Blog

  • Karen Buck – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Karen Buck – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Karen Buck on 2015-10-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many employment support allowance claimants in the City of Westminster have been referred to Maximus and the Work Programme since that company took over that contract.

    Priti Patel

    The information requested (up to June 2015) is published and available at:

    http://tabulation-tool.dwp.gov.uk/WorkProg/tabtool.html

    Guidance for users can be found at:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/dwp-tabulation-tool-guidance

    “

  • Karen Buck – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Karen Buck – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Karen Buck on 2015-10-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, if he will request from Maximus a report on (a) the number of employment support allowance claimants in the City of Westminster who have been sent a letter mandating them to attend a Work Programme interview that includes incorrect email contact details and (b) the steps taken since that error was identified to ensure that it is remedied.

    Priti Patel

    Of the overall total number of Initial Appointment letters sent out during the period 16/10/2013 – 19/08/2015 there are 169 customers with a Westminster postcode that could have had these letters sent to them with the incorrect Maximus e-mail address.

    Maximus have confirmed that the letter in question was originally created on 16/10/2013 for customers referred from City of Westminster. Customers affected will be those referred to Work Programme who have a Westminster postcode only.

    Maximus became aware of this letter containing an error via a customer complaint on 18/08/2015 and had resolved the issue by 19/08/2015 there is therefore no need to publish a report. Maximus has also set up an email address so that any customer responses sent to the incorrect address will be forwarded to the correct email address from 19/08/2015. Maximus are confident that they have remedied this unfortunate mistake.

  • Stephen Timms – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Stephen Timms – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Timms on 2015-10-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how frequently a person with a (a) multiple sclerosis and (b) another degenerative disease should be required to attend an assessment in connection with their claim for (i) employment and support allowance and (ii) personal independence payment.

    Priti Patel

    The Work Capability Assessment (WCA) assesses individuals against a set of functional descriptors not specific conditions, as two people with the same condition can be affected in different ways. This does however take account of how fluctuating and degenerative conditions, such multiple sclerosis, affect a claimant’s ability to work.

    A healthcare professional gives advice on when they think a claimants functional capability may have changed sufficiently to trigger a change in the outcome of the WCA. Re-referral dates chosen can be 3, 6, 12, 18, 24 or 36 months depending on when it is considered most appropriate for the claimant to have their next contact with the Department.

    Decisions on claims to Personal Independence Payment are made by case managers and are based on advice received from the assessment providers following an assessment, together with any other evidence received. People with a progressive condition, and who are not expected to live beyond six months, are not required to attend a face-to-face assessment and their claims will always be decided on the basis of the evidence received.

    Claims to Personal Independence Payment are looked at individually, considering the impact on daily living and mobility of the impairment or health condition, rather than solely basing the decision on the impairment or health condition itself. Award durations and reviews are based on an assessment of whether the individual’s functional abilities are likely to deteriorate, improve or stay the same. Reviews ensure that claimants continue to receive the appropriate level of award throughout their claim, including claimants with degenerative conditions who may get a higher award at review to reflect a deterioration in their condition.

  • Mark Hendrick – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Mark Hendrick – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mark Hendrick on 2015-10-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what recent meetings Ministers in his Department have had with cancer campaign groups on proposals in the Welfare Reform and Work Bill on changes to employment and support allowance for people in the work-related activity group.

    Priti Patel

    Ministers regularly have meetings with a variety of stakeholders, including cancer charities; as part of their role.

  • Kate Hollern – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Kate Hollern – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kate Hollern on 2015-10-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, if he will make it his policy to reintroduce National Road Safety targets.

    Andrew Jones

    The Conservative Manifesto 2015 had a commitment to reduce the number of cyclists and other road users killed or injured on our roads every year. We are working closely with road safety groups to consider what more can be done and we believe that every death is a tragedy and is one too many.

    The Government has not set road safety targets for local authorities or the police, and is not considering reinstating them. We do not believe that further persuasion is needed on the importance of road safety through “Whitehall knows best” diktats. However, local authorities and the police are free to set their own targets if they find this useful.

  • Lilian Greenwood – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lilian Greenwood – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lilian Greenwood on 2015-10-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what assessment he has made of the effect of changes in UK steel output in the last five years on the (a) value of orders placed by Network Rail and Highways England to companies in the UK supply chain and (b) projected number of steel-carrying rail freight movements over the next three years.

    Claire Perry

    Network Rail advises that for its major use of steel it has a five year framework contract from April 2014 for the supply of new steel rails from Long Steels UK Limited, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Tata Steel. Network Rail is in close contact with Tata Steel to ensure continuity of supply.

    Network Rail buys approximately 140,000 tonnes of steel rail per annum from Tata Steel, which equates to around 95% of total aggregated demand for Network Rail. This is supplied directly from Scunthorpe. Smaller contracts are also in place with Arcelor Mittal (Spain) and Voestalpine (Austria). These relate to the manufacture of very special steel products.

    These volumes are broken down are as follows. The figures for 2015-16 are provisional:

    Year

    Tata Supply (Tonnes)

    Tata Spend (£)

    2011-12

    137,762.2408

    97,715,813.91

    2012-13

    142,022.9286

    100,210,560.98

    2013-14

    158,891.8490

    107,201,303.99

    2014-15

    138,387.2325

    90,832,520.93

    2015-16

    138,000

    87,713,500.74

    Highways England does not procure steel materials directly. Despite the changes in UK steel output over the last five years, Highways England and its predecessor have continued to invest heavily in UK steel. During this period Highways England has used a category management framework as the main method of procuring steel gantries for the Strategic Road Network. To date circa 95% of this steel has been drawn from Tata Steel in the UK, which equates to approximately 11,000 tonnes of steel. The approximate framework spend is £30 million, of which about 35% will be steel procurement i.e. raw materials, and will equate to around £10.5 million.

    As rail freight is a wholly commercial business and therefore has to respond to market changes as part of its operational model, the Government does not itself undertake assessments of the impact on rail freight of variations in the flows of specific commodities. Network Rail’s Freight Market Study, published in 2013, assumed a small recovery in the steel market based on information available at that time.

  • Lilian Greenwood – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lilian Greenwood – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lilian Greenwood on 2015-10-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what orders were placed by (a) Network Rail and (b) Highways England for (i) steel manufactured by UK-based companies and (ii) all steel in 2014-15; and what tonnage was ordered at what cost in each such order.

    Claire Perry

    Network Rail advises that for its major use of steel it has a five year framework contract from April 2014 for the supply of new steel rails from Long Steels UK Limited, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Tata Steel. Network Rail is in close contact with Tata Steel to ensure continuity of supply.

    Network Rail buys approximately 140,000 tonnes of steel rail per annum from Tata Steel, which equates to around 95% of total aggregated demand for Network Rail. This is supplied directly from Scunthorpe. Smaller contracts are also in place with Arcelor Mittal (Spain) and Voestalpine (Austria). These relate to the manufacture of very special steel products.

    These volumes are broken down are as follows. The figures for 2015-16 are provisional:

    Year

    Tata Supply (Tonnes)

    Tata Spend (£)

    2011-12

    137,762.2408

    97,715,813.91

    2012-13

    142,022.9286

    100,210,560.98

    2013-14

    158,891.8490

    107,201,303.99

    2014-15

    138,387.2325

    90,832,520.93

    2015-16

    138,000

    87,713,500.74

    Highways England does not procure steel materials directly. Despite the changes in UK steel output over the last five years, Highways England and its predecessor have continued to invest heavily in UK steel. During this period Highways England has used a category management framework as the main method of procuring steel gantries for the Strategic Road Network. To date circa 95% of this steel has been drawn from Tata Steel in the UK, which equates to approximately 11,000 tonnes of steel. The approximate framework spend is £30 million, of which about 35% will be steel procurement i.e. raw materials, and will equate to around £10.5 million.

    As rail freight is a wholly commercial business and therefore has to respond to market changes as part of its operational model, the Government does not itself undertake assessments of the impact on rail freight of variations in the flows of specific commodities. Network Rail’s Freight Market Study, published in 2013, assumed a small recovery in the steel market based on information available at that time.

  • Greg Mulholland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Greg Mulholland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Greg Mulholland on 2015-10-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what recent discussions he has had with the Information Commissioner’s Office about the DVLA selling driver registration plate numbers to car parking firms.

    Andrew Jones

    The table below shows the income received by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) from processing requests for information from private parking management companies over the last five financial years. The DVLA sets fees to recover the cost of processing requests and does not make a profit from providing this information.

    Year

    Total Revenue

    2010/11

    £2,910,850

    2011/12

    £3,657,859

    2012/13

    £4,831,355

    2013/14

    £6,097,898

    2014/15

    £7,573,298

    The DVLA releases vehicle keeper information to those who can show reasonable cause for receiving it. The following table shows the number of requests from private car parking management companies for vehicle keeper information processed via electronic links over the last five financial years.

    Year

    Electronic Requests

    2010/11

    1,178,034

    2011/12

    1,574,397

    2012/13

    1,897,572

    2013/14

    2,430,130

    2014/15

    3,083,276

    The vast majority of requests for vehicle keeper information are made electronically but information can also be requested using a paper application form. However, these requests come from a range of customers including private car parking management companies and the figures are not broken down by customer type.

    The DVLA meets regularly with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) to discuss a range of issues, including the provision of information for private parking management. The ICO’s most recent audit resulted in a high assurance rating relating to the release of information from the DVLA’s vehicle record.

  • Greg Mulholland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Greg Mulholland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Greg Mulholland on 2015-10-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what estimate he has made of the number of driver registration plate numbers the DVLA has sold to car parking companies in each of the last five years.

    Andrew Jones

    The table below shows the income received by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) from processing requests for information from private parking management companies over the last five financial years. The DVLA sets fees to recover the cost of processing requests and does not make a profit from providing this information.

    Year

    Total Revenue

    2010/11

    £2,910,850

    2011/12

    £3,657,859

    2012/13

    £4,831,355

    2013/14

    £6,097,898

    2014/15

    £7,573,298

    The DVLA releases vehicle keeper information to those who can show reasonable cause for receiving it. The following table shows the number of requests from private car parking management companies for vehicle keeper information processed via electronic links over the last five financial years.

    Year

    Electronic Requests

    2010/11

    1,178,034

    2011/12

    1,574,397

    2012/13

    1,897,572

    2013/14

    2,430,130

    2014/15

    3,083,276

    The vast majority of requests for vehicle keeper information are made electronically but information can also be requested using a paper application form. However, these requests come from a range of customers including private car parking management companies and the figures are not broken down by customer type.

    The DVLA meets regularly with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) to discuss a range of issues, including the provision of information for private parking management. The ICO’s most recent audit resulted in a high assurance rating relating to the release of information from the DVLA’s vehicle record.

  • Greg Mulholland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Greg Mulholland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Greg Mulholland on 2015-10-27.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, for what reasons the proposal from High Speed UK on high speed rail has been rejected.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The proposals suggested by High Speed UK are similar to the Reverse ‘E’ considered by HS2 Ltd in their 2010 report submitted to the Government on the demand and business case analysis of the alternative proposals. It was considered that this proposal could not offer better journey times from London/Birmingham to Manchester/Liverpool than HS2 trains continuing to the north-west from Lichfield via the West Coast Main Line. Ministers considered the advice presented and views from a wide range of sources, and based on the evidence the decision was taken to proceed with the ‘Y’ shaped network.