Asked by: Earl of Clancarty (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact of any barriers faced by musicians touring in Europe following the UK's decision to leave the EU; and what steps they are taking to help musicians overcome these barriers.
Answered by Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Culture, Media and Sport)
His Majesty’s Government is committed to supporting touring artists, and the music industry more widely, to adapt to new arrangements following our departure from the EU, and we have worked with the sector and directly with Member States to provide clarity and support.
The UK’s rules for touring creative professionals are more generous than those in many EU Member States. The vast majority of Member States — 23 out of 27 so far — have clarified arrangements to confirm that they allow visa- and work-permit-free routes for UK performers for some short-term touring. This includes the UK’s biggest touring markets such as France, Germany, and also Spain, which we are very pleased changed its position following engagement from HM Government and the UK music industry. We continue to work closely with the sector and to engage with the few remaining Member States to improve arrangements or clarify guidance. It is, of course, up to them if they want to replicate the UK’s generous approach, but we encourage them to do so.
We have worked across Government and in collaboration with the music and wider creative industries to support artists to work and tour with confidence in the European Union. Ongoing industry engagement continues at ministerial and official level. This includes several recent events with the sector focused on touring and export support, hosted in partnership with the Department for Business and Trade. These events help to provide tailored guidance to people and organisations in the sector, alongside an opportunity for the sector to discuss with Ministers and officials challenges and opportunities.
Asked by: Simon Jupp (Conservative - East Devon)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, if she will make an assessment of the potential merits of making access to Bacillus Calmette-Guérin vaccinations available to farming and agricultural families that regularly interact with livestock.
Answered by Maria Caulfield - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Minister for Women)
The Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccination is not usually recommended for people aged over 16 years old, unless the risk of exposure is great. The vaccination can be offered to veterinary staff and those who handle animals or animal materials, for instance abattoir workers, which could be infected with tuberculosis (TB). Based on the current available evidence, only a very small subset of farmers may be at high risk of TB exposure and therefore eligible for vaccination. This does not include farmer’s household contacts or children who would not constitute a risk sufficiently high enough to warrant a recommendation for the vaccine. If the level of risk should increase, then the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation could be asked to review this.
Eligibility for the BCG vaccination as an occupational health vaccine should be based on an individual risk assessment. Those eligible would need to access the vaccine through a private occupational health provider, and may seek further advice from the National Farmers Union. Non-National Health Service providers can charge for this service.
Under the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations (COSHH), all new employees, including farmers, should undergo a pre-employment health assessment, which should include a review of immunisation needs. The COSHH risk assessment will indicate which pathogens staff are exposed to in their workplace, such as bovine TB. Staff considered to be at risk of exposure to pathogens should be offered routine pre-exposure immunisation as appropriate. This decision should also take into account the safety and efficacy of available vaccines.
Asked by: Jonathan Ashworth (Labour (Co-op) - Leicester South)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, on how many occasions Ministers from his Department have visited (a) Wales, (b) Scotland and (c) Northern Ireland in each of the last three financial years.
Answered by Mark Spencer - Minister of State (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The information requested is not held centrally and to obtain it would incur disproportionate costs.
Across the UK Government we are committed to delivering the best possible outcomes for all citizens, no matter where in the country they call home. All citizens contribute to the strength of the United Kingdom which is the most successful political and economic union the world has ever seen.
Asked by: Lord Bishop of St Albans (Bishops - Bishops)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what estimate they have made, if any, of how many preventable hospitalisations have occurred as a result of medication shortages caused by Brexit.
Answered by Lord Markham - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The medicine supply chain is highly regulated, complex, and global. Supply disruption is an issue which affects the United Kingdom as well as the other countries around the world, and it can have a variety of causes, including manufacturing issues, problems with access to raw ingredients, and sudden spikes in demand.
Whilst we can’t always prevent supply issues from occurring, we have a responsibility to manage and mitigate them, working in collaboration with the pharmaceutical industry, NHS England, the devolved administrations, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, and others operating in the supply chain, to help prevent shortages and to ensure that the risks to patients are minimised.
Following the exit from the European Union (EU), the Department has worked collaboratively with industry to support trader readiness for the new border controls. While some suppliers experienced delays at the border associated with trader readiness, these issues were swiftly resolved with no sustained impacts on medical supplies, and the Department has no evidence of the EU Exit leading to sustained medicines shortages.
Asked by: Lord Pearson of Rannoch (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the answer by Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton on 12 March (HL Deb col 1905), how much money the United Kingdom pays to the European Union annually; on what that money is spent; and what plans they have, and to what timescale, for its reduction.
Answered by Baroness Vere of Norbiton - Parliamentary Secretary (HM Treasury)
Details of how much money the UK has paid the EU under the Withdrawal Agreement, its purposes, forecasts of future payments and timings are set out in the annual European Union Finances Statement. The most recent version covers payments made in 2023 and is available in the library of the House and on Gov.uk.
Asked by: Lord Wigley (Plaid Cymru - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Business and Trade:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they have taken to persuade the Tata Steel Company to minimise job losses in their steel works at Port Talbot.
Answered by Lord Offord of Garvel - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade)
As announced on the 15th of September 2023, Tata Steel is investing £1.25 billion, including a UK Government grant worth up to £500 million, in a new Electric Arc Furnace. This support is expected to save at least 5,000 jobs in the company, and thousands more in the supply chain.
Where staff are affected by the transition to an Electric Arc Furnace, Tata has a legal obligation to consult staff in a meaningful way, and this process is underway, led by the company. Whilst this is a process for the company to lead on, Ministers and officials are meeting regularly with both Tata Steel and Union representatives, and will continue to hold Tata to account during the consultation process.
Regardless of the outcome of the consultation, we are working with Tata Steel to provide up to £100 million of funding for a dedicated Transition Board, with membership including representatives of the Welsh Government, to support impacted employees and the local economy. Tata has also announced that they will provide a £130 million comprehensive support package for affected employees.
Asked by: James Wild (Conservative - North West Norfolk)
Question to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities:
To ask the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, with reference to the Written Ministerial Statement of 24 January 2024 on Local Government Finance Update, HCWS206, when he plans to announce the allocation of funding for local authorities with the highest internal drainage board levies.
Answered by Simon Hoare - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
On 24 January the Government announced that having listened to authorities who continue to face sustained increases in their internal drainage board (IDB) special levies, we would again provide £3 million outside of the 24/25 Local Government Finance Settlement to support those experiencing the biggest pressures. We will confirm the distribution of this funding shortly, when data on projected special levies becomes available.
Separately, at the National Farmers Union Conference in February the Prime Minister and Defra Ministers announced a new one-off grant, up to £75 million, for IDBs in 2024/25. This fund will help IDBs recover from the recent flooding and contribute towards modernising IDB infrastructure, to lower costs and increase resilience to climate change.
Asked by: David Linden (Scottish National Party - Glasgow East)
Question to the Department for Business and Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, what assessment her Department has made of the potential impact on smallholder farmers of the measures in the Intellectual Property Chapter of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership relating to the requirement for signatory countries to ratify the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants 1991.
Answered by Greg Hands - Minister of State (Department for Business and Trade)
The UK’s accession to CPTPP will not change the UK’s existing commitments under the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV).
The Government does not foresee any impacts on UK small farmers due to the UK’s legal obligations under CPTPP Article 18.7.2 because there will be no changes to the UK’s existing legislative framework in this area.
UPOV provides for plant breeders’ rights, aiming to encourage the development of new varieties of plants, with benefits such as food security and mitigating climate change.
Mechanisms are available within CPTPP to discuss issues raised by signatory countries.
Asked by: Jim Shannon (Democratic Unionist Party - Strangford)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, whether he has had recent discussions with his European Union counterparts on the July 2023 summit declaration between the European Union and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States that referred to the Falklands Islands as Islas Malvinas.
Answered by David Rutley - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
We engage in multilateral and bilateral fora, including with the European Union and its Member States, in support of the Falkland Islanders' right of self-determination. Following publication of the EU - Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) Summit communiqué, the EU publicly clarified their position has not changed. We will, in all fora at which the UK is present, continue to insist on the use of the name that the Islanders recognise and wish to use: the Falkland Islands. This reflects the UK's unequivocal commitment to upholding the Falkland Islanders' right of self-determination, including in our discussions with the EU and its Member States.
Asked by: Justin Madders (Labour - Ellesmere Port and Neston)
Question to the Department for Business and Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, whether she has made a recent assessment of the use of compensatory uplifts by Employment Tribunals.
Answered by Kevin Hollinrake - Minister of State (Department for Business and Trade)
Under section 207A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, Employment Tribunals have the power to increase an employee’s compensation by up to 25% if an employer unreasonably fails to comply with a relevant Code of Practice.
The use of compensatory uplift by Employment Tribunals is a matter of judicial discretion based on the facts of each case.
Data on the use of compensatory uplifts by Employment Tribunals is not collected.