Blog

  • Glyn Davies – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Glyn Davies – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Glyn Davies on 2016-01-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many people were diagnosed with urinary incontinence in each of the last five years; and what the cost to the NHS was of treating that condition in each such year.

    Jane Ellison

    The Department does not hold information on the number of people admitted to hospital for a catheter-associated urinary tract infection, urinary tract infection or urinary incontinence.

    The following table shows a count of finished admission episodes (FAEs) in the last five years with a primary diagnosis of catheter-associated urinary tract infections.

    YEAR

    FAEs

    2010-11

    215

    2011-12

    294

    2012-13

    447

    2013-14

    641

    2014-15

    942

    The following table shows a count of FAEs in the last five years with a primary diagnosis of urinary incontinence in England.

    Year

    FAEs

    2010-11

    27,797

    2011-12

    26,751

    2012-13

    24,938

    2013-14

    23,498

    2014-15

    20,969

    The following table shows a count of FAEs in the last five years with a primary diagnosis of urinary tract infection in England

    YEAR

    FAEs

    2010-11

    168,581

    2011-12

    174,818

    2012-13

    184,924

    2013-14

    187,594

    2014-15

    195,282

    Source: Hospital episode statistics (HES), Health and social care information centre

    Notes:

    A finished admission episode (FAE) is the first period of admitted patient care under one consultant within one healthcare provider. FAEs are counted against the year or month in which the admission episode finishes. Admissions do not represent the number of patients, as a person may have more than one admission within the period.

    The primary diagnosis provides the main reason why the patient was admitted to hospital.

    The costs to the National Health Service of treating people with urinary tract infections and urinary incontinence is not available centrally.

    Such information as is available is from reference costs, which are the average unit costs of providing defined services to patients. Reference costs for acute care are published by Healthcare Resource Group (HRG), which are standard groupings of similar treatments that use similar resources. For example, costs relating to kidney or urinary tract interventions are assigned to the same HRGs.

    Table: Estimated total costs of kidney or urinary tract interventions and urinary incontinence or other urinary problems reported by NHS trusts and foundation trusts, 2010-11 to 2014-15 (£ millions)

    Kidney or urinary tract interventions

    Urinary incontinence or other urinary problems

    2010-11

    370.5

    28.2

    2011-12

    398.9

    28.1

    2012-13

    432.4

    27.8

    2013-14

    464.8

    28.3

    2014-15

    506.5

    27.6

    Source: Reference costs, Department of Health

  • Julie Cooper – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Julie Cooper – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julie Cooper on 2016-01-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what measures and regulations are in place to ensure that clinical drug tests are low-risk and safe.

    George Freeman

    Clinical trials of medicinal products in the United Kingdom are strictly regulated by European Union and UK legislation in order to ensure that the studies achieve their scientific targets while safeguarding the trial participants. Before any trial of a new medicine is initiated in humans, the medicinal product will have undergone extensive non-clinical testing, both in the laboratory and in animals as appropriate. The organisation responsible for proposing the trial (the Sponsor) will submit a Clinical Trial Authorisation application that will be reviewed by both the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and a research ethics committee.

    The MHRA assesses the safety and scientific value of the trial. A team of assessors will review the pharmaceutical quality of the medicinal product, the supporting data from pre-clinical testing and the details of the trial design and methodology, along with all available clinical data. The research ethics committee will ensure that the participant has been fully informed of all the necessary information about the trial, including information on potential risks and side effects.

    All Phase I trials in healthy volunteers are assessed taking into account European guidelines on strategies to identify and mitigate risks for first in human (FIH) trials. In the UK, trials that are identified as being higher risk are referred by the MHRA to an Expert Advisory Group of the Commission on Human Medicines for advice.

    The MHRA has instituted a Phase I accreditation scheme for organisations conducting phase I trials, in particular for those conducting FIH trials. MHRA Inspectors will grant Phase I accreditation only to those research units that exceed the basic regulatory Good Clinical Practice standards by having additional procedures that include the highest standards for avoiding harm to trial subjects and for handling any medical emergencies.

  • 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 2016-01-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, whether the UK has identified any people or ministries responsible for human rights violations in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

    Mr Hugo Swire

    We have strongly supported the work of the UN Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. The UN Commission of Inquiry documents serious human rights violations committed by the state in the DPRK and we have urged the DPRK authorities to respond in detail to the contents of the report. The report, which can be found at http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/CoIDPRK/Pages/CommissionInquiryonHRinDPRK.aspx, includes details of human rights violations committed by officials from a number of state institutions and ministries. There must be no impunity for those accused of serious human rights violations.

  • 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 2016-01-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, if his Department will increase funding for human rights projects in North Korea.

    Mr Hugo Swire

    We currently deliver a range of projects in the DPRK through our bilateral project fund, many of which are intended to deliver improvements in human rights. We will be assessing future projects on human rights for the next year under the Magna Carta Fund for Human Rights and Democracy where we will consider the practicalities and implications of delivering human rights projects in DPRK and how to improve the appalling human rights situation. We will continue to support humanitarian work aimed at alleviating the plight of the most vulnerable in DPRK’s society.

  • 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 2016-01-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, whether the Government has formulated plans to assist a mass humanitarian emergency response if instability were to occur in North Korea.

    Mr Hugo Swire

    All humanitarian crises are assessed on a case by case basis, along with any potential role for UK intervention.

  • Charlotte Leslie – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Charlotte Leslie – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Charlotte Leslie on 2016-01-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, how many officials of his Department and at which grades are classified speakers of foreign languages for each such language spoken.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    Records from the last 5 years (up to the end of 2015) show that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office has 505 officers with an Operational level (C1) exam pass across 33 different languages. This figure comprises 94 Senior Management Staff officers and 411 officers from the delegated grades.

  • Jamie Reed – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Jamie Reed – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jamie Reed on 2016-01-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to the Answer of 20 January 2016 to Question 19992, what the reason was for the time taken to answer that Question.

    Mr David Lidington

    I, along with my ministerial colleagues, always aim to provide timely and comprehensive responses to Written Parliamentary Questions. However, there are occasions where this is not possible. In the case of Question 19992, this Question did not fall within the remit of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, leading to a delay in providing the response.

  • Diane Abbott – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Diane Abbott – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Diane Abbott on 2016-01-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to the Answer of 19 January 2016 to Question 22275, what assessment his Department made of the risk that items might be used in the commission of a serious violation of international humanitarian law as defined in the Export Control Act 2002 and the EU Common position when making the decision to grant licences for the sale of arms to Saudi Arabia.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    The UK Government takes its arms export responsibilities very seriously and operates one of the most robust arms export control regimes in the world. All export licence applications are assessed on a case-by-case basis against the Consolidated EU and National Arms Export Licensing Criteria, taking account of all relevant factors at the time of the application including International Humanitarian Law. The Government is satisfied that extant licences for Saudi Arabia are compliant with the UK’s export licensing criteria.

  • Paul Flynn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Paul Flynn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Paul Flynn on 2016-01-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what information the Government holds on whether blueprints of (a) UK Magnox reactor designs and (b) URENCO uranium enrichment plant designs have been used by North Korea to manufacture plutonium and highly enriched uranium as fissile materials for use in its nuclear warhead programme.

    Mr Hugo Swire

    We remain deeply concerned by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s (DPRK) development of a nuclear programme. We do not know whether the DPRK, in the development of its reactor, drew upon UK Magnox reactor designs which were made public in the 1950s and 60s. While the DPRK has made frequent public statements regarding its nuclear capabilities and WMD development, it provides little substantive information on the precise nature of those capabilities. UN Security Council Resolutions prohibit the provision of technical training, advice, services or assistance related to the manufacture of the DPRK’s nuclear-related programmes; the UK strongly supports international efforts to uphold this provision to prevent the proliferation of WMD.

  • Stephen Doughty – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Stephen Doughty – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Doughty on 2016-01-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what assessment he has made of progress in electoral registration in Somaliland; and what support the UK is providing for that process.

    James Duddridge

    The UK, together with Denmark and the EU are providing funding in support of the biometric voter registration system and expertise required to plan and prepare the voter registration system in Somaliland. The UK has contributed £2.18million. The process began on 16 January and is progressing as planned. Over 100,000 people have already been registered. The UK is funding independent monitoring of the process to ensure that it continues to be effectively administered, peaceful and accessible to all.