Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • 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 2016-05-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what estimate he has made of the proportional real terms change in the cost of travelling by (a) private car, (b) bus, (c) train and (d) aeroplane since (i) 1980, (ii) 1997, (iii) 2010 and (iv) 2015.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The Department for Transport publishes statistics on travel costs, based on data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS), in the Transport Statistics Great Britain compendium, table 1308.

    Real terms change in cost of transport

    Motoring, including the purchase of a vehicle

    Bus and coach fares

    Rail fares

    (i) Between 1980 and 2015

    -19%

    +61%

    +65%

    (ii) Between 1997 and 2015

    -16%

    +30%

    +25%

    (iii) Between 2010 and 2015

    -10%

    +5%

    +7%

    (d) The costs of travelling by air are not available from ONS data. However estimates are available based on fare data from the Civil Aviation Authority passenger survey from 2000. The real cost of the average UK one-way air fare, including taxes and charges, covering domestic flights from 2010 to 2014 increased by 5%. Estimates for 2015 are not yet available.

  • David Burrowes – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    David Burrowes – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Burrowes on 2016-07-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what consultation her Department has undertaken on the draft Adults at Risk policy for vulnerable people detained under immigration powers.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    Stephen Shaw carried out a comprehensive consultation in preparing his report of his review of the welfare of vulnerable people in immigration detention, and the draft adults at risk policy forms part of the Government’s response to Mr Shaw’s review. The Government saw no reason to duplicate this in developing the adults at risk policy. However, when the draft policy was published on 26 May, the Government wrote to a wide range of relevant non-Governmental organisations and offered them the opportunity to discuss it. Subsequently, Home Office officials have held meetings with a number of interested organisations, and the views of these organisations have been taken into account as the policy has been developed further.

  • Steve McCabe – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Steve McCabe – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Steve McCabe on 2016-10-07.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what estimate his Department has made of the likely costs in administering changes to IR35 on public sector contracts; whether these costs will fall on public sector organisations; and what estimate his Department has made of the net gain to the Exchequer resulting from those changes.

    Jane Ellison

    Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) has formally consulted with stakeholders, including a large number of public sector organisations on the impacts of the changes. The Government is analysing these responses and will respond in due course.

    Changes to off-payroll working in the public sector will make the engager responsible for deducting and paying associated tax and National Insurance where the intermediary rules apply. These changes will increase compliance with existing rules, rather than introducing a new tax liability. It is right that public sector bodies ensure that their workers are paying the correct amount of tax. At Budget this year, the Government published an estimate of the Exchequer yield as a result of these changes. This totalled around £550 million over the scorecard period, to 2021.

  • Paul Blomfield – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Paul Blomfield – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Paul Blomfield on 2015-10-28.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to Question 1 of the consultation, Tackling exploitation in the labour market, published by her Department and the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills in October 2015, what the legal definition is of organised labour market exploitation.

    Karen Bradley

    Exploitation of workers comes in many different forms. The definition of ‘labour market exploitation’ used in the consultation is not a legal definition. For the purposes of the consultation, the phrase is explained at paragraph 50 in the consultation as meaning “more than merely deliberate non-compliance”.

  • Bill Esterson – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Bill Esterson – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Bill Esterson on 2015-11-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what his strategy is for maximising the economic contribution of (a) the steel industry and (b) other industries vital to the UK’s economic success.

    Anna Soubry

    The best way the Government can support our industries is to continue to deliver a strong and growing economy.

    In the Autumn Statement, the Chancellor announced an exemption for Energy Intensive Industries (EIIs), including the steel industry, from the policy costs of the Renewables Obligation and Feed-in Tariffs, a hugely significant step to provide industry with long-term certainty and helping them remain competitive. This is on top of the millions that has already been paid in compensation to EIIs for energy costs.

    The Government engages with various industrial sectors through our Sector Councils, where we discuss the opportunities and challenges facing certain sectors.

    The Government recognises the current difficulties that are unique to the steel sector. While we cannot fix the price of steel, halt global overproduction or fix currency rates, the Government has taken a number of measures to help our steel industry.

    We have taken action on unfair trade, recently voting in support of anti-dumping measures on wire rod and steel tubing imports, as well as lobbying successfully for an investigation into cheap imports of Reinforcing Steel Bar.

    The steel industry’s request for flexibility over Industrial Emissions Directive exemptions has been secured. This will save the industry millions of pounds of unnecessary expenditure at a time of crisis by offering steel companies more time to comply with this European legislation.

    Finally, we are taking action to drive up the number of public contracts won by UK steel manufacturers and their partners through fair and open competition. The Government published on 30 October new guidelines for departments to apply on major projects when sourcing and buying steel. The new instructions will help steel suppliers compete on a level playing field with international suppliers for major Government projects.

  • Christopher Chope – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Christopher Chope – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Christopher Chope on 2016-01-06.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will make it the policy of the Government to refer to the European Court of Justice the failure of the French government to register non-EU citizens in France who are in need of international protection.

    James Brokenshire

    All migrants in France who wish to seek international protection should do so in France. In accordance with the Joint Ministerial Declaration of August 2015, we continue to work closely with France on a range of migration and security issues and have no plans to change this constructive approach.

    The French Government is committed to meeting its EU and international obligations and has opened up new places in its asylum system for those that claim asylum in Calais.

  • Nigel Mills – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Nigel Mills – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nigel Mills on 2016-01-26.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many notifications under section 92 of the Finance Act 2015 were received by HM Revenue and Customs during the period from 1 April 2015 to 31 December 2015.

    Mr David Gauke

    The Diverted Profits Tax is designed to counter contrived tax arrangements used by some multinationals to shift their profits to other countries. It is deliberately set at a higher rate than corporation tax, so it acts as a deterrent and encourages more companies to pay corporation tax.

    No notices under section 93 Finance Act 2015 were issued during the period 1 April 2015 to 31 December 2015 but HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) received notifications from eleven companies under section 92 in relation to section 86 Finance Act 2015.

    For companies with accounting periods ending on or before 31 March 2016 the notification period is six months from the end of that period. HMRC is not able to disclose details of notifications relating to sections 80 and 81 of the Finance Act 2015 due to its duty to protect taxpayer confidentiality.

  • Andrew Rosindell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Andrew Rosindell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Rosindell on 2016-02-23.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what the Government’s policy is on funding for the Equitable Life Payment Scheme that has not been disbursed.

    Harriett Baldwin

    Payments under the scheme will continue to be made annually to With-Profits Annuitants for the duration of their annuities.

  • Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Caroline Lucas – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-03-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to the Answer of 29 February 2016 to Question 27368, on what basis the Child Support Agency allows non-resident parents to self-categorise as self-employed for child maintenance purposes; whether the new Child Maintenance Service plans to adopt the HM Revenue and Customs definition of self-employed when considering the employment status of non-resident parents under the 2012 child maintenance scheme or to allow non-resident parents to self-categorise their own employment status; and if he will make a statement.

    Priti Patel

    For the older schemes of maintenance, income information is initially gathered from the parents themselves. As part of this initial conversation, they are asked whether they classify themselves as self-employed or not.

    Calculation of their net income figure will always be based on the relevant taxation legislation for the nature of the employment, subject to any additional conditions imposed by Child Support legislation.

    For the 2012 scheme, unlike the older schemes, the income used to calculate maintenance is a gross taxable earnings figure. Our primary mechanism for getting this information is direct from HM Revenue & Customs. As a gross figure is used, it does not matter whether they are employed or self-employed.

  • Stephen Gethins – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Stephen Gethins – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Gethins on 2016-04-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what recent discussions he has had with the government of the Russian Federation on tensions in Nagorno-Karabakh.

    Mr David Lidington

    On 11 April, the National Security Adviser (NSA) discussed the recent upsurge in fighting in Nagorno-Karabakh with senior Russian officials in Moscow. The NSA expressed concern about the recent violence and support for the OSCE Minsk Group’s efforts to reach a negotiated peace settlement. The British Embassy in Moscow will follow up these discussions with Russian counterparts at working level.