Blog

  • Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-01-28.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he will consider allowing public bodies to continue to have the right, under the Local Government Pension scheme, to allow individuals to access an unreduced pension on compassionate grounds under the proposed public sector exit payments cap.

    Greg Hands

    The Government consulted on implementing a public sector exit payment cap in July 2015. The Government response to this consultation was published on 16 September 2015. This response provides detail on which organisations and types of payments the Government intends to capture within the scope of the public sector exit payment cap. This accords with the Government’s manifesto commitment to end tax payer funded six figure payoffs for public sector workers.

    The response document can be found at the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/464367/Public_sector_exit_payments_response.pdf

    The exit payment cap will apply to payments made as a result of an employee leaving their employment. It will not affect any pension a person has earned through their years of service or have any impact on accrued pension rights or pension lump sum entitlements on retirement. It will capture contributions, made by the employer, to fund early access to an unreduced or partially reduced pension. This is because such costs are ultimately funded by the tax payer.

    The Government has been clear that early retirements relating to ill health are outside the scope of the cap and will not be affected. Additionally, any payments directed by a Court or Tribunal will not be included in the scope of the cap.

    Exits on compassionate grounds are not such a clearly defined concept as exits related to ill health or redundancy. There will generally be a large degree of employer discretion on the terms of such exits, and on any payments. In these cases there will be discretion available to relax the cap in individual cases, subject to relevant Ministerial or local council approval, as will be set out in further detail in forthcoming Treasury guidance and directions.

  • Tim Loughton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Tim Loughton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tim Loughton on 2016-01-28.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what discussions he has had with Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport on options relating to the future of Channel 4.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    My Rt hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills has regular discussions with the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and sport on a wide variety of issues.

  • Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-01-28.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether academy schools will be covered under the public sector exit payment cap proposed in the Enterprise Bill.

    Greg Hands

    The Government consulted on implementing a public sector exit payment cap in July 2015. The Government response to this consultation was published on 16 September 2015. This response provides detail on which organisations and types of payments the Government intends to capture within the scope of the public sector exit payment cap. This accords with the Government’s manifesto commitment to end tax payer funded six figure payoffs for public sector workers.

    The response document can be found at the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/464367/Public_sector_exit_payments_response.pdf

    The exit payment cap will apply to payments made as a result of an employee leaving their employment. It will not affect any pension a person has earned through their years of service or have any impact on accrued pension rights or pension lump sum entitlements on retirement. It will capture contributions, made by the employer, to fund early access to an unreduced or partially reduced pension. This is because such costs are ultimately funded by the tax payer.

    The Government has been clear that early retirements relating to ill health are outside the scope of the cap and will not be affected. Additionally, any payments directed by a Court or Tribunal will not be included in the scope of the cap.

    Exits on compassionate grounds are not such a clearly defined concept as exits related to ill health or redundancy. There will generally be a large degree of employer discretion on the terms of such exits, and on any payments. In these cases there will be discretion available to relax the cap in individual cases, subject to relevant Ministerial or local council approval, as will be set out in further detail in forthcoming Treasury guidance and directions.

  • Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-01-28.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether it is his policy that a lump sum paid by a public sector employer to an employee’s pension fund to compensate the scheme for having to pay a reduced pension earlier than expected should be used as part of the calculation for the public sector exit payment cap proposed in the Enterprise Bill.

    Greg Hands

    The Government consulted on implementing a public sector exit payment cap in July 2015. The Government response to this consultation was published on 16 September 2015. This response provides detail on which organisations and types of payments the Government intends to capture within the scope of the public sector exit payment cap. This accords with the Government’s manifesto commitment to end tax payer funded six figure payoffs for public sector workers.

    The response document can be found at the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/464367/Public_sector_exit_payments_response.pdf

    The exit payment cap will apply to payments made as a result of an employee leaving their employment. It will not affect any pension a person has earned through their years of service or have any impact on accrued pension rights or pension lump sum entitlements on retirement. It will capture contributions, made by the employer, to fund early access to an unreduced or partially reduced pension. This is because such costs are ultimately funded by the tax payer.

    The Government has been clear that early retirements relating to ill health are outside the scope of the cap and will not be affected. Additionally, any payments directed by a Court or Tribunal will not be included in the scope of the cap.

    Exits on compassionate grounds are not such a clearly defined concept as exits related to ill health or redundancy. There will generally be a large degree of employer discretion on the terms of such exits, and on any payments. In these cases there will be discretion available to relax the cap in individual cases, subject to relevant Ministerial or local council approval, as will be set out in further detail in forthcoming Treasury guidance and directions.

  • Jim Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    Jim Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2016-01-28.

    To ask the Attorney General, if he will publish an estimate of the costs attributed to the Department for Education in cases relating to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 by the former Treasury Solicitor’s Department in each year since 2010.

    Robert Buckland

    The Treasury Solicitor’s Department was renamed the Government Legal Department (GLD) on 1 April 2015. It is primarily funded through the fees it charges for its legal services. It provides Litigation, Employment, Commercial and Advisory legal services to the Department for Education (DfE). The fees charged to DfE for this work, including the cost of disbursements, are as follows:

    Financial year

    Fees (excluding VAT) £

    2010-11

    4,208,845

    2011-12

    4,499,546

    2012-13

    4,805,840

    2013-14

    4,409,976

    2014-15

    4,098,629

    Providing information on the costs attributed to cases relating to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 would incur disproportionate cost as it would involve a manual exercise to identify those historical cases that relate to FOI.

  • Jim Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    Jim Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2016-01-28.

    To ask the Attorney General, if he will estimate the costs attributed to the Department for Education in cases relating to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 by the Government Legal Department since 2010.

    Robert Buckland

    The Treasury Solicitor’s Department was renamed the Government Legal Department (GLD) on 1 April 2015. It is primarily funded through the fees it charges for its legal services. It provides Litigation, Employment, Commercial and Advisory legal services to the Department for Education (DfE). The fees charged to DfE for this work, including the cost of disbursements, are as follows:

    Financial year

    Fees (excluding VAT) £

    2010-11

    4,208,845

    2011-12

    4,499,546

    2012-13

    4,805,840

    2013-14

    4,409,976

    2014-15

    4,098,629

    Providing information on the costs attributed to cases relating to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 would incur disproportionate cost as it would involve a manual exercise to identify those historical cases that relate to FOI.

  • Jim Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    Jim Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2016-01-28.

    To ask the Attorney General, if he will estimate the costs attributed to the Department for Education by the former Treasury Solicitor’s Department in each year since 2010.

    Robert Buckland

    The Treasury Solicitor’s Department was renamed the Government Legal Department (GLD) on 1 April 2015. It is primarily funded through the fees it charges for its legal services. It provides Litigation, Employment, Commercial and Advisory legal services to the Department for Education (DfE). The fees charged to DfE for this work, including the cost of disbursements, are as follows:

    Financial year

    Fees (excluding VAT) £

    2010-11

    4,208,845

    2011-12

    4,499,546

    2012-13

    4,805,840

    2013-14

    4,409,976

    2014-15

    4,098,629

    Providing information on the costs attributed to cases relating to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 would incur disproportionate cost as it would involve a manual exercise to identify those historical cases that relate to FOI.

  • Jim Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    Jim Cunningham – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2016-01-28.

    To ask the Attorney General, if he will estimate the costs attributed to the Department for Education by the Government Legal Department since 2010.

    Robert Buckland

    The Treasury Solicitor’s Department was renamed the Government Legal Department (GLD) on 1 April 2015. It is primarily funded through the fees it charges for its legal services. It provides Litigation, Employment, Commercial and Advisory legal services to the Department for Education (DfE). The fees charged to DfE for this work, including the cost of disbursements, are as follows:

    Financial year

    Fees (excluding VAT) £

    2010-11

    4,208,845

    2011-12

    4,499,546

    2012-13

    4,805,840

    2013-14

    4,409,976

    2014-15

    4,098,629

    Providing information on the costs attributed to cases relating to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 would incur disproportionate cost as it would involve a manual exercise to identify those historical cases that relate to FOI.

  • Kelvin Hopkins – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Kelvin Hopkins – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kelvin Hopkins on 2016-01-29.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what his Department’s plans are for the procurement of IT and digital services beyond the end dates of its current contracts.

    Justin Tomlinson

    The Department anticipates a shift in the way in which citizens will engage with the Department – with greater digital interaction in the future. Digital Technology, Data and Security capabilities are a key enabler of this shift. The department initiates on an ongoing basis a number of procurement exercises using open competitions under the EU Procurement Directives and call-off competitions under Government Frameworks.

  • Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-01-29.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what information he holds on the average length of time allocated for face-to-face appointments for personal independence payment claimants attending the Queen’s Road assessment centre in Brighton; and if he will make a statement.

    Justin Tomlinson

    DWP does not set a time limit for face-to-face assessments. Consultations take as long as necessary in order to reach the evidence-based conclusions on individual cases. Atos Healthcare assumes for scheduling purposes an average length of 1.5 hours for the Health Professional to see the claimant and to write up the report.