Asked by: Lord Taylor of Goss Moor (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Murray of Blidworth on 17 July (HL9008), how many times in 2022 the Passport Office asked (1) male, and (2) female, parents renewing their child’s passport to provide documentation proving custody, or a written letter of authorisation from the other parent before issuing the passport.
Answered by Lord Murray of Blidworth
HM Passport Office is unable to provide the information requested as it is not held in a reportable format.
Asked by: Lord Taylor of Goss Moor (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government how many times in each of the last five years the Passport Office has asked (1) male, and (2) female, single parents renewing their child’s passport to provide documentation in the form of birth certificates, court papers proving custody, or a written letter of authorisation from the other parent before issuing the passport.
Answered by Lord Murray of Blidworth
The information requested could not be obtained without disproportionate cost.
Asked by: Lord Taylor of Goss Moor (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities:
To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have, if any, to require all suitably orientated roofs on new buildings, including domestic properties, to be fitted with solar photovoltaic panels.
Answered by Baroness Scott of Bybrook - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
The Building Regulations continue to set a performance-based approach. This means that our approach to achieving higher standards remains technology-neutral, to provide developers with the flexibility to choose the most appropriate and cost-effective solutions for their site.
Asked by: Lord Taylor of Goss Moor (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the effectiveness of a market-led strategy through which developers are responsible for the installation of solar photovoltaic panels on suitably oriented roofs on new buildings.
Answered by Lord Callanan - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
The Government is working to publish a full technical consultation later this year on the Future Homes and Building Standards. As part of the consultation, we will explore how we can continue to drive onsite renewable electricity generation, such as solar panels, where appropriate in new homes and buildings.
Asked by: Lord Taylor of Goss Moor (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the potential costs and benefits of requiring plans for all new commercial and public car parks to include solar panels.
Answered by Baroness Scott of Bybrook - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
We recently consulted on proposals for a new permitted development right which would enable the construction of solar canopies in ground-level off-street car parks in non-domestic settings without a planning application. Further announcements will be made in due course.
Asked by: Lord Taylor of Goss Moor (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord True on 26 January (HL12011), what were the modelled projections, including the reasonable worst-case planning scenario estimates applied to the forecast modelling, used to inform the decision to place England under national restrictions to address the COVID-19 pandemic in November 2020.
Answered by Lord True - Leader of the House of Lords and Lord Privy Seal
Throughout the pandemic, the Government has used a broad range of health, social and economic evidence to inform decision making. The Scientific Advisory Group for Emergency (SAGE) is responsible for providing coordinated scientific advice to support decisions made by the Government. The SAGE subgroup, the Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Modelling (SPI-M), uses estimates across a range of metrics to support this advice, including short term modelling including on cases & hospitalisations. These models include a range of projections based on the observed rates of infection and hospitalisations. The assumptions underpinning these models develop as our understanding of the virus changes.
At the end of October, it was clear that rising infections had the potential to exceed NHS regular and surge capacity within weeks. Case projections showed increases in every region, and that national intervention was therefore necessary.
In December, the SAGE subgroup on New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats (NERVTAG), estimated that the B.1.1.7 variant may be up to 70% more transmissible. This informed the rapid escalation of areas and regions through the tier system in late December and a creation of Tier 4. Further analysis across a number of infection metrics, along with SPI-M modelled projections, helped inform the decision that national restrictions were again required on 5 January.
Asked by: Lord Taylor of Goss Moor (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord True on 26 January (HL12011), what reasonable worst-case planning scenario estimates were applied to the forecast modelling used to inform the decision to place England under national restrictions to address the COVID-19 pandemic on 5 January, including (1) the modelled projections, and (2) the amended assumptions, based on the increased transmissibility of the B.1.1.7 variant of SARS-CoV-2.
Answered by Lord True - Leader of the House of Lords and Lord Privy Seal
Throughout the pandemic, the Government has used a broad range of health, social and economic evidence to inform decision making. The Scientific Advisory Group for Emergency (SAGE) is responsible for providing coordinated scientific advice to support decisions made by the Government. The SAGE subgroup, the Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Modelling (SPI-M), uses estimates across a range of metrics to support this advice, including short term modelling including on cases & hospitalisations. These models include a range of projections based on the observed rates of infection and hospitalisations. The assumptions underpinning these models develop as our understanding of the virus changes.
At the end of October, it was clear that rising infections had the potential to exceed NHS regular and surge capacity within weeks. Case projections showed increases in every region, and that national intervention was therefore necessary.
In December, the SAGE subgroup on New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats (NERVTAG), estimated that the B.1.1.7 variant may be up to 70% more transmissible. This informed the rapid escalation of areas and regions through the tier system in late December and a creation of Tier 4. Further analysis across a number of infection metrics, along with SPI-M modelled projections, helped inform the decision that national restrictions were again required on 5 January.
Asked by: Lord Taylor of Goss Moor (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answers by Lord Bethell on 6 January (HL9878, HL9881, HL9883, HL9957), what reasonable worst-case planning scenario estimates were applied to the forecast modelling used to inform the decision to place England under national restrictions in (1) March 2020, (2) November 2020 and (3) January 2021; and to what extent the new COVID-19 variant has altered the assumptions underpinning the January restrictions.
Answered by Lord True - Leader of the House of Lords and Lord Privy Seal
The Reasonable Worst Case Scenario is an operational contingency planning tool. The Government has used a broad range of health, social and economic evidence to inform decision making, including modelled projections. The evidence used to introduce measures on 5 January 2021 included amended assumptions based on the increased transmissibility of the B.1.1.7 variant.
Asked by: Lord Taylor of Goss Moor (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what estimate of the proportion of COVID-19 cases that are asymtomatic they applied to the forecasting models that were used to inform the decision to place England under national restrictions in March to address the COVID-19 pandemic; and what was the evidence base used for this estimate.
Answered by Lord Bethell
The Scientific Advisory Group for Emergency (SAGE) is responsible for ensuring that timely and coordinated scientific advice is made available to support decisions by the Government. The SAGE subgroup, Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Modelling, Operational use their own estimates of metrics such as asymptomatic case proportions, infection hospitalisation rates, or infection fatality rates. These are based on a wide range of available data sources, including testing data, hospital admission, intensive care unit admissions, and deaths. Their models are regularly updated to fit to the observed transmission of the disease.
In the reasonable worst-case planning scenario from late March, SAGE’s best estimate of the infection fatality ratio was approximately 1%, however this was highly age-dependent. Precise estimates of the case fatality ratio – the proportion of people with clinical symptoms who die – are much harder, as the proportion of cases who are asymptomatic is difficult to estimate. Due to the difficulty with ascertaining the proportion of infections that are truly asymptomatic, modelling is based on estimates of the total number of infections in a population. At the time, the best estimate of the proportion of cases that were asymptomatic was 33%.
Estimates of mortality rates for those hospitalised were around 12%. However, again this was highly age-dependent, with 50% mortality in those hospitalised who require invasive ventilation.
SAGE’s estimate of the proportion of infections that required hospitalisation was 5% overall, but that this was also highly dependent on age. This reasonable worse-case planning scenario used an estimate for the number of patients requiring ventilation, mechanical or otherwise, of 30%. A copy of the SAGE paper Reasonable Worst-Case Planning Scenario – 29/03/2020 is attached.
Asked by: Lord Taylor of Goss Moor (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what estimate of the percentage of COVID-19 cases that lead to hospital admissions was applied to the forecast modelling used to inform their decision to place England under national restrictions in March; and what was the evidence base used for this estimate.
Answered by Lord Bethell
The Scientific Advisory Group for Emergency (SAGE) is responsible for ensuring that timely and coordinated scientific advice is made available to support decisions by the Government. The SAGE subgroup, Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Modelling, Operational use their own estimates of metrics such as asymptomatic case proportions, infection hospitalisation rates, or infection fatality rates. These are based on a wide range of available data sources, including testing data, hospital admission, intensive care unit admissions, and deaths. Their models are regularly updated to fit to the observed transmission of the disease.
In the reasonable worst-case planning scenario from late March, SAGE’s best estimate of the infection fatality ratio was approximately 1%, however this was highly age-dependent. Precise estimates of the case fatality ratio – the proportion of people with clinical symptoms who die – are much harder, as the proportion of cases who are asymptomatic is difficult to estimate. Due to the difficulty with ascertaining the proportion of infections that are truly asymptomatic, modelling is based on estimates of the total number of infections in a population. At the time, the best estimate of the proportion of cases that were asymptomatic was 33%.
Estimates of mortality rates for those hospitalised were around 12%. However, again this was highly age-dependent, with 50% mortality in those hospitalised who require invasive ventilation.
SAGE’s estimate of the proportion of infections that required hospitalisation was 5% overall, but that this was also highly dependent on age. This reasonable worse-case planning scenario used an estimate for the number of patients requiring ventilation, mechanical or otherwise, of 30%. A copy of the SAGE paper Reasonable Worst-Case Planning Scenario – 29/03/2020 is attached.