Tag: Andrew Smith

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Smith on 2015-11-05.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what proportion of total NHS expenditure spending on maternity services represented in each of the last 10 years.

Ben Gummer

Not all of the information requested is collected centrally. Data for primary care trusts (PCTs) secondary healthcare commissioning spend on maternity services for the years 2005/06 to 2012/13 is shown in the tables below. Maternity services may also be commissioned in primary care environments. However, it is not possible to separately identify the amount of primary care expenditure on maternity services from the statutory accounting data collected by the Department.

Table 1: 2005/06 to 2007/08. NHS expenditure figures on a pre-Clear Line of Sight resource budgeting basis.

Year	Maternity services commissioned by PCTs 2005/06 to 2012/13 ( £ billion)	Spend on maternity services as % of NHS revenue expenditure
2005/06	1.67	2.25%
2006/07	1.62	2.06%
2007/08	1.79	2.07%

Source: NHS (England) Summarised Account (2005/06 to 2010/11)

Table 2: 2008/09 to 2012/13. NHS expenditure figures on an aligned basis following the HM Treasury’s Clear Line of Sight programme.

Year	Maternity services commissioned by PCTs 2005/06 to 2012/13 ( £ billion)	Spend on maternity services as % of NHS revenue expenditure
2008/09	1.97	2.25%
2009/10	2.41	2.55%
2010/11	2.53	2.60%
2011/12	2.62	2.61%
2012/13	2.58	2.52%

Source: NHS (England) Summarised Account (2005/06 to 2010/11) and the Department of Health Annual Report and Accounts (2011/12 and 2012/13).

Notes:

1. Commissioning expenditure on maternity services relates to the payments made by commissioners to providers for delivery of maternity services.
2. The Clear Line of Sight HM Treasury alignment project simplified financial reporting to Parliament by ensuring improved consistency between accounts and HM Treasury budgeting rules.

Following the abolition of PCTs and strategic health authorities at 31 March 2013, NHS England became responsible for the commissioning of healthcare in England via the network of individual clinical commissioning groups (CCGs). The Department does not collect data on maternity services spend by CCGs.

NHS England has published expenditure on ‘maternity and reproductive health’ services commissioned by CCGs for 2013/14, which was estimated to be £2.8 billion (4% of total CCG expenditure). CCG spend represents a proportion of overall NHS expenditure on maternity services. NHS England also commissions some services that were previously included within PCT estimates, such as antenatal screening services. NHS England is currently reviewing the data on direct commissioning expenditure and plans to publish this when finalised.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Smith on 2015-12-14.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many of the Watchkeeper unmanned aerial vehicles purchased from Thales have been handed over to the British Army.

Mr Philip Dunne

As at 15 December 2015, 37 Watchkeeper Unmanned Air Vehicles have been delivered by Thales and accepted by the Ministry of Defence. Of these, 10 are currently held by the Army to meet its current flying training programme and readiness requirements. The remainder are either being used for flight trials at West Wales Airport, or being stored and maintained until required by the Army.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Education, how many children are being supported under section 17 of the Children Act 1989 where their parents have no recourse to public funds.

Edward Timpson

Information on children supported under section 17 of the Children Act 1989 is published in the annual Children in Need Census statistical first release. This data collection does not identify the number of children supported where their parents have no recourse to public funds.

Information in the form requested is therefore not held centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Smith on 2016-04-19.

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, if he will make it his policy to exempt universities and university research from the proposed ban on non-government organisations using funds from Government to lobby Government.

Matthew Hancock

As I made clear in the House on 27 April, we are continuing to consider the comments of all interested parties, ahead of the introduction into grant agreements of the clause aimed at protecting taxpayers’ money from being wasted on government lobbying government. We are pausing the implementation, pending a review of the representations made, and to give further time to consider any necessary adjustments to the wording of the clause, or the policy on its implementation, to help to deliver this policy in the best possible way for all involved.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Smith on 2016-06-07.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what accountability mechanics are in place related to decisions in Sustainability and Transformation Plan footprints.

George Freeman

Each Sustainability and Transformation Plan (STP) footprint is convened by a senior leader who has agreed to chair and lead the meetings on behalf of their peers. Each footprint has agreed its own governance and representation, depending on local circumstances and to ensure that all relevant National Health Service bodies and partners are included. An STP footprint supports organisations to come together to agree how best to improve and sustain services and health for their local populations.

The local, statutory architecture for health and care remains. The arm’s length bodies Regional Directors will retain accountability for delivery in their regions. Existing accountabilities for Chief Executives of provider organisations and Accountable Officers of Clinical Commissioning Groups are unchanged.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the date of receipt was of the oldest outstanding further submission related to an asylum claim.

Mr Robert Goodwill

Home Office records indicate that the oldest outstanding further submissions application related to an asylum claim is dated 12 December 2001.

In March 2015 the Home Office implemented a new policy for individuals who make new further submissions in person in Liverpool and has significantly improved the handling and processing times of applications submitted since 30 March 2015.

The Home Office is currently developing internal plans to address the older further submissions whilst deciding new applications submitted through the Further Submissions Unit in Liverpool. It is important to note there will always be exceptional cases that can not be dealt with due to circumstances outwith the control of the Home Office.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Smith on 2015-11-04.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many NHS (a) standalone midwife-led units, (b) midwife-led units situated alongside consultant-led units and (c) consultant-led maternity units there are in each region of England; and if he will make a statement.

Ben Gummer

Information on the number of standalone midwife-led units, midwife-led units situated alongside consultant-led units and consultant-led maternity units in each region of England is set out in the table below:

	Standalone midwife-led units	Midwife-led units situated alongside consultant-led units	Consultant-led maternity units
North West, Lancashire, Cheshire, Merseyside	4	12	20
Cumbria, North East of England and Yorkshire and the Humber	8	8	24
NHS Midlands and East.	14	37	44
South East Coast and Wessex	8	12	16
South	18	10	18
London	3	22	25

Women can expect a range of choices over place of birth. As set out in the NHS Choice Framework for 2015/16, these choices include giving birth at home with the support of a midwife, in a midwifery facility with the support of a midwife, or in any available hospital with the support of a maternity team. Choices will depend on what is best for the woman and her baby, as well as what is available locally.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, if he will make an assessment of the implications for his policy on Bahrain of the analysis and conclusions of the report by Americans for Democracy and Human Rights in Bahrain, entitled Shattering the Façade, published in November 2015.

Mr Tobias Ellwood

We have noted the report by Americans for Democracy and Human Rights in Bahrain which assesses the progress the Government of Bahrain is making against the recommendations of the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry Report (BICI). In June 2014, the UN Human Rights Council presented similar findings by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. That is why we continue to encourage plus support the Government of Bahrain in ensuring full implementation of the BICI recommendations, as well as those accepted in their UN Human Rights Council Universal Periodic Review. We are offering UK assistance to help them achieve this.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many people applied to have their circumstances changed to give them recourse to public funds in the last quarter; and what proportion of such applications were successful in (a) the first quarter of 2016 and (b) the second quarter of 2015.

James Brokenshire

Data for Q1 2016 is not yet available. However, in the last quarter for which statistics are publicly available (October – December 2015), 765 people applied to have their circumstances changed to give them recourse to public funds and of these 3.9% were successful, however a significant proportion of these cases are pending their final decision and as such the final proportion may be higher.

In Q2 2015 (April – June 2015), 750 people applied to have their circumstances changed to give them recourse to public funds. 735 of those applications had been concluded by the end of the publicly available statistics and 270 had been successful, which equates to a proportion of 36.7%.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Smith on 2016-04-19.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what the timetable and process is, including parliamentary scrutiny, for ratification by the UK of the EU-Israel Civil Aviation Agreement.

Mr Robert Goodwill

The EU-Israel Aviation Agreement was signed on 10 June 2013. Prior to this it was subject to UK parliamentary scrutiny (EM 16502/12 & 16650/12 dated 4 December 2012). Scrutiny clearance was received from the European Scrutiny Committee on 12 December 2012 and the UK government therefore agreed to the Council Decision to sign the Agreement at the Council held on 20 December 2012.

The Agreement is currently being amended due to the accession of Croatia to the European Union. The Decision to sign the amendment was agreed by Council on 8 October 2014 and is currently being considered by the European Parliament. Once this is complete, the Agreement and the amendment will then be concluded at a later date. The amendment will not be subject to UK parliamentary scrutiny as the European Scrutiny Committees of both Houses have agreed to waive parliamentary scrutiny of all amendments to EU-3rd country agreements, where the sole purpose of the amendment is to accede Croatia to an agreement.