Tag: 2016

  • Lord Pearson of Rannoch – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Lord Pearson of Rannoch – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Pearson of Rannoch on 2016-02-03.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Freud on 27 January (HL5012), why that answer provided a reference to a Written Answer in the House of Commons given by the then Minister of State for the Department of Work and Pensions, Esther McVey, on 20 November 2014 on a different subject to the question asked; and whether they will now state what is the annual cost of the in-work benefits for EU workers.

    Lord Freud

    I apologise to the noble Lord for the incorrect answer to HL5012 this was due to an administrative error. The correct answer was given by my Rt. Hon. Friend the Minister for Employment (Ms. Esther McVey) in the House of Commons on 20 November 2014 to Question number 211618 as below:

    While the Government checks the immigration status of benefit claimants to ensure the benefit is paid properly and to prevent fraud, traditionally that information has not been collected as part of the payment administrative systems.

    However, the Government is looking at ways to reform the current administrative system under Universal Credit so that it will systematically record nationality and immigration status of migrants who make a claim.

    The Government has made a radical series of changes over the last year to restrict the access by non-UK citizens from the European Economic Area to UK benefits and tax credits. This is in order to protect the UK’s benefit system and discourage people who have no established connection with the UK from moving here, unless they have a job or a genuine prospect of work, or have savings to support themselves until they do.

  • Lord Warner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Lord Warner – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Warner on 2016-02-29.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether repeated underspending year on year by the Scottish Government of monies passed to them for NHS services under the Barnett formula could be subject (1) to challenge under the Dispute Resolution procedure as set out in paragraphs 98–104 of the agreement between the Scottish and UK Governments on the Scottish fiscal framework or (2) a 2021 review as set out in paragraphs 111–113 of that agreement.

    Lord O’Neill of Gatley

    The mechanical application of the Barnett Formula ensures that the Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly and Northern Ireland Assembly receive a population share of changes in UK government funding on the services for which they have devolved responsibility. In accordance with the principles of devolution and the devolution Acts themselves, it is for the devolved administrations to decide how to allocate their funding (from the block grant or taxes/borrowing) to public services in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland; and it is for the devolved legislatures to hold them to account. The Scottish Government’s new fiscal framework does not alter this.

  • Sue Hayman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Sue Hayman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sue Hayman on 2016-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, how much subsidy was paid to the operators of the Northern rail franchise in each financial year between December 2004 and April 2016.

    Andrew Jones

    Subsidies paid from 2004 to 2008:

    2004/05 – 81.0 million (part year – December 2004 to March 2005)

    2005/06 – 278.2 million

    2006/07 – 168.5 million

    2007/08 – 119.3 million

    Figures from 2008 onwards are published on the Office of Rail and Road’s (‘ORR’) website at: http://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/displayreport/report/html/95218cca-408d-4047-83ce-a542c53b59e6. 2015-16 financial information will be made available following publication of Audited Statutory Accounts.

    “

  • Karl McCartney – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Karl McCartney – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Karl McCartney on 2016-04-27.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what representations he has received on the potential merits of exempting telematics car insurance policies from insurance premium tax.

    Harriett Baldwin

    HM Treasury receives representations on a wide variety of issues. We keep all taxes under review.

  • David Hanson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    David Hanson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Hanson on 2016-06-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, when he expects Capita to respond to the right hon. Member for Delyn in relation to correspondence dated 1 February, 14 April and 10 June 2016 relating to Mrs M. of Flint.

    Justin Tomlinson

    The letters to which you refer were received by Capita but not processed in line with their standard procedures. Capita apologises for the delay and any inconvenience caused and are investigating why their procedures were not followed.

    Capita sent their reply to the honourable Member on Friday, 17 June.

  • Jim Shannon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Jim Shannon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Shannon on 2016-09-06.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, if he will make representations to the Chinese government on banning organ tourism to China.

    Alok Sharma

    As My Rt Hon. Friend, the former Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Hugo Swire, stated to the house on the 12 July 2016, we have raised concerns about reports of organ harvesting, as well as about the torture and mistreatment of detainees, during the annual UK-China human rights dialogue. We will do so again at the next round. My officials also raised the issue with their Chinese counterparts on 1 September 2016.

    However, despite the fact that UK physicians always advise patients against, it is very difficult to prevent UK citizens travelling to less well-regulated countries to seek an organ transplant. Although numbers are not known, it is thought that very few patients in the UK choose to do so.

  • Diana Johnson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Diana Johnson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Diana Johnson on 2016-10-18.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, if it his policy to advocate for passporting for British financial services after the UK leaves the EU; and what steps the Government is taking to retain passporting for British financial services.

    Simon Kirby

    The “passporting” arrangements set out in the various pieces of EU financial services legislation are open to members of the EU and the EEA.

    Since the referendum, HM Treasury has been working to assess in detail the implications for the UK-based financial services sector of existing “passporting” arrangements, of alternative market access arrangements which exist for countries outside the EU (known as equivalence), and of other interactions between UK and EU markets within and beyond EU law.

    We are clear that the rights to access EU markets currently provided by these “passporting” arrangements are of great importance to the many UK-based financial services firms that make use of them.

    As the Chancellor has said, we will place a very high priority on getting the right solution with our European Union partners for the financial services sector. Our objective will be to ensure that the parts of the financial services sector that do business in Europe are able to continue doing so.

  • Andrew Rosindell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Andrew Rosindell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Rosindell on 2016-01-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, further to the Answer of 26 October 2015 to Question 12448, what criteria are used by her Department to determine the amount of aid provided to emerging economies like China and India.

    Mr Desmond Swayne

    As referred to in my response to Question 12448, we use a range of criteria to determine allocations to countries, and to meet the objectives of the UK Aid Strategy. Regarding the two partner countries referred to in the question, DFID closed its bilateral aid programme to China in March 2011 and now works in partnership with China on global development issues. The UK ended its traditional aid programme to India at the end of 2015. The new partnership with India will include technical assistance (sharing skills and expertise), investments in private sector projects that help the poor and generate a financial return for the UK taxpayer, and working together on global development issues such as trade and nutrition.

  • Viscount Ridley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Viscount Ridley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Viscount Ridley on 2016-02-03.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what consideration they have given to the finding of the report An Unholy Mess, published by the Fair Admissions Campaign and the British Humanist Association last year, that a number of religiously selective schools have asked parents for information about their occupational, marital, and financial status as part of the admissions process, and whether they consider this to be acceptable.

    Lord Nash

    Many of the findings of the report by the Fair Admissions Campaign and British Humanist Association echo those reported by the Chief Schools Adjudicator in her Annual Report for the 2013/14 school year.

    Admission authorities for all state-funded schools, including schools with a religious designation, are required to comply with the mandatory provisions of the School Admissions Code and other admissions law.

    Where an objection is made to the Schools Adjudicator, if the arrangements are found to be unfair or fail to comply with the Code, the admission authority must make changes to ensure their arrangements are compliant. Where an admission authority fails to implement decisions of the adjudicator, the Secretary of State may direct the admission authority to do so.

    We continue to keep the Code under review, and, where we consider any changes are necessary to make the admissions system work more effectively for parents, these will be subject to a full public consultation.

  • Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-02-29.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, pursuant to the Answer of 16 July 2015 to Question 6424, what progress his Department has made on its internal review of employment status, launched on 6 October 2014.

    Nick Boles

    The internal review of employment status has now concluded.

    Ministers are carefully considering whether further steps are required to improve clarity and transparency for employers and individuals alike.