Blog

  • Baroness Deech – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Baroness Deech – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Deech on 2016-06-06.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Verma on 25 April (HL7413), whether the independent auditor of UK payments to the Palestinian Authority that are channelled through a trust fund administered by the World Bank is regulated by any British regulator.

    Baroness Verma

    Deloitte is a registered audit firm that employs certified public accountants who conduct their assignment in compliance with the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) standards.

  • Baroness Deech – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Baroness Deech – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Deech on 2016-06-06.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Verma on 11 May (HL8116), whether the Deloitte auditors who determine the eligible Palestinian beneficiaries under the PEGASE mechanism are regulated by any British regulator.

    Baroness Verma

    Deloitte is a registered audit firm that employs certified public accountants who conduct their assignment in compliance with the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) standards.

  • Baroness Burt of Solihull – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Baroness Burt of Solihull – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Burt of Solihull on 2016-06-06.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what estimate they have made of the amount paid in levies to the Pension Protection Fund in each of the three years to 2012–13 due to companies using a contingent asset to replace the Pension Protection Fund’s Failure Score for the company with that of a different company, compared to what these companies paid in (1) 2012–13, (2) 2013–14 and (3) 2014–15.

    Baroness Altmann

    The Pension Protection Fund has not made a comparison of the amounts paid by schemes with a contingent asset prior to 2012/13 with later years, as substantial changes in the way that levies are calculated from year to year do not allow for robust comparison.

  • Baroness Burt of Solihull – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Baroness Burt of Solihull – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Burt of Solihull on 2016-06-06.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many companies list separate pension schemes for senior management in addition to their primary employee pension scheme.

    Baroness Altmann

    The information requested is not collated centrally either by DWP or TPR and could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

  • Baroness Burt of Solihull – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Baroness Burt of Solihull – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Burt of Solihull on 2016-06-06.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many companies required to pay levies to the Pension Protection Fund had put in place a contingent asset that replaced the Pension Protection Fund’s Failure Score for the company with that of a different company in each of the three years to 2012–13; and what are the names of those companies.

    Baroness Altmann

    We are unable to supply the information requested as to do so would incur disproportionate cost. Furthermore, the names of the companies concerned are classed as ‘Restricted Information’ under the Pensions Act 2004.

  • Lord Bradshaw – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lord Bradshaw – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Bradshaw on 2016-06-06.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they are aware of any assessment of the impact on operational resilience by an experienced and professional railway operator of the decision by the Office of Road and Rail to allow further open access operators onto the East Coast Main Line.

    Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

    The Department for Transport is not aware of any assessment of operational resilience in connection with the decision to extend open access operations on the East Coast Main Line. We expect Network Rail as network operator to ensure that their routes are able to operate effectively, whichever train operators are running on them.

  • Lord Bradshaw – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lord Bradshaw – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Bradshaw on 2016-06-06.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they are aware of any studies regarding the not primarily abstractive” test that the Office of Road and Rail makes in respect of open access applications to test its validity.”

    Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

    Her Majesty’s Government is not aware of any recent studies which specifically test the validity of the Office of Rail and Road’s not primarily abstractive test. However, it has made representations to the ORR on its appropriateness for use on individual open access applications, most particularly in relation to the recent open access applications on the East Coast Mainline.

  • Lord Bradshaw – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lord Bradshaw – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Bradshaw on 2016-06-06.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how long it has been since the Operational Research Computerised Allocation of Tickets to Services arrangements under which revenue is shared between operators were last updated; who is responsible for updating those arrangements; and whether that process is open to public scrutiny.

    Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

    The Department for Transport does not hold information on when Operational Research Computerised Allocation of Tickets to Services (ORCATS) was last updated. Any changes to ORCATS allocations is a matter for the Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC). However we understand from ATOC that as the way in which ORCATS currently works is built into the planning assumptions made by franchise bidders, there is no intention to change the actual way in which ORCATS works. The increase in future ticketing, such as smartcards and barcodes, will in time lead to actual usage based allocations being used, but for now the ORCATS model remains the industry method of allocation.

    Further information can be obtained from ATOC who can be contacted at:

    ATOC Ltd

    2nd Floor

    200 Aldersgate Street

    London
    EC1A 4HD

    enquiry@atoc.org

    “

  • Lord Bradshaw – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lord Bradshaw – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Bradshaw on 2016-06-06.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of whether the new open access operators using the East Coast Main Line will pay access charges that provide for fair competition with other operators, including VTEC; who determines those charges; and whether those charges reflect the opportunity costs that arise from using trains offering less seating capacity than the principal franchisee’s trains.

    Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

    Setting the framework for track access charges is the responsibility of the independent regulator, the Office of Rail and Road (the ORR). The ORR will set the charging framework for all operators as part of the regulatory process leading up to the next control period (April 2019-2024). As part of that process, the Government has clearly indicated that it supports fairer charges for open access operators and has set out its desire to see changes to those charges as soon as possible.

    Track access charges are not set on the basis of opportunity costs.

  • Lord Bradshaw – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lord Bradshaw – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Bradshaw on 2016-06-06.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the impact that the decision by the Office of Road and Rail (ORR) to allow competition on the East Coast Main Line will have on the reliability and timekeeping of the existing East Coast Main Line franchise and other operators using the railway; and what assessment they have made of the impact the proposed improvements to the infrastructure being made by Network Rail in Control Periods 5 and 6 and the ORR decision on competition will have on the existing standard of performance.

    Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

    The Department for Transport has not itself undertaken an analysis of the effects of the ORR’s decisions on access to the East Coast Main Line on the reliability and performance of services on the route. In correspondence to the ORR ahead of its decision, the Department expressed concern about the potential adverse performance impacts of allowing additional open access operation on the route.

    The potential additional capacity which would be provided by the enhancements to the route currently being planned by Network Rail over Control Periods 5 and 6 has been taken into account by the ORR in its decisions on access.

    We now look to Network Rail and the relevant train operators to work together through the normal industry processes, under the oversight of the ORR, to ensure that the resulting pattern of services operates as effectively as possible for passengers and freight users of the line, and to ensure that any negative impacts on performance are minimised.