Tag: 2015

  • Lord Scriven – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Scriven – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Scriven on 2015-11-26.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assumptions they have made about the increase in demand for social care in calculating that the new 2 per cent council tax levy and the £1.5 billion for the Better Care Fund, announced in the Spending Review and Autumn Statement 2015, would meet future demand; and whether they will list the assumptions made and the projected increase in demand for each year from 2015 to 2020.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    Spending Review decisions take into account a range of financial and economic factors as well as changes in demand. Our analysis of adult social care demand drew on:

    ‒ academic modelling of future demand for services;

    ‒ projections and data on pay including the National Living Wage from the Office of Budget Responsibility and Skills for Care;

    ‒ gross domestic product deflators for inflation; and

    ‒ consideration of the potential for efficiencies and savings, based on a range of sources.

    That analysis informed the decision to provide a settlement which means local government has access to the funding it needs to increase social care spending in real terms by the end of the Parliament, including:

    ‒ The social care precept which puts money raising powers into the hands of local areas who understand the need in their area and who are best placed to respond;

    ‒ From 2017-18, social care funds for local government, rising to £1.5 billion by 2019-20, to be included in an improved Better Care Fund; and

    ‒ More than double the funding for the heavily oversubscribed Disabled Facilities Grant to over £500 million per annum by 2019-20.

  • Peter Kyle – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Peter Kyle – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Peter Kyle on 2015-11-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what discussions he had with Monitor on South East Coast Ambulance NHS Foundation Trust’s project relating to the prioritisation of NHS 111 calls in winter 2014-15 before Monitor announced it was taking action on that matter.

    Jane Ellison

    Departmental officials were first notified of a project which was run between December 2014 and February 2015 in the south of England on 23 October 2015 by Monitor, the independent health sector regulator.

    We are advised that Monitor is taking action with South East Coast Ambulance Service Foundation Trust regarding concerns about the project and the regulator is working with the Trust now to identify the negative impact this project could have had on patients. It is Monitor’s function to undertaken such investigations independently of the Department where there are no immediate patient safety issues. Monitor and Departmental officials regularly discuss such issues on a routine basis.

    As part of regulatory action, Monitor advises it has asked the trust to carry out a detailed independent review of the impact the project had on patients. Monitor has asked the Trust to do this with the help of an external expert, who the regulator will select. The full details of what the review will look at and how long it will take are being worked on by the trust and Monitor, including consideration of publication of the review finding.

    In March, NHS England convened a risk summit meeting involving all partners following the suspension by South East Coast Ambulance Service of their unofficial call-handling project. It was agreed that NHS England would undertake an external investigation. The report of the investigation was published by NHS England today and is attached.

  • Lord Kennedy of Southwark – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Lord Kennedy of Southwark – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Kennedy of Southwark on 2015-11-26.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is the current level of spending on infrastructure in the UK, compared to the rest of the G7.

    Lord O’Neill of Gatley

    The National Infrastructure Pipeline outlines over £410 billion of planned investment to the end of the decade and beyond; this includes both public and private investment.

    At the Spending Review, it was announced that the Government will exceed its commitment to invest £100 billion in infrastructure by 2020-21. It will now make a public investment of £120 billion. (This includes social infrastructure).

    HM Government does not hold figures on infrastructure spending in other G7 countries, and methodological discrepancies prevent reliable comparison of infrastructure spending.

  • Bill Wiggin – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Bill Wiggin – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Bill Wiggin on 2015-11-02.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what steps he is taking to reduce red tape affecting estate agents subject to the Money Laundering Regulations 2007.

    Harriett Baldwin

    The Government’s Anti-Money Laundering regime has a clear aim: to make the UK financial system a hostile environment for illicit finances, whilst minimising the burden on legitimate businesses and reducing the overall burden of regulation.

    With this in mind, the Government has launched a review of the impact on business of the current anti-money laundering and terrorist finance regime as part of the Cutting Red Tape Review programme. The call for evidence from all parties closes on 6th November and the Review is specifically seeking evidence on the role of supervisors in that regime, so that regulatory activity can be made as efficient as possible. The Review will examine the potential to improve compliance and efficiency, by identifying aspects of the supervisory regime that appear to businesses in the regulated sector to be unclear or unnecessarily cumbersome.

  • Lord Freyberg – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Freyberg – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Freyberg on 2015-11-26.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what percentage of NHS secondary care centres do not provide tumour genetic testing in (1) breast cancer, (2) colorectal cancer, (3) lung cancer, and (4) melanoma.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    All NHS England commissioned secondary and tertiary hospitals will be able to collect blood and/or tissue samples for the purpose of genetic testing, depending on the sampling technique required. The testing itself is however usually undertaken by commissioned genetic laboratories, which will typically serve a catchment area much greater than the hospital in which they are based. There will usually be recommended criteria in place to guide National Health Service referrals for genetic testing.

    In a small number of cases, usually for very rare conditions, a test may need to be sent away to a non commissioned laboratory, including some abroad and some falling within the private sector, to access expertise. Funding will, however, continue to be provided from NHS budgets.

    The United Kingdom is also leading the world by using cutting edge technology in the form of whole genome sequencing to transform healthcare and health research. The Prime Minister launched the 100,000 Genomes Project to bring the benefits of genome sequencing to NHS patients. The Project will sequence 100,000 whole human genomes of NHS patients with cancer or a rare disease by the end of 2017. Eleven Genomic Medicine Centres have been established across the country and are recruiting patients to this landmark project. Otherwise, NHS England does not hold data on private or self-funded care or testing commissioned from either NHS or third party laboratories.

    Information on the percentage of eligible patients who received access to genetic testing is not held by NHS England. Due to data protection requirements, detailed data on the reasons for referral for specific tests are not currently aggregated at national level.

  • Antoinette Sandbach – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Antoinette Sandbach – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Antoinette Sandbach on 2015-11-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the availability of staff and resources in prisons to enable (a) Christian, (b) Muslim and (c) Jewish religious services to take place.

    Andrew Selous

    Prisons are required to facilitate and enable religious services for all faiths. The availability of staff and resources to do this is kept under review locally. In addition, chaplaincy Headquarters advisers conduct annual assurance and compliance visits to monitor compliance. Advisers will make recommendations as appropriate and work with prisons to resolve any outstanding issues.

  • Gordon Marsden – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Gordon Marsden – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gordon Marsden on 2015-11-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what consultation his Department carried out with (a) students and their representative bodies and (b) other people and bodies before announcing that university maintenance grants would be abolished.

    Joseph Johnson

    I refer the Hon Member to my reply to the hon Member for Newport West to question UIN 11271.

    “

  • Melanie Onn – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Melanie Onn – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Melanie Onn on 2015-11-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what assessment he has made of the effect of the cost of acquiring a Certificate in Professional Competence on access to such certificates for young people.

    Andrew Jones

    The Department for Transport has not made any assessments on the effect of the cost of acquiring a Certificate of Professional Competence (CPC) on access to such Certificates for young people.

    In order to allow newly qualified drivers to gain experience, the department allows those who have passed the theory test (module one) and practical driving test (module three) to enrol on an approved National Vocational Training (NVT) programme and defer taking the Driver CPC theory and practical tests. This allows a driver to work professionally for up to 12 months whilst working towards a Driver CPC qualification.

  • Rachel Reeves – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Rachel Reeves – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Rachel Reeves on 2015-11-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what estimate his Department has made of the average transitional protection award that will be paid to the claimants who are migrated from tax credits to universal credit.

    Priti Patel

    At the summer budget the Chancellor of the Exchequer set out the Government’s commitment to move the UK from a high tax, high welfare, low wage society to a lower tax, lower welfare, higher wage society. This remains the case, and Universal Credit (UC) is delivering this.

    UC is a fundamentally different benefit to the legacy benefit system and provides people with support into, and to progress in work.

    Therefore there is no meaningful way of comparing an unreformed Tax Credit system with Universal Credit. The Government has committed to transitional arrangements as we reform the benefits and Tax Credit system. Those transferred by DWP from tax credits to UC will receive Transitional Protection. In addition, estimates of entitlements under UC of the sort requested will vary depending on assumptions on the level of earnings.

  • Stephen Timms – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Stephen Timms – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Timms on 2015-11-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to the Answer of 16 September 2015 to the hon. Member for Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey to Question 9852, by when his Department will be able to form a reliable estimate of the number of disability living allowance recipients who are Motability users who will not qualify for the enhanced rate of the personal independence payment mobility component.

    Justin Tomlinson

    We expect to be able to form a reliable estimate once a significant proportion of working-age Disability Living Allowance recipients have been reassessed for the Personal Independence Payment. Over 1.75 million claimants require reassessing; as of July 2015 circa 186,900 had been reassessed.

    As referenced in our previous reply of 16 September 2015, DWP will continue to pay DLA for four weeks after the decision not to pay PIP enhanced mobility component is made. The Motability charity has confirmed that claimants can keep their car for up to three weeks after DLA payments end. This means that claimants will retain their car for up to nearly two months even though they are not entitled to PIP enhanced mobility component.

    In addition, the Department has worked closely with Motability to ensure that those claimants who no longer meet the criteria for the Motability Scheme are supported through the transitional period. For most of these claimants who entered into their first lease agreement with Motability before January 2013, Motability will provide transitional support of £2,000. This will enable many claimants to continue to meet their mobility needs by purchasing a used car. For claimants who entered into their first lease agreement with the scheme after January 2013 and up to December 2013, Motability will supply transitional support of £1,000 to assist with mobility costs.