The below Parliamentary question was asked by John Howell on 2015-02-11.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what the cost was to the NHS of paying doctors who had been excluded from practice on full pay in the most recent year for which figures are available.
Dr Daniel Poulter
This information is not collected centrally.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Dan Jarvis on 2015-02-11.
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what estimate he has made of the average number of days taken by coroners to release the body of a homicide victim back to the family for burial in each year since 2010.
Simon Hughes
Information on the average number of days taken by coroners to release the body of a homicide victim is not held centrally. This information could only be obtained by inspection of individual case files at each coroner’s office before collating the information, and this could only be done at disproportionate cost.
In July 2013 we implemented reforms in the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 together with new coroner regulations and rules aimed at improving standards and achieving greater consistency in coroner services. Regulation 20 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013 requires a coroner to release the body for burial or cremation as soon as is reasonably practicable. Where this cannot be done within 28 days, the coroner must notify the next of kin or personal representative of the reason for the delay.
In February 2014 we also published the statutory “Guide to Coroner Services” which explains the standards of service that can be expected during a coroner’s investigation and what action can be taken if these are not met.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Paul Flynn on 2014-07-16.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, on what dates the no-fly zones around nuclear facilities have been violated since May 2010; and what steps his Department has taken to ensure such violations do not occur in future.
Mr Robert Goodwill
The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) maintains a complaint log for three years. Since June 2011, it has received 12 complaints from onsite Security Guards about aircraft which they believe may have overflown their respective sites at low level. The dates of these incidents were:
| 12/06/2011 | 25/07/2012 | 25/08/2013 |
| 14/06/2011 | 02/01/2013 | 09/09/2013 |
| 24/06/2011 | 14/01/2013 | 03/10/2013 |
| 17/08/2011 | 15/08/2013 | 21/05/2014 |
All these recorded incidents were investigated, but due to a lack of evidence the only case which led to a successful prosecution occurred on 25 August 2013 and involved the use of a small unmanned aerial vehicle.
The need to report to the CAA all aircraft which appear to be low flying is written in the nuclear site’s security procedures manual. The successful prosecution demonstrates that the CAA investigates all such reported incidents and that it will take enforcement action when there is sufficient evidence available. In addition, both the CAA and the Department for Energy and Climate Change seek to learn what they can from the investigations into reported incidents.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2014-07-16.
To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, how the £1 million pledged by the UK to the UN’s Safe Schools Initiative is being used to ensure that children are being protected.
Lynne Featherstone
DFID is providing technical support to the design and development of the Safe Schools Initiative, as well as working through our existing education programmes in northern Nigeria to ensure safe access to learning. The Safe Schools Initiative was launched in May. The Government of Nigeria are leading on implementation. The aim is to provide a response for the protection of schools and the prevention of future attacks on schools. It will include a combination of school-based and community interventions to create safer environments in which schools can operate, improve school security measures and support provision of safe opportunities for learning.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Grahame M. Morris on 2014-07-16.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, which senior medical and administrative staff responsible for the operation of the Gamma Knife Centre at St Bartholomew’s Hospital Trust are employees of (a) the Trust and (b) the Hospital Corporation of America.
Jane Ellison
We are advised that three senior neurosurgery consultants are responsible for the Gamma Knife operation at St Bartholomew’s Hospital, along with one neuro interventional radiologist and two clinical oncologists. All are employed by Barts Health NHS Trust, and are overseen by the Clinical Director for Neurosciences and the Group Director for Emergency Care and Acute Medicine, both of whom are clinicians.
HCA employs one senior administrator, the Acting Chief Operating Officer for the Harley Street Clinic, along with the physicist and nursing staff and an administration co-ordinator who work in the Gamma Knife centre at St Bartholomew’s Hospital.
We are advised that HCA owns the Gamma Knife based at St Bartholomew’s Hospital and that HCA pays a rental fee to Barts Health NHS Trust.
We understand that, as the Gamma Knife was purchased by HCA, St Bartholomew’s Hospital (then part of Barts and The London NHS Trust) incurred minimal set up costs for the establishment of the service in 2009. This included costs for associated building work to accommodate the facility.
Gamma Knife surgery is funded by NHS England as the commissioner for all specialist services. We are advised that Barts Health NHS Trust receives approximately £9,200 per patient from NHS England and that HCA charges Barts Health £7,310 per patient treated by the Gamma Knife facility at St Bartholomew’s Hospital.
If the hon. Member wishes to obtain further information about the Gamma Knife facility at St Bartholomew’s Hospital, he may wish to contact Barts Health NHS Trust directly.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Charlotte Leslie on 2014-07-16.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, whether the Care Quality Commission look at (a) current and (b) historic patient files and consent forms.
Norman Lamb
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is the independent regulator of health and adult social care providers in England and has a key responsibility in the overall assurance of safety and quality of health and adult social care services.
The CQC has provided the following information.
CQC looks at current and historic patient records when appropriate in order to assess the quality and safety of services registered with it. Patient records are commonly reviewed during CQC inspections, in compliance with the Data Protection Act, to see how well care at a service is planned, delivered and reviewed, and form an integral part of judging the quality of care. In order to protect the confidentiality of people who use services, and to comply with legal requirements, CQC will only look at patient files where it has decided that it is both necessary and proportionate to do so for the purpose of CQC’s regulatory functions. This approach is set out in CQC’s Code of Practice on Confidential Personal Information and in guidance for inspectors on using CQC’s powers to access health and care records.
The Code of Practice on Confidential Personal Information is available on CQC’s website at :
www.cqc.org.uk/sites/default/files/documents/20121105_code_of_practice_on_cpi.pdf
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Luciana Berger on 2014-07-16.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how much his Department allocated to National Breastfeeding Week in each year since 2010.
Dr Daniel Poulter
The last year for which the Department provided funding for National Breastfeeding Week was 2010, when the contribution was £110,000.
Since 2011 the Department has collaborated with key partners including the Royal College of Midwives, Public Health England and UNICEF UK to promote National Breastfeeding Week through material and information on the NHS Choices website that can be used locally.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nigel Dodds on 2014-07-16.
To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what steps she is taking to ensure that UK assistance to the Democratic Republic of Congo is not misused or misappropriated.
Justine Greening
DFID takes seriously tackling the misuse or misappropriation of UK Aid, and has a range of robust controls and measures in place to safeguard the UK taxpayers’ money.
In the DRC this includes regular rigorous risk assessments of the fiduciary environment to determine the way in which UK Aid is provided. Currently this means DFID funds in DRC are channelled through United Nations agencies and NGOs, rather than provided directly to the government. All partners selected are subject to pre-funding due diligence checks and regular scrutiny during implementation.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sadiq Khan on 2014-07-16.
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment his Department has made of the likely effect on prison numbers of Clause 25 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill.
Mike Penning
Knife crime is a scourge, and this Government has already introduced new offences of threatening with a knife in a public place or school in the Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. We are also legislating in the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill to place statutory restrictions on the use of adult cautions for certain offences, which includes knife possession.
Clause 25 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill was introduced by back bench amendment in the House of Commons. On the 17 June the House of Commons passed the clause into the Bill at Report stage. The clause is now being considered in the House of Lords. We will publish an assessment of the impact of this clause on prison numbers, if it were to become law, in due course.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Pete Wishart on 2014-07-16.
To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland, how many officials of the Office of the Advocate-General for Scotland have been allocated to work on the Scotland Analysis programme; and if he will estimate the cost to the public purse of that work.
David Mundell
Work on the Scotland analysis programme has been undertaken in the course of normal business across Government by policy and legal experts in relevant areas. In the Office of the Advocate General, any work relating to the Scotland analysis programme and any associated costs have been absorbed by existing teams within the Office of the Advocate General in addition to their day-to-day responsibilities and from existing budgets. Therefore there have been no additional costs involved in work of the Office of the Advocate General on the programme.