UKPOL.CO.UK

Blog

  • Stephen Timms – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Stephen Timms – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Timms on 2014-03-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment he has made of the extent of (a) fraud, (b) duplication of job entries and (c) entries for non-existent jobs in the Universal Jobmatch website.

    Esther McVey

    Today, many jobs are only advertised on the internet. That’s why we are doing everything we can to give those looking for work the skills and the opportunities to access them. Universal Jobmatch is a powerful tool for successfully connecting people to jobs, and it is delivering.

    The website launches a public service into the digital age, allowing people to search for work from their home, handheld devices, local libraries, as well as the traditional Jobcentre. It allows employers to match jobseekers to their vacancies and gives our customers access to a greater number of opportunities. It puts them on an equal footing with everyone else seeking a new job in the UK. With over 6 million job searches per a day, the service is clearly popular, successful, and value for money.

    At 18 March 2014, there were 507,474 vacancies on the service.

    All internet job sites face the issue of duplicate vacancies. We take this issue very seriously, and whenever we have a doubt about the validity of a job offer we will intervene, suspend the vacancy and investigate. If an employer breaches our terms and conditions we remove their right to advertise. Our continuing removal of such employers or jobs demonstrates that our system of checks works.

    Since Universal Jobmatch was launched in November 2012, we have removed 1216 employer accounts that did not comply with our terms and conditions. That figure is equivalent to 0.2% of the total number of registered employer accounts.

    Universal Jobmatch has revolutionised the way we deliver the public employment service. With over 6,000,000 job searches per day at a cost of far less than 1 pence each, it represents excellent value for money.

  • Stephen Timms – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Stephen Timms – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Timms on 2014-03-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what his most recent assessment is of the (a) effectiveness and (b) value for money of Universal Jobmatch.

    Esther McVey

    Today, many jobs are only advertised on the internet. That’s why we are doing everything we can to give those looking for work the skills and the opportunities to access them. Universal Jobmatch is a powerful tool for successfully connecting people to jobs, and it is delivering.

    The website launches a public service into the digital age, allowing people to search for work from their home, handheld devices, local libraries, as well as the traditional Jobcentre. It allows employers to match jobseekers to their vacancies and gives our customers access to a greater number of opportunities. It puts them on an equal footing with everyone else seeking a new job in the UK. With over 6 million job searches per a day, the service is clearly popular, successful, and value for money.

    At 18 March 2014, there were 507,474 vacancies on the service.

    All internet job sites face the issue of duplicate vacancies. We take this issue very seriously, and whenever we have a doubt about the validity of a job offer we will intervene, suspend the vacancy and investigate. If an employer breaches our terms and conditions we remove their right to advertise. Our continuing removal of such employers or jobs demonstrates that our system of checks works.

    Since Universal Jobmatch was launched in November 2012, we have removed 1216 employer accounts that did not comply with our terms and conditions. That figure is equivalent to 0.2% of the total number of registered employer accounts.

    Universal Jobmatch has revolutionised the way we deliver the public employment service. With over 6,000,000 job searches per day at a cost of far less than 1 pence each, it represents excellent value for money.

  • Stephen Timms – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Stephen Timms – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Timms on 2014-03-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many Universal Jobmatch employer accounts have been found to be in breach of its rules since the service started.

    Esther McVey

    Today, many jobs are only advertised on the internet. That’s why we are doing everything we can to give those looking for work the skills and the opportunities to access them. Universal Jobmatch is a powerful tool for successfully connecting people to jobs, and it is delivering.

    The website launches a public service into the digital age, allowing people to search for work from their home, handheld devices, local libraries, as well as the traditional Jobcentre. It allows employers to match jobseekers to their vacancies and gives our customers access to a greater number of opportunities. It puts them on an equal footing with everyone else seeking a new job in the UK. With over 6 million job searches per a day, the service is clearly popular, successful, and value for money.

    At 18 March 2014, there were 507,474 vacancies on the service.

    All internet job sites face the issue of duplicate vacancies. We take this issue very seriously, and whenever we have a doubt about the validity of a job offer we will intervene, suspend the vacancy and investigate. If an employer breaches our terms and conditions we remove their right to advertise. Our continuing removal of such employers or jobs demonstrates that our system of checks works.

    Since Universal Jobmatch was launched in November 2012, we have removed 1216 employer accounts that did not comply with our terms and conditions. That figure is equivalent to 0.2% of the total number of registered employer accounts.

    Universal Jobmatch has revolutionised the way we deliver the public employment service. With over 6,000,000 job searches per day at a cost of far less than 1 pence each, it represents excellent value for money.

  • Mike Crockart – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Mike Crockart – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mike Crockart on 2014-03-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what consultation his Department has had with groups representing separated parents on steps to ensure universal credit makes shared parenting a financially viable option for parents who do not have family-based financial arrangements in place.

    Esther McVey

    Currently the child element will be awarded to the parent with whom the child or qualifying young person normally lives. Where separated parents both share the care of a child or qualifying young person they are expected to jointly nominate which of them has the main responsibility.

    Where parents are unable to come to an agreement themselves, a determination will be made. This will take account of where the child normally lives and who has the main day to day responsibility.

    The proposed approach to Universal Credit was set out in a White Paper "Universal Credit: Welfare that Works" and in draft Regulations upon which a wide range of organisations responded to in the consultation exercise carried out by the Social Security Advisory Committee.

  • Mike Crockart – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Mike Crockart – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mike Crockart on 2014-03-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how disputed child tax credits claims will be managed under the universal credit system.

    Esther McVey

    Currently the child element will be awarded to the parent with whom the child or qualifying young person normally lives. Where separated parents both share the care of a child or qualifying young person they are expected to jointly nominate which of them has the main responsibility.

    Where parents are unable to come to an agreement themselves, a determination will be made. This will take account of where the child normally lives and who has the main day to day responsibility.

    The proposed approach to Universal Credit was set out in a White Paper "Universal Credit: Welfare that Works" and in draft Regulations upon which a wide range of organisations responded to in the consultation exercise carried out by the Social Security Advisory Committee.

  • Mr Frank Field – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Mr Frank Field – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mr Frank Field on 2014-03-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how much was paid in service charges to housing associations for adaptations to accommodation for disabled tenants in the last year for which figures are available.

    Esther McVey

    The information requested is not available. Information about service charges paid by all tenants is not collected.

    Eligible service charges for Housing Benefit would not include the cost of making an adaptation.

  • Chris Ruane – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Chris Ruane – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chris Ruane on 2014-03-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to the Answer of 29 January 2014, Official Report, column 638W, on the work capability assessment, if he will make it his policy to collect such information in future.

    Mike Penning

    To provide the requested information would incur disproportionate cost

  • Lucy Powell – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Lucy Powell – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lucy Powell on 2014-03-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what estimate he has made of the number of workplace nurseries available to staff in (a) his Department and (b) his Department’s executive agencies or non-departmental public bodies in (i) 2010, (ii) 2013-14 and (iii) 2014-15.

    Mike Penning

    There were 7 workplace nurseries operated by third parties, including some provision for subsidised places, on DWP premises on 5 May 2010; all of which were still in operation on 5 February 2014.

    DWP does not directly operate any workplace nurseries. The department is reviewing the position of all on site nursery provision, and until the review is complete, it cannot confirm whether any nursery will close.

    No information is held on executive agencies and non-departmental bodies. There would be a disproportionate cost to source that information

  • Andrew Stephenson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Andrew Stephenson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Stephenson on 2014-03-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, for how many days the (a) Colne to Blackpool South and (b) Skipton to Leeds lines were closed in each of the last five years.

    Stephen Hammond

    This is not information that is held by the Department for Transport. This is a matter for Network Rail, who own and operate Britain’s rail network.

  • Stephen Mosley – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Stephen Mosley – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Mosley on 2014-03-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, with reference to the report of the Commission on Devolution in Wales published on 3 March 2014, what discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Wales on the potential implications for (a) rail services in Chester and (b) Chester railway station of the recommendation in that report to devolve the Wales and Borders rail franchise to the National Assembly for Wales.

    Stephen Hammond

    No discussions have taken place with my Rt. Hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Wales, on further devolution of responsibilities for the Wales and Border franchise and its implications for the division of responsibilities between the two Governments for rail services calling at, and the management of, Chester station.