|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
HMRC did not have an individual public drug targets for the Spending Review period covering 2003-04 to 2005-06. HMRC contributed to multi-agency targets through the Concerted Interagency Drugs Action (CIDA) group.
|(1) These figures are provisional until published in the HMRC annual report for 2005-06.|
The Department does not have a separate formal productivity target. Our SR04 settlement set a challenging financial efficiency target to achieve annual savings of £507 million by 1 April 2008, and as at 30 September 2006 savings of £225 million have been reported.
Danny Alexander: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what plans there are to review the Memorandum of Understanding between HM Revenue and Customs and the Social Security Advisory Committee; what the (a) timing and (b) terms of reference of the review are; who will conduct it; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Harper: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the (a) travel, (b) security and (c) other costs were for his first visit to Iraq in November 2006; and on which departmental budget those costs were borne. 
John Healey [holding answer 29 November 2006]: All ministerial travel is undertaken in accordance with the rules set out in the Ministerial Code and Travel by Ministers, copies of which are available in the Libraries of the House. Since 1999, the Government have published on an annual basis the total cost of overseas travel by all Ministers.
Norman Lamb: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) what assessment he has made of the reliability of the HM Revenue and Customs computer records on national insurance contributions; and if he will make a statement; 
(2) what assessment he has made of problems with computer records on national insurance contributions at HM Revenue and Customs; when he expects the problems to be resolved; and if he will make a statement. 
Dawn Primarolo: New arrangements were put in place for employers to submit their annual returns from the 2004-05 tax year. However, following the introduction of the new technology there were some delays in how the individual details from a small minority of online employer returns were processed. This problem has been resolved.
Mr. Grogan: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will take steps to ensure that the Office of Government Commerce issues guidance to all public bodies on the adherence to the principles of the Association of Professional Political Consultants by public affairs agencies who undertake public contracts. 
John Healey: OGC provides extensive guidance to public bodies on the appropriate steps to take when engaging third party suppliers to undertake public contracts. This guidance includes the need for officials to ensure that there is no conflict of interest or impropriety likely to arise from the engagement. OGC has published guidance on the use of consultants by Departments but this does not focus specifically on the use of political consultants.
John Healey: I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer given to the hon. Members for Monmouth (David T.C Davies) and for Sutton and Cheam (Mr. Burstow) on 6 July 2005, Official Report, column 433W. The estimated spending by the Treasury in 2005-06 on recruitment advertising was £83,000.
Mr. Drew: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what information he has received from the European Commission on the reasons for refusing to extend the UK derogation on the use of red diesel; and if he will publish the submission he made to the Commission. 
I have deposited a copy of the United Kingdoms application to the Commission for renewal of the derogation on the use of red diesel in private pleasure craft in the Library of the House. This application was based upon a partial Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) which was published at the time of the 2006 Budget and can now be found on the HM Revenue and Customs website.
Mrs. Moon: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment has been made of the effectiveness of (a) the function of supplier accreditation services and (b) the development of a centrally administered list of qualified suppliers by the Office of Government Commerce; and if he will make a statement. 
John Healey: In response to concerns expressed by Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs), the Chancellors 2005 Budget Statement tasked the Office of Government Commerce (OGC) and the Small Business Service (SBS) with conducting an investigation into the public sectors use of third party supplier accreditation services in lower value procurements. The resulting report can be found on the OGC website at http://www.ogc.gov.uk/documents/Third Party Supplier Accreditation.pdf.
There are currently no plans for a centrally administered list of qualified suppliers for lower value procurements. However, following further consultation in the light of the OGC/SBS report, the OGC is considering what more might be done on third party accreditation to address the concerns outlined in the report.
Mr. Paul Goodman: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many people did not renew their tax credit applications by the 2006 deadline; and how many of these have ceased receiving payments. 
Dawn Primarolo: For numbers of renewals outstanding at the 2006 deadline I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Laws) on 27 November 2006, Official Report, column 454W.
Mr. Paul Goodman: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many claimants appealed (a) successfully and (b) unsuccessfully through the HM Revenue and Customs complaints procedure against a decision to change the amount of tax credits paid to them in each year for which figures are available, broken down by (i) type of tax credit and (ii) region. 
For details of the number of appeals about tax credits received in HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) up to 30 November 2005, I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer I gave him on 25 January 2006, Official Report, column 2224.
Around 3,700 households appealed against a tax credits decision between December 2005 and March 2006 inclusive. Around 6,500 households have appealed in 2006-07 up to 31 October 2006. Figures for November 2006 are not yet available.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) if he will publish the monthly HM Revenue and Customs management account information on tax credit call centre performance for each month from April 2005 to September 2006; and if he will make a statement; 
(3) if he will publish the monthly HM Revenue and Customs management account information on disputed overpayment of tax credits for each month from April 2005 to October 2006; and if he will make a statement; 
(5) if he will publish (a) the HM Revenue and Customs narrative updates on the design and implementation of tax credit 2.T and (b) design work to improve and develop tax credits for each month since April 2005. 
Dawn Primarolo: HM Revenue and Customs monthly management accounts are produced for management purposes to chart progress and plan for the future. HMRC already publishes a significant quantity of information on tax credits. There are no plans to publish the raw data included in the management accounts, but this data are used to provide finalised data which are published in HMRCs reports.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many tax credit applications have been referred by HM Revenue and Customs for criminal proceedings to date in 2006-07; and if he will make a statement. 
Dawn Primarolo: Families entitlement to tax credits does not stop because one of the family is in prison. The children and partner still need to be supported and, in some instances, prisoners could be named on a claim that predates their imprisonment without impacting on the value of the award.
Mr. Dai Davies: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the average overpayment was of (a) working tax credit and (b) child tax credit as a result of claimants not notifying the authorities of a change of circumstance in the latest period for which figures are available. 
Dawn Primarolo: Excluding awards overpaid by less than £10, the average overpayment of 2004-05 finalised awards, for all causes of overpayment, is estimated at £866. Separate figures for working tax credit and child tax credit, and for overpayments arising from the reason described, are not available.
Anne Main: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what recent assessment he has made of the frequency of (a) administrative and (b) data handling and input errors in the tax credits computer system; and if he will make a statement. 
Dawn Primarolo: HM Revenue and Customs reports its performance against targets annually. Details can be found in the board's annual reports for the relevant year and the Comptroller and Auditor General's standard reports. These are available at:
Mr. Laws: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the cost of the £25,000 earnings disregard on tax credit payments is estimated to be in terms of (a) Exchequer effect and (b) increased entitlement between 2003-04 and 2010-11; and if he will make a statement. 
Dawn Primarolo: For information on the cost of the £25,000 disregard and increase in entitlement I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answers given to the hon. Member for Rayleigh (Mr. Francois), on 7 November 2006, Official Report, column 1043-44 and 14 December, Official Report, column 1428.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assumptions his Department has used regarding its ability to recover tax credit overpayments when estimating the Exchequer effect of increasing the tax credits disregard to £25,000 per annum; and if he will make a statement. 
Dawn Primarolo: The assumptions used were consistent with the profile for recovery of 2003-04 overpayments included in the Comptroller and Auditor General's Standard Report on the Accounts of the Inland Revenue 2004-05.
Jim Cousins: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer pursuant to the Paymaster Generals written ministerial statement of 6 November 2006, what IT changes were necessary before a process of imposing automatic limits on rates of tax credit recovery could be introduced; and on what basis HM Revenue and Customs concluded that it was not possible to make a risk-free introduction of this process to the original timetable. 
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|