The below Parliamentary question was asked by Clive Betts on 2016-03-23.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, whether his Department has undertaken a cost-benefit analysis of retaining his Department’s office at St Paul’s Palace, Sheffield.
Joseph Johnson
I refer the Hon Member to the answer I gave to Question UIN 27113 from the Hon Member for Sheffield Central.
“
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Clive Betts on 2016-03-23.
To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, with reference to page 2 of Budget 2016, whether the £3.5 billion savings to public spending to be achieved by 2012-20 will affect the four year funding settlement to local councils announced by his Department in December 2015.
Mr Marcus Jones
While the Government has not yet completed its departmental efficiency review to help identify further savings in 2019-20, we expect the four year allocations confirmed in the final settlement on 10 February 2016 to be the amounts presented to Parliament each year, should councils choose to accept the offer.
We look forward to councils publishing efficiency plans by 14 October 2016 that demonstrate how the greater certainty on offer can bring about opportunities for further savings. However, if councils prefer not to have a four year settlement we cannot guarantee their future levels of funding.
We have been clear that funding allocations in 2019-20 may be subject to the implementation of 100% business rate retention, something councils have asked for over decades and which we are working with the sector to deliver.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Clive Betts on 2016-03-23.
To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, how he plans that the section 31 grant to compensate councils for the extension of small business rate relief will be funded.
Mr Marcus Jones
By raising £8 billion through a package of measures to counter tax avoidance and aggressive tax planning by multinational enterprises, Government has been able to announce in the Budget a £6.7 billion reduction in business rates. This is the biggest ever cut in business rates in England. The funding for these section 31 grants was provided for in Budget 2016 through the Budget scorecard (lines 15-17). This additional funding is included in the DCLG Local Government DEL budget figures on page 91 of the Budget Report.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Clive Betts on 2016-03-23.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, how the proposed cost savings outlined in the BIS 2020 programme have been calculated; and what estimate he has made of projected savings of relocating staff from the office in Sheffield to London.
Joseph Johnson
The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills has committed to delivering 30-40% reductions in the Department’s operating expenditure which equates to around £350m by 2020. Savings of this magnitude can only be delivered by changing the Department’s overall business model so that it is simpler, cheaper and better for users of BIS services. This involves reducing the number of offices, our number of partner bodies, and our headcount as well as rationalising customer support, grant giving and digital service delivery. The proposed move of policy teams into a single centre and proposed closure of the Sheffield office forms part of a larger programme to change our business model.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Clive Betts on 2016-03-23.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, whether his Department has undertaken a cost-benefit analysis of retaining his Department’s office at St Paul’s Palace, Sheffield.
Joseph Johnson
I refer the Hon Member to the answer I gave to Question UIN 27113 from the Hon Member for Sheffield Central.
“
The parliamentary question asked by Clive Betts, the Labour MP for Sheffield South East, in the House of Commons on 1 December 2022.
Mr Clive Betts (Sheffield South East) (Lab)
The other day, I read with amazement an article in The Guardian which said, with regard to cancellations on the TransPennine Express, that between the middle of October and the middle of November, the reported figures were between 5% and 12% a week, but actual cancellations were over 20% each week. The difference is that train operators do not count as a cancellation a train that is cancelled before 10 pm the night before. When train operators are penalised under their contracts for non-performance, are the cancellation figures used those that the train operators report, or those that passengers experience?
Huw Merriman
I will write to the hon. Gentleman and specify how those figures are calculated. I will also give him up-to-date figures from the methodology that we calculate. I am confident that those figures recognise the same experience that passengers have suffered and he has described, but I will write to him and set that out in full.
The speech made by Clive Betts, the Labour MP for Sheffield South East, in the House of Commons on 16 November 2022.
May I associate myself with the aims that the Secretary of State has set out in his statement? I think they will be supported across the House.
I draw the Secretary of State’s attention to the Select Committee’s report, “The Regulation of Social Housing”, published in July—I gently remind him that the Department has not yet replied to it. In the report, we identified some social housing that was unfit for human habitation, and causing the sorts of health problems that tragically have been seen in this case. We identified problems with repair reporting, complaints handling, and a lack of proactive inspection of properties by housing providers and the social housing regulator. We put that in context and said
“some blame must attach to successive Governments for not investing enough in new homes, which has increased the sector’s reliance on outdated stock, and for not providing funding specifically for regeneration.”
Some of those are not individual repairs; there are failures of whole blocks and whole estates. I say to the Secretary of State: let us share the common objectives, and let us work together to get the money to ensure that those objectives can be realised.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Clive Betts on 2014-06-27.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, with reference to the Care Act 2014 and the care and support statutory guidance, what guidance his Department gives to local authorities on the action they should take if they receive evidence that self-funders and those with personalised care budgets are not paying social care firms enough to pay their staff at least the minimum wage, including remuneration for travel time between appointments.
Norman Lamb
Self-funders and people with personal budgets whose care is arranged by their local authority have no obligations under the provisions of the Care Act 2014, draft statutory Care Act guidance or draft regulations on the Care Act, to show that they pay social care providers enough to pay their staff at least the minimum wage, including remuneration for travel time between appointments. Social care providers must fulfil their legal obligations as employers which include ensuring that staff salaries conform to the national minimum wage.
If a person chooses to request their personal budget as a direct payment to purchase their own care and support, the draft Care Act guidance details what the local authority should do as part of its general monitoring of the direct payment to ensure that the person fulfils their legal obligations as an employer. This includes ensuring that the person is registered as an employer with Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs and is making the appropriate contributions for PAYE and income tax, and that payments conform to the national minimum wage. Where it is apparent that these obligations are not being met, the local authority should review the care plan and making of the direct payment to ascertain if alternate arrangements need to be made that result in the person no longer being an employer (para 12.46-12.49, p172-73).
The draft guidance and regulations on the Care Act are currently open for public consultation. The Department is also undertaking a series of engagement events with social care stakeholders to gather feedback on the content of the guidance and regulations.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Clive Betts on 2014-06-27.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, with reference to the Care Act 2014 and the care and support statutory guidance, whether self-funders and those with personalised care budgets are under an obligation to show that they are paying social care firms enough to pay their staff at least the minimum wage, including remuneration for travel time between appointments.
Norman Lamb
Self-funders and people with personal budgets whose care is arranged by their local authority have no obligations under the provisions of the Care Act 2014, draft statutory Care Act guidance or draft regulations on the Care Act, to show that they pay social care providers enough to pay their staff at least the minimum wage, including remuneration for travel time between appointments. Social care providers must fulfil their legal obligations as employers which include ensuring that staff salaries conform to the national minimum wage.
If a person chooses to request their personal budget as a direct payment to purchase their own care and support, the draft Care Act guidance details what the local authority should do as part of its general monitoring of the direct payment to ensure that the person fulfils their legal obligations as an employer. This includes ensuring that the person is registered as an employer with Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs and is making the appropriate contributions for PAYE and income tax, and that payments conform to the national minimum wage. Where it is apparent that these obligations are not being met, the local authority should review the care plan and making of the direct payment to ascertain if alternate arrangements need to be made that result in the person no longer being an employer (para 12.46-12.49, p172-73).
The draft guidance and regulations on the Care Act are currently open for public consultation. The Department is also undertaking a series of engagement events with social care stakeholders to gather feedback on the content of the guidance and regulations.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Clive Betts on 2014-04-10.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what assessment his Department has made of the effect a hydrogen transport system would have on air quality in (a) London and (b) the UK.
Mr Robert Goodwill
As set out in Driving the Future Today our strategy document published last year, the Government is committed to the move to ultra-low emission vehicles. We recognise the economic opportunities for the UK that this transition provides as well its potential contribution to cutting the emissions from road transport.
The Government’s approach to this agenda has been consistently technology neutral and we have been active participants in UKH2Mobility. This is a joint industry-Government project evaluating the potential for hydrogen as a transport fuel and the scope to make the UK an early market for the commercial deployment of hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) from 2015 onwards. The UKH2Mobility project is ongoing and both Government and industry participants are working together to consider the steps needed to secure the benefits of moving to hydrogen as a transport fuel for the UK. This includes the clear contribution that studies have shown FCEVs can make to improving air quality in the UK. We have undertaken no specific research on the impact of FCEVs on air quality in London.