Mr Cash: To ask the Leader of the House what recent discussions he has had with ministerial colleagues on compliance by Ministers with the terms of the Resolution of the House of 17 November 1998 on the scrutiny of European business, with particular reference to agreements given in (a) the Council of Ministers and (b) the European Council to any proposals which are still subject to scrutiny by the House under the terms of the Resolution; and what steps he plans to take to ensure that the House is notified of the Government's position on proposals still subject to scrutiny, with particular reference to (i) the decision of the extraordinary meeting of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council (ECOFIN) of 9 May 2010 in respect of EU Document 9606/10, proposed Council Regulation establishing a European financial stabilisation mechanism, (ii) the decision at the ECOFIN meeting of 18 May 2010 in respect of EU Document 6795/3/10, proposed Directive on Alternative Investment Fund Managers and (iii) the Commission Communication of 26 May 2010, COM(2010) 254, on bank resolution funds; and if he will make a statement. 
Sir George Young: I have had no discussions about the specific documents to which the hon. Gentleman refers. The Government are committed to complying with the terms of the House's Scrutiny Reserve Resolution and look forward to working closely and constructively with the European Scrutiny Committee when it is established.
Mr Winnick: To ask the Leader of the House if he will discuss with the Chair of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) (a) the further requirements for documentary evidence IPSA required from hon. Members in support of their claims and (b) the basis for the assumption by IPSA that the costs incurred in claims so submitted are being met by another until demonstrated otherwise. 
Sir George Young: I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave him on 2 June 2010, Official Report, column 45W. There is no ministerial responsibility for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority.
Sir George Young: I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Walsall North (Mr Winnick) on 2 June 2010, Official Report, column 45W. There is no ministerial responsibility for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority.
I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Walsall North (Mr Winnick) on 2 June 2010, Official Report, column 45W. There is no ministerial responsibility for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority.
Bob Russell: To ask the Leader of the House if he will bring forward proposals for funding from the public purse for hon. and right hon. Members to provide such security measures at their constituency offices as police forces may advise; and if he will make a statement. 
I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Walsall North (Mr Winnick) on Wednesday 2 June 2010, Official Report, column 45W. There is no ministerial responsibility for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority.
Bob Russell: To ask the Leader of the House if he will discuss with the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority the provision of funding for security measures at constituency offices of hon. and right hon. Members; and if he will make a statement. 
I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave on 2 June 2010, Official Report, column 45W to the hon. Member for Walsall North (Mr Winnick). There is no ministerial responsibility for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority
Mr Watson: To ask the Leader of the House if he will review his advice to Ministers on responses to parliamentary questions to take into account the determination of the Information Commissioner on the application of commercial confidentiality criteria to a request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (reference FS 50688016); and if he will make a statement. 
Sir George Young: Individual answers are a matter for the relevant Minister. Guidance issued on the Cabinet Office website suggests that commercial confidentiality may be a reason for not providing information in response to a written question. While requests under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and written parliamentary questions are different, we do however advise that Ministers should be as open as possible with Parliament and the public.
David Mundell: Information on staff numbers, including numbers of staff working in Private Office, is published routinely in the Office's Annual Report, copies of which are in the House Library. One member of staff is a member of the Senior Civil Service and the others range between the equivalent of Senior Executive Officer down to Executive Officer level.
Mr Anderson: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what his estimate is of the cost to the public purse of proposed reductions in numbers of non-front line staff in his Department and its agencies. 
David Mundell: The Scotland Office keep its staffing complement under constant review to ensure that the most efficient use is made of public resources. It has made not made any recent decisions to reduce staff numbers.
Helen Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many special advisers (a) he, (b) the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State and (c) the Advocate-General (i) has appointed and (ii) plans to appoint. 
David Mundell: The Scotland Office does not separately record entertainment costs, including alcohol. Any such costs will be met from within the Office's hospitality budget. The budget for future years will be calculated once the outcome of the Comprehensive Spending Review is announced.
David Mundell: The Prime Minister has written to Cabinet Ministers reiterating transparency commitments made in the Coalition Programme for Government, and setting out a timetable for achieving them. In particular, all new items of central Government spending over £25,000 will be published online in an open format from November 2010.
Maria Miller: The Government recognise that the UK's 6 million carers play an indispensable role in looking after friends or family members who need support. We also acknowledge the important role that both cash benefits and employment assistance play, especially in enabling many carers to combine care giving with paid employment.
We have set out our commitment to simplify the benefit system in order to improve work incentives and encourage responsibility and fairness. We will consider carefully the needs of carers as we develop our thinking on welfare reform. Additionally, over the coming months we will be considering the services that Jobcentre Plus currently provide for carers along with other issues affecting their daily lives such as flexible working.
Maria Miller: The Government are committed to supporting families, ending child poverty and encouraging, where possible, shared parenting from the earliest stages of pregnancy. For families where both parents do not live together, helping to deliver financial support is an important part of achieving these broader objectives. The 2010-11 business plan for CMEC sets out their role in this process.
Mr Anderson: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (1) what his most recent estimate is of the annual cost to his Department of redundancy payments for (a) front line and (b) other staff employed by (i) his Department and (ii) its agencies; 
The latest figures (2008-09) show that 2.8 million children remain in poverty, well off the target set by the previous Government of reducing this to 1.7 million by 2010-11. It is important that over the next 12 months a robust strategy be put in place to put the 2020 commitment back on track. In doing so we will want to listen to and consult a wide range of bodies.
John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what criteria must be met before an individual may be judged medically unfit for work; and under what circumstances an individual may be deemed unable to work again. 
Chris Grayling: Eligibility for employment and support allowance is assessed using the work capability assessment. The work capability assessment focuses on the functional effects of an individual's condition on their physical and mental capabilities, rather than on the condition itself. The criteria are set out in Parts 5, 6 and Schedules 2 and 3 of the Employment and Support Allowance Regulations 2008 (SI 2008 No. 794).
It is important that we move away from previous practices of parking people on this benefit, so anyone getting employment and support allowance will have a new assessment if and when their individual circumstances and functional abilities are expected to have changed. If at this point the decision-maker determines that they no longer meet the eligibility criteria, they will be found fit for work.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|