Tag: Andrew Gwynne

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-01-26.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what factors she takes into account in considering a request from a local authority to dispose of school sites under Schedule 14 of the Education Act 2011.

Edward Timpson

Since January 2013, the Secretary of State for Education has received:

• 1 application from Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council, this is currently being considered.
• 4 applications from Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council, all have been approved.
• 19 applications from the Greater Manchester combined authority, 1 is being considered and the other 18 have been approved.

These figures include applications in those local authorities relating to land held by Academy Trusts under a lease from the local authority.

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. Secretary of State consent is also required under section 77 of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998 where local authorities wish to dispose of playing field land that has been used by a school in the last ten years. A key consideration for the government is whether the land proposed for disposal could be suitable for use by a new school.

There are a range of reasons for these disposals. Some disposals are leases from the academy trustees back to the local authority, which allow a children’s centre on site to continue or which provide land for another school. A substantial number of consents refer to local authority maintained school sites for outright disposals where the school has closed or relocated to a new build site.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the contribution of the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health of 21 January 2016, Official Report, column 1634, when his Department plans to release the Government’s comprehensive childhood obesity strategy.

Jane Ellison

We will be launching our childhood obesity strategy shortly.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-02-01.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what discussions (a) he and (b) the Minister for Public Health has had with Ministers in HM Treasury on the fiscal effect of an additional tax on soft drinks containing sugar.

Jane Ellison

There are ongoing discussions between the Department and other Government departments, including HM Treasury, to consider a range of options to reduce sugar consumption.

We will be launching our childhood obesity strategy in due course. It will look at everything, including sugar, that contributes to a child becoming overweight and obese.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment she has made of the potential effect of a British exit from the EU on the international legal enforceability of protected UK food names.

George Eustice

We have not made an assessment of the potential effect of a British exit from the EU on the international legal enforceability of protected UK food names.

Separately, the Government is taking steps to achieve a significant increase in the number of UK food products covered by the EU’s protected food names scheme. We continue to exert pressure on the European Commission to secure wider international recognition of these products, as well as our wines and spirits drinks that are protected by Geographical Indications, in the context of EU bilateral trade negotiations.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-02-24.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what proportion of the £570 million referred to in paragraph 0.5 of his Department’s paper, Infected blood: reform of financial and other support, published in January 2016, will be spent in each year of the programme; what the average spend per recipient will be in each such year; and in what categories of spending that funding will fall in each such year.

Jane Ellison

The Department estimates that it would pay out £570 million over the next 45 years, based on the existing unreformed scheme. The Department currently anticipates that it will disburse the same sum under a reformed scheme plus the additional £125 million over the current spending review period of five years. We are currently consulting on the reformed scheme and are unable to estimate the future average annual spend beyond the current spending review or the categories of spend for the period. For the current spending review period the planned expenditure is £47.5 million for each of the next five years.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Education, how much has been spent on mindfulness in (a) primary and (b) secondary schools in each year since 2010.

Edward Timpson

The Department for Education does not hold information about the amount of money spent on mindfulness in primary or secondary schools.

Schools are free to provide the support they feel is most appropriate for their pupils, based on their pupils’ needs.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-03-08.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what proportion of office space owned or occupied by (a) his Department and (b) its executive agencies is currently unused.

Jane Ellison

The proportion of office space owned or occupied by the Department and its executive agencies which is currently unused is (a) 0% and (b) 1.37 %.

The Department’s executive agencies are Public Health England and the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. The vacant space is leased by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency and will be released on 31 March 2016.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-03-17.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will place copies of all responses received to NHS England’s consultation on the new Cancer Drugs Fund in the Library.

George Freeman

NHS England has operational responsibility for the Cancer Drugs Fund and has advised that it currently has no plans to publish all responses received on its consultation on the future of the Fund. An analysis of the consultation responses was published on 25 February 2016 and is available at:

www.engage.england.nhs.uk/consultation/cdf-consultation

“

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-04-11.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how much was spent by clinical commissioning groups on palliative care for (a) children and young people and (b) adults in each of the last three years.

Ben Gummer

The information is not available in the format requested. Such information as is available is shown in the following table.

Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) Expenditure on End of Life Care, 2013/14 (£ millions)

All CCGs in England

472.75

Source: Programme Budgeting Collection, NHS England

Notes:

1. CCG expenditure on end of life care was collected for the first time on an experimental basis as part of the 2013/14 Programme Budgeting Collection. The data is published in the Programme Budgeting benchmarking tool on the NHS England website at: https://www.england.nhs.uk/resources/resources-for-ccgs/prog-budgeting/ Data for 2014/15 is currently being collected and is not yet available.
2. “End of life care” expenditure in this data collection refers to expenditure on specialist palliative care and hospice care only and does not include a breakdown between palliative care spend on children and young people’s care and palliative care spend for adult care.
3. Data quality: The Programme Budgeting Collection currently contains experimental data. The quality of the data included in the Programme budgeting collection varies by CCG and certain CCGs’ data quality issues may have an impact on the ability to benchmark expenditure with other CCGs. Full details of data quality for each CCG are available on the NHS England website at: https://www.england.nhs.uk/resources/resources-for-ccgs/prog-budgeting/
4. Data on palliative care spend was not collected in 2011/12 and 2012/13 or previous programme budgeting data collections.

“

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what monitoring her Department undertakes of the (a) allocation, (b) spending and (c) outcomes of pupil premium funding at (i) maintained schools and (ii) academy trust schools.

Mr Sam Gyimah

The conditions of grant for the pupil premium make clear that its purpose is to raise the attainment of disadvantaged pupils. School leaders are best placed to decide how to spend the pupil premium in line with this policy and the needs of their pupils. Schools are not prevented from using the pupil premium to fund capital projects or from carrying over funding between years.

The Department for Education supports schools to make evidence-based decisions through the work of the Education Endowment Foundation, established to identify and promote effective practice in raising the attainment of disadvantaged pupils. The Department does not monitor how Academies and maintained schools spend the pupil premium but instead holds them to account for the outcomes of eligible pupils through the publication of data in performance tables and Ofsted inspection.

Where concerns are raised about the performance of an academy then they are addressed by the Regional School Commissioner with responsibility for that area. The Department also takes seriously any concerns about the financial management of a school. We are aware of the findings of the Ofsted report on Audenshaw School relating to its use of the pupil premium, following an inspection in February 2016. We are also aware that the Hon. Member, Andrew Gwynne, has met the Regional Schools Commissioner for Lancashire and West Yorkshire, Vicky Beer, on a number of occasions to discuss his concerns about Audenshaw School Academy Trust. The Department has carefully reviewed all the information provided on this matter and has identified no grounds to take further action.