Blog

  • Lord Naseby – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Naseby – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Naseby on 2016-04-26.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, for any grant awarded to Action on Smoking and Health in each of the last five years, how much was awarded in one financial year and spent in a subsequent one.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The Department has received an application for grant funding from Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) for the 2016-17 financial year. The application process is iterative to ensure the final objectives are in line with Departmental aims and the application that the Department currently holds is a draft application. Draft applications for grant funding are not published.

    There was no underspend of the grant awarded to ASH in 2015-16 and, in each of the last five years, the funding has been spent in the relevant financial year.

  • Lord Naseby – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Naseby – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Naseby on 2016-04-26.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how much of the grant awarded to Action on Smoking and Health in 2015–16 was unspent at the end of that financial year.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The Department has received an application for grant funding from Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) for the 2016-17 financial year. The application process is iterative to ensure the final objectives are in line with Departmental aims and the application that the Department currently holds is a draft application. Draft applications for grant funding are not published.

    There was no underspend of the grant awarded to ASH in 2015-16 and, in each of the last five years, the funding has been spent in the relevant financial year.

  • Lord Naseby – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Naseby – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Naseby on 2016-04-26.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have received an application for grant funding from Action on Smoking and Health for 2016–17, and if so, whether they will place a copy in the Library of the House.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The Department has received an application for grant funding from Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) for the 2016-17 financial year. The application process is iterative to ensure the final objectives are in line with Departmental aims and the application that the Department currently holds is a draft application. Draft applications for grant funding are not published.

    There was no underspend of the grant awarded to ASH in 2015-16 and, in each of the last five years, the funding has been spent in the relevant financial year.

  • Lord Storey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Lord Storey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Storey on 2016-04-26.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what have been the on-costs on teachers’ salaries for the last three years.

    Lord Nash

    The on-costs on teachers’ salaries consist of employer pension contributions and employer National Insurance (NI) contributions. In 2015/16, the total on-costs for a teacher with an average salary are approximately 25.4% of their gross salary.

    Employer contributions to the Teachers’ Pension Scheme are the same rate for all teachers regardless of salary and in 2015/16 they increased from 14.1% of teachers’ gross salary to 16.5%.

    The table below sets out the on-costs on teachers’ salaries for the last three years:

    Employer contributions

    2013/14

    2014/15

    2015/16

    Teachers’ Pension

    14.1%

    14.1%

    16.5%

    National Insurance

    7.9%

    7.9%

    8.9%

    Total On-Costs

    22.0%

    22.0%

    25.4%
  • Lord Storey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Lord Storey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Storey on 2016-04-26.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what are the legal requirements for home-educated pupils to sit SATs.

    Lord Nash

    Legislation which requires the administration of the tests at the end of key stages 1 and 2 only applies to state-funded schools.

    Independent schools and home-educated pupils can choose to participate in the national curriculum tests if they wish. Home-educated pupils can only do so by registering with a maintained school, academy or other independent school that is participating in the tests.

    Parents are entitled to educate their children at home; when they do so they opt out of state education. The education provided must comply with the duty in section 7 of the Education Act 1996 to cause the child to receive efficient full-time education suitable to the child’s age, ability and aptitude, and to any special educational needs the child may have.

  • Lord Pearson of Rannoch – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Lord Pearson of Rannoch – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Pearson of Rannoch on 2016-04-26.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord O’Neill of Gatley on 25 April (HL7458), what is their estimate of the UK’s (1) gross, and (2) net, contributions to the EU for 2015.

    Lord O’Neill of Gatley

    Full year outturns for 2010-14 are available in table 3.B of European Union Finances 2015 (Cm 9167) which is available in the Library of the House and on gov.uk. No estimates of the UK’s total net contribution in 2015 are currently available, since these are not forecast.

    For the purposes of producing a fiscal forecast, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) forecasts both UK gross contributions to the EU and contributions net of EU receipts administered by the UK public sector. These do not represent an estimate of the UK’s total net contributions since they exclude receipts directly administered by the European Commission, which means the net contribution appears higher than is actually the case. Therefore, they are not directly comparable with the data for 2013 and 2014 set out in table 3.B European Union Finances 2015, provided in Written Answer HL7458. Details of the OBR forecast can be found at table 3.A of European Union Finances 2015, and the differences between the figures in tables 3.A and the total net contributions set out in 3.B are explained fully in Annex B of both European Union Finances 2015 and HM Treasury analysis: the long-term economic impact of EU membership and the alternatives.

  • Lord Myners – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Lord Myners – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Myners on 2016-04-26.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Statement by the Business Minister, Anna Soubry, on 25 April (HC Deb, col 1174), what assistance they plan to offer BHS or Retail Acquisitions.

    Baroness Neville-Rolfe

    Workers and their families will be worried by the news that BHS has been placed in the hands of administrators. The Administrator must secure the best possible result for the business, starting with rescuing it if possible as a going concern. If this does not prove possible, then we stand ready to help those affected, including through Jobcentre Plus’ Rapid Response Service, to help people move into new jobs as quickly as possible.

  • Lord Myners – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Lord Myners – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Myners on 2016-04-26.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will order an inquiry into actions taken by the trustees of the BHS pension schemes in agreeing revisions to funding rates and supporting the sale of the employer.

    Baroness Altmann

    The Pensions Regulator regulates work-based pension schemes, including trust-based schemes. In accordance with Parliament’s wishes, it has operational independence so it would be entirely inappropriate for Ministers to intervene in its decisions or on-going investigations.

  • Lord Myners – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Lord Myners – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Myners on 2016-04-26.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will publish an estimate of the likely impact of the additional levy that will be imposed on well managed and solvent pension schemes in relation to the BHS pension schemes.

    Baroness Altmann

    Parliament gave the Pensions Protection Fund independence in how it operates. The PPF sets the pension protection levy at the level it considers necessary to meet its long term funding strategy rather than in direct response to recent claims. Factors relevant to the level of the levy include: the PPF’s existing funding position (£3.6bn in reserves at March 2015); the potential level of future claims; the potential level of assets that may be received from transferred schemes; and expected future investment returns.

  • Lord Myners – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Lord Myners – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Myners on 2016-04-26.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will review decisions taken by the Pensions Regulator in connection with the BHS pension schemes.

    Baroness Altmann

    In accordance with Parliament’s wishes, the Regulator has operational independence. Whilst performance against its key targets is regularly reviewed by the Department, this does not encompass its regulatory decision-making or the conduct of its investigations. It would be entirely inappropriate and improper for Ministers to comment on or intervene in these areas.