Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Neil Gray – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Neil Gray – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Neil Gray on 2015-11-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment he has made of the effect on claimants of the extension of time for personal independence payment reassessments referred to in the OBR forecasts of November 2015; and what steps he is taking to address the concerns of people on disability living allowance whose reassessments will take longer to process as a result.

    Justin Tomlinson

    The Government is committed to delivering Personal Independence Payment (PIP) in a safe and secure way, ensuring that we continue to roll it out to existing recipients of Disability Living Allowance (DLA) based on capacity, to ensure an effective and efficient service for claimants. Full PIP roll out started in July this year in a controlled way, allowing us to test, learn and improve the service before we ramp up at scale. From October, in line with previously published plans, we began the full rollout of PIP nationally. There are no delays in the claiming system and we are currently working at business as usual capacity. Existing DLA claimants are being kept informed about reassessment activity, including when or under what circumstances they may be invited to claim PIP, through a range of communication measures including information provided in the annual uprating letter or through information available on www.gov.uk.

    “

  • Gregory Campbell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Gregory Campbell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gregory Campbell on 2016-01-04.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what account his Department plans to take of the need to ensure religious balance when decisions are reached regarding potential forthcoming closures and staff redundancies in HM Revenue and Customs’ offices in Northern Ireland.

    Mr David Gauke

    HM Revenue and Customs has considered high level people and equality impacts, alongside its key location principles, as part of the decision-making process in determining the location of its future regional centres. The potential impacts on protected characteristic groups, as required by the Northern Ireland Equality legislation, have been incorporated in this approach and will continue to be considered throughout implementation.

  • Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-01-28.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether any of the devolved administrations have refused to consent to the provisions dealing with public sector exit payments contained within the Enterprise Bill.

    Greg Hands

    The public sector exit payment cap will come into effect at a date after the Enterprise Bill has received Royal Assent. The Enterprise Bill is currently expected to receive Royal Assent by May 2016. A set of secondary regulations which will give effect to the public sector exit payment cap are currently expected to come into force during autumn 2016.

    In the response to the consultation the Government stated that ‘the government would request Legislative Consent Motions from the Devolved Administrations where appropriate, however it would be for the Devolved Administrations to decide the approach they wish to take to this measure.’

    On 7 December 2015 the Northern Ireland Assembly declined to agree a Legislative Consent Motion. Subsequently, no provisions relating to Northern Ireland are included in the clauses relating to exit payments.

  • Paul Flynn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Paul Flynn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Paul Flynn on 2016-02-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, if he will make ithis policy to assess the potential merits of the pledge by the Austrian government set out in the report by the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, A Pledge to Fill the Legal Gap, published in February 2015 for the work of the UN Open Ended Working Group on multilateral disarmament negotiations.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    The UK is committed to creating the conditions for a world without nuclear weapons in accordance with the goals of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, in a way that promotes international stability, and is based on the principle of undiminished security for all. The Austrian pledge to stigmatise, prohibit and eliminate nuclear weapons runs counter to the step-by-step disarmament process; and it does not take into account the current global security and stability challenges. The UN Disarmament machinery and the Non-Proliferation Treaty provide the right framework for working towards a world without nuclear weapons.

  • Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer on 2016-03-17.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government why their representatives in the International Court of Justice on 14 March requested the Court to declare that it lacked jurisdiction over the claim brought against the UK by the Marshall Islands, or that the claim is inadmissible, and under what circumstances they believe the International Court of Justice has jurisdiction.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    The UK’s representatives requested the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to declare the case inadmissible because that was our assessment following our analysis of the Marshall Islands’ claim. The detail of the UK’s legal arguments is contained in its written preliminary objections to jurisdiction and admissibility, as filed with the Court on 15 June 2015 and oral pleadings, as delivered at the public hearings held at the Court between 9 and 16 March 2016. The question of whether the ICJ has jurisdiction in a particular set of circumstances is a matter to be determined by the Court on a case-by-case basis in light of the relevant facts.

  • Ian Austin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Ian Austin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Austin on 2016-04-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, how many academy alternative provision sponsor-led schools have been graded (a) outstanding, (b) good, (c) requires improvement and (d) inadequate in each year since 2010.

    Nick Gibb

    These are matters for Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector, Sir Michael Wilshaw. I have asked him to write to you and a copy of his reply will be placed in the libraries of the House.

  • Jim Shannon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Jim Shannon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Shannon on 2016-06-06.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what steps the Government is taking to help older women and men into work.

    Justin Tomlinson

    DWP recognises and welcomes the valuable knowledge and skills that older workers bring to the work place. There are now more older people in employment than ever before, 9.6 million 50+ workers in the UK – an increase of over a million (1.3 million) over the last 5 years.

    As well as access to the full Jobcentre Plus offer of personalised support, we introduced Older Claimant Champions in Jobcentre Plus, and have run two yearlong trials from April 2015 to test how we support older people where age is a barrier to them finding work. The trials are being evaluated and initial results will be available in autumn 2016.

    The Government intends to publish a new, employer-led national strategy later this year, setting out the future direction of the Fuller Working Lives agenda.

  • Justin Tomlinson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Justin Tomlinson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

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

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many people in (a) North Swindon constituency and (b) the UK have (i) had a reduction in the income tax they pay and (ii) been taken out of paying income tax since 2010.

    Jane Ellison

    By 2015-16 increases in the personal allowance since 2010-11 are estimated to have reduced the income tax liability of 27.9 million individuals in the UK and taken 3.97 million out of tax. The corresponding figures for the South West, which includes the Parliamentary Constituency of North Swindon, are 2.4 million and 344,000 respectively.

    These estimates are based on the 2013-14 Survey of Personal Incomes, projected to 2015-16 using economic assumptions consistent with the Office for Budget Responsibility’s March 2016 economic and fiscal outlook.

    HM Treasury does not publish this information at constituency level.

  • 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 2016-10-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many clinical commissioning groups commission foetal alcohol spectrum disorder and foetal alcohol syndrome services.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    This information is not held centrally.

  • Roger Godsiff – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Roger Godsiff – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2015-11-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of interim or emergency measures to provide access to drugs for rare cancers during the period of the accelerated access review.

    George Freeman

    The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence is the independent body that makes decisions on the clinical and cost effectiveness of drugs, including those for rare cancers, based on thorough assessment of the best available evidence.

    The Government has also established the Cancer Drugs Fund, which has helped over 72,000 cancer patients in England to access life-extending drugs that would not otherwise have been available to them.

    The Early Access to Medicines Scheme (EAMS) was launched in April 2014 to support access in the United Kingdom to unlicensed or off-label medicines representing a significant advance in treatment in areas of unmet medical need. Eight EAMS Promising Innovative Medicines designations and four positive EAMS scientific opinions have been issued so far, including some for new cancer drugs.

    The independent Accelerated Access Review is currently looking at how we can reduce the time, cost, and risk of drug development, develop a new range of flexible reimbursement models and consider the long term landscape for innovation adoption. The Review’s recommendations are expected in spring 2016.