Tag: 2016

  • Calum Kerr – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Calum Kerr – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Calum Kerr on 2016-09-12.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he will take steps to change HM Revenue and Customs practice of not repaying incorrectly withheld arrears or underpaid tax credits to claimants as a lump sum.

    Jane Ellison

    To tackle the problems associated with families overestimating falls in income, since 2007, when claimants report a fall in income during the year, HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) adjusts their tax credit payments for the rest of the year to reflect their new income level, but will not include a one-off payment for the earlier part of the year. At the end of the year, their award is finalised when their actual income is known. If they have been underpaid, a further payment will then be made. However, provisions are in place to make arrears payments to claimants suffering financial hardship.

    The purpose of withholding the payment is to reduce the number and size of any overpayments and prevent customers incurring debt.

    HMRC has provisions in place to support those customers who are suffering financial hardship and in those circumstances any withheld payments can be released and paid to the customer without having to wait for the claim to be finalised. There are no plans to alter the current practice.

  • Dan Jarvis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Dan Jarvis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Dan Jarvis on 2016-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, whether his Department plans to respond to the findings of the National Institute of Economic and Social Research evaluation study, No evidence Troubled Families Programme has any significant impact on key objectives, published on 17 October 2016.

    Mr Marcus Jones

    The National Institute of Economic and Social Research Impact Study was just one of 6 reports comprising the independent evaluation of the first Troubled Families Programme. The evaluation found that the programme had many positive achievements. These include:

    • Families feeling more confident and optimistic about being able to cope in the future
    • Joining up local services for families by encouraging a single keyworker approach to work with the whole family on all of its problems
    • Raising the quality and capacity of local data systems
    • Better joint working with partners such as Jobcentre Plus

    The data shows that nearly 120,000 of the families on this programme saw their lives improve – more children attending school, youth crime and anti-social behaviour significantly cut and, in more than 18,000 families, an adult holding down a job. The evaluation does not dispute this fact.

    Unsurprisingly, the ambitious and innovative impact study which used national administrative datasets to track changes in families circumstances over comparatively short time periods, was unable to specifically attribute positive outcomes achieved in employment, youth crime or school attendance to the Troubled Families Programme.

    This was because at that time the level of change achieved was not significantly different from that seen in a group of families not on the programme with whom comparisons were made. This is not the same, however, as saying that the evaluation shows family outcomes did not improve, as some have wrongly inferred.

    Of course, we will continue to review all evidence of how the programme is working, to learn from it and see if there’s more we can do to help families facing such multiple problems. In fact, we have already adapted the new programme in a number of ways, including extending the length of time over which family outcomes will be tracked – from 12 months to 5 years.

  • Louise Haigh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Louise Haigh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Louise Haigh on 2016-01-12.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what recent communications his Department has had with the National Archives on the release of Cabinet papers dated between 1986 and 1988.

    Matthew Hancock

    The Cabinet Office has regular ongoing communications with the National Archives.

    The Minister for the Cabinet Office met National Archive officials to discuss the release of Cabinet Office papers for the 1986 to 1988 period on two occasions.

  • Gordon Marsden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Gordon Marsden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gordon Marsden on 2016-02-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, whether he commissioned an independent evaluation of the UK Commission for Employment and Skills before deciding to withdraw funding from it; and if so, if he will publish it.

    Nick Boles

    No independent evaluation of UKCES was commissioned. The decision by Whitehall Departments to withdraw funding from UKCES during 2016-17 was taken as part of the spending review given the need to make savings in non-participation budgets to allow the core adult skills participation budgets to be protected in cash terms.

    The decision had regard to the range of priorities needing to be funded from non-participation budgets. BIS is working with UKCES and the users of its services, including the Devolved Administrations, to manage the implications of this decision.

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

    Paul Blomfield – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Paul Blomfield on 2016-03-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 11 February 2016 to Question 25609, what assessment he has made of the reasons for the increase in the average time taken for national minimum wage cases in employment tribunals between 2013-14 and 2014-15.

    Mr Shailesh Vara

    In 2014-15 HM Courts &Tribunals Service reviewed outstanding cases in employment tribunals and removed a backlog of very old cases which had settled or were completed from the case management system. The overall trend in average clearance time for single cases continues to improve and this can be seen in the Published Statistics at:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/tribunals-statistics.

    “

  • Tom Blenkinsop – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Tom Blenkinsop – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tom Blenkinsop on 2016-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, what support has been provided by the Government for the growth of the energy-from-waste industry.

    Andrea Leadsom

    The Government has provided a range of support for energy from waste technologies through the Renewables Obligation (RO), the Renewable Incentive (RHI), the Feed-In Tariff and the Contracts for Difference (CfD). The technologies supported include: Landfill Gas, Sewage Gas, Energy from Waste with CHP, Anaerobic Digestion and Advanced Conversion Technologies.

    As of the end of 2015, our support has brought forward just over 2.4 GWh of capacity in these technologies, delivering just under 9.4TWh of renewable electricity.

    The Green Investment Bank (GIB) has provided support to 20 projects using energy from waste technologies. Direct commitments by the Green Investment Bank (GIB) to date total £334m with additional indirect commitments of £130m to Foresight Group LLP through the Foresight-managed Recycling and Waste LP (RAW) fund, in which GIB is a cornerstone investor, and Greensphere Capital LLP which manages the UK Green and Sustainable Waste and Energy Investment Limited Partnership (UKGSWEI) fund on behalf of the GIB.

  • 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 2016-05-03.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what advice HM Revenue and Customs received before reaching its decision to set the cost of participation threshold at £520 per annum as part of the new Community Amateur Sports Club scheme rules; and how the level of that threshold was decided.

    Damian Hinds

    The new regulations for CASCs were introduced on 1 April 2015. All the changes made were necessary to reinforce the original spirit of the scheme requiring clubs to be open to the whole community, with the promotion of participation in sport as their main purpose.

    The Government consulted widely with the sector on all the changes to the scheme. It was aware that there was confusion about the meaning of participation prior to the consultation period for the new regulations. Responses to the consultation were mostly supportive of the 12 times a year rule for participation.

    The scheme does not permit clubs to impose fees which are a significant obstacle to membership. The vast majority of CASCs charge less than £520 for annual membership. To make membership more accessible, clubs with higher costs associated with membership are required to make provisions for those who can’t afford to pay more than £520 a year. If no suitable arrangements are made this club is not able to be a CASC because it is not considered to be open to the whole community.

    During the development of the new CASC regulations the Government was aware of State aid complaint SA.38208 (2014/NN). At the time, the Government was only asked to provide a response to the complaint. The Government provided this response, explaining why the CASC scheme was not State aid. The Commission’s subsequent ruling confirmed this view.

    Since the introduction of the new regulations all CASCs were given a 12-month period of grace to make any necessary changes to remain in the scheme. The Government wrote to all registered CASCs explaining the new regulations and asked clubs to complete a self-assessment checklist on income, membership and participation levels. They were also asked to contact HMRC if they did not meet the new requirements.

    From 1 April 2016, 500 clubs have been deregistered as CASCs, affecting some 35 different types of sport.

    Since 2010 there has been a steady increase in the numbers of CASCs registered in the scheme. Although the Government does not yet have figures for clubs registered as at 5 April 2016, the breakdown of figures since 2010 is:

    5630 – 5 April 2010

    5976 – 5 April 2011

    6165 – 5 April 2012

    6334 – 5 April 2013

    6571 – 5 April 2014

    6715 – 5 April 2015.

  • Kevan Jones – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Kevan Jones – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevan Jones on 2016-06-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what he plans the UK operational in-service date for the P-8 Poseidon will be.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    The main investment decision on the UK’s Maritime Patrol Aircraft programme has not yet been taken by Ministers and the date at which the aircraft will be brought into service has yet to be determined. As the Prime Minister set out during last year’s Strategic Defence and Security Review, however, at least three of the aircraft will be in place by the end of the current Parliament.

  • Justin Tomlinson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Justin Tomlinson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Justin Tomlinson on 2016-09-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what plans she has to support the library service in England.

    Mr Rob Wilson

    I am responding as Minister with responsibility for Libraries policy.

    The Public Libraries and Museums Act 1964 requires the Secretary of State to superintend, and promote the improvement of, the public library service provided by local authorities in England, and to secure the proper discharge by local authorities of the functions in relation to libraries as conferred on them as library authorities.

    The Government invested £2.6m in 2015/16 to install and upgrade WiFi in over 1,000 libraries in England. This means that WiFi is now available in over 99% of public libraries in England.

    In addition, the Government and the Local Government Association established the Libraries Taskforce in 2015. The Taskforce has already published Toolkits and case studies to assist local authorities and consulted on “Ambition”, a draft vision for public libraries. This will provide a range of practical and innovative options local authorities can deploy to maintain and transform our library services. I expect to see local authorities working with Government and their local communities to consider these options, and to ensure library services are sustainable for the long term.

  • Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Chi Onwurah – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Chi Onwurah on 2016-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, if she will ask Ofcom to review communications markets definitions to reflect the role of advertising as a proxy for payment, particularly in regard to the standard SSNIP test.

    Matt Hancock

    As the independent communications regulator it is for Ofcom to determine how it should approach the issue of defining communications markets and how it applies the standard SSNIP test. Ofcom does already take into account developments such as the role of advertising and the role of data as proxy for payments in the course of carrying out its duties and will continue to do so in its assessments of market power and its analysis of competition.