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 2014-04-30.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what discussions he has had with (a) representatives or organisations offering free debt advice, (b) representatives of fee charging debt management organisations, (c) creditors and (d) the Insolvency Service on the potential effect of his Department’s withdrawal from the Debt Management Plan Protocol guidance group.

    Andrea Leadsom

    The Government is committed to improving standards in the debt management industry to deliver a better deal for consumers and greater transparency for creditors. The Debt Management Plan Protocol played a crucial role in meeting this objective, working in complement with the OFT regulatory framework, and paved the way for more robust regulation of the sector by the FCA.

    From 1 April, responsibility for regulating debt management firms, along with all other consumer credit firms, transferred from the Office of Fair Trading to the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).

    Consumers will be better protected under the new regime – the FCA will:

    · police the gateway to the market more thoroughly;

    · proactively identify risks to consumers;

    · focus its supervisory resources on areas most likely to cause consumer harm;

    · approve individuals in influential roles in firms;

    · operate a flexible and responsive regime;

    · use its wide enforcement toolkit;

    · and ensure consumers have access to redress.

    The FCA will thoroughly assess every debt management firm’s fitness to trade as part of the authorisation process – debt management firms will be amongst the first to require authorisation.

    The FCA has also introduced new requirements for debt management firms, including:

    · Prudential requirements: Debt management firms often hold consumers’ money – the FCA is requiring large debt management firms to hold capital to ensure that consumers don’t risk losing their money if things go wrong.

    · Guidance added that debt management firms should not allocate more than half the money received from customers in debt management plans to meeting their fees and charges.

    With the new FCA regulatory regime in place which will greatly improve consumer protection in the debt management market, the Government decided following discussions with a range of stakeholders that it was the right time to step away from an active role in the Protocol.

    The Government hopes that the stakeholders involved in the Protocol will continue to work together to help the FCA monitor the market and drive best practice in the sector.

  • 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 2014-04-30.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, for what reason his Department will no longer participate in the Debt Management Plan Protocol guidance group; and if he will make a statement.

    Andrea Leadsom

    The Government is committed to improving standards in the debt management industry to deliver a better deal for consumers and greater transparency for creditors. The Debt Management Plan Protocol played a crucial role in meeting this objective, working in complement with the OFT regulatory framework, and paved the way for more robust regulation of the sector by the FCA.

    From 1 April, responsibility for regulating debt management firms, along with all other consumer credit firms, transferred from the Office of Fair Trading to the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).

    Consumers will be better protected under the new regime – the FCA will:

    · police the gateway to the market more thoroughly;

    · proactively identify risks to consumers;

    · focus its supervisory resources on areas most likely to cause consumer harm;

    · approve individuals in influential roles in firms;

    · operate a flexible and responsive regime;

    · use its wide enforcement toolkit;

    · and ensure consumers have access to redress.

    The FCA will thoroughly assess every debt management firm’s fitness to trade as part of the authorisation process – debt management firms will be amongst the first to require authorisation.

    The FCA has also introduced new requirements for debt management firms, including:

    · Prudential requirements: Debt management firms often hold consumers’ money – the FCA is requiring large debt management firms to hold capital to ensure that consumers don’t risk losing their money if things go wrong.

    · Guidance added that debt management firms should not allocate more than half the money received from customers in debt management plans to meeting their fees and charges.

    With the new FCA regulatory regime in place which will greatly improve consumer protection in the debt management market, the Government decided following discussions with a range of stakeholders that it was the right time to step away from an active role in the Protocol.

    The Government hopes that the stakeholders involved in the Protocol will continue to work together to help the FCA monitor the market and drive best practice in the sector.

  • 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 2014-04-30.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment he has made of the future implementation of the Debt Management Plan Protocol.

    Andrea Leadsom

    The Government is committed to improving standards in the debt management industry to deliver a better deal for consumers and greater transparency for creditors. The Debt Management Plan Protocol played a crucial role in meeting this objective, working in complement with the OFT regulatory framework, and paved the way for more robust regulation of the sector by the FCA.

    From 1 April, responsibility for regulating debt management firms, along with all other consumer credit firms, transferred from the Office of Fair Trading to the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).

    Consumers will be better protected under the new regime – the FCA will:

    · police the gateway to the market more thoroughly;

    · proactively identify risks to consumers;

    · focus its supervisory resources on areas most likely to cause consumer harm;

    · approve individuals in influential roles in firms;

    · operate a flexible and responsive regime;

    · use its wide enforcement toolkit;

    · and ensure consumers have access to redress.

    The FCA will thoroughly assess every debt management firm’s fitness to trade as part of the authorisation process – debt management firms will be amongst the first to require authorisation.

    The FCA has also introduced new requirements for debt management firms, including:

    · Prudential requirements: Debt management firms often hold consumers’ money – the FCA is requiring large debt management firms to hold capital to ensure that consumers don’t risk losing their money if things go wrong.

    · Guidance added that debt management firms should not allocate more than half the money received from customers in debt management plans to meeting their fees and charges.

    With the new FCA regulatory regime in place which will greatly improve consumer protection in the debt management market, the Government decided following discussions with a range of stakeholders that it was the right time to step away from an active role in the Protocol.

    The Government hopes that the stakeholders involved in the Protocol will continue to work together to help the FCA monitor the market and drive best practice in the sector.

  • 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 2014-04-30.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment he has made of the effect of his Department’s withdrawal from the Debt Management Plan Protocol guidance group on the development of future non-statutory debt solutions.

    Andrea Leadsom

    The Government is committed to improving standards in the debt management industry to deliver a better deal for consumers and greater transparency for creditors. The Debt Management Plan Protocol played a crucial role in meeting this objective, working in complement with the OFT regulatory framework, and paved the way for more robust regulation of the sector by the FCA.

    From 1 April, responsibility for regulating debt management firms, along with all other consumer credit firms, transferred from the Office of Fair Trading to the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).

    Consumers will be better protected under the new regime – the FCA will:

    · police the gateway to the market more thoroughly;

    · proactively identify risks to consumers;

    · focus its supervisory resources on areas most likely to cause consumer harm;

    · approve individuals in influential roles in firms;

    · operate a flexible and responsive regime;

    · use its wide enforcement toolkit;

    · and ensure consumers have access to redress.

    The FCA will thoroughly assess every debt management firm’s fitness to trade as part of the authorisation process – debt management firms will be amongst the first to require authorisation.

    The FCA has also introduced new requirements for debt management firms, including:

    · Prudential requirements: Debt management firms often hold consumers’ money – the FCA is requiring large debt management firms to hold capital to ensure that consumers don’t risk losing their money if things go wrong.

    · Guidance added that debt management firms should not allocate more than half the money received from customers in debt management plans to meeting their fees and charges.

    With the new FCA regulatory regime in place which will greatly improve consumer protection in the debt management market, the Government decided following discussions with a range of stakeholders that it was the right time to step away from an active role in the Protocol.

    The Government hopes that the stakeholders involved in the Protocol will continue to work together to help the FCA monitor the market and drive best practice in the sector.

  • William Bain – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    William Bain – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by William Bain on 2014-04-30.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, which meetings or telephone calls have taken place between Ministers and officials in his Department and (a) the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority, (b) BlackRock, (c) Capital Research, (d) Fidelity Worldwide, (e) GIC, (f) Henderson, (g) JP Morgan, (h) Kuwait Investment Office, (i) Lansdowne Partners, (j) Lazard Asset Management, (k) Och Ziff, Schroders, (l) Soros, (m) Standard Life, (n) Third Point and (o) Threadneedle since 2010 and what was discussed in any such discussions.

    Andrea Leadsom

    Treasury Ministers and officials have meetings with a wide variety of organisations in the public and private sectors as part of the process of policy development and delivery.

    Details of ministerial and permanent secretary meetings with external organisations on departmental business are published on a quarterly basis and are available at:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/hmt-ministers-meetings-hospitality-gifts-and-overseas-travel

    Details of officials’ meetings with external organisations are not held centrally and it would entail disproportionate cost to collate this information.

    “

  • William Bain – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    William Bain – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by William Bain on 2014-04-30.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what meetings or telephone calls have taken place between Ministers and officials in his Department with (a) the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority, (b) BlackRock, (c) Capital Research, (d) Fidelity Worldwide, (e) GIC, (f) Henderson, (g) JP Morgan, (h) Kuwait Investment Office, (i) Lansdowne Partners, (j) Lazard Asset Management, (k) Och Ziff, Schroders, (l) Soros, (m) Standard Life, (n) Third Point and (o) Threadneedle in relation to the flotation of the Royal Mail since May 2010; and what was discussed in such meetings.

    Michael Fallon

    Neither Ministers in the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills nor officials have discussed the Royal Mail flotation with any of these investors.

  • William Bain – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    William Bain – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by William Bain on 2014-04-30.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, which priority investors in Royal Mail have subsequently sold all or part of their holdings of shares since the date of flotation; and what estimate he has made of the level of profits made in each case.

    Michael Fallon

    Maintained by Royal Mail and is subject to uncertainties (e.g. funds can hold their shares through a range of nominees/custodians).

    Based on the Bloomberg register dated 23rd April, we estimate that more than half of the pilot fishing investors allocated shares remain invested and that they hold shares equal to more than 50% of their combined allocations.

    Given that the timings of sales and purchases are not available on a fund by fund basis, the Department does not know, and has not made any estimate, of any profits made by these investors (other than Lazard Asset Management whose representative told the Public Accounts Committee on 30 April the level of profit it made on the sale of Royal Mail shares for its clients).

  • Christopher Chope – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Christopher Chope – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Christopher Chope on 2014-04-30.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what information his Department holds on how many UK citizens are not being paid those Zimbabwean government pensions to which they are entitled; and what steps the UK Government is taking to end that default.

    Mark Simmonds

    The Overseas Service Pensioners Association (OSPA) have estimated that there are approximately 1250-1500 pensioners who are entitled to a pension from the Government of Zimbabwe, of whom 300-400 are estimated to be resident in the UK. This is unverified by the Government of Zimbabwe.

    The payment of Zimbabwe public service pensions is the responsibility of the Government of Zimbabwe. We appreciate the frustration and financial burden the non-payment of pensions puts on many pensioners and have continually pressed the Government of Zimbabwe to fulfil their obligations.

  • Christopher Chope – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Christopher Chope – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Christopher Chope on 2014-04-30.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, when officials of his Department in Harare last met the Zimbabwean government director of pensions to discuss distribution of the funds reserved for payment to overseas pensioners; and if he will make a statement.

    Mark Simmonds

    We continue to pursue a resolution to the non-payment of Zimbabwe civil servant pensions and are in regular contact with the interested parties, including the Overseas Service Pensioners Association (OSPA) and the Federal Pensioners Association in Harare.

    UK officials last spoke with the Director of Pensions at the end of January and are still pursuing a response from the Zimbabwean Civil Service Commission to our letter from December 2013. We have also raised the issue since with other interlocutors, including the Zimbabwean Ambassador in London.

  • Christopher Chope – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Christopher Chope – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Christopher Chope on 2014-04-30.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, on what date officials of his Department were informed that arrangements had failed for a commercial bank to facilitate payments to overseas pensioners out of funds reserved by the government of Zimbabwe; and when he expects an alternative service provider to be in place.

    Mark Simmonds

    We were in regular contact with the commercial bank following the request by the Government of Zimbabwe to facilitate the payment of pensions. They formally confirmed to the Government of Zimbabwe on 6 November that they were unable to act as the service provider, though had informed us of this decision in the preceding weeks.

    The payment of Zimbabwe public service pensions is the responsibility of the Government of Zimbabwe. We will continue to encourage them, and any possible service provider, to resolve the issue as soon as possible.