UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: 2016

  • John Spellar – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    John Spellar – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by John Spellar on 2016-06-27.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, if he will take steps to ensure that his Department’s purchasing policies support British (a) industry and (b) agriculture.

    Matthew Hancock

    The Government is committed to doing all it can to ensure UK suppliers can compete effectively for public sector contracts in line with our current international obligations. To this end we are seeking to ensure the huge purchasing power of government supports the task of boosting growth, and enables us to actively shape the UK market for the long term.

    We are providing industry with visibility of up to £191bn of potential procurement opportunities across 19 sectors. In addition, we are working with businesses to identify and address any key capabilities needed to meet future demand; actively helping them to remove barriers and supporting growth through additional benefits that boost exports and drive innovation.

  • Jonathan Edwards – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Trade

    Jonathan Edwards – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Trade

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jonathan Edwards on 2016-09-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Trade, when he plans to lay the Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement between the EU and Canada before Parliament.

    Greg Hands

    The EU Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) will be laid before Parliament in due course.

  • 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 2016-01-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps his Department is taking to improve end of life care and the account taken of the needs of patients with regard to (a) hydration and (b) respect and dignity.

    Ben Gummer

    The Government is committed to making improvements in the quality of care people experience at the end of life.

    In 2014, we set out five priorities for care of the dying person which should underpin the care being delivered to all dying people. The priorities for care state that an individual plan of care, which includes food and drink, symptom control and psychological, social and spiritual support, is agreed, co-ordinated and delivered with compassion.

    In December 2015, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence published guidance on the care of dying adults in the last days of life, including guidance on medical nutrition and hydration. Clinicians and commissioners should have regard to this guidance when making decisions about care for people at the end of life.

    The priorities also set out the critical importance of compassion, respect and dignity in delivering care to dying people and the implications, for staff, commissioners and providers, when making decisions about how end of life care services will meet the needs of local people. The new approach to care, based on these fundamental principles, is being used by clinicians across the country.

    In the coming months, we will be setting out the Department’s plans for building on this progress and achieving further quality improvements in end of life care throughout this Parliament.

  • Baroness Quin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Baroness Quin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Quin on 2016-02-08.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what the average waiting time is for a result to be given of a DEXA bone density scan in each NHS region in England; and what assessment they have made of the average waiting time for such results in (1) Scotland, and (2) Wales.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    Genomics England has set an objective to deliver 8,000 clinical reports by the end of 2016. The precise details of the reports from the pilot and main phases will become clearer once the phenotypic data is collected and linked to the genome data.

  • Baroness Crawley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Baroness Crawley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Crawley on 2016-03-03.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what have been the interim results of HMRC’s pilot of the Codentify system, when that pilot is due to end, when the final results will be assessed and published, and what benchmarks they have used in that pilot.

    Lord O’Neill of Gatley

    HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) takes the restrictions in the World Health Organisation Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) very seriously. These require that the development, implementation and enforcement of tobacco policies as part of public health policies should be protected from the influence of the tobacco industry.

    Codentify is a system, developed and introduced by the major tobacco manufacturers on their own initiative through the Digital Coding and Tracking Association (DCTA). HMRC played no part in the development or introduction of the system nor did HMRC require that it be introduced. Codentify codes already feature on packs and are there regardless of any HMRC use of them. The trial HMRC is undertaking is to see whether these existing codes could help officers in the field to authenticate products and help tackle illicit tobacco. No other companies currently provide such codes.

    The use of Codentify by HMRC is not part of an exercise to evaluate the wider use of potential tools available on the market. Any such exercise would be undertaken in the context of the implementation of the EU Tobacco Products Directive track and trace security feature requirements, which will be implemented by May 2019 for cigarettes and hand-rolling tobacco.

    The European Commission is still considering, with Member States, proposals for new pan European security features and track and trace systems, and has yet to determine any technical specifications. HMRC are not evaluating Codentify as a track and trace tool or potential security feature; the aspects of the system being used are entirely separate from the requirements of the Directive.

    The use of Codentify is not a formal pilot and there will not be reports or results to publish. Instead the trial will identify the strengths, weaknesses and usefulness of using Codentify to HMRC as an authentication tool in the field. HMRC will review this later in 2016. Some resource has been spent providing access to the system and training officers in the use of the tool. However, this has been minimal and has not been separately identified. The Department of Health leads on public health policy and has been consulted on this initiative. HMRC sees no conflict between its current use of the Codentify system and FCTC requirements.

  • Owen Smith – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Owen Smith – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Owen Smith on 2016-04-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what the cost has been of establishing and running the Fit for Work programme to date.

    Justin Tomlinson

    The cost to the end of March 2016 of establishing and running Fit for Work is £25.8m. A further £1m was spent with PricewaterhouseCoopers on the independent audit function.

  • Baroness Tonge – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Baroness Tonge – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Tonge on 2016-05-05.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what discussions they have had with the World Health Organization about making Misoprostol available in conflict settings.

    Baroness Verma

    DFID has regular contact with the Inter-Agency Working Group on Reproductive Health in Crisis Situations (IAWG), of which WHO is a member.

    The IAWG establishes technical standards for the delivery of reproductive health services in crisis contexts. Misoprostol is included in the drugs list for the IAWG’s Reproductive Health Kits for Crisis Situations, used to deliver the Minimal Initial Service Package for Reproductive Health in Crisis Situations (MISP), a series of crucial actions to respond to reproductive health needs at the onset of every humanitarian crisis. The UK advocates for full implementation of the MISP at the onset of emergencies.

    DFID has supported the Reproductive Maternal Newborn and Child Health Trust Fund that focuses on increasing the availability of misoprostol, as one of 13 life-saving commodities, in all countries as a follow up to the UN Commission on Life Saving Commodities.

  • Barry Gardiner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Barry Gardiner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Barry Gardiner on 2016-06-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what steps she is taking to ensure that the sustainable development goals that have 2020 deadlines will be met.

    Rory Stewart

    Of the 21 targets under the Global Goals for Sustainable Development that have a 2020 deadline, 11 of these fall within policy areas for which Defra is responsible. These goals and associated targets largely mirror the Aichi Biodiversity Targets and will be implemented through activities that are already in place in respect of the Aichi Targets.

  • Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town on 2016-09-14.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what estimate they have made of the proportion of retail businesses that have designated an appropriate alternative dispute resolution (ADR) provider for their sector in accordance with the EU ADR Directive.

    Baroness Neville-Rolfe

    The Government supports the use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) to help businesses and consumers save time and money when dealing with complaints. Approved ADR is available for every consumer to trader dispute in the UK.

    We have not estimated what proportion of retail businesses have a designated ADR provider as it is open to the retailer to choose a different ADR provider with the necessary skills and experience to deal with a particular dispute.

    The Chartered Trading Standards Institute acts as the lead competent authority and has held working groups and individual meetings with the other competent authorities to ensure consistency of approach.

  • Rosie Cooper – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Rosie Cooper – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Rosie Cooper on 2016-01-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether (a) Ministers and (b) officials in her Department have met (i) mobile telephone operators and (ii) BT to discuss the transfer of emergency calls made from mobile telephones to the wrong police force.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    I have been asked to reply on behalf of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS).

    The 999/112 Liaison Committee, chaired by DCMS, provides a forum for representatives from Government; Communications Providers, including BT (which provides the 999 call handling agency) and Mobile Network Operators (MNOs); emergency services and Ofcom, to discuss 999 operational matters The LC’s main concern is the effective handling and transfer of emergency calls from the public, through call handling agents ,to emergency authorities.

    The “Code of Practice for the Public Emergency Call Service (PECS) between Communications Providers, Call Handing Agencies and the Emergency Authorities” sets out protocols governing 999 calls. This includes guidelines for the Emergency Authorities to manage any occasional situation in which an emergency 999 call is misdirected.