Written Answers to Questions
Wednesday 29 April 2009
House of Commons Commission
Parliament Square: Access
Mr. Amess: To ask the hon. Member for North Devon, representing the House of Commons Commission, what discussions the House authorities have had with the Metropolitan police on vehicular access to the parliamentary estate from Parliament Square since 20 April; and if he will make a statement. [272172]
Nick Harvey: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 27 April 2009, Official Report, column 1000W.
Defence
Armed Forces: Cycling
Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what steps his Department is taking to ensure the provision of cycle-to-work schemes to members of each armed service. [271290]
Mr. Kevan Jones: The MOD has chosen not to adopt the specific Cycle-To-Work (C2W) scheme for Service Personnel (SP); instead it encourages greater cycle use under an equivalent scheme. Under the current arrangements eligible SP can claim a non-taxable benefit in the form of Home to Duty Travel allowance (Pedal Cycle) which reimburses them for commuting to work on bicycles. This is paid at a daily rate based upon the distance cycled. An internal review in June last year showed that this allowance is more advantageous than the likely benefits available under the C2W scheme.
The MOD is committed to promoting healthier lifestyles and reducing pollution wherever possible, and policies to encourage greater use of bicycles are kept under regular review.
Atomic Weapons Establishment
Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the objectives are of the Threat Reduction Division at the Atomic Weapons Establishment; and how many staff are employed in this division. [271266]
Mr. Quentin Davies: The Threat Reduction Division at the Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) currently employs some 140 staff, drawing on expertise as necessary from other parts of the AWE workforce to support its tasking objectives. The Threat Reduction Division supports four work-streams:
Nuclear Treaty Verification (including arms control verification research and support to the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organisation).
Nuclear Accident Response.
Counter Radiological and Nuclear Terrorism.
Nuclear Intelligence.
The detailed tasks and objectives within the four work-streams are being withheld as their release would, or would be likely to, prejudice national security.
Defence Medical Services: Contracts
Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much his Department has spent in employing private contractors in defence medical services in each of the last five years. [271398]
Mr. Kevan Jones: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave him on 20 April 2009, Official Report, columns 61-62W.
Departmental Billing
John Mason: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what percentage of invoices from suppliers his Department paid within 10 days of receipt in each of the last five months. [271855]
Mr. Quentin Davies: Performance figures, for the last five months, against the Government’s agreed 10 day payment target are shown in the table:
| Percentage | |
Departmental Official Hospitality
Mr. Rob Wilson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what his Department’s entertainment budget was in each of the last five years. [261105]
Mr. Kevan Jones: Official entertainment is typically offered where we host foreign Defence Ministers, armed forces representatives and civilian officials in the UK to use our influence to prevent conflict, pursue UK security policy interests and enhance professional contacts. Commanding Officers may include entertainment in events for members of their unit to enhance and develop cohesiveness and team spirit. We may also include entertainment to further wider public understanding of defence, for example during an official parliamentary visit to a military unit or where we are launching a major defence initiative. Entertainment, which must be modest, usually takes the form of light refreshments, lunches, dinners or, more rarely, receptions.
We have reported the costs of entertainment in our annual report.
These figures include expenditure by the Defence Agencies, but not by the MOD’s Trading Funds and Executive Non Departmental Public Bodies, which lie outside the MOD’s accounting boundary.
Expenditure is incurred according to business need and subject to prior approval and compliance with departmental rules and the principles of propriety set out in Managing Public Money and the Treasury’s handbook on Regularity, Propriety and Value for Money.
Copies of our Annual Report and Accounts are available in the Library of the House and online under the MOD Publication Scheme at:
Departmental Rail Travel
Mr. Hurd: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what guidance his Department has issued to its staff on claims for travel in first class carriages on trains if there are no seats in standard class. [268442]
Mr. Kevan Jones: Some military and civilian personnel are entitled to a certain standard of rail travel based on their rank or grade, and some of this involves rail travel at first class. Although some may utilise this, they are actively encouraged to consider whether it is needed, or whether the business can be conducted through alternative measures (e.g. video-conferencing).
There is no specific guidance on what staff with a standard class entitlement should do if no standard class seats are available; we would expect staff to weigh up the available options at the time and to minimise expenditure as far as possible.
Work and Pensions
Carer’s Allowance
Norman Lamb: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions whether provision for uprating the carer’s allowance has been made in the 2009 Budget. [271803]
Ms Rosie Winterton [holding answer 28 April 2009]: As announced in the 2009 Budget, the Government will at least maintain the cash value of all benefits, tax credits and personal tax allowances and thresholds in April 2010.
Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission: Complaints
Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many complaints he has received on the introduction of the Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission's CS2 computer system. [265480]
Kitty Ussher: The Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission is responsible for the child maintenance system. I have therefore asked the Child Maintenance Commissioner to write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 29 April 2009:
In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about child maintenance, the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Child Maintenance Commissioner.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many complaints he has received on the introduction of the CS2 Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission. [265480]
In order to interpret the question correctly, clarification was sought from your office. They confirmed that you wanted to know (a) the overall number of complaints received since responsibility
for the Child Support Agency transferred to the Commission and (b) the number of complaints received that have been specifically about the transfer.
The Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission took responsibility for the Child Support Agency on the 1st November 2008. The latest data available shows that in the following two months a total of 4,469 complaints were received, slightly less than the figure for the same period the previous year.
The Commission has been able to identify 18 complaints which were categorised as relating to 'Phasing/Transfer to New System', the most relevant category available. This would include complaints relating to difficulties arising from the 2003 review of the child maintenance system. Discussions with caseworkers, management and the Client Relations Director however, suggest there have been few, if any, complaints relating specifically to the transfer to the Commission.
I hope you find this answer helpful.
Children: Maintenance
Mr. Frank Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what progress has been made in respect of those cases which were not transferred from the old to the new child support scheme. [267689]
Kitty Ussher [holding answer 30 March 2009]: The Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission is responsible for the child maintenance system. I have therefore asked the Child Maintenance Commissioner to write to my right hon. Friend with the information requested.
In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about child support, the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Child Maintenance Commissioner as child support is now the responsibility of the Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what has happened to the so-called lost cases that were not transferred from the old to the new child support scheme. [267689]
At the end of December 2008 there were 628,200 cases on the original or old child maintenance scheme, these cases are not lost but continue to be managed by the Child Support Agency. As you will be aware, the problems encountered by the Child Support Agency following the launch of the Reforms in 2003 resulted in a decision to defer the bulk transfer of cases from the old scheme to the current child support scheme. This decision was kept under review until February 2006 when the Government asked Sir David Henshaw to review the entire system of child maintenance. His subsequent report led to the Government’s White paper and to the Child Maintenance and Other Payments Act 2008, which makes provision for a new system of child maintenance intended to be in place from 2011.
Consequently, there will not be an opportunity to transfer cases from the original, or old, child maintenance scheme to the current scheme introduced by the reforms in 2003. Instead, we expect a new gross income statutory maintenance scheme to be introduced in 2011, and that all clients on either existing scheme will then be invited either to apply to the new gross income scheme or make a private arrangement. It is currently planned that this process will take around three years, after which both of the existing schemes will close.
I hope you find this answer helpful.
Jobcentre Plus: Telephone Services
Steve Webb:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey, of 5 March 2009, Official Report, columns 1794-5W, on
Jobcentre Plus: telephone services, how many calls were received by benefit contact centres in each month in each of the last three years. [269290]
Jonathan Shaw: The administration of Jobcentre Plus is a matter for the acting chief executive of Jobcentre Plus, Mel Groves. I have asked the acting chief executive to provide the hon. Member with the information requested.
Letter from Mel Groves, dated 29 April 2009:
The Secretary of State has asked me to reply to your question asking how many calls were received by benefit contact centres in each month in each of the last three years. This is something that falls within the responsibilities delegated to me as acting chief executive of Jobcentre Plus.
Jobcentre Plus uses contact centres for a number of services including new claims to benefit (but excluding benefit enquiries). The table below provides information on the total number of calls received by Jobcentre Plus contact centres in each month of the last three years, from March 2006 to February 2009 inclusive:
| Calls received by Jobcentre Plus contact centres | ||||
| 2005-06 | 2006-07 | 2007-08 | 2008-09 | |
| Notes: 1. Contact centres went on line in March 2006. 2. Data for March 2009 is not yet available. Source: Centrevu, Opmis and Brio | ||||
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |