Asked by: Baroness Falkner of Margravine (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to publish examples of practices and biases within institutions that they consider to be relevant conduct under their definition of anti-Muslim hatred/Islamophobia.
Answered by Baroness Taylor of Stevenage - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip)
The independent Working Group have now provided their advice to Ministers who are carefully taking the time to review and consider the advice carefully before confirming next steps in due course.
Any definition used by government will be non-statutory. It will enable government and other relevant bodies to have a greater understanding of unacceptable treatment and prejudice against Muslim communities.
The published terms of reference for the Working Group were clear that their advice on a definition must be compatible with the unchanging right of British citizens to exercise freedom of speech and expression.
Asked by: Baroness Falkner of Margravine (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to carry out a public consultation in relation to their definition of anti-Muslim hatred/Islamophobia.
Answered by Baroness Taylor of Stevenage - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip)
The independent Working Group have now provided their advice to Ministers who are carefully taking the time to review and consider the advice carefully before confirming next steps in due course.
Any definition used by government will be non-statutory. It will enable government and other relevant bodies to have a greater understanding of unacceptable treatment and prejudice against Muslim communities.
The published terms of reference for the Working Group were clear that their advice on a definition must be compatible with the unchanging right of British citizens to exercise freedom of speech and expression.
Asked by: Baroness Falkner of Margravine (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether, within the last ten years, they have sought to require (1) the Tavistock Clinic, or (2) related NHS institutions which have treated gender dysphoric related conditions, to provide data linkage information; and whether they intend to do so in the future.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Data Linkage Study is a retrospective study based on an analysis of data collected historically for a cohort of adults who, as children, were cared for under a former model of National Health Service gender care, the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS). This study requires no active patient participation and instead relies on an analysis of the available digital information held within health records and other nationally held databases. The analysis looks for potential linkages or associations that do not prove ‘cause and effect’ but nonetheless may provide useful insights on the experience and outcomes of former GIDS patients.
The study was planned to take place during the lifespan of the Independent Cass Review and a statutory instrument was brought forward in 2022 aiming to protect those disclosing protected information. It is well documented that some NHS adult Gender Dysphoria Clinics did not send data to allow the study to commence and the study was not completed.
NHS England is now responsible for delivery of the Data Linkage Study. NHS England has taken time to undertake due diligence work on the data sources critical to the study, and to work with organisations to refine the planned approach to data sharing. Study approvals are currently in progress. As with usual research practice, the data linkage study protocol will be made available in the public domain once independent research and ethical approvals have been appropriately secured, at which point the analytical work can begin.
Asked by: Baroness Falkner of Margravine (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government how many public inquiries chaired by a judge since 2015 (1) had within their terms of reference the power to recommend individual compensation payments, and did so; (2) did not have the power within their terms of reference to recommend compensation payments, but did so.
Answered by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip)
The terms of reference for a public inquiry determine an inquiry’s scope. Since 2015, none of the terms of reference for public inquiries (whether or not led by a judicial chair) have specifically required an inquiry to make recommendations related to compensation. We do not hold data centrally on departmental reviews.
The Infected Blood Inquiry - a judge-led inquiry - specifically recommended the provision of compensation payments. The Inquiry did so in response to Sir Robert Francis’ framework into compensation payments for victims of infected blood which was commissioned by the Cabinet Office. The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) - an inquiry with a non-judicial chair - made a recommendation for a redress scheme for victims and survivors of sexual abuse.
We are not aware of any other inquiry since 2015 which made recommendations for compensation.
Asked by: Baroness Falkner of Margravine (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government how many departmental reviews since 2015 (1) had within their terms of reference the power to recommend individual compensation payments, and did so; (2) did not have the power within their terms of reference to recommend compensation payments, but did so.
Answered by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip)
The terms of reference for a public inquiry determine an inquiry’s scope. Since 2015, none of the terms of reference for public inquiries (whether or not led by a judicial chair) have specifically required an inquiry to make recommendations related to compensation. We do not hold data centrally on departmental reviews.
The Infected Blood Inquiry - a judge-led inquiry - specifically recommended the provision of compensation payments. The Inquiry did so in response to Sir Robert Francis’ framework into compensation payments for victims of infected blood which was commissioned by the Cabinet Office. The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) - an inquiry with a non-judicial chair - made a recommendation for a redress scheme for victims and survivors of sexual abuse.
We are not aware of any other inquiry since 2015 which made recommendations for compensation.
Asked by: Baroness Falkner of Margravine (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government how many public inquiries with a non-judicial chair since 2015 (1) had within their terms of reference the power to recommend individual compensation payments, and did so; (2) did not have the power within their terms of reference to recommend compensation payments, but did so.
Answered by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip)
The terms of reference for a public inquiry determine an inquiry’s scope. Since 2015, none of the terms of reference for public inquiries (whether or not led by a judicial chair) have specifically required an inquiry to make recommendations related to compensation. We do not hold data centrally on departmental reviews.
The Infected Blood Inquiry - a judge-led inquiry - specifically recommended the provision of compensation payments. The Inquiry did so in response to Sir Robert Francis’ framework into compensation payments for victims of infected blood which was commissioned by the Cabinet Office. The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) - an inquiry with a non-judicial chair - made a recommendation for a redress scheme for victims and survivors of sexual abuse.
We are not aware of any other inquiry since 2015 which made recommendations for compensation.
Asked by: Baroness Falkner of Margravine (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government what consideration they have given to introducing legislation to curtail the use of strategic lawsuits against public participation.
Answered by Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede
Behaviour that makes use of SLAPPs is intolerable and we will tackle it to protect investigative journalism and free speech, while also ensuring access to justice. The Government is focusing on implementing the SLAPPs measures in the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023. Our future approach to SLAPPs reform will be informed by monitoring how these new procedural rules operate when they come into effect in 2025. The work of the SLAPPs taskforce is ongoing and we continue to build our evidence base in considering options for reform in the longer term, taking into account the diversity of views expressed by stakeholders and those targeted by these abhorrent actions.
Asked by: Baroness Falkner of Margravine (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what consultations they have undertaken with (1) central clearing parties, (2) asset managers, (3) investment banks, and (4) insurance firms, about regulations for future market access to the EU; whether they intend to undertake a public consultation on future EU market access for financial services; and if so, when.
Answered by Earl of Courtown - Opposition Deputy Chief Whip (Lords)
The Government is in regular contact with the financial services industry on a range of EU issues, including the future relationship. This has included ministerial and official meetings with a wide range of central clearing parties, asset managers, investment banks, and insurance firms, among others, in order to inform our negotiations with the EU.
HM Treasury will continue to engage with the financial services sector as negotiations with the EU progress.
Asked by: Baroness Falkner of Margravine (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for International Development:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to eradicate polio within Commonwealth countries, including Pakistan and Nigeria; and whether this is a priority for the discussions on the Sustainable Development Goals during the forthcoming Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting.
Answered by Lord Bates
Remarkable progress has been made towards polio eradication in the last 30 years, with over 99% reduction in the number of polio cases. The UK has played a leading role in this process and UK support to the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) will mean up to 45 million children can be vaccinated against polio each year until 2020. Only two Commonwealth countries, Nigeria and Pakistan, have not yet been declared polio-free. In February the UK’s support enabled GPEI to conduct a campaign to vaccinate almost 39 million children in Pakistan, and in April large-scale immunisation campaigns are planned in Nigeria. Nigeria has not seen a case of polio since 2016 and there has only been one case in Pakistan this year, meaning that these two countries are on track to eradicating polio. Health and communicable diseases will be a key focus of the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting, a forum which acknowledges polio as a global health priority.
Asked by: Baroness Falkner of Margravine (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they have made an assessment of whether those Russians listed by the United States Treasury Department on 30 January as potentially subject to United States sanctions for illegal activity, including those identified by the Anti-Corruption Foundation for wrongdoing under the UK Bribery Act 2010, are persons connected to companies listed on the London Stock Exchange.
Answered by Lord Bates
The Government is aware of the recent report issued by the United States Treasury Department. This report is not a sanctions list and does not impose sanctions on individuals and entities listed in it.
The UK implements sanctions agreed at the UN, EU or those the Government put in place autonomously. Only a relevant prohibition contained in these sanctions will prevent a person from being connected to companies listed on the London Stock Exchange .
Allegations of illegal activity under the UK Bribery Act 2010 are a matter for the operationally independent Serious Fraud Office to investigate.