UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Joan Ryan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Joan Ryan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Joan Ryan on 2016-06-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps his Department is taking to ensure that the emergency department at North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust is able to guarantee patient safety; and if he will make a statement.

    Ben Gummer

    NHS England is the responsible organisation for emergency planning and resilience in London. As such, it has well-established contingency plans in place which take effect in the event of emergency departments (EDs) having to temporarily reduce their scope of operations in order to ensure the best standards of patient care, our central concern.

    As the Rt. hon. Member is aware, following an unannounced inspection by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) at North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust, the CQC issued a Warning Notice. The Warning Notice, published on 6 June 2016, requires the trust to significantly improve the treatment of patients attending its emergency department.

    The CQC is responsible for assessing whether the Trust is providing the right standard of care and ensuring that improvement plans meet the level of improvement required.

    NHS Improvement is working alongside NHS England and the local health and care system to ensure that the Trust has the resources it needs to ensure that patients receive safe, high quality care.

    We are informed by NHS Improvement that, in order to address the poor performance at the Trust’s ED, it has devised a plan titled Safer, Faster, Better. This is a whole system programme with the primary objective of improving performance, patient experience and outcomes for patients.

  • Jon Trickett – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Jon Trickett – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jon Trickett on 2016-09-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the implications for his policies of the Care Quality Commission report of December 2015, on Pinderfields Hospital; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    These are matters for the local National Health Service. It is the responsibility of the Mid Yorkshire NHS Trust Board, its commissioners and regulators, and of the clinicians who work at the Trust, to ensure that the expected standards of care quality are being met.

    Patients at Mid Yorkshire NHS Trust deserve the highest quality care and there is no excuse for services to fall short of the standards. The Trust must take the necessary steps to improve its safety and leadership with the support of NHS Improvement.

  • Graham Allen – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Graham Allen – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Graham Allen on 2016-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will estimate the annual cost to the public purse of (a) extending free dental check-ups to people aged 60 and over and (b) exempting people aged over 60 from all dental charges.

    David Mowat

    The table below shows the estimated cost of extending exemption to National Health Service dental charges for paying patients under the age of 21, age 60 and over and for examinations only for patients aged 60 and over.

    Age Group

    Estimated Cost

    People aged 18-21

    £15.7 million

    People aged 60 and over

    £329.2 million

    People aged 60 and over (for check-ups only)

    £25.1 million

    This data is based on FP17s submitted to the NHS Business Services Authority for general dentistry courses of treatment completed between April 2015 and March 2016. It shows the amount of patient revenue, based on 2016/17 charge levels, which would be foregone should the currently fee paying groups be made exempt.

    Dentists are required to submit a form called an FP17 for every course of NHS dental treatment they provide. The figures assume no increase in the number of patients currently accessing NHS dental care, in reality additional patients may seek NHS treatment if they were to become exempt.

  • Kate Green – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Kate Green – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kate Green on 2015-11-06.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what steps his Department is taking to implement the family test.

    Brandon Lewis

    Officials in my Department have liaised with the Department for Work and Pensions as the lead Department for the Family Test to embed it into the policy process. This has included training officials on applying the Test and disseminating relevant evidence, learning materials and best practice.

  • Emily Thornberry – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Emily Thornberry – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Emily Thornberry on 2015-12-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, how many single people under the age of 35 with no dependent children were accepted by local authorities as (a) homeless and (b) homeless and in priority need in each of the last six years.

    Mr Marcus Jones

    The information requested is not held centrally.

  • Hilary Benn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Hilary Benn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Hilary Benn on 2016-01-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what recent reports he has received on fighting in Diyarbakir, Turkey, and surrounding areas.

    Mr Philip Hammond

    I receive regular reports of developments in Diyarbakir and the whole of south east Turkey. The fighting in the region is extremely concerning. The Sur district in Diyarbakir is currently under curfew as part of the government’s response to terrorist attacks from the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). The UK condemns these attacks as we condemn all terrorism. PKK violence must end and we support a return to the peace process, in the interests of Turkey and the region. We stand ready to help in any way we can. I passed my condolences for victims of a recent PKK attack in Diyarbakir to the Prime Minister of Turkey during my 14 January visit to Ankara.

  • Stephen Doughty – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Stephen Doughty – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Doughty on 2016-02-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what the county of origin of manufacture is of the PCS clothing solution.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    The Ministry of Defence (MOD) does not hold a list of countries used by our prime contractors to manufacture Personal Clothing Solution garments. The MOD is required to comply with all legislation and relevant Government policy, and, subject to these conditions, the MOD does not restrict the geographical location of manufacture.

  • Rebecca Long Bailey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Rebecca Long Bailey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Rebecca Long Bailey on 2016-03-01.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to the Government’s memorandum submitted to the Lords Secondary Legislation Committee on 28 January, how many of the 800,000 tax credit claimants with a reduced award to an income rise above the new level of disregard are women.

    Damian Hinds

    From April 2016, the income rise disregard – the amount by which a tax credit claimant’s income can increase within a year before their tax credit award is adjusted – will be reduced from £5,000 to £2,500.

    The only people who will be affected by this will be those who see an increase in their in-year income by more than £2,500. There will be no net cash losers because their income will have increased.

    In the subsequent tax year, a claimant’s tax credits award will be calculated in the usual way, using their full annual income for the previous year to determine their tax credit entitlement. This means that after the change in the tax year, whether the claimant’s increase in income was above or below the disregard level, their tax credit award for the following year will be adjusted to what it would have been had no disregard existed.

  • Madeleine Moon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Madeleine Moon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Madeleine Moon on 2016-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, when he plans to consult on the proposals to reform attendance allowance that were referred to in the consultation on the provisional Local Government Finance Settlement 2016-17 and an offer to councils for future years, published in December 2015; whether that consultation will include an assessment of the potential effects of those proposals on older people; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr Marcus Jones

    In December, the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government announced that the Government will be consulting on giving councils in England “more responsibility to support older people with care needs – including people who, under the current system, would be supported through Attendance Allowance”. We want to explore if there is a better way to provide support for older people with care needs through local integration and we intend to launch a consultation on this in due course. Any change would not affect those already receiving Attendance Allowance. The consultation will be an open process that will give everybody a voice in determining the nature of any reform and will inform the decision about whether and how to proceed with any reform.

  • Tulip Siddiq – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Tulip Siddiq – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tulip Siddiq on 2016-05-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, of the Consent Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) submitted to the National Crime Agency in each year since 2011-12, how many involved suspected contraventions of (a) the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 and (b) Part 3 of the Terrorism Act 2000; and how many Consent SAR requests in each such category were permitted because they were not responded to within the seven-day time limit.

    Mr John Hayes

    The below table provides figures on the number of Suspicious Activity Reports received by the National Crime Agency (NCA) between October 2011 and September 2015 which requested consent under Part 7 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA) and Part 3 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (TACT). The table also includes figures on the number of consent requests where the reporter received no reply from the NCA.

    POCA Total Consent Requests

    POCA – No Reply within 7 Days

    TACT Total Consent Requests

    TACT – No Reply within 7 Days

    Oct 2011 – Sept 2012

    12915

    10

    75

    Nil

    Oct 2012 – Sept 2013

    14103

    8

    77

    Nil

    Oct 2013 – Sept 2014

    14155

    7

    102

    Nil

    Oct 2014 – Sept 2015

    14672

    110

    198

    Nil