|Previous Section||Back to Table of Contents||Lords Hansard Home Page|
Anyone who has previously acquired a national insurance number but no longer has the right to live, work or study in the UK does not have access to the benefits system and the use of a national insurance number in isolation is not sufficient to obtain benefits. Similarly, a national insurance number is not sufficient to demonstrate an entitlement to work.
The Chairman of Committees (Lord Brabazon of Tara): The possible use of cats, respectable or otherwise, to control the rodent population in the Palace of Westminster has been considered and rejected on a number of practical grounds. For example, the cats would ingest mouse poison when eating poisoned mice; there would be nothing to keep them in the areas
23 Feb 2010 : Column WA289
To ask Her Majesty's Government under what circumstances inspectors appointed under article 8 of the Pharmacy Order 2010 may enter and search any premises, including any dwelling house, without first obtaining the consent of the occupier of the premises or obtaining from a judge or magistrate a warrant authorising the entry and search. [HL2014]
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether it is an offence intentionally to obstruct an inspector exercising functions under articles 10 or 11 of the Pharmacy Order 2010 when that inspector has not obtained from a judge or magistrate a warrant authorising entry and search of the premises. [HL2015]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Baroness Thornton): Article 10(1) of the Pharmacy Order 2010 (the Order) permits an inspector to enter any registered pharmacy or other premises at any reasonable hour without notice or a warrant. This right of entry is restricted and inspectors may enter premises only in order to:enforce the standards required to be met by pharmacy owners and superintendent pharmacists in connection with carrying on a retail pharmacy business at a registered pharmacy;assist the council in its investigation of matter relating to fitness to practise of registrants; enforce provisions within the order with respect to offences relating to the Register; and enforce any other provisions of the order and of rules made under the order.
Article 10(2) of the order provides that an inspector should give 24 hours' notice of the intended entry into premises that are, or form part of, a private dwelling house. This is not intended to give an inspector a power to enter such premises without consent or by force.
Article 10(3) of the order covers the position when entry has been refused, in which case an inspector must apply for a warrant. The possibility of refusal of entry without a warrant is specifically catered for in Article 10 of the order, which provides alternative
23 Feb 2010 : Column WA290
It is not the intention that the obstruction offences in Article 12 of the order should apply where entry with 24 hours' notice has been refused. The possibility of a refusal is specifically catered for in Article 10 of the order, which provides alternative measures that the inspectors will be required to employ in order to exercise their functions. This involves obtaining a warrant. Once an inspector has obtained a warrant, they should not be obstructed from exercising their functions.
Article 12 of the Order is therefore intended to apply where, for example, an individual obstructs an inspector in the execution of a warrant or obstructs the inspector in the course of exercising the inspector's functions once entry has been gained to the premises with or without a warrant.
To ask Her Majesty's Government following their strategy Food 2030, how they intend to value "best and most versatile land" in deciding whether non-food-producing development should be allowed in such areas. [HL2003]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Davies of Oldham): Current policy in relation to best and most versatile land is set out in Planning Policy Statement 7 (Sustainable Development in Rural Areas). As stated in the soil strategy Safeguarding our Soils, published on 24 September 2009, Defra and CLG are reviewing the effectiveness of existing planning policy to protect important soils and whether there is a need to update it.
To ask Her Majesty's Government why, in relation to section 2.5 of the Agreement at Hillsborough Castle of 5 February, the Chief Constable's status has changed from being operationally "independent" to being operationally "responsible" for directing and controlling the police; and what assessment they have made of whether that change will affect public confidence in the Police Service of Northern Ireland. [HL1952]
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: The fundamental principle that the police are impartial and free from political control is enshrined in legislation and was underlined in the 1998 Good Friday agreement and reinforced by the 1999 Report of the Independent Commission on Policing in Northern Ireland (the Patten report). The concept of the operational responsibility of the Chief Constable was highlighted in the Patten report and in
23 Feb 2010 : Column WA291
Policing arrangements in Northern Ireland have worked well and continue to work well; the high level of public confidence in policing is evidence of this. The latest figures show confidence standing at 79.6 per cent.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Justice (Lord Bach): The ethnicity of parties involved in a reported incident is not collected centrally. This information will not often be collected locally with reports submitted not always identifying parties involved in an alleged incident.
While ethnicity data is not always collected, information that is reported will be regularly scrutinised locally. This would include any issues regarding the victimisation of a particular group such as Gypsy, Traveller and Roma prisoners. We don't request that this information is reported centrally and to collate these data would require examination of every individual report submitted.
To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Dan Norris, on 9 November 2009 (HC Deb, col 200W), why the average grant under the Rural Development Programme for England fell from around £2,800 in 2007-08 to around £1,500 in 2008-09. [HL2072]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Davies of Oldham): The previous answer given on 9 November 2009 at column 2W of the House of Commons Official Report reported the amount spent under Rural Development Programme for England (RDPE) business support projects (as defined under Solutions for Business) and the number of beneficiaries in the years 2007-08 and 2008-09. It is not possible to derive the average grant to individual beneficiaries from these figures because multiple businesses can benefit from a single project supported through the RDPE. For example, a training provider, as the recipient of a grant award from the Programme, can provide assistance to a large number of businesses.
The grants awarded in 2007-08 related to payments to legacy projects approved under the England Rural Development Programme (ERDP), the predecessor to the current RDPE. Grants awarded in 2008-09 related to payments made to a combination of legacy ERDP projects and the first projects to be supported through the RDPE, which commenced only in January 2008.
Largely because of the late start to the programme, the total amount of grant awarded in 2008-09 was lower than in 2007-08. Nevertheless, the number of businesses that benefited from the programme increased.
To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Dan Norris, on 9 November 2009 (HC Deb, col 200W), what is the normal interval between an application being made to the Rural Development Programme and a grant being awarded. [HL2073]
Lord Davies of Oldham: Regional Development Agencies (RDAs) are the delivery bodies responsible for delivering the socio-economic measures of the Rural Development Programme for England. All project applications are subject to rigorous appraisal processes based on guidance from the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and approved by the Office of Project and Programme Advice and Training.
The time taken to appraise projects reflects the size and complexity of the project proposal. The normal interval between an application being made to the RDAs and a grant being awarded varies between regions, and often depends on the amount of grant being sought by the applicant. The interval between application and any grant award is normally four weeks to three months, but can take longer in exceptional circumstances.
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they have worked with British non-governmental organisations in conflict resolution in the south Caucasus; and what lessons they have learnt from that work. [HL1939]
Lord Brett: The Government have worked with a number of British non-governmental organisations on conflict prevention and resolution in the South Caucasus in recent years, including International Alert, Conciliation Resources and the Institute for War and Peace Reporting. Lessons specific to the South Caucasus conflict environment have included:domestic civil society in the South Caucasus remains weak in some areas. There is a need to work with project partners to try to build up the strength and role of civil society;
To ask Her Majesty's Government what is the status of the recommendations of the 6th European Union-Turkey Civic Commission's International Conference; and who is responsible for implementing them. [HL1942]
Lord Brett: The European Union-Turkey Civic Commission (EUTCC) is a non-official body that monitors the implementation by Turkey of European human rights standards. The EUTCC would expect Turkey to scrutinise its recommendations carefully but, due to the body's unofficial status, the Turkish authorities are under no obligation to act upon the recommendations. We continue to encourage Turkey to meet EU standards in the areas of human rights and democracy as part of the EU accession process.
Lord Brett: We have not made any direct representations to the Turkish authorities about Mr Erbey. We are following the case closely along with EU partners and are in regular contact with the Human Rights Association.
To ask Her Majesty's Government what representations they have made or will make to the government of Turkey about the 15-year old Kurdish girl, Berivan, who was arrested in October 2009 at Batman, and imprisoned for alleged terrorist offences; whether they have raised her alleged maltreatment in custody; and whether they have discussed why 2,622 minors are being held in Turkish prisons. [HL1970]
Lord Brett: The UK Government are aware that a number of minors are being held in adult jails in Turkey. While we have not made specific representations about Berivan's case, we have made representations to the Turkish authorities about protecting children's rights, most recently in September 2009. We also supported the European Commission's Annual Progress Report on Turkey, published in October 2009, which raised serious concerns about the juvenile justice system. The Turkish authorities have undertaken to improve the pre-trial condition of minors and to make more extensive use of the probation system.
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether paragraph 11 of Schedule 1 to the Veterinary Medicine Regulations 2009 (SI 2009/2297) means that a product will not receive marketing authorisation for 10 years after the initial authorisation (in the case of products for bees or fish, 13 years), regardless of its benefits compared to its pharmacologically equivalent product. [HL2005]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Davies of Oldham): If an application is made using the procedure for a pharmacologically equivalent medicinal product, then the time limits referred to in paragraph 11-and, if appropriate, paragraph 12-of Schedule 1 to the Veterinary Medicine Regulations 2009 (SI 2009/2297) will apply.
If products are pharmacologically equivalent then this means that their safety and efficacy in the target species should in effect be the same and therefore the pharmacologically equivalent product should not have any clinical benefits over the existing product.
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether paragraph 11 of Schedule 1 to the Veterinary Medicine Regulations 2009 (SI 2009/2297) covers reference products made and authorised in the United Kingdom, reference products made in the European Union that do not have marketing authorisation in the United Kingdom, reference products made anywhere in the world that have marketing authorisation in the United Kingdom, and reference products made anywhere in the world that have a marketing authorisation recognised by the Government. [HL2006]
Lord Davies of Oldham: Paragraph 11 is applicable for any reference product that is cited as the basis of the pharmacologically equivalent application. All products that have a marketing authorisation within the European Union which complies with European Directive 2001/82/EC (as amended) are potentially eligible to be cited as the reference medicinal product as part of an application for a pharmacologically equivalent product.
The controls on the manufacturing of authorised veterinary medicinal products mean that they can be made anywhere in the world. The reference product is not required to be authorised in the UK but it does need to be authorised somewhere in the EU.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Davies of Oldham): The fees in Schedule 7 to the Veterinary Medicines Regulations are reviewed annually and any proposed changes are subject to a full 12-week stakeholder consultation. The consultation documents include an impact assessment explaining why changes are proposed and the estimated impact that this will have on the business sectors paying the fees. Consultees are invited to comment specifically on the financial impact of the proposed changes.
|Next Section||Back to Table of Contents||Lords Hansard Home Page|