Tag: Nicholas Brown

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nicholas Brown on 2015-11-06.

To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what representations or advice he has received on the expectation of current students and graduates to repay their student loans under the terms of the current scheme.

Joseph Johnson

A consultation on freezing the student loan repayment threshold closed on the 14th October. Responses are being analysed and we will publish the Government’s response in due course.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nicholas Brown on 2016-02-01.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what steps he is taking to ensure train companies have simple and easily comprehensible ticketing policies and offer the cheapest ticket for any requested journey.

Claire Perry

Rail passengers are protected by the National Rail Conditions of Carriage and also the terms of the Ticketing and Settlement Agreement (TSA), an inter-operator agreement that governs, among other things, the retail of rail tickets. These provisions safeguard passengers’ interests by requiring train operators to provide clear information and to sell the most suitable ticket for their journey. This will, in many cases, be the cheapest ticket. Operators are required, under the terms of the TSA, to ask sufficient suitable questions in order to ascertain and sell the best ticket for each passenger’s needs.

In a response to my challenge in December 2014, the rail industry worked with the Office of Rail and Road (ORR) to develop a Code of Practice on Retail Information, published in March 2015. The ORR wrote to all train operators in May 2015 to establish levels of compliance with the Code and published an update on progress in September 2015.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nicholas Brown on 2016-03-07.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what steps the Government plans to take in response to the findings of the Effective Pre-School, Primary and Secondary Education project by the Institute for Education; and what steps the Government plans to take to improve access to high quality early years education.

Mr Sam Gyimah

We know from the findings of the Effective Pre-School, Primary and Secondary Education (EPPSE) study that early education has a significant impact on child outcomes, and that attending high quality pre-school provision has a positive and long term impact not only on children’s attainment progress, but also on their social-behavioural development.

We have now invested in a major longitudinal Study of Early Education and Development (SEED) to update evidence from EPPSE and evaluate the effectiveness of the current early education model in England. Evidence from SEED will be used to continue to ensure that all children receive an effective, high quality early education experience that prepares them for school and allows them to fulfil their potential; that future investment is targeted correctly and policies are developed in the most effective way.

We understand the importance of quality and its impact on children’s outcomes. The Common Inspection Framework recently introduced by Ofsted will give greater clarity, coherence and comparability on early years and education settings to parents and providers. The most recent Ofsted early years and childcare inspection report shows that, 85% of all providers currently on the Early Years Register were judged "good" or "outstanding" for overall effectiveness. This is a 5 percentage point increase on the previous year to 31 August 2014.

And as part of our wider reforms, we will continue to work in collaboration with the early years sector to further develop our workforce strategy to improve the quality of the early years workforce. This will include a review of progression routes to identify what more can be done to ensure that good quality staff can maximise their potential and forge a successful career within the early years.

We want all children, regardless of their starting point, to have access to high quality early education and childcare, as we know this is what makes the difference to outcomes. We are currently funding 15 hours a week of free childcare for all three- and four-year-olds, worth around £2,500 a year per child to parents; and funding 15 hours a week of free childcare for the 40% most disadvantaged two-year-olds, worth around £2,500 a year per child to parents.

We know that the current model is extremely successful with 99% of four-year-olds and 94% of three-year-olds taking up a place. Based on survey data collected from local authorities in the autumn of 2015, it is estimated that 182,000 two-year-olds – around 72% of eligible children – have taken up a place on the two-year-old programme.

From September 2017, we are introducing 15 hours of free childcare a week for the working parents of three- and four-year olds, worth around a further £2,500 a year per child – on top of the existing early education entitlement.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nicholas Brown on 2016-04-19.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education, which guidance her Department provides to local authorities on the retention of case files for victims of serious child abuse in local authority-provided care.

Edward Timpson

Paragraphs 7.10 and 7.11 of Volume 2[1] of the guidance and regulations to Children Act 1989 (on care planning, placement and case review) explains how a local authority should retain and safe keep all looked after children’s case files.

Paragraphs 4.21 et seq of Volume 3[2] of the same guidance (on transition to adulthood for care leavers) includes information about access to records for people who have spent all or part of the childhood or adolescence in local authority care.

[1]https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/441643/Children_Act_Guidance_2015.pdf

[2]https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/397649/CA1989_Transitions_guidance.pdf

“

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nicholas Brown on 2016-05-26.

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what response he has made to HM Inspectorate of Probation’s Transforming Rehabilitation, Early Implementation 5 report, published in May 2016.

Andrew Selous

We are confident our reforms to probation services are being successfully implemented but are not complacent and are working to improve the issues identified in this report. The National Offender Management Service have developed an action plan and we are addressing the Chief Inspector’s recommendations.

We continue to closely monitor and robustly manage providers to make sure they fulfil their contractual commitments to maintain service delivery, reduce reoffending, protect the public and provide value for money to the taxpayer and will continue to support probation staff to deliver these important changes.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nicholas Brown on 2016-09-12.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what progress has been made on the Government’s discussions with the German government on (a) the proposed compensation scheme for UK thalidomide survivors and (b) proposals for UK Thalidomide Trust to submit collective compensation applications.

Sir Alan Duncan

I refer the Hon. Member to my answer of 2 August 2016 (42407).

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nicholas Brown on 2015-11-13.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what plans he has to ensure early access for the immuno-oncology treatment nivolumab for both lung cancer and melanoma.

George Freeman

Nivolumab (Opdivo) received a positive scientific opinion under the early access to medicines scheme for melanoma in May 2015 and for lung cancer in June 2015. Nivolumab was subsequently licensed for the treatment of advanced (unresectable or metastatic) melanoma in June 2015 and for locally advanced or metastatic squamous non-small cell lung cancer after prior chemotherapy in July 2015.

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) is currently developing technology appraisal guidance on the use of nivolumab for the treatment of:

– advanced, unresectable, metastatic melanoma – final guidance expected in May 2016;

– non-small-cell, squamous, metastatic lung cancer (after chemotherapy) – final guidance expected in May 2016; and

– untreated, advanced, unresectable, metastatic melanoma (with ipilimumab) – final guidance expected September 2016.

Commissioners are legally required to fund drugs and treatments recommended in NICE technology appraisal guidance within three months of its final guidance being issued. In the absence of guidance from NICE, it is for commissioners to make decisions on whether to fund new medicines based on an assessment of the available evidence.

We take the issue of ensuring rapid access to innovative therapies very seriously, which is why we have launched an independent Accelerated Access Review to make recommendations to Government on speeding up access for National Health Service patients to innovative and cost effective new medicines, diagnostics, medical technologies and digital products. The review published its interim report on 27 October 2015 and its full report and recommendations are expected in spring 2016.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nicholas Brown on 2016-02-01.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what plans he has to make it easier for passengers to access the cheapest tickets available for any requested journey.

Claire Perry

I refer the Rt Hon Member to the answer I gave to the Hon. Member for Coventry South (Jim Cunningham) on 29 January 2016 UIN 24320, http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-questions-answers/?page=1&max=20&questiontype=AllQuestions&house=commons%2clords&uin=24320.

“

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nicholas Brown on 2016-03-03.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will estimate the proportion of people affected by contaminated blood likely to (a) be financially advantaged, (b) have their income unchanged and (c) be financially disadvantaged by the Government’s compensation proposals.

Ben Gummer

The Government has committed £100 million in additional funding for a reformed payment support scheme for those affected by this tragedy. This is in addition to the current spend and the £25 million already announced in March 2015. This is significantly more than any previous government has been able to provide for those affected by this tragedy.

Around 2,400 people in England would be financially advantaged by the Government’s proposals to provide new annual payments for those who have received a stage 1 payment from the Skipton Fund, but who have not received a stage 2 payment.

The consultation proposes that those receiving annual payments from the Skipton Fund and MFET Ltd (879 people in England) would have their annual payment increased from £14,749 to £15,000 per year.

Discretionary payments (currently made by the charities) vary from year to year. Currently, all infected individuals can apply for discretionary support from the three charities. The consultation proposes that going forward, discretionary support for the infected could cover travel and accommodation costs related to ill-health. However, we are seeking views on this in the consultation and are keen to hear people’s views on this and all other proposals being made.

Bereaved spouses and partners who currently receive support from the charities are being asked whether they would prefer a lump sum amount or continued access to discretionary help or a choice of either, whatever benefits them most financially.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nicholas Brown on 2016-04-25.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what weighting her Department gives to deprivation as a factor affecting educational outcomes.

Mr Sam Gyimah

The department recognises that deprivation is a strong predictor of pupils’ future attainment and acts as a proxy for a range of barriers to educational success, including low aspiration for the future, low levels of parental education and special educational needs.

Overcoming these barriers can create additional costs for schools as they seek to provide additional support. This is why we have committed to continuing the pupil premium at current rates for the duration of this Parliament. Worth £2.5bn this year, the pupil premium provides schools with significant extra funding to help disadvantaged pupils achieve their full potential. Since its introduction in 2011 the attainment gap between disadvantaged pupils and their peers has narrowed at age 11 and age 16, offering disadvantaged pupils a more prosperous future as adults.

We are committed to introducing a national funding formula so that schools’ funding is matched fairly and consistently to need. In our recent consultation on the principles and building blocks of a national funding formula we proposed to include a deprivation factor. We will set out the detail of the formula in a second consultation, to be published later this year.