Tag: 2016

  • Lord Steel of Aikwood – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Lord Steel of Aikwood – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Steel of Aikwood on 2016-01-12.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government which countries they include in their Global Mine Action Programme, and whether they will consider adding Angola to that list.

    Earl of Courtown

    The Global Mine Action Programme which runs from 2014 to 2017 funds mine action projects in Mozambique, Sri Lanka, Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos. Further work in Burma, Somalia, South Sudan and Zimbabwe is currently being procured. The countries were selected following an inclusive consultation which took into account factors such as other donor funding and where the impact would be the greatest. In addition, DFID took the decision to shift the UK’s mine action funding to more fragile and conflict affected countries and where DFID could align mine action work with other DFID country programmes to maximise the impact. All funds have already been allocated under this programme therefore there is no scope for Angola to be included. This year DFID will reconsider the list of countries for future mine action programmes.

  • Richard Burden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Richard Burden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Richard Burden on 2016-02-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what representations he has (a) received and (b) made on the demolition of structures in the South Hebron Hills on 2 February 2016.

    Mr David Lidington

    We have not received any representations on this issue. An official from our Embassy in Tel Aviv raised our concerns about the demolition of structures in the South Hebron Hills with the Israeli Office for the Coordination of Government Activities in the Territories on 3 February.

  • – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by on 2016-02-24.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is the minimum amount of special educational needs teaching required to fulfil the Teacher Standards of having a clear understanding of the needs of all pupils

    Lord Nash

    The Teachers’ Standards set a clear baseline of expectations for the professional practice and conduct of teachers and define the minimum level of practice expected of teachers in England.

    Head teachers and other appraisers should use their professional judgement to assess teachers to a level that is consistent with what should reasonably be expected of a teacher given their role and level of experience and the specific demands of the setting in which they are working.

  • Paul Beresford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Paul Beresford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Paul Beresford on 2016-03-24.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what discussions he has had with officials of the Home Office and the police on proposals to allow members of the public to take their own ID photos for official documents on their own digital devices and the potential effect of this on ID fraud and quality of images.

    Matthew Hancock

    Government departments are fully committed to ensuring that the risks of identity fraud are minimised in transactions requiring photographs to be submitted. Currently applicants send paper photographs through the postal service. Technology now enables digital photographs to be submitted in online applications. In whichever channel is used the applicant must attest that the picture is a true likeness and departments put processes in place to assess the end-to-end risks of identity fraud. New technology has the potential to reduce fraud in this process, and we are investigating how technology can be used in a way that is both safe and cost effective.

  • Andy Slaughter – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Andy Slaughter – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andy Slaughter on 2016-04-29.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many tribunals relating to (a) sexual discrimination and (b) each other matter have been brought against employers in each of the last five years; and how many such claims have been successful.

    Mr Shailesh Vara

    Information on the number of tribunal claims relating to sexual discrimination and other matters brought against employers and the proportion of successful claims in each of the last five years can be found at: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/tribunals-statistics#employment-tribunal-and-employment-appeal-tribunal-statistics-gb.

    “

  • Greg Knight – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Greg Knight – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Greg Knight on 2016-06-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what steps he is taking to encourage more cyclists to use cycle lanes rather than cycling on the main highway; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    Cycle tracks, where provided, offer cyclists an alternative to cycling in the carriageway. However, the decision to use a lane or not will depend on the individual. We have no plans to make to make the use of lanes mandatory.

  • Tom Watson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Tom Watson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tom Watson on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many people are currently claiming expenses from the public purse under the Public Duty Cost Allowance.

    Ben Gummer

    The Public Duties Cost Allowance is to assist former Prime Ministers with the costs of continuing to fulfil duties associated with their previous position in public life. A copy of the policy and guidance on the allowance is in the Library of the House. The costs are a reimbursement of incurred expenses for necessary office costs and secretarial costs arising from their special position in public life. The allowance is not paid to support private or parliamentary duties. Civil servants are not entitled to claim this allowance.

    Current recipients of the allowance are published in the Cabinet Office Annual Reports and Accounts. Previous recipients have included Lady Thatcher; the current recipients who are former Prime Ministers are Sir John Major, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown. I also refer the Hon. Member to my answers to him of 9 September 2016 to (UIN 44045, 44048, 44049, 44053, 44054, 44055, 44056).

    The Public Duties Cost Allowance rate is currently set at a limit of £115,000 per annum. When originally introduced, the Government stated that it would be the equivalent in amount to the Parliamentary Office Costs Allowance. I would note that that allowance is now known as the Parliamentary Staffing Allowance, determined by the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority and that is currently set at the rate of £148,500 per annum.”

  • The Earl of Sandwich – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The Earl of Sandwich – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by The Earl of Sandwich on 2016-10-19.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of the scrutiny of the UK’s bilateral aid programmes by the International Development Committee and the Independent Commission on Aid Impact, in addition to internal departmental audit and risk analysis, what level of scrutiny is applied to multilateral aid programmes.

    Lord Bates

    As with bilateral aid, multilateral aid is subject to robust scrutiny by the International Development Committee and the Independent Commission on Aid Impact (ICAI). For example, ICAI published a review on “How the Department for International Development (DFID) works with multilateral agencies to achieve impact”, in June 2015 and the International Development Committee published an interim report on “UK Aid – Allocation of resources”, in March 2016.

    The Secretary of State has clearly stated her commitment to driving higher results and ensuring value for money and transparency from DFID’s multilateral partners. DFID has taken a strategic approach to scrutinising the impact of our investment in multilateral organisations through the Multilateral Aid Review, the latest review is due to be published soon. The UK is also an active member of the Multilateral Organisation Performance Assessment Network (MOPAN), which brings together 18 donor countries with a common interest in assessing multilateral effectiveness. MOPAN will commission its own assessments of multilateral organisations.

  • Lord Laird – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Northern Ireland Office

    Lord Laird – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Northern Ireland Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Laird on 2016-01-12.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether members of the security forces who served in Northern Ireland are entitled to parity of esteem on the same basis as those from Northern Ireland.

    Lord Dunlop

    As I have made clear in previous answers on this subject the UK Government is committed to affording due respect and parity of esteem to all the people in Northern Ireland as underpinned by the 1998 Belfast Agreement, and in accordance with the obligations on the Government to promote equality and prevent discrimination across the United Kingdom.

  • Paula Sherriff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Paula Sherriff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Paula Sherriff on 2016-02-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will make an assessment of the effect on patient care and safety of planned reductions in NHS funding for community 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.

    The Government’s vision is for a more efficient, modern system that will free up pharmacists to spend more time delivering clinical and public health services to the benefit of patients and the public.

    We are consulting the Pharmaceutical Services Negotiating Committee, other pharmacy bodies and patient and public representatives on our proposals.