To match an exact phrase, use quotation marks around the search term. eg. "Parliamentary Estate". Use "OR" or "AND" as link words to form more complex queries.


View sample alert

Keep yourself up-to-date with the latest developments by exploring our subscription options to receive notifications direct to your inbox

Written Question
Access to Work Programme: Musculoskeletal Disorders
Wednesday 26th April 2017

Asked by: Marie Rimmer (Labour - St Helens South and Whiston)

Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, with reference to the conclusion of 17 February 2017 of the Improving Lives disability employment consultation, what plans his Department has to increase awareness of the Access to Work scheme among people with musculoskeletal conditions; whether there are plans for Public Health England to publish a musculoskeletal component to the Workforce and Wellbeing Charter on best practice; and what steps his Department is taking to ensure the views of people with arthritis will be reflected in future government policy.

Answered by Penny Mordaunt - Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons

We have promoted Access to Work via the Disability Confident scheme, and will continue to do so. Disability Confident gives employers the tools and information they need to think differently about disability and to take action to recruit, retain and develop disabled workers.

After the election period we intend to undertake further marketing and promotion of the Access to Work programme. This includes working with stakeholders and partners and employer associations to raise awareness through communications to their customers and ensuring advisers who work with potential customers, including Jobcentre Plus, health professionals and advisory groups, have the information and tools to act as advocates.

This includes work with organisations which support or have an interest in people with musculoskeletal conditions, such as the Chartered Society of Physiotherapists, the British Association of Occupational Therapists, a number of Arthritis support organisations, health professionals, advisory groups and various employer associations.

The standards set in the national Workplace Wellbeing Charter include many elements which support the reduction of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs), such as increasing physical activity and weight reduction. However, there is no MSD specific standard.

Local accreditation schemes, such as the Better Work Award, can enhance the national standards by adding a local MSD component if appropriate, based on local population needs.

In March 2017, Public Health England, Business in the Community and The Arthritis and Musculoskeletal Alliance published a musculoskeletal toolkit for employers to address MSD issues at work. The toolkit builds on the existing best practice and considers the transferable learning between business sectors and businesses of different sizes. The toolkit has been downloaded over 1000 times since publication.

In our November 2016 Green Paper, the Government set out further proposals to support individuals with musculoskeletal conditions to find or to stay in work. The subsequent consultation drew considerable input from sufferers of musculoskeletal conditions (including arthritic conditions) and their representative groups. The consultation closed on 17th February 2017 and we are now carefully considering the submissions we received as we develop our policy options.


Written Question
Employment: Autism
Monday 24th April 2017

Asked by: Corri Wilson (Scottish National Party - Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock)

Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, if he will record the number of autistic people in employment as part of the Labour Force Survey; and what steps his Department has taken to ensure that autistic people are benefitting from increased employment rates.

Answered by Penny Mordaunt - Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons

Over a number of years employment data on people with specific long term health conditions has been collected by the Office for National Statistics using the Labour Force Survey. This important survey has allowed the Department to produce useful time series statistics on the employment rates of individuals with long term health conditions, where this information is collected. The Labour Force Survey includes a large range of health conditions that survey respondents can report they experience; however this does not currently include autism as one of the named health conditions and there are no plans to begin collecting this data.

DWP is working with Autism Alliance UK on a national training programme for Jobcentre Plus staff (so that they can better support claimants with autism into work). In addition, the Department has helped to develop a Disability Passport - About Me - to support disabled people, including those with autism, who are seeking jobs and those helping them. Disabled people can share it with their work coach or adviser, to help improve communication and put any reasonable adjustments in place at the earliest opportunity.

Additionally, Improving Lives – the Work, Health and Disability Green Paper sets out the Government’s proposals for improving work and health outcomes for disabled people and people with long-term health conditions. We are now considering consultation responses and the next steps for longer term reform.


Written Question
Flood Control
Monday 5th December 2016

Asked by: Paul Flynn (Labour - Newport West)

Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment her Department has made of the implications for her policies on flooding and land use of the Green Alliance Policy Insight of November 2016, entitled Smarter flood risk management in England.

Answered by Thérèse Coffey

The Government notes the Green Alliance report’s focus on flood prevention, including the use of natural measures and the whole catchment approach.

A combination of measures are needed to manage flood risk, including upstream activities to store or slow flood waters. The current Countryside Stewardship Scheme includes land management measures that help to prevent flooding. Our exit from the EU provides an opportunity to consider how best future agriculture and environmental policy can contribute to flood risk management. The Government recently announced £15m specifically for natural flood management schemes across England. This builds on demonstration projects at Pickering in North Yorkshire, Holnicote in Somerset and Upper Derwent, Derbyshire.

They demonstrated that natural measures can be effective in helping to manage flood risk at a catchment scale, slowing the flow of water and reducing local impacts when carefully incorporated into a wider suite of catchment measures, but were unlikely to offer an alternative to conventional defences in areas of greatest risk.

However, we refute the assertion that twice as much is spent on dealing with the after-effects of a flood than is spent on hard flood defences. In 2014/15, the year the report is referring to with respect to hard defences, of the £802.6m spent on flood risk management, £145m was for flood response and repair costs and £657.6m for routine flood risk management measures.

Moreover, in our current 6-year capital programme, we are investing £2.5 billion over six years on flood defences (up until 2021). This is a real terms increase in capital investment. We are exceeding our manifesto commitment by building 1,500 new flood defence schemes that will better protect 300,000 more homes.


Written Question
Employment: Autism
Thursday 13th October 2016

Asked by: Justin Madders (Labour - Ellesmere Port and Neston)

Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what steps he is taking to reduce the autism employment gap.

Answered by Penny Mordaunt - Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons

We will shortly publish a Green Paper on work and health and conduct a consultation aimed at disabled people, their representative organisations and a wide range of other stakeholders.

We have put in place the Autism Alliance UK contract to upskill autism leads across the JCP+/DWP Network – Delivering autism and associated hidden impairments training by specialists in this area. So far we have reached over 1,100 staff.

It is hoped the training will help increase the proportion of autistic adults in full-time employment, which currently stands at 15%, according to the National Autistic Society.

DWP has also developed an uncovering hidden impairments toolkit to help colleagues support those with hidden impairments, including autism.


Written Question
Peers: Attendance
Wednesday 25th November 2015

Asked by: Lord Marlesford (Conservative - Life peer)

Question

To ask the Chairman of Committees which peers who were Members of the House of Lords throughout the 2014–15 parliamentary session attended on fewer than 25 per cent of sitting days, indicating in respect of each peer the number of days attended.

Answered by Lord Laming

The House sat for 126 days in the 2014/15 Session and therefore members needed to attend at least 32 times to reach an attendance rate of 25%. For the purposes of this answer: an attendance is counted as an attendance in the Chamber, in Grand Committee, in a Select Committee or a vote in the division lobbies.

The following members attended on fewer than 32 days. The figures do not include members who joined part way through the Session, members who died or retired part way through the session, or members who were disqualified or on leave of absence throughout the Session. Some of the Members listed were unwell and have since died, and some took leave of absence in the next Session. In discharging their parliamentary duties members of the House of Lords can draw substantially on experience and expertise gained outside Parliament. Therefore members may devote considerable time to maintaining and increasing that knowledge.

Members who took leave of absence for part of the Session and attended fewer than 25% of total days that they were eligible to attend:

Days attended

Total sitting days that member was eligible to attend.

Dixon, L.

0

32

Mogg, L.

0

35

Janner of Braunstone, L.

0

36

Hutton, L.

1

109

Brooks of Tremorfa, L.

2

27

Evans of Parkside, L.

2

35

Thomas of Walliswood, B.

3

41

Other members who attended fewer than 32 times:


Days attended

Grabiner, L.

0

Healey, L.

0

Inge, L.

0

Mayhew of Twysden, L.

0

Neill of Bladen, L.

0

Saville of Newdigate, L.

0

Soulsby of Swaffham Prior, L.

0

Archer of Weston-Super-Mare, L.

1

Baldwin of Bewdley, E.

1

Browne of Madingley, L.

1

Goldie, B.

1

King of Lothbury, L.

1

Peel, E.

1

Weidenfeld, L.

1

Williamson of Horton, L.

1

Bell, L.

2

Cameron of Lochbroom, L.

2

Campbell of Loughborough, B.

2

Ezra, L.

2

Falkender, B.

2

Malloch-Brown, L.

2

Turner of Ecchinswell, L.

2

Wolfson of Aspley Guise, L.

2

Alliance, L.

3

Burns, L.

3

Carter of Barnes, L.

3

Heseltine, L.

3

Lloyd-Webber, L.

3

Sacks, L.

3

Tombs, L.

3

Sharman, L.

4

Parkinson, L.

4

Bamford, L.

5

Coe, L.

5

Feldman, L.

5

London, Bp.

5

Smith of Kelvin, L.

5

Waldegrave of North Hill, L.

5

Wilson of Dinton, L.

5

York, Abp.

5

Collins of Mapesbury, L.

6

Freyberg, L.

6

Fritchie, B.

6

Guthrie of Craigiebank, L.

6

Williams of Oystermouth, L.

6

Wolfson of Sunningdale, L.

6

Haughey, L.

7

Rogers of Riverside, L.

7

Stevenson of Coddenham, L.

7

Winchester, Bp.

7

Young of Graffham, L.

7

Darzi of Denham, L.

8

Kestenbaum, L.

8

Nickson, L.

8

Rotherwick, L.

8

Chelmsford, Bp.

9

Hall of Birkenhead, L.

9

Myners, L.

9

Renwick of Clifton, L.

9

Richards of Herstmonceux, L.

9

Bristol, Bp.

10

Rix, L.

10

Browne-Wilkinson, L.

11

O'Donnell, L.

11

Vallance of Tummel, L.

12

Carrington, L.

12

Browne of Ladyton, L.

12

Drayson, L.

12

Glendonbrook, L.

12

Green of Hurstpierpoint, L.

12

Leach of Fairford, L.

12

Sheffield, Bp.

12

Currie of Marylebone, L.

13

Hattersley, L.

13

Macfarlane of Bearsden, L.

13

Mandelson, L.

13

Ryder of Wensum, L.

13

Sassoon, L.

13

Truro, Bp.

13

Blackwell, L.

14

Canterbury, Abp.

14

McCluskey, L.

14

Tordoff, L.

14

Davies of Abersoch, L.

15

Hogg, B.

15

Leitch, L.

15

Neuberger, B.

15

Tanlaw, L.

15

Willoughby de Broke, L.

15

Falconer of Thoroton, L.

16

Hardie, L.

16

Haskins, L.

16

Montagu of Beaulieu, L.

16

Palumbo of Southwark, L.

16

Saatchi, L.

16

Stair, E.

18

Levene of Portsoken, L.

18

Edmiston, L.

18

Imbert, L.

18

Joffe, L.

18

Worcester, Bp.

18

Birmingham, Bp.

19

Kalms, L.

19

Lichfield, Bp.

19

Owen, L.

19

Patten of Barnes, L.

19

Young of Old Scone, B.

19

Feldman of Elstree, L.

20

Livingston of Parkhead, L.

20

Smith of Leigh, L.

20

Allan of Hallam, L.

21

Chadlington, L.

21

Chandos, V.

21

Durham, Bp.

21

Leicester, Bp.

21

Portsmouth, Bp.

21

Greenfield, B.

22

Macdonald of River Glaven, L.

22

Valentine, B.

23

Home, E.

23

Howard of Lympne, L.

23

Montgomery of Alamein, V.

23

Rochester, Bp.

23

Richardson of Calow, B.

24

Rosslyn, E.

24

Stern of Brentford, L.

24

Alli, L.

25

Magan of Castletown, L.

25

Puttnam, L.

25

Cullen of Whitekirk, L.

26

Levy, L.

26

Mar and Kellie, E.

26

Moore of Lower Marsh, L.

26

Palumbo, L.

26

Walker of Gestingthorpe, L.

26

Manningham-Buller, B.

27

Fellowes of West Stafford, L.

27

Turnbull, L.

28

Carswell, L.

29

Sugar, L.

29

Goldsmith, L.

30

Coventry, Bp.

30

Walker of Aldringham, L.

30

Cohen of Pimlico, B.

31

Judge, L.

31

Krebs, L.

31

Shaw of Northstead, L.

31

Sheldon, L.

31


Written Question
Public Expenditure
Monday 11th August 2014

Asked by: Lord Barnett (Labour - Life peer)

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the recent calculations by the Taxpayers’ Alliance that £120 billion of public funds was wasted last year; and what actions they are taking to ensure that public spending offers value for money.

Answered by Lord Deighton

The Government is committed to maximising value for money in all areas of public spending, and has introduced a programme to drive efficiencies and reduce wasteful expenditure. By 2014-15, departments working with HM Treasury and the Efficiency and Reform Group in the Cabinet Office will be saving £20 billion a year compared to 2009-10. Spending Round 2013 identified over £5 billion additional efficiency savings in 2015-16.

The Government sets clear principles and guidance for the management of public resources, including achieving value for money, in Managing Public Money. Ensuring value for money is the personal responsibility of each Accounting Officer. The methods by which civil servants determine the long run value for money of programmes are set out in The Green Book: Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government.