Tag: Lord Grocott

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Grocott on 2016-04-14.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Anelay of St Johns on 7 March (HL6442), whether they support the application to join the EU of (1) Turkey, (2) Macedonia, (3) Montenegro, (4) Albania, and (5) Serbia.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

We support all five countries’ aspiration to join the EU as an important means to drive reform. Turkey’s accession process remains the most effective mechanism to support continuing reform in Turkey. In the Western Balkans, the prospect of EU membership is helping to build stability and promote cooperation on issues that matter to the UK, including organised crime and illegal migration. The strict conditionality of the enlargement process means that it takes many years for a country to complete accession negotiations, undertake reforms and achieve the progress needed to meet EU membership criteria. Any decision to enlarge the EU requires the unanimous agreement of the governments of all existing Member States and ratification in accordance with each country’s constitutional arrangements. In the case of the UK, under the European Union Act 2011 ratification cannot take place without an Act of Parliament to approve the new accession. We can therefore ensure that our requirements are respected in any future EU enlargement. The UK will insist that controls on free movement cannot be lifted until accession countries’ economies have converged much more closely with existing Member States.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Grocott on 2016-04-19.

To ask the Chairman of Committees, in the light of the publication on 19 April of the result of the Hereditary Peers By-election, whether he will publish the contract with Electoral Reform Services to supervise and conduct the poll and count.

Lord Laming

The House has engaged Electoral Reform Services (ERS) to assist with each hereditary peers’ by-election. When the need for a by-election arises ERS are engaged under a standing agreement to administer and supervise the by-election and provide assurance that it conforms to good electoral practice.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Grocott on 2016-05-03.

To ask the Chairman of Committees, further to the Written Answer by the Chairman of Committees on 28 April (HL7763), what was the total cost for the services provided by Electoral Reform Services (ERS) for the recent hereditary peer by-election following the death of Lord Avebury, and what, in particular, was the cost of ERS supervising and conducting the count on 19 April.

Lord Laming

The total cost to the House of Lords for the services provided by Electoral Reform Services (ERS) in respect of the recent Liberal Democrat hereditary peers’ by-election was £300. This includes VAT at 20%.

As with other by-elections, there was one fee for all services provided. There was no separate fee for the cost of ERS supervising and conducting the count.

When the need for a by-election arises ERS are engaged to administer and supervise the by-election and provide assurance that it conforms to good electoral practice.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Grocott on 2016-05-05.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the answer by Lord Nash on 3 May (HL Deb, col 1308), what steps they plan to take to provide Parliament with a clear view of academy trusts’ spending.

Lord Nash

From 2016-17 onwards, the department will produce a new report and accounts covering the performance of the academy sector during the previous academic year. This will provide Parliament with information on academy trusts’ spending, income and assets that is clearer, more transparent and more timely. This approach has been considered and endorsed by the Education Select Committee and the Liaison Committee of the House of Commons.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Grocott on 2016-05-05.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the answer by Lord Nash on 3 May (HL Deb, col 1308), how many allegations of fraud in respect of academies and free schools were made to the Education Funding Agency in each financial year from 2012–13 to date.

Lord Nash

EFA does not classify allegations into fraud or other forms of irregularity until they have been investigated. The number of fraud allegations cannot therefore be isolated from other allegations of irregularity. After investigation EFA concluded that only 10 of the allegations received in respect of academies and free schools since 2012-13 were probable fraud. This shows that there are low levels of fraud within the 5,685 academies in the sector. Where fraud or other irregularity is identified EFA takes swift action which may include conducting its own investigations.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Grocott on 2016-05-19.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Nash on 10 May (HL8227), how many allegations of fraud in respect of academies and free schools there were in (1) 2013–14, and (2) 2014–15.

Lord Nash

As stated in the answer to PQ HL8227, the Education Funding Agency does not classify allegations into fraud or other forms of irregularity until they have been investigated. The number of fraud allegations cannot therefore be isolated from other allegations of irregularity.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Grocott on 2016-06-08.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what action, if any, they have taken during the last 12 months in relation to the fraud allegations at the Haberdashers’ Aske’s Federation academy chain.

Lord Nash

During the last 12 months, the fraud allegations at the Haberdashers’ Aske’s Federation academy trust chain have been reviewed as a criminal investigation since first reported to the police in October 2012 by this multi-academy trust. The criminal case against the perpetrator of the fraud began week commencing 6 June at Woolwich Crown Court.

The Education Funding Agency (EFA) has engaged with the Trust from the outset and immediately requested that the Trust assess financial systems and risks. The Trust carried out an independent and thorough review of its internal control procedures and reported on this to the EFA. The Trust has taken all the appropriate action since the issue was first identified and the remaining key actions now rest with the Police and the Crown Prosecution Service.

Academies and free schools face tighter financial scrutiny than local authority maintained schools. They must publish annual, independently-audited accounts, of which there is no equivalent requirement on maintained schools. We take swift action whenever we identify financial irregularities.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Grocott on 2015-10-29.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government how they define (1) a fatal, and (2) a non-fatal, motion, or amendment to a motion, relating to a statutory instrument.

Baroness Stowell of Beeston

The Companion to the Standing Orders distinguishes between amendments to approval motions whose effect is to withhold the agreement of the House to an affirmative instrument, and amendments or motions that do not prevent approval of the instrument (Companion to the Standing Orders, Para. 10.14). The terms “fatal” and “non-fatal” do not appear.

The amendments in the name of Baroness Meacher and Baroness Hollis of Heigham passed by the House on 26 October withheld the House’s agreement to the Tax Credits (Income Thresholds and Determination of Rates) Regulations 2015.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Grocott on 2015-10-29.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 26 October (HL2541), whether they will publish the latest figures on the number of members of each party in the House, and the ratio of government to opposition members, including all those peers whose introduction has been scheduled.

Baroness Stowell of Beeston

Including all those peers whose introduction or retirement has been advertised in House of Lords Business, and assuming no other changes to the membership of the House, as of 19 January 2016 there will be 249 members on the Conservative benches, 212 members on the Labour benches, and 112 members on the Liberal Democrat benches. This means that there will be 75 more peers on the benches of the largest two opposition parties than on the Government benches.

That will be 29 more peers than at the end of the 2009-10 session, when there were only 46 more peers on the benches of the largest two opposition parties than on the Government benches.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Grocott on 2015-11-03.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Gardiner of Kimble on 27 October (HL2665), how much of the 2015 Common Agricultural Policy budget has been, or will be, spent in support of United Kingdom agriculture.

Lord Gardiner of Kimble

In 2015, the UK has been allocated around 7% of the total CAP budget, equivalent to a total of €4 billion.

In pounds sterling, based on the average European central Bank exchange rate for September used for calculating direct payments, this equates to a total of £2.9 billion. Of this amount, £2.3 billion is allocated to Pillar 1 direct payments and £620 million to Pillar 2 rural development.