Show Search Form

Search Results

registered interest	true false
date	exactly: or between: and
answering body
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
hansard heading
house id
legislature	pref label
question text
tabling member constituency
tabling member printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member constituency answering member printed grouped question UIN question first answered answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

1127192

registered interest
date	16/05/2019
answering body	Cabinet Office
answering dept id	53
answering dept short name	Cabinet Office
answering dept sort name	Cabinet Office
hansard heading	Developing Countries: Fossil Fuels
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what assessment he has made of the implications for his policies of the findings the report entitled A False Promise of Prosperity, published by Platform in October 2018.
tabling member constituency	Nottingham North
tabling member printed	Alex Norris
uin	255378
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/05/2019 answer text <p>The Prosperity Fund has considered the findings of the report; we are confident the Prosperity Fund programmes are consistent with the UK government’s commitments, under the Paris Agreement.</p><p> </p><p>Within the portfolio, there are a considerable number of programmes where we are working with partner countries to increase their resilience to climate change, to reduce emissions, and to transition to a sustainable low carbon economy.</p><p> </p><p>The Fund’s energy related initiatives do not directly finance oil and gas exploration or production. They aim to help create policy and business environments that improve energy access, strengthen energy markets, encourage investment and promote energy efficiency. In turn this will improve energy security, and enable a faster transition to a cleaner, low carbon economy. This is consistent with the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in their Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5<sup>o</sup>C that oil and gas will continue to be an essential part of the global energy mix as we transition to a low carbon economy.</p> answering member constituency Aylesbury answering member printed Mr David Lidington question first answered 21/05/2019 15:59:41 answering member 15 label Biography information for Sir David Lidington
tabling member	4641 label Biography information for Alex Norris

1127214

registered interest
date	16/05/2019
answering body	Department of Health and Social Care
answering dept id	17
answering dept short name	Health and Social Care
answering dept sort name	Health and Social Care
hansard heading	Drugs: Prices
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, with reference to the draft resolution for consideration by the World Health Assembly in May 2019 on improving the transparency of markets for medicines, vaccines and other health-related technologies, if the Government will withdraw its support for suggested amendments to remove every mention of high prices.
tabling member constituency	Liverpool, Walton
tabling member printed	Dan Carden
uin	255380
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/05/2019 answer text <p>The United Kingdom has a long-established and globally-recognised track record of assessing the price of new, innovative medicines by their clinical benefit and value, rather than by their development costs or international reference prices.</p><p> </p><p>The UK will engage constructively with the talks at the World Health Assembly to achieve the best outcome for people here and globally, including in low and middle income countries. Pricing arrangements are the responsibility of Member States and are highly context specific, but the Department supports information sharing and mutual learning initiatives, where appropriate, in seeking to improve value for money for country procurement budgets.</p> answering member constituency South Ribble answering member printed Seema Kennedy grouped question UIN 255381 255382 question first answered 21/05/2019 16:12:54 answering member 4455 label Biography information for Seema Kennedy
tabling member	4651 label Biography information for Dan Carden

1127215

registered interest
date	16/05/2019
answering body	Department of Health and Social Care
answering dept id	17
answering dept short name	Health and Social Care
answering dept sort name	Health and Social Care
hansard heading	Drugs: Prices
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, with reference to the draft resolution for consideration by the World Health Assembly in May 2019 on improving the transparency of markets for medicines, vaccines and other health-related technologies, if the Government will take steps to help ensure that the recommendation to member states calls for mandatory rather than voluntary measures.
tabling member constituency	Liverpool, Walton
tabling member printed	Dan Carden
uin	255381
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/05/2019 answer text <p>The United Kingdom has a long-established and globally-recognised track record of assessing the price of new, innovative medicines by their clinical benefit and value, rather than by their development costs or international reference prices.</p><p> </p><p>The UK will engage constructively with the talks at the World Health Assembly to achieve the best outcome for people here and globally, including in low and middle income countries. Pricing arrangements are the responsibility of Member States and are highly context specific, but the Department supports information sharing and mutual learning initiatives, where appropriate, in seeking to improve value for money for country procurement budgets.</p> answering member constituency South Ribble answering member printed Seema Kennedy grouped question UIN 255380 255382 question first answered 21/05/2019 16:12:54 answering member 4455 label Biography information for Seema Kennedy
tabling member	4651 label Biography information for Dan Carden

1127216

registered interest
date	16/05/2019
answering body	Department of Health and Social Care
answering dept id	17
answering dept short name	Health and Social Care
answering dept sort name	Health and Social Care
hansard heading	Drugs: Prices
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, if the Government will support the draft resolution for consideration by the World Health Assembly in May 2019 on improving the transparency of markets for medicines, vaccines and other health-related technologies.
tabling member constituency	Liverpool, Walton
tabling member printed	Dan Carden
uin	255382
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/05/2019 answer text <p>The United Kingdom has a long-established and globally-recognised track record of assessing the price of new, innovative medicines by their clinical benefit and value, rather than by their development costs or international reference prices.</p><p> </p><p>The UK will engage constructively with the talks at the World Health Assembly to achieve the best outcome for people here and globally, including in low and middle income countries. Pricing arrangements are the responsibility of Member States and are highly context specific, but the Department supports information sharing and mutual learning initiatives, where appropriate, in seeking to improve value for money for country procurement budgets.</p> answering member constituency South Ribble answering member printed Seema Kennedy grouped question UIN 255380 255381 question first answered 21/05/2019 16:12:54 answering member 4455 label Biography information for Seema Kennedy
tabling member	4651 label Biography information for Dan Carden

1126837

registered interest
date	15/05/2019
answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
answering dept id	29
answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
hansard heading	Working Links
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what discussions officials in her Department have had with their counterparts in the Ministry of Justice on the Working Links: Ministerial direction correspondence published on 8 May 2019; and if she will introduce similar financial protections to her Department’s Working Links subcontractors.
tabling member constituency	Easington
tabling member printed	Grahame Morris
uin	254799
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/05/2019 answer text <p>DWP Commercial have had discussions recently with MOJ colleagues to clarify the MOJ Ministerial direction correspondence published on 8 May 2019.</p><p>The MOJ are making payments to a small number of Permitted Sub Contractors on the basis of a) the unique nature of their services (statutory services) and b) the structure of their current market in the context of the transformation announced yesterday.</p><p>The Department considered the impact on stakeholders and sub-contractors, based on the Administrator’s statement of affairs at the point of Working Links going into administration, and has worked with both the Administrator and Fedcap, who have taken over a number of Working Links contracts, to minimise the impact on those supply chain partners owed monies by Working Links at the point of administration.</p> answering member constituency Colchester answering member printed Will Quince question first answered 21/05/2019 16:43:14 answering member 4423 label Biography information for Will Quince
tabling member	3973 label Biography information for Grahame Morris

1126082

registered interest
date	13/05/2019
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Courts: Disability
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many court buildings in the south east of England, excluding Greater London, were inaccessible to (a) defendants and witnesses, (b) members of the public and (c) court staff with disabilities in the week beginning 6 May 2019; and how many of those buildings were only temporarily inaccessible in that week because of broken lifts; and how many of those courts were inaccessible to at least one of those groups for (i) more than one week and (ii) more than one month in the latest period for which figures are available.
tabling member constituency	Bolton South East
tabling member printed	Yasmin Qureshi
uin	253544
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/05/2019 answer text <p>HM Courts &amp; Tribunals Service is committed to ensuring access to courts and tribunals is maintained for staff and service users. We have a reasonable adjustments policy in place to accommodate those with particular access requirements. Disabled access was typically not factored in when many of our court and tribunal buildings were built. However, we have a number of accessible courts that our criminal justice partners are aware of, and these are used to list cases where a defendant might have accessibility needs.</p><p> </p><p>The majority of our buildings were accessible to the user groups listed during the period in question. Of the 81 total courts and tribunals in the South East, only 11 were inaccessible to witnesses and members of the public during the week commencing 6 May 2019, none were inaccessible to staff, whilst 39 were inaccessible to one very specific user group with disabilities (defendants using custodial facilities).</p><p> </p><p>3 of those buildings were temporarily inaccessible in that week because of broken lifts, of which 3 were inaccessible for more than one month.</p><p> </p><p>We aim to list cases at suitable venues when there are access needs. Where access issues do arise various mitigations are explored, including video-conferencing from a remote site, the use of judicial or staff lifts, or later start times for those who require longer to travel to court.</p><p> </p><p>Since 2015/16, we have invested more than £114m to improve court buildings and, in last year’s Budget, the Chancellor announced an additional £15m to be spent on improving maintenance and security across the estate.</p> answering member constituency Blackpool North and Cleveleys answering member printed Paul Maynard question first answered 21/05/2019 16:10:28 answering member 3926 label Biography information for Paul Maynard
tabling member	3924 label Biography information for Yasmin Qureshi

1126083

registered interest
date	13/05/2019
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Courts: Disability
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many court buildings in the Greater London were inaccessible to (a) defendants and witnesses, (b) members of the public and (c) court staff with disabilities in the week beginning 6 May 2019; and how many of those buildings were only temporarily inaccessible in that week because of broken lifts; and how many of those courts were inaccessible to at least one of those groups for (i) more than one week and (ii) more than one month in the latest period for which figures are available.
tabling member constituency	Bolton South East
tabling member printed	Yasmin Qureshi
uin	253545
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/05/2019 answer text <p>HM Courts &amp; Tribunals Service is committed to ensuring access to courts and tribunals is maintained for staff and service users. We have a reasonable adjustments policy in place to accommodate those with particular access requirements. Disabled access was typically not factored in when many of our court and tribunal buildings were built. However, we have a number of accessible courts that our criminal justice partners are aware of, and these are used to list cases where a defendant might have accessibility needs.</p><p> </p><p>The majority of our buildings were accessible to the user groups listed during the period in question. Of the 56 total courts and tribunals in London, only 7 were inaccessible to witnesses and members of the public during the week commencing 6 May 2019, none were inaccessible to staff, whilst 26 were inaccessible to one very specific user group with disabilities (defendants using custodial facilities).</p><p> </p><p>2 of those buildings were temporarily inaccessible in that week because of broken lifts, of which 2 were inaccessible for more than one month.</p><p> </p><p>We aim to list cases at suitable venues when there are access needs. Where access issues do arise various mitigations are explored, including video-conferencing from a remote site, the use of judicial or staff lifts, or later start times for those who require longer to travel to court.</p><p> </p><p>Since 2015/16, we have invested more than £114m to improve court buildings and, in last year’s Budget, the Chancellor announced an additional £15m to be spent on improving maintenance and security across the estate.</p> answering member constituency Blackpool North and Cleveleys answering member printed Paul Maynard question first answered 21/05/2019 16:06:13 answering member 3926 label Biography information for Paul Maynard
tabling member	3924 label Biography information for Yasmin Qureshi

1126084

registered interest
date	13/05/2019
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Courts: Disability
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many court buildings in the Midlands were inaccessible to (a) defendants and witnesses, (b) members of the public and (c) court staff with disabilities in the week beginning 6 May 2019; and how many of those buildings were only temporarily inaccessible in that week because of broken lifts; and how many of those courts were inaccessible to at least one of those groups for (i) more than one week and (ii) more than one month in the latest period for which figures are available.
tabling member constituency	Bolton South East
tabling member printed	Yasmin Qureshi
uin	253546
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/05/2019 answer text <p>HM Courts &amp; Tribunals Service is committed to ensuring access to courts and tribunals is maintained for staff and service users. We have a reasonable adjustments policy in place to accommodate those with particular access requirements. Disabled access was typically not factored in when many of our court and tribunal buildings were built. However, we have a number of accessible courts that our criminal justice partners are aware of, and these are used to list cases where a defendant might have accessibility needs.</p><p> </p><p>The majority of our buildings were accessible to the user groups listed during the period in question. Of the 44 total courts and tribunals in the Midlands, none were inaccessible to witnesses, staff or members of the public during the week commencing 6 May 2019, whilst 32 were inaccessible to one very specific user group with disabilities (defendants using custodial facilities).</p><p> </p><p>No buildings were temporarily inaccessible due to broken lifts.</p><p> </p><p>We aim to list cases at suitable venues when there are access needs. Where access issues do arise various mitigations are explored, including video-conferencing from a remote site, the use of judicial or staff lifts, or later start times for those who require longer to travel to court.</p><p> </p><p>Since 2015/16, we have invested more than £114m to improve court buildings and, in last year’s Budget, the Chancellor announced an additional £15m to be spent on improving maintenance and security across the estate.</p> answering member constituency Blackpool North and Cleveleys answering member printed Paul Maynard question first answered 21/05/2019 16:19:27 answering member 3926 label Biography information for Paul Maynard
tabling member	3924 label Biography information for Yasmin Qureshi

1126085

registered interest
date	13/05/2019
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Courts: Disability
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many court buildings in the north west of England were inaccessible to (a) defendants and witnesses, (b) members of the public and (c) court staff with disabilities in the week beginning 6 May 2019; and how many of those buildings were only temporarily inaccessible in that week because of broken lifts; and how many of those courts were inaccessible to at least one of those groups for (i) more than one week and (ii) more than one month in the latest period for which figures are available.
tabling member constituency	Bolton South East
tabling member printed	Yasmin Qureshi
uin	253547
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/05/2019 answer text <p>HM Courts &amp; Tribunals Service is committed to ensuring access to courts and tribunals is maintained for staff and service users. We have a reasonable adjustments policy in place to accommodate those with particular access requirements. Disabled access was typically not factored in when many of our court and tribunal buildings were built. However, we have a number of accessible courts that our criminal justice partners are aware of, and these are used to list cases where a defendant might have accessibility needs.</p><p> </p><p>The majority of our buildings were accessible to the user groups listed during the period in question. Of the 45 total courts and tribunals in the North West, only 4 were inaccessible to witnesses or members of the public during the week commencing 6 May 2019, none were inaccessible to staff, whilst 25 were inaccessible to one very specific user group with disabilities (defendants using custodial facilities).</p><p> </p><p>No buildings were temporarily inaccessible due to broken lifts.</p><p> </p><p>We aim to list cases at suitable venues when there are access needs. Where access issues do arise various mitigations are explored, including video-conferencing from a remote site, the use of judicial or staff lifts, or later start times for those who require longer to travel to court.</p><p> </p><p>Since 2015/16, we have invested more than £114m to improve court buildings and, in last year’s Budget, the Chancellor announced an additional £15m to be spent on improving maintenance and security across the estate.</p> answering member constituency Blackpool North and Cleveleys answering member printed Paul Maynard question first answered 21/05/2019 16:02:28 answering member 3926 label Biography information for Paul Maynard
tabling member	3924 label Biography information for Yasmin Qureshi

1126086

registered interest
date	13/05/2019
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Courts: Disability
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many court buildings in the north east of England were inaccessible to (a) defendants and witnesses, (b) members of the public and (c) court staff with disabilities in the week beginning 6 May 2019; and how many of those buildings were only temporarily inaccessible in that week because of broken lifts; and how many of those courts were inaccessible to at least one of those groups for (i) more than one week and (ii) more than one month in the latest period for which figures are available.
tabling member constituency	Bolton South East
tabling member printed	Yasmin Qureshi
uin	253548
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/05/2019 answer text <p>HM Courts &amp; Tribunals Service is committed to ensuring access to courts and tribunals is maintained for staff and service users. We have a reasonable adjustments policy in place to accommodate those with particular access requirements. Disabled access was typically not factored in when many of our court and tribunal buildings were built. However, we have a number of accessible courts that our criminal justice partners are aware of, and these are used to list cases where a defendant might have accessibility needs.</p><p>The majority of our buildings were accessible to the user groups listed during the period in question. Of the 51 total courts and tribunals in the North East, only four were inaccessible to witnesses and 3 to members of the public during the week commencing 6 May 2019, none were inaccessible to staff, whilst 34 were inaccessible to one very specific user group with disabilities (defendants using custodial facilities).</p><p>No buildings were temporarily inaccessible due to broken lifts. We aim to list cases at suitable venues when there are access needs. Where access issues do arise various mitigations are explored, including video-conferencing from a remote site, the use of judicial or staff lifts, or later start times for those who require longer to travel to court.</p><p>Since 2015/16, we have invested more than £114m to improve court buildings and, in last year’s Budget, the Chancellor announced an additional £15m to be spent on improving maintenance and security across the estate.</p> answering member constituency Blackpool North and Cleveleys answering member printed Paul Maynard question first answered 21/05/2019 16:22:54 answering member 3926 label Biography information for Paul Maynard
tabling member	3924 label Biography information for Yasmin Qureshi