The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Rosindell on 2016-02-23.
To ask the Prime Minister, if he will make representations to bodies campaigning on the EU referendum to ensure that members of the Royal Family are not referred to in the debate on that referendum; and if he will make a statement.
Mr David Cameron
This is a matter for the campaign groups. Government activities in respect of the EU Referendum will be in line with published propriety guidance.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Charles Walker on 2016-03-17.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what estimate his Department has made of the number of its senior civil servants who will potentially fall under the provisions of the fourth EU Money Laundering Directive, 2015/849; and what assessment he has made of which of his Department’s agencies or other public bodies will potentially be classed as holding a prominent public function for the purposes of that directive.
Mr Julian Brazier
Under the Fourth Anti-Money Laundering Directive, which will be transposed into national law by June 2017, a politically exposed person is one who has been entrusted with a prominent public function domestically or by a foreign country. This would include some senior civil servants, such as ambassadors and chargés d’affaires. The Government’s view is that the Directive permits a risk-based approach to the identification of whether an individual is a politically exposed person and, when identified, the Directive enables the application of different degrees of enhanced measures to reflect the risks posed. The Government will be setting out this view in a consultation which will be published shortly.
The changes proposed under the Directive should not prevent any individual in this category from gaining or maintaining access to financial services. The Treasury regularly raises these issues with financial institutions and the regulator, and we encourage financial institutions to take a proportionate, risk-based approach when applying these measures.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Owen Smith on 2016-04-25.
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to the Answer of 18 April 2016 to Question 33700, what steps his Department is taking to monitor levels of funeral poverty.
Justin Tomlinson
The Government recognises that some families on low incomes can struggle to meet the costs of a funeral, this is why the Social Fund Funeral Expenses Payments covers specified necessary costs and provides a significant contribution of up to £700 towards the fee levied by funeral directors for all other funeral expenses.
My Department continues to look at the effectiveness of the scheme so that it provides effective support and will keep on monitoring its effectiveness and liaising with stakeholders and interested groups so that it maintains its aim of providing a contribution towards the cost of a funeral.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by The Countess of Mar on 2016-06-07.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what form of evidence of incapacity is acceptable for Personal Independence Payments claims when a person suffering from severe myalgic encephalomyelitis or chronic fatigue syndrome, for which there is currently no treatment, has had no contact with any medical professionals or auxiliary practitioners for a considerable length of time.
Baroness Altmann
The Department encourages claimants to provide as much relevant evidence as necessary to support their claim. The “How your disability affects you” form and accompanying guidance sets out the range of information that can help the Department reach a decision. The guidance for Health Professionals also sets out sources of further evidence which could help inform their advice to the Department, this includes family members, carers or anyone else who supports them.
Before claimants are invited for a face-to-face consultation, all of the evidence held is reviewed and if, at that stage, a decision can be made on the paper evidence alone, then claimants will not be required to attend a face-to-face consultation. Alternatively, further evidence that might help inform the Department’s decision on the claim can be requested by the Health Professional.
If the Health Professional cannot provide advice to the Department at this stage, or where there is insufficient or no other suitable sources of evidence on which to make an assessment, claimants will be invited to attend a face-to-face consultation. This gives claimants the opportunity to put across their own views of the impact of their health condition on their everyday lives, ensuring that decisions reflect the best evidence. In some cases we carry out consultations in the claimant’s home.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Doughty on 2016-07-20.
To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, whether she plans to delay or revisit the (a) bilateral aid review and (b) multilateral aid reviews in response to the EU referendum result.
Rory Stewart
The Secretary of State is currently considering the outcomes of the Department for International Development’s Multilateral and Bilateral Aid Reviews, ahead of their publication.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Norman Lamb on 2016-10-11.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the potential effect of proposed changes in the level of community pharmacy funding on 100 hour pharmacies.
David Mowat
The Government’s proposals for community pharmacy in 2016/17 and beyond, on which we have consulted, are being considered against the public sector equality duty, the family test and the relevant duties of my Rt. hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Health under the National Health Service Act 2006. Our assessment considers a range of potential impacts in respect to the adequate provision of NHS pharmaceutical services and access to NHS pharmaceutical services, including supplementary hours and 100 hours per week pharmacies. An impact assessment will be completed to inform final decisions and published in due course.
Our aim is to ensure that those community pharmacies upon which people depend continue to thrive. We are consulting on the introduction of a Pharmacy Access Scheme, which will provide more NHS funds to certain pharmacies compared with others, considering factors such as location and the health needs of the local population.
An impact assessment will be completed to inform final decisions and published in due course.
Our aim is to ensure that those community pharmacies upon which people depend continue to thrive. We are consulting on the introduction of a Pharmacy Access Scheme, which will provide more NHS funds to certain pharmacies compared with others, considering factors such as location and the health needs of the local population.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Doughty on 2016-01-05.
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what discussions he has had with the Indian government on the recent attack on an Indian military facility at Pathawkof.
Mr Hugo Swire
Officials have been in regular contact with their Indian counterparts in London and in Delhi, including the National Security Adviser who spoke to the Indian National Security Adviser on 6th January. We have issued a statement offering condolences to the victims and their families and re-emphasising our commitment to work with India to counter terrorism.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Owen Smith on 2016-02-01.
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what his Department’s legal costs were in the case Susan Rutherford, Paul Rutherford and Warren Todd and Appellant A v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions.
Justin Tomlinson
The Government has incurred approximately £50,626 in legal costs in the Court of Appeal proceedings in the case of Rutherford and others v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and A v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2016] EWCA CIV 29.
It should be noted that this figure includes VAT where this is payable (e.g. on Counsel’s fees) but does not include costs attributable to the time spent by Government advisory lawyers on this case, as time spent by such advisory lawyers is not recorded in a manner that allows it to be attributed to individual cases.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-02-23.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, if he will take steps to reduce the amount of litter on Network Rail’s land; and if he will make a statement.
Claire Perry
This is an operational matter for Network Rail, but I acknowledge the Honourable Member’s concerns and note the size of Network Rail’s estate. I have been informed by Network Rail that it has policies on litter removal that are consistent with current legislation and that it already takes all practicable measures within its resources.
In cases where litter is on operational land, removal may only be dealt with when lines are closed for other maintenance activity, to avoid inconvenience to passengers and compromising safety. The company also prioritises litter clearance based on safety.
Network Rail has a 24 hour National Helpline on 08457 11 41 41, whose remit includes handling requests from local authorities and the public, to clear line-side areas.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tim Loughton on 2016-03-17.
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what benefits and support services are not available to non-UK nationals leaving care that are available to UK citizens.
Edward Timpson
Care leavers who are not British citizens usually receive the same range of support and services provided under the Children Act 1989 as British citizens. However, if they are aged over 18 and fall into one of the classes of ‘ineligible person’, under Schedule 3 to the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, they may only receive some of these. The most common class of care leavers who are ineligible persons are failed asylum seekers who have exhausted all appeals to remain in the UK.