UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: 2016

  • 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 2016-03-14.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government why the Department of Health gateway final report regarding the contact between UnitingCare LLP and the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) made no recommendations about the need to ensure that the business case was fully in-line with the accepted bid by UnitingCare LLP to run older people’s and adult community services for that CCG.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    NHS England is responsible for the review of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough clinical commissioning group’s (CCGss) contract with UnitingCare LLP. NHS England advises that it has commissioned an independent review to ensure objectivity. The review is looking at the contract from a commissioning perspective, which means it will cover the role of NHS England, but the role of the Department is not within its scope.

    The Department’s role in gateway reviews was to facilitate the review on behalf of the project owner. The procedure was that the Department’s Health Gateway Team, working with the project owner, selected a suitable review team from a pool of accredited, independent reviewers. At the end of the review, the independent review team produced a report which was presented to the project owner and was their property. The Department stopped providing this service in 2015.

    NHS England advises that the CCG, as the project owner, used the Department’s Health Gateway Team to facilitate three independent gateway reviews into its procurement for older people’s and adult community services, two in 2013 before the submission of final bids and the third in November 2014. NHS England advises that these gateway reviews were not intended to undertake detailed financial reconciliation.

    NHS England advises that it facilitated two gateway reviews in early 2014, before the appointment of the preferred bidder. These focused on reviewing significant service changes from a clinical pathway perspective. They were not intended to cover procurement and technical financial details.

  • Diane Abbott – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Diane Abbott – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Diane Abbott on 2016-04-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what assessment she has made of the effect of the Egyptian government’s restrictions on domestic non-governmental organisations on her Department’s effectiveness in that country.

    Justine Greening

    The UK Government is concerned by growing restrictions on civil society in Egypt and continues to make a positive case that the presence of a dynamic civil society is in Egypt’s interest.

    We work with a range of partners in the country including the World Bank, private sector and including some NGOs and we will continue to ensure that work remains 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 2016-05-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, when he plans to publish his Department’s post-implementation review of tribunal fees.

    Dominic Raab

    Following public consultation, the government introduced fees in Employment Tribunals as a way of reducing the burden on the taxpayer and to encourage parties to seek alternative ways of resolving their disputes.

    On 11 June 2015, we announced the start of the post-implementation review of the introduction of fees in the Employment Tribunals. The review will report in due course.

  • William Cash – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    William Cash – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by William Cash on 2016-07-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, what steps his Department is taking to remove any potential conflict of interest between National Grid and its electricity balancing and management responsibilities.

    Jesse Norman

    There is a case for greater independence for the system operator to promote more competition and flexibility in our electricity system. We are working alongside National Grid and Ofgem to this end, so that the electricity system continues to be operated in the best interest of consumers.

  • Helen Goodman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Helen Goodman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Helen Goodman on 2016-10-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what steps her Department is taking to ensure that EU agri-environment schemes will be open to UK applicants after current funding guarantees expire in 2019.

    George Eustice

    The Government’s announcement of 3 October provided further certainty on funding to rural communities while we develop a new approach to supporting agriculture, protecting the countryside and generating growth in the rural economy.

    We will now be working with the industry, rural communities and the wider public to shape our plans for food, farming, the environment and rural growth outside the EU.

  • Jim Shannon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Jim Shannon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Shannon on 2016-01-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, what estimate her Department has made of the cost per household of implementing measures agreed at the Paris Climate Conference.

    Andrea Leadsom

    The UK’s contribution to the Paris Agreement will be determined by our commitments to meeting EU climate and energy targets, and by the UK’s own domestic framework, comprising a 2050 emissions reduction target of at least 80% on 1990 base year levels and a series of five-year carbon budgets, as established by the Climate Change Act 2008.

    The level of the Fifth Carbon Budget covering the period 2028-2032 is required to be set in law by the end of June this year. When making the decision on the level, the Government is required to take account of a number of factors including social circumstances, and in particular the likely impact of the decision on fuel poverty. This decision will be accompanied by an impact assessment which will set out illustrative costs and benefits of meeting different budget levels, recognising that the actions to meet the budget will be uncertain at that stage. In addition, our new emission reduction plan is due to be published towards the end of this year.

  • Julie Cooper – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Julie Cooper – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julie Cooper on 2016-02-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to the Answer of 16 February 2016 to Question 26169, on social security benefits: disqualification, what steps his Department is taking to ensure that safeguards to prevent the accrual of sanctions are effective.

    Priti Patel

    The sanctions regime has a range of safeguards for claimants, including ensuring all requirements placed on claimants are reasonable, taking into account individual capability and circumstances, such as health conditions, disability and caring responsibilities.

    A further safeguard exists so that sanctions at the same level do not increase in duration when the claimant accrues 2 or more within a two week period. This ensures claimants cannot accrue lengthy sanctions within a short period in between meetings with their work coach. We keep the sanctions process under constant review and use research analysis and insight to improve the clarity of all our products and policies.

  • Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-03-11.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Prior of Brampton on 8 March (HL6323), how licence conditions R18-R27 and T97 have been specifically reflected in the patient information and consent forms submitted to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority by the person responsible in order to perform genome editing in human embryos by means of CRISPR-Cas9.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has advised that it carried out an audit of the patient information relating to the research project involving genome editing against the requirements of R19 and R20. T97 is not relevant, as it refers to the use of embryos in training, not research. The audit was completed as part of the inspection and feedback provided to the person responsible during the inspection. An assessment was made against the other licence conditions referred to during the inspection. The HFEA does not interpret the requirements to mean that each specific technique that might be used in the research must be specified in the patient information. In this case, the patient information, which is not yet finalised, makes it clear that genes may be altered but does not specifically refer to CRISPR-Cas9.

  • Andrew Rosindell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Andrew Rosindell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Rosindell on 2016-04-18.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment he has made of the anti-trust implications of the proposed merger between the London Stock Exchange and Deutsche Börse.

    Harriett Baldwin

    Once formally notified of the proposed merger, the Bank of England and the Financial Conduct Authority (as supervisors of the London Stock Exchange Group’s UK-authorised subsidiaries) must assess the proposal from a regulatory standpoint.

    In addition the proposed merger must be approved by competition authorities and is subject to a range of other assessments including those of overseas regulators and shareholders.

  • Alberto Costa – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Alberto Costa – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Alberto Costa on 2016-05-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, with reference to the Government’s response on the e-petition entitled, To introduce a permanent, minimum passing distance when overtaking cyclists, what assessment his Department is planning of cycle passing spaces in South Australia and by when he plans to complete that assessment.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The introduction of a legally enforceable minimum passing distance between cyclists and other vehicles in South Australia is relatively recent. As a result, there is limited information available regarding the impacts both positive and negative following this change in the law. As with other changes of this type introduced overseas, we remain interested in the change and are keeping it under review.

    The Highway Code already has a requirement for motorists to give cyclists plenty of room when overtaking.