Blog

  • in the light of the fact that the government of the Republic of Ireland currently requires applicants for state employment to be able to speak Irish.” – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Northern Ireland Office

    in the light of the fact that the government of the Republic of Ireland currently requires applicants for state employment to be able to speak Irish.” – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Northern Ireland Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by in the light of the fact that the government of the Republic of Ireland currently requires applicants for state employment to be able to speak Irish.” on 2016-01-18.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what discussions they have had with the government of the Republic of Ireland concerning equal opportunities for employment in the Republic of Ireland as outlined in the Belfast Agreement 1998, which affirmed the right to equal opportunity in all social and economic activities regardless of class

    Lord Dunlop

    As I have set out in previous answers, the UK and Irish Governments meet regularly at ministerial and official level to discuss issues of mutual interest and concern, and will continue to do so.

  • FALSE – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Northern Ireland Office

    FALSE – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Northern Ireland Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by FALSE on 2016-01-18.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what discussions they have had with the government of the Republic of Ireland concerning the human rights section of the Belfast Agreement 1998, in which that government affirmed the right to freely choose one’s place of residence”

    Lord Dunlop

    As I have set out in previous answers, the UK and Irish Governments meet regularly at ministerial and official level to discuss issues of mutual interest and concern, and will continue to do so.

  • 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 2016-01-18.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how much has been spent by Commissioning Support Units (CSUs) on external management consultancies since they were established; and how much of that was specifically related to contracts CSUs had with the NHS Commissioning Board.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    Commissioning Support Units (CSUs) were formally established in April 2013. As at December 2015, CSUs paid out £81 million on consultancy support. Total spend has been reducing year on year as CSUs develop their own internal capacity, with 2015/16 to date spend at £8.4 million.

    It is not possible to accurately apportion this to specific contracts with NHS England.

  • 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 2016-01-18.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government why the requirement laid down by the NHS Commissioning Board for Commissioning Support Units to become autonomous by the end of 2016 is to be removed.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    No decision has been made. The proposed change was at the request of Clinical Support Units’ (CSU) Managing Directors – to give greaterflexibility to apply to become autonomous when they are ready, rather than having to work to a fixed timetable. A decision will be taken once NHS England’sCommissioning Committee has met.

  • 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 2016-01-18.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether, as a result of the review of the NHS Commissioning Board’s policy on the autonomy of Commissioning Support Units (CSUs), CSUs that want to become staff enterprises or staff mutuals will have access to working capital on the same basis as other options open to CSUs.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    It will be for NHS England’s Commissioning Committee to decide, in due course, whether to offer Clinical Support Units (CSUs) who apply to become autonomous, access to working capital and if so, on what terms.

  • 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 2016-01-18.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the review of the NHS Commissioning Board’s policy on the autonomy of Commissioning Support Units will impact those units’ options for becoming staff enterprises or staff mutuals.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    NHS England’s Commissioning Committee will shortly be asked to review its current policy on Commissioning Support Unit (CSU) autonomy.

  • 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 2016-01-18.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government when they expect to publish a progress report on the 10-year PET-CT NHS England contract awarded to Alliance Medical in January 2015.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    NHS England has put in place robust governance arrangements to support the national positron emission tomography–computed tomography (PET CT) contract, including regular reviews of the national contract, to ensure that services are commenced as planned, securing significant benefits for patients. As the contract was not fully mobilised until December 2015, NHS England plans to review the progress made over the first year in April 2016 and would be happy to make this report available.

  • Baroness Deech – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Baroness Deech – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Deech on 2016-01-18.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what representations they have made to the Palestinian Authority concerning the alleged torture by Hamas of the Palestinian journalist Ayman al-Aloul, and respect for press freedoms.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    While we have not raised this issue with the Palestinian Authority, we are clear that journalists should have the protection that allows them to do their jobs in safety. Freedom of the media is an important principle of human rights .

  • Baroness Deech – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Baroness Deech – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Deech on 2016-01-18.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what representations they have made to the Palestinian Authority concerning incitement to violence in the light of the Palestinian Ministry of Health referring to Nashat Milhem as one of the dearest martyrs”.”

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    Our Consul-General in Jerusalem met the Palestinian Minister of Health on 21 January and strongly condemned the language used in the statement.

  • Baroness Coussins – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Baroness Coussins – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Coussins on 2016-01-18.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their assessment of the allegation that up to 300,000 forced sterilisations took place in Peru between 1996 and 1998, in the light of the Presidential Decree in November 2015 that there should be a Registry of Victims.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    Former President Alberto Fujimori’s National Family Planning Programme (Programma Nacional de Planificación Familiar) was carried out in Peru from 1996 to 1998. More than 2,000 complaints were brought against the government alleging individuals had been unaware of the permanent nature of these operations or had been financially compensated for being sterilised.

    An independent Congressional Committee set up to investigate the programme in 2002 established that 346,219 women and 24,535 men had been sterilised from 1993 to 2000. The committee recommended that victims of forced sterilisations be compensated and the responsible parties subject to legal proceedings.

    In January 2014, after nearly 10 years of investigations, the Peruvian Public Prosecutor’s Office brought charges against some health professionals involved in the programme; no charges were brought against the government.

    On 6 November 2015, a Supreme Decree was published which mandated the creation of a central register of “victims”. This aims to provide free legal advice, psychological support and medical attention to those affected. The Ombudsman will represent individuals in courts and seek reparations for those individuals found to be victims of irregularities in the implementation of this programme.

    This Government is working towards eliminating all forms of violence against women. This is part of our work to promote the golden thread of democracy, rule of law, free media and open, accountable institutions. Our Embassy in Lima continues to monitor developments on this issue.