Tag: Lord Alton of Liverpool

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-01-13.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they provided financial support to the exhibition Sand in My Eyes: Sudanese Moments at the Brunei Gallery, and what assessment they have made of whether that exhibition received funding from the government of Sudan or the Sudanese National Intelligence and Security Services.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe

We did not provide financial support to the exhibition Sand in My Eyes: Sudanese Moments at the Brunei Gallery, which is co-presented by the Brunei Gallery, SOAS and the Embassy of the Republic of Sudan.

We are aware that the Sudanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs are supporting the exhibition, however no formal assessment has been made whether the exhibition has received funding from the Government of Sudan or the Sudanese National Intelligence and Security Services.

The human rights situation in Sudan remains of serious concern; HMG consistently raise our concerns with the Government of Sudan and armed opposition groups and, where relevant, in the UN.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-01-26.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what action they are taking to prevent hostels requiring asylum seekers to wear red wristbands before providing food and to stop property companies singling out the accommodation used by asylum seekers by having their doors painted red.

Lord Bates

On 20 January my Rt. Hon. Friend the Immigration Minister (James Brokenshire), in response to the articles in the press regarding asylum seeker accommodation in Middlesbrough, announced an audit of asylum accommodation as a result of the allegations made (regarding the use of a single paint colour on asylum seeker properties).

The Home Office has asked for assurance from all accommodation providers that there are no further policies or practices that allow asylum seekers to be identified as such by the public.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-02-08.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Prior of Brampton on 27 January (HL5039), whether they will place in the Library of the House a full copy of the responses to peer reviewers by the person responsible for the recently approved licence application submitted to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) to perform genome editing in human embryos by means of CRISPR-Cas9; to what extent the HFEA’s Executive followed the recommendations raised by both of their peer reviewers; and on how many occasions the HFEA’s Executive have made decisions against the recommendations of all appointed peer reviewers.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) publishes on its website the inspection report relating to a licence renewal application and the minutes of the Licence Committee’s decision. It does not publish other information associated with a licence application.

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 (as amended) permits the genetic modification of embryos in research, subject to an HFEA licence. As the regulator, the HFEA’s responsibility is to apply the test in the legislation, namely that the research is necessary or desirable for any of the purposes specified in the Act and that the use of embryos is necessary. The Licence Committee has added a condition to the licence that no research using genome editing may take place until it has received approval from an NHS Research Ethics Committee.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-02-29.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Prior of Brampton on 11 February (HL5646), when the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority changed its practice; what the reasons were for doing so; and how that change in practice had previously been communicated publicly.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) cannot confirm when this practice changed. Making provision for interested members of the public to make their views known, whilst not a legal requirement under the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990, was part of the HFEA’s past practice although very few applications attracted a response. This change was not communicated publicly.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-03-14.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answers by Lord Prior of Brampton on 2 February (HL5773) and 7 March (HL6225), whether the previously licensed research to perform genome editing in human embryos by means of CRISPR-Cas9 has commenced; if so, when that research actually commenced and when the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) received evidence of ethics approval; if not, how the HFEA has confirmed that the newly approved activities have not already commenced prior to receipt of evidence of ethics approval; and whether the delay due to the absence of evidence of ethics approval has applied only to genome editing or also to all activities previously covered by the same licence.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has advised that the research referred to by the Noble Lord has not commenced. When ethics approval has been received, the person responsible is required to provide evidence of this to the HFEA. The ethics approval applies to new activities in the research project, including the use of CRISPR-Cas9.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-04-12.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answers by Lord Prior of Brampton on 23 March (HL6930 and HL6954), how the patient information and consent forms originally submitted to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) explicitly described the process of genome editing in human embryos by means of CRISPR-Cas9; whether such previously licensed research has now commenced; if so, when the HFEA received evidence of ethics approval; and what have been the reasons for the further delay in commencing such research in the light of previous complaints about delays by the person responsible in her correspondence to the HFEA dated 15 December 2015 and 12 January 2016.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has advised that the original patient information is part of the information presented to the Licence Committee and this was sent to the noble Lord on 7 March 2016. The research involving gene editing has not yet started. The HFEA is awaiting final confirmation that the changes to the patient information and consent forms requested by the research ethics committee have been made.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-04-21.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the reply by Baroness Anelay of St Johns to the private notice question from Lord Alton of Liverpool on 21 April, which members of the United Nations Security Council they believe would veto a referral to the International Criminal Court of evidence of genocide against Christian, Yazidi and other minorities in Iraq and Syria.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

The International Criminal Court (ICC) Prosecutor set out some of the complicated issues involved in the ICC investigating Daesh in her press statement of 8 April 2015. It is not possible to refer Daesh itself to the ICC. Any referral would cover ALL potential crimes against international humanitarian law within a specified geographic area, rather than a specified organisation or set of actors.

When efforts were made to refer the situation in Syria to the ICC in 2014, it was vetoed by Russia and China. We expect that any Security Council resolution at this time seeking to refer the situations in Iraq or Syria to the ICC would likewise be blocked.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-05-09.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Prior of Brampton on 25 April (HL7391), whether the single stem cell line from the research project R0152 that was in preparation for depositing with the UK Stem Cell bank was derived following any form of nuclear transfer or pronuclear transfer.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has advised that the single stem cell line from the research project R0152, that was in preparation for depositing with the UK Stem Cell bank, was not derived following any form of nuclear transfer or pronuclear transfer.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-05-25.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether any vessels of the Royal Navy fleet have been built or serviced at the Nauta shipyard in Poland; and whether the Government is aware of the use of North Korean labour at that shipyard.

Earl Howe

I can confirm that no Royal Navy vessels have been built or serviced at the Nauta shipyard in Poland. We are aware of reports, however, that North Korean labour has been used at the shipyard.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-06-20.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to ensure that the Juba Teaching Hospital in South Sudan has adequate supplies of electricity; what assessment they have made of the effect of power cuts and power rationing on that hospital’s ability to provide treatment; whether they have raised the issue of the lack of electricity at the Juba Teaching Hospital with the government of South Sudan; and what steps they will take to ensure that that government takes action.

Baroness Verma

The Government of South Sudan has provided one year’s supply of fuel to the Juba Teaching Hospital. The fuel was delivered and electricity was restored to the hospital at the end of May 2016. The Government has also recently signed a contract with a private company to undertake general renovation of the hospital.

The South Sudan Government’s annual budget allocations for health and education are amongst the lowest in the region averaging 6% for education and 4% for health, compared to an average of 17% and 15% respectively in other East African countries. The UK has consistently lobbied for increased budget allocations to these sectors. The UK is pressing the Government of South Sudan to increase funding for health in the 2016-17 annual budget which will be set in July, particularly for medicines, hospital infrastructure, recurrent running costs including fuel, and personnel for hospitals and clinics. This issue was most recently raised in a meeting with the Minister of Health, Riek Gai Kok on 21 June 2016.