Asked by: Jonathan Gullis (Conservative - Stoke-on-Trent North)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what the average waiting time was for patients to have (a) an assessment and (b) a first appointment with an NHS Talking Therapies therapist after being seen by a GP in each (i) clinical commissioning group between January 2021 and August 2023 and (ii) integrated care system area in the most recent period for which data is available.
Answered by Maria Caulfield
A table is attached that shows latest available information.
Asked by: Jonathan Gullis (Conservative - Stoke-on-Trent North)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what the average waiting time for (a) access to NHS Talking Therapies, (b) an assessment and (c) first appointment with a therapist after seeing a GP was in each Clinical commissioning group in the last 12 months; and what the average waiting time for each was in each Integrated care system area in the most recent period for which data is available.
Answered by Maria Caulfield
A table is attached that shows latest available information.
Asked by: Jonathan Gullis (Conservative - Stoke-on-Trent North)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how many people have been treated using NHS Talking Therapies online in each Integrated care system area in the most recent period for which data is available; and what proportion of such therapies are conducted (a) online, (b) face to face and (c) by phone.
Answered by Maria Caulfield
I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 13 November 2023 to question PQ560
It is available at the following link:
https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2023-11-07/560
Asked by: Jonathan Gullis (Conservative - Stoke-on-Trent North)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he will make an assessment of the potential merits of ending the high income child benefit charge.
Answered by Laura Trott - Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury
The Government is committed to managing the public finances in a disciplined and responsible way.
The High Income Child Benefit Charge (HICBC) ensures that the Government supports the majority of families whilst keeping welfare expenditure sustainable.
Most families are unaffected. In 2020-21, (the latest year that data is available), the HICBC raised over £400m in revenue. 99.7% of those who declared a liability for HICBC paid income tax at the higher rate or above, and 88% of Child Benefit claimants were unaffected by the HICBC.
The Government therefore considers that keeping the HICBC in place remains appropriate, but keeps all tax policies under review.
Asked by: Jonathan Gullis (Conservative - Stoke-on-Trent North)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, if she will consider the potential merits of introducing a minimum requirement to qualify for student loans of (a) grades EEE at A-level and (b) equivalent grades at (i) T-level and (ii) Level 3 Diploma.
Answered by Robert Halfon
The government consulted on whether there was a case, in principle, for a Minimum Eligibility Requirement for access to student finance for degree-level study. In the Higher Education (HE) Reform policy statement of 17 July, the department made an announcement to not proceed with such a requirement at this time.
The government is delivering on its manifesto commitment to drive up quality and tackle pockets of poor provision in the HE sector. The department has worked with the Office for Students (OfS) to set stringent minimum thresholds for student outcomes and the OfS has introduced face to face investigations where there is a risk of breach of these expectations.
The department wants to see recruitment limits used to reduce the growth of low-quality courses, and graduate earnings to be part of the quality regime, so that students can be confident in the quality of the course that they have chosen.
Asked by: Jonathan Gullis (Conservative - Stoke-on-Trent North)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what proportion of 999 calls related to mental health (a) nationally and (b) in each police force area in each of the last two years.
Answered by Chris Philp - Shadow Leader of the House of Commons
The Home Office collects data on volumes of 999 calls by force area.
The Home Office does not collect or publish data regarding the proportion of 999 calls related to mental health issues.
This data may be available from individual forces.
Asked by: Jonathan Gullis (Conservative - Stoke-on-Trent North)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether he has made an assessment of the potential merits of extending child benefit to families with children aged under 19 enrolled on apprenticeships.
Answered by Laura Trott - Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury
The Government is not considering extending Child Benefit payments to parents of children aged under 19 enrolled on apprenticeships.
Child Benefit is payable to parents of children up to the age of 16. Between the ages of 16 and 20, it is payable in respect of young people who remain in full-time non-advanced education or approved training provided outside a contract of employment. This includes A-Levels or the equivalent, but not advanced courses such as university degrees.
One of the core principles of an apprenticeship is that it is a paid job with training, allowing apprentices to earn while they learn, and it is treated accordingly in the benefit system. It is therefore appropriate that payments for the young person cease from this point.
For waged apprenticeships, since April 2023 employers are required to pay a minimum wage of £5.28 an hour, and many tend to pay more as young people develop their skills. A young person working 35 hours a week on a waged apprenticeship should earn no less than £184.80 each week.
Asked by: Jonathan Gullis (Conservative - Stoke-on-Trent North)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether he has made an assessment of the potential merits of raising the VAT registration threshold to £250,000.
Answered by Nigel Huddleston
Views on the VAT registration threshold are divided and the case for change has been regularly reviewed over the years.
In 2018, the Government consulted on how the design of the VAT registration threshold could better incentivise growth. However, there was no clear option for reform.
While the Government keeps all taxes under review, it was announced at Autumn Budget 2022 that the VAT threshold will be maintained at its current level of £85,000 until 31 March 2026.
Asked by: Jonathan Gullis (Conservative - Stoke-on-Trent North)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will make an assessment of the potential merits of raising the immigration health surcharge to £2,700 per person per year.
Answered by Robert Jenrick
The Immigration Health Surcharge rates are under review to ensure that it reflects the full cost of providing healthcare services and the extra cost pressure that the migrant-driven population growth is placing on the NHS. The Government is increasing the IHS rates, as set out in legislation laid before Parliament on 19 October. The increased IHS rates of £1,035 (full rate) and £776 (discounted rate) detailed in the Immigration (Health Charge) (Amendment) Order 2023 are based on the Department for Health and Social Care’s estimate of the average annual cost to the NHS of treating IHS payers.
Asked by: Jonathan Gullis (Conservative - Stoke-on-Trent North)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will make an assessment of the potential merits of raising the minimum combined income threshold for a family visa for a spouse to £26,200.
Answered by Robert Jenrick
The Minimum Income Requirement (MIR) was implemented in July 2012, reflecting the income at which a British family could no longer access income-related benefits at the time.
We keep all our immigration routes under constant review.