Author: admin

  • Cathy Jamieson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Cathy Jamieson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Cathy Jamieson on 2014-01-07.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment he has made of the potential effect of an interest rate rise on customers whose mortgages are held by UKAR; and what support is available to assist such customers to switch providers.

    Andrea Leadsom

    This Government’s long term economic plan has kept interest rates at record lows for hardworking people across the country.

    Many lenders impose affordability stress tests on their mortgage lending decisions to ensure that the mortgage will remain affordable should interest rates rise. The Financial Conduct Authority’s Mortgage Market Review rules, which came into force in April this year will require all mortgage lenders to conduct such a stress test.

    Although UKAR does not engage in new lending, UKAR runs a range of modelling scenarios to understand the potential effects of interest rate rises on customers. This work helps UKAR to identify customers who may be susceptible to higher interest rates and to engage with such customers at an early stage.

    UKAR assists all customers who wish to switch mortgage providers.

    NRAM and Bradford and Bingley are managed by UK Asset Resolution Limited (UKAR) which was established in 2010 to manage the disposal and rundown of outstanding assets at Bradford & Bingley and Northern Rock Asset Management in an integrated way, with a view to creating value for the taxpayer. UKAR is managed at arm’s length from Government, on commercial principles.

    It is therefore not for the Chancellor to discuss detailed commercial matters with UKAR.

  • Keith Vaz – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Keith Vaz – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Keith Vaz on 2014-01-07.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many non-UK EEA nationals had dependants eligible to receive child benefit where the dependant is (a) in the UK and (b) outside the UK on 1 January 2014; and how much has been paid in such a fashion in each of the last three years.

    Nicky Morgan

    HMRC are not able to provide the information in the manner requested. HMRC do not record the nationality of the claimant receiving Child Benefit for children living in another member state.

    Published Child Benefit statistics provide annual estimates of the number of families and children claiming. The latest available (August 2012) show that there were 7.92 million families, responsible for 13.77 million children and qualifying young people receiving Child Benefit.

    The main purpose of Child Benefit is to support families in the UK. Consequently, the rules generally do not provide for them to be paid in respect of children who live abroad.

    Nevertheless, Child Benefit is a family benefit under EC Regulation 883/2004. This regulation protects the social security rights of nationals of all member states of the European economic area, including the UK, and Switzerland when they exercise their rights of free movement under EU law.

    HMRC holds information on the number of Child Benefit awards under EC Regulation 883/2004. As at 31 December 2013, there were 20,400 ongoing Child Benefit awards under the EC Regulation in respect of 34.268 children living in another member state.

    This is a fall of 3,682 (15.3%) awards in respect of 5,903 (14.7%) fewer children since 31 December 2012.

    The breakdown by member state is as follows:

    *We have withheld the number where it is fewer than 5, as there is risk that the information could be attributed to an identifiable person, which would prejudice their right to privacy and would therefore be a breach of Principle 1 of the Data Protection Act.

    Child Benefit

    Country of residence of children

    Number of awards

    Number of children

    Austria

    23

    37

    Belgium

    75

    140

    Bulgaria

    186

    245

    Croatia

    *5

    *5

    Cyprus

    39

    61

    Czech Republic

    124

    203

    Denmark

    13

    23

    Estonia

    45

    65

    Finland

    12

    23

    France

    789

    1429

    Germany

    283

    495

    Greece

    44

    69

    Hungary

    136

    196

    Iceland

    *5

    *5

    Italy

    156

    273

    Latvia

    797

    1091

    Liechtenstein

    0

    0

    Lithuania

    1215

    1712

    Luxembourg

    7

    14

    Malta

    15

    22

    Norway

    30

    61

    Poland

    13174

    22093

    Portugal

    202

    309

    Republic of Ireland

    1231

    2505

    Romania

    230

    392

    Slovakia

    692

    1232

    Slovenia

    11

    21

    Spain

    600

    1019

    Sweden

    49

    95

    Switzerland

    77

    150

    The Netherlands

    142

    288

    Totals

    20400

    34268

    As announced in the 2014 Budget, to prevent EEA migrants claiming benefits they are not entitled to, the Government will increase compliance checks to establish whether EEA migrants meet the entitlement conditions to receive Child Benefit

    Under domestic law, in order to claim Child Benefit EEA Migrants must be present in the UK, ordinarily resident and have a right to reside in the UK and their children must live in the UK.

    The recent changes to migrants’ access to benefits announced by the Government sends a strong message that the UK benefit system is not open to abuse, as well as deterring those who may seek residence in the UK primarily to claim benefits.

    Strengthening compliance checks will help prevent EEA migrants from claiming, and continuing to claim, benefits they are not entitled to. Checks will be applied to both new claims and existing awards.

  • Chris Evans – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Chris Evans – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chris Evans on 2013-11-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what the cost of travel within the UK was for his Department in each year since 2010; and how much of this was spent on (a) hire cars, (b) helicopter hire, (c) hotel accommodation and (d) subsistence.

    Brandon Lewis

    Role of the Department

    Reflecting our responsibilities for local government, housing, planning and communities across England, the work of the Department involves staff travelling to different parts of the country.

    Improved procurement has reduced our average domestic hotel rate in the UK by 8% between 2009-10 and 2012-13. Moreover, domestic flights for longer journeys can avoid the need for paying for staff to stay in a hotel overnight.

    Since 2011-12, the Department accepted responsibility for some new functions outside of London, including residual functions following the closure of the Government Offices for the Regions and then oversight of the European Regional Development Fund following the abolition of the Regional Development Agencies. As these business functions relate to work in areas outside of London and to the European Commission, this has therefore increased our travel spend compared to the base of 2010-11. However, this is far more than offset by the very significant savings to taxpayers of the abolition of these regional bodies.

    Based on current estimates (which reflect accounting consequences from machinery of government changes) the DCLG Group is reducing its annual running costs by around 40% in real terms between 2010-11 and 2014-15. This equates to net savings of at least £532 million over this spending review period and includes savings of around £420 million from the closure of the Government Offices for the Regions.

    In addition to this, I note that the Regional Development Agencies were spending in the region of £246 million a year on administration (as cited in 11 March 2009, Official Report, Column 592W).

    Spending data

    The tables below list spending on travel by financial year. Figures for 2009-10 are from July 2009, as this is when the department’s current approved travel agent contract commenced; those figures are therefore only for three-quarters of the financial year, and the full year is likely to be proportionately higher.

    Overseas Travel

    Overseas Accommodation

    Overseas Subsistence

    Total

    July 2009 – March 10

    £408,621

    £19,847

    £79,574

    £508,042 (part-year)

    2010-11

    £56,304

    £21,759

    £27,798

    £105,861

    2011-12

    £69,463

    £21,204

    £19,946

    £110,613

    2012-13

    £78,474

    £29,224

    £21,911

    £129,609

    UK Travel

    UK Accommodation

    UK Subsistence

    Total

    July 2009 – March 10

    £621,028

    £309,260

    £174,888

    £1,105,176 (part-year)

    2010-11

    £434,467

    £199,563

    £81,315

    £715,345

    2011-12

    £980,307

    £162,544

    £71,913

    £1,214,764

    2012-13

    £1,030,710

    £166,149

    £74,424

    £1,271,283

    Explanatory notes:

    – Overseas subsistence costs can include accommodation, meals and travel tickets purchased locally.

    – The costs of internal travel abroad are not routinely recorded in the form requested and this information could only be provided at a disproportionate cost.

    – Data on cost per trip is not centrally held in the form requested.

    – For car hire, the data from our finance systems do not separate out expenditure for domestic and international car hire and this could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

    – For helicopter hire, our records show that the Department has incurred no expenditure on this since 2010-11.

    – Figures contained in this answer may differ from previous answers to Parliamentary Questions, as the data extracts have been re-run and reflect ongoing accruals and data. Delays in billing or crediting transactions can sometimes have an effect on the spend data between the financial years.

    Taken in the whole, we have reduced overall travel spending compared to the last Administration, and delivered substantive savings for taxpayers’ from the abolition of regional government in England.

  • Chris Leslie – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Chris Leslie – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chris Leslie on 2013-11-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, how many overseas trips, and at what total cost, his Department has made in each year since 2010; and what the costs of (a) flights, (b) internal travel, (c) hotel accommodation and (d) subsistence were of each trip.

    Brandon Lewis

    Role of the Department

    Reflecting our responsibilities for local government, housing, planning and communities across England, the work of the Department involves staff travelling to different parts of the country.

    Improved procurement has reduced our average domestic hotel rate in the UK by 8% between 2009-10 and 2012-13. Moreover, domestic flights for longer journeys can avoid the need for paying for staff to stay in a hotel overnight.

    Since 2011-12, the Department accepted responsibility for some new functions outside of London, including residual functions following the closure of the Government Offices for the Regions and then oversight of the European Regional Development Fund following the abolition of the Regional Development Agencies. As these business functions relate to work in areas outside of London and to the European Commission, this has therefore increased our travel spend compared to the base of 2010-11. However, this is far more than offset by the very significant savings to taxpayers of the abolition of these regional bodies.

    Based on current estimates (which reflect accounting consequences from machinery of government changes) the DCLG Group is reducing its annual running costs by around 40% in real terms between 2010-11 and 2014-15. This equates to net savings of at least £532 million over this spending review period and includes savings of around £420 million from the closure of the Government Offices for the Regions.

    In addition to this, I note that the Regional Development Agencies were spending in the region of £246 million a year on administration (as cited in 11 March 2009, Official Report, Column 592W).

    Spending data

    The tables below list spending on travel by financial year. Figures for 2009-10 are from July 2009, as this is when the department’s current approved travel agent contract commenced; those figures are therefore only for three-quarters of the financial year, and the full year is likely to be proportionately higher.

    Overseas Travel

    Overseas Accommodation

    Overseas Subsistence

    Total

    July 2009 – March 10

    £408,621

    £19,847

    £79,574

    £508,042 (part-year)

    2010-11

    £56,304

    £21,759

    £27,798

    £105,861

    2011-12

    £69,463

    £21,204

    £19,946

    £110,613

    2012-13

    £78,474

    £29,224

    £21,911

    £129,609

    UK Travel

    UK Accommodation

    UK Subsistence

    Total

    July 2009 – March 10

    £621,028

    £309,260

    £174,888

    £1,105,176 (part-year)

    2010-11

    £434,467

    £199,563

    £81,315

    £715,345

    2011-12

    £980,307

    £162,544

    £71,913

    £1,214,764

    2012-13

    £1,030,710

    £166,149

    £74,424

    £1,271,283

    Explanatory notes:

    – Overseas subsistence costs can include accommodation, meals and travel tickets purchased locally.

    – The costs of internal travel abroad are not routinely recorded in the form requested and this information could only be provided at a disproportionate cost.

    – Data on cost per trip is not centrally held in the form requested.

    – For car hire, the data from our finance systems do not separate out expenditure for domestic and international car hire and this could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

    – For helicopter hire, our records show that the Department has incurred no expenditure on this since 2010-11.

    – Figures contained in this answer may differ from previous answers to Parliamentary Questions, as the data extracts have been re-run and reflect ongoing accruals and data. Delays in billing or crediting transactions can sometimes have an effect on the spend data between the financial years.

    Taken in the whole, we have reduced overall travel spending compared to the last Administration, and delivered substantive savings for taxpayers’ from the abolition of regional government in England.

  • Mr Gareth Thomas – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Mr Gareth Thomas – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mr Gareth Thomas on 2013-11-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what funding was allocated from Homes and Community Agency to (a) develop new affordable housing and (b) bring empty homes back into use in Harrow in each of the last five years.

    Kris Hopkins

    [Holding Reply: Thursday 7 November 2013]

    The figures for affordable housing are as follows for the London Borough of Harrow area:

    2008-09

    £22 million

    2009-10

    £45 million

    2010-11

    £26 million

    2011-12

    £15 million

    2012-13

    £13 million

    Since April 2012, allocations from the Affordable Housing Programme have been overseen by the Greater London Authority rather than the Homes and Communities Agency. There have been no specific allocations on empty homes over this period.

    As outlined to the hon. Member in the answer of 7 January 2013, Official Report, Column 121W, I would note that the new Affordable Rent model now allows for more affordable housing to be delivered with lower levels of taxpayer capital subsidy and lever in more private investment.

    As the National Audit Office has observed: “The Department selected the best delivery model open to it for the funds it had available” and “The Department has so far achieved its policy objective to maximise the number of homes delivered within the available grant funding” (National Audit Office, “Financial viability of the social housing sector; introducing the Affordable Homes Programme”, 4 July 2012, HC465, pp.6-7).

    I also note that the Mayor’s proposed Housing Strategy states: “£1.8 billion of public funding has been secured by the Mayor which will unlock an estimated additional £3.7 billion of other investment for London to enable 55,000 affordable homes to be delivered between 2011-15” (Mayor of London, “The Revised London Housing Strategy”, December2011, p.35).

    Across England, 170,000 affordable homes have been delivered so far since April 2010, and a total of £19.5 billion of public and private investment is being spent on affordable housing over the current Spending Review period.

  • Fiona Bruce – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Fiona Bruce – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Fiona Bruce on 2013-06-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what powers and freedoms relating to (a) skills and employment, (b) housing and (c) economic development have been devolved since May 2010 to (i) local government and (ii) local enterprise partnerships.

    Kris Hopkins

    [Holding Reply: Monday 1 July 2013]

    The Government is taking considerable steps to devolve power and freedom to local government and Local Enterprise Partnerships.

    Through the Localism Act, councils now have the general power of competence that enables them to do anything that an individual might do, apart from that which is specifically prohibited. In addition we have radically reformed the local government finance system putting levers and incentives in the hands of local authorities, for instance:

    · The removal of ring-fencing from local government grants has given councils the freedom and flexibility over the money they receive and allows them to work with their residents to decide how best to make their spending decisions to fit their local priority needs.

    · rewarded places that deliver growth, through the New Homes Bonus and Business Rate Retention.

    · Local authorities now directly retain 50% of business rates locally which amounts to nearly £11 billion, instead of returning it to Whitehall.

    · We established five pilot Rural Growth Networks aimed at tackling the barriers to economic growth in rural areas, such as a shortage of work premises, slow internet connectivity and fragmented business networks. These pilots expect to create up to 3,000 new jobs and support up to 700 new businesses, offering a local approach to local problems. We will share the lessons they learn with other Local Enterprise Partnerships and Local Authorities to help them promote growth in other rural areas.

    We have also given councils the ability to borrow against their Housing Revenue Account.

    Through the city deals programme we have devolved powers and responsibilities to 26 cities. For example we have:

    •provided levers to deliver the skills and jobs that local businesses and people need;

    •created joint investment programmes; and

    • devolved greater financial powers and incentives to invest in growth to all cities.

    As we made clear in our response to Lord Heseltine’s review of Growth, we intend to go further. We have committed to negotiating Growth Deals with every Local Enterprise Partnership through which we will allocate the Local Growth Fund and negotiate broader powers, freedoms and flexibilities where a strong case for decentralisation can be made. The Local Growth Fund brings together funding from skills, housing and transport and we have committed £2 billion in 2015/16 and it will continue to be at least £2 billion a year up to 2021. The Local Growth Fund includes:

    • over £6 billion of transport funding;
    • £300 million of additional Housing Revenue Account borrowing;
    • £50 million of Local Infrastructure Funding for housing developers; and
    • £300 million skills capital funding.

    We are also for the first time putting £5 billion of European Structural Investment Funds for the 2014-20 period under the strategic direction of Local Enterprise Partnerships, bringing the total resource (including the Local Growth Fund) under the control of Local Enterprise Partnerships to over £17 billion up until 2020.

  • Gregg McClymont – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Gregg McClymont – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gregg McClymont on 2013-05-08.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what discussions he has had with officials in his Department on how the accounting officers’ conventions would apply to investment in Scotland in advance of the referendum on Scottish independence in 2014.

    Danny Alexander

    I have been asked to reply on behalf of the Treasury.

    The UK Government is not planning for independence as it believes that people in Scotland will vote to remain within the UK. As such, the Government has made no assessment of the risk of losses to the public purse, and has no plans to change accounting officers conventions

  • Mr Clive Betts – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Mr Clive Betts – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mr Clive Betts on 2013-05-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, whether he plans to consult on eligibility for free school meals ahead of the introduction of universal credit.

    Mr David Laws

    We are working very closely with other departments, including the Cabinet Office and the Department for Work and Pensions, to simplify free school meals criteria under universal credit, while ensuring that free lunches continue to be available to the families who need them most. These discussions, which include consideration of a phased implementation timetable, are in recognition of the significant number and complexity of passported benefits across Government, most of which have different eligibility criteria.

    We will allow good time to enable schools, local authorities and children’s charities to comment on our proposals before we introduce new entitlement criteria for free school meals under universal credit.

  • Margaret Curran – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Margaret Curran – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Curran on 2013-05-08.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what assessment he has made of the total loss to the economy as a result of underemployment in Scotland.

    Chloe Smith

    This is not a matter for Cabinet Office Ministers.

  • Alun Cairns – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Alun Cairns – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Alun Cairns on 2013-05-08.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how his Department scrutinises the Fundraising Standards Board; when a review was last conducted; and what the outcome was of this review.

    Mr Nick Hurd

    Lord Hodgson assessed the Fundraising Standards Board (FRSB) as part of his review of the Charities Act 2006 and concluded in his report ‘Trusted and Independent: Giving charity back to charities’ that it had broadly met 10 of the 12 success criteria set out when it was established in 2006. The FRSB and Cabinet Office are members of the Steering Committee established in response to Lord Hodgson’s recommendations to drive forward further progress in strengthening self-regulation.