Tag: Stephen O’Brien

  • Stephen O’Brien – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Stephen O’Brien – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen O’Brien on 2014-06-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will place in the Library a copy of the Health Protection Agency’s submission to the Inter-Departmental Group for the Valuation of Life and Health review and all evidence submitted to the series of interviews with his Department’s staff conducted by researchers from the University of Leeds in 2008.

    Dr Daniel Poulter

    I refer my Rt. hon. Friend to the answer given on 26 June 2014, Official Report, column 283W.

  • Stephen O’Brien – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Stephen O’Brien – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen O’Brien on 2014-06-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what the explicit monetary value per quality-adjusted life was in the context of ‘Evaluation of new pharmaceutical products or medical devices’, as quoted as part of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence’s submission to Inter-departmental Group for the Valuation of Life and Health review in 2008.

    Dr Daniel Poulter

    I refer my Rt. hon. Friend to the answer given on 26 June 2014, Official Report, column 283W.

  • Stephen O’Brien – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Stephen O’Brien – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen O’Brien on 2014-06-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what the explicit monetary value per quality-adjusted life was in the context of Interventions and Regulations, as quoted as part of his Department’s submission to the Inter-Departmental Group for the Valuation of Life and Health review in 2008.

    Dr Daniel Poulter

    I refer my Rt. hon. Friend to the answer given on 26 June 2014, Official Report, column 283W.

  • Stephen O’Brien – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Stephen O’Brien – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen O’Brien on 2014-06-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will place in the Library a copy of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence’s submission to the Inter-Departmental Group for the Valuation of Life and Health review and all evidence submitted to the series of interviews with his Department’s staff conducted by researchers from the University of Leeds in 2008.

    Dr Daniel Poulter

    I refer my Rt. hon. Friend to the answer given on 26 June 2014, Official Report, column 283W.

  • Stephen O’Brien – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Stephen O’Brien – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen O’Brien on 2014-06-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what monetary thresholds were applied to the cost-per-quality adjusted life year quoted in the evidence submitted as part of the Food Standards Agency’s work with the Inter-departmental Group for the Valuation of Life and Health review in 2008.

    Dr Daniel Poulter

    I refer my Rt. hon. Friend to the answer given on 26 June 2014, Official Report, column 283W.

  • Stephen O’Brien – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Stephen O’Brien – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen O’Brien on 2014-06-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what monetary thresholds were applied to the cost-per-quality adjusted life year quoted in the evidence submitted as part of the Health Protection Agency’s work with the Inter-departmental Group for the Valuation of Life and Health review in 2008.

    Dr Daniel Poulter

    I refer my Rt. hon. Friend to the answer given on 26 June 2014, Official Report, column 283W.

  • Stephen O’Brien – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Stephen O’Brien – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen O’Brien on 2014-06-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what the explicit monetary value per quality-adjusted life was in the context of Advice on Nuclear power, centre for infections and modelling, as quoted as part of his Department’s submission to the Inter-Departmental Group from the Valuation of Life and Health review in 2008.

    Dr Daniel Poulter

    I refer my Rt. hon. Friend to the answer given on 26 June 2014, Official Report, column 283W.

  • Stephen O’Brien – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Stephen O’Brien – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen O’Brien on 2014-06-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the explicit monetary value per quality-adjusted life was in the context of Homicide and crime categories of wounding, sexual offences, common assault and robbery, as quoted as part of her Department’s submission to the Inter-Departmental Group for the Valuation of Life and Health review in 2008.

    Norman Baker

    A copy of the Home Office’s written response to the 2008 Survey of Departmental
    Practice in the Valuation of Life and Health will be placed in the Library. The
    Home Office does not have a record of its response to the questions in Stage 2
    of the Survey. This is because the interviews were carried out face-to-face
    with researchers at the University of Leeds.

    The Home Office first estimated the social and economic costs of crime in 2000:
    http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218135832/rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/r
    ds/pdfs/hors217.pdf.

    The most recent update to these estimates prior to the Department’s submission
    to the Inter-Departmental Group for the Valuation of Life and Health review in
    2008 was published in 2005:
    http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100413151441/http:/www.homeoffice.go
    v.uk/rds/pdfs05/rdsolr3005.pdf.

    The monetary value per quality-adjusted life year used in the 2005 report was
    £80,620 in 2003 prices. This was based on a paper by Carthy et al. (1999).

  • Stephen O’Brien – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Stephen O’Brien – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen O’Brien on 2014-06-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what monetary thresholds were applied to the cost-per-quality adjusted life year quoted in the evidence submitted as part of his Department’s work with the Inter-departmental Group for the Valuation of Life and Health review in 2008.

    Stephen Hammond

    As suggested by the evidence submitted as part of the Department’s work with the Inter-Departmental Group for the Valuation of Life and Health review in 2008, the Department for Transport does not use cost per quality adjusted life year in its analysis.

  • Stephen O’Brien – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Stephen O’Brien – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen O’Brien on 2014-04-09.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to HM Revenue and Customs’ consultation document, Tackling marketed tax avoidance, published on 24 January 2014, whether consideration was given to (a) running the consultation for longer than one calendar month and (b) initiating it earlier, to allow more time for the decision-taking process in advance of the March 2014 Budget Statement.

    Mr David Gauke

    HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) has been successful in challenging tax avoidance and, in relation to avoidance cases that go to litigation, around 80% of cases litigated resulting in the tax being due. This led to around £1.7 billion of tax being protected in 2013. It is not possible to provide a breakdown of the range and frequency of amounts of tax due without causing undue cost on the department to provide the information.

    The Government considered different options for the consultation period for the proposals but concluded that the time period made available was reasonable. There were a very large number of responses, which suggests that the timescale did not cause any undue impediment to those who wished to give their views in response to the consultation. ‘Tackling Marketed Tax Avoidance’ followed on from the earlier consultation over the summer of 2013 ‘Raising the Stakes on Tax Avoidance’, which consulted in detail on the initial proposal for the Follower Notice measure.