The British Government consistently and unreservedly condemns torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and it is a priority for us to combat it wherever and whenever it occurs. We are aware of ongoing allegations against Ministry of Interior personnel, and we have expressed our concerns to the authorities. The Government of Bahrain has previously committed to consider ratifying the Optional Protocol of the Convention Against Torture. The UK strongly supports this and we have been working with the authorities to share best practice on torture prevention measures. We also continue to ask the Government of Bahrain to allow a visit of the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture.

We welcome the progress made by Bahrain on their reform programme particularly in the areas of youth justice, the establishment and increasing effectiveness of the Ombudsman’s office, the Prisoner and Detainees’ Rights Commission and the reformed National Institute of Human Rights. We continue to work with the Government of Bahrain to ensure momentum and progress on its reforms, for the benefit of all Bahrainis.

The Government of Bahrain has asked the international community for their assistance in implementing the reforms necessary to improve the human rights situation, including in the security services. We strongly support them in their efforts and that is why we will continue to offer bilateral assistance for Bahrain’s reform programmes. In August, following a meeting with His Majesty King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa, the Prime Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Mr Cameron), reiterated the UK’s support for ongoing political reform in Bahrain but encouraged His Majesty to continue to demonstrate substantive progress in all areas. Our package of technical assistance is focused on strengthening human rights and the rule of law, in line with the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry and the Universal Periodic Review.

This Government has been giving consideration to the legal position on caste discrimination in light of the Tirkey v Chandhok Employment Appeal Tribunal judgment which suggests there is an existing legal remedy for claims of caste-associated discrimination under the ‘ethnic origins’ element of Section 9 of the Equality Act 2010.

Our consideration of the research report commissioned by the coalition Government, designed to determine the feasibility of conducting a national survey to quantify the extent of caste discrimination in Britain, is part of this process.

We remain mindful of the Open Government Action Plan published by the Coalition Government in 2013, to the extent that this concerns the results of commissioned research.

This Government has been giving consideration to the legal position on caste discrimination in light of the Tirkey v Chandhok Employment Appeal Tribunal judgment which suggests there is an existing legal remedy for claims of caste-associated discrimination under the ‘ethnic origins’ element of Section 9 of the Equality Act 2010.

Our consideration of the research report commissioned by the coalition Government, designed to determine the feasibility of conducting a national survey to quantify the extent of caste discrimination in Britain, is part of this process.

We remain mindful of the Open Government Action Plan published by the Coalition Government in 2013, to the extent that this concerns the results of commissioned research.

This Government has been giving consideration to the legal position on caste discrimination in light of the Tirkey v Chandhok Employment Appeal Tribunal judgment which suggests there is an existing legal remedy for claims of caste-associated discrimination under the ‘ethnic origins’ element of Section 9 of the Equality Act 2010.

Our consideration of the research report commissioned by the coalition Government, designed to determine the feasibility of conducting a national survey to quantify the extent of caste discrimination in Britain, is part of this process.

We remain mindful of the Open Government Action Plan published by the Coalition Government in 2013, to the extent that this concerns the results of commissioned research.

Section 65 of the Immigration Act 2014 was commenced on 6 April 2015 and inserted new registration provisions into the British Nationality Act 1981 for persons born before 1 July 2006 to British fathers. Information about this is published on the Gov.UK website at: https://www.gov.uk/register-british-citizen/born-before-2006-british-father.

The National Archives is bringing all the primary legislation on legislation.gov.uk up to date. The British Nationality Act 1981 (c. 61) is up to date to the end of 2009. A further 50 subsequent amendments affecting this Act have been identified. A fully revised version, including the effects by the Immigration Act 2014 (c. 22), will be published and available by the end of 2015.

Details of the drugs removed from the national Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF) list following re-prioritisation are shown in tables 1 and 2. The latest version of the list is available on NHS England’s website at: www.england.nhs.uk/ourwork/pe/cdf/. A copy is attached.

NHS England publishes information on the number of patient applications for particular drugs/indications contained on the national CDF list on a quarterly basis. This information also includes the number of applications approved through the individual CDF request process. The latest information isattached as it is too long to be included in this answer. It is also available at:

www.england.nhs.uk/ourwork/pe/cdf/ and a copy of this is also attached.

The Government is committed to the CDF and is working with NHS England and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence on the future arrangements for the Fund.

The situation in Darfur has already been referred to the International Criminal Court (ICC) by the UN Security Council under UN Security Council Resolution 1593 (2005). As the prosecutor’s investigation is still ongoing, it could encompass any new allegations. However, such a decision would be for the Office of the Prosecutor of the Court to take. The UK remains a strong supporter of the ICC.

The Government continues to take forward work to deliver the recommendations in the 2014 report. We remain committed to improving stem cell transplantation services and doing all we can to help those in need of a transplant to find a suitable donor.

Since 2011, the Department has provided its delivery partners, NHS Blood and Transplant and the Anthony Nolan, a total of £16 million in additional, new funding to improve stem cell transplantation services in the United Kingdom. A further £3 million investment was announced in March 2015.

This funding has led to a tangible improvement in the availability of stem cells in the UK and the achievements include:

- More UK patients received a stem cell transplant in 2014 than ever before;

- Over 60% of black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) patients are now able to find a well matched donor compared to only 40% in 2010;

- A single unified bone marrow donor registry has been created streamlining the provision of stem cells and reducing the time to provide cells from adult donors;

- The proportion of patients receiving cord blood from UK donors has significantly increased; and

- An increase in UK patients receiving a transplant from 802 in 2010/11 to 1,060 in 1013/14. The increased use of UK-sourced stem cells has meant that more donors than ever are available to donate leading to a significant cost saving by reducing the need to import stem cells.

My Lords, I draw attention to the dedication of the All-Party Group on this issue over many years. Whether or not there will be an opportunity for this to be debated at some stage will depend on whether noble Lords try to get parliamentary time for it. Once the analysis is made, the Government will make an announcement. I will write to the noble Lord about whether it will be published.

My Lords, the United Kingdom Government are in regular contact with the Saudi authorities, including through our embassy in Riyadh and our Yemen office based in Jeddah. The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs visited Saudi Arabia earlier this week and underlined the importance that the United Kingdom attaches to finding a political solution to the current crisis as soon as possible. He also reinforced the necessity of full compliance with international humanitarian law and of facilitating access for humanitarian and commercial shipping.

My Lords, the noble Lord is right: the situation there at the moment is dreadful. In July it was declared a level 3 emergency, which is reserved for the worst humanitarian crises—shared only, I am afraid, by Syria, Iraq and South Sudan. As the noble Lord said, the intensified conflict has now displaced nearly 2.3 million people. He asked whether there is anything that we can do during our presidency of the Security Council. I will pass on his question to my colleagues in the department, but I can say that UN special envoy Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed briefed the Security Council in open session on Friday on his plans for further political negotiation. That is something that we are very pleased about.

The Government considers material from a range of sources as part of the normal policy making process. Professor Gabriel Zucman’s book points out that tax avoidance by large corporations can be stopped, and the UK is addressing this issue through the G20 and OECD Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) project. We recognise that the global issue of tax avoidance and aggressive tax planning requires a coordinated approach to come up with effective solutions. This is why the UK is at the forefront of multilateral action through the BEPS project to ensure profits are taxed where economic activities are performed.

The first phase of the BEPS project was delivered in 2014, and the UK was the first adopter of the 2014 recommendations, by legislating for the internationally agreed country-by-country reporting template; and consulting on implementing the OECD agreed rules to deal with hybrid mismatch arrangements.

The final recommendations from the BEPS project were endorsed by the G20 Finance Ministers at their meeting in Lima on 8 October. The project represents major and unprecedented efforts involving over 60 countries to clamp down on aggressive tax planning.

The Government is committed to countering tax avoidance to ensure all tax payers pay their fair share. The UK will give full consideration to the outputs of the BEPS project and we will engage with the OECD’s work on developing a framework for monitoring implementation.

Catering and Retail Services seek to provide an appropriate level of service to support an active and busy parliamentary chamber, and to provide excellent value to the taxpayer. The catering subsidy has been reduced by 32% since 2007 and we are working hard to reduce it further through an ambitious Change Programme.

The unpredictable nature of parliamentary business – in terms of sitting days, recesses, the length of each sitting, and the level of attendance at the House for each sitting – means that staffing costs and wastage are higher than would be the case in purely commercial catering outlets. This makes an operating loss extremely difficult to avoid.

Furthermore, catering facilities are used by a wide range of people, not just Members. Venues such as the River Restaurant and Millbank House cafeteria are mainly intended to provide facilities for staff and other users such as the Metropolitan Police, contractors and others working on the Parliamentary Estate. It is good practice for large employers to provide cafeteria facilities for staff, particularly for organisations that operate outside normal office hours as is the case in the House of Lords. We pay all catering staff at least the London Living Wage and provide them with workplace pensions. We are proud to do so but it means our costs are higher than some commercial restaurants.

Given these factors, some element of tax-payer funding is appropriate, but the Administration is vigilant to ensure that public money is stewarded responsibly. Catering and Retail Services are also exploring novel ways to generate income in quieter times, such as opening the Peers’ Dining Room to the public in longer recesses. This helps to reduce the overall cost of the refreshment service to the tax payer, and so the subsidy.

My Lords, I cannot comment on any individual cases but I can say that we continue to lobby strongly at the United Nations for measures that will improve the protection of civilians as a whole in conflict areas. This requires a greater compliance

with international laws by state and non-state actors, an improved response and action by the international community, and support to states to develop their capabilities to protect their own populations.

In light of commitments made during the passage of the Immigration Act 2014 to make Rules in respect of short term holding facilities (STHFs), the Government intends to consult on the short term holding facility rules once Stephen Shaw CBE’s report into detainee welfare in detention is published. Mr Shaw has completed this review and has submitted his report to the Home Office. His findings are being carefully considered before the report is published by laying it before Parliament, alongside the Government’s response to its recommendations.

The Government is committed todelivering further savings to eliminate the deficit in public expenditure in order to secure Britain’s long term economic security. DCMS is working closely with all of its arm’s length bodies, including the British Library, as part of the current spending review to understand the impacts of public funding decisions. The outcome of this will be announced by the Chancellor on 25 November 2015.

We have repeatedly raised our concerns at the UN Security Council over the reported bombing of hospitals in South Kordofan. Any decision to refer to the International Criminal Court must be made on the basis of what will be the most effective means to bring those responsible to account. We will therefore continue to look at every available option to ensure accountability, and to work with our international partners on what can be done to both assist the victims and to bring those responsible to justice. We will also continue to urge the Government of Sudan to cooperate fully with the UN Independent Expert, whose mandate was renewed at the recent Human Rights Council in September and allows him to assess, verify and report on the human rights situation throughout Sudan.

The Ministry of Justice does not exercise any functions under the provisions of the Registration of Burials Act 1864 and has not therefore undertaken such a review. Should the Government amend the Act in the future, however, it would have to take account of the requirements of the Equality Act 2010.