Tag: Andrew Gwynne

  • Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-05-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, whether she has received an application from Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council to release the former Two Trees High School site in Denton for development.

    Edward Timpson

    The Education Act 2011 requires that the Secretary of State must give consent prior to the disposal of land which has been used for any school or academy in the last eight years. A key consideration for the government is whether the land proposed for disposal could be suitable for use by a new academy or free school.

    School playing fields are also protected by Section 77 of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998. Schools and local authorities must obtain the Secretary of State’s approval before they can dispose of their land. Applications to dispose of school playing fields are first considered by the school playing fields advisory panel, who make a recommendation to the Secretary of State, before she then makes her final decision.

    At this time I am not aware of an application by Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council to seek approval to dispose of the former Two Trees Sports College, including the playing fields.

    Should an application be submitted, the Secretary of State would take into account any groups or organisations with permission to use the playing fields and what suitable alternative provision they may have been offered. Local schools, which are deficient in playing field land, should also be offered the opportunity to use the playing field before any application is presented. She will also take into account local school place needs and any academy requirement.

  • Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-05-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many cases relating to the (a) eviction of residents and (b) banning of guests in care homes have reached the High Court in each year since 2010.

    Mr Shailesh Vara

    The information requested could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

  • Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-05-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will request that the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation undertakes an assessment of the recommendation from the Britain Against Cancer conference held in December 2015 to report its review on extending HPV vaccination to boys in 2016.

    Jane Ellison

    The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation’s (JCVI) advice needs to be based on a robust cost-effectiveness analysis. This is underway and Public Health England is due to report by early 2017. The JCVI has agreed that shortcuts could undermine the validity of the results and will begin its deliberations on extending vaccination to adolescent boys once all the necessary evidence is available. It is important that we follow a proper process and that the JCVI has a full understanding of the cost-effectiveness of vaccination programmes.

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

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

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-06-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what estimate he has made of the amount charged to the deceased by TV Licensing in each of the last three years.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    TV Licensing (TVL) should be notified when a licence fee holder dies. If the person making the notice has previously been covered by the licence, it will be transferred into their name. If an executor or family member notifies TVL that a property is now vacant, the licence is cancelled, and a refund is made to the deceased’s estate.

    In the case of an over-75s licence, TVL is informed by the Department of Work and Pensions of deaths of those aged over 75. In this case, TVL will write to the licensed address to inform anyone living with the deceased that the licence will cover the occupants until the licence term expires.

  • Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-07-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what plans the NHS has to ensure that clinicians are able to maintain clinical expertise in procedures offered through the Commissioning through Evaluation programme in the event that patient access is withdrawn during the analysis phase of that programme.

    David Mowat

    Commissioning through Evaluation (CtE) is an innovative £25 million programme introduced by NHS England in 2013. It specifically aims to generate valuable new evaluation data in promising areas of specialised care where the current evidence base of cost and clinical effectiveness is insufficient to support routine National Health Service commissioning, and where further formal research trials are thought to be less likely.

    Each scheme – put forward by senior clinicians and other stakeholders – is funded on a time limited basis in a small number of selected centres, and then evaluated by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.

    Once the planned number of patients has been recruited across the participating centres, each scheme closes to new patients and analysis begins. This means that the funding identified for each scheme can then be reinvested into the evaluation of additional potentially life changing specialised treatments to maximise the value and impact of the overall evaluation fund for patients. As an example, routinely funding Selective Dorsal Rhizotomy contrary to the currently published clinical commissioning policy and in advance of a formal review of any new evidence would mean that between £2 million and £4 million per year (covering the surgical costs and immediate follow up only) would then be unavailable to support the evaluation of other promising treatments.

    The analysis phase for each CtE scheme will typically take between one and two years depending on how long we need to follow up patients after their treatment to identify its effectiveness. The three cardiology based CtE schemes are currently scheduled for a 15 month analysis and reporting phase, after which the data can be used by NHS England to support policy review.

    However, CtE is only one form of data that might be put forward in considering a new (or revision to an existing) policy and clinicians do not need to await the final report from CtE schemes if they feel that other new substantive data becomes available more quickly.

    NHS England’s published clinical commissioning policies (which set out eligibility for NHS funded specialised care on the basis of the available evidence) can be reviewed at any time where there is thought to be substantive new evidence available, and around 100 such proposals were developed and considered by NHS England during 2016/17.

    The policy development process is subject to both informal stakeholder testing and formal public consultation, including the opportunity for patients, clinicians and industry representatives to review and comment on the evidence base considered and the assessed impact on patients, existing services and cost.

    Where a new service is routinely commissioned as a result of a policy review, NHS England works with commissioned providers to ensure that sufficient clinical expertise and supporting infrastructure is in place to provide a safe service to patients in line with nationally set requirements.

  • Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-09-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, how many children in England were classed as living in fuel poverty in each year since May 2011.

    Jesse Norman

    Fuel poverty is measured at the household level. We do not publish the number of children in fuel poverty as we cannot accurately estimate personal level information.

  • Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-10-17.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he will extend the matching requirement for the Gift Aid Small Donations Scheme.

    Jane Ellison

    The Small Charitable Donations and Childcare Payments Bill relaxes the eligibility criteria for the Gift Aid Small Donation Scheme. These changes will ensure that the Scheme operates effectively and flexibly for a greater number of charities and a greater number of donations.

    The Government has no plans to extend the Gift Aid matching requirement.

  • Andrew Gwynne – 2022 Speech on World AIDS Day

    Andrew Gwynne – 2022 Speech on World AIDS Day

    The speech made by Andrew Gwynne, the Labour MP for Denton and Reddish, in the House of Commons on 1 December 2022.

    I, too, congratulate both my hon. Friend the Member for Brighton, Kemptown (Lloyd Russell-Moyle) on securing this debate, and the Backbench Business Committee on granting it. In thanking my hon. Friend, I want to say that we listened intently to his opening contribution. It was full of wisdom, insight and personal advocacy and showed the commitment that he brings to the issue in this place. The House of Commons is a better place when we speak openly and challenge those in power about the issues that still prevail, not just in this country but across the world when it comes to HIV/AIDS.

    On this day, we remember the 40 million people who have lost their lives to the worldwide AIDS pandemic and related illnesses since the disease was first found in the 1980s. In this debate, Members from across the House, in a small, but perfectly formed manner, have raised some important issues. I particularly thank the right hon. Member for Romsey and Southampton North (Caroline Nokes) for the way in which she always challenges inequalities around the world, especially inequalities facing women and girls, and, of course, this is an issue that affects women and girls around the globe. It is an equalities issue, and I thank her for her contribution. I also thank the hon. Members for West Bromwich East (Nicola Richards), for Heywood and Middleton (Chris Clarkson), and for Strangford (Jim Shannon) and even the SNP spokesman, the hon. Member for Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill (Steven Bonnar), for their contributions. The great thing about this issue is that it brings us together in unity on World AIDS Day. This is not a party political issue. As with covid, if we are to defeat the first pandemic, we must work together across party lines, and this has been a good debate because of that.

    We all recognise the extraordinary work of those who have fought to eradicate the virus. As has already been said, we have come a long way since the first World AIDS Day in 1988. Here in the UK, we have seen unprecedented scientific advancement. We understand more about HIV, and we have legislated against discrimination to better protect those living with HIV. We have seen some long-overdue justice delivered to victims of the contaminated blood scandal, with interim payments being granted for some—but not all—of those impacted. This victory is a testament to the unstinting work of campaigners and, indeed, colleagues from both sides of the House. However, as has been made clear in the Chamber today, there is still much more work to do with regards to this injustice. I hope that, in his response, the Minister will provide an update to the House on when the Government will respond in full to the 19 recommendations laid out in Sir Robert Francis’s framework for compensation.

    This World AIDS Day is not just about recognising and celebrating how far we have come, but about issuing a call to action. There can be no room for complacency in the late stages of this campaign. Today, we stand on the brink of achieving something extraordinary: ending all new HIV transmissions in England by 2030. That goal is ambitious, but achievable, and it is one that Labour is proud to support and to push the Government on to achieving. None the less, too many opportunities are still being missed, and sexual health services are struggling to keep up with demand. A total of 46% of people diagnosed with HIV are still diagnosed too late, and 38% of people attending sexual health services were not offered an HIV test last year. That is not good enough. Some 20% fewer people were tested for HIV in 2021 than in 2019, and research shows that 57% of people have waited more than 12 weeks for PrEP.

    Shockingly, in 2021, no local authority in England—not one—reported more than five women accessing PrEP, and there are still stark racial disparities in treatment and in support that must be addressed. I wish to use this debate to press the Minister on what steps the Government are taking to tackle unequal access to sexual health services and, in particular, to PrEP.

    In a recent study, 40% of people surveyed reported difficulty in booking a sexual health appointment online; 23% of people were turned away due to a lack of available appointments. With that in mind, what assessment have the Government made of sexual health accessibility levels, and what consideration has the Minister made of making PrEP available beyond sexual health services—for example in GPs, gender clinics, pharmacies and abortion clinics? I assume that that work would be included in the promised PrEP action plan, but that has yet to materialise. Will the Minister commit to an implementation date for this plan today, and if not, why not? Furthermore, what recent assessment has the Minister made of the eligibility criteria for PrEP, and are there any plans to expand it?

    PrEP is one side of the coin, but we do not often talk about the other side anymore—partly because of the success of PrEP—and that is access to post-exposure prophylaxis. The publicity has fallen for that, but it is still an important tool in the box for people who are fearing that they may have been inadvertently exposed to the HIV virus. There is a small window for those people who fear that they may have been exposed, or who have been exposed to HIV, to get access to PrEP for it to be successful. What are the Government doing to ensure that there is adequate advice and information on the availability of post-exposure prophylaxis?

    Sexual health services are under unprecedented pressure due to mpox. Service displacement means that appointments for PrEP, STI testing and long-active, reversible contraceptives have been cut. That has also led to reported hesitancy by clinics to deliver mpox vaccines. What action will the Minister take to ensure that all those who need the mpox vaccine can access one, and not to the detriment of other vital sexual health services?

    Moving to testing, the Minister will no doubt be aware that yesterday, NHS England released its report on HIV and hepatitis opt-out testing in areas of very high prevalence. Labour has been proud to support that for several years. The report shows that because of the tests, more than 800 people living with undiagnosed HIV and hepatitis have been identified in these areas. We have saved an estimated £6 million to £8 million on treatment costs. Put simply, opt-out testing has been a huge success. With that in mind, can the Minister set out whether there are any plans to change the current scope of HIV opt-out testing to include all areas of high prevalence?

    Finally, I want to touch on stigma. A study recently published by the Terrence Higgins Trust found that just 38% of people knew that those living with HIV and on effective treatment cannot pass the virus on to partners. Only 30% of people said that they would be comfortable dating somebody with HIV. The HIV epidemic is exacerbated by stigma, ignorance and misinformation. If we want equitable access to HIV treatment, we must proactively tackle the myths and bigotry that still permeate discussions around HIV. I am sure that the Minister will agree wholeheartedly with me about that.

    I would be interested to hear the Minister’s assessment of current legislative barriers affecting those living with HIV. A clear example is the fact that LGBT+ people with HIV are still not allowed to access fertility treatment, despite the fact that heterosexual people with HIV are able to do so. That is an out-of-date barrier and it needs scrapping. I am proud that the next Labour Government will equalise access to fertility treatment for LGBT+ people living with HIV. Will the Minister join us in committing to that, and pledge to introduce legislation now—before the general election—to end the restrictions that prevent people with HIV from starting a family?

    Labour is committed to the HIV 2030 pledge. It is more than prepared to work on a cross-party basis to make this ambition a reality. But we must address some incredibly concerning trends in HIV treatment and access, and not become complacent because of the progress that has come before us. No new transmissions of HIV by 2030 is still possible. We want to succeed, but there is no time to waste. As my hon. Friend the Member for Brighton, Kemptown said, let us all, together, sprint to that finish line.

  • Andrew Gwynne – 2022 Parliamentary Question on Rail Cancellations

    Andrew Gwynne – 2022 Parliamentary Question on Rail Cancellations

    The parliamentary question asked by Andrew Gwynne, the Labour MP for Denton and Reddish, in the House of Commons on 1 December 2022.

    Andrew Gwynne (Denton and Reddish) (Lab)

    I accept the sincerity of the Minister, but “disappointment” from the Government frankly does not cut it. These issues have long been known for at least the past six years or more. They are not new or particular to Avanti and the TransPennine Express, which are just manifestations of the problem right now. Last month we had more than 4,000 cancelled services, on top of 17,800 fewer services that had been pulled from the timetable. Why are Ministers not demanding a binding remedial plan urgently to restore the services that are desperately needed in communities, not just in the north of England but all over the country?

    Huw Merriman

    I agree with the hon. Gentleman. For too long we have worked in a manner that does not allow us to plan ahead and give certainty to the passenger or the workforce. TransPennine Express had too much reliance on the rest-day agreement. It seemed to operate because it was at 1.75 wage, which is the highest. Two other train operators operate at 1.5, and the others are much lower or have just normal rates. That was a high rate, and we could not get ASLEF to continue to operate it, which exacerbated the issue. There is too much reliance on rest-day working. When it operates, it works well, because train operators do not have as many drivers in place, but the train drivers earn overtime from that. When industrial action comes in, that breaks down. We want to move, and our modernisation plans and reforms, which we are trying to get an agreement to put in place, would deliver a seven-day railway where we are not reliant on rest-day working. That is the kind of certainty we want brought in, and that is the only way we will ever be able to avoid such issues in the years to come.

  • Andrew Gwynne – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Andrew Gwynne – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2015-10-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, how many people requiring consular assistance in Addis Ababa and Nairobi originated in Somalia in each of the last three years.

    James Duddridge

    British nationals are not required to state where they come from when they request assistance, and therefore we do not maintain records of this information. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office provides consular assistance as appropriate to the individual circumstances of each case.