Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • 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 assessment the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has made of recent research suggesting that the eggs of older women can be rejuvenated through injections of mitochondria from other cells; what data collected from clinics the HFEA holds regarding the incidence of aneuploidy in oocytes over time, and what evidence it has received from (1) OvaScience, (2) Professor Simon Fishel, and (3) other sources, that mitochondrial defects are primarily responsible for age-related exponential increases in oocyte aneuploidy; what published randomised trials the HFEA has been made aware of regarding the Augment technique, and what assessment it has made of those trials; and what assessment the HFEA has made of the credibility of claims by OvaScience and those previously made by Clonaid, in the light of data available in peer-reviewed journals.

    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 general steps they plan to take to ensure that all schools change their admission arrangements in line with recommendations by the Office of the Schools Adjudicator.

    Lord Nash

    Where the Schools Adjudicator determines that a school’s admission arrangements do not comply with the School Admissions Code, the admission authority has a statutory duty to revise its admission arrangements. The school must comply with the Adjudicator’s decision within two months of the decision or by 28 February following the decision, whichever is sooner, unless an alternative timescale is specified by the Adjudicator.

    An Adjudicator’s decision is binding and enforceable by the Secretary of State.

  • 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 recent progress has been made on the Government’s 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.

  • Vernon Coaker – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Vernon Coaker – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Vernon Coaker on 2016-04-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the availability of fertility treatments under each clinical commissioning group in England.

    Jane Ellison

    The level of provision of infertility treatment, as for all health services they commission, is decided by local clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) and will take into account the needs of the population overall. The CCG’s decisions are underpinned by clinical insight and knowledge of local healthcare needs. As such, provision of services will vary in response to local needs.

    NHS England expects that all those involved in commissioning infertility treatment services to be fully aware of the importance of having regard to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) fertility guidelines. CCGs have a legal duty to have regard to NICE guidelines.

    Following a meeting with Fertility Fairness in December 2015, officials from the Department and NHS England are considering options for addressing variation in the prices that CCGs are currently paying for in vitro fertilisation treatment.

  • 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 what is their assessment of the comments by the Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the Commonwealth, quoted in The Sunday Times on 8 May, that the Zionist bashing” at universities “has gone unchallenged”.”

    Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

    The Government is clear that there is absolutely no place in higher education or anywhere else in society for bigotry, hatred or any form of racism such as anti-Semitism.

    Recent reports of anti-Semitism are extremely concerning and must be met with a decisive response. We expect all universities and all bodies with a role in English higher education to be absolutely clear in their opposition to racism in all its forms, and to have robust policies in place to tackle such hatred and support victims.

    At the Government’s request, Universities UK has set up a taskforce to examine what more can be done to tackle harassment and hate crime on campus, and this includes anti-Semitism within its remit.

  • Helen Hayes – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Helen Hayes – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Helen Hayes on 2016-07-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, when he will publish the results of the review of the local housing allowance rate for supported housing.

    Gavin Barwell

    The Government is committed to protecting the most vulnerable.

    That is why we are continuing to work with the sector and other partners to develop a sustainable and workable future for supported housing and will announce next steps in due course.

    In the meantime we have put in place a one year exemption for supported housing from the Local Housing Allowance cap.

  • 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, whether he or officials of his Department have had any recent discussions with their Iranian counterparts on 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 nuclear power plants are currently required to report hourly or half-hourly radioactive emissions, and if not, whether they plan to require nuclear power plants to collect and publish hourly or half-hourly radioactive emissions statistics.

    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 101 call in each year since that service’s launch; and what the average response time was for 101 calls made to the Humberside Police from (a) North Lincolnshire and (b) 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.

    “

  • Lord Dholakia – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Dholakia – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Dholakia on 2016-01-26.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what percentage of prisoners they plan to test for blood-borne viruses in each of the next five years, in the light of the introduction of opt-out testing in prisons.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    Public Health England (PHE) working in partnership with NHS England and the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) have been implementing opt-out testing for blood-borne viruses (BBVs) since 2013/14 through a phased implementation programme using ‘pathfinder prisons’ with plans for the programme to be available in every adult prison in England by the end of financial year 2016/17. All consenting eligible adult prisoners will be offered the opportunity to test.

    Prisoners eligible for testing include those not known to be infected with BBVs who have not been tested recently and/or who had risk behaviour since their last test. Therefore over the next five years and beyond, we plan to offer tests for BBVs to all adult prisoners who fall into these categories. Phased implementation of the BBV opt-out testing programme in prisons has been informed by evaluation of pathfinder prisons. Preliminary data from suggests a near doubling of BBV testing following the introduction of the opt-out testing policy. Offer, uptake and outcome of testing is being collected by both the Health & Justice Indicators of Performance at prison level as well as through PHE’s sentinel surveillance study.