UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Robert Neill – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Robert Neill – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Robert Neill on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, for what reasons his recent assessment of NHS England’s performance against the Mandate in 2014-15 did not address NHS England’s performance in meeting the requirement contained in the Mandate to ensure that people have access to the right treatment when they need it.

    George Freeman

    The Secretary of State’s annual assessment of NHS England’s performance in 2014-15 sets out specifically his evaluation of NHS England’s performance in meeting the access standards set out in the NHS Constitution.

    In addition, the Secretary of State’s annual assessment sets out that he agrees with NHS England’s own assessment, as set out in its annual report for 2014-15, that it has made good progress against delivering its objectives in the mandate, which includes ensuring that people have the right treatment when they need it.

  • Greg Mulholland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Greg Mulholland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Greg Mulholland on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether the Wilson Doctrine has been consistently applied to the communications of the hon. Member for Leeds North West; and whether that hon. Member or his staff have been subject to surveillance.

    Mr John Hayes

    The Government’s position on the Wilson Doctrine was set out by the Prime Minister in a written ministerial statement made on 4 November 2015.

    As the Prime Minister made clear, the Wilson Doctrine has never been an absolute bar to the targeted interception of the communications of Members of Parliament or an exemption from the legal regime governing interception. The Doctrine recognised that there could be instances where interception might be necessary.

    The Prime Minister announced that as matter of policy the PM will be consulted should there ever be a proposal to target any UK Parliamentarian’s communications under a warrant issued by a Secretary of State. This applies to Members of Parliament, members of the House of Lords, the Scottish Parliament, the Northern Ireland Assembly, the Welsh Assembly and UK members of the European Parliament. It applies to all activity authorised by a warrant issued by a Secretary of State: any instance of targeted interception and, electronic surveillance and equipment interference, when undertaken by the Security and Intelligence Agencies. This is in addition to the rigorous safeguards already in the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) and the Code of Practice issued under it which set out a series of robust safeguards for any instance of interception.

    It is long standing policy of successive Governments neither to confirm nor deny any specific activity by the Security and Intelligence Agencies. Under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 it is an offence for anyone to identify an individual interception warrant or an individual interception that takes place.

  • Greg Mulholland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Greg Mulholland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Greg Mulholland on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what representations she has received from civil liberties campaign groups on the operation of and use of data from CCTV cameras with facial recognition and biometric tracking capabilities.

    Mike Penning

    I have received no representations about the use of CCTV cameras with facial recognition and biometric tracking capabilities.

    The use of any CCTV system operating in a public place in England and Wales (whether or not any facial recognition or biometric tracking technology is being used) is subject to the Surveillance Camera Code of Practice, issued as guidance under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. The police, as a relevant authority, are duty bound to have regard to the Code when performing their functions. Any use of such technology for covert investigative purposes by a public authority would be subject to the requirements of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 and its related Code of Practice. Further, the use and disclosure of personal data, such as CCTV images, is generally governed by the Data Protection Act 1998.

    Information on the fields of data which any CCTV system operator may use to identify individuals of interest is not held centrally. Further, any person (including those not suspected of an offence) may make a subject access request to a police force in respect of personal information which is held about them (including CCTV images). In broad terms, pursuant to the Code of Practice on the Management of Police Information (MOPI) and accompanying guidance published by the College of Policing, this should trigger a review of whether or not to delete such material based on an assessment of danger to the public and its value for policing purposes.

    It is the longstanding policy of successive Governments not to comment on intelligence matters.

  • Andy Slaughter – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Andy Slaughter – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andy Slaughter on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the oral evidence given by Ann Beasley, DG Finance and Corporate Services, Ministry of Justice, to the Justice Committee on 13 October 2015, HC 416, Question 30, how many agency staff his Department employed in each of the last five years.

    Mike Penning

    Workforce information including agency staff, interim managers, contractors and consultants for the Ministry of Justice, its agencies and executive non-departmental public bodies is published in the department’s annual accounts. Information for 2011 to 2015 is available at Annex A vi of the 2014/2015 annual report available at:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/434016/moj-annual-report-and-accounts-2014-15.pdf

    Information for the 2010 is available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/217275/moj-annual-report-accounts-2011-12.pdf

    “

  • Stephen Hammond – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Stephen Hammond – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Hammond on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what steps his Department has taken to prepare for the implementation of the proposed General Data Protection Regulation; which non-departmental public bodies (NDPBs) and agencies overseen by his Department will be affected by that Regulation; and what estimate he has made of the potential liability of his Department, its agencies and NDPBs in connection with that proposed Regulation.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    Negotiations on the proposed General Data Protection Regulation are still continuing and our negotiating position has taken into account the likely impact on Government Departments, NDPBs and agencies. Once the outcome of tripartite negotiations between the Council of the European Union, the European Parliament and the Commission are complete, and the Regulation has been adopted, the liabilities will be further assessed. There will then follow a maximum implementation period of two years. Between now and then, Government departments who will be affected by the Regulation are closely involved in work led by the Department for Culture, Media & Sport to consider the implications of the text as it develops through the negotiating process.

  • Carolyn Harris – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Carolyn Harris – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Carolyn Harris on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what recent assessment he has made of the implications for the workload of Jobcentre Plus of providing appropriate advice and support to parents with children aged two, three and four who (a) have never been employed, (b) do not have five A* to C grades at GCSE, (c) have a history of addiction, (d) have mental health problems and (e) were formerly looked-after children.

    Priti Patel

    Jobcentre staff are trained to deal with a wide range of circumstances, offering a personalised approach.

    In readiness for Universal Credit, Work Coaches will be multi skilled so they can work with the person to resolve a variety of issues or barriers preventing them securing employment. This is based on individual need rather than around particular groups or characteristics.

    There has been no specific assessment made of the implications for the workload of Jobcentre Plus of providing appropriate advice and support to parents with children aged two, three and four who (a) have never been employed, (b) do not have five A*-C grades at GCSE, (c) have a history of addiction, (d) have mental health problems and (e) were formerly looked-after children.

  • Andy Slaughter – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Andy Slaughter – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andy Slaughter on 2015-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what his policy is on (a) data protection, (b) sponsorship of the Information Commissioner’s Office and (c) sponsorship of the National Archives.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    Policy responsibility for data protection policy, sponsorship of the Information Commissioner’s Office, and sponsorship of The National Archives transferred from the Ministry of Justice to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, on 17 September. My department is working with the Information Commissioner and other stakeholders to effectively deliver the Government’s objectives in these areas. The National Archives remains a non-ministerial department.

  • Diana Johnson – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Diana Johnson – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Diana Johnson on 2015-10-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many people have qualified for a war pension as a result of contracting Hepatitis C or HIV from an infected blood transfusion while serving in the armed forces.

    Mark Lancaster

    The information is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  • Andrew Rosindell – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Andrew Rosindell – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Rosindell on 2015-10-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what the implications for his Department’s advice on travel to Egypt are of the accidental killing of foreign tourists in that country on 13 September 2015.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    As stated in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) Travel Advice for Egypt, in September 2015 Egyptian security forces mistakenly killed 12 members of a tour group, including 8 Mexicans, in the Western Desert area of Al-Wahat.

    Before the incident, FCO Travel Advice already advised against all but essential travel to this area of the country. After the incident, we made a factual update to the Travel Advice in order to make British Nationals aware of the incident, so they are able to make an informed decision on travel to the area.

    We keep our travel advice under constant review, based on robust and up to date information and analysis from our experts in country.

  • Jamie Reed – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Jamie Reed – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jamie Reed on 2015-10-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps he is taking to improve working conditions for employees in the social care sector.

    Alistair Burt

    The Government has taken a number of measures to improve working conditions for employees in the social care sector.

    The Government has taken action where social care providers have not previously paid the National Minimum Wage, to ensure staff receive the money owed to them and are paid fairly in future. The Government will introduce a National Living Wage from April 2016 to ensure care workers are better paid for the vital work they do. Guidance from Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs has been updated to make it clear when staff must be paid for travelling time and rest breaks.

    The Department continues to work closely with the social care sector to improve skills and is investing funding for training and developing the adult social care workforce.