Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Ian Liddell-Grainger – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Ian Liddell-Grainger – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Liddell-Grainger on 2016-02-23.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, what her Department’s policy is on the future development of tidal lagoons in the UK.

    Andrea Leadsom

    The Government recognises the potential that exists in harnessing tidal energy around the coastline of the UK.

    That is why we are commissioning an independent strategic review to assess the case for tidal lagoons and consider whether they could represent value for money for the consumer.

    Government will carefully consider the recommendations from the review before making decisions on future development of tidal lagoons.

  • Lord Stoddart of Swindon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Lord Stoddart of Swindon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Stoddart of Swindon on 2016-03-21.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what the criteria are for payments to be made from the Contingency Fund.

    Lord O’Neill of Gatley

    The criteria for access to the Contingencies Fund are set out in the Treasury publication “Supply Estimates: a guidance manual” which can be found on the gov.uk website. The Contingencies Fund enables the Treasury to make repayable cash advances to departments for urgent services, in anticipation of provision for those services being provided by Parliament.

    The main criteria against which any application is judged is genuine urgency in the public interest and – in cases of new services – near certainty that any related Bill will become law. However, not all advances are dependent upon the passage of enabling legislation: existing legislation may already exist. Advances are generally made in anticipation of the relevant Supply and Appropriation Act.

  • Robert Flello – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Robert Flello – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Robert Flello on 2016-04-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, with reference to the Care Quality Commission report, British Pregnancy Advisory Service, BPAS-Richmond, Quality Report, published in November 2015, whether his Department plans to issue guidance to abortion clinics on consultation on disposal arrangement following terminations.

    Jane Ellison

    The termination of pregnancies is a regulated activity. All providers of regulated activities must be registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) and must meet all of the relevant Regulations under the Health and Social Care Act 2008, including meeting the fundamental standards of quality and safety, which includes independent sector termination of pregnancy providers and managers. The CQC is responsible for monitoring and, where appropriate, inspecting providers in relation to their ongoing compliance with meeting those requirements. Independent sector providers are also required to comply with the Department’s Required Standard Operating Procedures which the CQC inspect against.

    The CQC has made a public commitment to undertake inspection of all independent providers of termination of pregnancy services using their new inspection approach and will continue to respond to risk as appropriate and take regulatory action as required.

    On the issue of whether the Department plans to issue guidance to abortion clinics on consultation on disposal arrangements following termination, I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 11 April 2016 to Question 32357.

    We have no plans to issue guidance to abortion clinics on the administration of drugs. The administration of drugs is managed through the CQC’s fundamental standards and through inspection visits.

    “

  • Gloria De Piero – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Gloria De Piero – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gloria De Piero on 2016-05-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how much of the funding which Central Nottinghamshire Clinical Services received from the public purse has been recovered by the Government; and if he will establish an investigation into that body’s handling of its finances.

    Ben Gummer

    This is a matter for Mansfield and Ashfield Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG), which managed the contract with Central Nottinghamshire Clinical Services (CNCS).

    NHS England advises that the CCG has paid CNCS the sums it was contractually due. The CCG will endeavour to recover costs incurred as a result of the provider failure.

    Local commissioners will conduct a review of the contract with CNCS, and the contingency process, to see if procurement processes can be strengthened in the future.

  • Lord Judd – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Lord Judd – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Judd on 2016-07-06.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to strengthen the resources available for the development of UK policies towards the UN, the UN Security Council, UN operational agencies, and international financial institutions.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    The Government regularly reviews resources devoted to supporting policy development on key multilateral institutions, including the UN and international financial institutions.

  • Kevan Jones – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Kevan Jones – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevan Jones on 2016-09-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many trained soldiers were assigned to the 3rd Division (UK) in each year since 2010.

    Mike Penning

    The Full Time Trained Strength of 3 Div as at the 1 April, from 2010 to present, is shown in the table below.

    Total

    Officers

    Other Ranks

    1 April 2010

    26,180

    2,030

    24,150

    1 April 2011

    25,100

    1,880

    23,220

    1 April 2012

    23,990

    1,840

    22,140

    1 April 2013

    21,790

    1,760

    20,030

    1 April 2014

    19,030

    1,520

    17,510

    1 April 2015

    17,960

    1,500

    16,460

    1 April 2016

    14,540

    1,200

    13,340

    The figures are for Full Time Trained Strength comprising Trained Regular, Full Time Reserve Service (FTRS) and Gurkhas.

    Figures have been rounded to "10". Figures ending in "5" have been rounded to the nearest multiple of 20 to prevent systematic bias.

    The reduction in the number of personnel assigned 3rd (United Kingdom) Division (3 Div) follows the creation of Force Troops Command under Army 2020. This saw the transfer of many personnel previously assigned directly to 3 Div being transferred to this new formation.

  • Lord Greaves – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Lord Greaves – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Greaves on 2015-10-28.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government to what extent the level of recorded crime in a police force’s area affects the amount of funding allocated under the proposed new formula for funding of police forces.

    Lord Bates

    The proposed police funding model is based on a set of objective indicators that correlate strongly with long term patterns of crime.

    As we set out in our consultation on a proposed new funding model, we believe it is not appropriate to directly base force level allocations on crime statistics as these are directly influenced by police activity.

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

    Andrew Gwynne – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2015-11-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what formal role NHS England has in the development of the Accelerated Access Review.

    George Freeman

    The Accelerated Access Review (AAR), chaired by Sir Hugh Taylor, will make recommendations to government on reforms to accelerate access for National Health Service patients to innovative medicines and medical technologies making our country the best place in the world to design, develop and deploy these products. The terms of the reference for the review focus on faster access to innovations, which may include certain off-patent repurposed drugs, as opposed to the routine availability of medicines or medical technologies.

    Prior to establishing the terms of reference for the AAR, the Department reviewed evaluation reports and met with officials from previous initiatives on the uptake of innovation in the NHS including the Innovation, Health and Wealth report. As a result, building upon the lessons of previous reviews is explicit with the terms of reference of the AAR.

    The AAR has regular meetings with senior officials from NHS England via a steering group as recommendations are being developed. In addition, some staff from NHS England have been assigned to support the review team.

    Sir Hugh is still in the process of developing final recommendations which will be published in spring 2016. In his Interim Report published in October, Sir Hugh sets out a proposition on “galvanising the NHS”. This involves supporting the NHS to adopt innovation, more rapidly through better practical support, stronger incentives and the potential streamlining of local structures.

    The Department reviewed evaluation reports and met with officials from previous initiatives on the uptake of innovation in the NHS prior to establishing the terms of reference for the AAR. It was clear that whilst progress has been made on the uptake of innovation in the NHS there is still much to do. Sir Hugh and the head of the External Advisory Group, Professor Sir John Bell, set out the case for uptake of innovation in the recently published AAR Interim Report.

    The AAR has senior level contact with officials working on Lord Carter’s review of NHS efficiency to ensure that information is shared between the two teams.

  • Kelvin Hopkins – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Kelvin Hopkins – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kelvin Hopkins on 2016-01-05.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what provision his Department has made for public sector employers to pay the (a) national living wage, (b) 3.4 per cent increase in Secondary National Insurance Contributions (NICs) from 2016-17 following the abolition of Contracted Out NICs and (c) Apprenticeship Levy.

    Greg Hands

    It is the responsibility of each Department to ensure they have sufficient funding available to cover any additional costs associated with either the National Living Wage, the 3.4 per cent increase in Secondary National Insurance Contributions (NICs) from 2016-17, or the apprenticeship levy. HM Treasury has only made provision for the costs that it will incur in respect of its own staff as a result of these changes.

  • Justin Madders – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Prime Minister

    Justin Madders – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Prime Minister

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Justin Madders on 2016-01-26.

    To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to the Answer of 14 September 2015 to Question 9202, what steps he has taken to reduce the number of peers.

    Mr David Cameron

    The Leader of the House of Lords has convened cross-party talks to consider the best way forward in addressing the size of the House. Those talks are ongoing.