Tag: 2016

  • Andrew Percy – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Andrew Percy – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Percy on 2016-04-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, if he will discuss with the Information Commissioner’s Office reasons to refer consumer complaints to equivalent bodies overseas in addressing nuisance telephone calls from abroad.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    This Government recently made an amendment to the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations 2003 (PECR), requiring direct marketing companies registered in the UK and those making calls on behalf of UK companies from outside the UK, to display Calling Line Identification. This measure will make it easier for the ICO to investigate and take enforcement action against callers who persistently and deliberately flout the rules.

    In addtion, both the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) and Ofcom engage with the Do Not Call Forum of the London Action Plan, which includes overseas regulators with responsibility for tackling nuisance calls. The ICO is joint secretariat and works with other members, including the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, to target organisations, share investigation methods and drive forward coordinated actions. The group are drafting an operational plan to strengthen cooperation at international level

  • Jonathan Edwards – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Jonathan Edwards – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jonathan Edwards on 2016-06-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what discussions the Government has had with the Iranian government on the treatment of (a) Maryam Nasim Naghash Zargaran and (b) other Christian prisoners in that country.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    We regularly raise our concerns on human rights issues, both in London and Tehran, including our concerns about the treatment of religious minorities. We call on Iran to cease harassment of all religious minorities and to fulfil its international and domestic obligations to allow freedom of religion to all Iranians.

  • Jim McMahon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Jim McMahon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim McMahon on 2016-09-02.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he will estimate how much fuel duty was collected by filling stations in Greater Manchester in each year since 2011.

    Jane Ellison

    HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) does not collect fuel duty from filling stations. Fuel duty is paid on hydrocarbon oil when it is released for consumption in the UK, either from a UK refinery or an excise warehouse. HMRC therefore does not collect the data to produce a reliable estimate.

    Fuel duty receipts for the whole of the UK are published by HMRC, and are available in the Hydrocarbon Oils Bulletin:

    https://www.uktradeinfo.com/Statistics/Pages/TaxAndDutybulletins.aspx

  • Maria Eagle – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Maria Eagle – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Maria Eagle on 2016-10-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, how many meetings (a) Ministers and (b) officials of his Department have had with key stakeholders in the pharmaceutical sector on the effect of the UK leaving the EU since 23 June 2016.

    Alok Sharma

    The details of meetings between Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) Ministers and external organisations are published in quarterly returns, which are available at:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/minister-data

    The details of meetings between external organisations and officials across the FCO network are not held centrally and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

  • Michael Dugher – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Michael Dugher – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Michael Dugher on 2016-01-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what the average hospital waiting time was for NHS patients in (a) Barnsley East constituency, (b) Barnsley, (c) South Yorkshire and (d) Yorkshire and the Humber since 2010.

    Jane Ellison

    The table attached shows average median waiting times in weeks to start consultant-led elective treatment for National Health Service commissioning organisations and regions which most closely match those requested.

  • Graham Brady – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Graham Brady – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Graham Brady on 2016-02-01.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what proportion of children obtained five or more good GCSEs including English and Mathematics in (a) selective, (b) partially selective and (c) comprehensive local authority areas in 2015; and what that proportion was by ethnic group in each of those categories.

    Nick Gibb

    The proportion of pupils achieving five or more GCSEs at A*-C, including English and mathematics, by local authority and ethnic group was published in the GCSE and equivalent statistical first release for 2015.[1]

    [1] https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/revised-gcse-and-equivalent-results-in-england-2014-to-2015

  • Ivan Lewis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Ivan Lewis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ivan Lewis on 2016-02-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what the average waiting time for an operation in (a) Pennine Acute NHS Trust and (b) Bolton NHS Trust was in the last year for which figures are available.

    Jane Ellison

    Patients have a legal right, set out in the NHS Constitution, to start consultant-led treatment within a maximum of 18 weeks from referral for non-urgent conditions. The following table shows the average median waiting time in weeks for patients whose wait ended during the month with an inpatient or day case admission to Pennine Acute NHS Trust or Bolton NHS Trust. Only a proportion of inpatient or day case admissions would have resulted in an operation.

    Table: average median waiting times1, 2 in weeks for patients whose wait ended during the month with an inpatient or day case admission3, 2015

    Month

    Bolton NHS Trust

    Pennine Acute NHS Trust

    January 2015

    8.2

    10.8

    February 2015

    8.7

    11.1

    March 2015

    7.6

    9.8

    April 2015

    7.6

    10.6

    May 2015

    7.9

    10.6

    June 2015

    7.0

    11.4

    July 2015

    6.6

    11.1

    August 2015

    6.3

    10.9

    September 2015

    6.9

    10.9

    October 2015

    7.1

    11.1

    November 2015

    7.0

    10.6

    December 2015

    5.7

    10.5

    Source: Consultant-led referral to treatment waiting times, NHS England

    Notes:

    1. Median waiting times are calculated from aggregate data, rather than patient level data, and therefore are only estimates of the position on average waits.
    2. Until September 2015, adjustments were permitted for clock pauses, where a patient declined reasonable offers of admission and chose to wait longer. From October 2015, there is no longer any provision to report pauses or suspensions in waiting time clocks.
    3. Not every admission to hospital is for an operation, but hospital episode statistics suggest that 94% of elective finished admission episodes involve some form of procedure or intervention.
  • Frank Field – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Frank Field – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Frank Field on 2016-03-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment she has made of the potential merits of introducing a national deposit return scheme as part of the Government’s litter strategy.

    Rory Stewart

    As part of its Litter Strategy, published in 2014, the Scottish Government announced that it had commissioned a feasibility study and a call for evidence investigating the implementation of a deposit return system for single use drink containers in Scotland. This valuable work, published last year, highlighted significant uncertainties regarding the impacts and benefits that a deposit return system would have, notably regarding costs, environmental quality and littering, and existing waste collection systems. The Scottish Government is doing further work on the topic and we will consider any new evidence arising from this in the course of developing our own National Litter Strategy for England.

    Defra analysed the costs and benefits of implementing a deposit return system for single use drink containers as part of the 2011 Review of Waste Policy in England, and to seek views in the 2012 consultation on higher packaging recycling targets. This work showed that introducing a deposit return system may increase recycling and reduce litter, but might impose additional costs on businesses, consumers and local authorities (which would lose revenue from recycling). However, we are lacking evidence to appropriately quantify these benefits and costs. The current approach has driven a significant increase in packaging waste recycling rates, from less than 47% in 2003 to nearly 65% in 2013.

  • Kirsten  Oswald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Kirsten Oswald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kirsten Oswald on 2016-04-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many service personnel have suffered (a) minor injuries and (b) serious or fatal injuries as a result of mines or improvised explosive devices in the last 10 years.

    Mark Lancaster

    From centrally held data it is not possible to provide the exact numbers and types of injuries to UK Service personnel specifically as a result of mines and improvised explosive devices (IEDs). However, we can provide the numbers of personnel that died or were injured whilst on Operations TELIC or HERRICK where the mechanism was recorded as an explosion. This includes mines, IEDs, unspecified explosives and explosive accidents.

    Between 1 April 2006 and 31 March 2016, 514 UK Armed Forces personnel sustained a minor injury due to an explosion. Of these, 39 personnel did not have an Initial Notification of Casualty raised and thus we are unable to determine the exact severity of the injury from the centrally held data.

    964 personnel sustained a serious or fatal injury due to an explosion, of which 310 had an Incapacitating Injury, 171 were Seriously Injured, 208 were Very Seriously Injured and 275 died.

    In these figures, individuals are counted once per injury. If any individual has been injured on multiple events they are counted for each event where the injury reported is not linked to a previous event. Individuals who were injured due to an explosion and later died of their injuries have been included in the number of fatalities, not injuries.

  • Steve McCabe – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Steve McCabe – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steve McCabe on 2016-06-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 23 May 2016 to Question 37472, on fertility: medical treatments, whether he plans to review clinical commissioning groups’ levels of compliance with NICE guidelines.

    Jane Ellison

    The Department has no plans to review clinical commissioning groups’ (CCGs) compliance with the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines. However, CCGs have to make prioritisation decisions on what they commission based on their local population need and having regard to national clinical guidance, including that produced by NICE.