Tag: 2016

  • Crispin Blunt – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Crispin Blunt – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Crispin Blunt on 2016-04-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what assessment he has made of the effect of improvements to the Brighton Mainline in Control Period 5 on seat capacity on northbound trains at (a) Horley, (b) Redhill and (c) East Croydon rail stations during weekday morning peak periods.

    Claire Perry

    The Department has not carried out a specific assessment of the effect of improvements to the Brighton Mainline (BML) in Control Period 5 (2014-19) on seating capacity from the three aforementioned stations. We are investing significantly in capacity improvements on the BML which will start to be delivered this year and fully delivered for the 2018 timetable change. Govia Thameslink Railway intend to carry out a public consultation on their proposed 2018 timetable changes later this year.

  • Kevin Hollinrake – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Kevin Hollinrake – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Hollinrake on 2016-05-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what progress her Department has made on developing the pork export accreditation protocol.

    George Eustice

    Defra has submitted detailed information required by the Chinese authorities, which they are reviewing. The UK Agriculture, Food and Drink Counsellor, based in Beijing, has met with the Chinese authorities to raise the importance of this agreement and we continue to press for expeditious consideration of the UK application to allow exports of UK pigs’ trotters to commence as soon as possible.

  • Richard Burden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Richard Burden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Richard Burden on 2016-07-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to the Answer of 11 July 2016 to Question 41675, on shipping: exhaust emissions, what legal and technical barriers his Department has identified that could restrict the growth in green technologies in shipping.

    Mr John Hayes

    Given the international nature of shipping and with a ship’s life cycle being typically in the region of 25-30 years, the Government’s priority has been to ensure that appropriate international and regional standards are in place for green technologies in shipping. The Government is keen to promote the global application and implementation of technical and where appropriate legal standards, applied fairly across the board, and with industry given as much advance notice as possible of any new requirements. This delivers a level and competitive playing field and clarity of regulatory approach.

    Currently, our focus has been on barriers which inhibit the development of abatement technologies and alternative fuels which control sulphur emissions. The lack of international technical standards for the storage, loading and the safe handling of liquefied natural gas and methanol is one factor which has discouraged ports and ships from investing in this technology. Uncertainty about whether the global 0.5 per cent sulphur cap will come into force in 2020, or be deferred until 2025 is another. As a consequence the UK is pressing for decisions to be taken as soon as possible to give industry as much time as possible to prepare for the new requirements.

  • Barry Sheerman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Barry Sheerman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Barry Sheerman on 2016-10-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many hospital-borne cases of MRSA were recorded in England in (a) 2000, (b) 2005, (c) 2010 and (d) 2015.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    In April 2013 Public Health England took over the surveillance of methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteraemia, formerly undertaken by the Health Protection Agency. We do not hold the data for 2000 and 2005.

    Cases are published according to both trust apportionment and trust assignment. For the purpose of answering this question trust apportionment or assignment can be considered as “hospital borne” cases.

    The assignment process was added to the MRSA surveillance in 2013 superseding the previously used apportionment method. The assignment process utilises individual case review and therefore allows for a much more considered categorisation of a case and associated learning to prevent similar cases occurring in the future, than was previously possible. The assignment process was only introduced in 2013 as MRSA numbers were previously considered to be too high to make this resource demanding method viable.

    The total number of trust apportioned and trust assigned cases are displayed in Tables 1 and 2 respectively.

    Table 1: Trust apportioned counts of MRSA bacteraemia in 2008, 2010 and 2015.

    April 2008 to March 2009

    April 2010 to March 2011

    April 2015 to March 2016

    1,606

    688

    297

    Table 2: Trust assigned counts of MRSA bacteraemia in 2015.

    April 2015 to March 2016

    302

    Notes:

    1. Cases are published on a financial year basis.
    2. Trust apportioned data are not available for the years 2000 and 2005.
    3. Trust assigned are not available for the years 2000, 2005 and 2010.
    4. Cases are deemed to be Trust apportioned if the following criteria are met:-

    – The location where the specimen was taken is given as ‘acute trust’ or is not known;

    – The patient was either an ‘In-patient’, ‘Day-patient’, in ‘Emergency assessment’ or is not known.

    – Patient’s specimen date is on, or after, the third day of the admission (or admission date is null), where the day of admission is day 1.

    1. Cases are deemed to be trust assigned on the basis of Post Infection Review (PIR) assignment and relevant cases are assigned to acute trusts.
    2. The trust assignment method supersedes the apportionment one post 2013 and utilises case review by the teams caring for the patient.

    “

  • Gregory Campbell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Gregory Campbell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gregory Campbell on 2016-01-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what progress his Department has made on establishing ex gratia financial support for people who were affected prior to 1991 by (a) HIV and (b) hepatitis C over the last 12 months.

    Jane Ellison

    The Government launched its consultation on proposals to reform the current payment schemes for those affected by HIV and/or hepatitis C through National Health Service-supplied blood/blood products on 21 January 2016.

    The consultation can be accessed on the gov.uk website:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/infected-blood-reform-of-financial-and-other-support

    “

  • Nic Dakin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Nic Dakin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nic Dakin on 2016-02-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, how many staff in the office of each regional schools commissioners are employed under a contract of employment to another third party.

    Edward Timpson

    The regional school commissioners currently have one agency worker and one inward secondee from a County Council.

  • Gordon Marsden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Gordon Marsden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gordon Marsden on 2016-03-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what estimate he has made of the potential number of large employers who will require existing training expenditure as a result of the introduction of the apprenticeship levy.

    Nick Boles

    The Government is committed to significantly increasing the quantity and quality of apprenticeships in England to 3 million new starts by 2020.

    Overall, there has been a steady decline in the amount and quality of training undertaken by employers over the last 20 years. This has been bad for productivity.

    We need a step change to reverse these trends and secure a high quality, sustainable apprenticeship programme, which is why we are introducing a levy on larger employers.

    The introduction of the apprenticeship levy will put employers in control of funding and incentivise them to train more apprentices. Large employers can potentially get out more than they put into the levy and will therefore have greater reward if they invest significantly in training their workforce.

    We are working closely with employers on the details of the design of the apprenticeship levy in preparation for its launch in April 2017.

  • Frank Field – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Frank Field – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Frank Field on 2016-04-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many claimants making the transition from employment and support allowance to jobseeker’s allowance have received a decision assurance call; and what the outcome was of each such call.

    Priti Patel

    The information requested is not readily available and could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

  • Jim Shannon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Jim Shannon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Shannon on 2016-05-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what steps the Government is taking to protect freedom of religion or belief in Syria.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    Syria’s conflict has developed from peaceful protests against the government in 2011 to a violent insurgency that has complex international angles. Asad’s brutal actions have fuelled sectarian violence and the growth of Daesh. His regime is ultimately responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians. We support the efforts of the UN Special Envoy for Syria, Staffan De Mistura, to seek agreement on a process of political transition in Syria. We are clear that there can be no military solution to the conflict. The UN led negotiations remain the best opportunity to end the conflict and achieve political transition away from Asad, leading to an inclusive government which can represent all Syrians.

    The UK, as a core member of the International Syria Support Group has agreed that protecting the rights of all Syrians, regardless of ethnicity or religious denomination is fundamental. This means seeking to ensure that Syrian minorities are included and safeguarded as the political process progresses. We are supporting non-governmental efforts to promote dialogue between different ethnic and sectarian groups in Syria, as we seek further progress on a political settlement.

  • Lord Hylton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Lord Hylton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hylton on 2016-07-12.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what action they are taking to enable child refugees and migrants who are now in France but who have close relatives in the UK to make take-charge requests.

    Baroness Williams of Trafford

    As stated in Written Answer HL649 on 27 June under the UK-France Joint Declaration of 20 August 2015 the UK and France have committed to ensur-ing that provisions of the Dublin III Regulation are used efficiently and effectively. To assist the handling of such cases, the two Governments have established a permanent official contact group, agreed single points of contact within respective Dublin Units and a UK asylum expert was seconded to the French administration earlier this year to facilitate the improvement of all stages of the process.

    We continue to work closely so that both the UK and France can fulfil our re-spective obligations under the Dublin Regulation to family members, including unaccompanied children, who qualify for transfer to the UK under the Regula-tion’s family unity provisions.

    The UK and France are running regular joint communication campaigns in northern France which inform unaccompanied children and others of their right to claim asylum in France and the family reunion process. Whilst the management of migrants in Calais is the responsibility of the French Govern-ment, the UK recognises that vulnerable people in the camps are at risk from exploitation and trafficking. This is why the UK Government funds a project, run by a French NGO, to identify and direct vulnerable people to protection, support and advice within France.