Asked by: Kate Kniveton (Conservative - Burton)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps her Department is taking to provide (a) funding and (b) infrastructure support to (i) local and (ii) community projects to tackle (A) knife crime and (B) violence against women and girls.
Answered by Chris Philp - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Government recognises the important role played by local and community projects in efforts to effectively tackle knife crime and violence against women and girls.
The Government has made £130m available this year alone (22/23) to tackle serious violence, including murder and knife crime. This includes £64m for Violence Reduction Units, which bring together key partners locally to address violence. VRUs take a public health approach to reducing violence, which includes as a central tenet working with and for community.
VRUs deliver a range of interventions that support young people at risk of involvement in serious violence, which requires close work with those local communities affected. Interventions commissioned by the VRU are often co-produced between statutory bodies and community organisations, to ensure shared support for those who need it most.
For example, in Greater Manchester, the VRU commissions hyper-local activity in communities across each of their ten local districts. This includes a pilot conducted in Salford, which identified 27 young people deemed to be at high-risk of becoming involved in violence over the summer holidays. Through a series of diversionary activities in the community, 26 of the 27-strong cohort had now become involved in education, employment or training by September 2021.
Additionally, this Government is determined to deliver on the commitments set out in Tackling Violence Against Women and Girls Strategy and the Domestic Abuse Plan. To achieve this, we have allocated £15.5m this financial year to activity to support victims and better establish what works to prevent VAWG. This will be delivered in part via local and/or community projects. We have also allocated £25m to perpetrator programmes and research, and £12m in response to the Rape Review (£5m to Operation Soteria and £7m to enhance the technical capability of police when dealing with Rape and other Serious Sexual Offences.)
Asked by: Barbara Keeley (Labour - Worsley and Eccles South)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how long each meeting of the Building the Right Support Delivery Board lasted since February 2021.
Answered by Maria Caulfield - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Minister for Women)
The Building the Right Support Delivery Board has met three times since 15 March 2022. A Minister attended all of these meetings apart from September, where the meeting took place in the national period of mourning, in accordance with the Government’s guidance. Each meeting since February 2021 has lasted for one hour. Meetings from December 2022 onwards are expected to last for an hour and a half. The membership of the Building the Right Support Delivery Board is as follows:
- Autism Programme Director, NHS England;
- Chair of the Association of Directors of Children's Services' Health, Care and Additional Needs Policy Committee;
- Chair of the Children and Young People’s Steering Group;
- Chair of the Independent Care (Education) Treatment Reviews Oversight Panel;
- Chief Executive Officer, Skills for Care;
- Chief Inspector of Adult Social Care, Care Quality Commission;
- Chief Nurse, Health Education England;
- Chief Social Worker, Department of Health and Social Care;
- Co-chairs of the Advisory Group of People with Lived Experience;
- Deputy Chief Executive, Local Government Association;
- Deputy Chief Inspector of Adult Social Care, Care Quality Commission;
- Deputy Director of Female Offenders and Health Policy, Ministry of Justice;
- Deputy Director of Housing with Care and Support, Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities;
- Deputy Director of Neurodiversity, Disability and Learning Disability, Department of Health and Social Care;
- Deputy Director Operational Research and Statistician, Department of Health and Social Care;
- Director – Adult Social Care Policy, Department of Health and Social Care;
- Director of Mental Health and Disabilities and Enhanced Protection Programme, Department of Health and Social Care;
- Director of Policy for Mental Health and Learning Disability and Autism, NHS England;
- Director of SEND and Alternative Provision, Department for Education;
- Director Youth Justice and Offender Policy, Ministry of Justice;
- Head of Children and Young People, NHS England;
- Head of Disability and Work Opportunities, Department for Work and Pensions;
- Head of Operations for Mental Health and Learning Disability and Autism, NHS England;
- National Clinical Director for Learning Disability and Autism, NHS England;
- National Director for Social Care, Ofsted;
- National Director of Learning Disability and Autism, NHS England;
- President of the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services;
- Representative of the Office of the Children’s Commissioner;
- Representatives of the Health and Wellbeing Alliance, Voluntary and Community Sector; and
- Representatives of the Provider Group.
Asked by: Barbara Keeley (Labour - Worsley and Eccles South)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how many times the Building the Right Support Delivery Board has met since 15 March 2022; and how many times a Minister has attended those meetings.
Answered by Maria Caulfield - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Minister for Women)
The Building the Right Support Delivery Board has met three times since 15 March 2022. A Minister attended all of these meetings apart from September, where the meeting took place in the national period of mourning, in accordance with the Government’s guidance. Each meeting since February 2021 has lasted for one hour. Meetings from December 2022 onwards are expected to last for an hour and a half. The membership of the Building the Right Support Delivery Board is as follows:
- Autism Programme Director, NHS England;
- Chair of the Association of Directors of Children's Services' Health, Care and Additional Needs Policy Committee;
- Chair of the Children and Young People’s Steering Group;
- Chair of the Independent Care (Education) Treatment Reviews Oversight Panel;
- Chief Executive Officer, Skills for Care;
- Chief Inspector of Adult Social Care, Care Quality Commission;
- Chief Nurse, Health Education England;
- Chief Social Worker, Department of Health and Social Care;
- Co-chairs of the Advisory Group of People with Lived Experience;
- Deputy Chief Executive, Local Government Association;
- Deputy Chief Inspector of Adult Social Care, Care Quality Commission;
- Deputy Director of Female Offenders and Health Policy, Ministry of Justice;
- Deputy Director of Housing with Care and Support, Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities;
- Deputy Director of Neurodiversity, Disability and Learning Disability, Department of Health and Social Care;
- Deputy Director Operational Research and Statistician, Department of Health and Social Care;
- Director – Adult Social Care Policy, Department of Health and Social Care;
- Director of Mental Health and Disabilities and Enhanced Protection Programme, Department of Health and Social Care;
- Director of Policy for Mental Health and Learning Disability and Autism, NHS England;
- Director of SEND and Alternative Provision, Department for Education;
- Director Youth Justice and Offender Policy, Ministry of Justice;
- Head of Children and Young People, NHS England;
- Head of Disability and Work Opportunities, Department for Work and Pensions;
- Head of Operations for Mental Health and Learning Disability and Autism, NHS England;
- National Clinical Director for Learning Disability and Autism, NHS England;
- National Director for Social Care, Ofsted;
- National Director of Learning Disability and Autism, NHS England;
- President of the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services;
- Representative of the Office of the Children’s Commissioner;
- Representatives of the Health and Wellbeing Alliance, Voluntary and Community Sector; and
- Representatives of the Provider Group.
Asked by: Barbara Keeley (Labour - Worsley and Eccles South)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, who the members of the Building the Right Support Delivery Board are.
Answered by Maria Caulfield - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Minister for Women)
The Building the Right Support Delivery Board has met three times since 15 March 2022. A Minister attended all of these meetings apart from September, where the meeting took place in the national period of mourning, in accordance with the Government’s guidance. Each meeting since February 2021 has lasted for one hour. Meetings from December 2022 onwards are expected to last for an hour and a half. The membership of the Building the Right Support Delivery Board is as follows:
- Autism Programme Director, NHS England;
- Chair of the Association of Directors of Children's Services' Health, Care and Additional Needs Policy Committee;
- Chair of the Children and Young People’s Steering Group;
- Chair of the Independent Care (Education) Treatment Reviews Oversight Panel;
- Chief Executive Officer, Skills for Care;
- Chief Inspector of Adult Social Care, Care Quality Commission;
- Chief Nurse, Health Education England;
- Chief Social Worker, Department of Health and Social Care;
- Co-chairs of the Advisory Group of People with Lived Experience;
- Deputy Chief Executive, Local Government Association;
- Deputy Chief Inspector of Adult Social Care, Care Quality Commission;
- Deputy Director of Female Offenders and Health Policy, Ministry of Justice;
- Deputy Director of Housing with Care and Support, Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities;
- Deputy Director of Neurodiversity, Disability and Learning Disability, Department of Health and Social Care;
- Deputy Director Operational Research and Statistician, Department of Health and Social Care;
- Director – Adult Social Care Policy, Department of Health and Social Care;
- Director of Mental Health and Disabilities and Enhanced Protection Programme, Department of Health and Social Care;
- Director of Policy for Mental Health and Learning Disability and Autism, NHS England;
- Director of SEND and Alternative Provision, Department for Education;
- Director Youth Justice and Offender Policy, Ministry of Justice;
- Head of Children and Young People, NHS England;
- Head of Disability and Work Opportunities, Department for Work and Pensions;
- Head of Operations for Mental Health and Learning Disability and Autism, NHS England;
- National Clinical Director for Learning Disability and Autism, NHS England;
- National Director for Social Care, Ofsted;
- National Director of Learning Disability and Autism, NHS England;
- President of the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services;
- Representative of the Office of the Children’s Commissioner;
- Representatives of the Health and Wellbeing Alliance, Voluntary and Community Sector; and
- Representatives of the Provider Group.
Asked by: Julian Knight (Independent - Solihull)
Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, if he will make an assessment of the potential impact on local government finance, including for Wolverhampton, Swindon and Leeds City Councils, of forthcoming changes to the Electronic Communications Code 2017.
Answered by Julia Lopez - Minister of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)
The reforms made to the Electronic Communications Code in 2017 were intended to make it cheaper and easier for digital infrastructure to be deployed, maintained and upgraded. These reforms recognised the increasing importance of digital communications services to UK consumers and businesses, and to the wider economy. The Government realised that the reforms would mean landowners receiving lower payments for allowing their land or buildings to be used than had previously been the case. However, these changes were only introduced following an extensive period of consultation and research, and were considered necessary to reduce operator costs and encourage the industry investment required for the UK to get the digital communications infrastructure it needs.
The Product Security and Telecommunications Infrastructure Bill (the Bill) contains provisions which will, amongst other things, amend the Code. Prior to the Bill’s introduction an assessment was carried out on potential impacts of reforms in the Bill, but this was general in nature and did not focus on specific categories of landowner.
Digital communications infrastructure needs to be rolled out in the right places. From this perspective, publicly owned land must be treated no differently from privately owned land. Although the reforms made to the Code in 2017 may have caused revenue from local authority sites to decrease, they will, however, gain through increased connectivity in their districts and from the economic growth which will accompany increased coverage.
The Government does not intend to carry out any additional assessment on the Bill’s potential impact on local authorities. Many consensual Code agreements include a confidentiality clause, meaning that information about the financial terms agreed cannot be shared with others or made publicly available, except in limited circumstances or with the other party’s consent. In addition, the financial arrangements underpinning these agreements can vary significantly: for example, in some instances the parties may agree to up front or lump sum payments, instead of, or as well as, ongoing rental payments.
It would therefore be extremely difficult to conduct such an assessment as it is unlikely that comprehensive data would be available. In any event, we do not believe such an assessment is needed or appropriate. Local authorities are responsible for managing their own budgets. The Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities collects data returns from local authorities in England, however data on the Code or the revenue from telecoms infrastructure sites is not included in these returns. The financial position of councils in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is the responsibility of the relevant devolved administration.
Asked by: Owen Thompson (Scottish National Party - Midlothian)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what steps he plans to take to improve the quality of data-gathering on the number of veterans who are homeless or at risk of homelessness.
Answered by Johnny Mercer - Minister of State (Cabinet Office) (Minister for Veterans' Affairs)
The Veterans' Strategy Action Plan launched in January 2022 sets out over 60 UK Government commitments with a combined value of over £70m to help support veterans and their families between 2022-2024. We are already making good progress with 24% of commitments already completed at the 6 month point.
According to data from the Homelessness Case Level Information Collection, Veterans are not more likely to be homeless than the general population. Research from the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities shows that only 0.6% of households who were homeless or at risk of homelessness in 2020-21 had served in the Armed Forces.
The Office for Veterans’ Affairs has a strong focus on data and research, so that we can better understand the veteran community and the support they need. The Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) are looking at the supply of supported housing by the end of 2022 and ensuring data on veteran homelessness is collected consistently. DLUHC are also working with all Local Authorities (LA) to ensure they are recording all veterans approaching LAs who are owed a homelessness duty.
Asked by: Munira Wilson (Liberal Democrat - Twickenham)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, whether his Department has commissioned research on the health impacts of living under concentrated flight paths in the context of airspace modernisation.
Answered by Robert Courts - Solicitor General (Attorney General's Office)
All major airports are required to map their noise impacts on a common basis every five years. However, there is no definition of ‘highly concentrated flightpath’ so no specific assessment has been made of the number of people impacted by such flightpaths.
All proposals to alter flightpath arrangements must follow the Civil Aviation Authority’s (CAA) airspace change process (CAP 1616) which was revised in 2018 following the publication by the department of revised air navigation guidance. This guidance sets out the Government’s objective to limit and, where possible, reduce the total adverse effects on people as a result of aviation noise.
A key requirement in the guidance is the need for airspace change sponsors to consider the use of multiple flightpaths to disperse air traffic, as well as undertaking a full assessment of the airspace options they are considering. Noise impacts must be assessed using the Department’s Transport Analysis Guidance which includes a module for valuing the impacts of noise on health and quality of life.
The Government accepts that there are health impacts associated with aircraft noise and keeps all relevant evidence under review. The Department has previously commissioned research on the effects of aviation noise on annoyance, health and wellbeing and has tasked the CAA to carry out a further survey in the next year.
The airspace modernisation programme is a critical national infrastructure project that aims to deliver quicker, quieter and cleaner journeys to the benefit of all airspace users and those impacted, including communities. Airports are responsible for the specific arrangements for low-level flightpaths. Engagement with all relevant stakeholders, including communities, is an important part of CAP1616 and is crucial to the success of the airspace modernisation programme. It is the responsibility of every airspace change sponsor (usually an airport or Air Navigation Service Provider (ANSP)) to ensure engagement meets the needs of local stakeholders. The majority of sponsors in the programme are currently at Stage 2 of the CAP1616 process. Once approved by the CAA, each sponsor will move to Stage 3. It is at this stage that sponsors will undertake a full options appraisal before undertaking a formal public consultation with all interested stakeholders, including local communities. We expect that the majority of sponsors will be in a position to consult publicly from 2023 onwards.
Asked by: Munira Wilson (Liberal Democrat - Twickenham)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, with reference to the Airspace Modernisation Programme, whether he plans to review the effect on the wellbeing of affected people of the introduction of highly concentrated flight paths in the United States.
Answered by Robert Courts - Solicitor General (Attorney General's Office)
All major airports are required to map their noise impacts on a common basis every five years. However, there is no definition of ‘highly concentrated flightpath’ so no specific assessment has been made of the number of people impacted by such flightpaths.
All proposals to alter flightpath arrangements must follow the Civil Aviation Authority’s (CAA) airspace change process (CAP 1616) which was revised in 2018 following the publication by the department of revised air navigation guidance. This guidance sets out the Government’s objective to limit and, where possible, reduce the total adverse effects on people as a result of aviation noise.
A key requirement in the guidance is the need for airspace change sponsors to consider the use of multiple flightpaths to disperse air traffic, as well as undertaking a full assessment of the airspace options they are considering. Noise impacts must be assessed using the Department’s Transport Analysis Guidance which includes a module for valuing the impacts of noise on health and quality of life.
The Government accepts that there are health impacts associated with aircraft noise and keeps all relevant evidence under review. The Department has previously commissioned research on the effects of aviation noise on annoyance, health and wellbeing and has tasked the CAA to carry out a further survey in the next year.
The airspace modernisation programme is a critical national infrastructure project that aims to deliver quicker, quieter and cleaner journeys to the benefit of all airspace users and those impacted, including communities. Airports are responsible for the specific arrangements for low-level flightpaths. Engagement with all relevant stakeholders, including communities, is an important part of CAP1616 and is crucial to the success of the airspace modernisation programme. It is the responsibility of every airspace change sponsor (usually an airport or Air Navigation Service Provider (ANSP)) to ensure engagement meets the needs of local stakeholders. The majority of sponsors in the programme are currently at Stage 2 of the CAP1616 process. Once approved by the CAA, each sponsor will move to Stage 3. It is at this stage that sponsors will undertake a full options appraisal before undertaking a formal public consultation with all interested stakeholders, including local communities. We expect that the majority of sponsors will be in a position to consult publicly from 2023 onwards.
Asked by: Munira Wilson (Liberal Democrat - Twickenham)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what assessment he has made of the potential effect of the Airspace Modernisation Programme on the number of people living under highly concentrated flight paths in (a) south west London and (b) the UK.
Answered by Robert Courts - Solicitor General (Attorney General's Office)
All major airports are required to map their noise impacts on a common basis every five years. However, there is no definition of ‘highly concentrated flightpath’ so no specific assessment has been made of the number of people impacted by such flightpaths.
All proposals to alter flightpath arrangements must follow the Civil Aviation Authority’s (CAA) airspace change process (CAP 1616) which was revised in 2018 following the publication by the department of revised air navigation guidance. This guidance sets out the Government’s objective to limit and, where possible, reduce the total adverse effects on people as a result of aviation noise.
A key requirement in the guidance is the need for airspace change sponsors to consider the use of multiple flightpaths to disperse air traffic, as well as undertaking a full assessment of the airspace options they are considering. Noise impacts must be assessed using the Department’s Transport Analysis Guidance which includes a module for valuing the impacts of noise on health and quality of life.
The Government accepts that there are health impacts associated with aircraft noise and keeps all relevant evidence under review. The Department has previously commissioned research on the effects of aviation noise on annoyance, health and wellbeing and has tasked the CAA to carry out a further survey in the next year.
The airspace modernisation programme is a critical national infrastructure project that aims to deliver quicker, quieter and cleaner journeys to the benefit of all airspace users and those impacted, including communities. Airports are responsible for the specific arrangements for low-level flightpaths. Engagement with all relevant stakeholders, including communities, is an important part of CAP1616 and is crucial to the success of the airspace modernisation programme. It is the responsibility of every airspace change sponsor (usually an airport or Air Navigation Service Provider (ANSP)) to ensure engagement meets the needs of local stakeholders. The majority of sponsors in the programme are currently at Stage 2 of the CAP1616 process. Once approved by the CAA, each sponsor will move to Stage 3. It is at this stage that sponsors will undertake a full options appraisal before undertaking a formal public consultation with all interested stakeholders, including local communities. We expect that the majority of sponsors will be in a position to consult publicly from 2023 onwards.
Asked by: Munira Wilson (Liberal Democrat - Twickenham)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, whether his Department has made a recent estimate of the number of people living under highly concentrated flight paths in (a) south west London and (b) the UK.
Answered by Robert Courts - Solicitor General (Attorney General's Office)
All major airports are required to map their noise impacts on a common basis every five years. However, there is no definition of ‘highly concentrated flightpath’ so no specific assessment has been made of the number of people impacted by such flightpaths.
All proposals to alter flightpath arrangements must follow the Civil Aviation Authority’s (CAA) airspace change process (CAP 1616) which was revised in 2018 following the publication by the department of revised air navigation guidance. This guidance sets out the Government’s objective to limit and, where possible, reduce the total adverse effects on people as a result of aviation noise.
A key requirement in the guidance is the need for airspace change sponsors to consider the use of multiple flightpaths to disperse air traffic, as well as undertaking a full assessment of the airspace options they are considering. Noise impacts must be assessed using the Department’s Transport Analysis Guidance which includes a module for valuing the impacts of noise on health and quality of life.
The Government accepts that there are health impacts associated with aircraft noise and keeps all relevant evidence under review. The Department has previously commissioned research on the effects of aviation noise on annoyance, health and wellbeing and has tasked the CAA to carry out a further survey in the next year.
The airspace modernisation programme is a critical national infrastructure project that aims to deliver quicker, quieter and cleaner journeys to the benefit of all airspace users and those impacted, including communities. Airports are responsible for the specific arrangements for low-level flightpaths. Engagement with all relevant stakeholders, including communities, is an important part of CAP1616 and is crucial to the success of the airspace modernisation programme. It is the responsibility of every airspace change sponsor (usually an airport or Air Navigation Service Provider (ANSP)) to ensure engagement meets the needs of local stakeholders. The majority of sponsors in the programme are currently at Stage 2 of the CAP1616 process. Once approved by the CAA, each sponsor will move to Stage 3. It is at this stage that sponsors will undertake a full options appraisal before undertaking a formal public consultation with all interested stakeholders, including local communities. We expect that the majority of sponsors will be in a position to consult publicly from 2023 onwards.