Tag: Frank Field

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Frank Field on 2015-11-20.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what assessment her Department is undertaking of the effect on children’s (a) attainment, (b) health and (c) attendance of the universal infant free school meals policy.

Mr Sam Gyimah

The decision to introduce universal infant free school meals (UIFSM) was based on pilots of universal free school meals carried out between 2009 and 2011 in Newham and Durham. The pilots demonstrated benefits in terms of children’s health, attainment and behaviour, as well as helping families with the cost of living.

The UIFSM policy has been in place for just over a year. We will look carefully at a range of indicators in relation to UIFSM once we are satisfied that we have sufficient time series data to undertake a robust analysis.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Frank Field on 2016-01-04.

To ask the Prime Minister, what steps the Government has taken to meet the conditions set out in the motion passed by the House on 2 December 2015 on ISIL in Syria.

Mr David Cameron

I refer the right hon. Member to the oral statement made by the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr Hammond) on 16 December 2015, Official Report, column 1566.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Frank Field on 2016-01-13.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education, if her Department will commission research on the (a) reasons for and (b) effects of the different thresholds for investigations to be initiated under section 17 and section 47 of the Children Act 1989.

Edward Timpson

Sections 17 and 47 of the Children Act 1989 have different purposes. Section 17 defines a child as being “in need” if they are unlikely to achieve or maintain a reasonable standard of health or development without the provision of services by the local authority, or their health and development are likely to be impaired (or further impaired), without the provision of such services, or they are disabled. Under this section, local authorities are required to provide a range and level of services appropriate to those children’s needs.

Section 47 places a duty on local authorities to make enquiries to decide whether and what action should be taken to safeguard the child from “significant harm”. This is the point at which compulsory intervention in a child’s life is justified.

Each local authority will interpret the definitions at Section 17 and Section 47 and set local thresholds, agreed by Local Safeguarding Children Boards, through their statutory function under the Children Act 2004, in discussion with all partners. This function is set out in Regulation 5 of the Local Safeguarding Children Boards Regulations 2006, as follows:

1(a) developing policies and procedures for safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children in the area of the authority, including policies and procedures in relation to:

(i) the action to be taken where there are concerns about a child’s safety or welfare, including thresholds for intervention;

This is also set out in the Working Together to Safeguard Children, 2015 statutory guidance. Ofsted looks at thresholds as part of its inspection process and considers whether the levels set locally are appropriate. It expects good Local Safeguarding Children Boards to monitor and understand the application of thresholds locally.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Frank Field on 2016-01-25.

To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, how many rough sleepers have been helped by the No Second Night Out Across England programme; and what proportion of those people were successfully kept off the streets.

Mr Marcus Jones

Rapid intervention is vital to identifying new rough sleepers and ensuring that the support is in place to help them off the streets quickly. The longer someone sleeps rough, the greater the risk that they will become entrenched on the streets. That is why we invested in rolling out No Second Night Out across England through the £20 million Homelessness Transition Fund. Over two-thirds of rough sleepers in 20 key areas outside London did not spend a second night on the streets.

The Government is committed to protecting the most vulnerable in society. But one person without a home is one too many, which is why we will increase central investment over the next four years to £139 million for innovative programmes to prevent and reduce homelessness and rough sleeping. We have also protected homelessness prevention funding for local authorities, through the provisional local government finance settlement, totalling £315 million by 2019-20.

Data on the number of people helped through the Fund is in an independent evaluation, published by Homeless Link: http://www.homeless.org.uk/sites/default/files/site-attachments/Three%20Years%20of%20Transition%20-%20summary%20evaluation%20report.pdf.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Frank Field on 2016-02-19.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what proportion of children in England received the meningitis B vaccine in 2015-16; and what steps he is taking to maximise take-up rates.

Jane Ellison

Meningitis B (MenB) immunisation for infants was introduced on 1 September 2015 on the basis of expert advice from the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, the independent body which advises Government on all immunisation matters. The vaccine is offered alongside other routine immunisations at two and four months of age, with a booster dose at 12-13 months. A limited one-off catch-up programme was also offered, targeting infants born in May and June 2015.

Preliminary vaccine coverage for children born in July 2015 was 94.0% for one dose and 84.8% for two doses when measured at six months of age.

The introduction of MenB immunisation has been supported by a comprehensive media and communications campaign in partnership with health partners and meningitis charities. This resulted in significant coverage across national, local, parenting and social media. New patient information leaflets and posters have also supported the campaign, and comprehensive guidance has been added to the NHS Choices website. Existing children’s immunisation information booklets and leaflets have been amended to reflect the new immunisation schedule. A training factsheet and video for health professionals have also been produced.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Frank Field on 2016-02-23.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will carry out an assessment of the effect of changes in funding for community pharmacies on patient safety.

Alistair Burt

The community pharmacy proposals for 2016/17 and beyond, on which we are consulting, are being considered in respect to the public sector equality duty, the family test and relevant duties of the Secretary of State under the National Health Service Act 2006. The latter includes the duty as to improvement in quality of services, such as the safety of services.

At this stage we would note that all pharmacists, pharmacy technicians and pharmacies are regulated by the General Pharmaceutical Council, which protects, promotes and maintains the health, safety and wellbeing of members of the public by upholding standards and public trust in pharmacy. Also, under NHS pharmaceutical services, community pharmacies are required to meet clinical governance requirements, which encourage continuing quality improvement, including through risk management.

An impact assessment will be completed to inform final decisions and published in due course.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Frank Field on 2016-03-18.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will respond to the petition of Isabelle Garnett on the www.change.org website, entitled Help my son get the autism care he needs.

Alistair Burt

I met Isabelle and Robin Garnett on 15 March, together with the hon. Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes). I was grateful for the opportunity to discuss Matthew’s care and the broader issues of ensuring that children and young people’s mental health services are transformed using the £1.4 billion funding being made available over the lifetime of this Parliament. It is crucial that children such as Matthew get the best possible care, based on the best clinical advice at all stages, with hospital stays kept to the minimum necessary and in the most appropriate setting to meet their needs.

On 22 March, Matthew transferred to a unit in Northampton where the specialist care he needs is available.

I have asked the Department, with NHS England and other partners, to consider urgently how we can best learn the lessons from the experiences of Matthew and his family, including whether this case raises broader systemic issues that need to be addressed.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Frank Field on 2016-04-14.

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, if he will estimate the number of working couples who in 2020-21 will be eligible for universal credit and who will receive more if they are living apart than if they are living together; and if he will make a statement.

Priti Patel

We do not issue forecasts of these volumes. The number of working couples on Universal Credit and their circumstances will vary according to a number of factors, such as the economic climate. Even if this data were published, such forecasts will change over time.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Frank Field on 2016-05-18.

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, when he plans to reply to the letter of 15 March 2016 on wage insurance from the hon. Member for Birkenhead.

Justin Tomlinson

My Rt. Hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Stephen Crabb) has replied to the Rt. Hon. Member today.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Frank Field on 2016-07-20.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, how many people working for his Department or its executive agencies on a (a) directly employed, (b) agency or (c) outsourced basis are paid less than the living wage as defined by the Living Wage Foundation; and how many of those people are employed on zero-hours contracts.

Sir Alan Duncan

No member of staff of the Foreign and Commonwealth (FCO) or its Executive Agencies who is directly employed is paid less than the living wage.

The FCO defines zero-hours contracts as a contract of employment which does not specify a fixed number of hours per week, and has no guaranteed minimum number of hours. The FCO uses this type of contract to cope with fluctuating demand and/or retain specialist expertise no longer available in the current workforce. For example, we bring back retired FCO officers with relevant skills/experience to act as sensitivity reviewers or VIP visit liaison officers.

Our centrally held records do not enable us to differentiate between staff on zero-hours contracts and those on contracts with a fixed number of hours. To provide this information would incur disproportionate cost.

We do not hold a record of contract status for staff employed by companies providing outsourced services to the FCO.