Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Christina Rees – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Christina Rees – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Christina Rees on 2016-10-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the reasons are for the proposal to reduce the number of benefit appeal cases in which (a) an appellant can appear in person and (b) the panel includes a member with direct experience of the relevant benefit; and what cost savings are expected to arise from that change.

    Sir Oliver Heald

    The Government is investing close to £1 billion to reform and digitise our courts and tribunals to deliver swifter and more certain justice.

    Technology will be at the forefront of our reforms but specific support will be provided to ensure tribunals remain accessible to all and physical hearings will continue to be used to resolve many cases.

    The impact assessment published alongside the Transforming our Justice System consultation paper sets out our estimate of potential savings from tribunal panel composition reform based on possible future scenarios.

    The panel composition reforms will ensure that the most appropriate panel is always selected to hear a case. As now, relevant expertise will always be available where needed, regardless of how a case is resolved. The Senior President of Tribunals will continue to determine when panel members are used.

  • Philip Davies – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Philip Davies – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Philip Davies on 2015-11-05.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 2 November 2015 to Question 13135, if he will place in the Library a copy of the review described at section A7 of Schedule One of the contract for the provision of tobacco control legislation enforcement undertaken by the contractor.

    Jane Ellison

    Section A7 of Schedule One, entitled ‘Grounds for discretionary rejection’ is available at:

    https://data.gov.uk/data/contracts-finder-archive/contract/1072169/

    The schedule does not describe a review.

    Two applications were submitted for the current tobacco control legislation enforcement contract.

  • Huw Irranca-Davies – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Huw Irranca-Davies – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Huw Irranca-Davies on 2015-12-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, when she plans to publish her Department’s response to the consultation on a review of the feed-in tariff scheme.

    Andrea Leadsom

    We are currently analysing feedback submitted during the Feed-in Tariff review consultation and intend to publish a Government response as soon as possible.

  • Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Andrew Gwynne – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-01-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 6 January 2016 to Question 20580, if his Department will ask NHS England to allow patient access to technologies assessed through NHS England’s Commissioning through Evaluation programme during the analysis phase on the same basis as during the first stage of the programme.

    George Freeman

    Whilst any patients already treated under a Commissioning through Evaluation (CtE) scheme will continue to receive appropriate follow up care, no new patients will be funded by NHS England during the subsequent analysis phase.

    This ensures that, during the analysis phase, NHS England continues its current policy of not funding treatments which have insufficient evidence of clinical and / or cost effectiveness.

    In turn, this means that NHS England can direct public funds to evidence based care. It also allows CtE programme funding to be redirected to support patient recruitment in another area of specialised care where further evaluation data is needed.

  • Baroness Jolly – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Baroness Jolly – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

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

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many reserve police officers of the Royal Air Force Police they estimate will be deployed in (1) 2015–16, (2) 2016–17, (3) 2017–18, (4) 2018–19, and (5) 2019–20.

    Earl Howe

    As at December 2015, the strength of the Royal Air Force Police Reserve, trained or in training, was 150. The liability for the Royal Air Force Police Reserve is 200 for the financial years 2015-2016 to 2019-2020 inclusive.

  • Kirsten Oswald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Kirsten Oswald – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kirsten Oswald on 2016-02-29.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what issues were discussed at the meeting between Ministers of his Department and representatives of the Financial Conduct Authority on 14 September 2015; and who the attendees were at that meeting.

    Harriett Baldwin

    Treasury Ministers and officials meet regularly with the Financial Conduct Authority to discuss relevant regulatory issues. As was the case with previous Administrations, it is not the Treasury’s practice to provide details of all such discussions.

  • Emily Thornberry – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Emily Thornberry – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Emily Thornberry on 2016-04-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 25 April 2016 to Question 34932, what the grades were of the civilian employees seconded by his Department to (a) the Joint Intelligence Organisation’s Assessments Staff and (b) the National Security Secretariat within the Cabinet Office during 2015.

    Mark Lancaster

    Given the nature of the work that the Joint Intelligence Organisation’s Assessments Staff and the National Security Secretariat carry out, the Ministry of Defence is unable to disclose details of staff seconded to these areas for the purpose of safeguarding national security.

  • Douglas Chapman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Douglas Chapman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Douglas Chapman on 2016-06-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether HMS Lancaster is in a state of extended readiness.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    HMS LANCASTER is presently alongside in Portsmouth and is maintained with a minimal Ship’s Company on board until her refit.The Royal Navy has determined that HMS LANCASTER is not required as a training platform ahead of her refit, therefore a number of her Ship’s Company have been redeployed in support of operational units and tasks.

    Such planned programming enables the Royal Navy to optimise the use of its ships and personnel through the operational cycles. The normal operating cycle of every ship includes periods of low readiness, and a number of ships will enter periods of ‘low’ or ‘very low’ readiness depending on their programmes and departmental planning requirements. It remains Ministry of Defence policy not to publish details of the readiness states of individual Royal Navy vessels for reasons of safeguarding national security.

  • Clive Efford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Clive Efford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Clive Efford on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what representations he has received from local health practitioners in Greenwich on the musculoskeletal service in Greenwich; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    The procurement of local health services by means of competitive tendering is a matter for the local National Health Service.

    We are advised that NHS Greenwich Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) undertook a review of the provision of musculoskeletal (MSK) services in the area in 2014, involving local general practitioners (GPs), secondary care clinicians, other MSK clinicians and patient groups. The CCG took account of this exercise in confirming its commissioning intentions for an integrated MSK service pathway. The CCG subsequently held a GP clinical commissioner-led provider engagement event on 2 March 2016 to seek feedback on the clinical service specification and the proposed contractual model.

    We understand that, as part of the procurement process, the MSK Programme Board was fully apprised of the Our Healthier South East London initiative, the predecessor to the Sustainability and Transformation Plan (STP) in respect of elective orthopaedic centres.

    We are advised that the Invitation to Tender (ITT) developed as part of the procurement exercise explicitly stated the aspirations of these two initiatives, in addition to the proposed implementation timeline. When submitting their bids, all prospective providers were required to confirm their understanding and acceptance of the planned new model of in-patient care. Patient choice continues to apply with regard to both this local procurement and the South East London STP proposals on elective care centres.

    We understand that the ITT issued to potential service providers, was divided into sections, with each section allocated a weighting. The financial weighting was designed to ensure that the selection of the preferred provider was driven by clinical quality scores whilst remaining within the CCG’s published financial envelope. The detailed clinical service specification will be used to hold the provider to account within the format of the NHS national standard contract.

    Health Ministers have not received any representations from local health practitioners in Greenwich with regard to the provision of MSK services in the area.

  • Grant Shapps – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Grant Shapps – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Grant Shapps on 2016-10-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, whether any assessment has been made of the effect of driverless vehicles on future demand for extra rail capacity.

    Mr John Hayes

    There is currently no evidence linking driverless vehicles and future demand for rail.