Blog

  • Louise Haigh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Louise Haigh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Louise Haigh on 2016-04-18.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many (a) full-time equivalent civil servants work in his Department and (b) civil servants work full-time on the Northern Powerhouse agenda.

    Harriett Baldwin

    Data for full-time equivalent Civil servants working in HM Treasury are published on .gov.uk and can be found using the link below.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hmt-workforce-management-information-december-2015

    We are unable to supply information on employees who may work on the Northern Powerhouse agenda as our system does not give a breakdown of staff to that level. Therefore to supply this information would be at a disproportionate cost.

    “

  • Michael Fabricant – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Michael Fabricant – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Michael Fabricant on 2016-04-18.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what the (a) cost of labour and (b) other expenses incurred by his Department was in producing its analysis of costs if the UK were to leave the EU; and how many man hours were required to produce that analysis.

    Mr David Gauke

    The British people are asking for the facts before they decide whether to vote Remain or Leave in the EU referendum. The Treasury’s analysis shows that if the UK leaves the EU, the UK would be permanently poorer and it estimates an annual loss of 6.2% of GDP after 15 years, which is equivalent to £4,300 per UK household.

    The Treasury is appropriately resourced to support the Government’s priorities in Europe. However, it is not practical to identify full-time equivalent staff numbers.

  • Phil Boswell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Phil Boswell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Phil Boswell on 2016-04-18.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what estimate he has made of the potential price per share at sale of the Government’s 73 per cent stake in the Royal Bank of Scotland compared to the amount paid per share in 2008.

    Harriett Baldwin

    The Government will conduct further sales of RBS shares subject to market conditions, and in doing so will maximise value for the taxpayer.

    The OBR presented an estimate of future proceeds in the March 2016 Budget.

  • Julian Knight – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Julian Knight – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julian Knight on 2016-04-18.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what information his Department holds on the reasons for the FCA changing its policy on whether guarantor lenders should have to issue legal default notices on borrowers before collecting money from guarantors as set in PS15/23, of September 2015, to that set in GC16/2, of February 2016.

    Harriett Baldwin

    These are matters for the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and relate to FCA Guidance Consultation (GC16/2) issued on the interpretation of provisions in the Consumer Credit Act 1974, regarding whether a default notice should be given to a guarantor before payment is taken from them when a borrower defaults. The FCA is currently considering responses to the consultation and will publish a response after considering the complex issues raised.

  • Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-04-18.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, on how many occasions in the last five years HM Revenue and Customs officials have raised concerns internally that UK taxpayers who are customers of the (a) High Net Worth Unit and (b) Large Business Unit have received preferential or inappropriate tax treatment as a result of their position.

    Mr David Gauke

    HMRC has a Whistleblowing and Raising a Concern Policy. Since April 2014 concerns raised under this policy have been captured centrally but the data has been captured at a high level and does not have sufficient detail to enable HMRC to reliably identify concerns relating to customers of the High Net Worth Unit and Large Business Unit over the last 5 years.

    HMRC does not offer preferential treatment to any tax payer or group. HMRC is even handed in its treatment of all customers, and manages different customers by allocating its resources to those groups which need more support or present higher risks of not meeting their tax obligations.

  • Lucy Allan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Lucy Allan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lucy Allan on 2016-04-18.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to the Answer of 18 March 2016 to Question 30728, what plans HM Revenue and Customs has for the future of its staff currently working in Abbey House and Parkside Court after the expiration of the leases of those buildings.

    Mr David Gauke

    HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) occupies Abbey House, Telford, under the terms of its STEPS PFI contract which runs to 2 April 2021. The Department has a rolling agreement with Land Registry to use part of their space at Parkside Court.

    In November 2015, HMRC announced its plans to create a Regional Centre in Birmingham and a Specialist Site in Telford as part of its UK wide Building our Future Locations Programme. HMRC will use flexibility provisions within its occupancy agreements at both Abbey House and Parkside Court to align their closure with the opening of its new facilities. Specialist roles will remain in Telford with others moving to the new Regional Centre.

  • Daniel Zeichner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Daniel Zeichner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Daniel Zeichner on 2016-04-18.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what assessment he has made of representations from the science community to his Department’s plans to insert a new clause into all new and renewed grant agreements.

    Matthew Hancock

    As I made clear in the House on 27 April, we are continuing to consider the comments of all interested parties, ahead of the introduction into grant agreements of the clause aimed at protecting taxpayers’ money from being wasted on government lobbying government. We are pausing the implementation, pending a review of the representations made, and to give further time to consider any necessary adjustments to the wording of the clause, or the policy on its implementation, to help to deliver this policy in the best possible way for all involved.

  • Paul Flynn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Paul Flynn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Paul Flynn on 2016-04-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the total cost to the public purse is of restarting the tendering process for the Transforming Rehabilitation Programme; and what recent steps he has taken to improve the subcontracting process of charities selected as preferred tenders.

    Andrew Selous

    No Community Rehabilitation Company (CRC) has withdrawn from the Transforming Rehabilitation Programme. As part of the Transforming Rehabilitation reforms, CRCs are required to deliver the services set out in their contract. CRCs can decide to contract with other organisations to deliver some of those services. If these sub-contractors decide to no longer provide services, the CRC will decide whether to re-tender or provide the service themselves. This should not affect the number of offenders able to access the services.

    We are not restarting the tendering process for probation providers. CRCs are in the process of finalising their supply chains. Contract Management Teams closely monitor arrangements to ensure consistency of service provision and that prime and sub-contractors comply with the terms of an Industry Standard Partnering Agreement set out in the original tender documents.

  • Paul Flynn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Paul Flynn – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Paul Flynn on 2016-04-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what effect the withdrawal of service providers from the Transforming Rehabilitation Programme has had on the projected numbers of prisoners able to take part in that programme.

    Andrew Selous

    No Community Rehabilitation Company (CRC) has withdrawn from the Transforming Rehabilitation Programme. As part of the Transforming Rehabilitation reforms, CRCs are required to deliver the services set out in their contract. CRCs can decide to contract with other organisations to deliver some of those services. If these sub-contractors decide to no longer provide services, the CRC will decide whether to re-tender or provide the service themselves. This should not affect the number of offenders able to access the services.

    We are not restarting the tendering process for probation providers. CRCs are in the process of finalising their supply chains. Contract Management Teams closely monitor arrangements to ensure consistency of service provision and that prime and sub-contractors comply with the terms of an Industry Standard Partnering Agreement set out in the original tender documents.

  • Andy Slaughter – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Andy Slaughter – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andy Slaughter on 2016-04-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many prisoners serving sentences for (a) murder, (b) attempted murder, (c) rape and (d) attempted rape are currently unlawfully at large having escaped or absconded from prison.

    Andrew Selous

    The number of escapes and absconds are published annually, by financial year, in the Prison Digest:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/494121/prison-performance-digest.xlsx

    Both escapes and absconds from prison have fallen to record lows since 2010. The specific information requested could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

    “