Tag: Lord Rooker

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Rooker on 2016-03-01.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answers by Baroness Neville-Rolfe on 25 February (HL5950 and HL6117), when their consultations, if any, on amending the rules of property ownership will commence.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe

A discussion paper on proposals to require foreign companies to provide beneficial ownership information when purchasing or owning property or bidding for public contracts was published on Friday 4 March.

The document has been published here: www.gov.uk/government/consultations/property-ownership-and-public-contracting-by-foreign-companies-improving-transparency and copies of the discussion paper have been placed in the libraries of both Houses.

“

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Rooker on 2016-05-25.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many passport applications have been made using the legend of a deceased person in each of the past six years.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

We do not routinely publish this data.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Rooker on 2015-10-28.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Gardiner of Kimble on 22 July (HL1237) regarding a consultation on flour additives, what is the timetable for that consultation, whom they are consulting, and what options for possible change they are considering.

Lord Gardiner of Kimble

In June this year the Government held an informal consultation in order to seek views on possible additions to the exemptions currently allowed under the Bread and Flour Regulations 1998 from the requirement to fortify flour with calcium, iron, niacin, and thiamine. The exemptions that were envisaged would allow more efficient and streamlined manufacturing operations for foods produced for export as well as for the home market, without compromising the public health benefits which accrue from fortification. A range of interested parties were consulted including millers, flour users, retailers, fortificant manufacturers and health professionals.

The options proposed in the consultation would allow millers to produce unfortified flour in England when used as a secondary ingredient which undergoes further processing, or is used in relatively small quantities in products. This approach was welcomed by most consultees and the Government is now considering how to take this forward.

The Department of Health and Public Health England has considered the proposals and concluded that it is unlikely that an exemption from fortification for flour used in such products will have a nutritionally significant impact on the intakes of calcium, iron, thiamine or niacin.

The changes proposed would apply to England only since food legislation is a devolved matter. The devolved administrations are aware of these proposals but have not yet made any decisions on whether to introduce similar changes.

Respondents to the consultation also asked for some additional flexibility around the point at which the fortificants are added to flour. At the moment flour must be fortified at the mill and the four fortificants are added as a premix at the end of the milling process. Many businesses which manufacture foods both for the home market and for export requested the flexibility to be able to add the fortificants at the bakery stage. They highlighted that the requirement for separate storage and handling for, both fortified and unfortified flour (which is used for exported products) was creating significant manufacturing complexities. That resulted in a more restricted product range and is having an adverse effect on their export potential and their ability to diversify into new global markets. The Government is currently considering this.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Rooker on 2015-10-28.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Gardiner of Kimble on 22 July (HL1237), whether any proposed change to the Bread and Flour Regulations 1998 will be forwarded to the relevant scientific committee for consideration.

Lord Gardiner of Kimble

In June this year the Government held an informal consultation in order to seek views on possible additions to the exemptions currently allowed under the Bread and Flour Regulations 1998 from the requirement to fortify flour with calcium, iron, niacin, and thiamine. The exemptions that were envisaged would allow more efficient and streamlined manufacturing operations for foods produced for export as well as for the home market, without compromising the public health benefits which accrue from fortification. A range of interested parties were consulted including millers, flour users, retailers, fortificant manufacturers and health professionals.

The options proposed in the consultation would allow millers to produce unfortified flour in England when used as a secondary ingredient which undergoes further processing, or is used in relatively small quantities in products. This approach was welcomed by most consultees and the Government is now considering how to take this forward.

The Department of Health and Public Health England has considered the proposals and concluded that it is unlikely that an exemption from fortification for flour used in such products will have a nutritionally significant impact on the intakes of calcium, iron, thiamine or niacin.

The changes proposed would apply to England only since food legislation is a devolved matter. The devolved administrations are aware of these proposals but have not yet made any decisions on whether to introduce similar changes.

Respondents to the consultation also asked for some additional flexibility around the point at which the fortificants are added to flour. At the moment flour must be fortified at the mill and the four fortificants are added as a premix at the end of the milling process. Many businesses which manufacture foods both for the home market and for export requested the flexibility to be able to add the fortificants at the bakery stage. They highlighted that the requirement for separate storage and handling for, both fortified and unfortified flour (which is used for exported products) was creating significant manufacturing complexities. That resulted in a more restricted product range and is having an adverse effect on their export potential and their ability to diversify into new global markets. The Government is currently considering this.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Rooker on 2015-10-28.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Gardiner of Kimble on 22 July (HL1237), whether the consultation in respect of the Bread and Flour Regulations 1998 includes the devolved administrations.

Lord Gardiner of Kimble

In June this year the Government held an informal consultation in order to seek views on possible additions to the exemptions currently allowed under the Bread and Flour Regulations 1998 from the requirement to fortify flour with calcium, iron, niacin, and thiamine. The exemptions that were envisaged would allow more efficient and streamlined manufacturing operations for foods produced for export as well as for the home market, without compromising the public health benefits which accrue from fortification. A range of interested parties were consulted including millers, flour users, retailers, fortificant manufacturers and health professionals.

The options proposed in the consultation would allow millers to produce unfortified flour in England when used as a secondary ingredient which undergoes further processing, or is used in relatively small quantities in products. This approach was welcomed by most consultees and the Government is now considering how to take this forward.

The Department of Health and Public Health England has considered the proposals and concluded that it is unlikely that an exemption from fortification for flour used in such products will have a nutritionally significant impact on the intakes of calcium, iron, thiamine or niacin.

The changes proposed would apply to England only since food legislation is a devolved matter. The devolved administrations are aware of these proposals but have not yet made any decisions on whether to introduce similar changes.

Respondents to the consultation also asked for some additional flexibility around the point at which the fortificants are added to flour. At the moment flour must be fortified at the mill and the four fortificants are added as a premix at the end of the milling process. Many businesses which manufacture foods both for the home market and for export requested the flexibility to be able to add the fortificants at the bakery stage. They highlighted that the requirement for separate storage and handling for, both fortified and unfortified flour (which is used for exported products) was creating significant manufacturing complexities. That resulted in a more restricted product range and is having an adverse effect on their export potential and their ability to diversify into new global markets. The Government is currently considering this.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Rooker on 2015-10-28.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have to move responsibility for flour fortification from millers to food manufacturers.

Lord Gardiner of Kimble

In June this year the Government held an informal consultation in order to seek views on possible additions to the exemptions currently allowed under the Bread and Flour Regulations 1998 from the requirement to fortify flour with calcium, iron, niacin, and thiamine. The exemptions that were envisaged would allow more efficient and streamlined manufacturing operations for foods produced for export as well as for the home market, without compromising the public health benefits which accrue from fortification. A range of interested parties were consulted including millers, flour users, retailers, fortificant manufacturers and health professionals.

The options proposed in the consultation would allow millers to produce unfortified flour in England when used as a secondary ingredient which undergoes further processing, or is used in relatively small quantities in products. This approach was welcomed by most consultees and the Government is now considering how to take this forward.

The Department of Health and Public Health England has considered the proposals and concluded that it is unlikely that an exemption from fortification for flour used in such products will have a nutritionally significant impact on the intakes of calcium, iron, thiamine or niacin.

The changes proposed would apply to England only since food legislation is a devolved matter. The devolved administrations are aware of these proposals but have not yet made any decisions on whether to introduce similar changes.

Respondents to the consultation also asked for some additional flexibility around the point at which the fortificants are added to flour. At the moment flour must be fortified at the mill and the four fortificants are added as a premix at the end of the milling process. Many businesses which manufacture foods both for the home market and for export requested the flexibility to be able to add the fortificants at the bakery stage. They highlighted that the requirement for separate storage and handling for, both fortified and unfortified flour (which is used for exported products) was creating significant manufacturing complexities. That resulted in a more restricted product range and is having an adverse effect on their export potential and their ability to diversify into new global markets. The Government is currently considering this.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Rooker on 2015-11-02.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they plan to review the Teratology Society recommendation regarding mandating folic acid fortification in Europe.

Lord Prior of Brampton

We have not formally reviewed the 2015 Obeid paper but officials are aware of its conclusions which are in line with information already considered by Ministers.

The recommendation in the Teratology Society in essence repeats current advice on folic acid supplements. There are no plans to review this advice.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Rooker on 2015-11-02.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the implications of research published by Obeid et al on preventable spina bifida and anencephaly in Europe for the development of a policy to reduce births affected by neural tube defects.

Lord Prior of Brampton

We have not formally reviewed the 2015 Obeid paper but officials are aware of its conclusions which are in line with information already considered by Ministers.

The recommendation in the Teratology Society in essence repeats current advice on folic acid supplements. There are no plans to review this advice.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Rooker on 2016-02-02.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Earl Howe on 22 July 2014 (HL939), what was the ranking of the UK in the Health at a Glance 2015: OECD Indicators report for (1) infant mortality, (2) numbers of MRI and CT Scanners, (3) low birth weight infants, (4) overweight and obesity amongst adults, (5) overweight and obesity amongst children, (6) mortality from cardiovascular disease, and (7) mortality from cancer; how these rankings compared to those for 2013; and what plans they have to improve the UK rankings.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The United Kingdom’s rankings among OECD member states (as shown by the 2015 and 2013 Health at a Glance reports) are the following:

The Government welcomes the OECD reports as an authoritative contribution to the development of health policy in the UK. For the health service in England, we have taken note of the OECD’s findings. The underlying data on health outcomes informs the development of our mandates and other guidance to the health and care system, in particular to NHS England and Public Health England.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Rooker on 2016-02-04.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they propose to bring the rules regarding transparency in respect of overseas company ownership of UK property into line with those for UK registered companies’ property ownership.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe

As announced, the Government is considering measures to increase the transparency of beneficial ownership of assets by foreign companies