UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Jim Shannon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Jim Shannon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Shannon on 2016-03-01.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps he is taking to ensure that most up-to-date treatments for women with pelvic floor related urinary conditions will be available on the NHS.

    Jane Ellison

    All treatments which are set out in the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence clinical guidelines for pelvic floor urinary conditions are available on the National Health Service.

    The guidelines can be found here:

    https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg171/chapter/1-recommendations.

    NHS England published new guidance on 16 November 2015 to help improve the care and experience of people with continence issues. This includes the most up to date evidence to support commissioners and providers. The guidance can be found on NHS England’s website and accessed via the following link:

    https://www.england.nhs.uk/2015/11/16/continence-care/

    “

  • Fiona Bruce – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Fiona Bruce – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Fiona Bruce on 2016-04-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the potential effect of introducing non-invasive prenatal testing on the prevalence of sex-selective abortions.

    Ben Gummer

    The UK National Screening Committee which advises Ministers and the National Health Service in all four countries about all aspects of screening policy has conducted a full review of the published scientific and cost evidence relating to Non-Invasive Pre-Natal Testing (NIPT) as a screening test for Down’s, Edwards’ and Patau’s syndromes. On 15 January 2016, the Committee announced its recommendation that NIPT should be introduced as an additional test into NHS Fetal Anomaly Screening Programme as part of an evaluation. This is because the evidence suggests that NIPT is much more accurate than the current testing used in screening and can substantially reduce the number of pregnant women needing an invasive test, which carries a high risk of miscarriage. Ministers are currently considering this recommendation.

    The possible introduction of NIPT into the NHS Fetal Anomaly Screening Programme does not fundamentally alter the choices presented to prospective parents, or the options and choices available when testing identifies a feotus with a syndrome. Therefore, no assessment has been made of the impact of NIPT on the number of abortions.

    NIPT testing as part of the NHS Foetal Anomaly Screening Programme will not be used to determine the sex of the foetus. Abortion on the grounds of gender alone is illegal.

  • Nicholas Soames – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Nicholas Soames – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nicholas Soames on 2016-05-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, with reference to paragraph 3.2 of his Department’s document, Implementing the replacement for the Horserace Betting Levy, published in March 2016, what progress has been made on the independent report on the value of the common interest between betting and racing; and when he expects to publish the findings of that report.

    David Evennett

    The rate payable by gambling operators will be informed by this independent economic analysis of the funding of horseracing and further discussion with the betting and racing industries. We will be consulting on the findings of the report with both industries within the next few weeks and intend to publish the report in due course.

  • Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-06-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to the Answer of 20 June 2016 to Question 40384, on Govia Thameslink Railway, whether Ministers requested a copy of the modelling analysis after those discussions; whether minutes were taken of those discussions; what questions Ministers asked during those discussions; and if he will make a statement.

    Claire Perry

    Following the disruption to rail services at London Bridge early in 2015 I held discussions with Network Rail to understand the root cause and seek reassurance as to how to prevent similar occurrences. My officials subsequently discussed my concerns about the modelling analysis with Network Rail.

  • Kate Osamor – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Kate Osamor – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kate Osamor on 2016-09-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many detainees who have medical evidence that they are vulnerable persons have suffered (a) state and (b) non-state violence.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    Information on the reasons for a claim for asylum is not readily accessible from central statistical records and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost through a manual search of individual case files.

  • Lord Pendry – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Lord Pendry – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Pendry on 2015-11-11.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the allegations directed at the leadership of the International Association of Athletics Federations in the light of the World Anti-Doping Agency report on non-compliance and widespread doping in Russian athletics.

    Baroness Neville-Rolfe

    The International Association of Athletics Federation’s (IAAF) near unanimous vote to suspend Russian athletes from all competition reflected the worldwide reaction to the Independent Commission’s report to the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA).

    Russia, the IAAF and WADA must now work together, to not only resolve the findings within the report, but to also re-establish the trust of clean athletes and spectators.

  • Kate Osamor – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Kate Osamor – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kate Osamor on 2015-12-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, if he will make representations to the Turkish government about the use of curfew, martial law and the deployment of the military in (a) Cizre and Silvan and (b) other mainly Kurdish towns.

    Mr David Lidington

    We welcome the visit on 15-16 October of Turkey’s national human rights body to Cizre and Sirnak to conduct analysis and research on the recent events there. We continue to monitor the human rights situation in Turkey closely and raise concerns regularly with the Turkish authorities.

  • Greg Mulholland – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Greg Mulholland – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Greg Mulholland on 2016-01-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many Tier 2 visas were (a) applied for and (b) awarded to (i) Bangladeshis, (ii) Indians and (iii) Pakistanis in each year since such visas were introduced.

    James Brokenshire

    The information requested is given in the following tables.

    The latest quarterly Home Office immigration statistics on entry clearance visas are published in ‘Immigration Statistics, April-June 2015’, available from the Library of the House and from the Home Office website at:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/migration-statistics

  • Jim Shannon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Jim Shannon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Shannon on 2016-02-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, when he plans to make available on the NHS less invasive treatment for inflamed pancreas conditions.

    Jane Ellison

    Pancreatitis (an inflammation of the pancreas) may either be acute or chronic. Chronic pancreatitis is usually the result of repeated acute episodes of the condition. If a person has suspected acute pancreatitis, urgent admission to secondary care is required. Initial treatment may include pain relief, intravenous fluids and antibiotics for treatment of associated cholangitis (an infection of the biliary tract) or other acute infections.

    The management of chronic pancreatitis is usually carried out in secondary care, although the primary care healthcare professional may have a role in the provision of adequate pain relief, screening for diabetes (a possible complication), providing general lifestyle advice and support and referring or admitting patients to secondary care if they develop complication.

    Surgical intervention may be required in particularly severe cases of the condition. This may involve the removal of: inflamed sections of the pancreas; pancreatic tissue that has died as a result of infection; gallstones or the entire gallbladder; pseudocysts (sacs of fluid) which can develop on the pancreas; and, in particularly severe cases, the entire pancreas. Whilst some of these interventions may be minimally invasive, others will require more extensive surgical treatment.

    The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has published Clinical Knowledge Summaries on both acute and chronic pancreatitis. They are available at the following links:

    cks.nice.org.uk/pancreatitis-chronic#!scenario

    cks.nice.org.uk/pancreatitis-acute

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

    David Nuttall – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Nuttall on 2016-03-01.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will make it his policy to commission an independent assessment of the effect of any new tobacco control measures on small businesses prior to their introduction.

    Jane Ellison

    The Department assesses the impact of all proposed measures before laying legislation using standard government methodology. These assessments are set out in Impact Assessments which are scrutinised by the Regulatory Policy Committee before publication alongside the Statutory Instrument. Impact Assessments specifically look at the impacts on small and micro businesses. A number of the tobacco measures contain commitments to further review the impact of the legislation within five years of them coming into force.

    The Department assesses the impact of tobacco control measures on an ongoing basis as it develops policy and considers new measures. In September 2013, the Department published An Audit of the impact of the Department of Health’s Regulations upon business. A copy of the report is attached. The Audit report covered all regulations for which the Department has responsibility believed to have a potential cost to business, including those relating to tobacco control. As advised in the report, there is a robust cost-benefit case for the tobacco control regulations considered and experience shows that initiatives to reduce smoking prevalence work best in combination, with cumulative effects over time.