Show Search Form

Search Results

human indexable	true false
published	true false
registered interest	true false
answer date	exactly: or between: and
date	exactly: or between: and
date tabled	exactly: or between: and
ddp created	exactly: or between: and
answering body
question status
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
ddp modified
hansard heading
house id
identifier
legislature	pref label
parliament number
question first answered
question text
session
session number
tabling member constituency
tabling member printed
title
type
uin
version
written parliamentary question type
answer	answer text answering member
creator	label
publisher	pref label
tabling member	label

Search

1050402

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	31/01/2019
	date	29/01/2019
	date tabled	29/01/2019
	ddp created	29/01/2019 19:42:08
	answering body	Home Office
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	1
	answering dept short name	Home Office
	answering dept sort name	Home Office
	ddp modified	31/01/2019 10:25:13 06/02/2019 18:11:01
	hansard heading	101 Calls: Fees and Charges
	house id	1
	identifier	214051
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	06/02/2019 17:39:49
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether the revenue accrued as a result of the 15 pence per minute charge for a 101 telephone call is retained by his Department.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Portsmouth South
	tabling member printed	Stephen Morgan
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 214051
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	214051
	version	2
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>The Home Office does not make any money from calls to the 101 Single Non-Emergency Number, nor do police forces. The 15 pence call charge goes directly to telecom service providers and covers the cost of handling calls and routing them to their destination. Calls to 101 cost 15 pence from mobile devices and landlines, regardless of duration, but are free from payphones.</p> answering member 1561
	creator	4653 label Biography information for Stephen Morgan
	publisher	25259 pref label House of Commons
	tabling member	4653 label Biography information for Stephen Morgan

1050403

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	31/01/2019
	date	29/01/2019
	date tabled	29/01/2019
	ddp created	29/01/2019 19:42:10
	answering body	Home Office
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	1
	answering dept short name	Home Office
	answering dept sort name	Home Office
	ddp modified	31/01/2019 10:35:06 06/02/2019 18:12:01
	hansard heading	101 Calls: Fees and Charges
	house id	1
	identifier	214052
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	06/02/2019 17:40:42
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment he has made of the effect of the 15 pence per minute 101 call charge on the finances of lower-income families.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Portsmouth South
	tabling member printed	Stephen Morgan
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 214052
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	214052
	version	2
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>There is no obligation on telecom service providers to supply the 101 service free of charge as is the case with 999 under the 2003 Communications Act. Calls to 101 cost 15 pence from mobile devices and landlines, regardless of duration, but are free from payphones.</p><p>The public have always paid to contact the police by telephone for non-emergencies and the 15p charge per call is a transparent rate. Police non-emergency numbers (such as 0845 numbers) which were used before 2011 could cost members of the public up to 40p per minute. While it may not be an option for everyone, the public can also report non-emergency crimes online via forces’ websites at a time that is convenient to them.</p> answering member 1561
	creator	4653 label Biography information for Stephen Morgan
	publisher	25259 pref label House of Commons
	tabling member	4653 label Biography information for Stephen Morgan

1050382

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	31/01/2019
	date	29/01/2019
	date tabled	29/01/2019
	ddp created	29/01/2019 19:40:16
	answering body	Home Office
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	1
	answering dept short name	Home Office
	answering dept sort name	Home Office
	ddp modified	29/01/2019 19:45:32 05/02/2019 16:53:01
	hansard heading	Action Fraud
	house id	1
	identifier	213951
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	05/02/2019 16:21:58
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many investigations resulting from information being passed to the police by Action Fraud have taken place in each year since 2013.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Blackpool South
	tabling member printed	Gordon Marsden
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 213951
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	213951
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>Action Fraud reports are passed on to the National Fraud Intelligence Bureau (NFIB), who are responsible for reviewing and allocating offences to forces for investigation.</p><p><br>The Home Office collects information on the number of fraud cases disseminated by the NFIB to police forces and also the number of fraud outcomes recorded by the police. These data are published annually as part of the Home Office’s ‘Crime Outcomes in England and Wales’ publication. The latest data can be found here:</p><p><a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/740625/prc-fraud-open-data-march2018-tables.ods." target="_blank">https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/740625/prc-fraud-open-data-march2018-tables.ods.</a></p><p>In order to improve our understanding of how forces are responding to fraud, we, last year, asked HMIC to inspect forces. We will study the report when it is published.</p><p> </p> answering member 1539
	creator	465 label Biography information for Gordon Marsden
	publisher	25259 pref label House of Commons
	tabling member	465 label Biography information for Gordon Marsden

1050411

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	31/01/2019
	date	29/01/2019
	date tabled	29/01/2019
	ddp created	29/01/2019 19:42:30
	answering body	Foreign and Commonwealth Office
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	16
	answering dept short name	Foreign and Commonwealth Office
	answering dept sort name	Foreign and Commonwealth Office
	ddp modified	29/01/2019 19:56:12 06/02/2019 16:13:02
	hansard heading	Africa: Diplomatic Relations
	house id	1
	identifier	214054
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	06/02/2019 15:41:43
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what assessment his Department has made of the potential effect of climate change on the UK's diplomatic relations with African countries.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	North East Fife
	tabling member printed	Stephen Gethins
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 214054
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	214054
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>The effects of Climate Change are already being felt across Asia and Africa, affecting those least responsible most severely. These effects will worsen over time and are for some already existential. To tackle this challenge, the UK is already engaging with countries and regions across both continents, including at a sub-national level, taking into account wide variations in economic development, emissions trajectory and climate change vulnerability. There is no doubt, however, that more must be done to deepen our mutual understanding and our practical and diplomatic cooperation with both regions to succeed. This is why the government, including through the £5.8bn of International Climate Finance, and relevant Prosperity Fund programmes, as well as many UK businesses and non-government bodies, is working with countries in Asia and Africa to increase their reliance to climate change, reduce emissions, and transition to a sustainable low carbon economy.</p> answering member 1405
	creator	4434 label Biography information for Stephen Gethins
	publisher	25259 pref label House of Commons
	tabling member	4434 label Biography information for Stephen Gethins

1050147

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	30/01/2019
	date	29/01/2019
	date tabled	29/01/2019
	ddp created	29/01/2019 00:31:36
	answering body	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	13
	answering dept short name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept sort name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	ddp modified	29/01/2019 19:25:07 05/02/2019 18:02:03
	hansard heading	Agricultural Products: Import Duties
	house id	1
	identifier	213404
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	05/02/2019 17:30:36
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment his Department has made of the potential effect of lowering import tariffs on agricultural products on the domestic food and drink industry in the event of the UK leaving the EU without a deal.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Bootle
	tabling member printed	Peter Dowd
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 213404
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	213404
	version	3
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>In the event the UK leaves the EU without a deal, there would be a number of tools available to help mitigate adverse impacts for the food and drink industry, as well as for consumers and producers. These tools could include lowering applied tariffs on certain goods, alongside tariff rate suspensions and opening up autonomous tariff rate quotas.</p><p> </p><p>Different combinations of these tools would have different impacts on the food and drink industry, as would different degrees of tariff reduction. In addition, the competitiveness of the domestic industry is heavily affected by a number of other factors, including commodity prices, exchange rates and oil prices. These drivers will continue to apply when we leave the EU, regardless of tariff rates.</p><p> </p> answering member 4033
	creator	4397 label Biography information for Peter Dowd
	publisher	25259 pref label House of Commons
	tabling member	4397 label Biography information for Peter Dowd

1050413

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	31/01/2019
	date	29/01/2019
	date tabled	29/01/2019
	ddp created	29/01/2019 19:42:34
	answering body	Department of Health and Social Care
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	17
	answering dept short name	Health and Social Care
	answering dept sort name	Health and Social Care
	ddp modified	29/01/2019 19:56:17 06/02/2019 15:30:04
	hansard heading	Air Pollution
	house id	1
	identifier	213913
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	06/02/2019 14:58:17
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether (a) his Department, (b) Public Health England and (c) the Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollutants have (i) made, (ii) commissioned and (iii) received assessments on the comparative levels of toxicity of (A) PM 0.1, (B) PM1 and (C) PM2.5 from different sources of emissions.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Stroud
	tabling member printed	Dr David Drew
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 213913
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	213913
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>Recent assessments have been undertaken of the health effects of long-term exposure to the air pollution mixture in the United Kingdom. This was based on studies reporting associations of mortality risk with fine particulate matter (PM2.5), which includes PM1 and PM0.1, and nitrogen dioxide (NO2), available to view at the following link:</p><p> </p><p><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nitrogen-dioxide-effects-on-mortality" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nitrogen-dioxide-effects-on-mortality</a></p><p> </p><p>The Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollutants (COMEAP) advised that, although it is unlikely that all components of particulate matter have the same potency in causing health effects, the available evidence is insufficient to allow further quantification. The COMEAP report can be viewed at the following link:</p><p> </p><p><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/particulate-air-pollution-health-effects-of-exposure" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/particulate-air-pollution-health-effects-of-exposure</a></p><p> </p><p>Reviews by the Health Effects Institute and World Health Organization concluded that there is currently limited evidence on the effects on health of ultrafine particles (PM0.1). These reviews can be viewed at the following links:</p><p> </p><p><a href="https://www.healtheffects.org/publication/understanding-health-effects-ambient-ultrafine-particles" target="_blank">https://www.healtheffects.org/publication/understanding-health-effects-ambient-ultrafine-particles</a></p><p> </p><p><a href="http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/193108/REVIHAAP-Final-technical-report-final-version.pdf?ua=1" target="_blank">http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/193108/REVIHAAP-Final-technical-report-final-version.pdf?ua=1</a></p><p> </p><p>Public Health England has no plans to engage in work on the comparative levels of toxicity of PM0.1, PM1 and PM2.5 from different sources of emissions.</p> answering member 4067
	creator	252 label Biography information for Dr David Drew
	publisher	25259 pref label House of Commons
	tabling member	252 label Biography information for Dr David Drew

1050414

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	31/01/2019
	date	29/01/2019
	date tabled	29/01/2019
	ddp created	29/01/2019 19:42:37
	answering body	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	13
	answering dept short name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept sort name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	ddp modified	30/01/2019 17:15:06 04/02/2019 18:18:01
	hansard heading	Air Pollution
	house id	1
	identifier	213914
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	04/02/2019 17:46:56
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, for what reasons the Clean Air Strategy 2018 does not discuss PM1 and PM0.1; and what evidence his Department has on the safety to human health of (a) those particles and (b) urban air quality.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Stroud
	tabling member printed	Dr David Drew
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 213914
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	213914
	version	2
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>The Clean Air Strategy 2019 sets out our proposals for meeting our legally binding emissions ceilings for five key pollutants – fine particulate matter (PM<sub>2.5</sub>), nitrogen oxides (NO<sub>x</sub>), sulphur dioxide (SO<sub>2</sub>), ammonia (NH<sub>3</sub>) and non-methane volatile organic compounds.</p><p> </p><p>The pollutant with the strongest evidence for impacts on human health is PM<sub>2.5</sub>. Many of the sources of PM<sub>2.5</sub> are also responsible for PM<sub>1</sub> and PM<sub>0.1</sub>, and so our actions to reduce emissions of fine particulate matter will have positive benefits for the emissions of even smaller particles. The other four pollutants also often undergo chemical reactions in the air, becoming PM<sub>1</sub> or PM<sub>0.1</sub> particles. The reductions in the emissions of these pollutants will result in less pollution to undergo these reactions, and therefore fewer PM<sub>1</sub> or PM<sub>0.1</sub> particles formed in the air.</p><p> </p><p>a) While we have not made an assessment of the impact on health of PM<sub>1</sub>, the independent Air Quality Expert Group published a report into PM<sub>0.1</sub> particles (known as ultrafine particulate matter) which is available on Defra’s UK-AIR website.</p><p> </p><p>b) Defra does not report on the health effects of urban air quality specifically, but we do carry out assessments of air quality nationally. The quality of our air is improving nationwide, with lower emissions and lower concentrations, and much of the decrease in emissions has been in urban areas. Our Clean Air Strategy is emission-source focused, and as urban areas are often where there are most sources, these are the areas that will experience the biggest benefits from the Strategy.</p> answering member 4098
	creator	252 label Biography information for Dr David Drew
	publisher	25259 pref label House of Commons
	tabling member	252 label Biography information for Dr David Drew

1050416

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	31/01/2019
	date	29/01/2019
	date tabled	29/01/2019
	ddp created	29/01/2019 19:42:42
	answering body	Department of Health and Social Care
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	17
	answering dept short name	Health and Social Care
	answering dept sort name	Health and Social Care
	ddp modified	29/01/2019 19:56:23 06/02/2019 15:52:02
	hansard heading	Air Pollution
	house id	1
	identifier	213916
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	06/02/2019 15:20:40
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, pursuant to the Answer of 16 January 2019 to Question 206215 on Air Pollution, if he will publish the evidence held by (a) his Department and (b) Public Health England of the effect on human health of ultrafine particles (i) PM0.1 and (ii) PM1.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Stroud
	tabling member printed	Dr David Drew
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 213916
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	213916
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>Recent assessments have been undertaken of the health effects of long-term exposure to the air pollution mixture in the United Kingdom. This was based on studies reporting associations of mortality risk with fine particulate matter (PM2.5), which includes PM1 and PM0.1, and nitrogen dioxide (NO<sub>2</sub>), available to view at the following link:</p><p> </p><p><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nitrogen-dioxide-effects-on-mortality" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nitrogen-dioxide-effects-on-mortality</a></p><p> </p><p>Reviews by the Health Effects Institute and World Health Organization concluded that there is currently limited evidence on the effects on health of ultrafine particles (PM0.1). These reviews can be viewed at the following links:</p><p> </p><p><a href="https://www.healtheffects.org/publication/understanding-health-effects-ambient-ultrafine-particles" target="_blank">https://www.healtheffects.org/publication/understanding-health-effects-ambient-ultrafine-particles</a></p><p> </p><p><a href="http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/193108/REVIHAAP-Final-technical-report-final-version.pdf?ua=1" target="_blank">http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/193108/REVIHAAP-Final-technical-report-final-version.pdf?ua=1</a></p><p> </p><p>Public Health England has no plans to engage in work on the effects of PM1 and PM0.1 particles on human health.</p> answering member 4067
	creator	252 label Biography information for Dr David Drew
	publisher	25259 pref label House of Commons
	tabling member	252 label Biography information for Dr David Drew

1050417

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	31/01/2019
	date	29/01/2019
	date tabled	29/01/2019
	ddp created	29/01/2019 19:42:44
	answering body	Department of Health and Social Care
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	17
	answering dept short name	Health and Social Care
	answering dept sort name	Health and Social Care
	ddp modified	29/01/2019 19:56:26 06/02/2019 15:54:03
	hansard heading	Air Pollution
	house id	1
	identifier	213917
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	06/02/2019 15:22:51
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, pursuant to his Answer of 16 January 2019 to Question 206215 pn Air Pollution, if he will direct Public Health England to make an assessment of the effect on respiratory and cardiovascular health of exposure to ultrafine particles (a) in and (b) outside the vicinity of waste incinerators.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Stroud
	tabling member printed	Dr David Drew
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 213917
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	213917
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>Assessments of the risks of pollutants to health are informed by the weight of the available evidence, rather than being undertaken on the basis of an individual study.</p><p> </p><p>Public Health England (PHE) funded a study to further extend the evidence base as to whether emissions from modern municipal waste incinerators (MWIs) affect human health. Study outputs concluded that the amount of particulate matter people are exposed to from municipal waste incinerators emissions is very low in Great Britain. The document can be viewed at the following link:</p><p> </p><p><a href="http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acs.est.6b06478" target="_blank">http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acs.est.6b06478</a></p><p> </p><p>When consulted, PHE provides an expert and independent opinion to the regulator, the Environment Agency, on the potential impacts, including from particulate matter, on human health of emissions arising from existing or proposed regulated facilities, such as MWIs.</p><p> </p><p>PHE’s position is that well run and regulated modern MWIs are not a significant risk to public health. This view is based on detailed assessments of the effects of air pollutants on health and on the fact that modern MWIs make a small contribution to local concentrations of air pollutants. This document can be viewed at the following link:</p><p> </p><p><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/municipal-waste-incinerator-emissions-to-air-impact-on-health" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/municipal-waste-incinerator-emissions-to-air-impact-on-health</a></p><p> </p><p>PHE has no plans to engage in work on the effects of ultrafine particles on respiratory and cardiovascular disease in and outside the vicinity of waste incinerators.</p> answering member 4067
	creator	252 label Biography information for Dr David Drew
	publisher	25259 pref label House of Commons
	tabling member	252 label Biography information for Dr David Drew

1050532

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	04/02/2019
	date	29/01/2019
	date tabled	29/01/2019
	ddp created	29/01/2019 19:47:23
	answering body	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	13
	answering dept short name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept sort name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	ddp modified	29/01/2019 20:00:49 04/02/2019 10:37:02
	hansard heading	Air Pollution
	house id	1
	identifier	214100
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	04/02/2019 10:05:13
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, when he plans to announce departmental targets for the reduction of PM 2.5 pollutants.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Dulwich and West Norwood
	tabling member printed	Helen Hayes
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 214100
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	214100
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	NamedDay
	answer	answer answer text <p>The UK has legally binding targets to reduce the emissions of fine particulate matter (PM<sub>2.5</sub>) by 2020 and again by 2030 under the National Emissions Ceilings Regulations 2018.</p><p> </p><p>We also have legally binding limits for PM<sub>2.5</sub> concentrations (annual mean of 25μg/m<sup>3</sup>), with which we are in full compliance nationwide. We are on track to meet the 2020 target (20μg/m<sup>3</sup>) already.</p><p> </p><p>In our recent Clean Air Strategy, we also set out our ambition to halve the number of people living in areas above the World Health Organization (WHO) guideline level of 10μg/m<sup>3</sup> by 2025.</p><p> </p><p>We also committed to setting a new, ambitious, long-term target to reduce people’s exposure to PM<sub>2.5</sub>, and we will publish evidence early in 2019 to examine what action would be needed to meet the WHO guideline level of 10μg/m<sup>3</sup>.</p><p> </p><p>We are the first major economy to set ambitions based on the WHO guidelines for PM<sub>2.5</sub>. Our Clean Air Strategy was welcomed by the WHO, who called it “an example for the rest of the world to follow.”</p> answering member 4098
	creator	4510 label Biography information for Helen Hayes
	publisher	25259 pref label House of Commons
	tabling member	4510 label Biography information for Helen Hayes