Tag: Parliamentary Question

Douglas Carswell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Douglas Carswell on 2016-03-21.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment she has made of the effect on unemployed people starting employment of the time taken by the Disclosure and Barring Service to process applications.

Karen Bradley

In the vast majority of cases, disclosure certificates are issued in a timely manner. Performance data relating to February 2016 indicates that average processing time for Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) applications was 15 days. It is important that checks undertaken are thorough and a proportion of the applications received by the DBS need to be referred to one or more police forces as part of the enhanced disclosure process.

The DBS is reliant on police forces completing their checks in a timely manner. A small number of forces have experienced difficulties in meeting the service level agreements in place between the DBS and each force. Whilst no assessment has been made of the impact of timeliness on unemployed customers, it is recognised that delays may create problems for some people. The DBS is working closely with those forces whose performance does not meet turnaround time targets. We will not compromise when it comes to the safety of children and vulnerable adults.

The number of applications to the DBS from people living in the Clacton constituency that have taken more than 60 days to process in the last 12 months is listed in the table below.

Month

Number of certificates issued by DBS to applicants in Clacton constituency

Applications that took longer than 60 days

March 2015– February 2016

5,707

322

01/01/2023
Lord Oates – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Oates on 2016-04-27.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government when the Prime Minister last visited Africa to promote trade, investment and economic development; which countries he visited; and when he next intends to make such a visit.

Lord Price

Details of ministerial visits overseas are published on a quarterly basis and can be accessed via the gov.uk website. For security reasons, the Prime Minister’s engagements are announced as and when appropriate.

01/01/2023
David Lammy – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Lammy on 2016-06-06.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answers of 6 June 2016 to Questions 37441 and 38348, why North Middlesex Hospital is not being supported by the Emergency Care Intensive Support Team via the Emergency Care Improvement Programme.

Ben Gummer

We are advised by NHS Improvement that North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust was not supported by the Emergency Care Intensive Support Team (ECIST) during 2015/16 as it did not fall within the criteria at the time of selection for enrolment in the Emergency Care Improvement Programme.

However, following concerns regarding the Emergency Department waiting time performance at the Trust, we are aware that NHS Improvement and NHS England jointly arranged a review of the system’s emergency care pathway by the North West Utilisation Management Unit.

We understand that in response to the findings the system has developed a ‘safer, faster, better’ programme to address issues across the pathway.

We are informed that the Trust requested support from ECIST at the end of April 2016. A tailored support programme is currently being developed. This will include visits from clinicians and improvement managers from ECIST.

01/01/2023

David Lammy – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Trade

The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Lammy on 2016-09-02.

To ask the Secretary of State for International Trade, how many officials of his Department are (a) on secondment from external companies and (b) engaged as external contractors or consultants; and what the cost is of engaging such people.

Greg Hands

Following her appointment on 13 July 2016 the Prime Minister established the Department for International Trade (DIT). The DIT aggregates UK Trade and Investment (UKTI), UK Export and Finance (UKEF), Trade Policy Units from the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS), as well as some new hires.

Until such time as a transfer of functions order establishes the Secretary of State as a corporation sole, DIT remains a unified Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) and Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS) department for accounting purposes.

Since the department was formed in July there have been no secondees appointed from the private sector. Secondees previously in post with syndicate organisations have moved across to DIT on legacy terms.

Contractors in post with syndicate organisations have also moved across to DIT on legacy terms. Since the department was formed in July the number of contractors remains 217 with incumbent costs, as tabled below.

	DIT Secondees	Monthly Costs	DIT Contractors	Costs for financial year 2015/16
Trade Policy & Ministerial (BEIS)	1	£0.00	1	£14,982
International Trade & Investment (UKTI)	*12	£14,299.27	196 – as of 01/09/16	£24 million
UK Export Finance	0	–	20 – as of 01/09/16	£2.54 million
Total	13	£14,299.27	217	£26.5 million

Table Notes:

The majority of secondees are funded by seconding companies. Costs are based on collective monthly salaries of DIT funded secondees.

Actual numbers of contractors fluctuate throughout the year as do costs. Contractor costs reflect the level of senior specialist, technical and commercial knowledge required by the former UKTI department to support British businesses in international markets, and with overseas investors looking to invest in the UK.

01/01/2023

Barry Sheerman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Barry Sheerman on 2016-10-17.

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what steps the Government plans to take to increase the number of household waste recycling centres that accept liquid paint.

Dr Thérèse Coffey

The Government has been engaging constructively with the British Coatings Federation on making better use of leftover paint, including identifying potential regulatory barriers to its recycling and remanufacture and how these might be overcome.

The Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP) encourages consumers to recycle and re-use household paint by providing information through the Recycle Now website. This includes a postcode locator which helps pinpoint local Household Waste Recycling Centres (HWRCs) that accept leftover paint. The Government’s Innovation in Waste Prevention Fund has also supported a pilot paint re-use project in Cheshire involving local charities, working with HWRCs and housing associations to increase paint donation and minimise disposal. WRAP will publish a summary of the project, lessons learned and a video case study later in the year.

In terms of public procurement, it is for each Government department to consider sustainability and put this into practice in its own procurement activity. Government Buying Standards do not currently include remanufactured paint. WRAP has recently published a guide on ‘How to Include Re-use in Local Authority HWRC Procurement’.

01/01/2023
Kelvin Hopkins – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kelvin Hopkins on 2015-11-04.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what procedures her Department has in place to assess at the conclusion of any animal experiment whether the severity level expected by researchers before the experiment corresponded to what the actual severity level was.

Mike Penning

The Home Office has published detailed guidance (see: Guidance on the Operation of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986), which describes the requirements the Home Office places on researchers in the assessment of retrospective severity. At the end of a series of regulated procedures the project licence holder is required to classify the actual severity of the series of procedures carried out using observations taken from the animals during day-to-day monitoring. This information has to be reported to the Home Office annually, and at the conclusion of a programme of work, and following implementation of 2010/63 EU was published for the first time in the Annual Statistics of Scientific Procedures on Living Animals, Great Britain 2014.

Where appropriate, Home Office Inspectors cross-check and assess these records against the severity categories set out in project licences.

All project licences using non-human primates, cats, dogs and equidae, all those involving procedures classified as severe as well as those for education and training purposes or using endangered animals, are also required to be assessed retrospectively. In such cases, the Secretary of State requires an establishment’s Animal Welfare and Ethical Review Body to conduct the retrospective assessment, which has to be submitted to the Home Office within three months in order that an inspector can complete the assessment on behalf of the Secretary of State.

01/01/2023
Sarah Wollaston – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sarah Wollaston on 2015-12-02.

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, if he will make one of the qualifying criteria for children under three years of age to access the mobility component of the disability living allowance possession of a blue badge by either of a child’s parents.

Justin Tomlinson

I refer the honourable lady to the answer provided to her on 2 November (13660).

01/01/2023
Chris Stephens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chris Stephens on 2016-01-07.

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what impact assessment his Department has carried out on the effects of reductions in the universal credit work allowance on (a) working families and (b) people’s ability to take on part-time work.

Priti Patel

The impact of the work allowance change cannot be considered in isolation – it is part of a broader package of measures announced at the Summer Budget, such as the increase to the personal tax allowance and introduction of the national living wage, which strengthens incentives to find work and better paid jobs.

01/01/2023
Lord Berkeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Berkeley on 2016-02-01.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the remarks by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon on 28 January (HL Deb, col 1405), what is the estimated cost of the next two years’ work by Network Rail that has now been cancelled on (1) the stabilisation of the cliff between Parsons and Teignmouth, and (2) breakwaters, groynes and revetments in the Dawlish area; and what are the new estimated completion dates for those works.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

No work on this study has been cancelled. Network Rail is currently progressing the Exeter to Newton Abbot geo-environmental study on the existing route via Dawlish to explore options which will reduce the chances of future route failure. The work will produce a short-list of options for further strengthening of the existing railway from Control Period 6 (CP6) (2019 to 2024) and beyond. It is due to be fully complete in May 2016 and will feed into the funding deliberations for CP6 and beyond.

Plans for Control Period 6 will be defined through the standard industry planning processes. These will take into account the recommendations of the Bowe and Shaw reviews and the re-profiling carried out by Sir Peter Hendy, along with the views of both PRTF and Network Rail .This process is led by Network Rail, with input from a wide range of stakeholders and funders, and covers the needs of each 5-year Rail Investment Strategy (RIS) with consideration of longer term requirements up to 2043.

01/01/2023
Lord Mawson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Mawson on 2016-02-25.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the impact of their planned pharmacy cuts on patients and health services in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets.

Lord Prior of Brampton

Community pharmacy is a vital part of the National Health Service and can play an even greater role. In the Spending Review, the Government re-affirmed the need for the NHS to deliver £22 billion in efficiency savings by 2020-21 as set out in the NHS’s own plan, the Five Year Forward View. Community pharmacy is a core part of NHS primary care and has an important contribution to make as the NHS rises to these challenges. The Government believes efficiencies can be made without compromising the quality of services or public access to them. Our aim is to ensure that those community pharmacies upon which people depend continue to thrive and so we are consulting on the introduction of a Pharmacy Access Scheme, which will provide more NHS funds to certain pharmacies compared to others, considering factors such as location and the health needs of the local population.

The Government’s vision is for a more efficient, modern system that will free up pharmacists to spend more time delivering clinical and public health services to the benefit of patients and the public.

We are consulting the Pharmaceutical Services Negotiating Committee, other pharmacy bodies and patient and public representatives on our proposals. An impact assessment will be completed to inform final decisions and published in due course.

NHS England has a statutory duty to ensure the adequate provision of NHS pharmaceutical services across England and will ensure that duty continues to be met, including in respect of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets.

01/01/2023