Tag: 2016

  • David Simpson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    David Simpson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Simpson on 2016-10-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how his Department plans to raise awareness among young people of the dangers of so-called smart drugs.

    Nicola Blackwood

    The Government’s drug information website FRANK is updating its content to include enhancement drugs, including so-called smart drugs.

    FRANK forms part of a wider programme of education and prevention that should be delivered locally in line with evidence on what works best in effective prevention programmes.

    Public Health England (PHE) commissioned Mentor’s Alcohol and Drug Education and Prevention Information Service (ADEPIS) programme to helps schools and practitioners share information and resources to help them deliver good quality drug prevention activities. PHE also delivers the Rise Above campaign to 11–16 year olds, which provides content that aims to delay and prevent uptake of risky behaviours including smoking, drinking alcohol and drug use, to build resilience and enable young people to make good life choices.

  • Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-01-26.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has made of recent research suggesting that the eggs of older women can be rejuvenated through injections of mitochondria from other cells; what data collected from clinics the HFEA holds regarding the incidence of aneuploidy in oocytes over time, and what evidence it has received from (1) OvaScience, (2) Professor Simon Fishel, and (3) other sources, that mitochondrial defects are primarily responsible for age-related exponential increases in oocyte aneuploidy; what published randomised trials the HFEA has been made aware of regarding the Augment technique, and what assessment it has made of those trials; and what assessment the HFEA has made of the credibility of claims by OvaScience and those previously made by Clonaid, in the light of data available in peer-reviewed journals.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) advises that it does not hold data from clinics on the incidence of aneuploidy in oocytes over time, nor has it received evidence from OvaScience, Professor Simon Fishel or other sources that mitochondrial defects are primarily responsible for age-related increases in oocyte chromosomal aneuploidy.

    The HFEA also advises that it has not been made aware of any published randomised trials regarding the Augment technique and has not made an assessment of the credibility of claims by OvaScience and those previously made by Clonaid, in the light of data available in peer-reviewed journals. It is currently considering whether techniques, which involve addition of autologous mitochondria to eggs, would be legal in the United Kingdom (under the framework of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990, as amended). Part of this consideration involves considering the claims made for Augment by Ovascience.

    The HFEA has not received any formal applications for clinical use of the Augment technique, and has not made an assessment of the ruling by the US Food and Drugs Administration to which the Noble Lord refers.

  • Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-02-23.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what general steps they plan to take to ensure that all schools change their admission arrangements in line with recommendations by the Office of the Schools Adjudicator.

    Lord Nash

    Where the Schools Adjudicator determines that a school’s admission arrangements do not comply with the School Admissions Code, the admission authority has a statutory duty to revise its admission arrangements. The school must comply with the Adjudicator’s decision within two months of the decision or by 28 February following the decision, whichever is sooner, unless an alternative timescale is specified by the Adjudicator.

    An Adjudicator’s decision is binding and enforceable by the Secretary of State.

  • Tom Elliott – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Tom Elliott – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tom Elliott on 2016-03-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what recent progress has been made on the Government’s application to the EU Solidarity Fund to help flood affected areas.

    James Wharton

    The Government submitted an initial UK application to the EU Solidarity Fund on Friday 26 February and we continue to refine our cost estimations.

    At the date the application was made, the Government had not been approached on this matter by the Northern Ireland Executive.

  • Tristram Hunt – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Tristram Hunt – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tristram Hunt on 2016-04-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, how many jobs in (a) his Department and (b) each of his Department’s non-departmental public bodies, executive agencies, non-ministerial departments, advisory bodies and other accountable statutory bodies (i) have been abolished in or relocated from East Cheshire Local Authority since 2010 and (ii) will be abolished in or relocated from East Cheshire Local Authority by 2020.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    Core DCMS

    DCMS has not employed staff to work in East Cheshire Local Authority since 2010 and do not currently employ any staff in the area.

    Other Bodies

    The abolition or relocation of jobs in the Department’s non-departmental public bodies, executive agencies, non-ministerial departments, advisory bodies and other accountable statutory bodies is a matter for the Chief Executives of each of the bodies.

  • David Lammy – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    David Lammy – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Lammy on 2016-05-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 23 May 2016 to Question 37441, what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the provision of accident and emergency services at each of the eight urgent and emergency care vanguard sites currently provided with expert input by the Emergency Care Intensive Support Team.

    Ben Gummer

    At each of the eight urgent and emergency care vanguard sites, data is recorded on monthly accident and emergency Attendances and Emergency Admissions and this information is published at provider organisation level, from NHS trusts, NHS foundation trusts and Independent Sector Organisations.

    The below are the eight urgent and emergency care vanguard sites:

    Greater Nottingham System Resilience Group

    Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Clinical Commissioning Group

    North East Urgent Care Network

    Barking and Dagenham, Havering and Redbridge System Resilience Group

    West Yorkshire Urgent Emergency Care Network

    Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland System Resilience Group

    Solihull Together for Better Lives

    South Devon and Torbay System Resilience Group

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

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

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Tonge on 2016-07-11.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what representations they have made to the government of Israel regarding reports of the confiscation and sinking of fishing boats by Israeli forces in the past three months.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    Whilst we have not raised this specific issue with the Government of Israel, officials from our Embassy in Tel Aviv have expressed our concern previously over the Israel Defence Forces’ use of live fire against fishermen and also about the confiscation of their boats.

  • Gloria De Piero – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Gloria De Piero – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gloria De Piero on 2016-10-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, when he plans to reply to the letter of 18 July 2016 from the hon. Member for Ashfield on the proposed closure of the children’s heart surgery unit at Glenfield Hospital.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    I responded to the hon. Member’s letter on 11 October.

  • Lord Dholakia – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Dholakia – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Dholakia on 2016-01-26.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what percentage of prisoners they plan to test for blood-borne viruses in each of the next five years, in the light of the introduction of opt-out testing in prisons.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    Public Health England (PHE) working in partnership with NHS England and the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) have been implementing opt-out testing for blood-borne viruses (BBVs) since 2013/14 through a phased implementation programme using ‘pathfinder prisons’ with plans for the programme to be available in every adult prison in England by the end of financial year 2016/17. All consenting eligible adult prisoners will be offered the opportunity to test.

    Prisoners eligible for testing include those not known to be infected with BBVs who have not been tested recently and/or who had risk behaviour since their last test. Therefore over the next five years and beyond, we plan to offer tests for BBVs to all adult prisoners who fall into these categories. Phased implementation of the BBV opt-out testing programme in prisons has been informed by evaluation of pathfinder prisons. Preliminary data from suggests a near doubling of BBV testing following the introduction of the opt-out testing policy. Offer, uptake and outcome of testing is being collected by both the Health & Justice Indicators of Performance at prison level as well as through PHE’s sentinel surveillance study.

  • Lord Jones of Cheltenham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Lord Jones of Cheltenham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Jones of Cheltenham on 2016-02-23.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many people living in each of the countries of the Commonwealth are in receipt of a UK state pension which is (1) frozen, or (2) uprated annually.

    Baroness Altmann

    The Government has a clear position, which has remained consistent for around 70 years: UK state pensions are payable worldwide and uprated abroad where we have a legal requirement to do so for example in the European Economic Area or countries where we have a reciprocal agreement that allows for uprating. There are no plans to change this.

    Details of the numbers of people in receipt of the state pension, and whether they live in countries where the state pension is frozen or uprated, is included at Annex A. Countries where the UK state pension is up-rated are identified by an asterisk by the name of the country.

    The Government’s view is that the UK will be stronger, safer and better off in a reformed EU. Of course there is uncertainty about how a vote to leave the EU could impact on access to pensioner benefits for UK pensioners living in other parts of Europe. These questions would need to be answered as part of the process of negotiating the UK’s exit if there is a vote to leave. We could only consider the detail of access to pensions and benefits for people in receipt of UK state pensions who are resident in Europe as part of the process for leaving the EU.