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 question first answered answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

1011613

registered interest
date	21/11/2018
answering body	Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	EU Budget: Contributions
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to the Draft agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community, what estimate he has made of the maximum amount of financial claims that the EU could make against the UK under the provisions in Article 136 and Article 140.
tabling member constituency	Witham
tabling member printed	Priti Patel
uin	194212
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 26/11/2018 answer text <p>Under Article 143 (formerly Article 136) of the draft Withdrawal Agreement, the UK will stand behind a share of EU contingent liabilities related to financial operations up to withdrawal. These are reported in the Consolidated Fund accounts as having a remote probability of crystallising. The UK will receive a share of the pre-paid guarantee funds and reflows from these operations and, in the event of crystallisation, the UK will receive its share of any amounts recovered by the EU.</p><p> </p><p>Under Article 147 (formerly Article 140), the UK will stand behind a share of EU contingent liabilities arising from legal cases related to the budget and linked policies and programmes up to the end of 2020. These are reported in the EU’s consolidated annual accounts of the European Union.</p> answering member constituency Salisbury answering member printed John Glen question first answered 26/11/2018 14:48:28 answering member 4051 label Biography information for John Glen
tabling member	4066 label Biography information for Priti Patel

1011614

registered interest
date	21/11/2018
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Immigration: EU Nationals
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if his Department will make an assessment of the potential merits of granting an exemption to the continuance residence qualifications for Settled Status to non-UK EU citizens who are the current or former spouses or partners of service personnel who have been based outside the UK.
tabling member constituency	Cardiff Central
tabling member printed	Jo Stevens
uin	194213
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 26/11/2018 answer text <p>The Government is committed to the military covenant which ensures that military personnel, or their families, are not disadvantaged by virtue of their military service. We are therefore considering carefully how this should be reflected in the eligibility requirements of the EU Settlement Scheme. We will set out further details in due course.</p> answering member constituency Romsey and Southampton North answering member printed Caroline Nokes question first answered 26/11/2018 15:34:11 answering member 4048 label Biography information for Caroline Nokes
tabling member	4425 label Biography information for Jo Stevens

1011615

registered interest
date	21/11/2018
answering body	Department of Health and Social Care
answering dept id	17
answering dept short name	Health and Social Care
answering dept sort name	Health and Social Care
hansard heading	Health Services: Migrants
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, pursuant to the Answer of 20 November 2018 to Question 191946 on Health Services: Immigrants, what the evidential basis was for his Department's conclusion that the surcharge has had no effect on recruitment and retention of NHS staff.
tabling member constituency	Cardiff Central
tabling member printed	Jo Stevens
uin	194214
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 26/11/2018 answer text <p>The Government publishes quarterly updates on immigration statistics, which include data on visa grants and is available at the following link:</p><p> </p><p><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/immigration-statistics-year-ending-march-2018/why-do-people-come-to-the-uk-2-to-work" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/immigration-statistics-year-ending-march-2018/why-do-people-come-to-the-uk-2-to-work</a></p><p> </p><p>The available evidence suggests that, since its introduction, there has not been any negative impact on the number of applications made to come to the United Kingdom as a result of the surcharge.</p> answering member constituency Wimbledon answering member printed Stephen Hammond question first answered 26/11/2018 16:11:10 answering member 1585 label Biography information for Stephen Hammond
tabling member	4425 label Biography information for Jo Stevens

1011616

registered interest
date	21/11/2018
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Immigration
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to the Answer of 19 November 2018 to Question 190910, for what reasons he cannot indicate in which of the remaining weeks of the year he intends to place the immigration White Paper before the House.
tabling member constituency	Cardiff Central
tabling member printed	Jo Stevens
uin	194215
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 26/11/2018 answer text <p>The Government will publish a White Paper on the UK's future border and immigration system later this year.</p> answering member constituency Romsey and Southampton North answering member printed Caroline Nokes question first answered 26/11/2018 15:36:01 answering member 4048 label Biography information for Caroline Nokes
tabling member	4425 label Biography information for Jo Stevens

1011617

registered interest
date	21/11/2018
answering body	Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	Living Wage
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many (a) attempted prosecutions, (b) successful prosecutions and (c) penalties imposed for failing to pay the National Living Wage there have been in (i) England, (ii) Wales, (iii) Scotland, and (iv) Northern Ireland in each of the last three years.
tabling member constituency	Cardiff Central
tabling member printed	Jo Stevens
uin	194216
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 26/11/2018 answer text <p>HMRC reviews all National Minimum Wage (NMW) complaints that are referred to them, in order to ensure that workers receive what they are legally entitled to. Breaches of NMW legislation are normally a civil matter, and consequences for not complying with paying NMW can include fines of up to 200% of the arrears and public naming.</p><p> </p><p>For the most serious NMW breaches, HMRC will refer cases to the CPS who decide whether to prosecute. All HMRC NMW cases taken forward by the CPS have resulted in successful prosecution.</p><p> </p><p>HMRC records do not distinguish between National Minimum Wage and National Living Wage (NLW) cases, nor is data available by reference to individual countries of the United Kingdom.</p><p> </p><p>For the years 2015/2016, 2016/2017 and 2017/2018, HMRC undertook a number of successful criminal and civil actions against employers who failed to pay NMW to their workers.</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>2015/2016</p></td><td><p>2016/2017</p></td><td><p>2017/2018</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Successful prosecutions</p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p>4</p></td><td><p>1</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Civil penalties</p></td><td><p>815</p></td><td><p>821</p></td><td><p>810</p></td></tr></tbody></table> answering member constituency Central Devon answering member printed Mel Stride question first answered 26/11/2018 14:34:13 answering member 3935 label Biography information for Mel Stride
tabling member	4425 label Biography information for Jo Stevens

1011618

registered interest
date	21/11/2018
answering body	Wales Office
answering dept id	28
answering dept short name	Wales
answering dept sort name	Wales
hansard heading	Brexit: Wales
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Wales, how many (a) discussions and (b) meetings he has had with the Welsh Government on the draft Withdrawal Agreement for the UK leaving the EU since the announcement (i) of that draft Agreement (ii) that the Welsh Government does not support the draft Agreement.
tabling member constituency	Cardiff Central
tabling member printed	Jo Stevens
uin	194217
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 26/11/2018 answer text <p>I have regular discussions with the Welsh Government on EU exit including at meetings of the Joint Ministerial Committee (EU Negotiations) which has met twice in the past two weeks; 13 November and 19 November. These meetings have provided an opportunity to discuss the draft Withdrawal Agreement and outline Political Declaration with the devolved administrations on a multilateral basis.</p><p>The Prime Minister and the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister for the Cabinet Office have also held several discussions with the First Ministers and Cabinet Ministers from the devolved administrations since the draft Withdrawal Agreement was announced.</p><p><strong> </strong></p> answering member constituency Vale of Glamorgan answering member printed Alun Cairns question first answered 26/11/2018 17:33:28 answering member 4086 label Biography information for Alun Cairns
tabling member	4425 label Biography information for Jo Stevens

1011620

registered interest
date	21/11/2018
answering body	Department for Exiting the European Union
answering dept id	203
answering dept short name	Exiting the European Union
answering dept sort name	Exiting the European Union
hansard heading	Court of Justice of the European Union
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, with reference to the Draft agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community, for what reason the provisions in Article 174 granting the Court of Justice of the European Union the jurisdiction to provide an interpretation of Union Law and of the Agreement was included.
tabling member constituency	Witham
tabling member printed	Priti Patel
uin	194219
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 27/11/2018 answer text <p>Under the Withdrawal Agreement, if there is a dispute which involves a question on the interpretation of EU law, the panel will not decide on that question, but request the CJEU to give a ruling on it. It will, however, still be for the arbitration panel to rule on the dispute itself.</p><p>Under the EU Treaties, the CJEU is the only body which can deliver interpretations of EU law which bind the EU and its Member States. If the arbitration panel was empowered to interpret EU law and bind the EU and its Member States to this interpretation, it would be considered unlawful by the CJEU and prevent the EU from being able to sign up to such a provision.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Spelthorne answering member printed Kwasi Kwarteng question first answered 27/11/2018 11:14:27 answering member 4134 label Biography information for Kwasi Kwarteng
tabling member	4066 label Biography information for Priti Patel

1011622

registered interest
date	21/11/2018
answering body	Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
answering dept id	201
answering dept short name	Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
answering dept sort name	Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
hansard heading	Scottish Limited Partnerships: Ownership
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, how many Scottish Limited Partnerships have maintained that they are unable to declare their Persons of Significant Control in each month since July 2017 due to the SLP stating that (a) it has no PSC because none of its partners has more than a 20 per cent stake, (b) it has not completed taking reasonable steps to identify its PSC, (c) it has a PSC but the required particulars have not all been confirmed, (d) it has a PSC that is another company or partnership that has no PSC and (e) it declares a non-registrable PSC which is not subject to the PSC disclosure requirement.
tabling member constituency	Oxford East
tabling member printed	Anneliese Dodds
uin	194221
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 26/11/2018 answer text <p>The Hon Member raises five points. In relation to the first three, Companies House only holds information for the past 12 months, as detailed in the table below. With respect to her first question the information provided refers to SLPs with partners who have more than a 20% stake, whereas the nature of PSC control is based on partners who have 25% stakes.</p><table><tbody><tr><td><p> </p></td><td colspan="12"><p><strong>Number of SLPs</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>PSC Statement Type</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Nov 17</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Dec 17</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Jan 18</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Feb 18</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Mar 18</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Apr 18</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>May 18</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Jun</strong> <strong>18</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Jul</strong> <strong>18</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Aug</strong> <strong>18</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Sep</strong> <strong>18</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Oct</strong> <strong>18</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>(a)There is no PSC (partnership)</p></td><td><p>1183</p></td><td><p>1234</p></td><td><p>1309</p></td><td><p>1361</p></td><td><p>1412</p></td><td><p>1451</p></td><td><p>1531</p></td><td><p>1593</p></td><td><p>1631</p></td><td><p>1661</p></td><td><p>1663</p></td><td><p>1678</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>(b) The partnership has not yet completed taking reasonable steps to find their PSC</p></td><td><p>4932</p></td><td><p>4925</p></td><td><p>4920</p></td><td><p>4921</p></td><td><p>4913</p></td><td><p>4638</p></td><td><p>4488</p></td><td><p>4432</p></td><td><p>4341</p></td><td><p>4206</p></td><td><p>3731</p></td><td><p>3542</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>(c) The partnership has identified a PSC but their required particulars have not all been confirmed</p></td><td><p>722</p></td><td><p>725</p></td><td><p>722</p></td><td><p>712</p></td><td><p>686</p></td><td><p>706</p></td><td><p>728</p></td><td><p>667</p></td><td><p>659</p></td><td><p>650</p></td><td><p>645</p></td><td><p>635</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p>In relation to the Hon Member’s fourth point, Companies House is not able to report this information.</p><p> </p><p>In relation to the Hon Member’s fifth point, Companies House do not have figures available for the number of SLPs who have declared a non-registrable PSC. This is an area that Companies House are working closely with civil society groups on to identify possible inaccuracies. Any potential issues that are, or have been, identified or reported to Companies House are followed up to seek clarification and/or to correct filings. Any cases where compliance is not achieved will be considered for possible prosecution action.</p><p> </p><p>There are no SLPs that fall under the Hon Member’s fourth point (point d).</p> answering member constituency Rochester and Strood answering member printed Kelly Tolhurst question first answered 26/11/2018 17:18:02 answering member 4487 label Biography information for Kelly Tolhurst
tabling member	4657 label Biography information for Anneliese Dodds

1011626

registered interest
date	21/11/2018
answering body	Foreign and Commonwealth Office
answering dept id	16
answering dept short name	Foreign and Commonwealth Office
answering dept sort name	Foreign and Commonwealth Office
hansard heading	Jamal Khashoggi
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, whether UK intelligence shares the conclusion of the US Central Intelligence Agency that the recent murder of Jamal Khashoggi was carried out on the orders of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia; and if he will make a statement.
tabling member constituency	Islington South and Finsbury
tabling member printed	Emily Thornberry
uin	194090
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 26/11/2018 answer text <p>It is the longstanding policy of successive British Governments not to comment on intelligence matters.</p> answering member constituency North East Bedfordshire answering member printed Alistair Burt question first answered 26/11/2018 16:59:41 answering member 1201 label Biography information for Alistair Burt
tabling member	1536 label Biography information for Emily Thornberry

1011627

registered interest
date	21/11/2018
answering body	Foreign and Commonwealth Office
answering dept id	16
answering dept short name	Foreign and Commonwealth Office
answering dept sort name	Foreign and Commonwealth Office
hansard heading	Jamal Khashoggi
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what assessment he has made of the veracity of allegations by the Government of Saudi Arabia that Jamal Khashoggi was (a) a member of the Muslim Brotherhood and (b) an enemy of the state of Saudi Arabia.
tabling member constituency	Islington South and Finsbury
tabling member printed	Emily Thornberry
uin	194091
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 26/11/2018 answer text <p>​Since the Saudi Public Prosecutor announced the initial findings of the Saudi investigation, the UK has called for the continuation of the investigation. We expect this to proceed in line with internationally recognised legal standards.</p><p>The UK condemns the killing of Jamal Khashoggi in the strongest possible terms: the circumstances of Mr Khashoggi's death reaffirm the need to protect journalists and freedom of expression around the world.</p> answering member constituency North East Bedfordshire answering member printed Alistair Burt question first answered 26/11/2018 17:01:00 answering member 1201 label Biography information for Alistair Burt
tabling member	1536 label Biography information for Emily Thornberry