Asked by: Lord Jones of Cheltenham (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the security implications of outsourcing UK national security infrastructure to non-UK companies.
Answered by Lord True - Shadow Leader of the House of Lords
Government departments are responsible for managing their own security risk when procuring goods and services, including risks associated with foreign ownership, control or influence. National security risks are specific to the goods or services being procured, and the parties involved in the transaction. Risks are considered on a case-by-case basis.
We are unable to comment on specific assessments owing to national security sensitivities.
Asked by: Lord Jones of Cheltenham (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the reported description by Dr Mike Ryan, head of the World Health Organisation’s emergencies programme, of the policy of relaxing COVID-19 restrictions on 19 July as “epidemiological stupidity”.
Answered by Lord True - Shadow Leader of the House of Lords
The Government made a full assessment of the epidemiological and other relevant data ahead of taking the decision to move to Step 4 of the roadmap on 19 July. The Government is clear that the pandemic is not over and that the public should continue to behave cautiously.
Asked by: Lord Jones of Cheltenham (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the letter in The Lancet ‘Mass infection is not an option: we must do more to protect our young’, published on 7 July, arguing against relaxing COVID-19 restrictions; and what assessment they have made of how their policy on lifting restrictions meets their objective of “following the science”.
Answered by Lord True - Shadow Leader of the House of Lords
The Government made a full assessment of the epidemiological and other relevant data ahead of taking the decision to move to step 4 of the roadmap on 19 July and assessed that the four tests had been met. The success of the vaccination rollout has paved the way for the safe and gradual lifting of restrictions. However, the Government has been clear that the pandemic is not over and that the public should continue to practice cautious behaviours.
The risks of hospitalisation and intensive care admission in children due to infection is very low (approximately 8 per 100,000 population under 18 are admitted to hospital). Therefore, from step 4, the Government changed the controls that apply in early years, schools, colleges and higher education institutions to maintain a baseline of protective measures while maximising attendance and minimising disruption to children and young people’s education.
Asked by: Lord Jones of Cheltenham (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have, if any, to introduce measures so that MPs and Peers are (1) covered by, and (2) liable to, regulations made under the Equality Act 2010.
Answered by Lord True - Shadow Leader of the House of Lords
The Government does not have plans to change the Act’s coverage as it relates to Parliamentarians. The constitutional position is affirmed by Parliament in Schedule 3 of the Act.
The conduct of Parliamentarians is a matter for each House. Codes of conduct set out the standards of behaviour expected of Members of Parliament in all aspects of their public life. Both Houses are advised by the Commissioners for Standards in each House.
Where MPs and peers recruit or employ staff, these aspects are covered by the Equality Act 2010, including the duty to make reasonable adjustments for disabled people.
Asked by: Lord Jones of Cheltenham (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the letter signed by scientists published in The Lancet on 8 July, which calls the planned relaxation of restrictions related to the COVID-19 pandemic on 19 July a “dangerous and unethical experiment”.
Answered by Lord True - Shadow Leader of the House of Lords
On Monday 12 July, the Prime Minister confirmed that the Government’s four tests for easing COVID-19 restrictions had been met and England proceeded to Step 4 of the roadmap on Monday 19 July. A range of data was considered, including from Public Health England, the NHS, and the ONS, as well as modelling from SAGE, to inform this decision. In June, the move to Step 4 was delayed by four weeks so more adults could be vaccinated, and more than 7 million vaccines were administered during this period.
The Government will continue to monitor the data on a regular basis to ensure there is no danger of the NHS facing unsustainable pressure. The Government will maintain contingency plans for reimposing economic and social restrictions at a local, regional or national level if evidence suggests they are necessary to suppress or manage a dangerous variant. Such measures would only be re-introduced as a last resort to prevent unsustainable pressure on the NHS.
Asked by: Lord Jones of Cheltenham (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what penalties apply to ministers who are found to have breached paragraph 1.7 of the Ministerial Code.
Answered by Lord True - Shadow Leader of the House of Lords
Ministers are personally responsible for deciding how to act and conduct themselves in the light of the Code and for justifying their actions and conduct to Parliament and the public.
The Prime Minister is the ultimate judge of the standards of behaviour expected of a Minister and the appropriate consequences of a breach of those standards.
As the Prime Minister noted in his letter to the Committee on Standards in Public Life on 28 April 2021, he agreed with the Committee's suggestion that the appropriate sanction should depend on the circumstances of the case, and that the expectation that has arisen over time - that any breach should lead automatically to resignation - is disproportionate.
Asked by: Lord Jones of Cheltenham (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assurances they can give to civil servants that CCTV footage from their workplace is held securely.
Answered by Lord True - Shadow Leader of the House of Lords
I refer the Noble Lord to my answer of 29 June 2021. Any use which is made of CCTV is for the protection of the government estate and individuals working there.
Each Department is accountable for the way in which security is maintained within Departments, which includes the provision of closed circuit television cameras.