Tag: Parliamentary Question

Barry Sheerman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Barry Sheerman on 2016-09-12.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what impact assessment his Department has conducted on the potential cost of eliminating or reducing prescription charges for people with long-term medical conditions.

David Mowat

The Department receives numerous representations on prescription charges for people in England with long-term medical conditions. It is not possible to say how many of these were from clinical experts or health economists, though the independent Commission on the Future of Health and Social Care in England’s report, A new settlement for health and social care, published in 2014, did have health economist input. There have also been representations from the Prescription Charges Coalition, but it is not certain to what extent these were informed by clinical experts or health economists.

Arrangements are in place to ensure that prescriptions are affordable for everyone, including those with a long-term condition. There are exemptions from the prescription charge for people with low income, including through receipt of specific benefits and through application to the NHS Low Income Scheme. For those who do not qualify for exemption, prescription prepayment certificates are also available, which allow people to claim as many prescriptions as they need for a set cost. To support those with high levels of need, the cost of the 12-month and 3-month certificates have been frozen since 2009 and 2011, respectively.

The Department has not undertaken a formal impact assessment on the potential cost of eliminating or reducing prescription charges for people with long-term medical conditions. However, the Prescription Charges Review undertaken by Professor Sir Ian Gilmore, and published in 2010, estimated that extending exemption to all those with a long-term condition would lead to a loss in revenue of between £360 and £430 million.

01/01/2023
Heidi Alexander – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Heidi Alexander on 2016-10-19.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what data his Department (a) records and (b) publishes on the nationality of NHS staff.

Mr Philip Dunne

The Department does not record or publish data on the nationality of staff working in the National Health Service. Data on nationality is published twice a year by NHS Digital and turnover data is published quarterly and available by nationality.

Nationality is a data item within the National Workforce Data set used with a range of other data items to support workforce planning, analysis of staff movement and equality monitoring. It is not mandatory, but self-declared.

In 2015 and 2016 requests for nationality data on NHS staff in England were published on the supplementary information part of the NHS Digital website, rather than as part of the routine Hospital and Community Health Services statistical publications. In 2016, following NHS Digital’s public consultation, NHS Digital now routinely publish tables showing the self-declared nationality of staff in staff groups and regions, bi-annually, together with quarterly turnover statistics which show the nationality of joiners and leavers to and from the NHS in England.

The latest nationality data was published in March 2016 and the next set will be published in December 2016 showing the position at September 2016.

The latest turnover data published in September 2016 covers the 12 month period to 30 June 2016.

01/01/2023
Andy Slaughter – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andy Slaughter on 2015-11-04.

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether his Department is investigating complaints made about the conduct and performance of the West London Coroner.

Caroline Dinenage

Operational responsibility for coroner services lies with the relevant local authority – in this case the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham – and complaints about a coroner’s conduct are investigated by the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO). The JCIO has recently confirmed that it is investigating a complaint about the West London Senior Coroner.

01/01/2023
Nicola Blackwood – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nicola Blackwood on 2015-12-02.

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what plans he has to modernise the courts and tribunals system.

Mr Shailesh Vara

We have secured over £700m of funding to invest in our courts and tribunals. We have worked closely with the senior judiciary to develop a plan to reform our courts system so it delivers swifter, fairer justice for everyone in England and Wales at a lower cost. This is a once in a generation opportunity to create a modern, user focused and efficient courts and tribunals service.

01/01/2023
Stephen Timms – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Timms on 2016-01-07.

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to the Answer of 15 December 2015 to Question 20339, what the repayment requirements are for universal credit advance payments; and whether interest is charged on those payments.

Priti Patel

Universal Credit (UC) Advance Payments of benefit are recovered from the UC award over a period of six months. In exceptional circumstances recovery can be deferred for up to 3 months.

No interest is charged on advance payments of benefit.

01/01/2023
Baroness Featherstone – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Featherstone on 2016-02-01.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government when they expect work to commence on the Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon.

Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth

On 10 February the Government announced that it will commission an independent review to assess the strategic case for tidal lagoons and whether they could represent good value for consumers. We anticipate that the review will be completed in the autumn.

The Government is currently in the first phase of a Contract for Difference negotiation with the developer of the proposed Swansea Bay tidal lagoon project. At present there is no timeframe for how long the negotiation process may take. The timeframe depends on a number of factors, many of which would be outside the control of the Department.

The work programme and the construction timetable for the proposed lagoon are matters for the developer.

01/01/2023
Lord McColl of Dulwich – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord McColl of Dulwich on 2016-02-25.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what guidance regarding the rights and treatment of victims of human trafficking has been issued to Home Office staff responsible for making decisions about the administrative removal of EEA nationals, and what specific guidance has been given to caseworkers about the criteria for determining whether or not the administrative removal of a confirmed victim of human trafficking who is an EEA national is proportionate.

Lord Bates

The processes and guidance in place relating to the factors to take into account in deciding whether to remove a person from the United Kingdom, including EEA nationals and potential victims of trafficking, are found within “Chapter 50: (EEA) EEA administrative removals” of the Enforcement Instructions and Guidance published on gov.uk.

The Home Office will consider exceptional and compassionate individual circumstances that may justify leave on a discretionary basis. The “Discretionary leave” Asylum Instruction on gov.uk gives guidance to Home Office staff on considering whether to grant discretionary leave (DL).

No action is taken to enforce the administrative removal of an EEA national identified as a potential victim of trafficking where their case is still being considered in accordance with the “Discretionary leave” Asylum Instruction. However, DL is not normally granted to EEA nationals (or their family members) where they have free movement rights under EU law and are exercising those treaty rights.

Guidance to immigration enforcement staff on how to identify and manage victims of trafficking is provided in “Chapter 9: identifying victims of trafficking” of Enforcement Instructions and Guidance. “Chapter 53: extenuating circumstances” gives guidance to immigration enforcement staff how to consider any extenuating circumstances. Section 4 of “Chapter 50: (EEA) EEA administrative removals” sets out the criteria that apply in considering whether it is right and reasonable to remove an EEA national and whether it is proportionate given all the circumstances of the case.

01/01/2023

Michelle Donelan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Michelle Donelan on 2016-03-21.

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many employment and support allowance claimants with (a) Parkinson’s disease, (b) rheumatoid arthritis, (c) motor neurone disease, (d) multiple sclerosis and (e) cystic fibrosis have been (i) placed in the support group, (ii) placed in the work-related activity group and (iii) found fit for work since 2008; and what statements have been made to current claimants of employment and support allowance to inform them that they will not be affected by changes.

Priti Patel

The information requested is shown in the table below.

Initial assessments	Cystic Fibrosis	Spinal Muscular Atrophy	Parkinson’s Disease	Multiple Sclerosis	Other Rheumatoid Arthritis
SG	900	1,200	1,700	8,000	3,600
WRAG	100	100	700	2,700	3,500
FFW	100	–	600	1,900	4,300
Repeat assessments
SG	500	300	1,100	7,500	4,600
WRAG	100	–	500	2,200	3,900
FFW	–	–	100	400	1,200
IBR assessments
SG	600	200	1,300	15,500	6,200
WRAG	100	–	300	2,600	5,000
FFW	–	–	–	300	1,200

Notes:

Figures from October 2008 – June 2015.
Figures are rounded to the nearest 100. “-“denotes nil or under 50.

The Department has stated throughout the passage of the Bill that current claimants will not be affected and these statements are in the public record.

01/01/2023

Julian Sturdy – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julian Sturdy on 2016-04-08.

To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, whether any expressions of interest have been received from neighbourhood planning groups for small-scale sites consisting of starter homes to be included in their neighbourhood plans.

Brandon Lewis

The Department does not hold this information.

01/01/2023

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, what the value was of assets (a) subject to restraint orders and (b) recovered using confiscation orders under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 in each year since 2009-10.

Mr John Hayes

The value of assets subject to restraint orders between 2009-10 and 2015-16 is shown in the tables below.

Orders are counted as fully paid where the outstanding balance, including any interest payable, is nil. There is no central record which would show how many people subject to unenforced orders were serving prison sentences.

Data is extracted from reports run on 4 May 2016 using the Joint Asset Recovery Database (JARD). JARD is a central repository of information relating to the seizure of the proceeds of crime.

JARD is a live database which is continually updated. As such, the data provided may vary from reports run on earlier dates.

Restraint Orders issued in England & Wales	2009-10	2010-11	2011-12	2012-13	2013-14	2014-2015	2015-16
Values (in millions)	£648.68m	£873.40m	£500.78m	£463.75m	£393.70m	£368.18m	£448.10m

Gross confiscation receipts – includes compensation paid to victims and receiver’s fees	2009-10	2010-11	2011-12	2012-13	2013-14	2014-2015	2015-16
Values (in millions)	£110.39m	£113.55m	£124.58m	£134.85m	£139.20m	£155.67m	£206.30m

Year	2009-10	2010-11	2011-12	2012-13	2013-14	2014-2015	2015-16
Number of confiscation orders issued	5592	6425	6268	6401	6043	5926	5900

01/01/2023