UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: 2016

  • David Amess – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    David Amess – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Amess on 2016-05-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 21 April 2016 to Question 34094, by what deadline clinical commissioning groups will be required to report on whether they have increased investment in mental health services above their overall increase in allocation each year.

    Alistair Burt

    Spending on mental health is expected to increase to £11.7 billion and clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) are required to continue to increase their spend on mental health each year.

    NHS England’s published planning guidance for 2015/16 for commissioners made the expectation clear that each CCG’s spend on mental health services in 2015/16 should increase in real terms, and grow by at least the same percentage as each CCG’s allocation increase.

    Detail on planned spend on mental health is captured as part of the National Health Service financial plan returns for 2016/17 with follow up as part of the plan assurance process. This information is being assessed during May by NHS England.

  • Steve McCabe – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Steve McCabe – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steve McCabe on 2016-06-28.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what criteria his Department uses to decide when and how to negotiate the UK’s tax treaties with other countries.

    Mr David Gauke

    HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) have responsibility for negotiating the UK’s double taxation agreements, subject to oversight by HM Treasury. HMRC run a periodic consultation exercise to establish the negotiating priorities, which are then approved by ministers. As part of this exercise they consider representations made by UK businesses, non-governmental organisations and government departments, as well as the UK’s diplomatic missions throughout the world. The results of the last such review were published by HMRC on the gov.uk website in November 2015.

    Decisions on the negotiation or renegotiation of a tax treaty are taken on the basis of a range of factors including the results of HMRC’s periodic review of the tax treaty network, economic factors, the need to counter avoidance and evasion, and the role of treaties in promoting development. We also receive requests from countries to negotiate with us, and we will endeavour to accommodate them as time and negotiating resources permit. Given the number of treaties the UK already has, most of the programme will involve renegotiating existing agreements.

  • Steve McCabe – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Steve McCabe – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steve McCabe on 2016-09-08.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he will make it his policy to discourage the financial sector from using performance bonuses in his Autumn Statement.

    Simon Kirby

    The UK is at the forefront of global efforts to tackle unacceptable pay practices in the banking sector and has the toughest regime on pay of any major financial centre.

    Firms are now required to have policies in place to defer, reduce, cancel or clawback bonuses in the event that poor performance or misconduct comes to light and the Government expects firms to be proactive in their application of these policies. Used in this way bonuses can be an effective incentive for staff to act in the long term interests of a business.

    The Government’s efforts have resulted in a restructuring of pay including a significant reduction in cash bonuses, and a better alignment of risk and reward in the financial sector.

  • Mrs Louise Ellman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Mrs Louise Ellman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mrs Louise Ellman on 2016-01-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what the (a) budget for and (b) expenditure on in-service emissions testing was for the (i) Vehicle Certification Agency and (ii) Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency in each of the last 10 years.

    Andrew Jones

    The Vehicle Certification Agency (VCA) in-service emissions budget is in the table below:

    Budget

    Expenditure

    2006 / 2007

    Not available

    Not available

    2007 / 2008

    Not available

    £170k

    2008 / 2009

    Not available

    £205k

    2009 / 2010

    £200K

    £200K

    2010 / 2011

    £200K

    £200K

    2011 /2012*

    £0

    £0

    2012 /2013

    £40K

    £40K

    2013 /2014

    £50K

    £29.5K

    2014 / 2015

    £150K

    £42.3K

    2015 / 2016

    £123.2K

    **

    * Following the work in 2010-2011, the focus of emissions testing changed to consider aftermarket alteration of vehicles, both light and heavy duty.

    ** Ongoing £96K anticipated.

    The Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency does not hold a budget for in-service emissions testing and it does not have expenditure for in service emissions testing.

  • Nick Thomas-Symonds – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Nick Thomas-Symonds – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nick Thomas-Symonds on 2016-02-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, when he intends to make a decision on the closure of the Risk Sharing Scheme; and what provisions his Department plans to put in place for people who are currently accessing drugs via that Scheme.

    George Freeman

    The Department is currently discussing with key stakeholders the arrangements for formally bringing the Multiple Sclerosis Risk Sharing Scheme to an end. Patients currently receiving drugs as part of the Scheme will continue to do so for as long as this is clinically appropriate for them.

  • Christopher Chope – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Christopher Chope – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Christopher Chope on 2016-03-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, with reference to page 15 of the Government’s publication, The Process of withdrawing from the European Union, CM 9216, for what reason the rights and obligations which the UK currently has with other non-EU WTO members would not subsist when the UK leaves the EU.

    Anna Soubry

    As set out in Cm 9216, in the event that we leave the EU, we would need to update the terms of our WTO membership where the commitments taken have previously applied to the EU as a whole. This would not be a straightforward process as, if we leave the EU, then we would need all other WTO Members to agree how the UK will take on the rights and obligations which we have formerly taken as part of the EU. This would mean submitting UK schedules and, until this process was completed, there could be questions surrounding our rights to access WTO members’ markets, and our ability to enforce those rights. These issues are also addressed in the Government publication, Alternatives to Membership: possible models for the United Kingdom outside the European Union.

  • Julie Cooper – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Julie Cooper – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julie Cooper on 2016-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to the Answer of 8 March 2016 to Question 29659, how many UK citizens have been prosecuted by the Financial Action Task Force for money laundering abroad since 2010.

    Mr John Hayes

    The Government is committed to ensuring that the UK has a robust anti-money laundering regime, and strongly supports the work of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) in developing and implementing effective anti-money laundering and counter terrorist financing regimes. FATF does not have any law enforcement or prosecutorial role.

    The Government established the National Crime Agency in 2013 to lead the law enforcement response to this threat. This has since been augmented with a new International Corruption Unit to provide a single centre of excellence in this field.

    The National Risk Assessment of money laundering and terrorist financing was published on 15 October 2015. This identified the threats and vulnerabilities we face in these areas, and an action plan will be published shortly, setting out the steps that we will take to address them.

    The number of people prosecuted, convicted and given a custodial sentence for money laundering offences, in England and Wales, from 2004 to 2014 (the latest data available), can be viewed on the Ministry of Justice website at the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/criminal-justice-system-statistics-quarterly-december-2014 under “Criminal justice statistics outcomes by offence data tool” by selecting the offence: 38 Money laundering.

  • Fiona Bruce – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Fiona Bruce – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Fiona Bruce on 2016-05-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the implications for his policies on the introduction of cell-free DNA non-invasive prenatal testing of the finding of the report of the Pro-Life APPG, Abortion on the grounds of disability, published in July 2013, that many parents feel steered towards abortion on receiving a diagnosis of fetal abnormality and that they do not receive adequate information about other options.

    Jane Ellison

    There is a long established Fetal Anomaly Screening Programme (NHS FASP) that prospective parents can choose whether to participate in.

    The UK National Screening Committee (UK NSC) has recommended that non-invasive prenatal testing for Down’s syndrome should be introduced as an additional test into the NHS FASP as part of an evaluation. Ministers are currently considering this important recommendation from the UK NSC which would give pregnant women and their partners more accurate information and should reduce the number of women having to undergo unnecessary invasive testing which carries a risk of miscarriage.

    The UK NSC recommendation does not change the offer to prospective parents of participating in the programme, nor the options and choices available when testing identifies a fetus with Down’s, Edwards’ or Patau’s syndrome.

    Existing guidance from the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists already makes it clear that women and their partners should receive appropriate information and support from a properly trained multidisciplinary team, who must adopt a supportive and non-judgemental approach regardless of whether the decision is to terminate or continue the pregnancy. This should include referral to other professional experts (including palliative care) and referral for counselling when this can help, as part of a co-ordinated package of care.

  • John Healey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    John Healey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by John Healey on 2016-06-28.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, for what reasons he has not allowed Ipswich Council’s recent proposal for the Ravenswood affordable housing development.

    Brandon Lewis

    The full reasons are set out in the Secretary of State’s decision letter on this case, which can be found on the Department’s website at:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/called-in-decision-areas-u-v-and-w-ravenswood-nacton-road-ipswich-suffolk-ref-3004099-13-june-2016

  • Sue Hayman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Sue Hayman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sue Hayman on 2016-09-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what steps her Department is taking to support the Lake District National Park Partnership in its bid for status as a UNESCO World Heritage Site.

    Tracey Crouch

    Government continues to support the excellent work of the Lake District National Park Partnership and other stakeholders, which has led to the Lake District becoming the UK’s nomination for World Heritage Status in 2017.

    Officials will be present to support the partnership during the World Heritage Committee mission to the Lake District, due to take place in October 2016.