Tag: Jim Cunningham

  • Jim Cunningham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Jim Cunningham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2014-04-09.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to the Answer of 7 April 2014, Official Report, column 18W, on employee ownership, if he will make an estimate of the Exchequer impact of the tax rules for shares awarded under employee shareholder agreements since 1 September 2013.

    Mr David Gauke

    Employers are not required to provide details of any shares awarded under employee shareholder agreements to HM Revenue & Customs until they submit their annual employment-related securities return for 2013-14. No details or estimates of the total value of shares awarded under employee shareholder agreements since 1 September 2013 are currently available.

    Estimates of the Exchequer impact of the capital gains tax exemption and the income tax and national insurance treatment of shares awarded under employee shareholder agreements in tax years to 2017-18 can be found at http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/tiin/emp-shareholder-status.pdf

  • Jim Cunningham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Jim Cunningham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2014-05-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many strategic clinical networks currently have a breast network site-specific group; and how many times each such group met in 2013-14.

    Jane Ellison

    The requirement for the provision of site-specific groups (SSGs), such as those for breast cancer, is written into national cancer peer review requirements. In consultation with strategic clinical networks (SCNs), NHS England has developed an SCN framework. The framework reiterates the role and importance of clinical networking groups as support for the commissioning process, but allows for local agreement to how those groups are supported.

    There are 12 SCNs and we would expect all to have a breast network SSG. This will be evidenced by the annual report published for the SCN and relevant area team. The National Peer Review Programme “Manual for Cancer Services; Breast Cancer Measures” states that network groups should meet regularly.

    The Review Programme further states that the network group should produce an annual work programme in discussion with the SCN and agreed with the director of the relevant Area Team. It should include details of any planned service developments and should specify the personnel responsible and the timescales for implantation. The SSGs also develop protocols for the treatment of patients within the SCN and agree audits and research projects that will be supported.

    The Review Programme also states that network groups should meet regularly. It gives guidance on the roles that should be represented on the group but not numbers.

    We do not hold information on how many breast network SSGs existed and how many times each group met prior to April 2013.

  • Jim Cunningham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Jim Cunningham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2014-06-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the Answer of 13 May 2014, Official Report, column 494W, on prisons: mobile telephones, when data on mobile telephones seized in prisons in 2013 will be made available.

    Jeremy Wright

    The number of mobile phone and SIM card seizures for the first six months of 2013 was 3398. The data for the whole of 2013 will be available by the end of August 2014, broken down by prison establishment.

    One seizure may constitute a handset containing one SIM card or media card, a handset only, or a SIM card only.

    All figures provided have been drawn from live administrative data systems which may be amended at any time. Although care is taken when processing and analysing the returns, the detail collected is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large scale recording system.

  • Jim Cunningham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Jim Cunningham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2014-04-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to the Answer of 2 April 2014, Official Report, column 724W, on housing benefit: social rented housing, for what reasons his Department has determined that a longer timeframe than one year is required to assess the effects of the under-occupancy penalty on rent arrears in the social rented sector.

    Esther McVey

    Rent arrears can have multiple causes and levels tend to fluctuate over time. Analysis of monthly, quarterly or even a single year of arrears is insufficient to reliably remove these normal fluctuations, driven by both seasonal and general economic trends, and to determine whether and to what extent the removal of the spare room subsidy has impacted on rent arrears levels

  • Jim Cunningham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Jim Cunningham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2014-05-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many breast network site-specific groups existed in (a) 2010-11, (b) 2011-12 and (c) 2012-13; and how many times each such group met in each year.

    Jane Ellison

    The requirement for the provision of site-specific groups (SSGs), such as those for breast cancer, is written into national cancer peer review requirements. In consultation with strategic clinical networks (SCNs), NHS England has developed an SCN framework. The framework reiterates the role and importance of clinical networking groups as support for the commissioning process, but allows for local agreement to how those groups are supported.

    There are 12 SCNs and we would expect all to have a breast network SSG. This will be evidenced by the annual report published for the SCN and relevant area team. The National Peer Review Programme “Manual for Cancer Services; Breast Cancer Measures” states that network groups should meet regularly.

    The Review Programme further states that the network group should produce an annual work programme in discussion with the SCN and agreed with the director of the relevant Area Team. It should include details of any planned service developments and should specify the personnel responsible and the timescales for implantation. The SSGs also develop protocols for the treatment of patients within the SCN and agree audits and research projects that will be supported.

    The Review Programme also states that network groups should meet regularly. It gives guidance on the roles that should be represented on the group but not numbers.

    We do not hold information on how many breast network SSGs existed and how many times each group met prior to April 2013.

  • Jim Cunningham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Jim Cunningham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2014-06-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what average time was left to be served on a sentence for prisoners serving (a) determinate, (b) indeterminate, (c) life and (d) all sentences moved from closed to open conditions within the prison estate in each year since 2010.

    Jeremy Wright

    We do not centrally hold data on the number of prisoners transferred from closed to open prisons for the time period requested – or the type of sentence which they were serving. Consequently, the information requested could be obtained only at disproportionate cost, as it would involve a manual trawl through the records of every prisoner who has formed part of the prison population since 2010, to identify if they had/have ever been held in open conditions during the time period requested.

    Determinate sentence prisoners should not generally be moved to open prison if they have more than 2 years to serve to their earliest release date, unless assessment of a prisoner’s individual risks and needs support earlier categorisation to open conditions. Such cases must have the reasons for their categorisation fully documented and confirmed in writing by the Governing Governor.

    Indeterminate sentence prisoners do not have fixed release dates, so even if the data on transfers was readily available, it would not be possible to identify a length of time left to be served in these cases.

    Depending on the length of tariff and the risk they pose, indeterminate sentenced prisoners (ISPs – both those serving life and IPP sentences) move through their sentence via a series of progressive transfers into lower security establishments in the closed estate and then usually into open conditions. ISPs may be considered for transfer to open conditions up to 3 years before the expiry of their minimum tariff. The decision to transfer ISPs to open conditions is a categorisation decision which is a matter for the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State may take this decision after seeking advice from the Parole Board – or without seeking advice from the Board, where the prisoners demonstrate exceptional progress.

    Placing a prisoner in open conditions serves two main purposes. Firstly, it facilitates the eventual resettlement of prisoners into the community, in conditions more similar to those that they will face in the community than closed conditions can provide. Secondly, it allows for risk to be assessed in order to inform release decisions and, should the prisoner secure release, to inform risk management plans for ongoing supervision in the community. Thus, for many prisoners who have spent a considerable amount of time in custody, this can assist in their successful reintegration in the community and help protect the public. To release these prisoners directly from a closed prison without the resettlement benefits of the open estate could lead to higher levels of post-release re-offending.

    Keeping the public safe is our priority. That is why this Government has taken action on both releases on temporary licence (ROTL) and absconds from prison. We commissioned a fundamental review of ROTL policy and practice last year and, in March, announced a package of measures to ensure that the public was properly protected. We have brought forward some of those measures so that they begin to take effect immediately; particularly with more serious offenders, where the review concluded that an enhanced risk assessment approach should be taken.

    The public have understandable concerns about the failure of some prisoners to return from temporary release from open prison. Keeping the public safe is our priority and we will not allow the actions of a small minority of offenders to undermine public confidence in the prison system. The number of temporary release failures remains very low; less that one failure in every 1,000 releases and about five in every 100,000 releases involving alleged offending, but we take each and every incident seriously. The Government has already ordered immediate changes to tighten up the system as a matter of urgency. With immediate effect, prisoners will no longer be transferred to open conditions if they have previously absconded from open prisons; or if they have failed to return or reoffended whilst released on temporary licence.

  • Jim Cunningham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Jim Cunningham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2014-04-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to the Answer of 2 April 2014, Official Report, column 724W, on housing benefit: social rented housing, if he will make an interim assessment of the effects of the under-occupancy penalty on rent arrears in the social rented sector in the first year of its introduction.

    Esther McVey

    We have already commissioned a two year evaluation of the effects of the removal of the spare room subsidy across Great Britain. The evaluation commenced in April 2013 and is being led by Ipsos-MORI and includes the Cambridge Centre for Housing and Planning Research. The final report will be published in late 2015.

    Rent arrears can have multiple causes and levels tend to fluctuate over time. A longer time frame than one year is required in order to factor out short-term fluctuations and to see whether and to what extent the removal of the spare room subsidy has impacted on rent arrears levels.

    There is some evidence that rent arrears levels are falling, as the Homes and Communities Agency reported in February 2014 that the median level of arrears among larger housing associations had fallen from 4.1% in the second quarter of 2013-14 to 3.9% in the third quarter of 2013-14.

  • Jim Cunningham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Jim Cunningham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2014-05-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what guidance is provided to breast network site-specific groups on (a) the frequency with which they should meet each year, (b) the number of members each group should have and (c) the roles that should be represented in the group’s membership.

    Jane Ellison

    The requirement for the provision of site-specific groups (SSGs), such as those for breast cancer, is written into national cancer peer review requirements. In consultation with strategic clinical networks (SCNs), NHS England has developed an SCN framework. The framework reiterates the role and importance of clinical networking groups as support for the commissioning process, but allows for local agreement to how those groups are supported.

    There are 12 SCNs and we would expect all to have a breast network SSG. This will be evidenced by the annual report published for the SCN and relevant area team. The National Peer Review Programme “Manual for Cancer Services; Breast Cancer Measures” states that network groups should meet regularly.

    The Review Programme further states that the network group should produce an annual work programme in discussion with the SCN and agreed with the director of the relevant Area Team. It should include details of any planned service developments and should specify the personnel responsible and the timescales for implantation. The SSGs also develop protocols for the treatment of patients within the SCN and agree audits and research projects that will be supported.

    The Review Programme also states that network groups should meet regularly. It gives guidance on the roles that should be represented on the group but not numbers.

    We do not hold information on how many breast network SSGs existed and how many times each group met prior to April 2013.

  • Jim Cunningham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Jim Cunningham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2014-06-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many prisoners serving sentences in open conditions have previously absconded for their current or previous establishments (a) once, (b) twice, (c) three times and (d) four or more times.

    Jeremy Wright

    Keeping the public safe is our priority. Absconds and escapes have reached record lows under this Government but each incident is taken seriously. Immediate changes have already been ordered to tighten up the system as a matter of urgency. Prisoners will no longer be transferred to open conditions or allowed out on temporary release if they have previously absconded, escaped, or attempted to do either.

    My officials are currently working to provide the information requested. I will write to you in due course.

  • Jim Cunningham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Jim Cunningham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2014-03-31.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will bring forward legislative proposals to regulate workers posted to the UK by companies.

    James Brokenshire

    Non-EEA nationals posted to the UK branch of their company are already
    regulated under the Tier 2 (Intra-Company Transfer) route, as set out in the
    Immigration Rules.

    Non-EEA nationals posted to the UK as contractual service suppliers under an
    international trade agreement are regulated under the Tier 5 (International
    Agreement) route.