10 Jun 2004 : Column 485W
Written Answers to Questions
Thursday 10 June 2004
TREASURY
Citizen Information Project
Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) whether the Citizen Information Project will cover the whole of the UK; [177795]
(2) whether an independent statutory body will be established to administer the Citizen Information Project; [177796]
(3) what security measures are planned for the Citizen Information Project; [177797]
(4) how identity will be verified of individuals wishing to update information held on the Citizen Information Project; [177798]
(5) whether audit trails will be used on the Citizen Information Project as a means of checking security; and who will be responsible for checking this; [177799]
(6) what assessments have been made of the (a) size, (b) cost of setting up and (c) the time necessary to set up the Citizen Information Project; [177840]
(7) what adjustments have been made to the Citizen Information Project since the Cabinet agreement to establish a national identity database; [177841]
(8) what the purpose is of the Citizen Information Project. [177842]
Ruth Kelly: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the General Registrar for England and Wales, who has been asked to reply.
Letter from Dennis Roberts to Mrs. Claire Curtis-Thomas, dated 10 June 2004:
The Registrar General for England and Wales has been asked to reply to your recent Parliamentary Questions on the Citizen Information Project (CIP). I have been asked to reply in his absence. (177799, 177840, 177841, 177842, 177795, 177796, 177797 and 177798)
The objective of CIP is to create, for the public sector, the prime source of address and other core contact information relating to people usually resident in the UK. The feasibility study, conducted in 2003, indicated that the creation of a UK-wide population register could lead to cost and efficiency savings for the public sector.
With regard to the specific points you raise in relation to security, identity verification, governance and logistics of its potential setting up, all of these points are being considered during the project definition stage, which is currently running. It is scheduled to run until June 2005 at which point the Office for National Statistics will report back to Ministers with proposals for how CIP could be taken forward. Therefore, no decisions have been taken yet on the form in which it would develop but the latest thinking can be found in the evidence supplied by the Registrar General to the Home Affairs Committee on 27 April 2004.
The CIP project team continues to work closely with all relevant government departments and to ensure that the project takes account of developments elsewhere.
Historic Houses (Pre-owned Assets Tax)
Mr. Boris Johnson: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what research his Department has commissioned on the effect upon historic houses of the tax on pre-owned assets. [176462]
Dawn Primarolo: Owners of historic houses will not be affected unless they have engaged in tax avoidance of the sort targeted by the Government's proposals. If they have, they will have the option—under the proposals set out in the Finance Bill—to bring their property back within the scope of inheritance tax. And that in turn opens the way to claims in due course to the heritage exemption from inheritance tax, if the property is of suitable quality and the necessary commitment is made to provide public access.
Child Care
Tim Loughton: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer on what basis he intends not to extend tax credits for employing nannies providing child care to parents who use grandparents and other family members to look after their children. [178356]
Dawn Primarolo: The Government announced, on the 17 May, their proposals for consultation on the new Childcare Approval Scheme which will extend the types of good quality child care for which families can get financial support, such as the child care element of the working tax credit. The results of the consultation and the details of the scheme will be made known in due course.
Customs and Excise
Mr. Paice: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the future role of HM Customs and Excise at UK sea and airports after its investigation and intelligence work is brought under the control of the Serious and Organised Crime Agency. [177155]
John Healey: HM Customs and Excise's expertise in working at the borders to protect national security, collect revenue, facilitate trade and prevent smuggling will continue to play a vital role in the new integrated revenue department, HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC).
Revenue from customs and excise duties, which raise almost £17 billion each year, are heavily dependent upon the protection afforded at the border. Equally important is the economic imperative to ensure that international trade is facilitated in a way that ensures the UK remains a good place to do business.
The nature of indirect taxes makes them more vulnerable to attack by fraudsters than direct taxes. Customs has developed strategies for countering such attacks which depend heavily upon their expertise in frontiers work, investigation, and disruption.
For these reasons HMRC will maintain its frontier role while working with the other agencies that undertake controls at UK borders. Following the creation of the Serious Organised Crime Agency,
10 Jun 2004 : Column 487W
HMRC will continue to deliver Customs' full range of import and export controls at the UK's frontiers, retaining intelligence resources to support the enforcement of prohibitions and restrictions.
Financial Services Authority
Mr. Garnier: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) what the (a) estimated and (b) outturn set-up costs of the Financial Services Authority were, expressed in (i) capital expenditure and (ii) revenue expenditure terms;. [175267]
(2) how set-up costs of the Financial Services Authority were accounted for in the public finances;. [175268]
(3) what the overall outturn revenue expenditure of the Financial Services Authority was in each year since its establishment;. [175269]
(4) if he will list those bodies whose responsibilities were taken on by the Financial Services Authority as successor; and what the outturn revenue expenditure for each of those bodies was in the final three years of their operation. [175270]
Ruth Kelly:
For the purposes of this response, 1 December 2001 ("N2") has been taken as the date the Financial Services Authority (FSA) was established, when the FSA was granted its full powers under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. The FSA's financial year ends on 31 March.
10 Jun 2004 : Column 488W
Estimated set-up running costs of the Financial Services Authority (FSA) were £14 million (FSA's annual reports for financial years 1999–00 and 2000–01). Outturn set-up running costs, relating to the new organisational structure of the FSA, were £13.2 million. A further £1.8 million was incurred in relation to the transfer of the UK Listing Authority function from the London Stock Exchange, which was not included in the original estimate. These costs were recovered from FSA fee-payers during the three years including and following N2 and so were not accounted for in the public finances.
In 1998–99, the FSA also incurred capital expenditure of approximately £37 million, to prepare the FSA's new premises in Canary Wharf, London. Annual depreciation is also being included in the amount charged to FSA fee-payers and is not accounted for in the public finances.
The overall outturn expenditure of the FSA since it was established (N2) was £69.1 million in the remainder of 2001–02, and £203.1 million in 2002–03. In addition, a £2 million deficit reduction contribution was made in 2002–03 to finance the FSA's pension scheme shortfall.The responsibilities of the bodies the FSA took on as successor, and the outturn expenditure of these bodies for the three financial years of their operation up to and including N2, is shown in the table as follows. In addition, the FSA took responsibility for the UK Listing Authority function from the London Stock Exchange on 1 May 2000. Between 1 May 2000 and N2, FSA outturn expenditure in relation to this function was £17.7 million.
| Name of body and/or relevant responsibility of body | Outturn expenditure for 1999–2000 | Outturn expenditure for 2000–01 | Outturn expenditure for April 2001–02 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Investment Management Regulatory Organisation (IMRO) | 18.6 | 16.6 | 11.7 | 46.9 |
| Personal Investment Authority (PIA) | 44.0 | 39.9 | 27.1 | 111.0 |
| Securities and Futures Authority (SFA) | 32.8 | 33.0 | 21.2 | 87.0 |
| Securities and Investments Boards (SIB) (Supervision of banks)(1) | 50.2 | 50.8 | 35.3 | 136.3 |
| Securities and Investments Board (SIB) (other regulatory responsibilities) | 15.3 | 15.6 | 13.7 | 44.6 |
| HM Treasury Insurance Directors(2) | 12.8 | 5.6 | 11.4 | 39.8 |
| Registry of Friendly Societies (RFS) (including the Building Societies Commission (BSC) and Friendly Societies Commission (FSC)) | 7.8 | 8.2 | (3)8.4 | 16 |
(1) Supervision of banks transferred from the Bank of England to the Securities and Investments Board (SIB) on 1 June 1998.
(2) Figures for FSA service charge to HM Treasury.
(3) Budget forecast for full financial year 2001–02. The Registry of Friendly Societies (RFS) was wound up in December 2001.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |