UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: 2016

  • Debbie Abrahams – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Women and Equalities

    Debbie Abrahams – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Women and Equalities

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Debbie Abrahams on 2016-07-11.

    To ask the Minister for Women and Equalities, what funding her Department has provided to the Equality and Human Rights Commission in each year since 2010-11.

    Caroline Dinenage

    The Equality and Human Rights Commission is an independent body, but wholly funded by Government. Full information on its budgets since 2010/11 can be found in its Annual Reports at the following links: https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/corporate-reporting/annual-reports

    “

  • Fiona Mactaggart – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Fiona Mactaggart – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Fiona Mactaggart on 2016-10-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many children who have applied in France for asylum in the UK have been successful in their application in the last three years.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    It is not possible for an individual to apply for asylum in the UK from France. If an asylum claim is made in France and the French Government consider that the UK is responsible for examining that asylum claim under the Dublin Regulation, a transfer request is made, which the UK subsequently either accepts or rejects. If the transfer request is accepted, the individual is transferred to the UK where their asylum claim is considered.

    Before the beginning of the year very few transfers of children were made from France to the UK. However, following a concerted effort to improve the functioning of Dublin by the UK and French authorities, between 1 January and 1 October 2016 over 80 children have been accepted for transfer from France to the UK.

  • Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-01-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what the most recent estimate is that his Department has made of (a) civilian public sector, (b) civilian private sector and (c) military personnel working (i) directly on and (ii) in the supply chain of the Trident nuclear weapon system.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    The nuclear deterrent is the cornerstone of the UK’s defence security policy. Maintaining the UK’s defence nuclear enterprise supports over 30,000 jobs across the UK and makes a significant contribution to the economy.

    In the UK, four key suppliers directly support the delivery of the Trident programme. The Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) managed and operated by AWE Management Limited is based in Aldermaston and Burghfield; BAE Systems Maritime-Submarines at Barrow-in-Furness; Babcock at Devonport; and Rolls-Royce at Raynesway, Derby. There are thousands of jobs sustained across these sites.

    There are also 6,800 Ministry of Defence (MOD) civilian and Royal Navy jobs at Her Majesty’s Naval Base Clyde including contractors from Babcock, Lockheed Martin UK and Rolls-Royce. This figure is due to grow to 8,200 in the 2020s. Rolls-Royce also operate the site at the Vulcan Naval Reactor Test Establishment, Dounreay, supporting the Trident programme and other nuclear-powered submarines. Also the Defence Equipment and Support’s military and defence civilian personnel are based at MOD Abbey Wood and other sites in the UK.

    The ability of these key areas to deliver their programmes depends heavily on an extensive network of sub-contractors who are working indirectly in support of the Trident programme.

  • Baroness Barker – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Baroness Barker – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Barker on 2016-02-22.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what representations were made to ministers and officials on the subject of lobbying by charities between May 2010 and February 2016 by organisations other than the Institute of Economic Affairs.

    Lord Bridges of Headley

    The Government has received a range of representations since 2010 on charities’ lobbying, campaigning and political activities, including from charities themselves. There is no central record that categorises the different representations received.

  • Chris Bryant – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Prime Minister

    Chris Bryant – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Prime Minister

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chris Bryant on 2016-03-10.

    To ask the Prime Minister, how many special advisers have notified the Prime Minister’s Principal Secretary that they are supporting ministers who are campaigning against the Government’s position on the EU referendum.

    Mr David Cameron

    I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Leicester South (Mr Ashworth) on 29 February 2016, UIN 28380.

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

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

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-04-14.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what mitigating actions they propose to take in the light of the equality analysis undertaken under section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 showing that certain features of the new contract for doctors in training will have an adverse impact on women who take maternity leave.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The contract published on 31 March is a huge step forward for achieving fairness for all trainee doctors. For the first time junior doctors will be paid and rewarded solely on the basis of their own hard work and achievement and pay progression will be linked to level of training rather than arbitrarily to time served.

    All junior doctors should have the same terms and conditions – a level playing field – which is ultimately what employers and the British Medical Association (BMA) want and everyone deserves.

    When the Secretary of State published the Equality Analysis on the new contract for doctors and dentists in training in the NHS (“Doctors”) on the 31 March 2016 on the GOV.UK website he made it clear that, as a result of considering the Equality Analysis, in accordance with his duties and obligations, he had asked for a number of changes to the draft contract to address specific issues for certain groups with protected characteristics. This has been done and the contract has been duly amended. These changes included changes that benefited staff who work part time. The new contract is not discriminatory it ensures that all junior doctors receive equal pay for work of equal value. The BMA’s own lawyers have advised that nothing in the new contract is discriminatory. Nevertheless the equality duty is an ongoing duty and it is intended that monitoring will continue after the introduction of the new contract in accordance with the public sector equality duty in the Equality Act 2010.

    A copy of the Equality Analysis is attached.

  • Stewart Malcolm McDonald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Stewart Malcolm McDonald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stewart Malcolm McDonald on 2016-05-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, if he will direct Vauxhall to extend the vehicle safety recall of Zafira B models to include those equipped with automatic climate control.

    Andrew Jones

    There are no plans to tell Vauxhall to extend the vehicle safety recall of Zafira B models to include those equipped with automatic climate control.

    The secondary safety recall (R/2016/104) affects only Vauxhall Zafira B vehicles equipped with a manual control heating and ventilation system.

    Vauxhall Zafiras fitted with automatic climate control use a different resistor pack that is not affected by manipulation or degradation, so their inclusion in the safety recall is unnecessary.

  • David Amess – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    David Amess – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Amess on 2016-07-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, if her Department will take steps to ensure that new investment in the Primary PE and Sport Premium directly benefits (a) the least active children and (b) children from poorer socio-economic backgrounds.

    Edward Timpson

    We want all pupils to be healthy and active. We have ring-fenced over £450 million to improve PE and sport in primary schools (2013/14 – 2015/16), and committed to doubling the primary PE and sport premium to £320 million a year from September 2017 using revenue from the soft drinks industry levy. Schools have the freedom to decide how to use the funding based on the needs of their pupils, and can choose to target funding on the least active and children from poorer socio-economic backgrounds. Schools are accountable for their spending through Ofsted inspections and are required to report plans and impact online.

    We have evaluated the impact and schools’ use of the premium through the independent research company, NatCen. Evidence indicates the funding is having a positive impact and schools reported almost universally that the PE and sport premium had had a positive impact on physical fitness (99%), healthy lifestyles (99%), skills (98%) and behaviour of pupils (96%).[1].

    We are currently exploring options for future evaluation once the premium is doubled. Further details will be announced in due course.

    [1] Evidence from the 2015 report, based on findings of a two year study between 2013 – 2015: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/pe-and-sport-premium-an-investigation-in-primary-schools

    “

  • Ian Austin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Ian Austin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Austin on 2016-10-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what criteria are used when deciding to give heroin to heroin addicts in line with his Department’s policy set out on page 31 of the Modern Crime Prevention Strategy, published by his predecessor in March 2016.

    Nicola Blackwood

    The prescribing of injectable opioids, such as methadone or diamorphine (pharmaceutical heroin) as substitutes for illicit heroin, as outlined in the Government’s Modern Crime Prevention Strategy, published in March by the then Home Secretary, has been an option for many years but since the late 1960s, prescribing of diamorphine for the management of addiction has been restricted to licensed addiction specialists.

    The decision to prescribe injectable diamorphine for the treatment of dependence is a clinical matter, for a clinician to take in conjunction with the patient. Advice to guide these decisions is contained in Chapter 5 and Annex 8 of the 2007 UK Guidelines on the Clinical Management of Drug Misuse and Dependence. The guidelines advise that:

    – “injectable opioid treatment may be suitable for a small minority of patients who have failed in optimised oral treatment.”;

    – “clinicians providing injectable opioid treatment should encourage patients not to regard it as a lifelong treatment option and should regularly review their patients and the continuing necessity for this unusual and expensive treatment”; and

    – The use of diamorphine “alone does not constitute drug treatment…it should be seen as on element or pathway within wider packages of planned and integrated drug treatment”.

    The guidelines are currently being reviewed by an Expert Working Group, to take into account developments in the evidence base. In July 2016, the Expert Working Group published their draft update for consultation. The consultation has closed and the responses are being considered by the Expert Working Group.

    Diamorphine is licensed as a medicine by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. Clinicians wishing to legally prescribe it for the treatment of dependence need to obtain a licence for that purpose from the Home Office and to comply with all other legislation relevant to the safe management, use and supply of medicines which are controlled drugs.

  • Ian Austin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Ian Austin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Austin on 2016-01-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what criteria her Department used to identify the 312 schools that had been classified as having fallen beneath the floor target in the school performance tables in England for 2014 to 2015, published in January 2016.

    Nick Gibb

    In 2014/15, 312 schools were below the 5+ A*-C including English and mathematics and expected progress floor standard. Schools were deemed to be below the floor standard if:

    • Fewer than 40% of pupils achieved five or more GCSEs at grade A*-C or equivalent, including both English and mathematics; and
    • The school had a below median score for the percentage of pupils making expected progress between key stage 2 and key stage 4 in English; and
    • The school had a below median score for the percentage of pupils making expected progress between key stage 2 and key stage 4 in mathematics.

    From 2016 Progress 8 will replace the existing 5 A*-C headline measure. Progress 8 will show pupils’ progress to a suite of 8 qualifications compared to other pupils with the same starting point at the end of key stage 2. The new measure will reward better teaching of all pupils and make the system of measuring performance fairer for schools.