1-20 of 180 results for subject:Staff
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.308 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.023 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Staff
- We searched for
- subject_t:Staff OR subject_t:Employees OR subject_t:"Human resources" OR subject_t:"Labour force" OR subject_t:Manpower OR subject_t:Personnel OR subject_t:"Work force" OR subject_t:Workers OR subject_ses:91923
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
More
Member
More
Primary member
More
Answering member
More
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what recent discussions she has had with relevant Trade Unions on the proposed transfer of staff from her Department to the Department of Transport Operator Ltd.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what recent discussions she has had with relevant Trade Unions on the proposed transfer of staff from her Department to the Department of Transport Operator Ltd.
Staffing matters are the formal responsibility of the Permanent Secretary and officials. As such, for the transfer of staff to DFTO on the 1st April 2026, the constructive discussions with Trade Unions and staff were led by senior DfT officials. Informal engagement took place with Trade Unions from the earliest opportunity. Formal consultation was conducted in line with the TUPE regulations and with constructive engagement from Trade Unions, DFTO and DfT.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what her Department's targeted staff headcount reduction was prior to 31 March 2026.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what her Department's targeted staff headcount reduction was prior to 31 March 2026.
Over financial year 2025/26, DfT(central) had an 8% headcount reduction target which was achieved by March 2026.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what protections are in place for staff transferring to the Department of Transport Operator Ltd in respect of a) civil servant status, b) terms and conditions and c) occupational pension.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what protections are in place for staff transferring to the Department of Transport Operator Ltd in respect of a) civil servant status, b) terms and conditions and c) occupational pension.
Staff were transferred from DfT to DFTO on 1st April 2026. In terms of a) DFTO is a public corporation and therefore staff are Public Servants. This means staff transferred to DFTO have not retained Civil Servant status. Regarding b), Terms and Conditions of staff transferring to DFTO are protected by TUPE regulations. All relevant issues arising from DFTO on transferring employees’ Terms and Conditions were presented and consulted on formally with Trade Unions, as staff representatives, ahead of transfer. Regarding c), staff transferred to DFTO retained their membership of their existing pension scheme. This includes those who are members of the Civil Service Pension Scheme and Rail Pension Scheme.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, for what reason she plans to transfer staff to Department of Transport Operator Ltd prior to the completion of the Railways Bill.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, for what reason she plans to transfer staff to Department of Transport Operator Ltd prior to the completion of the Railways Bill.
On 1 April 2026, an important milestone in delivering Great British Railways (GBR) was reached, as a significant part of the functions and staff responsible for the operational railway transferred from DfT to the DFT Operator (DFTO), the Government’s public sector rail owning group.
This move is a practical step towards creating a simpler, more accountable railway that delivers better outcomes for passengers, communities and taxpayers. It ensures the right capabilities sit in the right place now to maintain the strong progress we have already made to improve rail services. It also reduces the risk associated with simultaneous transfer of the organisations, functions, teams and operational capabilities that will form GBR in 2027.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, which agreements between the United States and the United Kingdom govern the presence of US National Security Agency personnel in Britain.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, which agreements between the United States and the United Kingdom govern the presence of US National Security Agency personnel in Britain.
The UK–US intelligence relationship is one of the closest in the world, built primarily on the longstanding UK-USA Agreement and our Five Eyes partnership, reinforced by our network of bilateral defence and security arrangements. Any details on US intelligence personnel are classified. It is government practice not to disclose any information regarding personnel working in intelligence roles to protect national security.
That this House recognises the essential contribution of all staff across the Parliamentary Estate, including, but not limited to, cleaners, caterers, chefs, kitchen stewards, baristas, doorkeepers, clerks, library support specialists, tour guides, police and firefighters, as well as those in Parliamentary offices and Departments, such as the Speaker’s office, the Serjeant at Arms, Health and Wellbeing, Service Delivery, Maintenance, Visitors Assistants, Porterage, Workspace, Members Services, Heritage, Accommodation, Governance, Parliamentary Health and Safety, Broadcasting, Project, Renewal and Restoration, Learning and Development, and Diversity and Inclusion; accepts that, without them, Parliament could not function; notes the vital role they therefore play in ensuring this institution runs safely and efficiently and in upholding our democracy; and acknowledges that all deserve to be respected for their important contribution and treated equally with dignity, kindness and respect.
That this House recognises the essential contribution of all staff across the Parliamentary Estate, including, but not limited to, cleaners, caterers, chefs, kitchen stewards, baristas, doorkeepers, clerks, library support specialists, tour guides, police and firefighters, as well as those in Parliamentary offices and Departments, such as the Speaker’s office, the...
I hope the Prime Minister will, because care workers are on the frontline looking after the most vulnerable people in our society. Keeping our care homes safe and well should be, and must be, an absolute priority.
The Prime Minister has been saying for quite a long time that NHS staff will get the equipment they need, yet the Health Care Supply Association—get that: the
Health Care Supply Association—has been forced to use Twitter to ask DIY shops to donate protective equipment to NHS staff. This is an appalling situation. When will NHS staff, social care staff and community nurses, and all other staff relating to healthcare, get the PPE equipment that they absolutely, desperately need?
I hope the Prime Minister will, because care workers are on the frontline looking after the most vulnerable people in our society. Keeping our care homes safe and well should be, and must be, an absolute priority.
The Prime Minister has been saying for quite a long time that NHS staff will get the equipment they need, yet the Health Care Supply Association—get that: the
Health Care Supply Association—has been forced to use Twitter to ask DIY shops to donate protective equipment to NHS staff. This is an appalling situation. When will NHS staff, social care staff and community nurses, and all other staff relating to healthcare, get the PPE equipment that they absolutely, desperately need?
The right hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to raise this issue, which I know has been a concern. We had a long meeting on it this morning. I am assured that not only are the stocks now there but the Army is now distributing the supplies to all the NHS staff and all the hospitals that need it, and in the past 24 hours has distributed 7.5 million pieces of equipment.
I do not want to appear totally negative, but it would be better if the whole place had been better staffed in the first place. But I will take it from what the Prime Minister said that there is going to be an increase in DWP staff in order that people can access universal credit more quickly.
It is right that Parliament be virtually closed today, and that the Prime Minister and Cabinet Ministers continue to deliver daily public information sessions. That is absolutely correct. However, I understand that it may be some time before the House meets again. There has to be scrutiny of what Governments do. That is what Parliament is for and what Oppositions exist for. I would therefore be grateful if the Prime Minister could indicate how, over the weeks until Parliament opens again, he will make himself open to some form of scrutiny—electronic or whatever it happens to be—so that Parliament can hold Government to account, given the levels of stress and concern of all the constituents we represent.
I do not want to appear totally negative, but it would be better if the whole place had been better staffed in the first place. But I will take it from what the Prime Minister said that there is going to be an increase in DWP staff in order that people can access universal credit more quickly.
It is right that Parliament be virtually closed today, and that the Prime Minister and Cabinet Ministers continue to deliver daily public information sessions. That is absolutely correct. However, I understand that it may be some time before the House meets again. There has to be scrutiny of what Governments do. That is what Parliament is for and what Oppositions exist for. I would therefore be grateful if the Prime Minister could indicate how, over the weeks until Parliament opens again, he will make himself open to some form of scrutiny—electronic or whatever it happens to be—so that Parliament can hold Government to account, given the levels of stress and concern of all the constituents we represent.
The right hon. Gentleman is entirely correct. We have tried to handle this crisis by being as open and transparent as we possibly can be with all our working and all our thinking. I will work with you, Mr Speaker, if I may, on how we can ensure that Parliament is kept informed throughout the recess.
The World Health Organisation said “test, test, test.” We should be testing on an industrial scale. When I met the Prime Minister on Monday evening, he assured me that 10,000 tests were going on per day. That is better than none, obviously, but it is nowhere near even the number of people working in the NHS and the care sector. It is a massive undertaking and I wish there was a greater sense of urgency from the Government in getting testing available for all staff.
NHS staff are obviously on the frontline, and many are scared because the guidance has been changed to say that they do not need to wear full protective equipment when caring for patients. A senior doctor has said:
“The rest of the world is providing staff with full protective gear and we are restricting it”.
This is a doctor saying, “I am scared.” We should not be scaring doctors and nurses. Is there or is there not a policy for them to have full protective equipment? I believe that that should be the case.
The World Health Organisation said “test, test, test.” We should be testing on an industrial scale. When I met the Prime Minister on Monday evening, he assured me that 10,000 tests were going on per day. That is better than none, obviously, but it is nowhere near even the number of people working in the NHS and the care sector. It is a massive undertaking and I wish there was a greater sense of urgency from the Government in getting testing available for all staff.
NHS staff are obviously on the frontline, and many are scared because the guidance has been changed to say that they do not need to wear full protective equipment when caring for patients. A senior doctor has said:
“The rest of the world is providing staff with full protective gear and we are restricting it”.
This is a doctor saying, “I am scared.” We should not be scaring doctors and nurses. Is there or is there not a policy for them to have full protective equipment? I believe that that should be the case.
Quickly, on testing, I can reassure the right hon. Gentleman that we are moving up to 25,000 tests a day.
On personal protective equipment for NHS staff, the right hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to raise the issue. It is obviously of huge concern to everyone that our NHS staff should feel that they are able to interact with patients with perfect security and protection, so there is a massive effort going on, comparable to the effort to build enough ventilators, to ensure that we have adequate supplies of PPE, not just now but throughout the outbreak.
I join the Prime Minister in sending condolences to the family and friends of Guardsman Mathew Talbot, who died while on anti-poaching activities. It is a reminder of the diverse work that the armed forces do, and we thank them for it and for the help they are giving to the people of Malawi. I join her also in welcoming the birth of the baby to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, and, along with all of us, in recognising and enjoying Ramadan and Vaisakhi at this time. It is important to show the diversity of this country and celebrate all religious festivals.
I hope the whole House will also join me in congratulating a great football team: Manchester City, on winning the women’s FA cup. In view of Liverpool’s amazing performance last night, perhaps the Prime Minister could take some tips from Jürgen Klopp on how to get a good result in Europe.
Our national health service is our country’s greatest social achievement. Its staff show amazing dedication, but this Government’s failures are taking their toll. An NHS staff survey found that 40% of staff had reported suffering work-related stress in the past year alone. Can the Government explain why staff are being so severely let down by this Government?
I join the Prime Minister in sending condolences to the family and friends of Guardsman Mathew Talbot, who died while on anti-poaching activities. It is a reminder of the diverse work that the armed forces do, and we thank them for it and for the help they are giving to the people of Malawi. I join her also in welcoming the birth of the baby to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, and, along with all of us, in recognising and enjoying Ramadan and Vaisakhi at this time. It is important to show the diversity of this country and celebrate all religious festivals.
I hope the whole House will also join me in congratulating a great football team: Manchester City, on winning the women’s FA cup. In view of Liverpool’s amazing performance last night, perhaps the Prime Minister could take some tips from Jürgen Klopp on how to get a good result in Europe.
Our national health service is our country’s greatest social achievement. Its staff show amazing dedication, but this Government’s failures are taking their toll. An NHS staff survey found that 40% of staff had reported suffering work-related stress in the past year alone. Can the Government explain why staff are being so severely let down by this Government?
First, may I say to the right hon. Gentleman that when we look at the Liverpool win over Barcelona last night, we see that it shows that when everybody says, “It’s all over and your European opposition
have got you beat. The clock’s ticking down, it’s time to concede defeat”, actually we can still secure success if everyone comes together.
The right hon. Gentleman asks about staffing in the NHS. For too long Governments have failed to produce the proper workforce planning to give our staff in the NHS the care they deserve. It is this Government, with their long-term plan, who are ensuring that we give that care to staff. NHS staff work hard, caring for patients, and this Government will care for NHS staff. It is only because we are able to give the NHS its biggest cash boost in its history and to give it that long-term plan that we will deliver for NHS staff.
Under the last Labour Government, NHS investment rose by 6% a year, but under this Government it has barely reached 1.5%. Five thousand nurses and midwives from European Union countries have left the NHS in the past two years, and there are 100,000 staff vacancies across the NHS in England alone. The Royal College of Radiologists recently said the shortage of cancer doctors “puts care at risk”. What is the Prime Minister doing to remedy this dangerous situation?
Under the last Labour Government, NHS investment rose by 6% a year, but under this Government it has barely reached 1.5%. Five thousand nurses and midwives from European Union countries have left the NHS in the past two years, and there are 100,000 staff vacancies across the NHS in England alone. The Royal College of Radiologists recently said the shortage of cancer doctors “puts care at risk”. What is the Prime Minister doing to remedy this dangerous situation?
What have seen this year? We have seen the numbers of doctors and nurses in the NHS at their highest level in its 70-year history. As I say, our NHS staff work hard 24/7 and their dedication is second to none. I am proud of our NHS. He talks down our NHS. Let us just remember this: at the last general election, the Labour party promised to give the NHS less money than the Conservative Government are giving it. The Labour party in government would crash the economy, which would mean less money available for the NHS. And who is the only party in government that has cut funding to the NHS? It is the Labour party.
Under the NHS in Wales, more people are surviving cancer than ever before. We should welcome the work that has been done.
The Royal College of Radiologists said,
“our workforce projections are increasingly bleak”,
and almost half of all women with ovarian cancer reported having to visit the GP three times before they were referred for a test. Today, we learned that GP numbers are experiencing their first sustained fall for 50 years. GPs often play the vital role in the early identification of cancers and other serious problems. Does the Prime Minister think it is acceptable that one third of people who need an urgent GP appointment on the day that they ask for one are being turned away because of the shortage of GPs?
Under the NHS in Wales, more people are surviving cancer than ever before. We should welcome the work that has been done.
The Royal College of Radiologists said,
“our workforce projections are increasingly bleak”,
and almost half of all women with ovarian cancer reported having to visit the GP three times before they were referred for a test. Today, we learned that GP numbers are experiencing their first sustained fall for 50 years. GPs often play the vital role in the early identification of cancers and other serious problems. Does the Prime Minister think it is acceptable that one third of people who need an urgent GP appointment on the day that they ask for one are being turned away because of the shortage of GPs?
We recognise that GPs are a vital part of the NHS, and there are actually more GPs in the NHS today than there were in 2015. We have made it easier for people to access their GPs by ensuring that GP surgeries are open for more days of the week. We are incentivising GP trainees to work in hard-to-recruit areas and making it easier and quicker for qualified doctors to return to the NHS. Under our NHS long-term plan, we will see—for the first time in its 70-year history—the proportion of funding for primary medical and community care increasing as a percentage of the NHS budget. That is because it is this Government who recognise the importance of primary care in our national health service, and it is this Government whose careful management of the economy means there is money available to put into our national health service.
Mr Speaker, if you go to any A&E department in the country, you will find that staff are under enormous pressure precisely because there is a shortage of GPs available to see people in the first place. At the same time as he promotes private GP services, the Conservative Secretary of State for Health and Social Care is overseeing the biggest drop in NHS GPs for 50 years. One in 10 GPs are now seeing twice as many patients as is safe for them to see—that is the pressure they are under. The NHS has failed to meet its A&E waiting time target for nearly four years. In March this year, more than one in five patients waited more than four hours to be seen. Will the Prime Minister, on behalf of the Government, apologise to the tens of thousands of people waiting for too long in deep distress just to get seen at an A&E department, because of the pressure A&Es are under?
Mr Speaker, if you go to any A&E department in the country, you will find that staff are under enormous pressure precisely because there is a shortage of GPs available to see people in the first place. At the same time as he promotes private GP services, the Conservative Secretary of State for Health and Social Care is overseeing the biggest drop in NHS GPs for 50 years. One in 10 GPs are now seeing twice as many patients as is safe for them to see—that is the pressure they are under. The NHS has failed to meet its A&E waiting time target for nearly four years. In March this year, more than one in five patients waited more than four hours to be seen. Will the Prime Minister, on behalf of the Government, apologise to the tens of thousands of people waiting for too long in deep distress just to get seen at an A&E department, because of the pressure A&Es are under?
We recognise the importance of these targets in the NHS. That is why one of the elements of the 10-year long-term plan in the NHS—funded by the biggest cash boost in the NHS’s history, which was given by this Conservative Government because of their good management of the economy—is to ensure that we are improving those targets. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman would like to stand up and apologise for the fact that the A&E waiting-time target has not been met not for four years, but for over a decade under a Labour Government in Wales.
I fully acknowledge the work the police do in helping people in a mental health crisis. My point is that there should be more mental health professionals to help people in a crisis. Half of all enduring mental health conditions materialise before the age of 14. Spending on child and adolescent mental health should be a priority. Instead, sadly, the number
of child and adolescent psychiatrists has fallen by 6.3%. Fully staffing our children’s and young people’s mental health has to be a priority.
I fully acknowledge the work the police do in helping people in a mental health crisis. My point is that there should be more mental health professionals to help people in a crisis. Half of all enduring mental health conditions materialise before the age of 14. Spending on child and adolescent mental health should be a priority. Instead, sadly, the number
of child and adolescent psychiatrists has fallen by 6.3%. Fully staffing our children’s and young people’s mental health has to be a priority.
I am not aware that there was a question at the end of that, but I will repeat the point. Young people’s mental health is a very serious issue; the right hon. Gentleman is focusing on one aspect. That is why we are ensuring that we start to address this at an earlier stage. He is right about the high proportion of mental health problems that start before somebody is 14. That is exactly why we are doing more in our schools and working to ensure that we have training for teachers.
There is a wider issue here, which I am sure everybody in the House will recognise. When I talk to young people who have developed mental health problems and hear about the problems they are facing, sadly, one of the issues that puts increasing pressure on young people’s mental health today is the use of social media and the bullying and harassment that they get on it. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will join me in saying that we need both to help our young people to have greater resilience in dealing with that social media bullying and to ensure that social media is not used in a way that leads to mental health problems that could well be with those young people for the rest of their lives.
If the proposals were put forward by the British Government, why did Conservative MEPs vote against them? There seems to be a sort of disconnect there. The Panama papers exposed the scandalous situation where wealthy individuals seemed to believe that corporation tax and other taxes are optional. Indeed, as the right hon. Member for Rutland and Melton (Sir Alan Duncan) informed us, they are apparently only for “low achievers”. When Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs says that the tax gap is £34 billion, why is the Prime Minister cutting HMRC staff by 20% and shutting down tax offices, losing the expertise of the people who could close that tax gap?
If the proposals were put forward by the British Government, why did Conservative MEPs vote against them? There seems to be a sort of disconnect there. The Panama papers exposed the scandalous situation where wealthy individuals seemed to believe that corporation tax and other taxes are optional. Indeed, as the right hon. Member for Rutland and Melton (Sir Alan Duncan) informed us, they are apparently only for “low achievers”. When Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs says that the tax gap is £34 billion, why is the Prime Minister cutting HMRC staff by 20% and shutting down tax offices, losing the expertise of the people who could close that tax gap?
I am glad that the right hon. Gentleman wants to get on to our responsibilities to pay our taxes, which I think is very important. I thought that his tax return was a metaphor for Labour policy: it was late, it was chaotic, it was inaccurate and it was uncosted. Turning to his specific questions, he is absolutely right to identify the tax gap. That is why we closed off loopholes in the last Parliament equivalent to £12 billion, and we aim to close off loopholes in this Parliament equivalent to £16 billion. HMRC is taking very strong action, backed by this Government, backed by the Chancellor and legislated for by this House. I think that I am right in saying that since 2010 we have put over £1 billion into HMRC to increase its capabilities to collect the tax that people should be paying. The difference between those on the Government Benches and the right hon. Gentleman is that we believe in setting low tax rates and encouraging people to pay them, and it is working.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what discussions he has had with NXET Trains Ltd about minimum levels of (a) on-train, (b) station and (c) ticket office staffing levels in each year of the new franchise agreement for rail passenger services on the Essex Thameside line; and what...
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what discussions he has had with NXET Trains Ltd about minimum levels of (a) on-train, (b) station and (c) ticket office staffing levels in each year of the new franchise agreement for rail passenger services on the Essex Thameside line; and what...
Staffing is a matter for the operator; as such no discussions have been held between the Secretary of State for Transport and NXET Trains Ltd and minimum levels of staffing have not been specified.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what discussions he has had with NXET Trains Ltd over plans to make staff more visible at stations on the Essex Thameside line during the term of the new franchise agreement for rail passenger services.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what discussions he has had with NXET Trains Ltd over plans to make staff more visible at stations on the Essex Thameside line during the term of the new franchise agreement for rail passenger services.
The standstill period for the Essex Thameside franchise competition has not yet concluded, as such the Department has not signed the new franchise agreement and we are not able to confirm this information at this time. An announcement will be made shortly once the agreement has been signed.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what safeguards there are in the new franchise agreement on the Essex Thameside line with NXET Trains Ltd against unsafe reductions in staff over the life of the agreement.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what safeguards there are in the new franchise agreement on the Essex Thameside line with NXET Trains Ltd against unsafe reductions in staff over the life of the agreement.
Staffing on the franchise is a matter for the operator. The operator must act within the regulatory environment of the railway, which includes safety obligations under their license to operate (granted by the Office of Rail Regulation).
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what change there will be in the number of military or civilian personnel employed across the Royal Navy due to the transfer of hunter-killer submarines from HM Naval Base Devonport to HM Naval Base Clyde;
[128976]
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what change there will be in the number of military or civilian personnel employed across the Royal Navy due to the transfer of hunter-killer submarines from HM Naval Base Devonport to HM Naval Base Clyde;
[128976]
The number of jobs at Her Majesty's Naval Base (HMNB) Clyde is forecast to increase from around 6,700 now to around 8,200 by 2022.
This change is primarily due to an increase of around 1,500 in the number of Royal Navy jobs at the site, of which around 630 will transfer from HMNB Devonport due to the move of the base-port for the Trafalgar Class submarines to HMNB Clyde. There are no plans to transfer any Ministry of Defence (MOD) civilian jobs from HMNB Devonport.
It is not possible to determine the impact on civilian jobs at HMNB Devonport caused solely by the move of the base-port for the Trafalgar Class submarines. It is anticipated, however, that it will not lead to any significant changes in either HMNB Devonport civilian numbers, or in the total number of civilians employed by the MOD. It is also anticipated that it will not lead to an increase in the overall size of the Royal Navy.
The decision to base-port the entire Astute Class at HMNB Clyde was taken before any of the submarines in the class entered service. As a result, no transfers of jobs from HMNB Devonport are planned.
(2) what change there will be in the number of military and civilian personnel employed at HM Naval Base Devonport due to the transfer of hunter-killer submarines to HM Naval Base Clyde;
[128977]
Jeremy Corbyn:
(2) what change there will be in the number of military and civilian personnel employed at HM Naval Base Devonport due to the transfer of hunter-killer submarines to HM Naval Base Clyde;
[128977]
Jeremy Corbyn:
The number of jobs at Her Majesty's Naval Base (HMNB) Clyde is forecast to increase from around 6,700 now to around 8,200 by 2022.
This change is primarily due to an increase of around 1,500 in the number of Royal Navy jobs at the site, of which around 630 will transfer from HMNB Devonport due to the move of the base-port for the Trafalgar Class submarines to HMNB Clyde. There are no plans to transfer any Ministry of Defence (MOD) civilian jobs from HMNB Devonport.
It is not possible to determine the impact on civilian jobs at HMNB Devonport caused solely by the move of the base-port for the Trafalgar Class submarines. It is anticipated, however, that it will not lead to any significant changes in either HMNB Devonport civilian numbers, or in the total number of civilians employed by the MOD. It is also anticipated that it will not lead to an increase in the overall size of the Royal Navy.
The decision to base-port the entire Astute Class at HMNB Clyde was taken before any of the submarines in the class entered service. As a result, no transfers of jobs from HMNB Devonport are planned.