Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Baroness Massey of Darwen – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Baroness Massey of Darwen – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Massey of Darwen on 2016-02-03.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what additional steps, if any, they will take to monitor and enforce compliance with the School Admissions Code in the light of their decision to limit those who can formally object to school admission arrangements; and what estimate they have made of what percentage of the objections submitted to the Office of the Schools Adjudicator by (1) parents, and (2) groups or organisations, were successful between 2012 and 2015 inclusive.

    Lord Nash

    The School Admissions Code exists to ensure that places in all state funded schools are allocated in a fair and transparent manner. The Department for Education will shortly be consulting on a package of changes to the Code, which will include measures to assist parents and promote fairness and transparency. The proposed changes in relation to objections are designed to ensure that the Schools Adjudicator is able to focus on the concerns parents may have about the fairness of the admission arrangements of their local school and is not held up by the need to also consider large numbers of objections referred by interest groups from outside the area. Local authorities will continue to have the right to object so that they are able to act on behalf of the local community.

  • Lord Maginnis of Drumglass – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Maginnis of Drumglass – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Maginnis of Drumglass on 2016-02-29.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they are aware of the recent case of 15 year-old Matthew Garnett who, as a consequence of being on the autistic spectrum, has been confined to a psychiatric intensive care unit for six months without having been moved to a more appropriate care facility, and what action they are taking to prevent such cases arising in future.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    We are aware of this case, and we welcome NHS England’s confirmation that Matthew will be moving to a more appropriate facility in the next month.

    Delivery of appropriate care for the few individuals with very complex needs will always be a challenge. The people who can best assess local care needs and ensure that those needs are met are local commissioners, though some people will require care that is commissioned on a national level for rare conditions, including some mental health conditions with comorbidities such as autistic spectrum disorders or learning disabilities. This includes inpatient treatment for children and young people with mental health conditions.

    NHS England is continuing Care and Treatment Reviews for children and young people with learning disabilities in inpatient settings and 52 week residential schools. These reviews ensure the care and setting are appropriate to the child or young person’s needs, and where needed, allow planned moves to community-based care or more appropriate inpatient accommodation.

  • Baroness Lister of Burtersett – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Baroness Lister of Burtersett – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Lister of Burtersett on 2016-03-23.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what consideration they have given to ring-fencing funding provided to local authorities for childcare.

    Lord Nash

    We have already announced over £1bn more for the early years entitlements within the ring-fenced Dedicated Schools Grant by 2019-20, which includes £300m per year to uplift the average funding rate to providers. The increase to the funding rate is based on robust evidence from the Review of the Cost of Childcare. We have made clear our commitment to maximise the amount of early years funding which reaches front line childcare providers, and will consult on proposals for achieving this as part of our consultation on early years funding reform later this year.

  • Karl McCartney – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Karl McCartney – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Karl McCartney on 2016-04-28.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many community amateur sports clubs (CASCs) in each (a) constituency and (b) sport had de-registered, or were in the process of de-registering, from the CASC scheme by 1 April 2016.

    Damian Hinds

    The new regulations for CASCs were introduced on 1 April 2015. All the changes made were necessary to reinforce the original spirit of the scheme requiring clubs to be open to the whole community, with the promotion of participation in sport as their main purpose.

    The Government consulted widely with the sector on all the changes to the scheme. It was aware that there was confusion about the meaning of participation prior to the consultation period for the new regulations. Responses to the consultation were mostly supportive of the 12 times a year rule for participation.

    The scheme does not permit clubs to impose fees which are a significant obstacle to membership. The vast majority of CASCs charge less than £520 for annual membership. To make membership more accessible, clubs with higher costs associated with membership are required to make provisions for those who can’t afford to pay more than £520 a year. If no suitable arrangements are made this club is not able to be a CASC because it is not considered to be open to the whole community.

    During the development of the new CASC regulations the Government was aware of State aid complaint SA.38208 (2014/NN). At the time, the Government was only asked to provide a response to the complaint. The Government provided this response, explaining why the CASC scheme was not State aid. The Commission’s subsequent ruling confirmed this view.

    Since the introduction of the new regulations all CASCs were given a 12-month period of grace to make any necessary changes to remain in the scheme. The Government wrote to all registered CASCs explaining the new regulations and asked clubs to complete a self-assessment checklist on income, membership and participation levels. They were also asked to contact HMRC if they did not meet the new requirements.

    From 1 April 2016, 500 clubs have been deregistered as CASCs, affecting some 35 different types of sport.

    Since 2010 there has been a steady increase in the numbers of CASCs registered in the scheme. Although the Government does not yet have figures for clubs registered as at 5 April 2016, the breakdown of figures since 2010 is:

    5630 – 5 April 2010

    5976 – 5 April 2011

    6165 – 5 April 2012

    6334 – 5 April 2013

    6571 – 5 April 2014

    6715 – 5 April 2015.

  • Jonathan Ashworth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Jonathan Ashworth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jonathan Ashworth on 2016-06-13.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, on what date the Inter-Ministerial Group on Corruption last met.

    Matthew Hancock

    I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave him on 6 June 2016 to UIN: 38864.

  • Justin Tomlinson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Justin Tomlinson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Justin Tomlinson on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what recent assessment he has made of the adequacy of the provision of support for post-traumatic stress disorder provided to (a) serving regular armed forces personnel, (b) serving reserve personnel and (c) veterans.

    Mark Lancaster

    The Ministry of Defence is committed to looking after the mental health of our Armed Forces, and our medical services are configured to provide community-based healthcare in line with national best practice. In the UK, we have 14 military Departments of Community Mental Health (DCMHs), which are located to be convenient for major centres of military population, and which support the provision of healthcare that is available through Service primary care facilities. The DCMH mental health teams comprise psychiatrists and mental health nurses, with access to clinical psychologists and mental health social workers. A wide range of psychiatric and psychological treatments are available, including medication, psychological therapies, and environmental adjustment where appropriate. In-patient care, when necessary, is provided in dedicated psychiatric units through a central contract with an in-patient psychiatric care provider.

    Mobilised Reservists are entitled to the same mental healthcare from the Defence Medical Services as their Regular colleagues. Both current and former Reservists can access the Veterans and Reserves Mental Health Programme (VRMHP) for a full mental health assessment, followed by a course of treatment at a military Department of Community Mental Health (DCMH) if their condition is assessed as attributable to operational experience. We have been actively engaged with the Department of Health to ensure that NHS GPs are aware of this service, and of the referral process.

    Veterans in England, Scotland and Wales are entitled to priority treatment at NHS hospitals for Service-related conditions (subject to the clinical need of all patients) and a Veterans’ Transition Protocol ensures any Service person discharged with a diagnosed mental health disorder is handed over appropriately to the NHS in England and the Devolved Administrations. A number of enhancements have been made to the care available for them, including more NHS veterans mental health nurses, follow-up of Service leavers twelve months after discharge, and a 24-hour mental health helpline sponsored by Combat Stress.

  • Mrs Cheryl Gillan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Mrs Cheryl Gillan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mrs Cheryl Gillan on 2016-10-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, when he plans to publish Christine Lenehan’s review of children’s services and learning disabilities.

    Nicola Blackwood

    Dame Christine Lenehan is in the final stages of completing her report into the co-ordination of care, support and treatment for children and young people with complex needs (and behaviour that challenges) involving mental health problems and learning disabilities and/or autistic spectrum condition.

  • Philip Davies – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Philip Davies – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Philip Davies on 2015-11-05.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, which regulations his Department introduced as a result of EU legislation in (a) 2013, (b) 2014 and (c) 2015 to date; which regulations his Department expects to implement as a result of EU legislation in (i) 2016 and (ii) 2017; and what estimate he has made of the cost of each such regulation to the (A) public purse and (B) private sector.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to UIN 15037.

  • Ian Blackford – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Ian Blackford – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Blackford on 2015-12-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what discussions his Department has had with the equity release industry on the potential contribution of equity release to supporting the income of pensioners.

    Justin Tomlinson

    The Government has created the foundation for saving for retirement via automatic enrolment and the State Pension reforms and given individuals the freedom to use their own savings and access other sources of income or capital in the way that best suits their needs. The latest figures from the Office for National Statistics indicate that around 80% of pensioners hold some form of housing equity. However, people who might choose to access potential sources of income, such as equity release or flexible pension products, will need to give careful consideration to whether it best suits their needs and how it could affect their income and entitlement to welfare, both now and in the future.

    That is why the government set up Pension Wise to provide information and guidance on how people can access their pension saving flexibly. Information is widely available in terms of how income and capital are treated in the means-tested benefits. Officials have held discussions with the equity release industry in May 2014 and February 2015 to explain the interactions between equity release and means tested benefits.

  • Tim Loughton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Tim Loughton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tim Loughton on 2016-01-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what contingency arrangements his Department has made for the eventuality of a majority leave vote in the upcoming EU referendum.

    Mr David Lidington

    The Government is fighting hard to fix the aspects of our EU membership that cause so much frustration in the United Kingdom, so we can get a better deal for our country and secure our future. We are confident that the right agreement can be reached.