Tag: 2016

  • Luciana Berger – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Luciana Berger – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Luciana Berger on 2016-02-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 5 January 2016 to Question 20189, what steps he plans to take to ensure that the thematic review and future monitoring of the Future in Mind policy address the needs of young carers to have more support for their mental health.

    Alistair Burt

    The purpose of the thematic review is to provide a qualitative assessment of how the Local Transformation Plans (LTPs), covering every clinical commissioning group (CCG), align with the Future in Mind principles to improve children and young people’s mental health, including the needs of young carers. It also aims to, where possible, identify local approaches that could inform future service planning and design in other areas to further improve children and young people’s mental health and wellbeing.

    As set out in NHS England’s guidance to support the development of LTPs an integral part was for CCGs to include a tracking template that sets out local progress milestones and financial spend. This tracker will be used as the basis for assurance assessment in 2015/16, and from 2016/17 onwards progress on local transformation will become part of the mainstream planning assurance process to ensure the successful delivery of the transformation of children and young people’s mental health.

  • Yvette Cooper – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Yvette Cooper – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Yvette Cooper on 2016-03-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many take charge requests under the Dublin III Regulation the UK has accepted from France for unaccompanied children for family reunification in the last 12 months.

    James Brokenshire

    Data on cases progressed under the Dublin Convention is recorded on the main immigration database. However, this data is not held in a way that allows it to be reported on automatically and is therefore not currently available.

  • Lord Mawhinney – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Mawhinney – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Mawhinney on 2016-04-11.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many pharmacies in the retail sector have been (1) reprimanded, and (2) sanctioned, by the General Pharmaceutical Council, in the last three years, for breaching patient dignity.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The Department does not hold this information. However, the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) has provided the following information.

    The GPhC undertakes inspections of all registered pharmacies in Great Britain. The vast majority of pharmacies currently receive a routine inspection every three to four years. Inspectors will, in addition, visit pharmacies to investigate concerns from members of the public or health professionals.

    Since November 2013 the GPhC has conducted 6,814 routine inspections of pharmacy premises to assess them against its standards. During every inspection GPhC inspectors seek evidence from the pharmacy team that standards relating to the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public are met. These standards cover the storage of confidential and private information and the physical and governance arrangements for ensuring patients can have private conversations with pharmacy professionals.

    Of the 6,814 inspections that have been carried out by the GPhC since November 2013, in 421 (6.2%) cases pharmacy premises were found to have failed one or more of the above three standards:

    – 274 did not meet standard 1.7 (Information is managed to protect the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public who receive pharmacy services);

    – 174 did not meet standard 3.2 (Premises protect the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public who receive pharmacy services); and

    – 73 did not meet standard 5.3 (Equipment and facilities are used in a way that protects the privacy and dignity of the patients and the public who receive pharmacy services).

    When pharmacy premises have not met one or more of the standards, they are required by the GPhC to complete and implement an improvement action plan.

    In addition, the United Kingdom and Scottish Parliaments recently approved legislation which includes powers to issue an improvement notice or disqualify a pharmacy from the register for a failure to meet the standards. This will improve the GPhC’s ability to protect patients and improve the quality of the pharmacy services they receive.

    In circumstances where the GPhC finds a registered professional’s fitness to practise is called into question it will investigate and can bring proceedings against that individual.

  • Jim Shannon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Jim Shannon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Shannon on 2016-05-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what recent discussions he has had with the Royal College of Midwives and the British Pregnancy Advisory Service on time limits for abortion.

    Jane Ellison

    No discussions have taken place with either organisation on this issue.

  • Lord West of Spithead – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Lord West of Spithead – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord West of Spithead on 2016-07-08.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the National Maritime Intelligence Centre has any command and control authority over assets available for security of UK territorial seas.

    Baroness Williams of Trafford

    The National Maritime Information Centre (NMIC) facilitates information exchange between government departments and agencies. Command and control of assets is administered by the respective organisations that are represented in the NMIC.

  • Grahame Morris – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    Grahame Morris – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Grahame Morris on 2016-10-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, if he will reform the Mineworkers’ Pension Scheme to ensure that the surplus is used to benefit former mineworkers.

    Jesse Norman

    The Department cannot unilaterally amend the terms of the scheme, though we would be willing to consider proposals put forward by the Scheme Trustees. Scheme members have already benefitted from surpluses through increases in benefits.

  • Jo Stevens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Jo Stevens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jo Stevens on 2016-01-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many (a) young offenders and (b) staff the Youth Justice Board recorded as injured in each young offender institute in each of the last eight years; how many such injuries to (i) young offenders and (ii) staff were recorded as serious injuries; and if he will make a statement.

    Mike Penning

    The number of (a) young offenders and (b) staff the Youth Justice Board recorded as injured in each young offender institute in each of the last eight years is set out in the attached table.

    The table includes information on injuries, including severe injuries, relating to Restrictive Physical Intervention (RPI), self-harm and assaults. The number of staff and visitors severely injured as a result of an assault is not included as obtaining these figures would incur disproportionate costs.

  • Charlotte Leslie – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Charlotte Leslie – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Charlotte Leslie on 2016-02-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many nurses were brought before a fitness to practise panel for lack of competence, communication issues between 2013 and 2015; and how many such nurses (a) were and (b) were not suspended.

    Ben Gummer

    The information requested is not held by the Department. As an independent body the Nursing and Midwifery Council is responsible for operational matters concerning the discharge of its statutory duties including fitness-to-practise investigations in respect of its registrants.

  • Royston Smith – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the House of Commons Commission

    Royston Smith – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the House of Commons Commission

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Royston Smith on 2016-03-08.

    To ask the Rt. hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, what steps the Commission is taking to ensure that Members of Parliament are providing good value for money in communications to their constituents using franked House of Commons envelopes.

    Tom Brake

    Under the Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament, Members are personally responsible and accountable for the way they use resources provided at public expense. The House of Commons provides each Member with prepaid envelopes and stationery up to a value of £9,000 a year. In addition, specific rules on prepaid envelopes, available via the Members’ Handbook, preclude their use for communications within Parliament, or for circulars or business, personal or party political purposes. The Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards is responsible for enforcing the rules on the proper use of prepaid envelopes and stationery.

  • Michelle Donelan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Michelle Donelan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Michelle Donelan on 2016-04-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what plans he has to introduce driving tests for drivers who have previously passed that test (a) who are over 70 year old and (b) every 20 years.

    Andrew Jones

    The Department for Transport considers that medical fitness and practical competence, not age, are the relevant factors in deciding if a driver can continue to hold a licence. The rules for drivers renewing a license at the age of 70 are designed to be fair and proportionate, and there are no plans to change them.