|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Vaizey: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what tax incentives are available to individuals wishing to make financial donations to arts institutions in the UK; and what the cost of these incentives was to the public purse in each of the last 10 years. 
Mr. Timms: There are several tax incentives available to individuals wishing to make financial donations to arts institutions in the UK, provided the organisation is a registered charity. These include gift aid, payroll giving, relief on gifts of shares, securities and land and buildings. Gifts of assets to charities or for national purposes are also exempt from inheritance tax and capital gains tax. Guidance about tax effective giving by individuals to charities is available on the HMRC website at
It is not possible to ascertain the amounts of these reliefs in respect of arts organisations because HMRC records do not distinguish amounts repaid to or claimed by charities according to the type of charity. However, estimates of the aggregate costs of reliefs on donations to charities by individuals are published on the HMRC website at
Colin Burgon: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will assess the implications of recent events at Leeds United Football Club for the effectiveness of the rules for the taxation of companies in administration. 
When companies enter administration they remain liable to pay taxes. Their affairs come under the control of the administrator who should on their behalf pay taxes arising during administration as an expense of and subject to the assets available in the administration.
Chris Huhne: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many cases remain to be dealt with following the Michael Fleming/TA Bodycraft case; how many full-time equivalent caseworkers have been allocated to deal with these matters; and when such cases are likely to be concluded. 
John Healey: As at 31 May 2007, 740 claims were being processed by HMRC following the Michael Fleming/TA Bodycraft case. A central team of four manages the handling of the claims but they are supported by many staff in other parts of the department who deal with the tax affairs of the relevant businesses. For this reason it is not possible to quantify the total resource allocated to this work.
Mr. Dai Davies: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the cost to the public purse has been of implementing the (a) child tax, (b) working tax and (c) pension tax credit schemes since inception; and what the cost has been of recovering overpayments for each scheme. 
Ed Balls: The cost of introducing, managing and paying child and working tax Credits are published in note 3 of the trust statement to the Inland Revenue and HMRC annual report and accounts, for each year since their introduction. Information on payments of entitlement is also published in note 3 of the same publication, which is available on the HMRC website at:
Mr. Frank Field: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) how many and what proportion of people who are eligible but not claiming tax credits have incomes which are at or above 60 per cent. of median income; 
(2) what estimate he has made of the (a) number and (b) value of tax credit payments which would need to be made to increase the income of those people who are eligible for but not claiming such payments to 60 per cent. of median income. 
Mr. Timms [holding answer 4 June 2007]: Estimates for the number of in-work families who were eligible but not claiming tax credits, by income used to calculate entitlement, is presented in table 4 of the publication "Child Tax Credit and Working Tax Credit. Take-up rates. 2004-05." This is available on the HMRC website at:
No estimate has been made yet, which is consistent with the published statistics on tax credits take-up, of the position within the household income distribution of those families who are eligible but not claiming tax credits.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer when the next set of data on tax credit take-up rates will be released; and what official releases of data in relation to tax credits there will be in each month from June 2007 to June 2008. 
Mr. Laws: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what his latest estimate is of the potential annual saving from reducing the current tax credits disregard on income increases from £25,000 to zero; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Laws: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many people were taken to court for non-payment of tax credit overpayments in each month from April 2003 to June 2007; and if he will make a statement. 
Derek Wyatt: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to the answer of 18 May 2007, Official Report, column 965W, on agriculture: subsidies, when his Department expects to make the 2005 single farm payment to Mr. Francis, single business identifier number 106302271, a constituent of the hon. Member for Sittingbourne and Sheppey. 
Kerry McCarthy: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to the answer of 1 March 2007, Official Report, column 1457W, on animal: circuses, when he expects to announce the findings of his Departments Circus Working Group. 
Mr. Bradshaw: The Circus Working Group will shortly provide a report setting out its findings to DEFRA Ministers. We hope to have draft regulations available for full public consultation later this year, with the aim of them coming into force in 2008.
I am aware of the public concern over the trade in live calf exports. However, this is a lawful trade and European Union (EU) law must be observed. The United Kingdom (UK) cannot place a unilateral ban
on the export of calves. The Government have consistently said that we prefer a trade in meat to the long distance transport of live animals to slaughter.
Consequently, we are seeking to encourage the industry to develop alternative uses for calves other than live export, and welcome the joint initiative from Compassion in World Farming and the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals to bring together welfare groups, the dairy and beef industry and the retail sector to discuss this issue. They hosted an event last July which I attended.
The industry has developed domestic veal rearing systems that satisfy robust welfare requirements, but the opportunities to sell the product in the UK are very limited while there remains strong commercial demand for veal calves on the continent. DEFRA recently commissioned a study to look at the economic drivers and potential for developing alternative markets to the export of veal calves. The report confirmed that the domestic market for home-produced veal is resistant to growth. It did, however, conclude that there are commercially attractive opportunities for rearing dairy calves for the growing domestic market for manufacturing beef. This is promising and DEFRA will continue to play its part in encouraging such alternative uses.
Mr. Greg Knight: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what discussions he has had with his European Union counterparts on dealing with coastal erosion; and if he will make a statement. 
Ian Pearson: The Department meets regularly with European Union and other European counterparts at official level to exchange ideas on dealing with coastal erosion. Forums include, for example, the informal North Sea Coastal Managers Group. There have not been any recent official discussions at ministerial level, however I have discussed flood and coastal erosion issues informally with EU counterparts.
Mr. Greg Knight: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what grants or financial assistance are available to those who are obliged to demolish their property due to coastal erosion; and what changes he plans to make to such provision. 
Approaches to helping communities adapt to a changing coastline are being considered in a project, under the cross-Government Making space for water programme, to assess the scale and effect of concerns and to develop a broader portfolio of options for addressing them. This includes looking at the current powers local authorities have in relation to helping communities at risk from a changing coastline.
Mr. Bradshaw [holding answer 5 June 2007]: The Department works with other countries, through the Agreement on the Conservation of Small Cetaceans of the Baltic, North East Atlantic, Irish and North Seas (ASCOBANS) toward the prevention of significant disturbance to cetaceans.
The Department has implemented a comprehensive system of by-catch monitoring under the requirements of the EC Habitats Directive and Council Regulation 812/2004. In 2003, the UK was the first member state to publish a response strategy for the monitoring of small cetaceans by-catch. In December 2004, the UK banned pelagic pair trawling for bass by UK vessels within 12 miles off the south-west coast of England. The Sea Mammal Research Unit (SMRU) regularly reports the results of its research on by-catch monitoring which covers all relevant UK fishery sectors, including the bass pair trawl fishery to the Department and has recently presented us with their 2006 findings. This report will be submitted to the European Commission and published on DEFRAs website in due course. The Commission evaluate all contributing member states schemes.
The Department also provides funding for the Institute of Zoology and Natural History Museum Cetacean (and Turtle) Strandings Scheme, which monitors and investigates porpoise and dolphin strandings around the UK. This long-running DEFRA-funded contract showed a slight increase in strandings around the UK coast in 2006 compared to 2005. The latest report is scheduled to be published soon and will be available on DEFRAs website.
The UK Government have also identified the potential benefits of acoustic devices such as pingers in reducing bycatch in fixed gear fisheries and argued successfully for these devices to be required in certain fisheries by EU legislation. Prior to enforcing the use of pingers under Council Regulation EC 8121 2004, the UK Government wants to ensure that those we recommend to be used are safe and cost effective for the industry and offer the maximum protection to porpoises.
Mr. Hollobone: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what base year was used in calculations of local authority populations in his Departments new waste strategy for England; and what account has been taken of significant future population and housing growth in designated growth areas in setting targets. 
Mr. Bradshaw: The Waste Strategy is a national strategy for England as a whole and does not contain local targets. As such, no calculations were carried out which required data relating to local authority populations.
The modelling that informed the setting of national targets for municipal solid waste assumed that the number of households will grow at 0.8 per cent. per annum until 2020. The national targets for reducing residual waste per head use the 2004-based principal population projections produced by the Government Actuarys Department (October 2005).
Mark Hunter: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what his assessment is of (a) the quality of the data produced by the Monitoring the Illegal Killing of Elephants system and (b) its ability to detect changes in poaching rates. 
Barry Gardiner: I am satisfied that the standards established for the Monitoring the Illegal Killing of Elephants (MIKE) system, together with the governance arrangements, including advice from the MIKE-ETIS Technical Advisory Group, ensure that the data gathered are of sufficient quality.
(a) to measure levels and trends in the illegal hunting of elephants;
(b) to determine changes in these trends over time; and
(c) to determine the factors causing or associated with such changes, and to try and assess, in particular, to what extent observed trends are a result of any decisions taken by the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES).
Mr. Peter Ainsworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment he has made of the impact of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme on emissions of carbon dioxide in (a) the UK and (b) other participating nations in each year since its commencement; and if he will make a statement. 
Ian Pearson: The approved UK national allocation plan (NAP) for phase I (2005-07) of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme is set to deliver carbon dioxide emissions savings of around 65 million tonnes (roughly 8 per cent.) below the projected business as usual emissions of the installations covered by the scheme during phase I. The rationale behind emission trading is to ensure that the emission reductions take place where the cost of the reduction is lowest thus lowering the overall costs of tackling climate change. The emissions reductions referred to above may not therefore all take place in the UK.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|