Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-07-18.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what discussions they have held with the Secretary General of the Commonwealth about recent visits to Rwanda and Uganda by Omar al Bashir, President of Sudan, who has been indicted by the International Criminal Court for genocide and crimes against humanity.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    We have not held any discussions with the Secretary General of the Commonwealth on this matter. However we continue to believe that State cooperation, in particular with respect to enforcement of arrest warrants is vital for the International Criminal Court to be effective in fulfilling its mandate to achieve justice for the victims of atrocities. We look forward to future meetings and discussions with the Secretary General on shared priorities for the Commonwealth.

  • Matthew Offord – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Matthew Offord – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Matthew Offord on 2016-10-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what estimate her has Department made of the number of UK nationals who have travelled overseas to engage in terrorist activity and have subsequently returned to this country.

    Mr Ben Wallace

    The Government takes the threat posed by UK nationals who travel overseas to engage in terrorist activity extremely seriously. We are particularly concerned about those who travel to Syria and Iraq to fight; around 850 linked individuals have travelled to engage in the conflict since it began, and just under half of those have returned.

    People seeking to travel to engage in terrorist activity should be in no doubt we will take the strongest possible action to protect our national security.

  • Sadiq Khan – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Sadiq Khan – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sadiq Khan on 2015-10-29.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many new cases of psychosis were diagnosed in (a) the UK, (b) London, (c) each London borough and (d) each health trust in London in each year between 2010 and 2015.

    Alistair Burt

    Sadiq Khan (Tooting):

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many new cases of psychosis were diagnosed in (a) the UK, (b) London, (c) each London borough and (d) each health trust in London in each year between 2010 and 2015. [14122]

    ALISTAIR BURT

    Data on new cases of psychosis is not collected at United Kingdom level.

    Data for England is provided in the table below:

    England Level Data

    Financial Year

    The number of new cases of psychosis served by early intervention teams

    2014-15

    10,186

    2013-14

    10,475

    2012-13

    10,375

    2011-12

    10,099

    2010-11

    10,312

    Data for new cases of psychosis in London is provided in the table below:

    Financial Year

    The number of new cases of psychosis served by early intervention teams

    2014-15

    1,993

    2013-14

    2,177

    2012-13

    2,198

    2011-12

    1,952

    2010-11

    2,051

    Data on a London borough level is not available centrally.

    Data for new cases of psychosis diagnosed in each London Trust are provided in the attached table.

  • Lord Wills – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Wills – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Wills on 2015-11-19.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made in the Comprehensive Spending Review of the incidence of mesothelioma in the constituencies covered by the Northern Powerhouse.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The Spending Review has not made assessments on the incidence, or expected incidence, of mesothelioma in constituencies covered by the Northern Powerhouse.

  • Stephen Timms – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Stephen Timms – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Timms on 2015-12-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, when he expects Deutsche Bahn to commence operating international services from London St Pancras; and if he will make a statement.

    Claire Perry

    I recognise the international importance of the HS1 network in allowing high-speed rail services from London to reach Europe, whilst noting that no international services currently serve Stratford International station. Eurostar, in which the government recently sold its 40% stake, accesses the HS1 network on an open access basis and is not subject to the terms of a franchise agreement or a contract let by government. Government has no power to direct or specify that Eurostar stops at Stratford International station. A decision made by Eurostar not to serve Stratford International would be as a result of commercial imperatives and priorities, for example, the potential revenue derived from customers using the station or the increased journey time which a further stop would involve. It would not be appropriate for government to interfere with that decision-making process. I have not received any recent representations on this matter from potential or actual train operators; who in any event, should address their questions to HS1 Ltd, as the infrastructure manager, in the first instance; nor have I held any discussions with Eurostar on the matter of services to Stratford.

    Regarding any aspirations of Deutsche Bahn to commence operation of international services from St Pancras International, this is rightly a matter for HS1 Ltd as the infrastructure manager, who I understand have held discussions with a number of potential new entrants, including Deutsche Bahn. It would not be appropriate to comment on any ongoing commercial discussions between those parties.

  • Jim Shannon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Jim Shannon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Shannon on 2016-01-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what recent discussions his Department has had with NATO on progress with NATO’s Force Integration Units.

    Mr Julian Brazier

    The Ministry of Defence is fully involved in the development of NATO’s Force Integration Units (NFIU) and we will contribute personnel to the NFIUs in the Baltic States, Poland, Bulgaria, and Romania.

  • Gavin Robinson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Gavin Robinson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gavin Robinson on 2016-02-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, pursuant to the Answer of 22 February 2016 to Question 264385, what steps her Department has taken to ensure that EU environmental law is transposed and implemented across the whole of the UK.

    Rory Stewart

    I refer the hon Member to the answer I gave on the 22 February 2016, PQ UIN 26438. The obligation to transpose and implement EU environmental law applies across the whole of the UK, although the responsibility for transposition and implementation in this area is a competence of the devolved administrations.

  • Hannah Bardell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Hannah Bardell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Hannah Bardell on 2016-03-15.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether HM Revenue and Customs conducted an open tender exercise to select the Codentify system for piloting as a tobacco product authentication tool.

    Damian Hinds

    Tobacco products classified as ‘illicit’ in the UK include anything on which duty has not been paid but should have been paid. This includes counterfeit products, brands manufactured legally overseas but not legally sold in the UK, and genuine products originating in the UK and overseas but diverted from legitimate supply chains by criminals. Because of this, HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) officers use a variety of ways to identify illicit product. Testing product authenticity is one mechanism.

    To test product authenticity, HMRC uses identifiers required by legislation, for example, Fiscal Marks which manufacturers are required to print on specified tobacco products to show they are UK duty paid, as well as voluntary tools used by the manufacturers. One such voluntary tool is Codentify.

    Codentify was developed and introduced by the major tobacco manufacturers on their own initiative through the Digital Coding and Tracking Association (DCTA). HMRC played no part in the development or introduction of the system nor did HMRC require that it be introduced. Codentify codes already feature on packs and are there regardless of any HMRC use of them. HMRC took a policy decision, in line with the commitment to tackle illicit tobacco, to examine whether these existing codes could provide a useful additional tool to help officers authenticate product in the field.

    The trial is concerned only with the use of Codentify for product authentication, and no other aspect of the system is being used or evaluated. Codentify requires no specialist equipment or training. Officers are provided with basic guidance and access to an online system. No charge is made for use of the system and, as no procurement was needed, there was no requirement for HMRC to run a tender exercise. As this is a trial only, no Ministerial approval was required or has been sought.

    A number of HMRC officers have been given access to the system and trained by HMRC colleagues. The time spent on this activity is minimal and is estimated to be less than one staff year in total.

    HMRC has explained the use of Codentify as a potential product authentication tool to colleagues in Border Force and Trading Standards. However, they have not provided training to any officers in those organisations.

    The EU Tobacco Products Directive introduces a requirement for a pan European security feature and track and trace systems. The European Commission, working with Member States, is considering proposals and have yet to determine any technical specifications,

    HMRC is aware of a wide range of potential track and trace and security feature solutions on the market. They are not evaluating, and, given the current position on the Directive, could not evaluate any products against its requirements. The aspects of Codentify being used are entirely separate from the requirements of the Directive.

    In accordance with regulatory requirements, when technical specifications are determined, HMRC will ensure that any evaluation against them ensures no unfair competitive advantage or obstacles to competition.

  • Jim Shannon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Jim Shannon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Shannon on 2016-04-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what discussions he has had with the Royal College of Nursing on connections between hayfever, sleeping and allergy tablets and memory, cognitive and concentration difficulties.

    Jane Ellison

    No such discussions have taken place.

  • Sarah Wollaston – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Sarah Wollaston – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sarah Wollaston on 2016-05-23.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what plans he has to continue monitoring breastfeeding rates following the abolition of the infant feeding survey; and if he will make a statement.

    Ben Gummer

    Following the discontinuation of the Infant Feeding Survey, the Department has been exploring with Public Health England (PHE) and other key stakeholders alternative methods and sources of information to monitor the impact of its policy on infant feeding.

    In future, the Maternity and Children’s Dataset will regularly capture data on breastfeeding initiation and prevalence from all women using NHS services rather than using a survey sample. This means that local service providers and commissioners can have up-to-date (e.g. quarterly) information about outcomes for their local populations, enabling service provision to be more agile, responsive and targeted.

    The Government is committed to supporting breastfeeding through the Healthy Child Programme. Breastfeeding is also included in the Public Health Outcomes Framework so that the improvements can be tracked, and action taken as needed.

    Since 2010, we have recruited more than 2,100 additional midwives who will provide women with the information, advice and support they need with breastfeeding. A further 6,000 midwives are in training. There are also 3,400 more health visitors than in 2010.

    The Department is working with PHE, NHS England and UNICEF to try and encourage women to breastfeed for the first six months, although we recognise that not all mothers choose to or are able to breastfeed.

    Support and information is currently available to health professionals and parents through NHS Choices, the National Breastfeeding Helpline, UNICEF UK Baby Friendly Initiative, the Start4Life Information Service for Parents and local peer support programmes.

    The Department has not retained a record of how many full-time equivalent staff there were with a specific focus on breastfeeding between 2010 and 2016; breastfeeding policy has always formed part of the larger maternity policy for which the Department has the policy lead. Resources to cover this policy area would have fluctuated according the level of work required at any one time.