Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Baroness Stern – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Baroness Stern – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Stern on 2015-11-09.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what proportion of funding allocated to Syria supports non-humanitarian work.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    The UK has delivered over £85 million in non-humanitarian support to Syria, Jordan and Lebanon since the start of the crisis, in addition to the £1.12 billion that has been allocated in humanitarian aid. This has focussed on strengthening the moderate opposition, building resilience against extremists, fostering civil society structures in besieged areas, and laying the foundations for a more peaceful and inclusive future for Syria.

  • Luciana Berger – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Luciana Berger – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Luciana Berger on 2015-12-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will publish the recent review into pathways for victims of sexual assault; and if he will make a statement.

    Jane Ellison

    The independent review of pathways for victims of sexual assault was commissioned by NHS England. Work on next steps, including production of a summary report, is ongoing.

    Sexual Assault Referral Centres (SARCs) service models vary from area to area, dependant on the commissioning decisions taken by police and Police and Crime Commissioners in partnership with their NHS England commissioners. Data on the numbers of SARCs offering therapeutic services is not collected centrally.

  • Luciana Berger – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Luciana Berger – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Luciana Berger on 2016-01-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, with reference to paragraph 1.86 of the Autumn Statement 2014, how much of the planned annual £30 million additional budget for services for young people with eating disorders has been spent; and for what purposes that budget has been spent.

    Alistair Burt

    The whole £30 million for 2015/16 has been allocated directly to clinical commissioning groups. It is being spent on setting up new specialist community-based eating disorder teams. NHS England, in partnership with the National Collaborating Centre for Mental Health Services, developed the Children and Young People’s Eating Disorder Access and Waits Commissioning Guide, which was issued in August 2015 alongside the first tranche of money. The commissioning guide included detailed specifications on how to set up, train and support the teams.

    The aims of these new services are to support quicker access to evidence based treatment in the community and a reduction in the rate of relapse. In time, this should decrease the need for hospital stays and reduce the need for transition to adult services, although where there is still a need, the transitioning arrangements should be improved.

    This service will enable the introduction of an eating disorder standard for children and young people who are aged 18 and under, for treatment to be received within four weeks, from first contact with a designated health professional for routine cases and within one week for urgent cases.

  • Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chi Onwurah on 2016-02-05.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, how many times the Digital Accessibility Alliance has met in each quarter since it was formed.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    This Government recognises the importance of Digital Inclusion, and remains committed to seeing an improvement in the provision of digital information services for disabled people. Annual correspondence with the FTSE 100 companies has indicated that from 2013 to present there has been a steady increase in the number of companies that provide video relay. We welcome this positive progress, and public facing Government departments will continue to work with interested parties to ensure this continues.

    We have also been monitoring progress of the provision of access services for Video on Demand (VoD) content since 2013 through engagement with the Authority for Television on Demand (ATVOD), platform operators content providers and broadcasters.

    The Alliance for Digital Accessibility (formerly the Digital Accessibility Alliance), which has met twice since its formation, has created the environment for members to engage and discuss Accessibility issues.

  • Royston Smith – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Royston Smith – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Royston Smith on 2016-03-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what steps he plans to take in the forthcoming Charter Review to ensure that the BBC provides greater value for money.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    Value for money is one of many issues we are looking at as part of Charter Review.

  • Chris Stephens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Chris Stephens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chris Stephens on 2016-03-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, when he plans to Answer Question 26990, tabled on 11 February 2016 by the hon. Member for Glasgow South West.

    Nick Boles

    I apologise to the hon Member for the delay. I will reply as soon as possible.

  • Andrew Rosindell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Andrew Rosindell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Rosindell on 2016-05-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what provisions are in place to ensure that the jurisdiction of Investor State Dispute Settlement tribunal hearings remains restricted to its current mandate under the terms of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.

    Anna Soubry

    Investment protection provisions in trade and investment treaties such as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) aim to protect international investors from discriminatory or unfair treatment by a state. Their investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) provisions allow international investors to bring claims if they think the obligations set out in the treaty have been breached by the host state. As such, Governments cannot initiate claims against investors. Under the European Commission’s proposals for TTIP, in line with normal investment treaty practice, UK investors would be able to bring ISDS claims against the US Government.

    The jurisdiction of any ISDS tribunal established in TTIP will be set out in the investment protection and ISDS provisions of the agreement. The aim of the European Commission’s proposals for investment protection provisions in TTIP is to clearly define the scope for ISDS claims and tribunal jurisdiction, including protecting the right of governments to regulate lawfully in the public interest. If an ISDS tribunal did exceed its jurisdiction in making an award, typically those elements of the resulting award would not be enforceable.

  • Clive Lewis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Clive Lewis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Clive Lewis on 2016-06-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what resources his Department has allocated to the Regulatory Delivery Directorate for enforcement of part G of the Building Regulations 2010 in domestic properties.

    Anna Soubry

    My Department has no direct responsibility for Building Regulations Part G as this falls to the Department for Communities and Local Government and is enforced through local authorities who have a general duty to enforce Building Regulations in their area.

  • Michael Fabricant – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Michael Fabricant – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Michael Fabricant on 2016-09-06.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what progress his Department has made on delivering the UK’s contribution to NATO’s enhanced forward presence in eastern Europe; and if he will make a statement.

    Michael Fallon

    The UK will be the Framework Nation for NATO’s enhanced Forward Presence in Estonia. Detailed planning is now underway with NATO and our Estonian hosts, and with the Governments of France and Denmark, who have indicated that they will deploy forces alongside us.

    As agreed at the Warsaw Summit, our enhance Forward Presence forces will deploy in Spring 2017.

  • Lord Lexden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Lord Lexden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Lexden on 2016-10-21.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their estimate of the total amount of land that has been disposed of by schools which have sold their playing fields since 2010.

    Lord Nash

    Local authorities and schools must by law seek consent from the Secretary of State to dispose of playing field land. The department has a strong policy presumption against the disposal of school playing fields and only provides consent to dispose of playing field land if the criteria set out in the departmental guidance are met; which includes an expectation that proceeds from sales are reinvested in sports and education facilities. The department publishes a list of department decisions on applications for consent to dispose of school playing field land.

    It would neither be practical or desirable to artificially curb the sale of school playing fields, when such disposals may represent the most effective use of public assets. Often changes are made to education provision, such as school closures or mergers, which mean it is no longer necessary to retain playing fields for school use. In such cases it is only right that local communities are able to benefit from space that otherwise would not be used. Converting surplus or unwanted assets to invest in school grounds has benefits that extend far beyond the school gates. No operating school has disposed of its entire playing field.

    It is therefore right that schools should continue to determine what is suitable for their individual circumstances; subject to strong statutory protections including the Secretary of State’s consent and the application of rigorous criteria for what is best for pupils’ education and wider school and community life.