Tag: Andrew Gwynne

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2015-11-02.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what estimate he has made of the value of stationery that has been (a) lost and (b) stolen from his Department in each of the last five fiscal years; and what the cost was of replacing such stationery.

Jane Ellison

The Department does not hold details centrally of lost stationery items nor does it collect details of the cost to replace lost or stolen items.

The Department’s official Losses and Special Payments Register has confirmed that there have been no cases of ‘stolen’ stationery reported in the last five fiscal years.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2015-11-24.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what forecast his Department has made of (a) the reduction in cases of and deaths from infection with meningococcal disease caused by groups A, C, W, and Y as a result of the introduction of the Men ACWY vaccine in 2015, (b) the number of Men ACWY vaccines which will be administered and (c) the cost of delivering that programme in each year of its operation.

Jane Ellison

The MenACWY programme was introduced in August 2015 as an emergency programme to control a national outbreak of meningococcal group W (MenW) disease.

From August 2015 to the end of August 2017 the MenACWY programme will offer a single dose of vaccine to individuals born between 1 September 1996 and 31 August 2003 inclusive. In addition, vaccines will be offered to those entering university for the first time aged up to 25 years (excluding individuals in the previously mentioned birth cohort). The number of doses given will depend on uptake, i.e. the proportion of eligible individuals who receive the vaccine.

Due to the emergency status and aims of this programme, a formal cost-effectiveness analysis was not performed, part of which would have been an estimation of the reduction in cases and deaths from invasive meningococcal disease (IMD). The MenACWY vaccine is currently replacing the MenC vaccine used in the existing adolescent and university freshers’ programmes.

The forecast cost of delivering the MenACWY programme in each year.

Year	Estimated cost of delivering the MenACWY programme
2015/16	£35 million
2016/17	£30 million
2017/18	£20 million

Note: These are the full programme costs (including cost of the vaccine) for England, inclusive of VAT.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-01-04.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps his Department is taking to ensure that all lower limb amputees have access to the most appropriate prosthetics.

Alistair Burt

The commissioning of prosthetics is the responsibility of NHS England as a specialised service. The rehabilitation and re-ablement of patients is provided at a local level by specialised Multi-Disciplinary Teams which should be consultant led. The NHS Standard Contract for Complex Disability Equipment – Prosthetics, sets out how the specialist centres should operate and the required level of prosthetic services to be delivered.

A revised policy proposal for the routine commissioning of microprocessor controlled knees was considered by NHS England’s expert Clinical Priorities Advisory Group which recommended its adoption for routine commissioning. The proposal was then considered by NHS England’s Specialised Commissioning Oversight Group at its meeting on 9 December where it was agreed that NHS England would support this service development as a possible call on its resources. However given the potential scale of investment and the need to consider its priority relative to other treatments which would also have a possible call on the specialised commissioning resources, it was decided that the policy should go forward for consideration as part of NHS England’s next annual prioritisation round in June 2016.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-01-11.

To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, if he will bring forward legislative proposals on the introduction of (a) call-in and (b) scrutiny arrangements for the Greater Manchester Combined Authority.

Mr Marcus Jones

The Cities and Local Government Devolution Bill, when enacted, will require all combined authorities to establish at least one overview and scrutiny committee to scrutinise decisions and actions, and make recommendations to the authority. Such a committee will be able to call-in decisions of the combined authority and mayor and recommend that the decision be reconsidered.

The Greater Manchester Combined Authority has – ahead of the legislative requirement – established such an overview and scrutiny committee. The Bill also requires the Secretary of State to make secondary legislation about membership of overview and scrutiny committees, which the Secretary of State intends to do as Parliamentary time allows. We are confident that with these legislative provisions each combined authority will have robust scrutiny arrangements commensurate with the powers the authority will exercise.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-01-27.

To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, whether the Greater Manchester Combined Authority is legally required to consult the public on the sites identified in the draft Greater Manchester Spatial Framework Development Plan.

James Wharton

The Association of Greater Manchester Authorities is currently involved in the preparation of a Greater Manchester Spatial Framework Development Plan working with the 10 metropolitan councils in the Greater Manchester Combined Authority’s area. We understand that this is intended to become a joint development plan document.

A local authority may arrange for the discharge of any of its functions by a committee, sub-committee, an officer or by any other local authority. The ten local authorities have delegated responsibility for the “coordination” of the Greater Manchester Strategic Framework to Association of Greater Manchester Authorities Executive Board, a committee of the Combined Authority. Under these current arrangements, it is for each individual authority to decide how to engage its members in the production of the document.

Each local planning authority must also comply with section 18 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, which requires them to prepare a Statement of Community Involvement which should explain how they will engage local communities and other interested parties in producing development plan documents and determining planning applications. This should be published on the local planning authority’s website and it is the authority’s responsibility to ensure that any Development Plan Document is prepared in accordance with it.

It would not be appropriate for me to meet to discuss the detail of a plan in preparation.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-01-28.

To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, if he will bring forward legislative proposals to strengthen planning regulations in respect of air quality considerations when a planning application falls within an Air Quality Action Plan.

James Wharton

There are already strong protections in place to safeguard people from unacceptable risks from air pollution with particular recognition given to Air Quality Management Areas in national planning policy. The National Planning Policy Framework expects local planning policies to sustain compliance with and contribute to EU limit values or national objectives for pollutants, taking account the presence of Air Quality Management Areas. The Framework is also clear that planning decisions should ensure that any new development in Air Quality Management Areas is consistent with the local air quality action plan.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-02-02.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education, by what process a local authority seeking to dispose of school land can obtain Ministerial permission for development.

Edward Timpson

There are strict rules protecting publicly funded school land. This is set out in published guidance, which is available at: www.gov.uk/government/publications/protection-of-school-playing-fields-and-public-land-advice

A copy of the guidance has been placed in the House Library.

“

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-02-03.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education, pursuant to the Answer of 3 February 2016 to Question 24211, whether public health and health inequalities are taken into account in the consideration she gives to an application of dispose of former school playing fields.

Edward Timpson

The Education Funding Agency and the Independent School Playing Fields Panel who advise on playing field disposals will look at a range of factors before advising the Secretary of State on disposals, including any reduction in access to playing fields for the school, other local schools and the local community.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-02-10.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what the cost was to the public purse of graffiti removal across the (a) Highways England and (b) Network Rail networks in each of the last five years.

Andrew Jones

The Highways England does not separately identify the exact annual cost of removing graffiti from its road signs and structures, as this forms part of a wider contracted service which includes a range of maintenance activities.

Network Rail spends more than £3.5 million a year removing graffiti. This spending is devolved to local teams and it would involve disproportionate cost to retrieve exact annual expenditure. However, there is no reason to expect significant annual variations.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-02-23.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, if he will take steps to reduce the amount of litter on Network Rail’s land; and if he will make a statement.

Claire Perry

This is an operational matter for Network Rail, but I acknowledge the Honourable Member’s concerns and note the size of Network Rail’s estate. I have been informed by Network Rail that it has policies on litter removal that are consistent with current legislation and that it already takes all practicable measures within its resources.

In cases where litter is on operational land, removal may only be dealt with when lines are closed for other maintenance activity, to avoid inconvenience to passengers and compromising safety. The company also prioritises litter clearance based on safety.

Network Rail has a 24 hour National Helpline on 08457 11 41 41, whose remit includes handling requests from local authorities and the public, to clear line-side areas.