Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Lord Hylton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Lord Hylton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hylton on 2015-12-21.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their response to the Resolution of the House of Commons of 10 September calling on them to implement the recommendations of the report of the Inquiry into the Use of Immigration Detention in the United Kingdom, by the All Party Parliamentary Groups on Refugees and Migration.

    Lord Bates

    Detention plays a vital role in maintaining effective immigration control and there are safeguards in place to prevent unnecessary or arbitrary detention.

    Turning to the principal recommendations of the APPG report, though a common misconception, we cannot detain indefinitely under immigration powers. There are significant, long standing and highly effective protections for individuals against indefinite detention in the current system. A statutory limit is therefore not necessary.

    An arbitrary time limit would potentially allow criminals and non-compliant individuals to play the system knowing that if they refuse to cooperate with removal for long enough they will be released.

    The Home Office is conducting detailed analysis of the use of immigration detention including looking at the checks and balances in the systems to ensure that there is a more efficient and more effective process so that people are removed more swiftly.

    The Home Secretary commissioned an independent review of the policies and operating procedures that have an impact on detainee welfare earlier this year. Stephen Shaw CBE, former Prisons and Probation Ombudsman for England and Wales, undertook the review and has recently submitted his report. The report will be published by laying it before Parliament, alongside the Government’s response to its recommendations, before the Lords Committee stage for the Immigration Bill.

  • Baroness Doocey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Baroness Doocey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Doocey on 2016-01-27.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what discussions they have had with Patina Rail, the owners of Eurostar, about human trafficking and the creation of a commuter route between St Pancras and Ashford that mirrors the so-called Lille loophole.

    Lord Bates

    The UK Government takes child trafficking extremely seriously. All Border Force officers at the Eurostar ports in the UK France and Belgium have received training in keeping children safe and all operational processes involving children comply with requirements as set out in the Children and Young Persons Act. Border Force and Eurostar have daily contact on operational matters. When passengers are identified by Border Force officers as potential victims of trafficking, immediate action is taken to safeguard the individual by following Home Office guidance on the treatment of the victims of trafficking. Border Force collects data on these cases in order to notify the Human Trafficking Centre. Contact is also made with Camden Social Services Safeguarding Team as soon as possible in order to establish safe care of the child. Eurostar has its own policy on unaccompanied children travelling on its services which can be found on its website.

    Border Force has not provided training to French border officials on UK child trafficking patterns. All cases of suspected trafficking detected by the French border officials at St Pancras are handed to the BTP to action. In France and Belgium any concerns Border Force officers have about vulnerable children attempting to travel to the UK would be referred to the French and Belgian frontier control authorities. The Home Office has not had any discussions with Patina Rail about a proposed new routing between St Pancras and Ashford.

  • Neil Coyle – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Neil Coyle – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Neil Coyle on 2016-02-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what steps the Government is taking to close the higher education attainment gap between BME students and other students.

    Joseph Johnson

    The Higher Education Green Paper sets out steps the Government plans to take to improve outcomes for students, including BME students. We have consulted on how the Teaching Excellence Framework will recognise the efforts that providers make to improve the access and experience of students from all backgrounds, and the importance of this to the overall student learning experience.

    Ministers have also asked Universities UK to establish an expert advisory group on social mobility and higher education to identify what more can be done to address this gap, and other issues concerning social mobility. The group will provide advice to the Minister.

    In addition, new guidance from Ministers to the Director of Fair Access (DfA), published on 11 February, asks the Director to continue to address gaps in outcomes, including those for BME groups, through Access Agreements agreed with universities.

  • Nic Dakin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Nic Dakin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nic Dakin on 2016-03-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what proportion of those eligible for winter fuel payments in 2014-15 received a letter informing them about their rights to claim this benefit.

    Justin Tomlinson

    The information requested is not collated centrally and could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

    The majority of Winter Fuel Payments are made automatically from information already held by the Department. We invite claims mainly from men under 65 who meet the eligibility criteria, as the largest group not identified and paid automatically. Claims can be made up to and including 31 March and are not accepted after that date.

  • Lord Rowe-Beddoe – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Lord Rowe-Beddoe – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Rowe-Beddoe on 2016-04-26.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their estimate of costs incurred by them in connection with the recent visit of the President of the United States.

    Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

    It is long established Government policy not to comment upon matters of personal protective security and their associated costs. Disclosure of such information could compromise the integrity of those arrangements and affect the security of the individuals concerned.

  • Jim Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Jim Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2016-06-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what estimate he has made of the amount spent by his Department on audio-visual systems intended for buses in the last three years; and if he will make a statement.

    Andrew Jones

    The Department has not funded audio/visual equipment on buses, but we understand the importance of accessible on-board information to many passengers, including those who are visually impaired, and have supported initiatives to develop innovative and low-cost approaches for delivering it.

    For instance, we worked with the Transport Systems Catapult on the All Aboard Competition, resulting in the development of a prototype vibrating wristband which alerts users to upcoming stops.

    Many bus operators have already embraced audible and visual next stop announcements, and I encourage the wider industry to consider the potential benefit for all of its customers.

  • Nick Clegg – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Trade

    Nick Clegg – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Trade

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nick Clegg on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Trade, how much his Department has spent to date on legal advice relating to Britain’s exit from the EU from (a) the Government Legal Department and (b) external legal firms; and how much he plans to spend on such advice over the next 12 months.

    Mark Garnier

    DIT already has a strong and capable in-house legal team and has not needed to spend on external legal advice. In the next two years we will be developing our in-house team to build the expertise needed to deliver the best outcomes for the UK and position the UK as a global leader in free trade. We have also received many offers of pro bono support from the UK’s outstanding legal profession.

  • Justin Madders – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Justin Madders – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Justin Madders on 2016-10-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what discussions Ministers of his Department have had with Ministers of the Department for Justice on the investigation of stillbirths and neonatal deaths.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    No recent meetings have been held with colleagues at the Ministry of Justice to discuss this subject.

    By law coroners can only investigate deaths of a baby when they have lived independently of their mother. Coroners have no role in investigating stillbirths, and there are no plans to change this. If there is doubt as to whether a baby was stillborn or lived independently of their mother the loss should be reported to the coroner to consider whether an investigation should be carried out.

    We are providing £500,000 of funding, via the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership, for the development of a new system – the Standardised Perinatal Mortality Review Tool – which once complete will be used across the National Health Service to enable maternity services to review and learn from every stillbirth and neonatal death. We have also asked the new independent Healthcare Safety Investigation Branch, established in April 2016, to consider a particular focus on maternity services in its first year.

    On 17 October my Rt. hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health announced a comprehensive package of measures designed dramatically to improve the safety of maternity care in the NHS, with a particular focus on learning and supporting the NHS to become the world’s largest learning organisation. The announcement introduced the commitment to consult on a new voluntary alternative to litigation for families affected by severe birth injury (Rapid Resolution and Redress (RRR)).

    RRR will provide an independent and thorough investigation of all instances of severe avoidable birth injury (around 500 cases per year), and for eligible cases the option to join an alternative system of compensation that offers support and regular payments without the need to bring a claim through the courts. We will be consulting to ensure the policy design best meets the needs of families.

  • Jim Cunningham – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Jim Cunningham – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2015-11-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the adequacy of NHS treatment measures to deal with antibiotic resistant infections; and if he will make a statement.

    Ben Gummer

    Patient safety is of primary importance to the National Health Service. An integral part of this focus on safety is work to prevent the spread of antimicrobial resistance and preserve the effectiveness of antibiotics that are currently effective against resistant infections.

    There is mandatory surveillance of resistant infections such as meticillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus, Clostridium difficile and E.coli within the NHS and data are published by Public Health England on a monthly basis. This transparency of data has ensured that NHS organisations are focused on minimising the number of resistant infections, and identifying and dealing with patients suffering from such resistant infections appropriately.

    The NHS has also implemented a Public Health England screening protocol to identify people suffering from carbapenem resistant infections so that adequate treatment measures can be implemented in a timely way. Carbapenems are a powerful group of broad spectrum (penicillin-related) antibiotics.

    The NHS vaccination programmes have also proved effective at tackling resistance through reducing the incidence of certain diseases. NHS England will continue to work with Public Health England to implement the national vaccination programmes successfully.

    In addition, to these existing measures, we are introducing a set of indicators which specifically focusses on resistant infections. These indicators will enable NHS organisations to identify their priorities concerning resistance and take appropriate local action. To support this we will highlight to NHS organisations key actions they can take. These include best practice on controlling levels of resistance and reducing levels of antimicrobial prescribing, and guidance on general infection prevention and control standards.

  • John Pugh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    John Pugh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by John Pugh on 2015-12-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what plans the Government has to change the rate of interest on student loans (a) retrospectively for recent graduates and current students and (b) for future students during the current Parliament.

    Joseph Johnson

    There are no plans to change the rate of interest on student loans retrospectively for recent graduates and current students.

    The interest rates are reviewed annually and the rates set from 1st September for the following 12 months. This is set out in the Education (Student Loans) (Repayment) Regulations. It is too early yet to say what the rate will be from September 2016.

    For the pre-2012 scheme, the rate used is the March Retail Prices Index (RPI) figure which applies during the 12 month period commencing 1st September. If, however, the base rate plus 1% across a specified group of banks is lower than RPI, then this lower rate will be applied instead.

    For the post-2012 scheme, the rate is also set by reference to the March RPI figure (2.5%):

    • RPI plus 3% is applied whilst the borrower is studying and up until the April after leaving their course;
    • After April 2016, variable rates of interest dependent on the borrower’s income will apply for those in repayment. These range from RPI for those earning £21,000 or less to RPI plus 3% for those earning £41,000 or more; and
    • Borrowers who lose touch with the SLC after they leave their course will be subject to an interest rate of RPI + 3%.