Tag: Caroline Lucas

  • Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    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

  • Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    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.

  • Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    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.

  • Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    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.

  • Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-10-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, whether the Carbon Plan will outline policies that ensure that the UK meets the emissions limit in the fourth carbon budget of a 50 per cent reduction in annual emissions on 1990 levels.

    Mr Nick Hurd

    We are engaging with a wide range of stakeholders and other government departments in order to meet the shared challenge of moving to a low carbon economy. The Emissions Reduction Plan will set out how we will meet our carbon budgets through the 2020s (the period covering the fourth and fifth carbon budgets).

  • Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-10-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, pursuant to the Answer of 26 July 2016 to Question 42842 and with reference to freedom of information requests ref: 2016-0032573 and ref: 2016-0042333, on pupil data sharing with the police and Home Office, on how many people has data been (a) requested and (b) provided in response to requests for information to the National Pupil Database made by the (i) Home Office and (ii) police; and if she will make a statement.

    Nick Gibb

    The National Pupil Database (NPD) is information the Department for Education (DfE) holds on pupils attending schools in England, which includes information collected in the School Census and attainment data from awarding organisations.

    The Home Office and police can request data from the NPD where they have clear evidence that a child may be at risk or if there is evidence of criminal activity. The data that can be requested does not include information on nationality, country of birth or English language proficiency.

    Between April 2012 and October 2016, the Police have made 31 access requests of the NPD data and the School Census. 21 of these have resulted in information being passed to the police. All were requests for individual level data about individual pupils. Therefore, information about 21 pupils has been shared.

    “Between July 2015 and September 2016, the Home Office has made requests of DfE data on 25 occasions. Two of these requests were subsequently withdrawn. During this 15 month period, requests relating to a total of 2,462 individuals have been made by the Home Office to DfE and 520 records have been identified within DfE data and returned to the Home Office.”

    To address any uncertainties, I have placed an information note in the House Libraries.

  • Caroline Lucas – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Caroline Lucas – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2015-11-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, what the cost per megawatt hour of electricity is from the (a) Hunterston B, (b) Heysham 1&2, (c) Torness, (d) Hatlepool, (e) Sizewell, (f) Dungeness B and (g) Hinkley Point C power stations.

    Andrea Leadsom

    As EDF own Hunterston B, Heysham 1 and 2, Torness, Hartlepool, Sizewell and Dungeness, the cost per megawatt hour is a matter for them. Under the proposed Contract for Difference for Hinkley Point C, the Strike Price (in 2012 figures) is £92.50/MWh fully indexed to the Consumer Price Index.If Sizewell C receives a CFD (or equivalent), or advances to first nuclear island concrete pour for the project, prior to the commissioning of the first reactor at Hinkley point C, the Strike Price for Hinkley Point C will be reduced to £89.50/MWh. This reduction is provided for on the assumption that EDF will be able to share ‘first of a kind’ costs of EPR reactors across Hinkley Point C and Sizewell C sites.

  • Caroline Lucas – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Caroline Lucas – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2015-11-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what mechanisms are in place to ensure transparency of the ownership of limited partnerships; what plans he has to (a) improve such transparency and (b) ensure that such partnerships are not set up for money laundering purposes; and if he will make a statement.

    Anna Soubry

    To improve transparency, the Department has established a publicly accessible central register of people with significant control (PSC register) through the Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Act 2015.

    The PSC register will be an easily accessible single source of information about the ultimate owners and controllers of UK companies, Limited Liability Partnerships and Societas Europeae. From June 2016, these corporate entities will be required to make their beneficial ownership information publically available through the UK register of companies.

    It is already a legal requirement that the name of each of the partners of limited partnerships be submitted to Companies House on registration. This information is available to the public free of charge through the new Companies House beta service. Companies House also works collaboratively with other government departments and agencies to tackle crime and fraud, including money laundering.

    We are currently considering the scope of the UK register to ensure we comply with the European Union’s Fourth Money Laundering Directive, which requires corporate and other legal entities to obtain and hold beneficial ownership information.

  • Caroline Lucas – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Caroline Lucas – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2015-12-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the implications for his policies of the recommendations of HM Inspectorate of Prisons’ thematic report on Behaviour management and restraint of children in custody, published in November 2015.

    Andrew Selous

    Restraint is only be used as a last resort, when young people are putting their own safety and the safety of others at risk.

    The recent report by HM Inspectorate of Prisons welcomed our new arrangements, which are designed to limit the use of physical restraint on young people in custody as far as possible.

    The report does raise some concerns over how the new system is operating and we will carefully consider its recommendations.

  • Caroline Lucas – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Women and Equalities

    Caroline Lucas – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Women and Equalities

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2015-12-14.

    To ask the Minister for Women and Equalities, pursuant to the Answer of 10 June 2015 to Question 700, when she plans to (a) publish the evaluation report on the Access to Elected Office Fund and (b) make a decision on whether that fund should continue.

    Caroline Dinenage

    The number of people who have applied to the Access to Elected Office for Disabled People Fund is in the table below:

    Financial Year

    Number of applicants (some applicants made more than one application)

    2012/13

    27

    2013/14

    34

    2014/15

    48

    The total amount claimed by successful applicants was £271,260 (out of awards totalling £418,733)

    An evaluation of the pilot fund is currently being undertaken and will be published in due course. An announcement regarding the future of the fund is anticipated early in 2016.

    The information on regional breakdown of expenditure and the diversity of candidates can be found in the tables below:

    Region (location of election seat)

    Amount claimed and paid (£)

    East Midlands

    1,099

    East of England

    480

    Greater London

    89,399

    North East England

    4,382

    North West England

    20,567

    South East England

    69,474

    South West England

    21,260

    West Midlands

    20,281

    Yorkshire and Humberside

    17,882

    Total (rounded)

    271,260

    Political Party

    Amount claimed and paid (£)

    Conservative

    32,361

    Democracy 2015

    350

    Green

    5,791

    Labour

    120,846

    Liberal Democrat

    32,601

    Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition

    276

    UKIP

    53,236

    Independent

    25,798

    Total (rounded)

    271,260

    Gender

    Amount claimed and paid (£)

    Male

    139,524

    Female

    131,736

    Total

    271,260

    Ethnic Group

    Amount claimed and paid (£)

    White; all backgrounds

    218,117

    Mixed ethnic origin

    1,348

    Asian; all backgrounds

    26,680

    Black/African/Caribbean/Black British

    22,977

    Other ethnic group

    350

    Prefer not to say

    1,788

    Total

    271,260