UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Jim Fitzpatrick

  • Jim Fitzpatrick – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Deputy Prime Minister

    Jim Fitzpatrick – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Deputy Prime Minister

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Fitzpatrick on 2014-06-05.

    To ask the Deputy Prime Minister, what assessment he has made of the Electoral Commission’s efforts to improve the conduct of elections in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets.

    Greg Clark

    The integrity of our elections is central to our democracy.

    I am aware that the Electoral Commission is investigating allegations of electoral misconduct in Tower Hamlets at the recent local elections and the Metropolitan Police are conducting a number of criminal investigations. I have written to the chair of the Electoral Commission, stressing the importance of ensuring public confidence in the electoral process.

    Given the gravity of the allegations it is important that the Electoral Commission provides a robust assessment of what went on in Tower Hamlets and includes firm recommendations of how to ensure the integrity of future elections.

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

    Jim Fitzpatrick – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Fitzpatrick on 2014-04-01.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will make resources available for a project by the Law Commission investigating the question of fraud by victims of personal injury.

    Mr Shailesh Vara

    The Government is committed to turning the tide on fraudulent personal injury claims. To this end, it is considering what specific reforms might be appropriate, including whether the Law Commission should be asked to consider this issue. We will make our conclusions known in due course.

    No figures are available on the number of exaggerated or fabricated personal injury claims struck out by the courts. Figures for 2011 published by the Association of British Insurers (ABI) indicate that whiplash claims cost customers more than £2 billion a year and add £90 to the average motor insurance premium.

    The ABI describe 7% of all motor claims in 2011 – worth £441m – as fraudulent. In addition, they estimate that a further £1 billion of motor insurance fraud went undetected in 2011.

    As announced last year, we are working with stakeholders in the industry to tighten the medical evidence process so that only evidence from accredited experts can be considered, and the costs for those reports can be fixed. This will mean people can no longer profit from exaggerated or fraudulent compensation claims but victims with genuine cases can still get the help they deserve. We are introducing these reforms later in the year. We are also working to secure better data on motor accident cases, including the number of fraudulent cases.

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

    Jim Fitzpatrick – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Fitzpatrick on 2014-06-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the merits of strengthening penalties for breaches of food law in reducing food fraud.

    Jane Ellison

    The Food Standards Agency (FSA) is the competent authority for the Food Hygiene Regulations. The FSA Board has, on a number of occasions, highlighted its concern that the level of sanction imposed by the courts for food hygiene offences has not been sufficient to deter offending. The sentences imposed are often small when set against the potential profits to be accrued from non–compliance with the Regulations. The FSA would welcome the strengthening of penalties for breaches of the Food Hygiene Regulations.

    The FSA is also keen to ensure that there is consistency in sentencing for food hygiene offences. They have approached the Office of the Sentencing Council and requested that they consider producing sentencing guidelines for food hygiene offences. They are currently working with officials from the Council, who are hoping to produce draft guidelines that can be put before the full Sentencing Council.

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

    Jim Fitzpatrick – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Fitzpatrick on 2014-04-01.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what estimate his Department has made of the scale of (a) detected and (b) undetected insurance fraud in the last year for which figures are available.

    Mr Shailesh Vara

    The Government is committed to turning the tide on fraudulent personal injury claims. To this end, it is considering what specific reforms might be appropriate, including whether the Law Commission should be asked to consider this issue. We will make our conclusions known in due course.

    No figures are available on the number of exaggerated or fabricated personal injury claims struck out by the courts. Figures for 2011 published by the Association of British Insurers (ABI) indicate that whiplash claims cost customers more than £2 billion a year and add £90 to the average motor insurance premium.

    The ABI describe 7% of all motor claims in 2011 – worth £441m – as fraudulent. In addition, they estimate that a further £1 billion of motor insurance fraud went undetected in 2011.

    As announced last year, we are working with stakeholders in the industry to tighten the medical evidence process so that only evidence from accredited experts can be considered, and the costs for those reports can be fixed. This will mean people can no longer profit from exaggerated or fraudulent compensation claims but victims with genuine cases can still get the help they deserve. We are introducing these reforms later in the year. We are also working to secure better data on motor accident cases, including the number of fraudulent cases.

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

    Jim Fitzpatrick – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Fitzpatrick on 2014-06-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what recent discussions he has had with the Food Standards Agency on joined-up action at both national and local level to tackle food fraud.

    Jane Ellison

    The Food Standards Agency (FSA) continues to develop its capability in relation to food fraud, working closely with other Government Departments including the Department of Health, local authorities and industry to detect and deter food fraud.

    The FSA is building an enhanced intelligence gathering network to increase the opportunity to capture and act on intelligence which may be indicative of future risks relating to food fraud, as well as producing strategic and tactical assessments to share with relevant enforcement agencies. Through this, the FSA has strengthened its links with other enforcement agencies, including the National Trading Standards Board, National Crime Agency, the Intellectual Property Office and the Gangmasters Licencing Agency. The FSA is a member of the Government Agencies Intelligence Network and is sharing and receiving intelligence through this network to support cross-government investigations.

    At a European level, the FSA is fully engaged with the European Commission Food Fraud Team and its network which is now sharing intelligence to support cross-Europe investigations.

    The FSA also provide support to local authorities in their food fraud related investigations through the provision of financial support, expert advice and training.

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

    Jim Fitzpatrick – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Fitzpatrick on 2014-04-01.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will request that the Law Commission undertake a law reform project on the question of fraud victims of personal injury as part of its 12 programme of law reform.

    Mr Shailesh Vara

    The Government is committed to turning the tide on fraudulent personal injury claims. To this end, it is considering what specific reforms might be appropriate, including whether the Law Commission should be asked to consider this issue. We will make our conclusions known in due course.

    No figures are available on the number of exaggerated or fabricated personal injury claims struck out by the courts. Figures for 2011 published by the Association of British Insurers (ABI) indicate that whiplash claims cost customers more than £2 billion a year and add £90 to the average motor insurance premium.

    The ABI describe 7% of all motor claims in 2011 – worth £441m – as fraudulent. In addition, they estimate that a further £1 billion of motor insurance fraud went undetected in 2011.

    As announced last year, we are working with stakeholders in the industry to tighten the medical evidence process so that only evidence from accredited experts can be considered, and the costs for those reports can be fixed. This will mean people can no longer profit from exaggerated or fraudulent compensation claims but victims with genuine cases can still get the help they deserve. We are introducing these reforms later in the year. We are also working to secure better data on motor accident cases, including the number of fraudulent cases.

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

    Jim Fitzpatrick – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Fitzpatrick on 2014-06-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what recent assessment he has made of the effectiveness of current tools available to enforcement officers to take swift action in tackling food fraud.

    Jane Ellison

    The Food Standards Agency (FSA) works with local authority enforcement officers to ensure that food law is applied across the entire food chain. Direction and guidance on the approach that local authority food law regulatory services should take is given in the statutory Food Law Code of Practice (the Code). The FSA regularly assesses the effectiveness of tools available to these enforcement officers through undertaking audit of local authorities’ enforcement services, reviewing the Code and ensuring lessons are learnt from major incidents.

    The Code sets out instructions and criteria to which the authorities must have regard and is periodically reviewed to ensure that it reflects current enforcement practices and supports local authorities’ delivery of their official control obligations and that enforcement is consistent, effective and proportionate.

    The FSA provides specific tools to support local authorities with investigations relating to potential food fraud. The FSA operates the Food Fraud Database, which utilises specialist intelligence management software to record intelligence reports and identify links, and uses this to assist local investigations. The FSA also provides local authorities with financial support through its Fighting Fund, expert advice through its Food Fraud Advisory Unit and holds dedicated training courses for enforcement officers.

    In addition, the FSA is building an enhanced intelligence gathering network to increase the opportunity to capture and act on intelligence which may be indicative of future risks relating to food fraud, as well as producing strategic and tactical assessments to share with relevant enforcement agencies.

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

    Jim Fitzpatrick – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Fitzpatrick on 2014-04-29.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the effect on the (a) numbers of GP practices and (b) services offered by GP practices of removing performance indicators from the Quality Outcomes Framework.

    Jane Ellison

    We have reduced the number of indicators in the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) by more than a third. This is intended to free up time for general practitioners (GPs) to provide more personalised care which includes the new responsibility of providing a named GP for all of their patients aged 75 and over. The money released from the QOF will be reinvested in general practice.

    We understand that NHS England is currently developing the specifications and reporting protocols that will be required to capture the information provided by the retired QOF indicators.

    This will enable NHS England’s commissioning teams, clinical commissioning groups and the Care Quality Commission to take this information into account in reaching rounded judgements about the quality of care provided by general practice. It will also be used to evaluate the impact of the indicators that were retired on 1 April 2014, and will inform future decisions about the development of QOF.

    NHS England has recently undertaken an analysis to identify ‘outlier’ practices – those that will lose the largest amount of funding per patient as a result of the phasing out of the Minimum Practice Income Guarantee. Details of these practices have been sent to NHS England area teams.

    In a small number of cases where there are exceptional underlying factors that necessitate additional funding – for example because a practice is serving an atypical population – it is anticipated that area teams will meet with the practices to discuss and agree arrangements to ensure that appropriate services for patients continue to be available.

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

    Jim Fitzpatrick – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Fitzpatrick on 2014-06-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps he has taken to strengthen food surveillance and the analytical capability of local authorities to pre-empt potential food fraud in the last 12 months.

    Jane Ellison

    The main role for the Food Standards Agency (FSA) in combatting food fraud is to provide assistance and resources to United Kingdom local authorities (LAs) food fraud related investigations through the provision of financial support, expert advice and training. The FSA continues to develop its capability in relation to food fraud, working closely with other Government Departments, LAs and industry to detect and deter food fraud.

    The FSA provides additional funding on an annual basis to UK Enforcement Authorities for sampling and surveillance of food to help ensure risk-based targeted checks at ports and inland. Food authenticity and food adulteration issues have been prioritised in consultation with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and the Department of Health.

    In 2013-14, the FSA made available £1.6 million to LAs and ports plus an additional £700,000 specifically for authenticity issues including: meat speciation and fish speciation by DNA testing; added water in chicken; authenticity of durum wheat; and authenticity of basmati rice.

    Over the last 12 months, FSA and DEFRA have worked with the Authenticity Steering Group to address and prioritise analytical method development for the Food Authenticity Research Programme. Current activities include knowledge transfer sessions, which have been joint-funded by FSA and DEFRA, to enhance the range of analytical methods available to support LA enforcement activity. For example, a knowledge transfer event took place for Public Analysts on DNA extraction processes in early 2014 with a further two planned for later this year.

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

    Jim Fitzpatrick – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Fitzpatrick on 2014-04-29.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment has been made of the effects of the removal of the Minimum Practice Income Guarantee on (a) GP services and (b) the income of GPs; and if he will commission research on the range and extent on GP income in Tower Hamlets.

    Dr Daniel Poulter

    As part of the general practitioner (GP) contract settlement in 2013, the Department decided to phase out Minimum Practice Income Guarantee (MPIG) top up payments over a seven year period, starting in the coming financial year 2014-15. This means that MPIG payments to practices will be reduced by one-seventh every year from 1 April 2014.

    The money released by doing this will be reinvested in the basic payments made to all General Medical Services practices, which are based on numbers of patients and key determinants of practice workload, such as patient age, health needs and the unavoidable costs of providing services in rural areas. The decision to implement the changes over a period of seven years is designed to allow those practices that will lose funding to adjust gradually.

    GPs are independent contractors and are responsible for deciding their own levels of income. The decision on how to address specific local issues will be taken by NHS England’s area teams after a full assessment of local circumstances. We understand that NHS England’s primary care team in London is in regular contact with the Chief Officer of Tower Hamlets clinical commissioning group about this issue.