The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Moonie on 2016-03-01.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many abortions there were in 2015 at 23 weeks gestation and above.
Lord Prior of Brampton
This data is not currently available. Abortion data for 2015 will be published by the Department in May.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julian Sturdy on 2016-04-08.
To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, whether any expressions of interest have been received from neighbourhood planning groups for small-scale sites consisting of starter homes to be included in their neighbourhood plans.
Brandon Lewis
The Department does not hold this information.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tulip Siddiq on 2016-05-03.
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the value was of assets (a) subject to restraint orders and (b) recovered using confiscation orders under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 in each year since 2009-10.
Mr John Hayes
The value of assets subject to restraint orders between 2009-10 and 2015-16 is shown in the tables below.
Orders are counted as fully paid where the outstanding balance, including any interest payable, is nil. There is no central record which would show how many people subject to unenforced orders were serving prison sentences.
Data is extracted from reports run on 4 May 2016 using the Joint Asset Recovery Database (JARD). JARD is a central repository of information relating to the seizure of the proceeds of crime.
JARD is a live database which is continually updated. As such, the data provided may vary from reports run on earlier dates.
|
Restraint Orders issued in England & Wales |
2009-10 |
2010-11 |
2011-12 |
2012-13 |
2013-14 |
2014-2015 |
2015-16 |
|
Values (in millions) |
£648.68m |
£873.40m |
£500.78m |
£463.75m |
£393.70m |
£368.18m |
£448.10m |
|
Gross confiscation receipts – includes compensation paid to victims and receiver’s fees |
2009-10 |
2010-11 |
2011-12 |
2012-13 |
2013-14 |
2014-2015 |
2015-16 |
|
Values (in millions) |
£110.39m |
£113.55m |
£124.58m |
£134.85m |
£139.20m |
£155.67m |
£206.30m |
|
Year |
2009-10 |
2010-11 |
2011-12 |
2012-13 |
2013-14 |
2014-2015 |
2015-16 |
|
Number of confiscation orders issued |
5592 |
6425 |
6268 |
6401 |
6043 |
5926 |
5900 |
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gareth Thomas on 2016-06-15.
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many people who overstayed their visa have been identified leaving the UK in each month since 8 April 2015; and if she will make a statement.
James Brokenshire
The data requested is not currently available. My Department is considering the use of exit checks data for statistical reporting purposes. Any data published then will be subject to data assurance standards.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Diana Johnson on 2016-09-12.
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the process is for considering whether to withhold sensitive material from courts to aid their consideration of (a) whether to impose Temporary Exclusion Orders (TEOs), (b) whether a TEO already imposed should be revoked and (c) whether the conditions imposed on those subject to TEOs are fair.
Mr Ben Wallace
The Court Rules for Temporary Exclusion Orders provide for the disclosure of open material, the use of private hearings, and the withholding of closed material (the disclosure of which would be contrary to the public interest). The Home Office cannot determine which information is closed and must submit an application to the court for permission not to disclose certain information. Under the closed material procedure, the TEO subject and his legal representatives would attend ‘open’ court proceedings but would not be present at ‘closed’ proceedings. Special advocates appointed by the Attorney General would represent the interests of the excluded party in relation to closed evidence. The use of closed material proceedings is designed to ensure that the court has sight of sensitive material whilst protecting it from wider disclosure.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Diana Johnson on 2016-10-19.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, whether the reformed discretionary support scheme for people affected by contaminated blood will consider (a) housing benefit or (b) jobseeker’s allowance in calculating eligibility for financial support for (i) widows and widowers of people affected and (ii) other beneficiaries.
Nicola Blackwood
In 2017/18, as part of the wider reform of the Infected Blood Payments Scheme in England, a new discretionary scheme will replace the current three discretionary schemes. The new discretionary scheme is in design and the relationship between receipt of welfare support and eligibility for discretionary support from the new scheme has yet to be decided.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Moonie on 2016-01-18.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many members of HM Armed Forces are currently serving in Afghanistan; how many are female, and what roles they are fulfilling.
Earl Howe
As of 18 January 2016, there were 458 members of HM Armed Forces serving in Afghanistan under Operation TORAL. Routine movements and minor changes in requirements mean that this number will vary over time. The UK’s commitment to Operation TORAL nevertheless remains in line with the figure of around 450 personnel announced by the Defence Secretary in his statement of 27 October 2015 ( Ref: UK Military Support to Afghanistan:Written statement – HCWS273).
Out of the 458 personnel, 33 are female. There are 10 UK female officers and 23 other ranks. These personnel undertake a wide range of roles including: medical, force protection, mentors, police, logistics, communications, human resources and administration, and engineering and technical support.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steve Rotheram on 2016-02-04.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, whether his Department has made an assessment of (a) the number of potential closures of and (b) the reduction in community pharmacies as a result of proposed reductions in funding to such pharmacies.
Alistair Burt
Community pharmacy is a vital part of the National Health Service and can play an even greater role. In the Spending Review the Government re-affirmed the need for the NHS to deliver £22 billion in efficiency savings by 2020/21 as set out in the NHS’s own plan, the Five Year Forward View. Community pharmacy is a core part of NHS primary care and has an important contribution to make as the NHS rises to these challenges. The Government believes efficiencies can be made without compromising the quality of services or public access to them. Our aim is to ensure that those community pharmacies upon which people depend continue to thrive and so we are consulting on the introduction of a Pharmacy Access Scheme, which will provide more NHS funds to certain pharmacies compared to others, considering factors such as location and the health needs of the local population.
We are not able to assess which pharmacies may close because we do not know the financial viability of individual businesses or the extent to which they derive income from services commissioned locally by the NHS or local authorities or have non-NHS related income.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town on 2016-03-01.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will review the Financial Conduct Authority’s oversight of anti-money-laundering regulations in the light of consumer complaints about enforced, unannounced and unexplained closures of bank accounts.
Lord O’Neill of Gatley
The Government encourages banks to take a risk based approach in its activities to ensure that measures they take are effective, proportionate and mitigate the risks that they face. In doing so the Government also encourages them to have due regard to financial inclusion.
Whilst it would be inappropriate for the Government to intervene in these decisions, individuals are able to request a review of the decision to close their bank account using the bank’s formal complaint procedure and the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS).
The below Parliamentary question was asked by John Healey on 2016-04-08.
To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what average time the Housing Ombudsman has taken to complete a case in each year since 2009-10.
Brandon Lewis
The Housing Ombudsman is an independent body whose objective it is to resolve disputes involving tenants and leaseholders of social landlords and their voluntary members. The average times taken to complete a case, which are within the Housing Ombudsman’s formal remit are provided below.
2009-10: 23 weeks
2010-11: 15 weeks
2011-12: 17 weeks
2012-13: 23 weeks
2013-14: Not available
2014-15: Not available
2015-16: 41 weeks
The levels of complaints and enquiries have increased year on year since 2006 and there was a 64% increase between 2012-13 and 2014-15, which is partly due to an extension of The Housing Ombudsman’s remit to cover local housing authorities.
At a DCLG Select Committee hearing, in January 2016, the new Housing Ombudsman made a commitment to reduce the backlog of older cases within their formal remit dating back from previous years. Very substantial progress has been made and by 31 March there were only 9 cases outstanding over 12 months old.