Tag: Lord Alton of Liverpool

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2015-12-10.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps are being taken to ensure that Do Not Resuscitate orders are not assigned in the future to patients solely because they have Down’s syndrome or any other learning disability.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Department expects National Health Service trusts and foundation trusts to have in place local policies on resuscitation that are based on expert professional guidance. We have commended, as a basis for local policies, professional guidance, Decisions relating to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (2014), published jointly by the British Medical Association, the Resuscitation Council (UK) and the Royal College of Nursing. The guidance is clear that any resuscitation decision must be free from any discrimination, tailored to the individual circumstances of the patient and fully documented. The use of a Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation decision solely on the basis that a patient has Down’s Syndrome is totally unacceptable.

A copy of the guidance is attached.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-01-18.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will commission an assessment of the implications for the mental and physical health of children conceived through the use of sperm from prolific, unregulated donors, and whether they intend to review the regulation of sperm donation.

Lord Prior of Brampton

According to media reports, this particular case concerns private arrangements made between individual women seeking sperm for home insemination and the man providing the sperm. There is no third party involved. Such private arrangements between a man and a woman are not regulated. We understand that there is also no evidence to support the claim of up to 800 children having been born.

It is important that women seeking sperm donation treatment fully understand the benefits of using clinics licensed by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-01-25.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Anelay of St Johns on 22 January (HL4827), in the light of the statements of the United Nations Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide and the Special Adviser on the Responsibility to Protect, in their press releases on Islamophobia (Dec 2015), some religious leaders’ incitement to Holy War (Sept 2015), bombing by the Assad regime (June 2015), and concerns about people caught in Yarmouk (April 2015), where their statements about the murder, abduction, enslavement and genocide of Christians and Yazidis appear.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

Statements made by the Office of the UN Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide and the Special Adviser on the Responsibility to Protect are published on the UN website.

The statements cover a range of issues including incitement to violence in Syria on religious grounds; urging against rhetoric that escalates the risk of violence against religious communities; expressing concern about the on-going threat to the safety of minority groups in Syria; expressing outrage at speeches and media articles that dehumanise Alawites and Christians; expressing alarm at reports of the abduction of 1,500 Yazidi, Christian and Shabak women and girls; expressing concern at the situation of religious and other minorities, noting that members of the Christian community were fleeing the northern city of Mosul following the Daesh-led invasion; urging leaders in the wider region to refrain from using or condoning any language that may escalate sectarian tension; calling on all actors to condemn hate speech that could constitute incitement to violence against communities based on their religious affiliation.

The complete statements are attached to this response, and the link to the website is provided below for your ease of reference: http://www.un.org/en/preventgenocide/adviser/statements.shtml

“

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-02-10.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many meetings have been held between senior officials of the UK and representatives of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea since the release of the report of the UN Commission of Inquiry on 7 February 2014.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

Our Ambassador to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) and senior officials from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) have met representatives of the DPRK on a number of occasions since 7 February 2014. These meetings are part of normal diplomatic business and play a crucial role in our policy of critical engagement with the DPRK. The FCO does not keep a record of the number of individual meetings.

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

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what representations they have made to the Russian Ambassador to the United Kingdom regarding the findings of the UN Commission of Inquiry’s 2014 report on human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) that persons who are forcibly repatriated to the DPRK are commonly subjected to torture, arbitrary detention, summary execution, forced abortions and other sexual violence; and the Commission’s recommendation that countries should respect the principle of non-refoulement and abstain from forcibly repatriating any persons to the DPRK.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

We have not made specific bilateral representations to the Russian Federation Government on the UN Commission of Inquiry (COI) report.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-03-11.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answers by Earl Howe on 22 January 2013 (WA194–5) and by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for the Department of Health, Mr George Freeman, on 8 March (HC29426), what control the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has over the contents of any external website, such as that maintained by the Francis Crick Institute; what prior examples they can provide in which (1) either centre 0157 or 0206, or (2) any other licensed centre, has immediately and voluntarily altered the publication on their websites of clinical success rate data or information on costs in response to a request from the HFEA to do so; and what assessment they have made of how any expectations that licensed centres would comply with such requests might be affected by the Francis Crick Institute’s claim that it is exempt from the Freedom of Information Act 2000 as a private body that has hitherto not provided copies of the patient information and consent forms directly for that reason.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) Code of Practice, at section 4.5, sets out the obligations on a licensed treatment centre regarding information provided on its website; other relevant marketing communications; and in relation to associated satellite and transport centres. This is in line with the Advertising Standards Authority Code. This guidance does not apply to licensed research centres.

Assessment of the websites of licensed treatment centres is made during inspections undertaken by the HFEA, or in response to ad hoc instances where information has come to us suggesting breaches of these requirements. There have been a number of examples where clinics have voluntarily and immediately amended the content of their websites and it would not be proportionate to set out all such examples. The HFEA has no statutory powers relating to the costs of treatment.

The fact that the Francis Crick Institute is exempt from the Freedom of Information Act 2000 has no impact on the HFEA’s expectations of licensed centres’ websites.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-04-11.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their assessment of the timing of the referendum taking place in Darfur between 11 and 13 April, in the light of the levels of violence in Jebel Marra, Central Darfur.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

We remain concerned by the timing of the Darfur referendum due to ongoing violence and the absence of a peace agreement. The continued fighting and level of civilian displacement in Jebel Marra is particularly troubling, and brings in to question the viability of holding the referendum at this time. We have raised such concerns with the Government of Sudan. We have also pressed for full humanitarian access to be granted, including at the UN Security Council and bilaterally as part our recent strategic dialogue with the Government of Sudan, led by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office’s Africa Director. Officials from our Embassy in Khartoum are monitoring the situation closely.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-04-27.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the attacks on 26 April on the Christian neighbourhood of Sulaymaniyah in Aleppo, and of reports that at least eight children were among those killed.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

We are aware of reports of attacks on the Sulaymaniyah neighbourhood in Aleppo, and of reports that at least eight children were among those killed. We are deeply concerned about the increasing numbers of violations of the Cessation of Hostilities, especially around Aleppo. In the overwhelming majority of cases, it is the Asad regime that is responsible for the breaches, including when it has bombed schools, marketplaces, hospitals and a search and rescue centre in the last week. As the Foreign Secretary, my Rt Hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr Hammond), said in a press statement on 28 April, we call on those with influence to apply real pressure to end this spiral of violence. The UK will continue to support the Syrian people to secure their future, free from Asad, and push for progress with our international partners.

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

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to ensure that the human rights of detained Sudanese pastors Telahoon Nogosi Kassa Rata and Hassan Abduraheem Kodi Taour are respected.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

Freedom of religion or belief in Sudan continues to be an area of deep concern. We have consistently called on the Government of Sudan to ensure all legislation is consistent with the Interim Constitution of 2005; within which religious freedom is enshrined. We regularly attend court cases in Sudan on freedom of religion or belief and through our project work we also seek to support lawyers who take on cases addressing important human rights issues.

Our Ambassador in Khartoum raised the specific cases of Mr Talahon and Reverend Hassan with the Minister of Guidance and Religious Endowments and the Sudanese Director of Church Affairs in February. We also raised this issue with the Sudanese Director of Human Rights during the UK-Sudan bilateral talks in March, and again with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in April. Furthermore, we continue to raise concerns about the scope of the National Security Act (2010) and the powers it gives the National Intelligence and Security Service. Most recently, we highlighted this issue in our statement at Sudan’s Universal Periodic Review at the UN Human Rights Council on 4 May. We will remain active on these issues.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-06-07.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their assessment of the risk that President Joseph Kabila may attempt to change the constitution of the Democratic Republic of the Congo to remain in power and not hold the elections scheduled for November.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

The Constitution of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) is clear: a President may serve two terms of five years. In 2015 President Kabila made a tentative attempt to change the Constitution to enable him to stay on beyond the end of his current, final term of office but was rebuffed by the Congolese Parliament. The risk that he will attempt to do so again remains, but the UK position is clear: we do not believe that constitutions should be amended for the benefit of incumbent leaders. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my Hon. Friend the Member for Rochford and Southend East (James Duddridge), has repeatedly urged Foreign Minister Tshibanda to do all in his power to ensure the DRC government enables elections to take place in line with the Constitution.

We remain concerned by the lack of progress towards elections in the DRC. Primary responsibility for organising the elections rests with the government and institutions of the state of the DRC. The UK stands ready to support elections. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary for International Development, my Hon. Friend the Member for Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner (Mr Hurd), announced in March that the UK would make up to £11.4million available to support the election process, provided certain conditions were met. But we have also been clear that individuals responsible for repression and human rights violations in the run-up to the election period will have to face the consequences of their actions.