Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Lord Palmer – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Palmer – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Palmer on 2014-06-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the Chantler Review’s suggestion that there is a spillover effect, whereby the branding of consumer goods intended for adult consumption may also appeal to young people; and what assessment they have made of the implications for consumer goods other than tobacco that might be deemed to put children at risk.

    Earl Howe

    Tobacco is treated uniquely in regulatory terms, because it is a uniquely harmful consumer good. All smoking is addictive and harmful to health. Around half of all regular smokers are eventually killed by a smoking-related illness, and on average, smokers who die from a smoking-related illness lose around 16 years of life. Smoking is the primary cause of preventable morbidity and premature death, accounting for almost 80,000 deaths in England each year, some 18% of all deaths of adults aged 35 and over.

    Regulatory controls on tobacco are commensurate with the potential harm to the health of smokers and others that it can cause. Over the past decade in particular, tobacco has become increasingly regulated and controlled as further evidence about the harm to health from smoking has emerged. Tobacco, therefore, is subject to greater levels of regulation than other consumer products.

  • Lord Beecham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Lord Beecham – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Beecham on 2014-06-09.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether, in the event of a rise in the anticipated costs of community rehabilitation companies emerging from the bidding process, the Secretary of State will delay the process; and, if so, what estimated impact on the National Probation Service would trigger such a decision.

    Lord Faulks

    The Transforming Rehabilitation Programme is opening up the market to a diverse range of new providers, so that we can harness the best that the private and voluntary sectors has to offer to reduce reoffending. We are on track to award and mobilise Payment by Results (PbR) contracts for offender rehabilitation services across England and Wales by 2015. Bids to run the Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs) have yet to be submitted, but are expected by the end of June 2014. We currently have strong, competitive bidder interest across all Contract Package Areas, and we do not expect rising costs to be an issue.

  • Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2014-06-09.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made as to which alternative facilities will be used by those who currently use Worcester Walk-In Health Centre if it is closed.

    Earl Howe

    The reconfiguration of local health services is a matter for the National Health Service. All service changes should be led by clinicians and be in the best interests of patients, not driven from the top down.

    We are aware that the local consultation on the Worcestershire Urgent Care Strategy closed on 9 April 2014. The clinical commissioning groups in Worcestershire are now considering the responses. No decisions have yet been made.

  • Lord Berkeley – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lord Berkeley – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Berkeley on 2014-06-09.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the switch data encryption system proposed by HS2 Ltd for communication with petitioners against the High Speed Rail (London–West Midlands) Bill allows petitioners to copy, circulate and otherwise communicate as a normal email; and whether any tracking or monitoring of such communications will be available to HS2 through the system.

    Baroness Kramer

    Egress is an email system used by many government departments, NHS trusts and local authorities, including the London Borough of Camden, for communicating externally. It does not provide HS2 Ltd with any abilities to track or monitor emails sent by others. Petitioners will use Egress to download their petition response document; it will not be attached to an email. HS2 Ltd will only be able to confirm if and when the Petition Response Document (PRD) has been downloaded. Once downloaded, the PRD can be saved and copied, and circulated to others, subject to the constraints of email service providers on large files.

  • Lord Temple-Morris – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Lord Temple-Morris – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Temple-Morris on 2014-06-09.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many parents have been imprisoned for non-payment of fines in respect of taking their school-age children on holiday during term time.

    Lord Nash

    Parents who have been issued a penalty notice (fine) for failing to secure their child’s regular attendance at school cannot be imprisoned for not paying the fine. However, if a parent knowingly and deliberately takes their child on holiday during term time (without a leave of absence granted by the school) they could face a term of imprisonment for doing so if they are prosecuted under the substantive offence set out in section 444(1A) of the Education Act 1996 (the Act). It will be a matter for the prosecuting authority (the Local Authority) to decide on the particular facts and circumstances of the case whether to bring formal proceedings and under what offence.

  • Robert Buckland – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Robert Buckland – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Robert Buckland on 2014-06-09.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what assessment he has made of the benefits of future mergers of public service ombudsman services in England.

    Mr Francis Maude

    The Government is considering recent reports of the Public Administration Select Committee (PASC) into how complaints about public services are handled. As part of this, the Cabinet Office is working to investigate further how public services can make best use of complaints and also to take a wider look at the role and powers of the Public Sector Ombudsmen. The Government will respond to the PASC in due course. I am happy to discuss this matter further with my Hon. Friend.

    The annual reports and accounts of the public service ombudsmen in the UK provide details of their performance over the past 12 months including information about complaints received.

  • Philip Davies – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Philip Davies – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Philip Davies on 2014-06-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many prisoners who breached their temporary licence conditions in each of the last three years were granted further release on temporary licence.

    Jeremy Wright

    An answer to this question could only be provided at disproportionate cost. It would entail detailed checking of over 1,100 individual prisoner records relating to those who had breached conditions attached to their temporary release during this period in order to see whether they had subsequently been granted further temporary release.

    The number of temporary release failures remains very low, less that one failure in every 1,000 releases and only around five failures in every 100,000 releases involve alleged offending; but we are keenly aware of understandable public concern about temporary release failures. Towards the end of May we accelerated our plans to improve release on temporary licence (ROTL) policy and practice. We brought forward aspects of the new “restricted ROTL” approach for serious offenders to safeguard the public, and the requirement that no ROTL can take place without a clearly defined, legitimate purpose. In addition, those who have failed to return from or offended on temporary release, or who have absconded or escaped from custody during the current sentence will now be refused temporary release in the absence of exceptional circumstances.

  • Mark Lazarowicz – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Mark Lazarowicz – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mark Lazarowicz on 2014-06-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what funding his Department received from the European Commission for projects relating to bees in 2013-14.

    Dan Rogerson

    In 2013/14 €116,760.90 of funding was provided by the European Commission for research projects relating to bees.

  • Tom Greatrex – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Tom Greatrex – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tom Greatrex on 2014-06-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what assessment he has made of the report, Merits of UK Coal State Aid Application submitted to his Department on 9 May 2014 by Orion Innovations.

    Michael Fallon

    I asked officials to review the report and discuss it with the author. This included a discussion on the background to the report and an explanation from Orion of the methodology and conclusions made in the report. Furthermore, they questioned the detail of the analysis, the robustness of the assumptions and areas for further development. Their conclusions are that the report is a high level analysis of the key issues and that it would require significant further work, diligence and validation of assumptions and contingency. It also requires enhancements to methodology, for example, to model the phasing of cash flows and include time value of money considerations and appropriate returns to capital. Orion has noted that the work was completed on a short timeframe and that they would be open to carrying out further work if a mandate could be agreed. On this basis, it is not possible to draw conclusions sufficient to inform any investment decision.

  • Gareth Thomas – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Gareth Thomas – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gareth Thomas on 2014-06-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what estimate he has made of the number of European Economic Area nationals who received NHS treatment in (a) 2010-11, (b) 2011-12, (c) 2012-13 and (d) 2013-14; and if he will make a statement.

    Jane Ellison

    The following information is not held by the Department:

    – income health trusts in each region or nation of the United Kingdom received for the cost of treating European Economic Area (EEA) nationals;

    – income each NHS trust in each region of England claimed back for the cost of treating EEA nationals;

    – the number of EEA nationals who received NHS treatment;

    – the cost of treating EEA nationals who received NHS treatment in each region of the UK.

    Claims to and from EEA countries are managed centrally by the Department on behalf of the whole of the UK. Income claimed from EEA countries is based on both data collected from trusts and arrangements in place with other EEA countries under bilateral agreements.

    The Department does hold information on claims to the UK from other EEA countries for healthcare costs. However, claims to the UK from other EEA countries are not based on nationality – they are based on whether the UK is judged to be responsible for someone’s healthcare costs, for example due to residency in the UK or, for state pensioners, someone with a UK state pension who has retired to a different EEA country. It is therefore not possible to provide a breakdown of costs based on UK nationality.