Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Jess Phillips – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Jess Phillips – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jess Phillips on 2016-02-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what estimate she has made of the number of children (a) under 16 and (b) between 16 and 18 who have been groomed on social media sites in each year since 2010.

    Karen Bradley

    Significant under-reporting of online grooming is likely and it is therefore difficult fully to quantify numbers. The National Strategic Assessment of Serious and Organised Crime, issued by the National Crime Agency, recognises child sexual exploitation and abuse as one of the highest serious and organised crime risks and the Home Office has published a review of the evidence on cybercrime, including online grooming (Cyber Crime: A Review of the Evidence Research Report 75. Chapter 3: Cyber-enabled crimes – sexual offending against children, McGuire and Dowling 2013).

  • Andy Slaughter – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Andy Slaughter – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andy Slaughter on 2016-02-29.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to the answer of 14 January 2016 to Question 21498, on social security benefits: personal injury, whether the estimated effect of the proposed changes on social security recoupment from injuries other than whiplash are likely to be caught by the changes.

    Justin Tomlinson

    DWP officials are continuing to work with the Ministry of Justice to assess the potential impact of the proposed changes. The government will consult on these measures which will be accompanied by an impact assessment that will cover claims for compensation which are recoverable under the Social Security (Recovery of Benefits) Act 1997.

  • Richard Burden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Richard Burden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Richard Burden on 2016-03-23.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment his Department has made of the effects on the incidence of hearing loss of mobile phones and other similar devices which do not have a volume control; and if he will make a statement.

    Alistair Burt

    The Department has made no assessment of the effects on the incidence of hearing loss of mobile phones and other similar devices which do not have a volume control.

    The Department’s Policy Research Programme is funding COSMOS (Cohort Study of Mobile Phone Use and Health) which is conducted by Imperial College London and expected to end in 2019. This study will investigate possible health effects from long term use of mobile phones and other wireless technologies, on a United Kingdom cohort of 105,000 adults. One of the health outcomes investigated will be tinnitus (ringing in the ears). Hearing loss is one of the factors that may be involved in the development of tinnitus and this study will monitor the incidence of tinnitus in mobile phone users.

  • Gordon Marsden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Gordon Marsden – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gordon Marsden on 2016-05-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, how many existing staff from the Skills Funding Agency it is planned will be transferred to the new Institute for Apprenticeships.

    Nick Boles

    The final size and structure of the Institute for Apprenticeships will be determined in due course. No decisions have yet been made about its structure or staffing.

  • Richard Burgon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Richard Burgon – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Richard Burgon on 2016-06-15.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment his Department has made of the effect of a FCA-regulated monthly maximum charge on unarranged overdrafts for personal current accounts.

    Harriett Baldwin

    The Government is clear that consumers must be able to access clear and transparent information about the charges that may apply to financial services products, including bank accounts. In addition, the Financial Conduct Authority requires firms to be clear, fair and not misleading when giving information to consumers, including on fees and charges.

    The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) is currently undertaking a market investigation into competition within the retail banking market, including personal current accounts. In its May 2016 provisional decision on remedies, the CMA proposed requiring banks to take steps including: a monthly maximum charge for unarranged overdrafts; alerts to help customers avoid unarranged overdraft charges; improving comparisons by allowing customers to share data on transactions with other banks and trusted third parties; and regular prompts for customers to check that they are getting good value from their banking provider.

    The CMA’s investigation is ongoing and it is currently consulting on the provisional decision on remedies. The Government welcomes the CMA’s work as a crucial step towards the goal of a highly competitive banking system, and stands ready to take action as necessary once the CMA publishes its final report in the summer.

  • Calum Kerr – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Calum Kerr – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Calum Kerr on 2016-09-12.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he will take steps to change HM Revenue and Customs practice of not repaying incorrectly withheld arrears or underpaid tax credits to claimants as a lump sum.

    Jane Ellison

    To tackle the problems associated with families overestimating falls in income, since 2007, when claimants report a fall in income during the year, HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) adjusts their tax credit payments for the rest of the year to reflect their new income level, but will not include a one-off payment for the earlier part of the year. At the end of the year, their award is finalised when their actual income is known. If they have been underpaid, a further payment will then be made. However, provisions are in place to make arrears payments to claimants suffering financial hardship.

    The purpose of withholding the payment is to reduce the number and size of any overpayments and prevent customers incurring debt.

    HMRC has provisions in place to support those customers who are suffering financial hardship and in those circumstances any withheld payments can be released and paid to the customer without having to wait for the claim to be finalised. There are no plans to alter the current practice.

  • Dan Jarvis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Dan Jarvis – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Dan Jarvis on 2016-10-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, whether his Department plans to respond to the findings of the National Institute of Economic and Social Research evaluation study, No evidence Troubled Families Programme has any significant impact on key objectives, published on 17 October 2016.

    Mr Marcus Jones

    The National Institute of Economic and Social Research Impact Study was just one of 6 reports comprising the independent evaluation of the first Troubled Families Programme. The evaluation found that the programme had many positive achievements. These include:

    • Families feeling more confident and optimistic about being able to cope in the future
    • Joining up local services for families by encouraging a single keyworker approach to work with the whole family on all of its problems
    • Raising the quality and capacity of local data systems
    • Better joint working with partners such as Jobcentre Plus

    The data shows that nearly 120,000 of the families on this programme saw their lives improve – more children attending school, youth crime and anti-social behaviour significantly cut and, in more than 18,000 families, an adult holding down a job. The evaluation does not dispute this fact.

    Unsurprisingly, the ambitious and innovative impact study which used national administrative datasets to track changes in families circumstances over comparatively short time periods, was unable to specifically attribute positive outcomes achieved in employment, youth crime or school attendance to the Troubled Families Programme.

    This was because at that time the level of change achieved was not significantly different from that seen in a group of families not on the programme with whom comparisons were made. This is not the same, however, as saying that the evaluation shows family outcomes did not improve, as some have wrongly inferred.

    Of course, we will continue to review all evidence of how the programme is working, to learn from it and see if there’s more we can do to help families facing such multiple problems. In fact, we have already adapted the new programme in a number of ways, including extending the length of time over which family outcomes will be tracked – from 12 months to 5 years.

  • Richard Burden – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Richard Burden – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Richard Burden on 2015-11-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what discussions, on what dates and by what medium he has had with Volkswagen about the reliability of carbon dioxide emissions data for its vehicles; and what response he has received from Volkswagen in those discussions.

    Andrew Jones

    The Government takes the unacceptable actions of Volkswagen (VW) Group extremely seriously. As we investigate what went wrong and what we can do to stop it happening again, the priority of course remains to protect the public. We expect VW to take every step necessary to protect its UK customers, but it is right that the Government carry out their own thorough and independent investigation.

    A written statement was made today (10 November) informing the House of the latest developments on the Department for Transport’s vehicle emissions testing programme, following the revelations that VW had fitted defeat devices to some of its vehicles.

    The Vehicle Certification Agency (VCA) is working to confirm that this issue is not industry wide. They have tested two VW group vehicles known to contain a defeat device and will rerun laboratory tests on popular cars sold in the UK to compare real world driving emissions against laboratory performance. This will include measuring CO2 .

    The Secretary of State spoke to Dr Herbert Deiss of VW on 4 November to discuss CO2 emissions, seeking information on those vehicles affected in the UK and the extent of the discrepancy. VW have stated that they are working hard to clarify the situation and are liaising with relevant approval authorities.

    The Secretary of State has written jointly with the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills to VW seeking clarification on several issues. Separately, officials from the Department for Transport, and its Agencies have held a number of discussions with VW regarding the recall of affected vehicles.

    The Department for Transport has not made a specific assessment of on road emissions in relation to type approval requirements, but officials are aware of the findings in published reports suggesting significant differences.

  • Emily Thornberry – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    Emily Thornberry – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Emily Thornberry on 2015-12-02.

    To ask the Attorney General, pursuant to the Answer of 24 November 2015 to Question 16871, what the budget allocated to the Specialist Fraud Division was in each of the last six years.

    Robert Buckland

    The budget allocated to the Specialist Fraud Division in each of the last six years was:

    2009/10 – £7.3m

    2010/11 – £23.4m

    2011/12 – £22.1m

    2012/13 – £26.8m

    2013/14 – £25.6m

    2014/15 – £23.6m

  • Lisa Cameron – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lisa Cameron – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lisa Cameron on 2016-01-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how much of his Department’s planned £8.4 million expenditure on armed forces veterans’ mental health services will be spent in Scotland in (a) 2015-16, (b) 2016-17, (c) 2017-18, (d) 2018-19 and (e) 2019-20; and in which areas of mental health services that funding will be spent in each of those years.

    Alistair Burt

    The funding and provision of healthcare in Scotland is a matter for the Scottish Government. The additional £8.4 million announced in the 2015 Budget will be used by the National Health Service across England to enhance mental health and support services for vulnerable veterans.