Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Tom Watson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Tom Watson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tom Watson on 2014-06-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, if he will restrict the use of fused multi-disciplinary intelligence at the forthcoming Joint and Combined Geo-INT event held by the Defence Geospacial Intelligence and Fusion Centre at RAF Wyton.

    Mr Mark Francois

    Sharing and fusing intelligence in an increasingly complex world is essential if we are to understand threats to UK interests. The Ministry of Defence intelligence community works closely with international partners in the fulfilment of this aim. Any intelligence sharing is conducted in accordance with UK law.

  • Stephen Timms – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Stephen Timms – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Timms on 2014-04-29.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many people have benefited from Youth Contract wage incentives, by region, in each year since the Youth Contract was introduced.

    Esther McVey

    The latest information that we hold on Youth Contract Wage Incentives was published in February 2014 and can be found at the link below. We do not collect payment data in a form that allows it to be reported at regional level.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/283873/youth-contract-feb14.pdf

  • Huw Irranca-Davies – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Huw Irranca-Davies – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Huw Irranca-Davies on 2014-06-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what proportion of mango lots or number of shipments infested by tephriditae were rejected by Fera in each of the last five years; and from which source country each infected shipment was exported.

    Dan Rogerson

    The ban was imposed following persistent interceptions of plant pestson imports of Indian produce into the European Union (EU) and critical reports from the European Commission’s Food and Veterinary Office audits in 2010 and 2013. Despite assurances from India in response to these reports the level of interceptions remained high. The EU’s decision to introduce a ban was therefore fully justified and supported by all Member States including the UK, in line with our policy of strengthening plant health controls. Therefore, no alternatives to a ban were considered by Defra.

    Protecting plant health is a key Defra objective. Plant pests and diseases such as those intercepted from India in recent years can cause serious damage to the UK glasshouse industry which is worth over £300 million per annum. However, I am aware of the importance of the mango trade and Defra officials are liaising with the Indian High Commission on what support the UK can offer to India to help it ensure compliance with EU import requirements.

    The following table shows the number of consignments of mangoes imported into the UK in the last five years which were infested with Tephriditae (and therefore rejected) by country of origin. The European Commission is considering similar measures to those taken against India for other countries with high levels of interceptions of plant pests. Such consideration takes account of findings from all Member States, and covers all plant commodities and all pests identified.

    Year

    Country of origin

    No. of consignments imported into the UK

    No. of consignments infected with Tephritidae

    2010

    Dominican Republic

    351

    1

    India

    1977

    1

    Jamaica

    228

    3

    Pakistan

    3302

    6

    2011

    Dominican Republic

    417

    2

    India

    1836

    11

    Jamaica

    262

    3

    Pakistan

    3690

    19

    Puerto Rico

    1

    1

    Sri Lanka

    144

    1

    Uganda

    138

    1

    2012

    Bangladesh

    146

    1

    Brazil

    445

    1

    Costa Rica

    70

    2

    Dominican Republic

    606

    18

    Ghana

    628

    15

    India

    3448

    23

    Jamaica

    332

    24

    Kenya

    2044

    4

    Pakistan

    5128

    81

    Philippines

    12

    2

    Sri Lanka

    189

    10

    St Lucia

    50

    1

    Thailand

    1050

    3

    Uganda

    104

    2

    2013

    Brazil

    316

    3

    Dominican Republic

    756

    16

    Ghana

    357

    4

    Guinea

    7

    1

    India

    3563

    13

    Jamaica

    516

    17

    Kenya

    1654

    17

    Pakistan

    5910

    47

    Puerto Rico

    104

    1

    Sri Lanka

    111

    3

    U A E

    1

    1

    Vietnam

    77

    1

    2014 (to 18/06/14)

    Brazil

    106

    1

    Dominican Republic

    420

    3

    Ghana

    271

    1

    India

    401

    1

    Jamaica

    464

    9

    Kenya

    698

    7

    Mexico

    61

    1

    Senegal

    4

    1

    Sri Lanka

    69

    3

    Source: Fera and Europhyt

  • Mike Hancock – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Mike Hancock – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mike Hancock on 2014-04-29.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what estimate he has made of the number of deaths in (a) Portsmouth, (b) Hampshire and (c) the South East attributed to air pollution in each of the last 10 years.

    Jane Ellison

    Estimates of the fraction of mortality in English local authority areas and regions in 2010 and 2011 attributable to long-term exposure to particulate air pollution arising from human activities are published by Public Health England (PHE) as one of the indicators in the Department of Health’s Public Health Outcomes Framework. For Portsmouth Unitary Authority this figure was 5.9% in both 2010 and 2011; for Hampshire County Council this figure was 5.3% in 2010 and 5.4% in 2011; and for the South East this figure was 5.5% in both 2010 and 2011.

    PHE has also published mortality estimates for 2010 as attributable deaths[1] and associated years of life lost. The estimated mortality burdens attributable to long-term exposure to particulate air pollution arising from human activities were: 95 attributable deaths and 1059 associated years of life lost in Portsmouth Unitary Authority; 601 attributable deaths and 6211 associated years of life lost in Hampshire County Council; and 4,034 attributable deaths and 41,729 associated years of life lost in the South East.

    [1] The ‘number of deaths’ attributable to a risk factor is a metric which is widely used in communicating about public health risks. Nonetheless, a calculated figure of ‘attributable deaths’ does not represent the number of individuals whose length of life has been shortened by air pollution. Long-term exposure to air pollution is understood to be a contributory factor to deaths from respiratory and, particularly, cardiovascular disease, ie unlikely to be the sole cause of deaths of individuals. This means that it is likely that air pollution contributes a smaller amount to the deaths of a larger number of exposed individuals rather than being solely responsible for a number of deaths equivalent to the calculated figure of ‘attributable deaths’. The distribution of the mortality effect within the population is unknown.

  • Matthew Offord – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Matthew Offord – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Matthew Offord on 2014-06-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what his priorities are for renegotiating UK membership of the EU.

    Mr David Lidington

    The Government’s priorities are to reform the EU so that it is more flexible, competitive and democratically accountable. We want to see further deepening of the Single European Market, especially in services; an ambitious and sustained drive to cut red tape, and successful free trade negotiations with the United States, Japan and other countries. We are also seeking greater powers for groups of national parliaments to block or review EU legislation; an end to benefit tourism, and the development of Economic and Monetary Union in a way that safeguards the interests of countries which have chosen not to join the Euro. The Government has already made progress in delivering reform, including cutting the EU budget for the first time and securing reforms of the Common Fisheries Policy that include a ban on discards and a shift to the regional and local management of fisheries.

  • Nicholas Brown – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Nicholas Brown – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nicholas Brown on 2014-04-29.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what guidance his Department issues on what criteria schools should use when deciding whether to employ an individual who does not possess a formal teaching qualification as a teacher.

    Mr David Laws

    The Department for Education does not issue guidance prescribing the criteria that schools should use when employing teaching staff.

    The latest school workforce statistics (November 2013) show that the overwhelming majority (96%) of teachers in state-funded schools hold qualified teacher status.

    Headteachers are best-placed to make decisions about the qualifications, skills and experience they need in their teaching staff. They are held to account for those decisions through inspection and the publication of school performance data.

  • Simon Burns – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Simon Burns – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Simon Burns on 2014-06-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what progress has been made on the development of the HIV/STI national clinical audit; and if he will make a statement.

    Jane Ellison

    The Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership (HQIP) commissions and manages the National Clinical Audit and Patient Outcomes Programme on behalf of NHS England. The HQIP has asked for expressions of interest from suitable providers who are able to design and complete a one year feasibility study to inform any future national clinical audit of HIV and sexually transmitted infections. The contract for the work will be awarded this summer. NHS England cannot disclose the number of expressions of interest that have been received at this stage as this is commercially sensitive information.

  • Fiona Bruce – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Fiona Bruce – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Fiona Bruce on 2014-04-29.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 7 April 2014, Official Report, column 42W, on In vitro fertilisation, (a) what the evidential basis is for his statement that no genomic DNA is found in the mitochondria but only in the cell nucleus, (b) what account he took of the data on the human genome available in the ENSEMBL and OMIM databases in preparing that statement and (c) what genetic modifications applied to the eggs or embryos would prevent any nuclear DNA from the eggs or embryo donor being inherited by the resulting child.

    Jane Ellison

    We have been advised by the Wellcome Trust that whole mitochondrial DNA genome sequencing has revealed no evidence of nuclear genomic DNA inside mitochondria and data on the human genome available in the ENSEMBL and OMIM databases confirms that there is no nuclear genomic DNA in the mitochondria.

    Inheritance of nuclear DNA from the donor egg is prevented in the Maternal Spindle Transfer technique through the removal of the spindle from the donor egg. Given that the nuclear DNA in the form of condensed chromosomes is attached to the spindle, nuclear genomic DNA from the donor will be removed and not inherited by the resulting child. Techniques that allow the visualisation of condensed chromosomes in eggs are used to ensure that all the chromosomes are removed.

    For embryos used in the Pronuclear Transfer technique, the nuclear genomic DNA is enclosed within the nuclear membrane of the maternal (egg-derived) and paternal (sperm-derived) pronuclei. The donor nuclear genomic DNA will be removed when the pronuclei are removed.

    There is no universally agreed definition of genetic modification in humans. The Government has adopted a working definition for the purpose of taking forward the draft mitochondrial donation regulations, that genetic modification involves the germ-line modification of nuclear DNA that can be passed on to future generations. Therefore, the Government does not accept that mitochondrial donation amounts to genetic modification.

  • Andrew Percy – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Andrew Percy – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Percy on 2014-06-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, on what criteria his Department differentiates a food for special medical purposes and a food supplement.

    Jane Ellison

    The Department’s role and the definition of these products are set out in legislation. Information on this legislation is available at:

    www.gov.uk/government/publications/food-supplements-guidance-and-faqs

    www.gov.uk/government/publications/infant-formula-and-foods-for-particular-nutritional-uses-parnuts-notification-requirements

    Local authorities are responsible for enforcement of the legislation and provide advice to businesses on compliance with legislation.

  • Peter Luff – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Peter Luff – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Peter Luff on 2014-04-29.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, if he will provide an estimate of the costs of redoubling the section of the North Cotswold line between (a) Charlbury to Wolvercote Junction and (b) Evesham and Norton Junction.

    Stephen Hammond

    The provision of a cost estimate for further redoubling of the North Cotswold line would normally be sought from Network Rail only when a business case is identified for the extra benefits this enhancement would provide. No business case has yet been identified and so a cost estimate is not being sought. Network Rail is investigating the opportunities for line speed improvements on the route to reduce journey times.