Tag: Lord McColl of Dulwich

  • Lord McColl of Dulwich – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Lord McColl of Dulwich – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord McColl of Dulwich on 2015-11-25.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government when they will lay before Parliament a report setting out their plans in relation to independent child trafficking advocates, in accordance with section 48(7) of the Modern Slavery Act 2015.

    Lord Bates

    Section 48(7) of the Modern Slavery Act requires the Government to lay before Parliament a report setting out the steps it proposes to take in relation to independent child trafficking advocates within nine months of Royal Assent of the Modern Slavery Act. The Government will publish this report by 16 December, whilst Parliament is sitting. The evaluation report will be published by 16 December and set out the number of children referred into the trial and their countries of origin.

  • Lord McColl of Dulwich – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Lord McColl of Dulwich – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord McColl of Dulwich on 2015-11-25.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many children who received a child trafficking advocate under the trials conducted in 2014–15 were (1) UK nationals, (2) nationals of the EU or EEA excluding UK nationals, and (3) nationals of countries not in the EU or EEA.

    Lord Bates

    Section 48(7) of the Modern Slavery Act requires the Government to lay before Parliament a report setting out the steps it proposes to take in relation to independent child trafficking advocates within nine months of Royal Assent of the Modern Slavery Act. The Government will publish this report by 16 December, whilst Parliament is sitting. The evaluation report will be published by 16 December and set out the number of children referred into the trial and their countries of origin.

  • Lord McColl of Dulwich – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Lord McColl of Dulwich – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord McColl of Dulwich on 2015-11-25.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many children were referred to the child trafficking advocate trials from each of the 23 participating local authorities.

    Lord Bates

    Section 48(7) of the Modern Slavery Act requires the Government to lay before Parliament a report setting out the steps it proposes to take in relation to independent child trafficking advocates within nine months of Royal Assent of the Modern Slavery Act. The Government will publish this report by 16 December, whilst Parliament is sitting. The evaluation report will be published by 16 December and set out the number of children referred into the trial and their countries of origin.

  • Lord McColl of Dulwich – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Lord McColl of Dulwich – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord McColl of Dulwich on 2015-12-15.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the number of people being killed by buildings collapsing as a result of subterranean excavations carried out in order to increase accommodation.

    Baroness Altmann

    In the last 10 years, no people have been killed by buildings collapsing during subterranean excavation work to increase accommodation. Subterranean excavation to increase accommodation involves significant health and safety risks, including the potential for the collapse of both excavated ground and buildings. There have been two deaths caused by collapsing excavated ground during construction of subterranean accommodation. The Health and Safety Executive’s construction programme has initiatives aimed at improving standards in this type of construction work, including targeted inspection and enforcement campaigns.

  • Lord McColl of Dulwich – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Lord McColl of Dulwich – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord McColl of Dulwich on 2016-01-14.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the relationship between malnutrition, water, sanitation and hygiene.

    Baroness Verma

    DFID commissioned the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine to undertake a review of the evidence on the links between water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) and nutrition in 2012. The review concluded that there was good evidence that WASH has an impact on under-nutrition. At the very basic level, the act of infant and child feeding needs good personal hygiene – hand washing with soap and water, plus good food hygiene. In addition, water is important in that it is generally required to prepare complementary foods. It needs to come from a safe source and then be collected, transported and stored safely. The living environment of infants has to be free from faecal contamination to minimise the risk of ingesting pathogens or coming into contact with intestinal worms.

    This review is currently being updated drawing on a report by the World Health Organisation (WHO) in 2014 which estimated that 50% of child under-nutrition is associated with repeated diarrhoea or intestinal worm infections as a result of unsafe water, inadequate sanitation or insufficient hygiene. There is increasing evidence that chronic diarrheal disease may inhibit nutrient absorption even if sufficient food is consumed. This latter condition referred to as Environmental Enteropathy is currently one of the subjects of a large randomised control trial being conducted in Zimbabwe with DFID support.

  • Lord McColl of Dulwich – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord McColl of Dulwich – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord McColl of Dulwich on 2015-02-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Earl Howe on 9 February (HL4411), how the draft Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Mitochondrial Donation) Regulations 2015 make provision for the follow-up studies to investigate how mutations vary in each of the different cells of the resulting children; at what age or ages the children would be when their cells would be examined in that way; how many different tissues and of which type would have to be biopsied to obtain the cells of interest; how informed consent would be obtained from the children for that purpose; and at what point such children would be informed of the techniques used in their conception.

    Earl Howe

    The Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Mitochondrial Donation) Regulations 2015, if approved by Parliament, will not come into force until 29 October 2015. The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) will consider how best to apply a monitoring framework to clinics awarded a licence to carry out mitochondrial donation treatment, against which it would inspect.

    The HFEA will announce its proposals for the regulation and monitoring of mitochondrial donation treatment cycles following the approval of regulations by Parliament.

  • Lord McColl of Dulwich – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord McColl of Dulwich – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord McColl of Dulwich on 2015-02-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answers by Earl Howe on 18 November 2014 (HL2644) and on 26 January 2015 (HL4063 and HL4228), whether they will place in the Library of the House a full copy of the correspondence between either the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) or members of the HFEA’s Expert Panel and the Chinese authorities, in which the reasons for banning pronuclear transfer in China following publication of the abstract in Fertility and Sterility in 2003 (Volume 30, supplement 3, p56) were explained in detail.

    Earl Howe

    The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has advised that neither the Authority nor the members of Expert Panel it convened have had any correspondence with the “Chinese authorities” on this matter.

    With regard to correspondence between the expert panel, the HFEA and the authors of the Zhang researchers, I refer my noble friend to my previous Written Answer of 26 January on the matter highlighting that the Expert Panel is independent of the HFEA and does not act on its behalf.

  • Lord McColl of Dulwich – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord McColl of Dulwich – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord McColl of Dulwich on 2015-02-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the latest research shared on a confidential basis with the Expert Panel convened by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) indicates that the first embryo generated following either spindle-chromosomal complex transfer or pronuclear transfer could be implanted into a woman later this year with the first baby born in 2016, as reported in The Independent on 30 January and by BBC News online on 1 February.

    Earl Howe

    At this time, any suggestion of a date when the first mitochondrial donation treatment cycle might take place or when the first child resulting from the use of the donation techniques might be born is speculation.

    The Draft Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Mitochondrial Donation) Regulations 2015, if approved by Parliament, will come into force on 29 October 2015. Clinics wishing to offer mitochondrial donation in treatment after that date, will first need to apply to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority for authorisation to do so; this would need to be granted before such treatment could take place.