Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Gregory Campbell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Gregory Campbell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gregory Campbell on 2016-01-04.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many people in Northern Ireland were (a) prosecuted and (b) convicted for their part in offences connected with fuel laundering between 1 January and 30 June 2015.

    Damian Hinds

    HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) is not a prosecuting authority. Where cases do proceed to the criminal courts in Northern Ireland the Public Prosecution Service for Northern Ireland (PPSNI) carries out the prosecution.

    HMRC’s records do not differentiate between the forms of fuel fraud it investigates and so they cannot identify arrests and convictions solely for fuel laundering. In the period between 1 January and 30 June 2015, there were 4 successful prosecutions and convictions relating to oils fraud.

    HMRC fights fraud on a wide range of fronts, from special units performing thousands of roadside checks to raiding laundering plants. The UK has recently introduced, jointly with the Republic of Ireland, an improved new marker for rebated fuel, which will make it much harder to launder marked fuel and sell it at a profit.

  • Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Kevin Brennan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Brennan on 2016-01-28.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether tribunal awards made to employees will be included when calculating the proposed exit payments cap for those workers.

    Greg Hands

    The Government consulted on implementing a public sector exit payment cap in July 2015. The Government response to this consultation was published on 16 September 2015. This response provides detail on which organisations and types of payments the Government intends to capture within the scope of the public sector exit payment cap. This accords with the Government’s manifesto commitment to end tax payer funded six figure payoffs for public sector workers.

    The response document can be found at the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/464367/Public_sector_exit_payments_response.pdf

    The exit payment cap will apply to payments made as a result of an employee leaving their employment. It will not affect any pension a person has earned through their years of service or have any impact on accrued pension rights or pension lump sum entitlements on retirement. It will capture contributions, made by the employer, to fund early access to an unreduced or partially reduced pension. This is because such costs are ultimately funded by the tax payer.

    The Government has been clear that early retirements relating to ill health are outside the scope of the cap and will not be affected. Additionally, any payments directed by a Court or Tribunal will not be included in the scope of the cap.

    Exits on compassionate grounds are not such a clearly defined concept as exits related to ill health or redundancy. There will generally be a large degree of employer discretion on the terms of such exits, and on any payments. In these cases there will be discretion available to relax the cap in individual cases, subject to relevant Ministerial or local council approval, as will be set out in further detail in forthcoming Treasury guidance and directions.

  • Charlotte Leslie – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Charlotte Leslie – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Charlotte Leslie on 2016-02-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, how many officials of his Department undertook language classes at (a) his Department and (b) post in (i) 2001 and (ii) 2010.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    I refer my rt hon. Friend to my answer of 10 February 2016 set out in PQ 25525.

  • Lord Myners – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Lord Myners – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Myners on 2016-03-17.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the Office for Budget Responsibility has produced its own forecast of the consequences of the UK leaving the EU.

    Lord O’Neill of Gatley

    The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) prepares its forecasts on the basis of the current Government policy and does not look at alternative policy scenarios. Government policy is to remain within the EU. Therefore the OBR has not factored into its forecast the impact of a UK exit from the EU.

  • Lord Hylton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Lord Hylton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hylton on 2016-04-25.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will propose that the three billion euros offered to Turkey from the EU be transferred to the UNHCR World Food Programme for work in Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan for refugees and displaced people, in particular for continuing child and adult education.

    Baroness Verma

    The purpose of the EU-Turkey Refugee Facility is to provide support to refugees and host communities in Turkey. We expect that the Facility will provide immediate humanitarian support, as well as help meet longer-term development needs, such as education.

    The first projects funded through the Facility are starting to be implemented, for example through the World Food Programme and UNICEF.

  • Ian Blackford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Ian Blackford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Blackford on 2016-06-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, for what reasons people who have leave to remain in the UK while seeking permanent residence do not have the right to work.

    James Brokenshire

    Those with temporary leave to remain keep the conditions of that leave, including any associated work rights, until a new application is decided.

    Those whose leave to remain has already expired do not have permission to work and must normally make an application to regularise their stay within 28 days.

  • Debbie Abrahams – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Debbie Abrahams – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Debbie Abrahams on 2016-07-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many employers have been advised that their pay cycles might affect universal credit payments; how many employers have altered their pay cycles as a result of that advice; and how many employees have been affected by such alterations.

    Damian Hinds

    Throughout the life of Universal Credit, officials and Ministers have consulted and liaised with employers about Universal Credit and its interaction with labour market and employers’ processes.

    We are currently implementing a test and learn approach to understand the interaction of Universal Credit and employer pay cycles and its effect on awards. This work will include discussions with employers.

  • Jim Shannon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Jim Shannon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Shannon on 2016-10-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, when he plans for new implants for people diagnosed with damaged shoulder tendons to be available on the NHS.

    Nicola Blackwood

    It is for the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) to provide national clinical guidance and advice to improve health and social care based on the latest research and evidence base for use of interventional procedures. NICE has not issued any guidance on the use of new implants for damaged shoulder tendons.

    Clinical commissioning groups are responsible for commissioning services to meet the requirements of their local population. It would be for them to decide whether this procedure should be made available, taking into account any available evidence of its clinical and cost effectiveness.

  • Roger Godsiff – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Roger Godsiff – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2015-11-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of interim or emergency measures to provide access to drugs for rare cancers during the period of the accelerated access review.

    George Freeman

    The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence is the independent body that makes decisions on the clinical and cost effectiveness of drugs, including those for rare cancers, based on thorough assessment of the best available evidence.

    The Government has also established the Cancer Drugs Fund, which has helped over 72,000 cancer patients in England to access life-extending drugs that would not otherwise have been available to them.

    The Early Access to Medicines Scheme (EAMS) was launched in April 2014 to support access in the United Kingdom to unlicensed or off-label medicines representing a significant advance in treatment in areas of unmet medical need. Eight EAMS Promising Innovative Medicines designations and four positive EAMS scientific opinions have been issued so far, including some for new cancer drugs.

    The independent Accelerated Access Review is currently looking at how we can reduce the time, cost, and risk of drug development, develop a new range of flexible reimbursement models and consider the long term landscape for innovation adoption. The Review’s recommendations are expected in spring 2016.

  • Lord Moynihan – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Lord Moynihan – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Moynihan on 2015-11-26.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the impact of the Spending Review and Autumn Statement 2015 on the discretionary spend of local authorities on sport and recreational facilities, and what projections they have made of future years.

    Baroness Neville-Rolfe

    Local authorities make their own decisions on how they spend their budgets on sport and other discretionary areas. Many local authorities already understand the value of investing in sport and are best placed to make the right decisions for their communities locally, whilst continuing to be supported by a strong national offer directed by Sport England. Strengthening grassroots sport will be at the heart of our forthcoming new sports strategy.