The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevan Jones on 2014-06-12.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether his Department will issue a formal response to the National Audit Office report, Army 2020, HC 263, published on 11 June 2014.
Mr Mark Francois
The Ministry of Defence will respond to the NAO’s report in line with Government practice for such reports.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Maria Eagle on 2014-04-10.
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, how soon the cage trapping and shooting of badgers was implemented alongside the freeshooting of badgers after the commencement of the pilot badger cull in Gloucestershire in 2013; and what authorisation from the Department was required.
George Eustice
Cage trapping was used from the outset in each of the pilot areas. Under the licence issued to each area, cage trapping and shooting and controlled shooting are both permitted control methods. No further authorisation from the Department was required.
The Guidance issued to Natural England on issuing licenses to kill or take badgers for the purpose of preventing the spread of bovine TB under section 10(2)(a) of the Protection of Badgers Act 1992, and the Government’s policy document on Bovine TB and badger control in England, both state ‘in order to ensure humaneness, only two culling methods will be permitted (which can be used in combination, or as single control methods): i. cage-trapping followed by shooting; and ii. controlled shooting.’ Both of these documents were published on 14th December 2011.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Madeleine Moon on 2014-06-12.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what the anticipated out-turn cost of AFC Harrogate is for financial year 2014-15; and if he will make a statement.
Anna Soubry
Financial data is held from financial year 2007-08 onwards. The Ministry of Defence’s budgetary structure is organised into a number of different Top Level Budget areas. This means that the cost of activities at a single location can often be split between a number of different budgets which are not managed centrally. For example infrastructure costs (including utilities) are managed by the Defence Infrastructure Organisation through contracts which do not split out the costs for individual units operating on a particular site. Similarly, equipment costs are managed across whole fleets of items by Defence Equipment and Support, and not by individual location. For this reason the full running costs of the Infantry Training Centre and the Army Foundation College cannot be provided in the format requested. However the costs attributable to the Army can be provided from financial year 2007-08 onwards.
|
Unit |
2007-08 |
2008-09 |
2009-10 |
2010-11 |
2011-12 |
2012-13 |
2013-14 |
|
£million |
£million |
£million |
£million |
£million |
£million |
£million |
|
|
Army Foundation College |
54.658 |
62.078 |
58.435 |
60.829 |
62.199 |
63.486 |
62.232 |
|
Infantry Training Centre |
83.172 |
90.790 |
104.702 |
81.471 |
103.196 |
105.274 |
93.046 |
The Army’s anticipated outturn for the Army Foundation College Harrogate in 2014-15 is £66.204 million, and for Infantry Training Centre Catterick is £90.793 million.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Rosindell on 2014-04-10.
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what recent discussions he has had with his counterpart in North Korea on freedom of religion.
Mr Hugo Swire
The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right hon. friend the member for Richmond (Yorks) (Mr Hague) has never met his Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) counterpart.
However, the UK takes every opportunity to raise with the DPRK authorities our concerns about their appalling human rights record, not least with regard to freedom of religion or belief. The British Embassy in Pyongyang last raised our concerns with the DPRK Ministry of Foreign Affairs in March 2013. A senior official in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office raised this issue with the North Korean Embassy in February 2014.
We have also raised concerns specifically about recent reports that 33 people have been sentenced to death for alleged contact with Kim Jung-wook (aka Kim Jong-uk), a South Korean arrested by the DPRK authorities last year on suspicion of trying to establish underground churches. We have requested official confirmation of what has happened to the individuals concerned and called on the DPRK to respect the provision in its constitution guaranteeing “freedom of belief in religion”. We also played a leading role in securing a strong resolution at the UN Human Rights Council, calling for accountability for the range of human rights violations documented in the DPRK.
The annual FCO Human rights report, published on 10 April 2014 includes the DPRK as a country of concern. The full report can be found at http://www.hrdreport.fco.gov.uk
“
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Lister of Burtersett on 2014-06-18.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they have taken to monitor the scale and causes of food poverty in the United Kingdom; and what steps they plan to take.
Lord De Mauley
The root causes of household food insecurity are varied and complex. The Government is committed to playing its part in tackling both short and long term challenges. While it is not the Government’s role to set food prices, we work to promote open and competitive markets that help offer the best prices to consumers.
Through Healthy Start the Government provides a nutritional safety net that encourages healthy eating to around half a million pregnant women and children under 4 years old in low income and disadvantaged families throughout the UK. The Government provides free school meals to disadvantaged children, and the Deputy Prime Minister has announced healthy free school meals for all school children in reception, year 1 and year 2 from September 2014. We are reforming the welfare system to make it fairer, more affordable and better able to tackle poverty, unemployment and welfare dependency. We are also providing increased access to jobs through the Government’s efforts to promote growth in the economy.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Bingham on 2014-04-10.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what criteria his Department use to define illness as mental as opposed to physical.
Norman Lamb
The International Classification of Diseases is the standard diagnostic tool for epidemiology, health management and clinical purposes. This includes the analysis of the general health situation of population groups. It is used to monitor the incidence and prevalence of diseases and other health problems.
The Tenth Revision of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems includes in Chapter V a detailed classification of more than 300 mental and behavioural disorders. Its publication follows extensive field-testing by more than 100 clinical and research centres in 40 countries.
Aggregate primary care trust (PCT) expenditure on mental health was £11.28 billion in 2012-13, which is 11.9% of the £94.78 billion total spend by PCTs. The estimate of expenditure on mental health does not include the majority of expenditure on primary care appointments which is recorded as a separate programme category.
It is not possible to provide an estimate of expenditure on physical health. A number of programme categories will have elements of expenditure which could be classified as non-physical, for example, learning disabilities, neurological and social care.
The Department has made no estimate of the cost to the economy of untreated mental illness.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Eames on 2014-06-18.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what discussions they have had with the government of the Republic of Ireland on ways to encourage dialogue among Northern Ireland parties on the issues of flags, parades and dealing with the past.
Baroness Randerson
The Government is in regular contact with the Irish Government at ministerial and official levels on these issues. Both Governments strongly support an intensification of the parties’ negotiations and believe that finding an agreed way forward on these issues would be an important step forward for Northern Ireland.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen O’Brien on 2014-04-10.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, in what circumstances he uses a calculation of the (a) value of preventing a fatality, (b) willingness to pay and (c) cost-per-quality adjusted life year approach to quantify the value of a policy intervention; what other tools he uses to quantify the benefit of a policy intervention; and if he will make a statement.
Dr Daniel Poulter
The Green Book and associated supplementary guidance is publicly available on the Treasury website. It sets out a range of approaches and methods that may be appropriate in a number of different appraisal circumstances.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Murray on 2014-06-18.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what discussions his Department has had with Royal Mail regarding the redirection notices it provides to other postal operators.
Jenny Willott
None. Matters relating to its operations and services, which includes its Redirection Service, are the direct responsibility of Royal Mail’s management.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Alex Cunningham on 2014-04-10.
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if her Department will consider extending the trial advocate scheme to unaccompanied children.
Karen Bradley
In January 2014 the Home Office announced proposals to trial specialist,
independent advocates for trafficked children which is due to begin this
summer. This trial forms part of the Government’s work to eradicate modern day
slavery and as such there are no plans for this trial to be extended to
unaccompanied children.
The Child Trafficking Advocate will be fully independent from the local
authority, but will need to work with the existing structures around the Child
Trafficking Victim, such as children’s services, education, criminal justice
system and immigration system.
The advocate role is intended to deliver the best outcomes for children. The
advocate’s role will include the following activities but this is not an
exhaustive list and we expect the advocate to respond to the specific needs of
the child.
• being a consistent point of contact for the Child Trafficking Victim;
• assisting the local authority to assess the needs of the Child Trafficking
Victim as a victim of trafficking, thereby promoting the safety and wellbeing
of the Child Trafficking Victim (in particular in light of the risk of
re-trafficking);
• making recommendations for referrals to other services (e.g. mental health
services) to ensure the Child Trafficking Victim receives educational, medical,
practical and legal support they need and deserve;
• accompanying the Child Trafficking Victim to certain meetings – e.g. with an
immigration lawyer;
• supporting the Child Trafficking Victim in any age assessment process;
• supporting the Child Trafficking Victim in overcoming language and cultural
barriers;
• supporting witnesses through the criminal justice system;
• supporting looked after children and children in need through the care
system, in particular in safety planning, age assessment and future planning;
• assisting the local authority to plan for the Child Trafficking Victim’s
future and receive any compensation that they may be entitled to;
• helping prevent the Child Trafficking Victim from facing further exploitation
or harm from traffickers (and the risks of going missing);
• providing advice on immigration, criminal justice and welfare matters to the
Child Trafficking Victim and arranging effective legal representation;
• involvement in the key decisions relating to the Child Trafficking Victim
(but final decisions would remain the responsibility of the local authority or
Home Office, where relevant).
The Home Office is commissioning an independent evaluation of the trial which
will report six months after the trial commences. The evaluation will include
the terms of reference for the trial.