood – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Khalid Mahmood – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Khalid Mahmood on 2016-02-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if she will make it her policy to monitor air pollution levels outside schools.

    Rory Stewart

    The UK national monitoring network follows strict criteria for the number and location of air quality monitoring sites as set out in Annex III of the ambient air quality Directive.

    These do not preclude siting monitoring outside or nearby to schools and some existing monitors are near to schools. To ensure the network meets the Directive requirements, monitoring is undertaken at a range of locations (e.g. urban background, roadside, industrial and rural locations).

    Practical factors such as health and safety, access, locality to services, planning, land ownership and cost of monitoring sites are also key in siting new monitoring stations.

    Many Local Authorities also conduct air quality monitoring and are free to determine their chosen approach in assessing air pollution based on local circumstances and priorities. Local Authorities are able to use monitoring methods not available to the national network due to the Directive’s requirements.

    This means that they are able to design monitoring more suited to the local circumstance. However, when a new national monitoring site is required, Local Authorities will be consulted and where possible, existing sites may be shared or a new site located to meet both national and local needs. This may often mean consideration is given to siting at a local school or at a Local Authority or public building.