Tag: 2016

  • Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ruth Cadbury on 2016-01-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment she has made of the effect Tier 2 migration is having on the (a) pay and (b) terms and conditions of UK employees.

    James Brokenshire

    Tier 2, the skilled worker route, is designed to fill roles which cannot be filled by a suitable resident worker. The immigration rules, and UK employment law, do not allow workers to be made redundant and directly replaced.

    It is a decision for businesses whether to outsource certain functions. We are, however, mindful of concerns that use of the Intra-Company Transfer (ICT) category for third party contracting may undercut or displace resident workers.

    That is why, in June last year, we commissioned the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) to examine the ICT category as part of its wider review on Tier 2. The MAC published its report on 19 January and it can be found on the gov.uk website at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/migration-advisory-committee-mac-review-tier-2-migration

    Chapter 6 of the report sets out the MAC’s findings on the ICT category, including its use for third party contracting, the salaries paid to IT workers and the impacts on the resident labour market. The MAC found that salaries for these transferees were clustered around the 25th percentile of earnings for resident workers in IT occupations (the current minimum permitted under the immigration rules).

    The Government is currently considering the MAC’s findings carefully and will announce any changes in due course.

  • The Lord Bishop of Southwark – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The Lord Bishop of Southwark – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by The Lord Bishop of Southwark on 2016-02-22.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their assessment of the decision by the High Court of Israel on 1 February to dismiss the latest petitions submitted by the Salesian Sisters Convent against the building of the annexation wall in the Cremisan Valley.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    The UK’s position on the Separation Barrier is clear: where it has been constructed beyond the 1967 border, such as in the case of the Cremisan Valley, it is illegal under international law.

  • Lord West of Spithead – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Lord West of Spithead – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord West of Spithead on 2016-03-17.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether, under the plans following the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015, there will be more or fewer Royal Navy ships in commission by 2025 than the 57 currently.

    Earl Howe

    The 2015 Strategic and Defence Security Review announced that we will maintain our fleet of 19 frigates and destroyers whilst also conducting a concept phase assessment for the design and build of a new class of lighter, flexible general purpose frigate. This will mean that by the 2030s we can further increase the total number of frigates and destroyers. Joint Force 2025 will also include three replacement solid support ships, the two new Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers and at least two new offshore patrol vessels. Our national shipbuilding strategy, which we will publish later this year, will inform our plans.

  • Julian Knight – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Julian Knight – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julian Knight on 2016-04-14.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what estimate his Department has made of the proportion of people taking out a lifetime ISA who will take that ISA in the form of (a) a cash only lifetime ISA and (b) an equity investment lifetime ISA in each of the first three years that those ISAs are available.

    Harriett Baldwin

    The new Lifetime ISA will provide savers with the flexibility to save towards a first home and retirement at the same time.

    From April 2017, people aged 18 to 40 will be able to save up to £4,000 each year into a Lifetime ISA and receive a 25% bonus from the Government.

    The Lifetime ISA is a voluntary product. For further information on the costing of this policy, please see page 9 of the Budget 2015 Policy Costings document: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/508147/PU1912_Policy_Costings_FINAL3.pdf

    ISA statistics are published on the GOV.UK website. Table 9.7 sets out the number of individuals subscribing to ISAs: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/number-of-individuals-subscribing-to-an-individual-savings-account-isa-by-income

    “

  • Lord Hylton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Lord Hylton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hylton on 2016-05-23.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the remit of the National Infrastructure Commission includes the provision of sufficient social and affordable housing.

    Baroness Williams of Trafford

    The National Infrastructure Commission will have a mandate to examine all sectors of economic infrastructure – including flood defences, energy, transport, water and sewage, waste and digital communications. While the Commission’s remit will not include housing supply directly, the Commission will consider the potential interactions between its infrastructure recommendations and housing supply.

  • Diana Johnson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Exiting the European Union

    Diana Johnson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Exiting the European Union

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Diana Johnson on 2016-07-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, whether any staff of EU institutions will be eligible to transfer their employment to the UK Government under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006.

    Mr Robin Walker

    The new Department for Exiting the European Union will oversee negotiations to leave the EU and establish the future relationship between the UK and EU. At every step of the negotiations we want to get the best deal for Britain and for the British people, including for British nationals employed by the EU institutions.

  • Gareth Thomas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Gareth Thomas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gareth Thomas on 2016-10-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what assessment she has made of the implications for her policies of the recommendations in the UN High Level Panel on Access to Medicines report, published in September 2016, on stimulating research and development in underfunded areas and improving access to medicines; whether she has plans to take those recommendations forward; and if she will make a statement.

    James Wharton

    The UK government is committed to ensuring access to low cost, effective medicines in the developing world. We support the provision of essential medicines and other health products through global partnerships such as the Global Fund for AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (GFATM), UNITAID, Gavi the Vaccine Alliance, and the Medicines Patent Pool (MPP). We place a great emphasis on research and development of new vaccines, medicines and diagnostics for conditions that affect millions of poor people. For example, the UK is a leading investor in public-private Product Development Partnerships (PDPs), an innovative financing mechanism to stimulate research and development (R&D) where market incentives are insufficient.

    We support the aims of the UN High Level Panel on Access to Medicines and welcome efforts to shed light on this important issue. However, we note that this panel of experts could not reach agreement on the best approach, given the evidence presented. Our view is that the World Health Organisation (WHO) has already undertaken a large amount of work to consider the full range of barriers that limit access to medicines, and is well placed to consider which recommendations add the most value.

  • Poulter – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Poulter – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Poulter on 2016-01-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what assessment her Department has made of the adequacy of (a) funding and (b) other support for global mental healthcare.

    Mr Nick Hurd

    Last year the World Health Organisation (WHO), in their Mental Health Atlas 2014, indicated that levels of public expenditure on mental health are very low in low and middle-income countries (US$2 per head of population) and falls far below levels estimated for high-income countries (over US$50 per head of population). A large proportion of funds in low and middle-income countries go to inpatient care, especially mental hospitals.

  • 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 2016-02-22.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the impact on the quality and experience of inspectors of the decision by the Care Quality Commission to outsource services to Remploy.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    Experts by Experience provide an important role in the Care Quality Commission’s (CQC) inspections programme, working alongside the CQC’s professional inspectors. Experts by Experience provide valuable insights and judgements, talking to people who use the service and observing the environment and the quality of care hospitals and care homes provide.

    In December 2015, the CQC announced the successful winners of the new contracts to provide Experts by Experience, Choice Support and Remploy Ltd. The Experts by Experience service has been an outsourced service since its inception. The CQC’s professional inspectors are not outsourced and are unaffected by these contracts.

    The delivery of these services from 1 February 2016 by Remploy is as a result of a compliant procurement of these services. The procurement process included a rigorous evaluation of each of the tendering organisations response to delivering the service requirements against quality standards for service delivery.

    The CQC’s decision to award these new contracts focussed on expanding the numbers of Experts by Experience involved in the CQC’s inspections, ensuring that the high quality contribution Experts by Experience have provided to date is maintained and delivering value for money.

    The CQC is the independent regulator for health and adult social care in England. It is responsible for its own staffing requirements, including any decisions on contracts around the supplying of Experts by Experience for its inspections of providers. In line with Cabinet Office approvals processes, the Department:

    – gave approval for the CQC to invite tenders for the Experts by Experience programme; and

    – reviewed and approved the CQC’s business case, to enable the CQC to proceed with finalising new contracts for Experts by Experience.

  • Tom Pursglove – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    Tom Pursglove – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tom Pursglove on 2016-03-16.

    To ask the Attorney General, how many unduly lenient sentences were given out to (a) British nationals, (b) non-British EU nationals and (c) nationals from outside the EU in each of the last three years.

    Robert Buckland

    The nationality of the offenders referred to the court is not collated centrally and could only be obtained at a disproportionate cost.