Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • David Amess – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    David Amess – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Amess on 2016-07-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, if Sport England will take steps to ensure that children’s fitness and activity levels do not decline from their term-time levels in the summer holidays.

    Tracey Crouch

    We want to ensure that all children, regardless of background, ability or where they live, are able to engage in sport and physical activity in a way that interests and benefits them. Through the Government’s sports strategy Sporting Future, published in December 2015, Sport England will now invest in sporting provision for children aged five and over – previously the starting age was 14 years old.

    In addition, Sport England’s new strategy, Towards an Active Nation, published in May 2016, sets out their plans to make a major new investment of £40 million into projects which offer new opportunities for families with children to get active and play sport together. Sport England will continue to work with organisations across the sport sector as it implements its strategy.

  • Ian Austin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Ian Austin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Austin on 2016-10-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how much heroin has been given to heroin addicts in line with his Department’s policy set out on page 31 of the Modern Crime Prevention Strategy, published by his predecessor in March 2016.

    Nicola Blackwood

    As outlined in the Government’s Modern Crime Prevention Strategy, the use of injectable diamorphine as part of treatment for a small cohort of entrenched, long-term opiate users can be effective.

    On behalf of the Department, Public Health England managed a pilot programme of supervised injectable diamorphine prescribing at a cost of £2 million per annum. The pilot ran from 2012 to 2015 at: South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust in Southwark, London; Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust in Brighton; and Tees, Esk and Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust in Easington, County Durham.

    Information about expenditure on diamorphine prescribing for the treatment of dependence, sites where it is available outside this pilot, and how much diamorphine has been prescribed to heroin addicts is not collected centrally. The decision to commission and fund the local provision of diamorphine prescribing is for local authorities.

  • Nia Griffith – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Wales Office

    Nia Griffith – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Wales Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nia Griffith on 2015-11-05.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Wales, for what reasons the draft Wales Bill would seek to change the criteria on which the Assembly could legislate outside its normal competence, as set out in section 108(5) of the Government of Wales Act 2006.

    Stephen Crabb

    The purpose of the reserved powers model in the draft Wales Bill is to define clearly the legislative competence reserved to the UK Parliament. At the same time, it enables the Assembly to modify the law in areas that would otherwise be reserved to enforce, or otherwise give effect to, its legislation.

    It is right that this freedom should be balanced by a test to be applied when the Assembly seeks to modify the law in areas that are not devolved. For that reason the draft Bill defines the circumstances in which it can do so and the test to be applied – the test of necessity. This gives the Assembly flexibility to modify the law in areas outside devolved competence in order to enforce its legislation effectively, whilst ensuring the effect on these areas goes no further than necessary.

  • Margaret Ferrier – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Scotland Office

    Margaret Ferrier – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Scotland Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Ferrier on 2015-12-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland, when he last met with the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions to discuss the rollout of universal credit across Scotland.

    David Mundell

    I and my officials have regular engagement with colleagues in the Department for Work and Pensions on a range of important matters, including the rollout of universal credit and fulfilling our commitment to devolve employment support currently delivered by the Work Programme and Work Choice. In addition, I also discuss Welfare related issues in my regular meetings with Local Authorities across Scotland.

  • Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-01-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what projects his Department plans to fund through the £40 million allocated to the Health and Work Innovation Fund.

    Priti Patel

    The Work and Health innovation fund will be used to build an evidence base for what works to improve employment and health outcomes.

    This evidence base will enable the Work and Health Unit to develop proposals for Longer Term reform across Work and health Systems The Unit is currently working with partners including NHS England to develop these proposals.

  • Louise Haigh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Louise Haigh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Louise Haigh on 2016-02-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, if he will publish in full his Department’s report entitled, BIS 2020: What-why-when-how.

    Joseph Johnson

    “BIS 2020: What-why-when-how” (September 2015) was one of a series of internal briefings for BIS staff. Staff are briefed on our change programme on a regular basis. The briefings are not formal documents and, as such, we do not publish them.

    The House was informed about the recent BIS 2020 announcements and their impact on BIS staff by my Rt hon Friend the Minister of State for Small Business, Industry and Enterprise (Anna Soubry) on Friday 29 January.

  • Joan Ryan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Joan Ryan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Joan Ryan on 2016-02-29.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what recent representations she has received from (a) schools and (b) local authorities on the efficacy of the indicators of deprivation used to calculate formulae for schools.

    Mr Sam Gyimah

    Children from disadvantaged backgrounds often need extra support at school to achieve as well as their peers. That is why, in addition to providing £2.5 billion this year through the pupil premium – which we have protected at current rates for the duration of the parliament – we also require local authorities to target funding for deprived pupils through their local formula.

    Under current arrangements local authorities can choose between a pupil-level measure of disadvantage (pupils eligible for free school meals or eligible at any point in the previous 6 years) or an area-level measure of disadvantage (the Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index), or a combination. We are aware that the update to the area-level deprivation data last year led to some areas changing their local formulae to mitigate the impact on deprivation funding for their schools.

    We recently launched the first stage of the consultation on our plans to introduce a national funding formula for schools from 2017. Our proposals would mean schools’ funding is matched fairly and transparently to their needs and their pupils’ characteristics. Through the consultation process we are seeking views on the best way to target funding for disadvantaged pupils to support them to achieve to the best of their ability.

  • Tulip Siddiq – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Tulip Siddiq – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tulip Siddiq on 2016-04-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what his policy is on whether the same data protection and privatisation obligations will apply for the company carrying out the functions of the Land Registry in the event that it is privatised under the (a) Government’s preferred model of privatisation with a contract between the Government and a private operator and (b) alternative model of privatisation with independent economic regulation.

    Anna Soubry

    Government recognises the importance of data protection and data security. Data protection maintains confidence in the integrity of the register and the services of Land Registry. Under all the proposals put forward in the consultation, statutory data collected through core statutory functions would continue to be owned by government.

    In addition, a private sector operator would be a data processor and would be required to comply with the Data Protection Act 1998. This controls how personal information is used by organisations, businesses or government.

    Everyone responsible for using data has to follow strict rules called ‘data protection principles’. They must make sure the information is:

    • used fairly and lawfully;
    • used for limited, specifically stated purposes;
    • used in a way that is adequate, relevant and not excessive;
    • accurate and kept up to date;
    • kept for no longer than is necessary;
    • handled according to people’s data protection rights;
    • kept safe and secure.

    All data controllers are accountable to the Information Commissioner who has powers to enforce data protection law and impose sanctions.

  • Ian Blackford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Ian Blackford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Blackford on 2016-05-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to the Answer of 24 May 2016 to Question 37321, on healthy life expectancy, what specific assessment he has made of what account is taken of healthy life expectancy distinct from life expectancy in making decisions on future levels of pension age.

    Justin Tomlinson

    In making decisions on future State Pension age arrangements the Secretary of State will be informed by the first review, established under the Pensions Act 2014, which is due to report by May 2017. This review will take into account up to date life expectancy data and the report from the independently led review.

    The purpose of the independent report is to recommend to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what to consider when making decisions on future State Pension age arrangements. In conducting its analysis and reaching recommendations the review will also to have regard to variations between different groups and the views of organisation and individuals on factors to be taken into account. It will consult widely to ensure that it has considered the appropriate evidence and the range of views of interested parties.

  • David Amess – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    David Amess – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Amess on 2016-07-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will develop and implement a national measure to (a) monitor whether patients with suspected giant cell arteritis (GCA) are being referred to a specialist within one working day and (b) ensure services are complying with the recommendation in National BSR and BHPR Guidelines for the management of GCA’s urgent referral to a specialist.

    David Mowat

    Clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) are responsible for the provision of services for people with giant cell arteritis (GCA). Whilst it would not be appropriate for NHS England to direct CCGs to adopt a particular clinical pathway, it continues to ensure that the innovative approach developed at Southend University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (FT) is shared and made available to clinicians.

    There are a number of clinical guidelines that are available to support the prompt diagnosis and referral of patients with suspected GCA, including one produced by the Royal College of Physicians, which Professor Bhaskar Dasgupta, who developed the GCA pathway at Southend University Hospital NHS FT, helped to produce. This guidance provides a framework for disease assessment, immediate treatment and referral to specialist care. Furthermore, both the British Society for Rheumatology and the British Health Professionals in Rheumatology published guidelines on the management of polymyalgia rheumatica, a related condition, for general practitioners and rheumatologists. These encourage the prompt diagnosis and urgent management of GCA, helping to minimise GCA related vision loss.

    The Specialised Rheumatology Clinical Reference Group at NHS England has developed proposals to establish local rheumatology networks. These are being implemented over a three year period to support consistent access to clinically effective therapies and to share good and innovative practice across the country. In addition, NHS England’s innovation team has invited Professor Dasgupta to contribute to the NHS Innovation Exchange Portal to ensure that this knowledge is shared.

    On 24 June 2016, NHS England recently facilitated a webinar presented by Professor Dasgupta, which aimed to show how the fast-track pathway has significantly reduced the number of patients suffering sight-loss as an avoidable complication of GCA and, in addition, presents a case that this model is cost-saving, results in an increased patient quality of life, and successfully reduces the time to diagnosis in line with established clinical guidelines. NHS England promoted the webinar across the musculoskeletal community as well as to CCGs and patient groups through a wide range of communications channels.