Tag: Caroline Lucas

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-01-08.

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, with reference to page 86 of her Department’s publication, Review of the Feed-in Tariffs Scheme: Government response, published in December 2015, what work her Department is undertaking to better understand the whole-system impacts of different electricity technologies; when she plans to complete and publish such work; and if she will make a statement.

Andrea Leadsom

DECC recognises the importance of considering the whole system impacts (both costs and benefits) of different electricity technologies when formulating future government policy, since it is a crucial element in delivering secure, clean and affordable energy to consumers.

In order to continue to improve its evidence base in this area and inform future policy developments, DECC has commissioned a project on the Whole System Impacts of Electricity Generation Technologies on the electricity system. This project will improve DECC’s understanding of what these system costs are (for example, the impact of electricity technologies on wider system balancing actions and networks requirements), as well as improve DECC’s modelling capability to quantify these system costs and their dynamics. The project covers both conventional and low-carbon large- and small-scale technologies.

This project is currently ongoing and given the complex modelling involved, it requires a rigorous quality assurance process to ensure the analysis is robust. A report will be published in due course.

Once this project is completed, DECC will be able to better quantify system costs to inform policy decisions. Any future policy development, such as future renewable support, will be informed by the improved evidence base developed through this project.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-01-26.

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, whether the entering into force of the agreement between the UK and EDF to proceed with Hinkley Point C is conditional on the Flamanville successfully demonstrating capability of operation; what recent conversations her Department has had with EDF about the findings of the French Nuclear Safety Authority on tests on the Flamanville EPR reactor vessel head and bottom and the implications for her policies on new nuclear power; and if she will make a statement.

Andrea Leadsom

My rt. hon. Friend the Secretary of State’s final decision on the Contract for Difference and associated agreements for Hinkley Point C is not dependent on developments at Flamanville. The UK has its own independent nuclear regulatory regime which has assessed the reactor design proposed for use at Hinkley Point and will continue to regulate the project through construction, operation and decommissioning. As part of this, the Office for Nuclear Regulation has said that it expects EDF to apply any relevant lessons learned from Flamanville and improve its design to ensure the delivery of high standards of nuclear safety for its new nuclear power plants in the UK. DECC officials are in regular contact with EDF about both projects.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-02-09.

To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what his policy is on the proposal from the European Parliament’s Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee for a mandatory Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) in the EU, in order to have one set of rules for calculating the taxable profits of companies operating in more than one member state; and if he will press for the introduction of such a CCCTB with other EU member states in the Council.

Mr David Gauke

The European Parliament’s Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee (ECON) has a keen interest in tax, and hence put forward certain proposals. However, the Commission has the sole power of initiative in relation to legislative measures. Tax files are to be agreed by unanimity at the Economic and Financial Affairs Council (ECOFIN). The European Parliament’s role in this process in not formal, and purely consultative.

The term tax haven is often used as shorthand for low or zero tax jurisdictions. However, low tax rates are not by themselves harmful and the UK supports fair tax competition. The UK is working with other Member States in the EU Code of Conduct Group to identify harmful tax regimes and will continue to take strong action against aggressive avoidance and evasion.

The UK and other Member States have not yet seen any proposals from the European Commission or the European Parliament on public country-by-country reporting (CbCR). The Commission is due to publish an Impact Assessment on public CbCR shortly, and we are interested in the results of their analysis. The UK will carefully consider any proposals put forward by the Commission.

The UK played a leading role in encouraging other countries and jurisdictions to sign up to international tax transparency agreements during its G8 presidency in 2013. Thanks in large part to the UK’s continuing leadership on this agenda, over 90 countries have now committed to exchange information on offshore accounts, beginning in 2017 or 2018. The UK also initiated the international work on CbCR and was the first country to formally commit to implementing the OECD model for CbCR, with legislation in the Finance Act 2015. We support the proposal to amend the Directive on Administrative Co-operation to require all EU Member States to adopt and exchange the OECD CbCR template.

The European Commission intends to publish a revised proposal for a mandatory Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) later this year. The Government will wait to see the detail of the Commission’s proposal, including a robust impact assessment, before finalising its position. However, we have stated that the UK will not sign up to anything that undermines our tax sovereignty.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-02-19.

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many requests were made by his Department’s Child Maintenance Group to HM Revenue and Customs for information relating to a non-resident parent’s unearned income in each year since the commencement of the 2012 statutory child maintenance scheme.

Priti Patel

The Information requested is not routinely recorded for management information purposes and could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

CMS has direct access to income information held by Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) which allows the Child Maintenance Service to capture a much wider range of income types received by non-resident parents. Therefore the definition of income within variations under the 2012 scheme of maintenance has been opened to deal with almost all additional sources of income captured by self-assessment. This is referred to as “unearned income” and captures income derived from property, savings and investments (including dividends), and other miscellaneous incomes.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-03-24.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education, if she will make it her policy to ring-fence special educational needs funding as part of her Department’s new national funding formula.

Mr Sam Gyimah

We are currently consulting on arrangements for new national formulae for schools and high needs funding (funding for pupils with high cost Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND)). Both funding streams, along with early years funding, make up the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG), which is ring-fenced so that local authorities can only spend it on specified elements of education. The DSG will continue to be ring-fenced when the national funding formulae are in place. We have also protected the high needs budget in this Parliament and the previous one. We recently added £92.5 million to the 2016-17 allocations.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-04-28.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, with reference to paragraph 84 of the Equality Analysis on the new contract for doctors and dentists in training in the NHS, published in March 2016, whether his Department plans to accept the recommendation for amendment of the draft new junior doctor contract to address the position of part-time doctors and advance equality of opportunity between women and men doctors; and if he will make a statement.

Ben Gummer

Yes. This is explicit in paragraph 60 of Schedule 2 of the Terms and Conditions of Service published by NHS Employers on 31 March 2016.

In addition amendments have also been made to the provision for on-call availability with respect to doctors working less than full-time, transitional arrangements have been amended so that doctors who take approved time out of training are not disadvantaged on return to training and so that those doctors who have not completed their training by the end of the transition period (2019/20), because they are working less than full time, or need to take an approved break from training can have the transitional protection period extended by up to three years until August 2022.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-05-20.

To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he will establish an investigation unit within HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) to deal with cases in which the receiving parent has been advised by the Child Maintenance Service to contact HMRC to report possible tax evasion by the paying parent.

Mr David Gauke

HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) works closely with the Child Maintenance Service as well as other Government Departments to ensure that all allegations of tax evasion from members of the public are assessed, dealt with appropriately and a decision made on the most appropriate course of action.

HMRC values the information they receive from the public and business community. Clamping down on those who try to cheat the system through evading taxes and over claiming benefits is a key priority for the Government and we are committed to ensuring the tax system operates fairly and efficiently.

Any information received is passed on to HMRC’s Enforcement and Compliance teams. This can result in recovery of funds, education to help support compliance civil or criminal action depending on the severity of the evasion.

More serious cases can result in prosecution action by HMRC’s Fraud Investigation Service

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-06-15.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what steps he is taking to (a) assess and (b) address the effect on rail services of the infrastructure bottleneck at Croydon.

Claire Perry

Network Rail’s Sussex Route Study has assessed capacity constraints on the Brighton Main Line. It is increasingly apparent the junctions around Croydon create a complex operating environment for train operators, which translates into constrained capacity and potential delays for passengers. As we develop our emerging priorities for improvements to the national network in 2017, we will give due consideration to improving these junctions.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-07-19.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, whether the requirements for the Great Northern and Thameslink services to be Driver Only Operation contained in the Invitation to Tender for the Govia Thameslink Railway (GTR) Franchise apply to all other services across that franchise; what agreement is in place between GTR and his Department on Driver Only Operation; and if he will place that agreement in the public domain.

Paul Maynard

The requirements the Department specified for Driver Only Operation in the Invitation To Tender can be seen in that document on page 74. Govia proposed changes beyond what was specified in the Invitation to Tender in their bid. These were then contractualised in the Franchise Agreement as an obligation for the operator to fulfil. A copy of the Invitation To Tender and redacted Franchise Agreement is available on the DfT website.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-09-02.

To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, what the total amount of arrears recovered by HM Revenue and Customs for non-compliance with the national minimum wage is in 2016-17 to date; how many (a) workers and (b) employers those arrears relate to; and how many of those employers (i) were issued a financial penalty, (ii) self-corrected and paid those arrears back to the workers concerned without being issued a financial penalty and (iii) have been named and shamed for that non-compliance.

Margot James

HM Revenue and Customs do not provide ad-hoc data for National Minimum Wage/National Living Wage enforcement, although mid-year figures will be available later in the year.

Employers found to have broken minimum wage law will be issued with a Notice of Underpayment by HMRC and will have 28 days to appeal against it. If the employer does not appeal or an appeal has been unsuccessful, HMRC will issue a case closure letter to the employer and refer them to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) to be considered for naming and shaming. The employer will then have 14 days from the date of the case closure letter to make written representations to BEIS outlining whether they fall under any of the exceptional circumstances for not being named under the scheme. Employers issued with a case closure letter after 1 April 2016 will be named by BEIS in future naming rounds.