Tag: Kirsten Oswald

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kirsten Oswald on 2016-07-21.

To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what discussions she has had with representatives of charities and voluntary groups concerned with child welfare on possible amendments to the meaning of the term supply in the Video Recordings Act 1984 to include adults providing children with access to recordings categorised as containing age-inappropriate content.

Matt Hancock

Following public consultations involving representations from classification bodies, child welfare groups, local authorities, content producers and many others, since 2010 we have legislated twice to strengthen the protections provided by the Act. This has ensured that retailers now cannot sell or rent any age-inappropriate DVDs or video games discs or cartridges to children. It also ensures these products are all labelled with relevant British Board of Film Classification (DVDs) and PEGI (video games) age ratings and content advice. This means adults have better information to help them make responsible decisions about the material children can access.

We will continue to work with industry and the age ratings bodies to encourage further promotion of the BBFC and PEGI age ratings to consumers including through initiatives such as BBFCInsight and AskAboutGames.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kirsten Oswald on 2016-10-07.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, (a) how many and (b) what proportion of (i) all service leavers and (ii) early service leavers from each of the armed forces who left the service voluntarily have been assessed as achieving a positive employment or training outcome within six months of leaving the service.

Mark Lancaster

UK Service personnel with four or more years’ Service who voluntarily left the Armed Forces in Financial Year 2014-15 (the latest statistic available) and used the Career Transition Partnership (CTP) services had the following estimated employment outcomes, up to six months after leaving:

Service	Employed %	Economically Inactive %	Unemployed %
Royal Navy	89% (1,950)	7% (160)	3% (70)
Army	84% (6,560)	9% (690)	7% (510)
Royal Air Force	83% (1,710)	14% (290)	4% (70)
Total Average %	85% (10,220)	10% (1,150)	6% (640)

Notes: The Ministry of Defence (MOD) does not record the training outcomes of Service leavers. The following categories of personnel have been included in the definition of those leaving Service voluntarily; those reaching the end of their engagement; those giving notice to terminate and those medically discharged. Figures include all Service leavers who used the Career Transition Partnership, less Early Service Leavers (this includes those with less than four years’ service and those compulsorily discharged). The numbers and percentages for employment outcomes cannot be summed together, as the unemployment figures were calculated on a different population to the employment and economically inactive figures. All totals and sub-totals have been rounded and so may not equal the sums of their rounded parts. When rounding to the nearest 10, numbers ending in “5” have been rounded to the nearest multiple of 20 to prevent systematic bias.

For Early Service Leavers (ESL i.e. those with less than four years service or those compulsorily discharged irrespective of length of Service), the Future Horizons Programme (FHP) for ESL was introduced on 1 October 2013. Between 1 October 2013 and 31 March 2014 approximately 33% of eligible personnel participated in FHP. During Financial Year 2014-15 some 62% of eligible personnel participated in the Future Horizons Programme. Prior to the establishment of FHP all ESL were entitled to unit level support as part of standard MOD policy.

From 1 October 2015, the resettlement provision for ESL is termed CTP Future Horizons. Official statistics on the six-months post-discharge employment status of ESL who used CTP Future Horizons will be published in January 2017 as part of the CTP official statistic.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kirsten Oswald on 2015-11-13.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what account he has made of the adequacy of tariffs in the armed forces compensation scheme for former service personnel with an employment-related mental illness.

Mark Lancaster

In 2009 Lord Boyce was asked to review the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme (AFCS), including its associated tariffs, to ensure that the Scheme was fit for purpose. Lord Boyce made his recommendations in February 2010, and as a result the Ministry of Defence tripled the maximum lump sum award for mental illness from £48,875 to £140,000 in order to accurately reflect the impact of the most serious mental health conditions. While Lord Boyce was clear in his report that a further fundamental review of the AFCS should not be required, we recognise that it is appropriate to review our policies and associated tariffs on a regular basis.

In addition to the AFCS lump sum, the most seriously injured receive a tax-free Guaranteed Income Payment for life. This is uplifted annually by the Consumer Price Index.

An Independent Medical Expert Group (IMEG) was also established in 2010 to advise on appropriate levels of compensation for several specific injuries and illnesses, including mental health. The IMEG has looked at how best to compensate for mental health problems and they keep this under review.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kirsten Oswald on 2015-12-15.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many dangerous occurrences were reported by his Department to the Health and Safety Executive in each of the last five years; and how many of those incidents involved the unplanned or faulty discharge of a weapon.

Mark Lancaster

We are investigating the compilation of the requested statistics and I will write to the hon. Member in due course.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kirsten Oswald on 2016-02-01.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what estimate he has made of the cost to the public purse of rectifying faults in the power and propulsion system of the Type 45 Destroyer; and if he will make a statement.

Mr Philip Dunne

A number of measures to improve the reliability of the Type 45 Power and Propulsion systems have been identified and the ongoing programme to implement these changes continues to deliver positive results. In addition, and as part of the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015, we are committed to improving system resilience by adding upgraded diesel generators to provide further electrical generation capacity. Alternative technical options and a variety of delivery models are currently being explored with several competing industrial partners.

A number of early modifications were implemented under the Type 45 Destroyer Contract for Availability arrangement with BAE Systems at no additional cost to the Ministry of Defence. The total cost and timetable for implementing the diesel generator upgrade will be determined at the main investment decision. I am withholding details of our current time and cost estimates as premature disclosure of this information could prejudice the commercial interests of the Department.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kirsten Oswald on 2016-03-23.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what assessment his Department has made of the extent to which members of the armed forces work with trichloroethylene in the line of duty and the suitability of existing health and safety arrangements when this takes place.

Mark Lancaster

The assessment of exposure to hazardous chemicals, including Trichloroethylene, by Armed Forces personnel is covered by legislative requirements in the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations (COSHH). These require that the employer makes a suitable and sufficient assessment of exposure to employees, and that any exposure is prevented or adequately controlled. The Ministry of Defence (MOD) fully complies with these regulations, through risk assessments of exposure to hazardous substances being undertaken at local level by the Chain of Command. This includes an assessment of the suitability of arrangements to prevent or control exposure.

The MOD is also aware that after 21 April 2016, an authorisation will be needed for continued use of Trichloroethylene and has arrangements in place to ensure compliance.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kirsten Oswald on 2016-04-26.

To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what estimate he has made of the funding of research into the use of proton therapy for cancers from the science budget in the next five years.

Joseph Johnson

Research into cancer involving proton therapy and laser treatment falls within the remit of the Research Councils.

I have asked the Chair of the Research Councils UK Strategic Executive to write to the hon. Member and I will place a copy of the letter in the Libraries of the House.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kirsten Oswald on 2016-04-25.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what criteria are used to determine the level of compensation due to current or former service personnel diagnosed with cancer related to working conditions experienced during their period of service.

Mark Lancaster

The Ministry of Defence (MOD) provides no-fault compensation for members of the Armed Forces where illness, injury or death is caused by service from 6 April 2005 under the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme (AFCS) and, before that date, under the War Pensions Scheme (WPS).

Any disablement, injury or illness, including cancer, can be claimed with awards made where the claimed disorder is accepted as being due to service. Lay and scheme medical advisers work together and decisions are evidence based, reflecting the individual case facts, contemporary medical understanding of causation and the relevant law.

Awards under the WPS depend on the assessed level of disablement with the method of assessment set out in the legislation and expressed as a percentage. The AFCS is tariff based. The legislation includes nine tables of injuries and disorders with associated tariff levels, relevant to military service. A lump sum is paid for pain and suffering taking account of the likely progress of the condition over the person’s lifetime. There are fifteen tariff levels and, for the more serious disorders like cancer, a Guaranteed Income Payment to cover reduced civilian employability is paid, in addition, from the date of claim for life.

Where negligence exists on the part of the MOD, Service personnel may make a claim for damages under common law for service after May 1987. Awards are determined by common law principles which, broadly, take into account, as appropriate, an individual’s pain and suffering, degree of injury, past and future financial losses and level of care required. Levels of compensation which include these elements can vary depending on an individual’s circumstances.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kirsten Oswald on 2016-04-27.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to his Department’s press release, A new pay model for the Armed Forces, published on 7 January 2016, what assessment he has made of the potential effect of the reformed pay structure on the number of complaints about terms and conditions received through the service complaints process.

Mark Lancaster

The changes associated with the new Armed Forces pay model have been extensively communicated, both prior to and since their announcement in January. These communications are expected to address a significant proportion of the questions and concerns that might otherwise have been raised as service complaints. Whilst it is impossible to predict how many service complaints might be raised, planning is in place for a means of dealing with them if they do arise in volume in a way that is fair, effective and efficient and does not overwhelm the system.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kirsten Oswald on 2016-06-10.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what steps he is taking to take account of the levels of satisfaction with pay reported in the Regular Armed Forces Continuous Attitude Survey in his setting of pay policy for the armed forces.

Mark Lancaster

The new Pay 16 structure was specifically established in response to Service personnel criticisms of the old pay model. The Ministry of Defence (MOD) has developed the new pay model as a simpler, more transparent system which provides Service personnel with greater pay predictability. It addresses some of the concerns about the previous pay model reported by personnel through both the Service Complaints system and the Armed Forces Continuous Attitude Survey (AFCAS) and in feedback from the Armed Forces Pay Review Body (AFPRB). I fully expect these changes to be positive for morale overall.

Many personnel will experience an increase in pay as a result of the new pay model, and no one will take a cut in core pay on implementation. We have taken steps to ensure that personnel are aware of the range and nature of the pay reforms that began on 1 April 2016 and comprehensive internal communications activity has been undertaken to explain the changes. This included Departmental guidance to help personnel understand their new pay statement and any changes. Personnel, including those under pay protection, continue to remain eligible for any Government-approved pay award. Pay protection has been put in place to ensure that no one will take a pay cut on implementation of Pay 16 and this arrangement will exist for at least the first three years to ensure that no one is disadvantaged.

The new pay model is not designed as a cost saving exercise, but is a rebalancing of pay to make more efficient and effective use of the Armed Forces pay bill; the AFPRB will continue to recommend pay rates for all personnel. As we go forward the Service Complaints Process and AFCAS will be primary sources which inform our assessment of the benefits realised through the pay reforms.