Tag: 2014

  • Lord Willis of Knaresborough – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lord Willis of Knaresborough – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Willis of Knaresborough on 2014-03-31.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether consideration is being given to proposals to separate the testing and repair functions following the periodic roadworthiness testing of motor vehicles and their trailers.

    Baroness Kramer

    As a result of the effectiveness of our negotiations, the new periodic testing Directive contains no requirement to separate testing and repair functions. The proposal to force separation was successfully opposed, including by the UK Government and UK MEPs. Systems are in place to support testing integrity within the current system and this will continue.

  • Robert Buckland – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Robert Buckland – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Robert Buckland on 2014-06-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, when his Department plans to publish further details of its review of resolution of disagreements for people with education, health and care needs under the Children and Families Act 2014.

    Mr Edward Timpson

    The Department for Education, in consultation with the Ministry of Justice and others, is in the process of developing proposals for the review of redress and complaint arrangements for children and young people with special educational needs and disabilities. The review will consider:

    1. Whether the amended mediation arrangements set out in the Act provide parents and young people with a way of having their complaints considered in a holistic way and whether they reduce the number of appeals to tribunals.
    2. How successful the new assessment and EHC planning process itself is at resolving disagreements.
    3. If health and social care complaint arrangements are working for parents and young people.
    4. What role the Tribunal might play in hearing appeals and complaints across education, health and social care.

    Running parallel to the review will be pilots to test an expansion of the powers of the first tier tribunal to make recommendations about the health and social care elements of EHC Plans. We estimate that the pilots will begin in the spring of 2015 as the first appeals about the new Education, Health and Care Plans begin to be heard and that the pilots will last for two years as they build up the evidence on which to base any recommendations.

    The Secretary of State for Education and the Lord Chancellor must lay a report on the outcome of the review before Parliament within three years of any of the provisions of Part 3 of the Children and Families Act 2014 coming into force in September 2014. Interim findings from the pilots could be published before the final report on the review.

  • David Morris – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    David Morris – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Morris on 2014-03-31.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what reports he has received of levels of council tax set by Lancaster District Council for 2014-15.

    Brandon Lewis

    [Holding Reply: Thursday 3 April 2014]

    I refer my hon. Friend to my answer of Monday 7 April 2014, Official Report, Column 66W.

  • Stephen Timms – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Stephen Timms – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Timms on 2014-06-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what reports he has received of (a) Farshid Fathi, (b) Behnam Irani, (c) Silas Rabbani, (d) Amin Khaki, (e) Saeed Abedini and (f) other pastors and deacons imprisoned in Iran being beaten in prison.

    Hugh Robertson

    We remain deeply concerned by the detention and ill treatment of all prisoners of conscience in Iran, and the ongoing discrimination against Christians and other minority religious groups. We have called for the Iranian government to protect the rights of all minority groups in Iran and end the persecution of individuals on the basis of their faith.

  • Angus Robertson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Angus Robertson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Angus Robertson on 2014-03-31.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether any other aircraft were operating in the area at the time of the collision between the two Tornado aircraft above the Moray Firth on 3 July 2012.

    Dr Andrew Murrison

    I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right Hon. Friend the Minister of State for the Armed Forces (Mark Francois) on 3 December 2013, (Official Report, column 639W). It would be inappropriate to comment on any details relating to this incident prior to the publication of the Service Inquiry.

  • John Baron – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    John Baron – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by John Baron on 2014-06-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what guidance he has given to clinical commissioning groups on the use of the NICE breast cancer quality standard when commissioning breast cancer services.

    Jane Ellison

    The majority of treatments for cancer, such as radiotherapy and chemotherapy, are commissioned nationally by NHS England. Commissioning is informed by a range of clinical reference groups established as a primary source of advice on best practice, service standards for commissioned providers and forward strategy and innovation.

    Clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) plan and buy local community and non-specialised hospital cancer services in their local area. This includes the diagnosis, oversight of treatment and surgical management of breast cancers.

    NHS England is not aware of any formal guidance being given to CCGs on engagement with Strategic Clinical Networks (SCNs) or breast network site-specific groups. However, it would expect that all health organisations would wish to be part of SCNs. As CCGs are responsible for much of the commissioning of services covered by the SCNs (e.g. cancer, stroke, mental health, and dementia care), they have an interest in their activities.

    Breast network site specific groups are specialist groups who focus on protocol development, improving care and the quality and outcomes of services within the SCN area. It would not be expected for a CCG to normally engage directly with that group but they would be part of a process to approve protocols and of any escalation process if there were concerns about a particular service within the SCN.

    National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) quality standards define clinical best practice for the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer to help clinicians ensure that patients are given information about the treatment options available and help in choosing the best option to suit them. NHS England would expect CCGs to take into account NICE quality standards when commissioning breast cancer services.

  • Maria Eagle – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Maria Eagle – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Maria Eagle on 2014-03-31.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, pursuant to the Answer of 24 March 2014, Official Report, column 31W, on the Environment Agency, when the review of existing workloads against enforcement priorities and available budgets will be completed; and if he will make a statement.

    Dan Rogerson

    It is expected that the process of reviewing the baseline total enforcement and legal casework to match this to the Environment Agency budget will be completed within the next six weeks.

  • Tom Watson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Tom Watson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tom Watson on 2014-06-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many arrests in the UK have resulted from Operation Rescue; how many charges were brought following those arrests; how many open investigations remain from those identified; and if she will make a statement.

    Damian Green

    Operation Rescue was an investigation into a website that promoted the distribution of Indecent Images of Children. From 2007 to 2011, 240 intelligence packages were disseminated by the SOCA affiliated Child Exploitation Online Protection Centre (CEOP) to Police Forces across the UK.

    At the end of the intelligence dissemination phase of the operation in 2011 CEOP had been notified of 121 arrests; of these 33 individuals were convicted and 7 cautioned.

    Further information regarding charges, convictions and open investigations is handled at a local level by the relevant police force and is not recorded centrally.

  • Philip Davies – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Philip Davies – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Philip Davies on 2014-03-31.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many prisoners who are in open prisons are serving (a) a life sentence and (b) an indeterminate sentence for public protection.

    Jeremy Wright

    Depending on the length of tariff and the risk they pose, indeterminate sentenced prisoners (ISPs – both those serving life and Imprisonment for Public Protection sentences) move through their sentence via a series of progressive transfers into lower security establishments in the closed estate and then usually into open conditions. The purpose of any placement in open conditions is for such prisoners’ risks to be tested in less stringent conditions in order to inform the Parole Board’s consideration as to whether it is safe to release them into the community. It is also is an important part of the offender’s rehabilitation. The decision to transfer ISPs to open conditions is a categorisation decision which is a matter for the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State may take this decision after seeking advice from the Parole Board or executively where the prisoners may demonstrate exceptional progress.

    However, there is nothing automatic about progress from open conditions to eventual release. Rather, the period in open prison will serve as an important time to test the prisoner and will help inform the Parole Board’s decision whether the offenders risk is such that it may be safely managed in the community.

    For many prisoners, in particular those such as ISPs who have spent a considerable amount of time in custody; these are essential components for successful reintegration in the community and therefore an important factor in protecting the public. To release these prisoners directly from a closed prison without the resettlement benefits of the open estate would undoubtedly lead to higher levels of post-release re-offending.

    The main purpose of open conditions is to test prisoners in conditions more similar to those that they will face in the community. It also enables them to develop their plans for eventual release. Time spent in open prisons affords prisoners the opportunity to find work, re-establish family ties, reintegrate into the community and ensure housing needs are met. Open prisons are the most effective means of ensuring that prisoners are subject to testing, with appropriate risk assessment to ensure the protection of the public, before they are released into the community. Once tariff has expired, an ISP’s continued detention is justified only so long as it is necessary for the protection of the public.

    Public protection is the priority and the Board will take into account a range of factors when assessing whether an offender’s risk is reduced sufficiently, in order that they can be managed in open conditions or on licence in the community. These might include the completion of offence related courses, a sustained period of good custodial behaviour, access to appropriate and stable accommodation, access to education, training and employment, and support from professionals as well as family and friends. The Parole Board would not recommend a prisoner’s transfer to open conditions unless they considered it safe to do so. Prisoners located in open prison conditions have been rigorously risk assessed and categorised as being of a low enough risk to the public to warrant their placement in an open prison.

    The requested information is provided in the table attached.

    These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.

  • Simon Burns – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the House of Commons Commission

    Simon Burns – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the House of Commons Commission

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Simon Burns on 2014-06-16.

    To ask the hon. Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross representing the House of Commons Commission, whether the next Clerk of the House and Chief Executive will be subject to security vetting if he or she is appointed from outside the House service or Civil Service; and whether he or she will be subject to a confirmation hearing before a select committee.

    John Thurso

    Three organisations specialising in executive search services were invited to tender to provide support for the recruitment of the next Clerk of the House and Chief Executive. Saxton Bampfylde was selected through this process.

    The selection panel comprises Mr Speaker, Rt Hon Andrew Lansley MP, Angela Eagle MP, John Thurso MP, Rt Hon Margaret Hodge MP and Dame Julie Mellor (Parliamentary & Health Service Ombudsman). No confirmation hearing is envisaged. The composition of the panel for the recruitment of the present postholder was Mr Speaker, Rt Hon Sir George Young MP, Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, John Thurso MP, Rt Hon Sir Alan Beith MP, Rt Hon Lindsay Hoyle MP and Sheila Drew Smith.

    Knowledge of procedural and constitutional issues will be tested as part of the formal interview process. The Clerk of the House is appointed by the Crown by Letters Patent, on the recommendation of the Speaker to the Prime Minister, and the Prime Minister to the Crown. As part of normal pre-appointment checks it will be a requirement for the next Clerk of the House to be subject to security vetting. The terms of the recruitment brief were agreed by the Commission by correspondence, and the advertisement, finalised by the Speaker and the Director General of HR and Change, was based on the agreed brief.