UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-01-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what plans he has for call-in and scrutiny arrangements for the work of the Greater Manchester Combined Authority.

    James Wharton

    I refer the hon. member to my answer of 19 January, PQ 921796 and would add that the Cities and Local Government Devolution Bill received Royal Assent on 28 January.

    The provisions of that Act, including those on overview and scrutiny, are now in force for the purposes of making secondary legislation and for all other purposes will come into force two months after Royal Assent. My rt. hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (Greg Clark) intends to exercise his powers to make further provision about the membership and operation of overview and scrutiny committees as soon as practicable.

  • Tristram Hunt – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Tristram Hunt – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tristram Hunt on 2016-02-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, how many and which local authorities have notified her Department about plans to dispose of grant-funded assets through the (a) sale, (b) transfer and (c) change of use of children’s centres under the requirements of the Sure Start Early Years and Childcare Grant.

    Mr Sam Gyimah

    Where local authorities dispose of or change the use of buildings or other assets funded wholly or partly through Sure Start capital grants, they must repay the money through the claw-back process.

    The Department for Education has a thorough set of monitoring arrangements in place regarding claw-back rules. Local authorities are required to notify the department of each and every proposed change of services and provide details about the level of early years services that are to continue. The department then considers if the local authority has continued to offer a sufficient level of early years services for children and their families from the building in question to meet the original aims of the grant.

    If the department is satisfied that the funding for the asset will continue to be used for purposes consistent with the grant, the department may defer claw-back. Deferring claw-back means that we accept the change of usage at that time, however, the department retains its interest in the asset and if in the future the asset has its usage changed, is transferred or otherwise disposed of, and does not continue to meet the purposes of the grant the local authority must inform the department and we will claw-back the funding. The department’s interest in an asset funded by Sure Start capital grants is 25 years from designation of the building. If the grant was used to purchase capital items or re-furbish an existing asset, the length of time and value of any claw-back depends on the depreciation value of the items, according to local authority depreciation rules.

  • Chris Stephens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Chris Stephens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chris Stephens on 2016-03-15.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether HM Revenue and Customs has any current contracts with Google to provide services; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr David Gauke

    HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) does not have a direct contract with Google. As with most of HMRC’s IT services, licenses for Google products are provided through its existing IT contracts and also via G-Cloud (a government framework of digital contracts).

    HMRC carefully selects all products and services to ensure its staff have the right tools to do the job. These tools aid collaborative working and support improved productivity.

  • Richard Fuller – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Richard Fuller – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Richard Fuller on 2016-04-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, which clinical commissioning groups in England fund (a) no, (b) one, (c) two, (d) three and (e) more than three cycles of IVF treatment.

    Jane Ellison

    The level of provision of infertility treatment, as for all health services they commission, is decided by local clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) and will take into account the needs of the population overall. The CCG’s decisions are underpinned by clinical insight and knowledge of local healthcare needs. As such, provision of services will vary in response to local needs.

    CCGs have a legal duty to have regard to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines. As such, NHS England expects that all those involved in commissioning infertility treatment services to be fully aware of the importance of having regard to the NICE fertility guidelines.

    Following a meeting with Fertility Fairness in December 2015, officials from the Department and NHS England is considering options for addressing variation in the prices that CCGs are currently paying for in vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment.

    Information about cycles of IVF treatment is not collected centrally.

  • 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 2016-05-23.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what proportion of hospitals have a policy of charging (a) blue badge holders and (b) carers for parking.

    Alistair Burt

    Data is not collected centrally in the exact format requested. Data on car parking is collected annually through two collections.

    The Estates Return Information Collection asks whether organisations charge for the use of designated disabled parking spaces. Of the 1,038 sites that have designated disabled car parking spaces 87% do not charge.

    The Patient Led Assessment of the Care Environment asks about the number of sites that offer car parking charge concessions in accordance with the National Health Service patient, visitor and staff car parking principles. Of the 372 sites that charge for car parking, 86% offer concessions, which include either free car parking or reduced charges or caps.

  • 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 2016-07-18.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the British Red Cross report Not So Straightforward and its campaign to reunite refugee families, Torn Apart.

    Baroness Williams of Trafford

    We are reviewing our process for dealing with applications for refugee family reunion in consultation with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Ministry of Justice. We are working closely with the British Red Cross and are considering the recommendations made in the Not So Straightforward report in detail.

    We have now improved our guidance on processing family reunion applications so that it is clear, consistent and accessible. We intend to publish this in the next few weeks. We have also committed to redesigning the application form to ensure that applicants better understand the process and what is required of them.

    There are no plans to extend the family reunion criteria as called for in the British Red Cross Torn Apart campaign. The current family reunion policy meets our international obligations and strikes the right balance. Where family members cannot meet the requirements of the Immigration Rules, such as in the case of an 18 year old applying to join their refugee parents in the UK, we consider whether there are exceptional circumstances or compassionate reasons to justify granting entry clearance outside the Rules.

  • Ian Austin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Ian Austin – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Austin on 2016-10-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, with reference to the Modern Crime Prevention Strategy, published in March 2016, page 31, whether his Department has sought legal advice on its policies relating to heroin-assisted treatment; and what assessment he has made of the legal implications of those policies.

    Nicola Blackwood

    The prescribing of injectable opioids, such as methadone or diamorphine (pharmaceutical heroin) as substitutes for illicit heroin, as outlined in the Government’s Modern Crime Prevention Strategy, published in March by the then Home Secretary, has been an option for many years but since the late 1960s, prescribing of diamorphine for the management of addiction has been restricted to licensed addiction specialists.

    The decision to prescribe injectable diamorphine for the treatment of dependence is a clinical matter, for a clinician to take in conjunction with the patient. Advice to guide these decisions is contained in Chapter 5 and Annex 8 of the 2007 UK Guidelines on the Clinical Management of Drug Misuse and Dependence. The guidelines advise that:

    – “injectable opioid treatment may be suitable for a small minority of patients who have failed in optimised oral treatment.”;

    – “clinicians providing injectable opioid treatment should encourage patients not to regard it as a lifelong treatment option and should regularly review their patients and the continuing necessity for this unusual and expensive treatment”; and

    – The use of diamorphine “alone does not constitute drug treatment…it should be seen as on element or pathway within wider packages of planned and integrated drug treatment”.

    The guidelines are currently being reviewed by an Expert Working Group, to take into account developments in the evidence base. In July 2016, the Expert Working Group published their draft update for consultation. The consultation has closed and the responses are being considered by the Expert Working Group.

    Diamorphine is licensed as a medicine by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. Clinicians wishing to legally prescribe it for the treatment of dependence need to obtain a licence for that purpose from the Home Office and to comply with all other legislation relevant to the safe management, use and supply of medicines which are controlled drugs.

  • Christopher Chope – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Christopher Chope – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Christopher Chope on 2015-10-29.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many employees of Border Force are seconded to Frontex; and in what locations such staff are deployed.

    James Brokenshire

    UK Border Force currently has twelve staff deployed to support Frontex joint operations in the Mediterranean, and one staff member seconded to Frontex Headquarters, Returns Sector, in Warsaw. Eight of the twelve staff support joint operation ‘Poseidon Sea’ in Greece: two in Kos, three in Lesbos, one in Leros, one in Samos and one in Chios; and four support Frontex joint operation ‘Triton’ in Italy: two in Trapani, one in Lampedusa and one in Syracuse.

    UK staff cannot exercise any powers on Frontex operations. Border Force staff debrief migrants to gather intelligence on their routing, modus operandi and any facilitators involved; Border Force staff also screen migrants to establish their identity, to aid the host member state with documentation and return of those migrants with no right of stay in Europe.

  • Lord Kennedy of Southwark – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Lord Kennedy of Southwark – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Kennedy of Southwark on 2015-11-19.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the Lenox Project in south-east London.

    Baroness Neville-Rolfe

    The Lenox Project is an independent private enterprise project.

  • Lilian Greenwood – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lilian Greenwood – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lilian Greenwood on 2015-12-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, whether the Gospel Oak to Barking Line electrification programme includes electrification of that line’s freight links.

    Claire Perry

    The Gospel Oak–Barking electrification programme includes plans to electrify the freight links. The timing and funding for these links is being reviewed in conjunction with Sir Peter Hendy’s re-plan of Network Rail enhancements and the revised cost estimates of all electrification projects. The main scheme continues to be on target for completion in 2017.