Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Jo Cox – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Jo Cox – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jo Cox on 2016-04-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what assessment his Department has made of the fairness of the (a) licence fee and (b) initial overcharge for those paying the licence fee by direct debit.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    The BBC’s funding has been a central issue in the Charter Review process, and this has included consideration of the fairness and affordability of the licence fee, and the ways in which it can be paid. David Perry QC’s independent report on TV Licence Fee Enforcement highlighted that current payment plans, set out in regulations, inhibit the ability of TV Licensing to help those on lower incomes by offering alternative, more manageable payment schemes. The conclusions of his report have been considered as part of the wider Charter Review process, and the government’s position on these issues will be set out in the forthcoming White Paper.

  • Kirsten Oswald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Kirsten Oswald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kirsten Oswald on 2016-06-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what steps he is taking to take account of the levels of satisfaction with pay reported in the Regular Armed Forces Continuous Attitude Survey in his setting of pay policy for the armed forces.

    Mark Lancaster

    The new Pay 16 structure was specifically established in response to Service personnel criticisms of the old pay model. The Ministry of Defence (MOD) has developed the new pay model as a simpler, more transparent system which provides Service personnel with greater pay predictability. It addresses some of the concerns about the previous pay model reported by personnel through both the Service Complaints system and the Armed Forces Continuous Attitude Survey (AFCAS) and in feedback from the Armed Forces Pay Review Body (AFPRB). I fully expect these changes to be positive for morale overall.

    Many personnel will experience an increase in pay as a result of the new pay model, and no one will take a cut in core pay on implementation. We have taken steps to ensure that personnel are aware of the range and nature of the pay reforms that began on 1 April 2016 and comprehensive internal communications activity has been undertaken to explain the changes. This included Departmental guidance to help personnel understand their new pay statement and any changes. Personnel, including those under pay protection, continue to remain eligible for any Government-approved pay award. Pay protection has been put in place to ensure that no one will take a pay cut on implementation of Pay 16 and this arrangement will exist for at least the first three years to ensure that no one is disadvantaged.

    The new pay model is not designed as a cost saving exercise, but is a rebalancing of pay to make more efficient and effective use of the Armed Forces pay bill; the AFPRB will continue to recommend pay rates for all personnel. As we go forward the Service Complaints Process and AFCAS will be primary sources which inform our assessment of the benefits realised through the pay reforms.

  • Diana Johnson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Diana Johnson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Diana Johnson on 2016-09-06.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many full-time equivalent staff from (a) his Department, (b) NHS England, (c) NHS commissioners, (d) NHS providers and (e) local authorities are working on the NHS Sustainability and Transformation Plan (STP) for Coast, Humber and Vale; and how much has been spent to date on the Coast, Humber and Vale STP.

    David Mowat

    The information is not held centrally. The number of staff working on and resources allocated to local Sustainability and Transformation Plans (STPs) will vary at different stages of the process. These are locally led health and care transformation programmes and resources relating to each STP will be determined at a local level.

  • Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-10-18.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is the priority given to the promotion of democracy and human rights within the UK–Sudanese strategic dialogue; and what assessment they have made of (1) the reliability of the Sudanese regime as a reliable partner with a shared agenda, and (2) the extent to which the strategic dialogue will embolden the regime in Sudan to continue with their current policies.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    Improving human rights remains one of our policy priorities in Sudan, and therefore discussions of human rights issues are a key part of the UK-Sudan Strategic Dialogue. At the last round of talks on 10/11 October, a representative from the Sudan Advisory Council for Human Rights accompanied the Sudanese delegation.

    In a number of areas we fundamentally disagree with the government of Sudan; however, in others our interests are much more closely aligned. We assess that direct engagement through the Strategic Dialogue process provides better opportunities to raise issues of bilateral concern, as well as to look at strategic questions such as the resolution of internal conflicts, regional security and migration. We keep this policy under regular review.

  • Gareth Thomas – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Gareth Thomas – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gareth Thomas on 2015-11-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to the Answer of 5 September 2015 to Question 14459, whether the Civil Aviation Authority plans to make the conclusions of the review into the safety of operations at RAF Northolt publicly available; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The review was conducted by the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) in response to concerns raised by the operator of Biggin Hill Airport. The CAA has advised Biggin Hill of the conclusions of the review. The CAA remains satisfied that operations by civil aircraft at Northolt are safe. The CAA has no plans to publish the conclusions of the review but will continue to ensure that all operators using RAF Northolt have access to all relevant information about the aerodrome.

  • Oliver Dowden – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Oliver Dowden – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Oliver Dowden on 2015-12-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what meetings officials in his Department have had with their Iranian counterparts on the detention of Kamal Foroughi in Evin Prison.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    We remain very concerned about the case of dual-national Mr Mr Kamal Foroughi and in particular recent reports of deterioration in his health whilst in detention. Iran does not recognise dual nationality and as such has not granted us consular access. I met his family on 1 December, and confirmed that we have raised his case with the Iranian authorities on repeated occasions, urging Iran to provide regular medical assistance and access to a lawyer. The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr Hammond) raised this with Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif and President Rouhani during his trip to Iran in August. He also raised it most recently with Foreign Minister Zarif in New York at the UN General Assembly in September. The Prime Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Mr Cameron) raised the case with President Rouhani during a telephone call in July, and wrote a further letter on the matter in October regarding our consular cases.

  • Baroness Armstrong of Hill Top – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Baroness Armstrong of Hill Top – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Armstrong of Hill Top on 2016-01-19.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many houses have been brought back into use through the Empty Homes programme.

    Baroness Williams of Trafford

    The Empty Homes Programme created 9,044 homes from empty properties between 2012-2015. The number of empty homes is now at its lowest level since records began.

    Local authorities have powers and strong incentives to tackle empty homes, and through the New Homes Bonus they earn the same financial reward for bringing an empty home back into use as building a new one. In addition, councils may also charge up to 150 per cent council tax for homes empty for over two years. Given these levers, the Government has no plans for a further empty homes funding programme.

  • Steve McCabe – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Steve McCabe – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steve McCabe on 2016-02-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what recourse is available to patients who believe they have undergone poor or harmful NHS psychotherapy treatment.

    Alistair Burt

    Complaints about poor or harmful National Health Service psychotherapy treatment are handled through the NHS complaints process. Details are available at the following link:

    http://www.nhs.uk/choiceintheNHS/Rightsandpledges/complaints/Pages/NHScomplaints.aspx

    “

  • Alistair Carmichael – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Alistair Carmichael – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Alistair Carmichael on 2016-03-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether there is a maximum time her Department expects a person to travel for in order to enrol biometrics for a biometric residence permit.

    James Brokenshire

    There is no maximum time the Department expects a person to travel in order to enrol their biometric information for a biometric residence permit.

    There are 115 Post Office branches across the UK providing the biometric enrolment service; these are primarily located in or around cities and towns where the majority of applicants are residing. The extension of the service to other locations would be a commercial consideration for the Post Office Ltd.

  • Alan Brown – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Alan Brown – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Alan Brown on 2016-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, if he will take steps to introduce lifetime awards for people assessed as requiring the upper personal independence payment allowance mobility component who have been diagnosed with muscle degenerative diseases or conditions.

    Justin Tomlinson

    Personal Independence Payment is specifically designed to ensure that the benefit is awarded to those with the greatest need and the award review process is integral to ensuring this happens. Under Disability Living Allowance over 70% of all claims had no review built-in, meaning that claimants could have been receiving too much or too little in benefit.

    We take a personalised approach to setting the length of awards, varying the frequency and format of awards and reviews depending on the individual’s needs and the likelihood of their health condition or impairment changing.

    Where the claimant has high levels of functional impairment which are only likely to increase or not improve, it is likely that the claimant will receive an enhanced rate of benefit and a longer term award.

    We recognise that it is important to ensure that the review process is applied sensitively and appropriately. As such, it is likely that the awards of such claimants would also go through a less intensive review process which may not, if all the necessary information is held, include a face-to-face assessment.