Tag: Margaret Hodge

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2015-11-13.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what assessment he has made of the progress made by Montserrat in meeting the Prime Minister’s ambition for a public register of beneficial ownership since June 2013.

James Duddridge

I refer the Right Honourable Lady to the answer given by my Hon Friend the member for Hertfordshire South West (David Gauke), the Financial Secretary to the Treasury to questions 10437, 10438 and 10448, which sets out the criteria we expect the Overseas Territories to meet in relation to their central register of company beneficial ownership, or similarly effective system. We are in discussions with the Montserrat authorities on this and are offering technical assistance as they develop their proposals.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2016-04-27.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how he plans to ensure that an additional 20,000 patients a year will have their cancers genetically tested as part of the Government’s Cancer Taskforce strategy; and what data he plans to collect on those people who are tested.

Jane Ellison

The independent Cancer Taskforce recognised the need for more accessible molecular diagnostic provision in its report, Achieving World-Class Cancer Outcomes: A Strategy for England 2015-2020, published in July 2015.

Following this, in September 2015, we confirmed a commitment from NHS England to implement the recommendations on molecular diagnostics. This will mean that around 25,000 additional people a year will have their cancers genetically tested to identify the most effective treatments. NHS England is currently working with partners across the healthcare system to produce an implementation plan to determine how best to take forward the Taskforce’s recommendations.

Regional Genetic Laboratories are central to all NHS Genomic Medicine Centres and have been the focal point for adoption of genomic technologies into healthcare for over 40 years. These laboratories are currently the focus of an NHS England Specialised Commissioning intended re-procurement exercise, the invitation to tender for which is due to be launched towards the end of the year. The re-procurement aims to create a new genomic laboratory infrastructure for the National Health Service in England based on centralised and local genomic laboratory hubs to support rare, inherited and acquired disease, as well as the future personalised medicine requirements inclusive of molecular diagnostics in stratified medicine.

In September 2015, the NHS England Board approved the development of a Personalised Medicine Strategy for the NHS, to be discussed at the NHS England Board in the summer.

This work will build on the 100,000 Genomes Project, in which the NHS is a key delivery partner. The Project will sequence whole genomes from eligible patients with rare diseases and cancers. It is moving the NHS to a new model of diagnosis and treatment based on understanding of underlying genetic causes and drivers of disease and a comprehensive phenotypic characterisation of the disease (rather than deduction from symptoms and individual diagnostic tests). This will be critical in guiding the approach to molecular diagnostics.

In addition, changes to the section 118 guidance implemented in the national tariff payment system for molecular diagnostics from April will support clinical change and practice. This includes a number of molecular diagnostic tests to be funded separately by commissioners for the first three years before being incorporated into national prices for treatment episodes.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2016-09-02.

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many times his Department has used the services of (a) PwC, (b) Deloitte, (c) Ernst and Young, (d) KPMG and (e) other consulting firms in the last three financial years; and what (i) work was undertaken and (ii) the cost to the public purse was on each such occasion.

Caroline Nokes

We are unable to provide the requested information on the number of times the Department for Work and Pensions has used the services of consulting firms, including details of the work undertaken and cost to the public purse for each occasion. To do so would incur a disproportional cost to the Department because of how the data is held on our systems, and the time and resource required for extracting and analysing it.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2016-09-02.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will publish a list of all secondees to his Department from (a) PwC, (b) Deloitte, (c) Ernst and Young, (d) KPMG and (e) other consulting firms in the last three financial years; and what the role was of each of those secondees.

David Mowat

In line with privacy and data protection legislation as well as standing Cabinet Office instructions, the exact numbers and details of individual roles cannot be published. This is to prevent the personal identification of individuals either directly or in combination with other published information.

There have been two appointments in total into Senior Civil Servant roles as follows, during the years in question as follows:

Name	Start date	Grade	End date	Seconding Organisation	Role
Robin Furnell	24/08/2015	SCS1	31/12/2016	Accenture	Contract Management Function Implementation Lead
Nicole Mather	22/04/2014	SCS2	22/10/2016	Deloitte (formally seconded to BEIS and part-time to DH)	Director – Office for Life Sciences

During the same period of time, at lower grades the following table summarises the disclosable information

Company	Numbers	Grades of role
PwC	5 or fewer	HEO and SEO
Deloitte	5 or fewer	Analyst and G7
Ernst and Young	5 or fewer	G7
KPMG	0	–
Accenture	0	–

The above information does not include secondees to the Department’s agencies or arms’ length bodies.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2016-10-19.

To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to paragraph 7.2, Heading contingent liabilities, page 176 of the Annual Report and Accounts 2015-16 of HM Revenue and Customs, published in December 2015, under what area of legislation are those cases of current liability.

Jane Ellison

The Trust Statement is prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards adapted or interpreted for public sector context.

International Accounting Standard 37 – ‘Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets’ is the standard that HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) follows when calculating the level of contingent liability to be included with the disclosure notes to the Trust Statement. The contingent liabilities relate to legal cases for which the outcome is uncertain and HMRC considers that there is only a possible rather than probable likelihood that they will be required to make a payment, or the amount cannot be reliably measured.

These cases are not current liabilities – they are a possible obligation dependent on whether some uncertain future event occurs.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2015-11-13.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what assessment he has made of the time taken for the Turks and Caicos Islands to respond to his Department’s consultation on a public register of beneficial ownership.

James Duddridge

I refer the Right Honourable Lady to the answer given by my Hon Friend the member for Hertfordshire South West (David Gauke), the Financial Secretary to the Treasury to questions 10437, 10438 and 10448, which sets out the criteria we expect the Overseas Territories to meet in relation to their central register of company beneficial ownership, or similarly effective system.

We are in discussions with the Turks and Caicos Islands authorities on this and are offering technical assistance as they develop their proposals.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2016-06-20.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what plans he has to nationally commission (a) minor ailments services and (b) minor eye conditions services.

George Freeman

There are no plans to commission either service at a national level. Those with a minor ailment may visit a pharmacy, walk in centre or practice nurse for treatment and those concerned they may have a minor eye condition can visit their general practitioner, optical practice or pharmacy.

Services for minor ailments are commissioned by clinical commissioning groups who are also able to commission services from local optometrists to provide treatment for minor eye conditions. This ensures that services are commissioned to reflect local need.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2016-09-02.

To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, how many times his Department has used the services of (a) PwC, (b) Deloitte, (c) Ernst and Young, (d) KPMG and (e) other consulting firms in the last three financial years; and what (i) work was undertaken and (ii) the cost to the public purse was on each such occasion.

Joseph Johnson

The information requested for this PQ is publicly available. Since BEIS has recently been created through a machinery of government change the data is available through separate weblinks.

The ex-DECC link is: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/departmental-spend-over-500. This contains all monthly transactions in excess of £500.

The ex-BIS link is: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/bis-spending-totals. This contains all monthly transactions in excess of £500.

“

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2016-09-02.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many times his Department has used the services of (a) PwC, (b) Deloitte, (c) Ernst and Young, (d) KPMG and (e) other consulting firms in the last three financial years; and what (i) work was undertaken and (ii) the cost to the public purse was on each such occasion.

David Mowat

The breakdown for the last three financial years 2013-14 to 2015-16 for both the Department’s cost and how many times it has used the services of Deloitte, KPMG, Ernst & Young and PricewaterhouseCoopers are all contained in the attached table.

Spend for all four firms is taken from cash receipted amounts against purchase orders in line with Crown Commercial Services definitions and is not comparable with consultancy costs data published annually by the Department, where all now reported as resource (accruals) based.

Any further information would incur disproportionate cost to provide.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2015-11-13.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, if he will ensure that any agreement on a central registry of beneficial ownership in the Turks and Caicos Islands will include access for the public with legitimate reason.

James Duddridge

I refer the Right Honourable Lady to the answer given by my Hon Friend the member for Hertfordshire South West (David Gauke), the Financial Secretary to the Treasury to questions 10437, 10438 and 10448, which sets out the criteria we expect the Overseas Territories to meet in relation to their central register of company beneficial ownership, or similarly effective system.

We are in discussions with the Turks and Caicos Islands authorities on this and are offering technical assistance as they develop their proposals.