| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
9 Mar 2006 : Column 1645W—continued
TREASURY
Cash Machines
Dr. Cable: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what estimate he has made of the total amount of charges that bank customers will pay to access money from their accounts through fee-charging cash machines in 2006–07; and if he will make a statement. [53514]
Mr. Ivan Lewis: There is no official estimate of the amount of charges that bank customers will pay to access money from their accounts through fee-charging cash machines in 2006–07. However, the Government are aware that the proportion of transactions carried out through surcharging machines is only 4 per cent. and believes that it is unlikely to rise significantly in the future.
Dr. Cable: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the results were of his Department's work to monitor the number of (a) banks being sold and (b) banks closing their cash machine networks; and if he will make a statement. [53569]
Mr. Ivan Lewis: The Treasury does not officially monitor the number of banks being sold.
Following the Treasury Select Committee's report on cash machines, the Government committed to monitor the ATM market, including the impact of charges on vulnerable and low-income consumers.
The Government subsequently asked LINK to keep it updated on the trends in the market, including the number of free and charging cash machines and the volume of cash withdrawals from these machines. These statistics have now been made publicly available on LINK'S website.
In addition, the Financial Inclusion Taskforce has commissioned research into how low income groups access cash and transmit money and this work will indicate the extent to which fee-charging ATMs are used by the financially excluded. The results of this work are due later in the spring.
Correspondence
Sir Michael Spicer: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he will reply to the letter of 16 December 2005, from the hon. Member for West Worcestershire, PO reference: 7/12600/2006. [57565]
Dawn Primarolo: I have replied to the hon. Member.
Public Service Pensions
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer pursuant to the note on the Total Liability of Unfunded Public Service Occupational Pension Schemes publishedon 2 March 2006, what the impact on total liability would have been if all unfunded state pension schemes had adopted the real discount rate of 2.4 per cent. [57264]
Mr. Des Browne:
The Government's latest estimate of the total liability of unfunded public service pensions has been provided in the answer I gave on the Floor of the House on 2 March to the hon. Member for Ludlow. This was based on the discount rates used to draw up the
9 Mar 2006 : Column 1646W
relevant scheme accounts and full details are set out in the paper I placed in the Library of the House. Applying different discount rates would produce different estimates of the total liability but this would not affect the size of future cash payments.
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on (a) the cause of the Prior Year Adjustment made in the 2004–05 accounts of the unfunded occupational public service pension schemes and (b) the impact of the adjustment upon the cash cost of these schemes. [57265]
Mr. Des Browne: The Note deposited in the Library on 2 March showed that one component of the increase in liabilities reported in accounts of unfunded public service pension schemes as of 31 March 2005 was the impact of prior year adjustments amounting to approximately £6 billion in total across all the accounts of all the schemes. This is the total effect of incorporating new data on membership and entitlements which, had it been available earlier, would have led to the liabilities being reported as higher by this amount in previous estimates. The new data and the new total liability calculated from it does not have a material effect on the projections of cash payments to be made by these schemes as a proportion of GDP in future, as shown in the latest Long Term Public Finance Report published in December 2005.
Warwick Agreement
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment he has made of the financial effects of the reform of (a) funded and (b) unfunded pension schemes as a consequence of the Warwick agreement. [57263]
Mr. Des Browne: None. I understand that no such reforms were contained in the 'Warwick agreement'.
CABINET OFFICE
Engagements
Mr. Heald: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster how many public events the former Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster attended in his capacity as a member of the Cabinet from 8 September 2004 to 6 May 2005. [56797]
Mr. Jim Murphy: During his period in office, the former Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster attended a variety of public events, including speeches at conferences, regional visits and visits and events relating to Duchy business.
TRANSPORT
Air Passenger Records
Mr. Clegg: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport which bodies maintain records of passengers on board non-charter aircraft which transit the United Kingdom. [55382]
9 Mar 2006 : Column 1647W
Ms Buck [holding answer 2 March 2006]: None. There is no obligation for operators to provide passenger lists to any UK body when transiting (i.e. overflying or refuelling in) the UK. Flight plans received by air traffic service providers contain no information about passengers, although copies of the full flight plan, held at the airport of departure, may include the total number of persons on board.
Aviation Health
Mr. Brazier: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when he expects the inter-departmental Aviation Health Working Group to publish the findings of the review it commissioned from the independent Committee on Toxicity on evidence collected by the British Airlines Pilots Association. [55304]
Ms Buck: The completed Committee on Toxicity (COT) review will be published as an agreed statement on the COT internet site.
It is not possible at this early stage of the process to say when the COT review will be finalised.
Bathside Bay Development
Mr. Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport who has been appointed to conduct the Stage 1 Study into the options to improve the A120(T) in relation to the proposed Bathside Bay development in Harwich; when he expects the study to be published; and when he expects to announce a preferred route for the improvements. [57146]
Dr. Ladyman: The Stage 1 Study is being carried out by Faber Maunsell, on behalf of and funded by the developer, Hutchison Ports Ltd and in association with the Highways Agency and Essex county council. Hutchison Ports anticipate that the study will be completed by the end of May.
The development has yet to receive formal planning permission. If that were to be granted, public consultation could take place later this year, leading to a preferred route in 2007.
Crossrail
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport whether there will be a direct Crossrail service from Shenfield to Heathrow. [55602]
Derek Twigg: No decisions have yet been made on the final service pattern of Crossrail services.
Driver Disqualification
Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport whether there are plans to impose a driving ban in the UK on British drivers who are disqualified from driving in other EU countries. [54964]
Dr. Ladyman:
The United Kingdom is signatory to the 1998 Convention on Driving Disqualifications 1 , which is intended to provide that a motorist, disqualified from driving abroad, should not escape the consequences of that disqualification when they return to their country of normal residence.
9 Mar 2006 : Column 1648W
The 1998 Convention applies, as it stands, to the member states of the European Union as they were in June 1998. Once the Convention has entered into force (90 days after the last of the 15 original signatory states has notified the EU Council that it has adopted it), it will mean that any holder of a Great Britain or Northern Ireland driving licence disqualified from driving in another European Union member state in which the Convention applies will be required to surrender his licence to (or have his licence kept from him by) the United Kingdom authorities, whichever is applicable, until such time as the period of disqualification has been served. Under the Convention there would be reciprocal arrangements to deal with licence-holders of other states to which the Convention applied which had been disqualified in Great Britain or Northern Ireland, so that they would be disqualified in their state of residence for motoring offences committed here.
The 1998 Convention will not come into force until all the original 15 signatory states have ratified it. So far only Spain of the original 15 has ratified; Slovenia has also done so. However, meanwhile signatory states may, if they choose to do so, cooperate on a bilateral basis within the framework established by the Convention. The United Kingdom passed the necessary primary legislation to enable it to ratify the Convention, or to apply it early under the process of notification provided by the Convention, as part of the Crime (International Cooperation) Act 2003, and I recently exchanged letters with my Irish colleague declaring our joint intention to cooperate bilaterally as soon as possible.
I refer the hon. Member to my answer of to the right hon. Member for East Yorkshire (Mr. Knight) of 27 February 2006, Official Report, column 147W.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |