UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: 2015

  • David Anderson – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    David Anderson – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Anderson on 2015-10-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what progress has been made on implementation of a national screening programme for prostate cancer.

    Jane Ellison

    The UK National Screening Committee (UK NSC) advises Ministers and the National Health Service in all four countries about all aspects of screening policy.

    The UK NSC re-affirmed in March 2012 that a national screening programme for prostate cancer should not be offered. This is because:

    – The test for prostate cancer, the prostate specific antigen test, is not effective enough and does not identify a large proportion of men who in fact have prostate cancer;

    – A positive test will lead in most cases to a biopsy, which often does not give a definitive answer and leads to anxiety and to further investigations; and

    – Current research indicates for every 100,000 men at age 50 offered screening, 748 would end up being treated. The men accepting screening would have their lives extended on average by a day – while 274 men would be made impotent, 25 incontinent and 17 would have rectal problems as a result of the treatment.

    The UK NSC is currently reviewing its recommendation on whether a national screening programme for prostate cancer should be offered. Ministers expect to receive a recommendation shortly.

  • Roger Godsiff – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Roger Godsiff – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2015-10-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what forecasts his Department has made of the proportion of NHS (a) nurses and (b) doctors that will be recruited from agencies in each of the next five years.

    Ben Gummer

    The information requested is not held by the Department.

  • Conor McGinn – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Conor McGinn – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Conor McGinn on 2015-10-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the effect of the delay in reform of social care funding until 2020 on the provision of social care; and how many people will be affected by that delay in (a) St Helens North constituency, (b) the North West and (c) the UK.

    Alistair Burt

    We remain committed to the implementation of the cap on care costs, which will offer financial protection and peace of mind. The decision to delay followed careful consideration of feedback from stakeholders that April 2016 was not the right time to implement these significant and expensive reforms. The benefits of the cap have had to be weighed against the need to focus on supporting the system that supports the most vulnerable.

    In reaching the difficult decision to delay we considered the impact on those who would have entered the cap system from April next year. Though they will not benefit from the additional help straightaway, many will still benefit from the cap system when it is introduced in 2020. The delay will allow local authorities time to focus on consolidating the important reforms to care and support introduced on 1 April 2015, laying the groundwork to implement the funding reforms as successfully as possible in 2020.

    Based on the most recent impact assessment, had the cap system been implemented in April 2016, around 23,000 older people in England would have benefitted immediately in 2016/17 and by 2025/26 up to 80,000 additional older people would have received state support.

    Information regarding how many people will be affected by the delay in specific constituencies or regions is not held in the format requested.

    Means-tested financial support remains available for those who cannot afford to pay for care to meet their eligible needs.

  • David Amess – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    David Amess – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Amess on 2015-10-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many stakeholders responded to the consultation on the Call to Action on improving eye health and provision of NHS eye health services.

    Alistair Burt

    NHS England received 330 responses to the Call to Action on improving eye health and provision of NHS eye health services.

    The total identifiable spend by NHS England on the Call to Action was £34,184. This consisted of £25,950 for engagement events and £8,234 for the compilation of responses. Figures provided are exclusive of VAT. No consultants were employed.

    There are no current plans for NHS England to publish a report on the Call to Action, however, the findings have been discussed with commissioners and stakeholders. Work is underway to develop local and national responses to the findings as part of NHS England business plan for 2016/17.

  • Stephen McPartland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Stephen McPartland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen McPartland on 2015-10-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will bring forward legislative proposals to amend the Obscene Publications Act 1959 to remove the time limit for prosecution of obscene publications; and if he will make a statement.

    Mike Penning

    The offence of publishing an obscene article under the Obscene Publications Act 1959 is triable either way, with a maximum custodial penalty of six months on summary conviction or five years on conviction on indictment. The Government has no current plans to amend it but is happy to consider relevant evidence.

  • Kate Osamor – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Kate Osamor – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kate Osamor on 2015-10-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment she has made of the performance of (a) the police and (b) her Department in responding to human trafficking; and what steps she is taking to improve the way reports of human trafficking are dealt with.

    Karen Bradley

    The Government has set out its plan for responding to human trafficking in the Modern Slavery Strategy. The Inter-Departmental Ministerial Group (IDMG) on Modern Slavery oversees implementation of the strategy, supported by a quarterly Strategy Board, a monthly stakeholder meeting, and a Modern Slavery Threat Group that is chaired by Chief Constable Shaun Sawyer, the National Policing Lead for Modern Slavery. The IDMG’s 2015 report will be published shortly and will provide a detailed assessment of the scale and nature of the threat, what the Government has done to respond and our priorities for future work. In addition, the Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner will each year publish a report on his work and on progress being made on tackling modern slavery. As part of our wider strategy, the Government is committed to strengthening the way in which we identify and refer potential victims of trafficking into the National Referral Mechanism. As part of this, the Home Office is piloting reforms to the National Referral Mechanism in West Yorkshire and the South West.

  • Kate Osamor – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Kate Osamor – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kate Osamor on 2015-10-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the longest recorded time is for which a person has been held in immigration detention since 2010.

    James Brokenshire

    The longest time a person has been detained in the immigration estate – a foreign criminal who who left detention and was returned to Algeria in Q1 2012 – was 2,319 days.

    The individual in this case had accumulated 14 convictions from 32 offences committed between 1998 and 2004, including – but not limited to – convictions for firearms/ shotguns/offensive weapons, drug offences, offences relating to police/courts/prisons and theft. He was continuously non-compliant with the Home Office and Algerian authorities, using a false identity and nationality, which frustrated attempts to obtain travel documentation to facilitate his deportation. His continued non-compliance, deception and a history of absconding led to detention being prolonged.

    This information does not include those held in prisons solely under Immigration Act powers.

    The Home Office publishes quarterly and annual statistics on the number of people detained in the United Kingdom for immigration purposes, within the Immigration Statistics release on the GOV.UK website: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office/series/immigration-statistics-quarterly-release

  • Mark Durkan – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Mark Durkan – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mark Durkan on 2015-10-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what assessment he has made of the implications for peace talks in Colombia of the on-going violence perpetrated by paramilitaries in that country.

    Mr Hugo Swire

    We strongly believe that the best way to achieve a sustainable peace in Colombia after decades of conflict is through the current Peace Process. We welcome the announcement by both sides on 23 September, on an agreement for justice and victims’ reparations. The agreement ends any notion of impunity, including those alleged to be involved in Paramilitary groups.

    Our Embassy in Bogotá receives regular reporting on the security and human rights situation in Colombia from a range of sources including non-governmental organisations operating in Colombia. This includes allegations of abuses by paramilitary groups such as attacks against leaders of land restitution claims and human rights defenders. The majority of such abuses continue to take place in areas affected by the ongoing conflict. We remain concerned about the ongoing activity of paramilitary forces operating in Colombia and we continue to raise this issue of Human rights regularly with the Colombian authorities.

  • Rushanara Ali – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Rushanara Ali – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Rushanara Ali on 2015-10-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the effect of the proposed new junior doctor contract on the ability of female doctors to take time out of training for parental leave.

    Ben Gummer

    The proposed new contract will not affect the ability of doctors in training (male or female) to take time out for parental leave. All doctors will be treated the same.

    There will be no change to the existing leave and pay entitlements for those taking a break for maternity or parental leave. Pay on return will be the same as that for other trainees at the same stage of training and/or responsibility. This is consistent with what happens for other public sector staff.

  • Dr Poulter – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Dr Poulter – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Dr Poulter on 2015-10-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, whether under the new junior doctor contract proposals, doctors will be prevented from receiving remuneration or other financial support for teaching advanced life support and other medical training courses.

    Ben Gummer

    The principle underpinning the relevant proposals is that junior doctors should not be paid twice for the same time. Junior doctors will be paid by their National Health Service employer for the contractual duties set out in their work schedules. They will be entitled to carry out fee-paying work in periods for which they are not being paid by the NHS employer and to receive payment for that, additional to the payment for their NHS employment. If a fee is paid directly to a junior doctor for work done during time when they are being paid by their NHS employer, the junior doctor will be required to remit the fee to the employing organisation.

    These proposals are – as in other respects – substantively the same as those agreed when the hon. Member was a Minister. As then, it is precisely to look at how these proposals would work that we wish to continue negotiations with the British Medical Association.