UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Steve Reed – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    Steve Reed – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steve Reed on 2016-02-25.

    To ask the Attorney General, what steps the CPS has taken to ensure that administrative errors do not prevent victims from giving evidence at trial.

    Robert Buckland

    The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) does all that it can to make sure that administrative errors do not prevent victims from giving evidence at trial.

    The CPS introduced a national standard operating practice for magistrates’ court activity in May 2015. The process is digital and task-based and is designed to ensure consistency of approach and timing of activity in managing casework which will further reduce the risk of administrative errors being made. Testing of Crown Court standard operating practice commenced at the beginning of February 2016.

    Joint police/CPS Witness Care Units (WCUs) provide a single point of contact for victims and witnesses and ensure they have access to tailored support to make sure they are able to attend court and give their best evidence. Most WCUs use the Witness Management System (WMS) to record the contact they have with victims and witnesses. WMS is a bespoke IT system designed to support WCUs in managing their cases, thereby reducing the risk of administrative errors.

  • Tulip Siddiq – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Tulip Siddiq – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tulip Siddiq on 2016-03-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, pursuant to the Answer of 18 March 2016 to Question 30738 on employment: telephone services, what the equivalent data is for each of the last five years.

    Nick Boles

    The attached table shows the total number of enquiries made to the Pay and Work Rights Helpline (PWRH) by trade sector and whether the call relates to Employment Agency Standards, the Agricultural National Minimum Wage (NMW), Gangmasters Licensing Authority, Health and Safety Executive or NMW issues, where call topic information is collected, between 2009/10 and 2014/15.

  • Paul Flynn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Paul Flynn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Paul Flynn on 2016-04-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 22 October 2015 to Question 12325, how many defence attachés at what rank were employed at each of those locations on 1 April 2016; and whether each of those attachés has civilian assistants.

    Mr Julian Brazier

    All Defence Attaches (except those for Bahrain and the UK Mission to the UN) have civilian employees working within the Defence Section. The Defence Attaches by rank as at 1 April 2016 are listed in the attached table.

  • Bob Stewart – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Bob Stewart – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Bob Stewart on 2016-06-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, if he will provide field surgical teams for the Peshmerga Regional Government.

    Penny Mordaunt

    The UK keeps its contribution to the Global Counter-Daesh Coalition in Iraq (including the Kurdish region) under review with wider Coalition partners, but has no plans to deploy a field hospital to the region. Any such deployment would need to be carefully balanced against medical commitments to current and future planned operations.

  • Clive Efford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Clive Efford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Clive Efford on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how his Department consulted local GPs and other health providers during the tendering process for musculoskeletal services in Greenwich; how his Department assessed the implications of the outcome of that process for the services provided by those people; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    The procurement of local health services by means of competitive tendering is a matter for the local National Health Service.

    We are advised that NHS Greenwich Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) undertook a review of the provision of musculoskeletal (MSK) services in the area in 2014, involving local general practitioners (GPs), secondary care clinicians, other MSK clinicians and patient groups. The CCG took account of this exercise in confirming its commissioning intentions for an integrated MSK service pathway. The CCG subsequently held a GP clinical commissioner-led provider engagement event on 2 March 2016 to seek feedback on the clinical service specification and the proposed contractual model.

    We understand that, as part of the procurement process, the MSK Programme Board was fully apprised of the Our Healthier South East London initiative, the predecessor to the Sustainability and Transformation Plan (STP) in respect of elective orthopaedic centres.

    We are advised that the Invitation to Tender (ITT) developed as part of the procurement exercise explicitly stated the aspirations of these two initiatives, in addition to the proposed implementation timeline. When submitting their bids, all prospective providers were required to confirm their understanding and acceptance of the planned new model of in-patient care. Patient choice continues to apply with regard to both this local procurement and the South East London STP proposals on elective care centres.

    We understand that the ITT issued to potential service providers, was divided into sections, with each section allocated a weighting. The financial weighting was designed to ensure that the selection of the preferred provider was driven by clinical quality scores whilst remaining within the CCG’s published financial envelope. The detailed clinical service specification will be used to hold the provider to account within the format of the NHS national standard contract.

    Health Ministers have not received any representations from local health practitioners in Greenwich with regard to the provision of MSK services in the area.

  • Grant Shapps – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Grant Shapps – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Grant Shapps on 2016-10-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, if he will allow the completed High Speed 2 railway line to be open access as opposed to restricted by franchise.

    Andrew Jones

    The Government is considering how best HS2 services should be provided both when operating on the new High Speed and conventional rail networks. This includes consideration of franchising options but does not rule out alternative routes for service delivery, to ensure that services deliver the Government objectives for HS2, and optimum use is made of total capacity across the entire network to maximise the benefits for passengers and secure a return for taxpayers on the significant investment Government is making in HS2. No final decision has been taken.

  • Mark Hendrick – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Mark Hendrick – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mark Hendrick on 2015-11-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he or Ministers in his Department will attend the heats and further stages of the Bar National Mock Trials Competition.

    Mr Shailesh Vara

    I am aware of this valuable initiative for school students organised by the Citizenship Foundation and funded by the Bar. While Ministers have no current plans to attend any of the stages, I wish this competition continuing success.

  • Lord Scriven – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Lord Scriven – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Scriven on 2015-12-01.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of the Upper Tribunal’s decision in MSM (journalists; political opinion; risk) Somalia [2015] UKUT 00413 (IAC), what plans they have immediately to revise their country-specific bulletins, and how they will now apply their discretion to asylum and immigration cases.

    Lord Bates

    We do not believe our country specific bulletins are at odds with the Upper Tribunal’s decision in MSM (Somalia) such that they require urgent revision. However, we are constantly reviewing our country information and guidance to ensure we reflect the most up-to-date situation and caselaw.

    A fundamental principle of the 1951 Refugee Convention is that each case is considered on its own merits. That is the approach taken by the Home Office.

  • David Amess – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    David Amess – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Amess on 2016-01-06.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many IT contractors were employed by HM Revenue and Customs on a self-employed basis in 2015.

    Mr David Gauke

    There were no IT contractors employed on a self-employed basis in 2015.

  • Lord Kinnock – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Lord Kinnock – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Kinnock on 2016-02-01.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Freud on 30 December 2015 (HL4654), what (1) in-work, and (2) out-of-work, benefits were paid to recent EU migrants in households supported by the benefits system as at March 2013.

    Lord Freud

    I refer the noble Lord to the answer given by my Rt. Hon. Friend the Minister for Employment (Ms. Esther McVey) in the House of Commons on 20 November 2014 to Question number 211618 as below:

    While the Government checks the immigration status of benefit claimants to ensure the benefit is paid properly and to prevent fraud, traditionally that information has not been collected as part of the payment administrative systems.

    However, the Government is looking at ways to reform the current administrative system under Universal Credit so that it will systematically record nationality and immigration status of migrants who make a claim.

    The Government has made a radical series of changes over the last year to restrict the access by non-UK citizens from the European Economic Area to UK benefits and tax credits. This is in order to protect the UK’s benefit system and discourage people who have no established connection with the UK from moving here, unless they have a job or a genuine prospect of work, or have savings to support themselves until they do.