Show Search Form

Search Results

registered interest	true false
date	exactly: or between: and
answering body
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
hansard heading
house id
legislature	pref label
question text
tabling member printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member printed attachment file name file name title title question first answered question first ministerially corrected answering member label previous answer version answering member printed attachment file name file name title title answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

348825

	registered interest
	date	08/06/2015
	answering body	Cabinet Office
	answering dept id	53
	answering dept short name	Cabinet Office
	answering dept sort name	Cabinet Office
	hansard heading	Iraq Committee of Inquiry
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they expect the report of the Chilcot Inquiry to be published before the summer recess; and, if not, why not.
	tabling member printed	Lord Stoddart of Swindon
	uin	HL304
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 23/06/2015 answer text <p>Sir John Chilcot and the Prime Minister exchanged letters on 15 and 17 <ins class="ministerial">January</ins> <del class="ministerial">June</del>. In his letters, Sir John said that once the essential Maxwellisation process was complete, it was his intention to provide the Prime Minister with a timetable for the completion of the Inquiry’s report.</p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Bridges of Headley attachment 1 file name 2015-01-20_Chilcot_to_Cameron.pdf title Sir John Chilcot to David Cameron Letter 2 file name 2015-01-20_Cameron_to_Chilcot.pdf title David Cameron to Sir John Chilcot Letter question first answered 23/06/2015 11:16:54 question first ministerially corrected 24/06/2015 11:40:17 answering member 4535 label Biography information for Lord Bridges of Headley previous answer version 7535 answering member printed Lord Bridges of Headley attachment 1 file name 2015-01-20_Chilcot_to_Cameron.pdf title Sir John Chilcot to David Cameron Letter 2 file name 2015-01-20_Cameron_to_Chilcot.pdf title David Cameron to Sir John Chilcot Letter answering member 4535 label Biography information for Lord Bridges of Headley
	tabling member	950 label Biography information for Lord Stoddart of Swindon

155706

	registered interest
	date	17/11/2014
	answering body	Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
	answering dept id	26
	answering dept short name	Business, Innovation and Skills
	answering dept sort name	Business, Innovation and Skills
	hansard heading	Overseas Trade: Cuba
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what has been the level of trade between Cuba and the United Kingdom in each of the last 10 years.
	tabling member printed	Lord Hutton of Furness
	uin	HL2890
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 24/11/2014 answer text <p><del class="ministerial">Sources are:</del></p><p> </p><p><del class="ministerial">Data on trade in goods with Cuba is available from HMRC and trade in services from the ONS. Services data on the most recent basis are not available before 2007. The goods and services data are on a different basis as figures on the same basis are not available. This information has not been adjusted for inflation.</del></p><p><ins class="ministerial">The data we have is as below. Please see notes for further explanation.</ins></p><p>Value of UK Trade (exports plus imports) with Cuba: current prices (£ million)</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p>Year</p></td><td><p>Goods</p></td><td><p>Services</p></td><td><p>Goods + Services</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2004</p></td><td><p>24</p></td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td><p>2005</p></td><td><p>25</p></td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td><p>2006</p></td><td><p>29</p></td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td><p>2007</p></td><td><p>23</p></td><td><p>149</p></td><td><p>172</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2008</p></td><td><p>25</p></td><td><p>155</p></td><td><p>180</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2009</p></td><td><p>19</p></td><td><p>171</p></td><td><p>190</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010</p></td><td><p>21</p></td><td><p>196</p></td><td><p>217</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011</p></td><td><p>69</p></td><td><p>145</p></td><td><p>214</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012</p></td><td><p>62</p></td><td><p>188</p></td><td><p>250</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013</p></td><td><p>138</p></td><td><p>213</p></td><td><p>351</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Sources are:</p><p>Goods: HMRC, Overseas Trade Statistics (OTS) database, figures are on a border basis, not seasonally adjusted.</p><p> </p><p>Services: ONS, special request from the ONS, figures are on a balance of payments (BPM6) basis, seasonally adjusted.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Data on trade in goods with Cuba is available from HMRC and trade in services from the ONS. Services data on the most recent basis (new balance of payments method) are not available before 2007. The goods and services data are on a different basis as figures on the same basis are not available. This information has not been adjusted for inflation.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Livingston of Parkhead question first answered 24/11/2014 14:31:48 question first ministerially corrected 24/11/2014 16:42:00 answering member 4278 label Biography information for Lord Livingston of Parkhead previous answer version 29429 answering member printed Lord Livingston of Parkhead answering member 4278 label Biography information for Lord Livingston of Parkhead
	tabling member	494 label Biography information for Lord Hutton of Furness

178691

	registered interest
	date	09/02/2015
	answering body	Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
	answering dept id	26
	answering dept short name	Business, Innovation and Skills
	answering dept sort name	Business, Innovation and Skills
	hansard heading	European Union
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the total cost of the Review of the Balance of Competences between the United Kingdom and the European Union to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and its associated agencies, broken down by (1) staff time, (2) printing costs, (3) running of engagement events, (4) witness expenses, (5) publicity of the reports, and (6) any and all other associated costs.
	tabling member printed	Baroness Quin
	uin	HL4840
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/02/2015 answer text <p>As you will be aware, the Balance of Competences Review concluded in December. It was the most comprehensive analysis of the UK’s relationship with the EU ever undertaken. The review involved a large number of Departments across Whitehall to produce 32 reports. The Review was based on the evidence and views received through widespread consultation with interested parties from across society. Across the whole review, departments received close to 2,300 evidence submissions. Departments held over 250 events, attended by around 2,100 stakeholders.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>It was important that what is an unprecedented examination of EU membership was done with appropriate time and care. But the government is also very conscious of the need to ensure value for money in everything it does.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>(1) Staff time</p><p> </p><p><strong>Between 2012-2013, the Balance of Competences Review Team in the Department was staffed by the equivalent of one Grade 7 (salary range £47, 545 - £55,882), and one intern (salary range £23,869 – £27, 281) dedicating 100% of their time to the review to project manage 7 BIS led reports and 1 joint report. Between 2013 – 2014 this was reduced to one Grade 7. Between 2012 – 2014 one Deputy Director (salary range £62,000 - £117,800) dedicated 20% of their time as the senior reporting officer for the review. All other work on the review was allocated, according to need, to existing staff within the Department. Therefore, providing a full breakdown of staff time and costs would exceed the disproportionate cost threshold.</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>(2) Printing costs</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>Printing and publication for the 8 Departmental reports, was coordinated centrally but paid for by the Department, with the exception of the Single Market Report which was printed in-house. Printing and publication costs for all 8 reports totalled £32,821.94. The costs for all 32 reports was £133, 053 </strong><ins class="ministerial"> This figure was a partial figure, covering the printing of some, but not all, reports across the whole review.</ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>(3) Running of Engagement events</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>Each policy team in the Department held a wide range of engagement events over the 2 years; the department did not incur any costs for the running of these events. The facilities for hosting these events were either provided by other Government Departments or by business partners or were held on department premises at no extra cost to the department. </strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>(4) Witness </strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>From centrally held figures, we understand that across the whole of the Balance of Competences Review witness expenses amounted to approximately £2,255.00.</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>(5) Publicity</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>The Department did not incur any publicity costs as we published the reports and the call for evidence via email, social media and the Government website.</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>(6) All other associated costs</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>Between 2012 – 2014 the Department commissioned research and analysis to form part of the literature review to provide the reports with legal analysis to ensure the reports were neither too analytical or too speculative and political, but instead adhere to the agreed treaties. The cost for all 8 reports was £108, 738.28. </strong></p><p> </p><p><strong><br /> Department officials incurred some additional associated costs due to travel to meetings and stakeholder events in the UK. Some officials also incurred costs related to events in Brussels. We estimate that the additional travel costs incurred amounted to less than £300.</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member printed Baroness Neville-Rolfe question first answered 19/02/2015 16:48:27 question first ministerially corrected 10/03/2015 16:18:58 answering member 4284 label Biography information for Baroness Neville-Rolfe previous answer version 45530 answering member printed Baroness Neville-Rolfe answering member 4284 label Biography information for Baroness Neville-Rolfe
	tabling member	518 label Biography information for Baroness Quin

178697

	registered interest
	date	09/02/2015
	answering body	Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
	answering dept id	26
	answering dept short name	Business, Innovation and Skills
	answering dept sort name	Business, Innovation and Skills
	hansard heading	European Union
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the total cost of the Review of the Balance of Competences between the United Kingdom and the European Union to UK Export Finance and its associated agencies, broken down by (1) staff time, (2) printing costs, (3) running of engagement events, (4) witness expenses, (5) publicity of the reports, and (6) any and all other associated costs.
	tabling member printed	Lord Tugendhat
	uin	HL4846
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/02/2015 answer text <p><del class="ministerial">I refer my Noble Lord to the answer as given for <strong>HL4840</strong></del></p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial">I refer the noble Lord to HL4847 for the combined answer.</ins></p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member printed Baroness Neville-Rolfe question first answered 19/02/2015 16:52:19 question first ministerially corrected 23/02/2015 15:09:02 answering member 4284 label Biography information for Baroness Neville-Rolfe previous answer version 45531 answering member printed Baroness Neville-Rolfe answering member 4284 label Biography information for Baroness Neville-Rolfe
	tabling member	1705 label Biography information for Lord Tugendhat

178698

	registered interest
	date	09/02/2015
	answering body	Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
	answering dept id	26
	answering dept short name	Business, Innovation and Skills
	answering dept sort name	Business, Innovation and Skills
	hansard heading	European Union
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the total cost of the Review of the Balance of Competences between the United Kingdom and the European Union to UK Trade and Investment and its associated agencies, broken down by (1) staff time, (2) printing costs, (3) running of engagement events, (4) witness expenses, (5) publicity of the reports, and (6) any and all other associated costs.
	tabling member printed	Lord Tugendhat
	uin	HL4847
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/02/2015 answer text <p><del class="ministerial">I refer my Noble Lord to the answer as given for <strong>HL4840</strong></del></p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial">As you will be aware, the Balance of Competences Review concluded in December. It was the most comprehensive analysis of the UK’s relationship with the EU ever undertaken. The review involved a large number of Departments across Whitehall to produce 32 reports. The Review was based on the evidence and views received through widespread consultation with interested parties from across society. Across the whole review, departments received close to 2,300 evidence submissions. Departments held over 250 events, attended by around 2,100 stakeholders.</ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial">It was important that what is an unprecedented examination of EU membership was done with appropriate time and care. But the government is also very conscious of the need to ensure value for money in everything it does.</ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial">(1) Staff time</ins></p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>Between 2012-2013, the Balance of Competences Review Team in the Department was staffed by the equivalent of one Grade 7 (salary range £47, 545 - £55,882), and one intern (salary range £23,869 – £27, 281) dedicating 100% of their time to the review to project manage 7 BIS led reports and 1 joint report. Between 2013 – 2014 this was reduced to one Grade 7. Between 2012 – 2014 one Deputy Director (salary range £62,000 - £117,800) dedicated 20% of their time as the senior reporting officer for the review. All other work on the review was allocated, according to need, to existing staff within the Department. Therefore, providing a full breakdown of staff time and costs would exceed the disproportionate cost threshold.</strong></ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>(2) Printing costs</strong></ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>Printing and publication for the 8 Departmental reports, was coordinated centrally but paid for by the Department, with the exception of the Single Market Report which was printed in-house. Printing and publication costs for all 8 reports totalled £32,821.94. The costs for all 32 reports was £133, 053. This figure was a partial figure, covering the printing of some, but not all, reports across the whole review. </strong></ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>(3) Running of Engagement events</strong></ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>Each policy team in the Department held a wide range of engagement events over the 2 years; the department did not incur any costs for the running of these events. The facilities for hosting these events were either provided by other Government Departments or by business partners or were held on department premises at no extra cost to the department. </strong></ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>(4) Witness </strong></ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>From centrally held figures, we understand that across the whole of the Balance of Competences Review witness expenses amounted to approximately £2,255.00.</strong></ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>(5) Publicity</strong></ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>The Department did not incur any publicity costs as we published the reports and the call for evidence via email, social media and the Government website.</strong></ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>(6) All other associated costs</strong></ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>Between 2012 – 2014 the Department commissioned research and analysis to form part of the literature review to provide the reports with legal analysis to ensure the reports were neither too analytical or too speculative and political, but instead adhere to the agreed treaties. The cost for all 8 reports was £108, 738.28. </strong></ins></p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong><br /> Department officials incurred some additional associated costs due to travel to meetings and stakeholder events in the UK. Some officials also incurred costs related to events in Brussels. We estimate that the additional travel costs incurred amounted to less than £300.</strong></ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member printed Baroness Neville-Rolfe question first answered 19/02/2015 16:52:27 question first ministerially corrected 23/02/2015 15:08:40 answering member 4284 label Biography information for Baroness Neville-Rolfe previous answer version 45532 answering member printed Baroness Neville-Rolfe answering member 4284 label Biography information for Baroness Neville-Rolfe
	tabling member	1705 label Biography information for Lord Tugendhat

79478

	registered interest
	date	22/07/2014
	answering body	Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
	answering dept id	26
	answering dept short name	Business, Innovation and Skills
	answering dept sort name	Business, Innovation and Skills
	hansard heading	Students: Loans
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have plans to initiate a review of the sustainability of the student loans system.
	tabling member printed	Baroness Deech
	uin	HL1377
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 11/08/2014 answer text <p> </p><p>There are no current plans to initiate a formal review of the student loans system in England.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The costs of the loan system are based on projections of graduate repayments over the next 35 years. These projections were revised in 2013-14 following changes to the student loan repayments model but will continue to fluctuate due to numerous macroeconomic variables, and present no immediate pressure on the system. Funding for new student loans is secure for the remainder of the Spending Review period.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Popat question first answered 11/08/2014 11:43:29 question first ministerially corrected 08/09/2014 08:16:28 answering member 4173 label Biography information for Lord Popat previous answer version 16050 answering member printed Lord Wallace of Saltaire answering member 1816
	tabling member	3756 label Biography information for Baroness Deech

174084

	registered interest
	date	15/01/2015
	answering body	Department for Communities and Local Government
	answering dept id	7
	answering dept short name	Communities and Local Government
	answering dept sort name	Communities and Local Government
	hansard heading	Domestic Waste: Waste Disposal
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government which local authorities in England have taken part in the Weekly Collection Support Scheme; how many authorities took part in the expression of interest process; which have subsequently received financial support, and how much; and of those, which have reinstated weekly collections of general (“grey” or “residual”) waste, which have used the support to collect food waste separately, and which have used it in other ways.
	tabling member printed	Lord Greaves
	uin	HL4187
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 12/02/2015 answer text <p>In March 2012, my Department received initial expressions of interest from 151 lead local authorities, which resulted in bids from 113 local authorities. Some local authorities submitted multiple expressions of interest which were consolidated before final bid stage. The final bids were then assessed in line with the published criteria, and recipients then awarded funding.</p><p>A detailed table listing the schemes that are being supported is attached and on my Department’s website.</p><p> </p><p>It may be helpful to the noble Lord to outline what this Government has delivered since 2010:</p><p> </p><ul><li>Safeguarded weekly collections for 6 million households through the Weekly Collection Support Scheme as well as championing innovation and best practice; the answer of 14 May 2014, <em>Official Report</em>, House of Commons 646W, outlined how 14 million households in England have some form of weekly collection of smelly rubbish.</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Issued the first ever Whitehall guidance on weekly bin collections, demolishing the myths that fortnightly bin collections are needed to save money or increase recycling. This best practice was directly informed by the Weekly Collections Support Scheme;</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Supported over 40 innovative reward schemes to back recycling through the Weekly Collection Support Scheme (as pledged in the Coalition Agreement); the winning bids for a further Recycling Rewards Scheme for 2015-16 will be announced shortly;</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Stopped the Audit Commission inspections which marked down councils who do not adopt fortnightly rubbish collections, and rejected the Audit Commission guidance which advocated fortnightly collections (“Waste Management: The Strategic Challenge and Waste Management Quick Guide”);</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Abolished the Local Area Agreements and National Indicator 191 imposed by Whitehall which created perverse incentives to downgrade waste collection services;</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Scrapped the Whitehall requirement for municipal Annual Efficiency Statements, which allowed a reduction in the frequency of a household rubbish collection service to qualify as a “valid efficiency” and allowed revenue from bin fines to classed as a “cashable efficiency gain”;</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Scrapped the imposition of eco-towns which would have had fortnightly bin collections and/or bin taxes as part of the “eco-standards”;</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Through the Localism Act, revoked the 2008 legislation that allowed for the imposition of new bin taxes;</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Issued guidance to stop the imposition of illegal ‘backdoor bin charging’ on households bins;</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Stopped funding the ‘Waste Improvement Network’ which told councils to adopt fortnightly collections as best practice;</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Challenged the incorrect interpretation by some bodies that European Union directives require fortnightly collections, and resisted the imposition of bin taxes by the European Union;</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Removing powers of entry and snooping powers from bin inspectors and scrapped guidance telling councils to rifle through families’ bins;</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Changed building regulations and planning guidance to tackle ‘bin blight’, and worked with the NHBC Foundation to produce new best practice guidance for house builders;</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Changing the law through the Deregulation Bill to scrap unfair bin fines.</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Without our active support, Ministers are clear that weekly collections would have disappeared across England. This Government’s approach can be contrasted with the devolved Labour-led Administration in Wales, where fortnightly bin collections are official policy, and pilots of monthly bin collections are being actively encouraged.</p> answering member printed Lord Ahmed question first answered 12/02/2015 14:39:13 question first ministerially corrected 16/02/2015 17:33:13 answering member 3470 label Biography information for Lord Ahmed attachment 1 file name PQ HL4187 List of successful bidders to the Weekly Collection Support Scheme.xls title List of Supported Schemes previous answer version 45064 answering member printed Lord Ahmed answering member 3470 label Biography information for Lord Ahmed attachment 1 file name 150203 PQ677818 Lord Greaves - Attachment.pdf title List of Supported Schemes
	tabling member	2569 label Biography information for Lord Greaves

64615

	registered interest
	date	30/06/2014
	answering body	Department for Education
	answering dept id	60
	answering dept short name	Education
	answering dept sort name	Education
	hansard heading	Schools: Standards
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the remarks by Elizabeth Truss MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Education and Childcare, that "our 15 year-olds are up to three years behind their peers in the top-performing countries in reading and mathematics", what action they propose to address this.
	tabling member printed	Lord Quirk
	uin	HL698
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/07/2014 answer text <p>The Department for Education believes that improving the quality of teaching in literacy and numeracy is crucial to building the foundation for future study and work. The Government has revised the national curriculum and set more rigorous and challenging content in English and mathematics to match the highest performing countries around the world. The new programmes of study for English and maths will challenge pupils to realise their potential in an increasingly competitive global market.</p><p> </p><p>The new maths GCSE will have more content, be more challenging and – alongside English - will be double weighted in school performance tables. The Department has recently allocated £11 million to fund <del class="ministerial">over</del> 32 new maths hubs to support a more challenging maths GCSE to improve the quality of maths education. This initiative, which includes a teacher exchange programme with Shanghai, will enable every school and college in England, from early years to the post-16 sector, to access locally-tailored support in all areas of maths teaching and learning.</p><p> </p><p>The new national curriculum for English places a greater emphasis on reading and requires pupils to study a range of books, poems and plays.</p><p>The national curriculum for English will give teachers greater flexibility and freedom which will help to raise standards and expectations for all pupils. It has been significantly slimmed down and will free up teachers to use their professional judgement to design curricula that meet the needs of their pupils.</p><p> </p><p>The new English language GCSE will place greater demands on pupils and has more emphasis on those skills demanded by employers. The new English literature GCSE will build on this foundation, and encourage students to read, write and think critically.</p> answering member printed Lord Nash question first answered 08/07/2014 15:42:37 question first ministerially corrected 09/07/2014 15:07:12 answering member 4270 label Biography information for Lord Nash previous answer version 8669 answering member printed Lord Nash answering member 4270 label Biography information for Lord Nash
	tabling member	3254 label Biography information for Lord Quirk

89915

	registered interest
	date	01/09/2014
	answering body	Department for Energy and Climate Change
	answering dept id	63
	answering dept short name	Energy and Climate Change
	answering dept sort name	Energy and Climate Change
	hansard heading	Energy: Prices
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what consideration they have given to encouraging energy companies to use income-differentiated tariffs as a means of addressing fuel poverty.
	tabling member printed	The Lord Bishop of St Albans
	uin	HL1757
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/09/2014 answer text <p>Energy suppliers provide direct bill support for low income households through the Government’s Warm Home Discount scheme. <del class="ministerial">As the original impact assessment for the scheme made clear, the scheme grew in part out of a concern about affordability of energy bills and accessibility of appropriate tariffs for those on low incomes. The scheme is now hugely successful.</del> <del class="ministerial">This year the</del> <ins class="ministerial">The </ins>Warm Home<ins class="ministerial">s</ins> Discount will<ins class="ministerial"> increase to</ins> give eligible low-income bill payers £140 money off their energy bills, helping over 2 million people including 1.4 million of Britain’s most vulnerable pensioners.</p><p>There has been consideration of the role of differentiated tariffs as part of the Hills Review of Fuel Poverty, and in the development of Fuel Poverty: Framework for future action and Cutting the cost of keeping warm, the consultation to prepare for a new fuel poverty strategy.</p><p>We continue to monitor the impacts of the Ofgem’s Retail Market Review and wider Government action to ensure consumers are treated fairly in the energy market and are better able to the choose a deal that suits them. We expect to keep the case for further action under review as part of this.</p> answering member printed Baroness Verma question first answered 08/09/2014 08:09:35 question first ministerially corrected 15/09/2014 12:14:23 answering member 3790 label Biography information for Baroness Verma previous answer version 18278 answering member printed Baroness Verma answering member 3790 label Biography information for Baroness Verma
	tabling member	4308 label Biography information for The Lord Bishop of St Albans

178680

	registered interest
	date	09/02/2015
	answering body	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept id	13
	answering dept short name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept sort name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	hansard heading	European Union
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the total cost of the Review of the Balance of Competences between the United Kingdom and the European Union to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and its associated agencies, broken down by (1) staff time, (2) printing costs, (3) running of engagement events, (4) witness expenses, (5) publicity of the reports, and (6) any and all other associated costs.
	tabling member printed	Baroness Scott of Needham Market
	uin	HL4830
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 23/02/2015 answer text <p>Defra was responsible for the following reports as part of the Balance of Competences Review:</p><ul><li>Animal Health and Welfare and Food Safety (which was produced jointly with the Food Standards Agency);</li><li>Environment and Climate Change (which was produced jointly with DECC);</li><li>Agriculture; and</li><li>Fisheries.</li></ul><p> </p><p>1) Staff costs</p><p>The cost of the Defra team which led on producing the four reports between 2012 and 2014 was approximately £500,000. The team drew on expert advice from staff across the Department. Providing a full breakdown of all staff time and costs would exceed the disproportionate cost threshold.</p><p> </p><p>2) Printing costs</p><p>Defra paid approximately £13<del class="ministerial">0</del>,000 to print and publish the four reports.</p><p> </p><p>3) Running engagement events</p><p>Engagement events were held in Brussels, various locations in all parts of the UK, and at Defra’s London and York offices. The total cost of events, including refreshments and Defra staff travel, was approximately £4,000. To provide a full breakdown of staff time and costs would exceed the disproportionate cost threshold.</p><p> </p><p>4) Witness expenses</p><p>Defra did not incur any expenses for witnesses.</p><p>5) Publicity</p><p>Defra did not incur expenses for publicity of the reports.</p><p> </p><p>6) All other associated costs</p><p>There were no other associated costs.</p> answering member printed Lord De Mauley question first answered 23/02/2015 13:02:07 question first ministerially corrected 11/03/2015 13:09:46 answering member 2202 label Biography information for Lord De Mauley previous answer version 45712 answering member printed Lord De Mauley answering member 2202 label Biography information for Lord De Mauley
	tabling member	2542 label Biography information for Baroness Scott of Needham Market