UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: 2014

  • Andrew Rosindell – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Andrew Rosindell – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Rosindell on 2014-03-11.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many migrants from EU countries living in the UK receive child benefit.

    Nicky Morgan

    HMRC are not able to provide the information in the manner requested. HMRC do not record the nationality of the claimant receiving Child Benefit for children living in another member state.

    Published Child Benefit statistics provide annual estimates of the number of families and children claiming. The latest available (August 2012) show that there were 7.92 million families, responsible for 13.77 million children and qualifying young people receiving Child Benefit.

    The main purpose of Child Benefit is to support families in the UK. Consequently, the rules generally do not provide for them to be paid in respect of children who live abroad.

    Nevertheless, Child Benefit is a family benefit under EC Regulation 883/2004. This regulation protects the social security rights of nationals of all member states of the European economic area, including the UK, and Switzerland when they exercise their rights of free movement under EU law.

    HMRC holds information on the number of Child Benefit awards under EC Regulation 883/2004. As at 31 December 2013, there were 20,400 ongoing Child Benefit awards under the EC Regulation in respect of 34.268 children living in another member state.

    This is a fall of 3,682 (15.3%) awards in respect of 5,903 (14.7%) fewer children since 31 December 2012.

    The breakdown by member state is as follows:

    *We have withheld the number where it is fewer than 5, as there is risk that the information could be attributed to an identifiable person, which would prejudice their right to privacy and would therefore be a breach of Principle 1 of the Data Protection Act.

    Child Benefit

    Country of residence of children

    Number of awards

    Number of children

    Austria

    23

    37

    Belgium

    75

    140

    Bulgaria

    186

    245

    Croatia

    *5

    *5

    Cyprus

    39

    61

    Czech Republic

    124

    203

    Denmark

    13

    23

    Estonia

    45

    65

    Finland

    12

    23

    France

    789

    1429

    Germany

    283

    495

    Greece

    44

    69

    Hungary

    136

    196

    Iceland

    *5

    *5

    Italy

    156

    273

    Latvia

    797

    1091

    Liechtenstein

    0

    0

    Lithuania

    1215

    1712

    Luxembourg

    7

    14

    Malta

    15

    22

    Norway

    30

    61

    Poland

    13174

    22093

    Portugal

    202

    309

    Republic of Ireland

    1231

    2505

    Romania

    230

    392

    Slovakia

    692

    1232

    Slovenia

    11

    21

    Spain

    600

    1019

    Sweden

    49

    95

    Switzerland

    77

    150

    The Netherlands

    142

    288

    Totals

    20400

    34268

    As announced in the 2014 Budget, to prevent EEA migrants claiming benefits they are not entitled to, the Government will increase compliance checks to establish whether EEA migrants meet the entitlement conditions to receive Child Benefit

    Under domestic law, in order to claim Child Benefit EEA Migrants must be present in the UK, ordinarily resident and have a right to reside in the UK and their children must live in the UK.

    The recent changes to migrants’ access to benefits announced by the Government sends a strong message that the UK benefit system is not open to abuse, as well as deterring those who may seek residence in the UK primarily to claim benefits.

    Strengthening compliance checks will help prevent EEA migrants from claiming, and continuing to claim, benefits they are not entitled to. Checks will be applied to both new claims and existing awards.

  • Philip Davies – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Philip Davies – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Philip Davies on 2014-06-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the daily average (a) number and (b) proportion is of prisoners serving custodial sentences who are out of prison on temporary licence from category (i) A, (ii) B, (iii) C and (iv) D prisons.

    Jeremy Wright

    Temporary release can be a valuable tool in the resettlement of prisoners in the community but it must never take place at the expense of public safety. We conducted a fundamental review of the policy and practice of rerelease on temporary licence (ROTL) after serious failures last year. We are introducing a system that enhances the assessment of serious offenders and restricts access to ROTL to cases where there is a clear, legitimate reason for the release. We have already introduced some of these changes and have additionally introduced a restriction on prisoners transferring to open conditions and having ROTL if they have previously absconded from open prisons; or if they have failed to return or reoffended whilst released on temporary licence.

    It has not been possible to provide an answer in the time specified, I will write to you with an answer as soon as possible.

  • 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 2014-03-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many and what proportion of (a) new employment and support allowance claimants and (b) existing employment and support allowance claimants reporting a change in circumstances receive their benefit payments within (i) one week, (ii) two weeks, (iii) three weeks, (iv) four weeks, (v) eight weeks, (vi) 12 weeks and (vii) more than 12 weeks.

    Esther McVey

    The information requested is not available.

  • John Robertson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    John Robertson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by John Robertson on 2014-06-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, what estimate he has made of the average profit made by energy companies on the energy bills of households in each constituency in the UK.

    Michael Fallon

    Data on the average profit made by energy companies at the level of households in each constituency is not available.

    The average pre-tax profit made per household consumer in 2012 was £53 or 4.3%. (Source: “Making the Profits of the six largest energy suppliers clear” factsheet, Ofgem). Ofgem also estimates pre-tax margins over the next 12 months using current data in their Supply Market Indicator. Their latest estimate of pre-tax margins for May 2014-April 2015 was £96 or 7% (Source: Understanding energy bills, Ofgem).

  • Lord Tebbit – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Lord Tebbit – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Tebbit on 2014-03-11.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is the total yearly extra cost to schools of educating children whose first language is not English.

    Lord Nash

    We do not collect this data centrally. It is for individual schools to decide how much extra they choose to spend on educating pupils whose first language is not English.

    Through their local funding formulas, local authorities may allocate funding to schools on the basis of the number of pupils in the school who speak English as an additional language and entered the state school system in the past three years. Local authorities allocated £233 million in this way in 2013-14. The funding is not ring-fenced within a school’s budget so this figure may not be a reliable indicator of actual spending.

  • Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Hilary Benn – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Hilary Benn on 2014-06-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what representations his Department has received on the effectiveness of the role of the Independent Person under the Localism Act 2011.

    Brandon Lewis

    [Holding Reply: Thursday 12 June 2014]

    As stated in the impact assessment on the abolition of the Standards Board regime (published in January 2011), a post implementation review will be carried out three to five years after implementation of the policy which was in July 2012.

    My Department routinely receives representations about standards arrangements in local government, and indeed, on a whole range of local government issues. We will have regard to representations and comments when we undertake our post implementation review.

    However, Ministers are clear that the new provisions are a significant improvement on the old, discredited regime. The Localism Act has clarified predetermination rules allowing elected councillors to campaign and speak up on local issues. We have reversed the petty culture of malicious and unfounded complaints that wasted time and energy and undermined the good reputation of local government. We have increased transparency on councillors’ interests, and put in place criminal sanctions for the very rare instances of corruption. This is complemented by the role of political parties in ensuring good conduct, the law of libel, and the ultimate sanction: the ballot box.

  • Mr Angus Brendan MacNeil – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Mr Angus Brendan MacNeil – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mr Angus Brendan MacNeil on 2014-03-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what proportion of air passengers showing passports to UK Border agents are from Schengen area countries.

    James Brokenshire

    This information is not available from Border Force systems.

    Additionally, it is not in the interests of border and national security to disclose either the specific information held on Home Office Systems, or details relating to the volumes of data.

  • Ivan Lewis – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Ivan Lewis – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ivan Lewis on 2014-06-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, whether he consulted his Northern Ireland counterpart on his Department’s publication Guidance to the Civil Aviation Authority on Environmental Objectives Relating to the Exercise of its Air Navigation Functions.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    There was no specific consultation with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland on this publication.

  • Philip Davies – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Philip Davies – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Philip Davies on 2014-03-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what proportion of eligible (a) male and (b) female offenders were recalled on a fixed term recall instead of a standard recall (i) in 2008, (ii) in 2009, (iii) in 2010, (iv) in 2011, (v) in 2012 and (vi) since 3 December 2012.

    Jeremy Wright

    It has not been possible to obtain this information. I will write to the Honourable member in due course.

  • 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 2014-06-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what additional costs and savings he expects from the introduction of the Single Fraud Investigation Service in each of the years from 2012 to 2018.

    Esther McVey

    The SFIS Business Case covers the period 2011/12 to 2021/22, and the current figures indicate that the cost of implementing SFIS is £73 million with a saving expected around £507million. As the project progresses the business case will be reviewed and where necessary updated.