Linked Data API

Show Search Form

Search Results

1690526
registered interest false more like this
date less than 2024-02-20more like thismore than 2024-02-20
answering body
Department for Work and Pensions remove filter
answering dept id 29 more like this
answering dept short name Work and Pensions more like this
answering dept sort name Work and Pensions more like this
hansard heading AEA Group: Pensions more like this
house id 1 more like this
legislature
25259
pref label House of Commons more like this
question text To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, with reference to Q329 of the oral evidence given by the Minister for Pensions to the Work and Pensions Select Committee on 10 January 2024, HC 144, what discussions his Department has had with the Cabinet Office on adequate means of redress for individuals impacted by the collapse of the AEA Technology pension scheme. more like this
tabling member constituency Glasgow North remove filter
tabling member printed
Patrick Grady more like this
uin 14895 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction false more like this
date of answer less than 2024-02-23more like thismore than 2024-02-23
answer text <p>Discussions between officials from my Department and Cabinet Office have not concluded. It would be unreasonable to pre-empt the outcome of those discussions. Wider considerations, such as potential routes of redress beyond the powers of the Pensions Ombudsman, fall outside the remit of my Department.</p> more like this
answering member constituency Blackpool North and Cleveleys more like this
answering member printed Paul Maynard more like this
question first answered
less than 2024-02-23T12:05:38.513Zmore like thismore than 2024-02-23T12:05:38.513Z
answering member
3926
label Biography information for Paul Maynard more like this
tabling member
4432
label Biography information for Patrick Grady more like this
1605447
registered interest false more like this
date less than 2023-03-20more like thismore than 2023-03-20
answering body
Department for Work and Pensions remove filter
answering dept id 29 more like this
answering dept short name Work and Pensions more like this
answering dept sort name Work and Pensions more like this
hansard heading Habitual Residence Test more like this
house id 1 more like this
legislature
25259
pref label House of Commons more like this
question text To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment his Department have made of the potential merits of changing the requirements of past presence tests for social security benefits to take account of peoples inability to travel during the covid-19 pandemic. more like this
tabling member constituency Glasgow North remove filter
tabling member printed
Patrick Grady more like this
uin 169328 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction false more like this
date of answer less than 2023-03-28more like thisremove minimum value filter
answer text <p>The past presence test (PPT) is a qualifying condition for the DWP disability and carer benefits and ensures claimants have a substantial and recent connection to the UK.</p><p> </p><p>There are a number of exemptions to the PPT which are clearly set out in secondary legislation. The PPT policy is kept under review and changes are made when appropriate, as shown by the amendments that have been made over the last few years in response to different situations; for example, introducing exemptions for refugees, those granted humanitarian status and for some people fleeing the conflicts in Afghanistan and Ukraine.</p><p> </p><p>Claimants who were abroad and could not return to Great Britain due to travel restrictions during the COVID-19 epidemic were advised that they could continue to be paid for as long as those restrictions remained in place. Once restrictions were lifted, allowing for travel back, then claimants were expected to do so if they wanted to continue to receive payment.</p>
answering member constituency Corby more like this
answering member printed Tom Pursglove more like this
grouped question UIN 169330 more like this
question first answered
less than 2023-03-28T11:48:07.33Zmore like thismore than 2023-03-28T11:48:07.33Z
answering member
4369
label Biography information for Tom Pursglove more like this
tabling member
4432
label Biography information for Patrick Grady more like this
1605449
registered interest false more like this
date less than 2023-03-20more like thismore than 2023-03-20
answering body
Department for Work and Pensions remove filter
answering dept id 29 more like this
answering dept short name Work and Pensions more like this
answering dept sort name Work and Pensions more like this
hansard heading Habitual Residence Test more like this
house id 1 more like this
legislature
25259
pref label House of Commons more like this
question text To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, if his Department will take steps to review social security benefit applications rejected on the basis of the past presence test, in the context of people's inability to travel during the covid-19 pandemic. more like this
tabling member constituency Glasgow North remove filter
tabling member printed
Patrick Grady more like this
uin 169330 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction false more like this
date of answer less than 2023-03-28more like thisremove minimum value filter
answer text <p>The past presence test (PPT) is a qualifying condition for the DWP disability and carer benefits and ensures claimants have a substantial and recent connection to the UK.</p><p> </p><p>There are a number of exemptions to the PPT which are clearly set out in secondary legislation. The PPT policy is kept under review and changes are made when appropriate, as shown by the amendments that have been made over the last few years in response to different situations; for example, introducing exemptions for refugees, those granted humanitarian status and for some people fleeing the conflicts in Afghanistan and Ukraine.</p><p> </p><p>Claimants who were abroad and could not return to Great Britain due to travel restrictions during the COVID-19 epidemic were advised that they could continue to be paid for as long as those restrictions remained in place. Once restrictions were lifted, allowing for travel back, then claimants were expected to do so if they wanted to continue to receive payment.</p>
answering member constituency Corby more like this
answering member printed Tom Pursglove more like this
grouped question UIN 169328 more like this
question first answered
less than 2023-03-28T11:48:07.363Zmore like thismore than 2023-03-28T11:48:07.363Z
answering member
4369
label Biography information for Tom Pursglove more like this
tabling member
4432
label Biography information for Patrick Grady more like this