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

390946

registered interest
date	17/07/2015
answering body	Ministry of Defence
answering dept id	11
answering dept short name	Defence
answering dept sort name	Defence
hansard heading	Afghanistan: Armed Conflict
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 7 July 2015 to Question 5927, if he will commission a lessons learned post-Afghanistan review to inform future military strategy.
tabling member constituency	West Bromwich East
tabling member printed	Tom Watson
uin	7772
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 24/07/2015 answer text <p>No decisions have yet been taken by the Government on a wider post- Afghanistan review. We have been learning the tactical lessons of our operations in Afghanistan throughout the campaign.</p> answering member constituency Sevenoaks answering member printed Michael Fallon question first answered 24/07/2015 11:13:23 answering member 88 label Biography information for Sir Michael Fallon
tabling member	1463 label Biography information for Lord Watson of Wyre Forest

391054

registered interest
date	17/07/2015
answering body	Ministry of Defence
answering dept id	11
answering dept short name	Defence
answering dept sort name	Defence
hansard heading	Iraq: Military Aid
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they plan to integrate training on sexual violence and gender issues into all training given by British forces to the Peshmerga in Iraq.
tabling member printed	Baroness Helic
uin	HL1592
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 30/07/2015 answer text <p>Protection of Civilian (PoC) training is now integrated into all of the training courses delivered to Peshmerga troops by UK training teams. This includes training on sexual violence and gender issues.</p><p>UK trainers have also delivered training to coalition partners' training teams within the Building Partner Capacity site at Erbil. This includes German, Norwegian, and Italian trainers. All UK trainers deployed to Iraq are now trained to deliver PoC training prior to leaving the UK.</p> answering member printed Earl Howe question first answered 30/07/2015 13:46:53 answering member 2000 label Biography information for Earl Howe
tabling member	4331 label Biography information for Baroness Helic

390608

registered interest
date	16/07/2015
answering body	Department for Transport
answering dept id	27
answering dept short name	Transport
answering dept sort name	Transport
hansard heading	Railways: EU Action
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether officials were instructed to vote against the technical pillar of the Fourth Railway Package at the European Union Transport Council Working Group meeting in June, whilst at the same time supporting the package; and if so, why.
tabling member printed	Lord Berkeley
uin	HL1548
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 23/07/2015 answer text <p>A proposal for the technical pillar of the Fourth Railway Package was subject to endorsement by Member States on 30 June at a meeting of the Permanent Representatives Committee (COREPER). In line with Government policy, the UK delegation was unable to support the item on the grounds that the proposals were not consistent with the UK’s preferred approach on the use of secondary legislation powers and the use of delegated acts. Notwithstanding our position on this issue, officials were able to offer the UK’s general support for the Package as a whole.</p> answering member printed Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon question first answered 23/07/2015 15:55:22 answering member 4210 label Biography information for Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
tabling member	3526 label Biography information for Lord Berkeley

390751

registered interest
date	16/07/2015
answering body	Department for Education
answering dept id	60
answering dept short name	Education
answering dept sort name	Education
hansard heading	Children in Care
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Education, how many children in care have been placed in children's homes outside their local authority area in each of the last five years.
tabling member constituency	East Worthing and Shoreham
tabling member printed	Tim Loughton
uin	7603
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/07/2015 answer text <p>The number of children who have been placed in children’s homes outside their local authority area in each of the last five years, 2010 to 2014, is shown in the table below:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Year</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Number of children accommodated in children homes outside council boundary at 31 March</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010</p></td><td><p>2,400</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011</p></td><td><p>2,350</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012</p></td><td><p>2,390</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013</p></td><td><p>2,540</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2014</p></td><td><p>2,730</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>This information is published in table A3 of the statistical first release “Children looked after in England including adoption”, which is available online at:</p><p> </p><p><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/children-looked-after-in-england-including-adoption--2" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/children-looked-after-in-england-including-adoption--2</a></p><p> </p> answering member constituency Crewe and Nantwich answering member printed Edward Timpson question first answered 21/07/2015 14:32:47 answering member 1605 label Biography information for Edward Timpson
tabling member	114 label Biography information for Tim Loughton

390752

registered interest
date	16/07/2015
answering body	Department for Education
answering dept id	60
answering dept short name	Education
answering dept sort name	Education
hansard heading	Children in Care
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what steps she has taken to reduce the number of children in care placed out of their home local authority area.
tabling member constituency	East Worthing and Shoreham
tabling member printed	Tim Loughton
uin	7604
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/07/2015 answer text <p>Looked-after children should only be placed far from home where this is in their best interests. To improve practice in this area the Government has amended regulations so that:</p><ul><li>the Director of Children’s Services must approve that the decision to place a child at a distance from their home is the best decision for the child and that there will be ongoing support for them;</li><li>the local authority making the placement must consult with the authority in which the home is located before making the decision to place the child there. This consultation should include the quality of the home and the services available for the child.</li></ul> answering member constituency Crewe and Nantwich answering member printed Edward Timpson question first answered 21/07/2015 09:44:05 answering member 1605 label Biography information for Edward Timpson
tabling member	114 label Biography information for Tim Loughton

390341

registered interest
date	15/07/2015
answering body	Department of Health
answering dept id	17
answering dept short name	Health
answering dept sort name	Health
hansard heading	Pharmacy: Negligence
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health, whether the inadvertent mislabelling of medicines will remain an offence following the Government's legislation to decriminalise dispensing errors.
tabling member constituency	Rother Valley
tabling member printed	Kevin Barron
uin	7377
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 22/07/2015 answer text <p>The programme board for “rebalancing” medicines legislation and pharmacy regulation is tasked with examining the respective scope of legislation and regulation, and the interface between them, with a view to ensuring these are optimally designed to provide safety for users of pharmacy services, while facilitating and reducing the barriers to responsible development of practice, innovation and a systematic approach to quality in pharmacy. Members of the board, from across the United Kingdom, include representatives from the pharmacy regulators, the professional bodies for pharmacists and pharmacy technicians, pharmacy owners, pharmacists and pharmacy technicians from the various sectors of practice and patients and the public.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>A UK wide consultation, issued on behalf of the four UK Health Departments, ran from 12 February to 14 May 2015. It sought comments and views on two pharmacy related draft Orders being made under the powers in section 60 of the Health Act 1999. The two pharmacy-related draft Orders are:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>- The Pharmacy (Preparation and Dispensing Errors) Order 2015</p><p> </p><p>- The Pharmacy (Premises Standards, Information Obligations, etc.) Order 2015</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The responses to the consultation were supportive of the proposals and included many from individual pharmacy professionals (registered pharmacists and registered pharmacy technicians), as well as pharmacy representative bodies, health organisations, patients and the public and others. A report will be published in due course and recommendations made to ministers on next steps.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>While retaining the criminal sanction the draft section 60 Order entitled ‘The Pharmacy (Preparation and Dispensing Errors) Order 2015’ provides:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>- a defence to prosecution under section 63 (adulteration of medicinal products) of the Medicines Act 1968, in cases of errors where medicines are prepared by a registered pharmacist or a registered pharmacy technician, or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist;</p><p> </p><p>- a defence to prosecution under section 64 (medicinal products not of the nature or quality ordered) of the Medicines Act 1968, in cases of errors where medicines are dispensed by a registered pharmacist or registered pharmacy technician, or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist; and</p><p> </p><p>- the conditions to be met if the new defences are to apply.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Criminal sanctions will remain in place for dispensing errors falling outside the proposed defences, for example, where pharmacy professionals do not act in the course of their profession by using their professional skills for an improper purpose or deliberately failing to have due regard for patient safety. General criminal law may also apply.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>A draft impact assessment was published alongside the consultation on dispensing errors. This will be updated, taking account of the consultation responses.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>There was an error made in the transposition of section 85 of the Medicines Act 1968 in part into regulation 269 of the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 during consolidation of medicines legislation. A legislative amendment has now been made, which came into force on 1 July 2015, to restore the effect of the original provisions which existed in section 85(5) of Medicines Act 1968, such that the labelling offence applies to businesses and not individuals, such as pharmacists and pharmacy technicians.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North East Bedfordshire answering member printed Alistair Burt grouped question UIN 7371 7372 7373 7374 7375 7376 question first answered 22/07/2015 15:40:22 answering member 1201 label Biography information for Alistair Burt
tabling member	392 label Biography information for Sir Kevin Barron

390347

registered interest
date	15/07/2015
answering body	Department of Health
answering dept id	17
answering dept short name	Health
answering dept sort name	Health
hansard heading	Pharmacy: Negligence
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what plans he has to consult further with pharmacy representative bodies before bringing forward legislative proposals to decriminalise dispensing errors made by pharmacists.
tabling member constituency	Rother Valley
tabling member printed	Kevin Barron
uin	7371
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 22/07/2015 answer text <p>The programme board for “rebalancing” medicines legislation and pharmacy regulation is tasked with examining the respective scope of legislation and regulation, and the interface between them, with a view to ensuring these are optimally designed to provide safety for users of pharmacy services, while facilitating and reducing the barriers to responsible development of practice, innovation and a systematic approach to quality in pharmacy. Members of the board, from across the United Kingdom, include representatives from the pharmacy regulators, the professional bodies for pharmacists and pharmacy technicians, pharmacy owners, pharmacists and pharmacy technicians from the various sectors of practice and patients and the public.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>A UK wide consultation, issued on behalf of the four UK Health Departments, ran from 12 February to 14 May 2015. It sought comments and views on two pharmacy related draft Orders being made under the powers in section 60 of the Health Act 1999. The two pharmacy-related draft Orders are:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>- The Pharmacy (Preparation and Dispensing Errors) Order 2015</p><p> </p><p>- The Pharmacy (Premises Standards, Information Obligations, etc.) Order 2015</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The responses to the consultation were supportive of the proposals and included many from individual pharmacy professionals (registered pharmacists and registered pharmacy technicians), as well as pharmacy representative bodies, health organisations, patients and the public and others. A report will be published in due course and recommendations made to ministers on next steps.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>While retaining the criminal sanction the draft section 60 Order entitled ‘The Pharmacy (Preparation and Dispensing Errors) Order 2015’ provides:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>- a defence to prosecution under section 63 (adulteration of medicinal products) of the Medicines Act 1968, in cases of errors where medicines are prepared by a registered pharmacist or a registered pharmacy technician, or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist;</p><p> </p><p>- a defence to prosecution under section 64 (medicinal products not of the nature or quality ordered) of the Medicines Act 1968, in cases of errors where medicines are dispensed by a registered pharmacist or registered pharmacy technician, or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist; and</p><p> </p><p>- the conditions to be met if the new defences are to apply.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Criminal sanctions will remain in place for dispensing errors falling outside the proposed defences, for example, where pharmacy professionals do not act in the course of their profession by using their professional skills for an improper purpose or deliberately failing to have due regard for patient safety. General criminal law may also apply.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>A draft impact assessment was published alongside the consultation on dispensing errors. This will be updated, taking account of the consultation responses.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>There was an error made in the transposition of section 85 of the Medicines Act 1968 in part into regulation 269 of the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 during consolidation of medicines legislation. A legislative amendment has now been made, which came into force on 1 July 2015, to restore the effect of the original provisions which existed in section 85(5) of Medicines Act 1968, such that the labelling offence applies to businesses and not individuals, such as pharmacists and pharmacy technicians.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North East Bedfordshire answering member printed Alistair Burt grouped question UIN 7372 7373 7374 7375 7376 7377 question first answered 22/07/2015 15:40:22 answering member 1201 label Biography information for Alistair Burt
tabling member	392 label Biography information for Sir Kevin Barron

390350

registered interest
date	15/07/2015
answering body	Department of Health
answering dept id	17
answering dept short name	Health
answering dept sort name	Health
hansard heading	Pharmacy: Negligence
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will take steps to exclude pharmacists from sanctions resulting from genuine dispensing errors and medicine labelling errors.
tabling member constituency	Rother Valley
tabling member printed	Kevin Barron
uin	7372
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 22/07/2015 answer text <p>The programme board for “rebalancing” medicines legislation and pharmacy regulation is tasked with examining the respective scope of legislation and regulation, and the interface between them, with a view to ensuring these are optimally designed to provide safety for users of pharmacy services, while facilitating and reducing the barriers to responsible development of practice, innovation and a systematic approach to quality in pharmacy. Members of the board, from across the United Kingdom, include representatives from the pharmacy regulators, the professional bodies for pharmacists and pharmacy technicians, pharmacy owners, pharmacists and pharmacy technicians from the various sectors of practice and patients and the public.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>A UK wide consultation, issued on behalf of the four UK Health Departments, ran from 12 February to 14 May 2015. It sought comments and views on two pharmacy related draft Orders being made under the powers in section 60 of the Health Act 1999. The two pharmacy-related draft Orders are:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>- The Pharmacy (Preparation and Dispensing Errors) Order 2015</p><p> </p><p>- The Pharmacy (Premises Standards, Information Obligations, etc.) Order 2015</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The responses to the consultation were supportive of the proposals and included many from individual pharmacy professionals (registered pharmacists and registered pharmacy technicians), as well as pharmacy representative bodies, health organisations, patients and the public and others. A report will be published in due course and recommendations made to ministers on next steps.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>While retaining the criminal sanction the draft section 60 Order entitled ‘The Pharmacy (Preparation and Dispensing Errors) Order 2015’ provides:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>- a defence to prosecution under section 63 (adulteration of medicinal products) of the Medicines Act 1968, in cases of errors where medicines are prepared by a registered pharmacist or a registered pharmacy technician, or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist;</p><p> </p><p>- a defence to prosecution under section 64 (medicinal products not of the nature or quality ordered) of the Medicines Act 1968, in cases of errors where medicines are dispensed by a registered pharmacist or registered pharmacy technician, or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist; and</p><p> </p><p>- the conditions to be met if the new defences are to apply.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Criminal sanctions will remain in place for dispensing errors falling outside the proposed defences, for example, where pharmacy professionals do not act in the course of their profession by using their professional skills for an improper purpose or deliberately failing to have due regard for patient safety. General criminal law may also apply.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>A draft impact assessment was published alongside the consultation on dispensing errors. This will be updated, taking account of the consultation responses.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>There was an error made in the transposition of section 85 of the Medicines Act 1968 in part into regulation 269 of the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 during consolidation of medicines legislation. A legislative amendment has now been made, which came into force on 1 July 2015, to restore the effect of the original provisions which existed in section 85(5) of Medicines Act 1968, such that the labelling offence applies to businesses and not individuals, such as pharmacists and pharmacy technicians.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North East Bedfordshire answering member printed Alistair Burt grouped question UIN 7371 7373 7374 7375 7376 7377 question first answered 22/07/2015 15:40:22 answering member 1201 label Biography information for Alistair Burt
tabling member	392 label Biography information for Sir Kevin Barron

390352

registered interest
date	15/07/2015
answering body	Department of Health
answering dept id	17
answering dept short name	Health
answering dept sort name	Health
hansard heading	Drugs: Labelling
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what plans he has to amend the law on labelling of medicines in order to decriminalise dispensing errors.
tabling member constituency	Rother Valley
tabling member printed	Kevin Barron
uin	7376
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 22/07/2015 answer text <p>The programme board for “rebalancing” medicines legislation and pharmacy regulation is tasked with examining the respective scope of legislation and regulation, and the interface between them, with a view to ensuring these are optimally designed to provide safety for users of pharmacy services, while facilitating and reducing the barriers to responsible development of practice, innovation and a systematic approach to quality in pharmacy. Members of the board, from across the United Kingdom, include representatives from the pharmacy regulators, the professional bodies for pharmacists and pharmacy technicians, pharmacy owners, pharmacists and pharmacy technicians from the various sectors of practice and patients and the public.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>A UK wide consultation, issued on behalf of the four UK Health Departments, ran from 12 February to 14 May 2015. It sought comments and views on two pharmacy related draft Orders being made under the powers in section 60 of the Health Act 1999. The two pharmacy-related draft Orders are:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>- The Pharmacy (Preparation and Dispensing Errors) Order 2015</p><p> </p><p>- The Pharmacy (Premises Standards, Information Obligations, etc.) Order 2015</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The responses to the consultation were supportive of the proposals and included many from individual pharmacy professionals (registered pharmacists and registered pharmacy technicians), as well as pharmacy representative bodies, health organisations, patients and the public and others. A report will be published in due course and recommendations made to ministers on next steps.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>While retaining the criminal sanction the draft section 60 Order entitled ‘The Pharmacy (Preparation and Dispensing Errors) Order 2015’ provides:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>- a defence to prosecution under section 63 (adulteration of medicinal products) of the Medicines Act 1968, in cases of errors where medicines are prepared by a registered pharmacist or a registered pharmacy technician, or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist;</p><p> </p><p>- a defence to prosecution under section 64 (medicinal products not of the nature or quality ordered) of the Medicines Act 1968, in cases of errors where medicines are dispensed by a registered pharmacist or registered pharmacy technician, or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist; and</p><p> </p><p>- the conditions to be met if the new defences are to apply.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Criminal sanctions will remain in place for dispensing errors falling outside the proposed defences, for example, where pharmacy professionals do not act in the course of their profession by using their professional skills for an improper purpose or deliberately failing to have due regard for patient safety. General criminal law may also apply.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>A draft impact assessment was published alongside the consultation on dispensing errors. This will be updated, taking account of the consultation responses.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>There was an error made in the transposition of section 85 of the Medicines Act 1968 in part into regulation 269 of the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 during consolidation of medicines legislation. A legislative amendment has now been made, which came into force on 1 July 2015, to restore the effect of the original provisions which existed in section 85(5) of Medicines Act 1968, such that the labelling offence applies to businesses and not individuals, such as pharmacists and pharmacy technicians.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North East Bedfordshire answering member printed Alistair Burt grouped question UIN 7371 7372 7373 7374 7375 7377 question first answered 22/07/2015 15:40:22 answering member 1201 label Biography information for Alistair Burt
tabling member	392 label Biography information for Sir Kevin Barron

390353

registered interest
date	15/07/2015
answering body	Department of Health
answering dept id	17
answering dept short name	Health
answering dept sort name	Health
hansard heading	Drugs: Labelling
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the effect of section 85 of the Medicines Act on the willingness of pharmacists to report dispensing errors; and if he will make a statement.
tabling member constituency	Rother Valley
tabling member printed	Kevin Barron
uin	7375
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 22/07/2015 answer text <p>The programme board for “rebalancing” medicines legislation and pharmacy regulation is tasked with examining the respective scope of legislation and regulation, and the interface between them, with a view to ensuring these are optimally designed to provide safety for users of pharmacy services, while facilitating and reducing the barriers to responsible development of practice, innovation and a systematic approach to quality in pharmacy. Members of the board, from across the United Kingdom, include representatives from the pharmacy regulators, the professional bodies for pharmacists and pharmacy technicians, pharmacy owners, pharmacists and pharmacy technicians from the various sectors of practice and patients and the public.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>A UK wide consultation, issued on behalf of the four UK Health Departments, ran from 12 February to 14 May 2015. It sought comments and views on two pharmacy related draft Orders being made under the powers in section 60 of the Health Act 1999. The two pharmacy-related draft Orders are:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>- The Pharmacy (Preparation and Dispensing Errors) Order 2015</p><p> </p><p>- The Pharmacy (Premises Standards, Information Obligations, etc.) Order 2015</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The responses to the consultation were supportive of the proposals and included many from individual pharmacy professionals (registered pharmacists and registered pharmacy technicians), as well as pharmacy representative bodies, health organisations, patients and the public and others. A report will be published in due course and recommendations made to ministers on next steps.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>While retaining the criminal sanction the draft section 60 Order entitled ‘The Pharmacy (Preparation and Dispensing Errors) Order 2015’ provides:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>- a defence to prosecution under section 63 (adulteration of medicinal products) of the Medicines Act 1968, in cases of errors where medicines are prepared by a registered pharmacist or a registered pharmacy technician, or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist;</p><p> </p><p>- a defence to prosecution under section 64 (medicinal products not of the nature or quality ordered) of the Medicines Act 1968, in cases of errors where medicines are dispensed by a registered pharmacist or registered pharmacy technician, or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist; and</p><p> </p><p>- the conditions to be met if the new defences are to apply.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Criminal sanctions will remain in place for dispensing errors falling outside the proposed defences, for example, where pharmacy professionals do not act in the course of their profession by using their professional skills for an improper purpose or deliberately failing to have due regard for patient safety. General criminal law may also apply.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>A draft impact assessment was published alongside the consultation on dispensing errors. This will be updated, taking account of the consultation responses.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>There was an error made in the transposition of section 85 of the Medicines Act 1968 in part into regulation 269 of the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 during consolidation of medicines legislation. A legislative amendment has now been made, which came into force on 1 July 2015, to restore the effect of the original provisions which existed in section 85(5) of Medicines Act 1968, such that the labelling offence applies to businesses and not individuals, such as pharmacists and pharmacy technicians.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North East Bedfordshire answering member printed Alistair Burt grouped question UIN 7371 7372 7373 7374 7376 7377 question first answered 22/07/2015 15:40:22 answering member 1201 label Biography information for Alistair Burt
tabling member	392 label Biography information for Sir Kevin Barron