Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Andrew Percy – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Andrew Percy – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Percy on 2015-12-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, with reference to the Answer of 27 February 2015 to Question 225126, what steps he is taking to ensure growth in investment to increase endoscopy unit capacity in line with the recommendations of Professor Sir Mike Richards, Gateway Reference 16973, of 8 December 2011; and what assessment he has made of progress with planning for 10 to 15 per cent year-on-year increase in lower gastro intestinal endoscopy actively in reducing waiting times and ensuring high quality care.

    Jane Ellison

    Health Education England has pledged to fund the training of 200 non-medical endoscopists, which will significantly increase endoscopy capacity in England. The first cohort will begin training in January 2016. NHS England’s Sustainable Improvement Team (formerly NHS Improving Quality) is working intensively with trusts that have significant endoscopy waiting lists, in order to improve performance. NHS England is also exploring ways to improve endoscopy performance through pricing changes.

  • Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-01-26.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what are the proposed protocols for (1) detection of aneuploidy in embryos following application of the proposed Augment technique, and (2) demonstrating that injected mitochondria either disperse so as to be equally inherited by each blastomere of any resulting embryos or are concentrated in the inner cell mass, in the recent application received by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) for a pilot trial in the UK; what estimate the HFEA has been provided regarding (1) the likely financial costs to patients undergoing the proposed Augment procedure, and (2) the potential impact on clinical pregnancy rates of any assessments deemed to be scientifically necessary; and what assessment the HFEA has made of the ruling by the US Food and Drugs Administration in 2013 that Augment is a novel drug in need of extensive and expensive safety testing.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) advises that it does not hold data from clinics on the incidence of aneuploidy in oocytes over time, nor has it received evidence from OvaScience, Professor Simon Fishel or other sources that mitochondrial defects are primarily responsible for age-related increases in oocyte chromosomal aneuploidy.

    The HFEA also advises that it has not been made aware of any published randomised trials regarding the Augment technique and has not made an assessment of the credibility of claims by OvaScience and those previously made by Clonaid, in the light of data available in peer-reviewed journals. It is currently considering whether techniques, which involve addition of autologous mitochondria to eggs, would be legal in the United Kingdom (under the framework of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990, as amended). Part of this consideration involves considering the claims made for Augment by Ovascience.

    The HFEA has not received any formal applications for clinical use of the Augment technique, and has not made an assessment of the ruling by the US Food and Drugs Administration to which the Noble Lord refers.

  • Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-02-23.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what percentage of objections submitted to the Office of the Schools Adjudicator about the admission arrangements of schools were submitted by (1) groups and organisations, and (2) local parents, in each of the years from 2012 to 2015 inclusive.

    Lord Nash

    There is currently no requirement for an objector to identify themselves, or whether they belong to, or represent, a campaign group or organisation. Some objectors volunteer this information. However, some wish to remain anonymous and other parent objectors may not reveal whether they submitted the objection on behalf of a campaign group. We have no means of identifying this.

  • Tom Elliott – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Tom Elliott – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tom Elliott on 2016-03-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what discussions he had with the Northern Ireland Executive on the Government’s recent application to the EU Solidarity Fund to help flood affected areas.

    James Wharton

    The Government submitted an initial UK application to the EU Solidarity Fund on Friday 26 February and we continue to refine our cost estimations.

    At the date the application was made, the Government had not been approached on this matter by the Northern Ireland Executive.

  • Vicky Foxcroft – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Vicky Foxcroft – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Vicky Foxcroft on 2016-04-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what safeguards are in place to ensure that patients are not removed from patient registers without their prior knowledge.

    Alistair Burt

    Where a general practitioner (GP) practice wishes to remove a patient from their list the contract, between the practice and NHS England, requires practices to have reasonable grounds for doing so. The contract also requires practices to have notified the patient in the preceding 12 months that they are at risk of removal from the list and explained the reasons for this.

    Practices must notify NHS England and the patient of the intended removal and the reasons for the removal. It is the responsibility of NHS England to notify the patient that they will be, or have been, removed from their practice’s list of patients. Removal from the list will take place on the eighth day after NHS England receive notification of the removal or the date on which NHS England are notified that the patient has registered with another GP practice.

    Where a patient is receiving treatment at intervals of less than seven days, the removal will take place on the eighth day after treatment is no longer needed or the date on which NHS England receives notification that the patient has registered with another practice.

  • Lord Patten – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Lord Patten – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Patten on 2016-05-18.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Evans of Bowes Park on 4 May (HL8001), whether they have requested that the taskforce set up by Universities UK includes members of those minorities subject to harassment and hate crime, representatives of the relevant law and order agencies, and independent members with no direct university involvement.

    Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

    The taskforce, established by Universities UK, is looking at all forms of violence and harassment affecting students. Its task is to bring together students, university experts and external organisations to consider the current evidence and what universities are currently doing to address issues of harassment and hate crime, including anti-Semitism, and what more needs to be done.

    The taskforce have had meetings with or received evidence from a wide range of organisations which includes the Union of Jewish Students, Rape Crisis, Tell Mama and Stonewall. In regards to anti-Semitism, the Taskforce has also received evidence from the Jewish Leadership Council, the Board of Deputies of British Jews and Community Security Trust. In terms of law and order agencies, evidence has been received from a number of lawyers and from the police via PAHELO (Police Association of Higher Education Liaison Officers).

  • Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-07-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what guidance his Department provides to local authorities on how to take into account a neighbourhood planning process being underway when considering making their own applications for housing on sites that will be affected by that neighbourhood plan.

    Gavin Barwell

    The procedures for dealing with development by local authorities are contained in the Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1992. A local authority’s development proposals, like those of other persons applying for planning permission, must be decided in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

    Once brought into force, a neighbourhood plan becomes part of the development plan for the area; an emerging neighbourhood plan may be a material consideration. The National Planning Policy Framework sets out that the weight of emerging plan policies will depend on the stage of the plan, the extent of unresolved objections and the degree of consistency with national policy. It is for the decision maker in each case to determine what is a material consideration and what weight to give to it.

  • Tom Brake – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Tom Brake – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tom Brake on 2016-10-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, if he will make representations to the UK Security Council on prosecuting the people responsible for the massacre of political prisoners in Iran in 1988.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    The British Government opposes the use of the death penalty in all circumstances and takes any allegations of extrajudicial killings seriously. The Iranian Government has repeatedly denied that a mass execution took place, though we are aware that between July 1988 and January 1989 executions did take place. However, even with the recording and media reporting on the incident, we have no confirmation of the numbers involved. Although we have no plans to pursue this specific matter we will continue to take action with the international community to press for improvements on all human rights issues in Iran, including ending the death penalty.

  • Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb on 2015-11-17.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of research on the links between the risk of cancer and radiation spikes during the refuelling of nuclear power plants, whether they plan to publish statistics on spikes in radioactive emissions from nuclear power plants in the UK.

    Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth

    Radioactive discharges from nuclear power plants are subject to permitting by the UK and devolved environmental agencies. Permitted discharge and notification levels are set out in individual site permits. These limits are set well within the levels required to comply with the public radiation dose constraints that have been set out in UK and devolved legislation in line with international standards.

    The environmental and food standards agencies jointly monitor actual levels of radioactivity in the environment and report annually in Radioactivity in Food and the Environment (RIFE). The results of this programme indicate that discharge levels from nuclear plants are well within the permitted limits.

  • Andrew Percy – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Andrew Percy – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Percy on 2015-12-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the average response time was for a 999 call in each of the last 10 years; and what the average response time was for 999 calls made to the Humberside Police from (a) across the force area, (b) North Lincolnshire and (c) East Yorkshire in the last 12 months.

    Mike Penning

    The Home Office does not hold data centrally on the average response times for 999 calls. Information on average 101 call waiting times since April 2014, provided by forces, including Humberside Police, can be found at: www.Police.uk

    The Home Office does not hold information on call waiting times for individual forces which pre-dates April 2014 or about calls made to forces from local areas. This information is held by forces.

    “