Asked by: Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord O'Shaughnessy on 13 June 2018 (HL8293), whether the Department of Health and Social Care has published a response to its consultation Promoting Professionalism, Reforming Regulation.
Answered by Baroness Manzoor
The four United Kingdom Governments’ consultation Promoting professionalism; reforming regulation closed on 23 January 2018. The Government with the devolved administrations are now considering how to take forward reform of professional regulation. A Government response will be published in due course.
Asked by: Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what is their current estimate of the combined cost of phases 1 and 2 of High Speed 2; and what was the estimated cost of phases 1 and 2 in 2010 when the scheme was reviewed.
Answered by Baroness Sugg
The current HS2 funding envelope is £55.73bn (at 2015 prices), as set out in the 2015 Spending Review settlement. This is split between phases, with Phase One set at £27.18bn and Phase 2a&b at £28.55bn.
At the 2013 Spending Review the HS2 funding envelope was at £50.1bn (at 2011 prices). This funding allocation was split as follows: Phase One £21.4bn, Phase 2 £21.2bn and Rolling Stock £7.5bn. Spending Review 2013 was the first time a long term funding envelope was established for the HS2 network.
Asked by: Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what evaluation they have carried out of the benefits of the grant-in-aid they provide to the National Forest Company.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
Since 1995, the grant in aid provided by Defra to the National Forest Company (NFC) has facilitated benefits to the environment, economy and communities with an increase in forest cover from 6% in 1991 to nearly 21% in 2018, planting 8.7 million trees and creating more than 7,000 hectares of new habitat. 70% of woodlands have been brought into active management and there has been an increase in the visitor economy of 30% with an economic impact of £428 million each year, supporting more than 5,000 jobs.
A report commissioned by Defra and the NFC (attached) in 2010 calculated a net present value for the National Forest of £721 million between 1991 and 2100. The report estimated that by 2100 the cost-benefit ratio of the National Forest will be 1:4.8 for regeneration, biodiversity, wildlife and non-use values, landscape, recreation, carbon sequestration and timber production. The largest contributor to the benefits is the recreational value. The additional indirect benefits of regeneration, ecosystem services, health, education and social care are not captured in this analysis.
Asked by: Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they have considered using High Speed 2 as a conduit for a pipeline for pumping water from areas with an excess supply of water to those which are under-supplied.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
The Government recognises the need to increase long term security of water supplies. The Government has committed to a ‘twin track approach’ to improving water resilience in its Strategic Policy Statement to Ofwat and in the 25 Year Environment Plan.
The Government is developing a national policy statement for water resources, which will set out the need for and streamline the delivery of nationally significant water resources infrastructure including water transfers.
The National Infrastructure Assessment published by the National Infrastructure Commission (NIC) confirmed that strategic transfers are a necessary part of improving the security of water supplies.
Water companies have recently consulted on their draft water resources management plans. None have proposed a scheme using HS2 to transfer water as a preferred option. Each company faces different challenges in maintaining their supply-demand balance and it is for the individual company to decide how best to meet this requirement.
Asked by: Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans, if any, they have to strengthen the business appointment process for former ministers and civil servants.
Answered by Lord Young of Cookham
The Government’s view remains that the current Business Appointment Rules system provides the right balance between preventing conflicts of interest, and ensuring the public sector can attract the skills and capability it needs, whilst also recognising the common law freedoms of individuals to earn a living without unreasonable hindrance.
However, as set out in the Government response to the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee’s most recent report on the subject, we have introduced a number of administrative changes to strengthen the process at a Departmental level, and ensure consistency in the way the Rules are applied. This includes issuing new guidance to Departments on administering the Rules, and requiring the Chairs of Departmental Audit and Risk Committees to take responsibility for monitoring compliance with the Rules as part of their existing governance processes.
The full Government response is attached.
Asked by: Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many former (1) ministers, and (2) civil servants have taken up business appointments without getting approval from the Prime Minister and Advisory Committee on Business Appointments since 2015.
Answered by Lord Young of Cookham
The Advisory Committee on Business Appointments publish details of all advice given to former ministers and senior civil servants on their website, including where they are aware of a breach of the process. However the specific information requested is not recorded centrally.
Asked by: Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to protect people experiencing mental health problems from accessing treatment from unqualified counsellors and psychotherapists, including by requiring statutory registration.
Answered by Lord O'Shaughnessy
The Five Year Forward View for Mental Health, published in February 2016, includes the recommendation that:
“The Department of Health should consider how to introduce the regulation of psychological therapy services, which are not currently inspected unless they are provided within secondary mental health services.”
The Department is currently working with the Care Quality Commission to examine the options and possibilities for taking this recommendation forward. The Department is committed to proportionate regulation of healthcare professionals.
We are considering options for deciding the right level of regulatory oversight for professional groups following on from our Promoting Professionalism, Reforming Regulation public consultation, which closed on 23 January 2018. We expect to publish a full response to this consultation in due course.
Asked by: Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what analysis supports the view of the Chief Executive of Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs that the proposed maximum facilitation customs arrangement after the UK leaves the EU could cost businesses between £17 billion and £20 billion per year.
Answered by Lord Bates
Analysis to support the numbers used by the Chief Executive of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs was outlined in a letter to the Chair of the Treasury Select Committee sent on 4 June 2018[1]. The letter is also attached.
[1] https://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/treasury/Correspondence/2017-19/hmrc-customs-costs-040618.pdf
Asked by: Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government how much revenue they estimate would be raised if a national insurance charge of one per cent were applied to the employment, pension, savings, and rental income of those over retirement age, assuming the same national insurance allowance as for those below retirement age.
Answered by Lord Bates
The revenue raised from increasing Class 1 national insurance rates on employment income by 1% may be approximated using the “Direct effects of illustrative tax changes”1.
This shows the yield from a change in the Class 1 employee main rate by 1 percentage point and the Class 1 employee additional rate by 1 percent point in 2018-19 through to 2020-21.
(£m) | 2018-19 | 2019-20 | 2020-21 |
Change Class 1 employee main rate by 1 percent point | 4050 | 4200 | 4300 |
Change Class 1 employee additional rate by 1 percent point | 890 | 910 | 940 |
An estimate of the impact of introducing a NICs charge for those over state pension age or a surcharge for those below state pension age on rental, savings, and pensions income is not available. National Insurance is not currently payable on these income streams and therefore a number of policy design decisions would need to be taken in order to estimate how much would be raised from introducing such a charge.
Asked by: Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government how much revenue they estimate would be raised if a national insurance surcharge of one per cent were applied to the employment, rental, savings, and pensions income of those below retirement age.
Answered by Lord Bates
The revenue raised from increasing Class 1 national insurance rates on employment income by 1% may be approximated using the “Direct effects of illustrative tax changes”1.
This shows the yield from a change in the Class 1 employee main rate by 1 percentage point and the Class 1 employee additional rate by 1 percent point in 2018-19 through to 2020-21.
(£m) | 2018-19 | 2019-20 | 2020-21 |
Change Class 1 employee main rate by 1 percent point | 4050 | 4200 | 4300 |
Change Class 1 employee additional rate by 1 percent point | 890 | 910 | 940 |
An estimate of the impact of introducing a NICs charge for those over state pension age or a surcharge for those below state pension age on rental, savings, and pensions income is not available. National Insurance is not currently payable on these income streams and therefore a number of policy design decisions would need to be taken in order to estimate how much would be raised from introducing such a charge.