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 constituency
tabling member printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member constituency answering member printed grouped question UIN question first answered question first ministerially corrected answering member label previous answer version answering member constituency answering member printed answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

100049

registered interest
date	21/10/2014
answering body	Department for Transport
answering dept id	27
answering dept short name	Transport
answering dept sort name	Transport
hansard heading	East Coast Main Line
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the long-term access rights for Grand Central on the East Coast Main Line require them to pay the same access charge as Intercity East Coast; and, if not, why not.
tabling member printed	Lord Bradshaw
uin	HL2255
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/10/2014 answer text <p>Grand Central will not pay the same access charges as Intercity East Coast as Open Access Operators do not pay Fixed Track Access Charges (FTAC). However, both Franchised and Open Access Operators pay Variable Track Access Charges (VTAC) since these are set to reflect the direct ‘wear and tear’ costs that train services impose on the network when they are run.</p><p> </p><p>For Control Period 5 (CP5) the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) has held <ins class="ministerial">the Capacity Charge element of VTAC at CP4 levels for services currently run by existing passenger Open Access Operators, however they will pay CP5 rates for any additional or new services whilst any new entrant Open Access Operator will pay CP4 rates on services below a set threshold and CP5 rates on services above that threshold. </ins><del class="ministerial">Open Access (both passenger and freight) VTAC at CP4 levels, whilst</del> Franchised Operators pay the new, higher CP5 rates<del class="ministerial">.</del> <ins class="ministerial">for both existing and new services.　 However, this is the only element of VTAC that is calculated on a different basis.</ins></p><p> </p> answering member printed Baroness Kramer question first answered 28/10/2014 15:24:42 question first ministerially corrected 12/01/2015 16:11:35 answering member 1557 label Biography information for Baroness Kramer previous answer version 24717 answering member printed Baroness Kramer answering member 1557 label Biography information for Baroness Kramer
tabling member	2483 label Biography information for Lord Bradshaw

100071

registered interest
date	21/10/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Asylum: Finance
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have assessed the effectiveness of the combination of the Azure payment card and support under section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 in enabling refused asylum seekers to meet their basic needs.
tabling member printed	Lord Roberts of Llandudno
uin	HL2277
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/10/2014 answer text <p>The Azure card is issued to destitute failed asylum seekers accommodated under section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 because they are temporarily unable to leave the United Kingdom. The card can be used at most of the main supermarket chains to purchase food and other essential items. The performance of the card is kept under regular review but the Government is satisfied that it is an effective way of ensuring that recipients are able to meet their essential living needs and are not left destitute.</p><p> </p><p>The Government therefore has no plans to abolish the card or change legislation to allow people supported under section 4 to receive cash instead.</p><p> </p><p>The total administrative costs of the card scheme since it was introduced in 2009 are approximately £1,515,000. Estimated administrative costs for the current financial year are £200,000.</p><p> </p><p>The Government published its response to the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee report about asylum procedures in December 2013 (cm 8769). A response to the Committee’s views on section 4 support was set out on page 18-19.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Bates grouped question UIN HL2278 HL2279 HL2280 HL2281 question first answered 28/10/2014 15:17:54 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
tabling member	3691 label Biography information for Lord Roberts of Llandudno

100072

registered interest
date	21/10/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Asylum: Finance
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have to abolish the Azure payment card and amend legislation to enable the provision of cash support for all refused asylum seekers until they are either given status in the United Kingdom or return to their country of origin.
tabling member printed	Lord Roberts of Llandudno
uin	HL2278
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/10/2014 answer text <p>The Azure card is issued to destitute failed asylum seekers accommodated under section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 because they are temporarily unable to leave the United Kingdom. The card can be used at most of the main supermarket chains to purchase food and other essential items. The performance of the card is kept under regular review but the Government is satisfied that it is an effective way of ensuring that recipients are able to meet their essential living needs and are not left destitute.</p><p> </p><p>The Government therefore has no plans to abolish the card or change legislation to allow people supported under section 4 to receive cash instead.</p><p> </p><p>The total administrative costs of the card scheme since it was introduced in 2009 are approximately £1,515,000. Estimated administrative costs for the current financial year are £200,000.</p><p> </p><p>The Government published its response to the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee report about asylum procedures in December 2013 (cm 8769). A response to the Committee’s views on section 4 support was set out on page 18-19.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Bates grouped question UIN HL2277 HL2279 HL2280 HL2281 question first answered 28/10/2014 15:17:55 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
tabling member	3691 label Biography information for Lord Roberts of Llandudno

100073

registered interest
date	21/10/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Asylum: Finance
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government how much they have spent on administering the Azure card system since its inception.
tabling member printed	Lord Roberts of Llandudno
uin	HL2279
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/10/2014 answer text <p>The Azure card is issued to destitute failed asylum seekers accommodated under section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 because they are temporarily unable to leave the United Kingdom. The card can be used at most of the main supermarket chains to purchase food and other essential items. The performance of the card is kept under regular review but the Government is satisfied that it is an effective way of ensuring that recipients are able to meet their essential living needs and are not left destitute.</p><p> </p><p>The Government therefore has no plans to abolish the card or change legislation to allow people supported under section 4 to receive cash instead.</p><p> </p><p>The total administrative costs of the card scheme since it was introduced in 2009 are approximately £1,515,000. Estimated administrative costs for the current financial year are £200,000.</p><p> </p><p>The Government published its response to the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee report about asylum procedures in December 2013 (cm 8769). A response to the Committee’s views on section 4 support was set out on page 18-19.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Bates grouped question UIN HL2277 HL2278 HL2280 HL2281 question first answered 28/10/2014 15:17:55 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
tabling member	3691 label Biography information for Lord Roberts of Llandudno

100074

registered interest
date	21/10/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Asylum: Finance
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their forecast annual cost for administering the Azure card payment scheme in the coming year.
tabling member printed	Lord Roberts of Llandudno
uin	HL2280
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/10/2014 answer text <p>The Azure card is issued to destitute failed asylum seekers accommodated under section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 because they are temporarily unable to leave the United Kingdom. The card can be used at most of the main supermarket chains to purchase food and other essential items. The performance of the card is kept under regular review but the Government is satisfied that it is an effective way of ensuring that recipients are able to meet their essential living needs and are not left destitute.</p><p> </p><p>The Government therefore has no plans to abolish the card or change legislation to allow people supported under section 4 to receive cash instead.</p><p> </p><p>The total administrative costs of the card scheme since it was introduced in 2009 are approximately £1,515,000. Estimated administrative costs for the current financial year are £200,000.</p><p> </p><p>The Government published its response to the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee report about asylum procedures in December 2013 (cm 8769). A response to the Committee’s views on section 4 support was set out on page 18-19.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Bates grouped question UIN HL2277 HL2278 HL2279 HL2281 question first answered 28/10/2014 15:17:56 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
tabling member	3691 label Biography information for Lord Roberts of Llandudno

100075

registered interest
date	21/10/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Asylum: Finance
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their response to the conclusion of the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee that "section 4 is not the solution for people who have been refused but cannot be returned" as stated in their report <i>Asylum</i> (7th Report of session 2013–14, HC 71).
tabling member printed	Lord Roberts of Llandudno
uin	HL2281
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/10/2014 answer text <p>The Azure card is issued to destitute failed asylum seekers accommodated under section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 because they are temporarily unable to leave the United Kingdom. The card can be used at most of the main supermarket chains to purchase food and other essential items. The performance of the card is kept under regular review but the Government is satisfied that it is an effective way of ensuring that recipients are able to meet their essential living needs and are not left destitute.</p><p> </p><p>The Government therefore has no plans to abolish the card or change legislation to allow people supported under section 4 to receive cash instead.</p><p> </p><p>The total administrative costs of the card scheme since it was introduced in 2009 are approximately £1,515,000. Estimated administrative costs for the current financial year are £200,000.</p><p> </p><p>The Government published its response to the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee report about asylum procedures in December 2013 (cm 8769). A response to the Committee’s views on section 4 support was set out on page 18-19.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Bates grouped question UIN HL2277 HL2278 HL2279 HL2280 question first answered 28/10/2014 15:17:56 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
tabling member	3691 label Biography information for Lord Roberts of Llandudno

100076

registered interest
date	21/10/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Free Movement of People: Republic of Ireland
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what role the free movement of people between the United Kingdom and Ireland, however defined, plays in the Anglo-Irish agreement and in the documents which underpin it.
tabling member printed	Lord Mawhinney
uin	HL2282
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/10/2014 answer text <p>Free movement of people between the United Kingdom and Ireland within the Common Travel Area has existed since 1923 and therefore predates both the Anglo-Irish Agreement and the subsequent British-Irish Agreement. The free movement of people between the two jurisdictions is not provided for by either Agreement.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Bates question first answered 28/10/2014 15:18:32 answering member 1091 label Biography information for Lord Bates
tabling member	121 label Biography information for Lord Mawhinney

100080

registered interest
date	21/10/2014
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	Judicial Review
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many judicial reviews there were involving Government departments according to records held by the (a) Treasury Solicitor and (b) Administrative Court Office in each of the last four years; and how many such reviews were upheld in whole or in part in each such year.
tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
tabling member printed	Mr Andy Slaughter
uin	211271
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/10/2014 answer text <p>The Treasury Solicitor’s Department holds records relating only to those cases in which it has acted. The Treasury Solicitor represents most, but not all, government departments in litigation. For example, Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs normally conducts its own litigation. According to records held by the Treasury Solicitor, the number of judicial reviews involving government departments in which it has acted in each of the last four years is as follows:</p><p>2010 – 8,566</p><p>2011 – 9,603</p><p>2012 – 10,274</p><p>2013 – 16,449</p><p>Information relating to how many of those reviews were upheld in whole or in part in each year is not held centrally and could not be created without incurring disproportionate cost.</p><p><del class="ministerial">The Administrative Court Office does not collate the information requested centrally and determining the number of reviews and how many such reviews were upheld in whole or in part would incur a disproportionate cost.</del></p><p><ins class="ministerial">The information requested in respect of the Administrative Court Office is published online at <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/267408/additional-court-tables-2012.xls" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/267408/additional-court-tables-2012.xls</a> . The 2013 data is not currently available.</ins></p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland question first answered 28/10/2014 15:10:43 question first ministerially corrected 05/01/2015 17:35:17 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland previous answer version 24759 answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

100089

registered interest
date	21/10/2014
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	Venture Capital
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what assessment his Department has made of a potential equity gap in UK venture capital sector.
tabling member constituency	Stratford-on-Avon
tabling member printed	Nadhim Zahawi
uin	211212
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/10/2014 answer text <p>I have asked the British Business Bank to publish its analysis of equity finance available to UK small business before the end of the year, which will include analysis on UK venture capital. The Department also published an economics paper in January 2012 on SME access to finance, which summarized the evidence at that time about the equity gap in UK venture capital. The paper is available at the following web address: <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/32263/12-539-sme-access-external-finance.pdf" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/32263/12-539-sme-access-external-finance.pdf</a></p><p> </p> answering member constituency West Suffolk answering member printed Matthew Hancock question first answered 28/10/2014 11:00:19 answering member 4070 label Biography information for Matt Hancock
tabling member	4113 label Biography information for Nadhim Zahawi

100095

registered interest
date	21/10/2014
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	Directors
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what recent representations he has received about ensuring the presence of workforce representatives on Board of Directors of companies.
tabling member constituency	Coventry South
tabling member printed	Mr Jim Cunningham
uin	211365
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/10/2014 answer text <p>I have received no recent representations about ensuring the presence of workforce representatives on Board of Directors of companies. Giving employees both a meaningful stake and a ‘voice’ in the business can lead to growth and productivity benefits. While what is right will vary from business to business, I therefore encourage employee ownership. Guidance, model documents and links to further expert advice for businesses and employees considering a move to employee ownership, are at:</p><p> </p><p><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/employee-ownership-company-model-documentation" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/employee-ownership-company-model-documentation</a></p><p> </p><p><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/employee-ownership-guide-for-employees" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/employee-ownership-guide-for-employees</a></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Research also suggests a link between employee engagement and enhanced employee wellbeing. Initiatives such as Engage for Success (<a href="http://www.engageforsuccess.org/" target="_blank">http://www.engageforsuccess.org/</a>) support employers to bring these practices into their workplaces.</p> answering member constituency East Dunbartonshire answering member printed Jo Swinson question first answered 28/10/2014 15:22:41 answering member 1513 label Biography information for Jo Swinson
tabling member	308 label Biography information for Mr Jim Cunningham