Tag: 2015

  • Andrew Rosindell – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Andrew Rosindell – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Rosindell on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what assessment he has made of the implications for his policy of the Iranian government’s decision to release from custody five senior members of Al Qaeda during international negotiations on the lifting of international sanctions against Iran.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    We are aware of public reports that Iran released a number of senior Al Qaeda members. We continue to have concerns about Iran’s role in fostering international instability. The recent nuclear agreement has not changed our view on this. As part of the nuclear agreement, Iran will now begin to take required steps on its nuclear programme. These must be verified by the International Atomic Energy Agency before Iran benefits from any financial and economic sanctions relief.

  • Alex Cunningham – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Alex Cunningham – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Alex Cunningham on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what plans his Department has to assess whether unpaid carers are receiving their new rights to support as introduced by the Care Act 2014.

    Alistair Burt

    The Government recognises the valuable contribution made by carers, many of whom spend a significant proportion of their life providing support to family members or friends.

    That is why we continue to support implementation of the improved rights for carers enshrined in the Care Act 2014. The Department has provided £104 million of funding to local authorities for these rights in 2015/16, which include an extended right to assessment and, for the first time, a duty on local authorities to meet carers’ eligible needs for support.

    To support implementation of the reform programme, we have established a joint Programme Management Office between the Department, Local Government Association and Association of Directors of Adults Social Services (ADASS). This unprecedented partnership is driving collaborative working with the sector, influencing the local implementation of these changes to support a consistent and coherent approach. This approach was recognised by the National Audit Office as best practice and should be adopted by other programmes.

    The programme includes a series of stocktakes of Local Authority readiness and the latest, from June 2015, demonstrates an overall positive picture on implementation:

    – Councils’ confidence in their ability to deliver the Care Act Reforms in 2015/16 remains high, with 99% very or fairly confident.

    – 89% of councils say that they are ‘on track’ with their implementation. The remaining 11% report themselves as only slightly behind.

    We have also produced a suite of implementation support documents around the new carers’ rights, one of which is The Economic Case for Investment in Carers, a short factsheet for local authorities to use in considering whether to put in place a policy of charging carers, setting out the evidence that charging would be a false economy. This expands on the position set out in the Care Act statutory guidance, which at paragraph 8.50 states that:

    “Local authorities are not required to charge a carer for support and indeed in many cases it would be a false economy to do so. When deciding whether to charge, and in determining what an appropriate charge is, a local authority should consider how it wishes to express the way it values carers within its local community as partners in care, and recognise the significant contribution carers make.”

    The Care Act replicates the previous position where charging carers was permissible. It would not have been appropriate to impose a blanket ban on charging for carers services, because in some cases small charges are necessary to the viability of services. However, the Care Act provides additional protection to carers by making it clear that local authorities cannot charge carers for services provided to the person being cared for. This means that carers may only be charged for services provided directly to them.

    Most local authorities do not routinely charge carers in recognition of the valuable contribution carers make to their local communities, and the Carers Trust report confirms that this is still the case. We will continue to make the case against routine charging of carers and to monitor the situation closely through the implementation monitoring process set out above.

    We have no plans to create a new duty around NHS identification of carers. The Care Act requires NHS bodies and local authorities to co-operate with each other in the exercise of their respective functions relevant to care and support, including those relating to carers, so we would expect local authorities and NHS bodies to cooperate in identifying and signposting carers. The Department is working with ADASS and NHS England to produce a “local pathway” for carer identification and support that will set this out in more detail.

    The Department has also provided over £2 million in recent years to the professional bodies such as the Royal College of General Practitioners and the Royal College of Nursing, as well as Carers UK and the Carers Trust, to develop initiatives to raise awareness of carers among healthcare professionals and to help identify and support carers.

    The Department is also leading on the development of a new National Carers’ Strategy that will be looking at the best of international practice and examine what more we can do to support existing carers and the new carers.

  • Robert Neill – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Robert Neill – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Robert Neill on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what information his Department holds on when the Health and Social Care Information Centre expects its innovation scorecard to attain the status of non-experimental statistics; what steps that centre is taking to improve the data quality of that scorecard; and if he will make a statement.

    George Freeman

    The Health and Social Care Information Centre is working towards the removal of the experimental status of the innovation scorecard during the first half of 2016. The data already complies with the UK Statistics Authority’s Code of Practice for Official Statistics.

  • Greg Knight – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Greg Knight – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Greg Knight on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what information her Department holds on the number of police forces which do not follow Government guidance on the operation of fixed and mobile speed cameras.

    Mike Penning

    The Home Office does not hold any information on police compliance with Department for Transport issued guidance on the operation of fixed and mobile speed cameras. The deployment of speed cameras is an operational matter for the police.

  • Greg Mulholland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Greg Mulholland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Greg Mulholland on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what legal advice she has sought on the use by police of data from CCTV cameras with facial recognition and biometric tracking capabilities; and if she will publish that advice.

    Mike Penning

    I have received no representations about the use of CCTV cameras with facial recognition and biometric tracking capabilities.

    The use of any CCTV system operating in a public place in England and Wales (whether or not any facial recognition or biometric tracking technology is being used) is subject to the Surveillance Camera Code of Practice, issued as guidance under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. The police, as a relevant authority, are duty bound to have regard to the Code when performing their functions. Any use of such technology for covert investigative purposes by a public authority would be subject to the requirements of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 and its related Code of Practice. Further, the use and disclosure of personal data, such as CCTV images, is generally governed by the Data Protection Act 1998.

    Information on the fields of data which any CCTV system operator may use to identify individuals of interest is not held centrally. Further, any person (including those not suspected of an offence) may make a subject access request to a police force in respect of personal information which is held about them (including CCTV images). In broad terms, pursuant to the Code of Practice on the Management of Police Information (MOPI) and accompanying guidance published by the College of Policing, this should trigger a review of whether or not to delete such material based on an assessment of danger to the public and its value for policing purposes.

    It is the longstanding policy of successive Governments not to comment on intelligence matters.

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

    David Burrowes – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Burrowes on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many times ambulances have been required to attend prisons as a result of emergency call-outs relating to (a) illegal drugs, (b) prescribed drugs and (c) psychoactive substances in the last 12 months.

    Ben Gummer

    Information about the frequency of emergency ambulance call-outs to prisons is not collected centrally by the Department or NHS England.

    In February 2013, the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) issued guidance to prisons and immigration removal centres operated by NOMS concerning emergency ambulance call-outs. This guidance, Prison Service Instruction (PSI) 03/2013 Medical Emergency Response Codes outlines the medical symptoms in a prisoner, but not behaviours such as drug misuse, for which a prison must always call out an emergency ambulance. This PSI is mandatory in all prisons in England.

    A copy of the guidance is available at:

    http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/offenders/psipso/psi-2013/psi-03-2013-medical-emergency-response-codes.doc

  • Greg Mulholland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Greg Mulholland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Greg Mulholland on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to the Answer of 1 July 2015 to Question 4425, when he expects Network Rail to publish an update to its industry electrification strategy.

    Claire Perry

    The Department expects that the industry electrification strategy will be published by Network Rail as a draft for consultation in early 2016, taking into account the outcome of the review by Sir Peter Hendy of Network Rail’s programme of rail investment.

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

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

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Hammond on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what steps his Department has taken to prepare for the implementation of the proposed General Data Protection Regulation; which non-departmental public bodies (NDPBs) and agencies overseen by his Department will be affected by that Regulation; and what estimate he has made of the potential liability of his Department, its agencies and NDPBs in connection with that proposed Regulation.

    Justin Tomlinson

    Negotiations on the proposed General Data Protection Regulation are still continuing and our negotiating position has taken into account the likely impact on Government Departments, NDPBs and agencies. Once the outcome of trilogue negotiations between the Council of the European Union, the European Parliament and the Commission are complete, and the Regulation has been adopted, the liabilities will be further assessed. There will then follow a maximum implementation period of two years. Between now and then, Government departments who will be affected by the Regulation are closely involved in work led by the Department for Culture, Media & Sport to consider the implications of the text as it develops through the negotiating process.

  • David Warburton – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    David Warburton – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Warburton on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what his policy is on the digital single market.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    The Department for Business and the Cabinet Office have overall policy responsibility for the Digital Single Market. The Department for Culture Media and Sport leads on telecoms, audio visual policy, IT Security and now Data Protection. The Digital Single Market is a key priority for the UK Government and we welcome its ambition. It offers huge potential for jobs and growth and could increase UK GDP by up to 2%, and it can also benefit citizens, as shown by our recent deal within the European Council on roaming.

  • Andrew Rosindell – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Andrew Rosindell – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Rosindell on 2015-10-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to the memorandum from the Director of the US Office of the Secretary of Defense on Observations on the Marine Corps F-35B Demonstration on USS Wasp, published by Project on Government Oversight on 14 September 2015, what assessment he has made of the implications for his policy on procurement of the F-35 of that memorandum’s finding on that aircraft’s reliability and combat readiness.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    The trial aboard the USS Wasp was an operational test for the United States Marine Corps (USMC) F-35B, with much of the data produced being used to inform the USMC’s declaration of initial operating capability. This achievement was a significant milestone for the USMC and for the wider Joint Strike Fighter programme, particularly for the UK which operates the same Short Take-Off Vertical Landing variant.

    UK personnel were fully embedded in the USS Wasp trial and we will use the data gathered from this event, future trials and operational deployments to support our own flying trials aboard HMS Queen Elizabeth in 2018 as we re-generate the UK’s Carrier Strike capability.