The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Timms on 2016-03-23.
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many appeal hearings at the First-tier Tribunal (Social Security and Child Support) were (a) withdrawn and (b) adjourned as a result of the Department for Work and Pensions not sending a representative in each of the last three years.
Mr Shailesh Vara
The information requested is not held centrally.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Green of Deddington on 2016-04-21.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what estimate they have made of the (1) EU GDP, and (2) UK GDP, per household in 2030 in each of the three scenarios in the HM Treasury analysis The long-term economic impact of EU membership and the alternatives (Cm 9250) published on 18 April.
Lord O’Neill of Gatley
In ‘HM Treasury analysis: the long-term economic impact of EU membership and the alternatives’ the central estimates for the annual loss of UK GDP under the 3 alternatives (relative to remaining in the EU) in 2030 are: 3.8% in the case of the EEA, 6.2% in the case of a negotiated bilateral agreement, and 7.5% in the WTO case. Expressed in 2015 terms that means a loss of GDP per household of £2,600 for the EEA case; £4,300 for the negotiated bilateral agreement case; and £5,200 for the WTO case.
No estimate has been made of the impact on the EU GDP per household. This reflects a cautious approach, as, for example, the main estimates for the effect of leaving the EU do not take into account the negative economic impacts on the rest of the EU as a result of UK exit or the possible foregone benefits to the UK of future EU reform.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Paul Flynn on 2016-06-06.
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, pursuant to the oral evidence given by the Minister of State for Energy to the Energy and Climate Change Committee on 24 May 2016, at Question 200, what the basis is for the Minister’s statement that the case brought by the government of Austria in the European Court on the European Commission decision on state aid for the Hinkley Point reactor has no merit; and whether that statement refers to lack of legal or of political merit.
Andrea Leadsom
The UK Government has intervened in the legal challenge brought by Austria against the European Commission’s State aid decision for Hinkley Point C. We have always been confident that the Commission’s decision is legally robust and, as a party to the proceedings, we have now seen the legal arguments made by Austria in their pleadings to the European General Court. It is on this basis that we do not consider that Austria has submitted a challenge of any merit. We consider that the Austrian Government, although following the correct legal procedures in challenging certain aspects of the State aid decision through the Court, has been motivated by its political stance on the future of nuclear more generally.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Karl McCartney on 2016-09-02.
To ask the Prime Minister, what steps 10 Downing Street has taken to prepare for the UK to leave the EU since 23 June 2016; and what further such steps 10 Downing Street plans to take in the remainder of 2016.
Mrs Theresa May
I refer the hon. Member to the Oral Statement I gave to the House on 7 September 2016, Official Report, column 336.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Stevens of Kirkwhelpington on 2016-10-10.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have made to ensure that effective healthcare is available in Northumberland following the closure of Rothbury Community Hospital’s in-patient ward.
Lord Prior of Brampton
These are matters for the local National Health Service. We understand the decision was taken by NHS Northumberland Clinical Commissioning Group and the Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust in light of the continued extremely low use of the ward. As the suspension is a temporary measure, public consultation is not required.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Louise Haigh on 2016-01-11.
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what bids were received for the Debt Market Integrator contract.
Matthew Hancock
The companies that bid to provide Debt Market Integrator services were as follows;
Single Bidders:
Consortia:
As of 12/01/ 2016 The debt collections agencies providing service for Indesser through the Debt Market Integrator contract are:
Walker Love
Rossendales
Akinika
Advantis
CCS Collect
Drydens
Apex
Bluestones
Freds
Rossendales
Walker Love
Moorcroft
Past Due
CCI Legal
The private sector partner owns 75% equity in Indesser.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Phillips on 2016-01-28.
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to the Answer of 28 January 2016 to Question 23481, of the 57 breaches in handling secure materials there identified, how many breaches concerned documents within each of the following categories applicable prior to April 2014, namely (a) top secret, (b) secret, (c) confidential, (d) restricted, (e) protected and (f) unclassified; and how many breaches concerned documents within each of the following categories applicable from April 2014, namely (i) top secret, (ii) secret and (iii) official-sensitive or official.
Mr David Lidington
The figures quoted in my answer of 28 January to written question 23481 referred only to the period since April 2014. The information on breaches prior to April 2014 are not held centrally and could be collated only at disproportionate cost. The number of breaches from April 2014 onwards are as follows:
Classification:
Top Secret
Number:
1
Comment:
There was no loss of data related to this breach.
Classification:
Secret
Number:
0
Classification:
Confidential
Number:
12
Comment:
The Confidential classification pre-dates the introduction of the Government Security Classifications (GSCs).
Classification:
Official-Sensitive
Number:
43
Comment:
Official – Sensitive is not a classification under GSC and is a caveat. Materials designated Official or Official-Sensitive does have a level of protection; however loss of its control does not warrant a breach as per existing Cabinet Office guidelines.
Classification:
Official
Number:
1
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Iain Wright on 2016-02-23.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what assessment his Department has made of the effect of the apprenticeship levy on the training requirements of small and medium-sized firms unable to access the levy.
Nick Boles
When the apprenticeships levy is introduced in April 2017, small and medium sized employers will continue to have access to government funding to support apprenticeships. We will provide further details on the support available later this year.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Zac Goldsmith on 2016-03-23.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, if he will assess the alternative Colne Valley tunnelling scheme for High Speed 2 as proposed by Hillingdon Council; and if he will meet the hon. Member for Richmond Park, the Leader of Hillingdon Council and the hon. Member for Uxbridge and Ruislip Northwood and Pinner to discuss that alternative.
Mr Robert Goodwill
The alternative Colne Valley tunnelling scheme, as proposed by the London Borough of Hillingdon (LBH), has been assessed and evidence was presented to the House of Commons HS2 Phase One Bill Select Committee. The Select Committee highlighted a number of concerns with the tunnel scheme in their statement on the 15th July 2015 which concluded that ‘our overall view is that a convincing case for a tunnel instead of the viaduct has not been made.’ Importantly, the Select Committee noted that the evidence was that a tunnel would not eliminate the impact of construction works in Hillingdon and surrounding areas.
However, HS2 Ltd is currently undertaking a study with LBH to identify how the HS2 construction impacts in Hillingdon can be further reduced. The results from this study are due to be reported in May 2016.
In the meantime, the Secretary of State is happy to meet the hon. Member for Richmond Park, the hon. Member for Uxbridge and South Ruislip, the hon. Member for Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner, and the Leader of Hillingdon Council.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Mackintosh on 2016-04-21.
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what assessment his Department has made of the feasibility of introducing a centralised, national electoral register.
John Penrose
Electoral registers are compiled and maintained locally by Electoral Registration Officers primarily for the purposes of running Parliamentary and local elections in their area. A centralised, national electoral register would not necessarily help them do this, and would potentially create concerns about how government handles citizens personal data, so we have made no assessment of this kind.