Blog

  • 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 2016-02-01.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what representations they are making to the government of Israel following the arrest of three members of the Palestinian Legislative Council, Hatim Qufayshah, Isa al-Ja’bari, and Muhammad Abu-Tayr; and whether they will take steps to discover what charges, if any, will be brought against them, and whether they will be released on bail.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    While we have not specifically raised the arrests of the three Palestinian Legislative Council Members with the Israeli authorities, we remain concerned about Israel’s extensive use of administrative detention which, according to international law, should be used only when security makes this absolutely necessary rather than as routine practice, and as a preventive rather than a punitive measure.

  • Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-02-01.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the NHS Low Income Scheme refers to personal income or family income with regard to university students.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The NHS Low Income Scheme provides income-related help with health costs to students, as for all other adults.

    The extent of any help is based on a comparison between a person’s weekly income and requirements at the date they apply to the NHS Low Income Scheme. For a student, income will include any maintenance grant or loan available, the assessment of which may be based on parental income, and the amount of parental contribution assessed by an education authority as payable. Any other income a student may have, such as non-assessed contributions from parents or earnings, will also be taken into account in calculating entitlement. Bursaries will not be included so long as they are clearly not intended for day to day living expenses.

  • Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-02-01.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether students qualify for the NHS Low Income Scheme.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The NHS Low Income Scheme provides income-related help with health costs to students, as for all other adults.

    The extent of any help is based on a comparison between a person’s weekly income and requirements at the date they apply to the NHS Low Income Scheme. For a student, income will include any maintenance grant or loan available, the assessment of which may be based on parental income, and the amount of parental contribution assessed by an education authority as payable. Any other income a student may have, such as non-assessed contributions from parents or earnings, will also be taken into account in calculating entitlement. Bursaries will not be included so long as they are clearly not intended for day to day living expenses.

  • Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-02-01.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of how much the average student spends per year on prescriptions.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    We are unable to provide the cost of giving free prescriptions to students in full-time education.

    The estimated cost of giving free prescriptions to those young people aged 16, 17 and 18 in full-time education for the period April 2014 to March 2015 is £68,088,373. This is based on information captured when processing National Health Service FP10 prescription forms which were dispensed in the community during the period April 2014 to March 2015.

    We do not hold the information on how much the average student spends per year on prescriptions.

  • Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-02-01.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the cost of giving free prescriptions to students in full-time education.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    We are unable to provide the cost of giving free prescriptions to students in full-time education.

    The estimated cost of giving free prescriptions to those young people aged 16, 17 and 18 in full-time education for the period April 2014 to March 2015 is £68,088,373. This is based on information captured when processing National Health Service FP10 prescription forms which were dispensed in the community during the period April 2014 to March 2015.

    We do not hold the information on how much the average student spends per year on prescriptions.

  • Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-02-01.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of whether the decision by NHS England to refuse funding for micro-processor knees is consistent with its Five Year Forward View, which states that the NHS needs to adapt to take advantage of the opportunities that science and technology offer patients and carers.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    NHS England has not refused to fund micro-processor knees. A revised policy proposal for the routine commissioning of microprocessor controlled knees was considered by NHS England’s expert Clinical Priorities Advisory Group which recommended its adoption for routine commissioning. The proposal was then considered by NHS England’s Specialised Commissioning Oversight Group at its meeting on 9 December 2015 where it was agreed that NHS England would support this service development as a possible call on its resources. However given the potential scale of investment and the need to consider its priority relative to other treatments which would also have a possible call on the specialised commissioning resources it was decided that the policy should go forward for consideration as part of NHS England’s next annual prioritisation round in June 2016.

  • Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-02-01.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the impact on patients of the decision by NHS England to refuse funding for micro-processor knees.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    NHS England has not refused to fund micro-processor knees. A revised policy proposal for the routine commissioning of microprocessor controlled knees was considered by NHS England’s expert Clinical Priorities Advisory Group which recommended its adoption for routine commissioning. The proposal was then considered by NHS England’s Specialised Commissioning Oversight Group at its meeting on 9 December 2015 where it was agreed that NHS England would support this service development as a possible call on its resources. However given the potential scale of investment and the need to consider its priority relative to other treatments which would also have a possible call on the specialised commissioning resources it was decided that the policy should go forward for consideration as part of NHS England’s next annual prioritisation round in June 2016.

  • Baroness Featherstone – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Baroness Featherstone – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Featherstone on 2016-02-01.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government when they expect work to commence on the Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon.

    Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth

    On 10 February the Government announced that it will commission an independent review to assess the strategic case for tidal lagoons and whether they could represent good value for consumers. We anticipate that the review will be completed in the autumn.

    The Government is currently in the first phase of a Contract for Difference negotiation with the developer of the proposed Swansea Bay tidal lagoon project. At present there is no timeframe for how long the negotiation process may take. The timeframe depends on a number of factors, many of which would be outside the control of the Department.

    The work programme and the construction timetable for the proposed lagoon are matters for the developer.

  • Lord Campbell of Pittenweem – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Lord Campbell of Pittenweem – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Campbell of Pittenweem on 2016-02-01.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what conclusions they have drawn from the recent study of the UK’s future rotary wing requirements carried out by the Joint Helicopter Command.

    Earl Howe

    The 2015 Air Manoeuvre Future Capability Study reviewed and confirmed a number of major assumptions made about Battlefield Helicopter capabilities in the Rotary Wing Strategy of 2009. These were further tested through the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2010 and in the Defence Rotary Wing Capability Study of 2011. These included:

    Attack Helicopter capability will be sustained through the Apache Capability Sustainment Programme until at least 2040.

    Rotary Wing Heavy Lift capability will be sustained through a Chinook Capability Sustainment Programme until at least 2040.

    An opportunity exists to review the means by which medium lift capabilities are delivered from the mid-2030s, following the out of service dates for Puma Mk 2 and Merlin Mk 3/4. This will be examined initially through a capability investigation that will also consider the broader utility of unmanned aviation.

  • Lord Boswell of Aynho – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Lord Boswell of Aynho – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Boswell of Aynho on 2016-02-01.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, for each government department, from July to December 2015, on how many occasions the scrutiny reserve resolution in (1) the House of Lords, and (2) the House of Commons, was overridden, and in respect of how many documents an override occurred in (1) both Houses, or (2) either House.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    Between July and December 2015, 434 Explanatory Memoranda on EU documents were submitted for scrutiny. There were 54 occasions when the Government supported decisions in the EU Council of Ministers before the scrutiny procedures had been completed by either one or both Scrutiny Committees. In each case the Government wrote to the Scrutiny Committees to explain the reasons why it was important for the Government to support the proposal before the scrutiny process could be completed or where the Committees were unable to provide a waiver for the Government to support the proposal whilst retaining the issue under scrutiny. As with previous six-monthly periods, the largest category of instrument were fast-moving EU restrictive measures where there were overrides on 40 such measures (74 per cent of the total number) of which 12 measures addressed the situation in Iran.

    The figures requested are set out below:

    Department

    (1). House of Lords Override

    (2). House of Commons override

    (1). No. of overrides in both Houses

    (2). Total no. of overrides

    Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    42

    44

    41

    45

    HM Treasury

    7

    7

    7

    7

    Culture, Media and Sport

    1

    1

    1

    1

    Food Standards Agency

    0

    1

    0

    1

    Totals

    50

    53

    49

    54

    I refer the noble Lord to my answer of 29 July 2015 (HL1633) which presented the figures for overrides for the period January-June 2015. That answer contained two errors. In a letter dated 16 September 2015 to the Chairs of the two Scrutiny Committees, the Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for Aylesbury (Mr Lidington), undertook to correct the errors when providing figures for the period July-December 2015. One Foreign and Commonwealth Office override on the Council decision extending the mandate of the EU Special Representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina had been counted twice. This brings the overall total down from 90 to 89. The total in the House of Lords (54) is unchanged since the Committee cleared that proposal before adoption, but it does reduce the number declared for the House of Commons from 86 to 85. The answer also stated that the 39 measures (the largest category of the total) were the Common Foreign and Security Policy restrictive measures. A recalculation has shown the figure to be 38. The earlier answer also highlighted an unresolved issue of whether an override needed to be recorded against a Commission Communication on the Paris Protocol (‘A Blueprint for tackling Global Climate Change beyond 2020’) because discussion with the European Scrutiny Committee had at that stage not been concluded. It was subsequently agreed that agreement of the document did not need to be recorded as a scrutiny override.