Tag: Dan Jarvis

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Dan Jarvis on 2016-03-21.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what powers the EU has to freeze the assets of suspected terrorist groups or individuals suspected of involvement in terrorism; and what assessment he has made of the benefits to the UK of those powers.

Mr David Lidington

The EU has two mechanisms for freezing the assets of individuals and groups suspected of involvement in terrorism. The UN’s ISIL (Daesh) and Al-Qaida sanctions regime is implemented in the United Kingdom by way of EU Council Regulation (EC) No. 881/2002 and subsequent EU regulations adding new individuals and entities to the regime. The EU also has its own autonomous counter-terrorism regime under Common Position 931, for listing individuals and groups based on national competent authority decisions by a Member State or third country.

HM Treasury reports quarterly to Parliament on the implementation of these measures. The Treasury’s latest report [http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-statement/Commons/2016-02-24/HCWS548/], published on 24 February 2016, sets out that in Q4 of 2015 a total of 43 UK accounts were frozen under either EU or UN counter-terrorism measures. A further 36 accounts were frozen under the UK’s domestic Terrorist Asset Freezing etc. Act 2010 regime.

The EU’s autonomous regime lends a multiplying effect to the reach of a number of the UK’s domestic asset freezes and proscriptions of terrorist organisations, and facilitates the sharing of information on designated persons between Member States. The UK also benefits from the consistent application across EU territory of the UN’s ISIL (Daesh) and Al-Qaida asset freezes.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Dan Jarvis on 2016-03-17.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, how much funding her Department received from the European Social Fund (a) between 2007 and 2014 and (b) from 2014 to the last month for which data is available.

Mrs Theresa Villiers

My Department has not received any funding from the European Social Fund in either of the periods requested. Implementation of the European Social Fund in Northern Ireland is the responsibility of the Northern Ireland Executive.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Dan Jarvis on 2016-03-21.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what the EU’s decision-making process is for (a) humanitarian and (b) military interventions; who is involved in those decision-making processes; and what the timetable for those processes is.

Mr David Lidington

The EU’s humanitarian assistance is administered primarily by the European Commission’s Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection department (ECHO). Approved implementation partners submit project proposals to ECHO in response to its Humanitarian Implementation Plan. ECHO has a number of decision-making procedures available to it: the delegation procedure, where ECHO has delegated powers for emergency humanitarian work up to a limit of €3m and a maximum duration of three months); and the empowerment procedure, where the Commissioner for Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection may take decisions relating to emergency operations up to €30m (maximum €10m for non-urgent decisions) for a maximum of six months. These decisions are subject to a consultation procedure within the Commission. Emergency decisions exceeding €10m and non-urgent decisions exceeding €2m (and all other decisions not covered by the delegated or empowerment procedures) require the approval of the Humanitarian Aid Committee (of representatives of all EU Member States). These decisions can be made by consensus or by voting, simple majority or Qualified Majority Voting, depending on the circumstances. The voting procedure has not been used in the Humanitarian Aid Committee as yet. The timeframe for the Commission’s approval will depend on the urgency of the humanitarian crisis.

EU military interventions fall under the EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy. Proposals are framed by Member States and the European External Action Service. A military intervention requires two Council Decisions: one to establish the mission; and, once planning is complete, another to launch the mission. All CSDP Council Decisions require unanimity. Timescales for military interventions depend on a range of factors, such as operational urgency and planning requirements.

There are other Commission-administered programmes, aside from those administered by ECHO, which have humanitarian aspects. Typically, under these programmes, the Commission is responsible for framing proposals with decision-making involving a committee of Member States.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Dan Jarvis on 2016-04-21.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education, when her Department plans to publish the terms of reference for Sir Nick Weller’s report into transforming education across the Northern Powerhouse.

Nick Gibb

Our White Paper, Education Excellence Everywhere, sets out the range of support we will offer to schools across England.

Where schools are failing, Regional Schools Commissioners will identify a suitable academy sponsor to turn them around. In areas where there are too few sponsors, we will recruit new sponsors, including high-performing schools and more sponsors from business, charity and philanthropy. We will also encourage existing sponsors to expand, increasing incentives and minimising barriers, learning from the investment we have already made through the Northern Sponsor Fund.

For other struggling schools, we will ensure there is nationwide coverage of system leaders (teaching schools and National Leaders of Education), who will be expected to work with weaker schools to support them to improve. To help achieve this, we will improve how we designate system leaders by introducing a more sophisticated approach based on timely and accurate data rather than relying heavily on Ofsted judgements. We will also partner schools with the potential to become strong system leaders with existing teaching schools and National Leaders of Education.

Through the Department’s strategy for Achieving Excellence Areas, we will target our existing programmes to secure sufficient high quality teachers, leaders, system leaders, sponsors and members of governing boards on the areas of greatest need. At the Budget, the Government announced that we will invest an additional £20 million a year to build on this strategy to raise education standards across the Northern Powerhouse. The allocation of this funding will depend on the identified need and will be reassessed each year, based on the evidence.

For the additional funding announced in the budget, decisions on how the funding will be allocated for the 2016-17 financial year will be made by the autumn of this year and will be informed by the emerging findings of the review by Sir Nick Weller. We will be publishing the terms of reference for Sir Nick Weller’s review shortly.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Dan Jarvis on 2016-05-23.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if his Department will take steps to ensure that the medical exemption criteria for determining prescription charges is suitable to allow for the changing nature and improving prognosis of many medical conditions.

Alistair Burt

The process for determining entitlement to a medical exemption is suitable for purpose, and takes account of whether someone continues to meet the criteria. We do not have any plans to make any amendments to the list of medical conditions which provide exemption from the prescription charge.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Dan Jarvis on 2016-10-10.

To ask the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, what the staffing costs are of the secondees to his Department from elsewhere in the Civil Service.

Mr Robin Walker

The term ‘secondment’ to refer to an interchange of staff between the Civil Service and an external organisation as such we have not brought any secondees into the Department from elsewhere in the Civil Service. All joiners from other Government departments have been on a loan basis, which refers to an interchange of staff between Civil Service departments or Agencies. The Department’s budget will be set out to the House of Commons and approved as part of the Supplementary Estimates in the new year, as is standard practice.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Dan Jarvis on 2016-10-19.

To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what information her Department holds on the number of people who have undertaken full-time volunteering over the last (a) 12 months, (b) three years and (c) five years.

Mr Rob Wilson

DCMS does not hold this information.

However, through the annual youth social action survey we do know that 42% of 10 to 20 year olds have participated in some form of social action in the past year. Full-time volunteering is one of many opportunities for young people to participate in meaningful social action.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Dan Jarvis on 2015-10-29.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what estimate he has made of the number of cases of frostbite diagnosed in (a) Barnsley Central constituency, (b) Yorkshire and Humber and (c) the UK in each year since May 2010.

Jane Ellison

The table below sets out the count of finished admission episodes (FAEs)¹ with a primary diagnosis² of frostbite³ in Barnsley Central constituency⁴, North Yorkshire and Humber, West Yorkshire, and South Yorkshire and Bassetlaw Area Teams of residence⁵ and England for years 2010-11 to 2013-14⁶

Activity in English NHS Hospitals and English NHS commissioned activity in the independent sector

	2010-11	2011-12	2012-13	2013-14
Barnsley Central	0	0	0	0
North Yorkshire and Humber Area Team of Residence	2	0	1	0
South Yorkshire and Bassetlaw Area Team of Residence	2	1	3	2
West Yorkshire Area Team of Residence	5	7	6	3
England	84	43	48	51

Source: Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), Health and Social Care Information Centre

Notes:

1. Finished admission episode

A finished admission episode (FAE) is the first period of inpatient care under one consultant within one healthcare provider. FAEs are counted against the year or month in which the admission episode finishes. Admissions do not represent the number of inpatients, as a person may have more than one admission within the period.

2. Primary diagnosis

The primary diagnosis is the first of up to 20 (14 from 2002-03 to 2006-07 and 7 prior to 2002-03) diagnosis fields in the Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) data set and provides the main reason why the patient was admitted to hospital.

3. ICD-10 Codes

The following ICD-10 codes were used to identify frostbite:

T33 Superficial frostbite

T34 Frostbite with tissue necrosis

T35 Frostbite involving multiple body regions and unspecified frostbite

4. Parliamentary constituency of residence

The parliamentary constituency containing the patient’s normal home address. This does not necessarily reflect where the patient was treated as they may have travelled to another parliamentary constituency for treatment. This field is only available from 2009-10 onwards.

5. Area Team of residence

The area team containing the patient’s normal home address. This does not necessarily reflect where the patient was treated as they may have travelled to another area for treatment.

6. Assessing growth through time (Inpatients)

HES figures are available from 1989-90 onwards. Changes to the figures over time need to be interpreted in the context of improvements in data quality and coverage (particularly in earlier years), improvements in coverage of independent sector activity (particularly from 2006-07) and changes in NHS practice. For example, changes in activity may be due to changes in the provision of care.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Dan Jarvis on 2015-11-16.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, whether reducing incidents of negligent care will be the primary focus of the Government’s proposed package of reforms aimed at reducing costs in medical negligence litigation.

Ben Gummer

Over the past 10 years claimant legal costs as a percentage of damages paid by the National Health Service have increased from 32% to 52%. We believe that claimant legal costs are disproportionate to the value of the damages paid, sometimes representing up to 299% for lower value claims, and disproportionate to the defendant costs. Ultimately this all comes out money for front line services. The proposal for fixed recoverable cost in lower value clinical negligence claims was suggested by Lord Justice Jackson in his report Reform of Civil Litigation Funding and Costs in England and Wales.

The Department is working closely with partners and interested parties to develop a proposal to introduce fixed recoverable costs for clinical negligence claims. The Department’s proposal in the consultation is a maximum threshold level of £250,000, based on Lord Justice Jackson’s original proposal and with a view to covering at least 80% of all claims. We welcome views on the proposal from all sectors. The results of a pre-consultation exercise with a number of key stakeholders, including representatives of claimant lawyers, and the consultation documentation, including the Impact Assessment, will be published early 2016 subject to relevant Committee clearances.

The level of potential savings will ultimately depend upon the final maximum threshold level proposed. By making legal costs proportionate to the damages paid we would hope to save circa £80 million per annum. The Department is also working with various clinical groups looking at how the current level of incidents can be reduced. In terms of maternity our target to reduce avoidable harm by 50% and save 6,000 lives.

The Department sees the fixed recoverable cost work as part of an overall strategic approach aimed at improving patient safety, improving customer care and improving litigation. Improving patient safety and reducing the incidents of harm is a key element of this.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Dan Jarvis on 2016-01-12.

To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment his Department has made of the effect of the Carbon Price Floor tax on energy intensive industries.

Damian Hinds

The government recognises that the increased cost of electricity in the UK, as a result of the Carbon Price Floor (CPF), has an impact on the competitiveness of energy intensive industries that operate in international markets. This is why the most energy intensive industries are compensated for up to 85% of the indirect costs of the Carbon Price Floor – this is greatest amount currently allowed under EU law.