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 answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

100009

registered interest
date	20/10/2014
answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
answering dept id	29
answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
hansard heading	Unemployed People: Travel
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what financial assistance is given to help young people on benefits with the travel costs associated with attending job interviews.
tabling member printed	Lord Roberts of Llandudno
uin	HL2224
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 23/10/2014 answer text <p /> <p>All Jobcentre Plus District Managers have access to the Flexible Support Fund, that they can use to supplement mainstream services and to tailor support to the needs of individuals and the local area. A proportion of this fund will be spent by their Work Services Teams on discretionary awards to individual claimants, which could include helping with travel costs to attend job interviews.</p> answering member printed Lord Freud question first answered 23/10/2014 15:06:09 answering member 3893 label Biography information for Lord Freud
tabling member	3691 label Biography information for Lord Roberts of Llandudno

1000260

registered interest
date	02/11/2018
answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
answering dept id	29
answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
hansard heading	Universal Credit
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, for what reason the taper that is applied to wages is not applied to pensions in relation to universal credit.
tabling member constituency	Barnsley Central
tabling member printed	Dan Jarvis
uin	187333
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 12/11/2018 answer text <p>The taper is the rate at which Universal Credit is reduced to take account of earnings. It is specifically for in work claimants and linked to earnings to incentivise work, and those in work to earn more. Universal Credit has a single taper of 63 per cent so payments reduce in a transparent and predictable way as earnings increase. Universal Credit is a means tested benefit, and income other than earnings, such as pensions, is taken fully into account in the assessment of Universal Credit. This is consistent with how legacy means tested benefits such as Employment and Support Allowance, Jobseeker’s Allowance and Income Support treat pension income. Therefore it would not be consistent to extend the earnings taper to pensions income and doing so would also undermine the incentives to work for people of working age.</p> answering member constituency Reading West answering member printed Alok Sharma question first answered 12/11/2018 18:05:06 answering member 4014 label Biography information for Lord Sharma
tabling member	4243 label Biography information for Dan Jarvis

1000268

registered interest
date	02/11/2018
answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
answering dept id	29
answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
hansard heading	State Retirement Pensions: Females
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to the Answer of 1 November 2018 to Question 185131 on Independent Case Examiner, if she will publish that same information for complaints by women on the equalisation of the state pension age.
tabling member constituency	Rutherglen and Hamilton West
tabling member printed	Ged Killen
uin	187381
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 12/11/2018 answer text <p>Individual departments have set up complaints procedures. That approach has not changed under Labour 1997-2010 or successive governments. The DWP has a two tier complaints process which considers formal complaints about our service<strong>. </strong>Once a complainant has exhausted the DWP complaint process they are signposted to the Independent Case Examiner’s Office if they are dissatisfied with the final response to their complaint.</p><p>The Independent Case Examiner is independent, and discusses complaints. The Independent Case Examiner is appointed under contract to adjudicate on escalated complaints about the DWP, and its contracted service providers, in cases where the complainant has exhausted the relevant internal complaints process and remains dissatisfied. If a complainant is dissatisfied with the outcome of an I Independent Case Examiner investigation (or the service provided by the Independent Case Examiner) they can ask their Member of Parliament to escalate their complaint to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman.</p><p>The table below provides details of the number of complaints concerning the equalisation of women’s state pension age, that have been (a) received; (b) accepted for investigation and (c) resolved by the Independent Case Examiner in each month since January 2017 (we have interpreted (c) as a request for the number of concluded complaint examinations).</p><p>At the end of October 2018, there were 865 such cases awaiting a decision on whether the complaint could be accepted for investigation, which explains the drop in the number of cases accepted for investigation since April 2018.</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p>Month</p></td><td><p>Complaints received</p></td><td><p>Complaints accepted for investigation</p></td><td><p>Concluded complaint examinations</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>January 2017</p></td><td><p>2</p></td><td><p>1</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>February 2017</p></td><td><p>26</p></td><td><p>5</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>March 2017</p></td><td><p>211</p></td><td><p>187</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>April 2017</p></td><td><p>172</p></td><td><p>157</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>May 2017</p></td><td><p>171</p></td><td><p>148</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>June 2017</p></td><td><p>144</p></td><td><p>124</p></td><td><p>1</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>July 2017</p></td><td><p>222</p></td><td><p>185</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>August 2017</p></td><td><p>290</p></td><td><p>243</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>September 2017</p></td><td><p>297</p></td><td><p>232</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>October 2017</p></td><td><p>418</p></td><td><p>338</p></td><td><p>3</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>November 2017</p></td><td><p>320</p></td><td><p>265</p></td><td><p>6</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>December 2017</p></td><td><p>222</p></td><td><p>177</p></td><td><p>4</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>January 2018</p></td><td><p>314</p></td><td><p>254</p></td><td><p>11</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>February 2018</p></td><td><p>240</p></td><td><p>210</p></td><td><p>28</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>March 2018</p></td><td><p>171</p></td><td><p>132</p></td><td><p>16</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>April 2018</p></td><td><p>196</p></td><td><p>2</p></td><td><p>11</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>May 2018</p></td><td><p>159</p></td><td><p>2</p></td><td><p>15</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>June 2018</p></td><td><p>147</p></td><td><p>2</p></td><td><p>30</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>July 2018</p></td><td><p>131</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>13</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>August 2018</p></td><td><p>108</p></td><td><p>5</p></td><td><p>14</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>September 2018</p></td><td><p>101</p></td><td><p>1</p></td><td><p>15</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>October 2018</p></td><td><p>119</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>14</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p> answering member constituency Hexham answering member printed Guy Opperman question first answered 12/11/2018 14:57:29 answering member 4142 label Biography information for Guy Opperman
tabling member	4672 label Biography information for Ged Killen

1000285

registered interest
date	02/11/2018
answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
answering dept id	29
answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
hansard heading	Personal Independence Payment: Muscular Dystrophy
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what representations she has received from claimants of personal independence payment with myotonic dystrophy on personal independence payment assessments; and if she will make a statement.
tabling member constituency	Gedling
tabling member printed	Vernon Coaker
uin	187298
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 12/11/2018 answer text <p>I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 5<sup>th</sup> November 2018 to Question <a href="https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-questions-answers/?page=1&amp;max=20&amp;questiontype=AllQuestions&amp;house=commons%2clords&amp;uin=186178" target="_blank"><strong>UIN 186178</strong></a></p><p> </p> answering member constituency Truro and Falmouth answering member printed Sarah Newton question first answered 12/11/2018 15:04:21 answering member 4071 label Biography information for Sarah Newton
tabling member	360 label Biography information for Lord Coaker

100116

registered interest
date	21/10/2014
answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
answering dept id	29
answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
hansard heading	Funeral Payments
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many applications have been made to the Government Funeral Payment scheme since May 2010; and how many such applications have been rejected.
tabling member constituency	Liverpool, Walton
tabling member printed	Steve Rotheram
uin	211293
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 24/10/2014 answer text <p>From the latest data available, 280,780 applications have been made for Funeral Payments in Great Britain between May 2010 and September 2014. In the same period there have been 139,560 refusals.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>Notes</strong></p><p> </p><p>1. These figures do not include applications which were processed clerically and have not yet been entered on to the Social Fund Computer System.</p><p> </p><p>2. The figures given are the number of applications and initial refusals in the given time period and not the number of people who made applications or received awards. An individual may make more than one application in a year. Information on the number of people who made applications and received awards is not available.</p><p> </p><p>3. The refusal figures given are based on the initial decisions made on each case and may include cases where an award was later made on review.</p><p> </p><p>4. All figures are rounded to the nearest 10.</p> answering member constituency Thornbury and Yate answering member printed Steve Webb question first answered 24/10/2014 13:48:18 answering member 220 label Biography information for Steve Webb
tabling member	4035 label Biography information for Steve Rotheram

1001921

registered interest
date	05/11/2018
answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
answering dept id	29
answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
hansard heading	Universal Credit
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, if she will set out the timeframe for implementing her Department's response to the court judgement of June 2018 on the payment of Severe Disability Premium to claimants who are already in receipt of Universal Credit.
tabling member constituency	Croydon North
tabling member printed	Mr Steve Reed
uin	188119
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 12/11/2018 answer text <p>Written statement HCWS745 on 7 June 2018 , which preceded the Court judgment of 14 June, set out our plans to make provision for claimants already in receipt of Universal Credit, to receive a Severe Disability Premium backdated.</p><p><strong> </strong></p><p>The ‘Universal Credit (Managed Migration) Amendment Regulations 2018’, which contain these provisions, were laid in Parliament on 5 November 2018 and will now be scrutinised and voted on by Parliament.</p> answering member constituency Reading West answering member printed Alok Sharma question first answered 12/11/2018 18:08:45 answering member 4014 label Biography information for Lord Sharma
tabling member	4268 label Biography information for Steve Reed

1001922

registered interest
date	05/11/2018
answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
answering dept id	29
answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
hansard heading	Universal Credit
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what steps the Government is taking to ensure that a claimant will not receive less money in benefits as a result of moving to universal credit under the managed migration process.
tabling member constituency	Torfaen
tabling member printed	Nick Thomas-Symonds
uin	188120
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 16/11/2018 answer text <p>Welfare claimants whose circumstances remain the same will not see their benefit entitlement reduced as a direct result of being moved on to Universal Credit through managed migration, as they will receive transitional protection. This will ensure that claimants who are managed migrated will have total entitlement to Universal Credit that is at least as great had been their total entitlement to existing benefits at the point they are migrated, so safeguarding their benefit entitlement until their circumstances change.</p><p> </p><p>Claimants whose entitlement is less in Universal Credit than their legacy entitlement will receive transitional protection to ensure their benefit allowance remains the same at the point of transition. The other claimants who are migrated onto Universal Credit as part of managed migration will receive the same or an increased entitlement as they receive on legacy benefits.</p><p> </p><p>Additionally, we have announced that Tax Credits claimants with capital in excess of the £16,000 capital threshold will now receive a 12-month grace period during which they can receive transitional protection if eligible.</p><p> </p><p>We have also announced that, from 16 January 2019, we will prevent those claimants who are, or have been within the past month entitled to an award of an existing benefit that includes a Severe Disability Premium (SDP), from naturally migrating to Universal Credit following a change of circumstances. These claimants will continue to receive the relevant legacy benefit(s) appropriate to their change of circumstance and will only move to Universal Credit via managed migration (and therefore be eligible to transitional protection), safeguarding their existing benefit entitlement.</p><p> </p><p>We will also provide both an on-going monthly payment to eligible claimants who have already lost the SDP as a consequence of moving to Universal Credit and an additional monthly payment to cover the period since they moved. Eligibility for these payments will depend on a number of criteria being satisfied, which include whether the basic qualifying conditions for SDP continue to be met.</p> answering member constituency Reading West answering member printed Alok Sharma question first answered 16/11/2018 14:33:47 answering member 4014 label Biography information for Lord Sharma
tabling member	4479 label Biography information for Nick Thomas-Symonds

1002002

registered interest
date	05/11/2018
answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
answering dept id	29
answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
hansard heading	Universal Credit: Separation
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether there is provision in place to equalise universal credit entitlement when a couple separates.
tabling member constituency	Hemsworth
tabling member printed	Jon Trickett
uin	188012
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 16/11/2018 answer text <p>When a couple separates and still require the support of Universal Credit they will claim separately and as such the two claimants will be treated as entirely separate claims and will have their entitlements and therefore award amounts treated accordingly.</p><p> </p><p>If an advance has been awarded to a couple and the couple subsequently separate, they will be equally liable to repay the advance.</p><p> </p><p>When a couple separates, and an advance has not been recovered from the associated benefit claim because the claim ends or there was no entitlement to that benefit, the outstanding balance is treated as if it were an overpayment. This would then be recoverable (as per Section 71 of the Social Security Administration Act 1992) at the standard overpayment rate.</p><p><strong> </strong></p><p>After separation, if a couple have an overpayment for which they are both equally liable, the debt is apportioned equally. Once this apportionment has been done we will not reverse the split liability decision. Any debt for which only one member of a couple is liable will follow that person on separation.</p> answering member constituency Reading West answering member printed Alok Sharma grouped question UIN 188013 188014 question first answered 16/11/2018 14:20:06 answering member 4014 label Biography information for Lord Sharma
tabling member	410 label Biography information for Jon Trickett

1002003

registered interest
date	05/11/2018
answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
answering dept id	29
answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
hansard heading	Universal Credit: Separation
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what steps her Department takes to ensure that there is a fair division when recovering advance payments when a couple separate.
tabling member constituency	Hemsworth
tabling member printed	Jon Trickett
uin	188013
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 16/11/2018 answer text <p>When a couple separates and still require the support of Universal Credit they will claim separately and as such the two claimants will be treated as entirely separate claims and will have their entitlements and therefore award amounts treated accordingly.</p><p> </p><p>If an advance has been awarded to a couple and the couple subsequently separate, they will be equally liable to repay the advance.</p><p> </p><p>When a couple separates, and an advance has not been recovered from the associated benefit claim because the claim ends or there was no entitlement to that benefit, the outstanding balance is treated as if it were an overpayment. This would then be recoverable (as per Section 71 of the Social Security Administration Act 1992) at the standard overpayment rate.</p><p><strong> </strong></p><p>After separation, if a couple have an overpayment for which they are both equally liable, the debt is apportioned equally. Once this apportionment has been done we will not reverse the split liability decision. Any debt for which only one member of a couple is liable will follow that person on separation.</p> answering member constituency Reading West answering member printed Alok Sharma grouped question UIN 188012 188014 question first answered 16/11/2018 14:20:06 answering member 4014 label Biography information for Lord Sharma
tabling member	410 label Biography information for Jon Trickett

1002004

registered interest
date	05/11/2018
answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
answering dept id	29
answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
hansard heading	Universal Credit: Separation
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether her Department take steps to ensures that the remaining claimant of universal credit is not held fully responsible for unpaid advance payments when a couple separates.
tabling member constituency	Hemsworth
tabling member printed	Jon Trickett
uin	188014
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 16/11/2018 answer text <p>When a couple separates and still require the support of Universal Credit they will claim separately and as such the two claimants will be treated as entirely separate claims and will have their entitlements and therefore award amounts treated accordingly.</p><p> </p><p>If an advance has been awarded to a couple and the couple subsequently separate, they will be equally liable to repay the advance.</p><p> </p><p>When a couple separates, and an advance has not been recovered from the associated benefit claim because the claim ends or there was no entitlement to that benefit, the outstanding balance is treated as if it were an overpayment. This would then be recoverable (as per Section 71 of the Social Security Administration Act 1992) at the standard overpayment rate.</p><p><strong> </strong></p><p>After separation, if a couple have an overpayment for which they are both equally liable, the debt is apportioned equally. Once this apportionment has been done we will not reverse the split liability decision. Any debt for which only one member of a couple is liable will follow that person on separation.</p> answering member constituency Reading West answering member printed Alok Sharma grouped question UIN 188012 188013 question first answered 16/11/2018 14:20:06 answering member 4014 label Biography information for Lord Sharma
tabling member	410 label Biography information for Jon Trickett