Asked by: Lord Stevens of Birmingham (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the classification review of universities announced by the Office for National Statistics in January 2017, what assessment they have made of the (1) fiscal, and (2) other, consequences of universities being reclassified as public bodies as a result of that review.
Answered by Baroness Neville-Rolfe - Shadow Minister (Treasury)
The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority.
Please see the letter attached from the National Statistician and Chief Executive of the UK Statistics Authority.
The Office for National Statistics is not responsible for making an assessment of the non-statistical impacts of classification decisions. Therefore, no such assessment has been made of other consequences.
The Lord Stevens of Birmingham
House of Lords
London
SW1A 0PW
19 January 2024
Dear Lord Stevens of Birmingham,
As National Statistician and Chief Executive of the UK Statistics Authority, I am responding to your Parliamentary Questions asking when the Office for National Statistics (ONS) will conclude its review of the classification of universities in the National Accounts, first announced in January 2017 (HL1604). And further to the classification review of universities announced by the ONS in January 2017, what assessment we have made of the (1) fiscal, and (2) other, consequences of universities being reclassified as public bodies as a result of that review (HL1606).
The ONS regularly reviews legislation and guidance relating to a number of institutions, including universities, to determine whether any changes would have a potential impact on their sector classification. As such, the classification review of universities in the UK, first announced on 31 January 2017 [1] will consider whether the substantial rise in tuition fees from 2012, and other changes in funding arrangements affect the classification of universities.
A further statement on the classification review of universities in the UK was released on 5 April 2018 [2]. This statement explained that the classification review had been paused because of the announcement of the review of post-18 education and funding, which raised the possibility that the cap for tuition fees may be altered. As this could affect the classification status of individual universities, the statement confirmed the classification review would recommence when there is more certainty in this area.
It was necessary to further postpone the classification review of universities in the UK due to new higher priority classification cases, such as support schemes initiated during the COVID-19 pandemic, and more recently, the energy support schemes introduced in 2022 and 2023.
At present, the ONS plans to begin the classification review of universities in the UK from Quarter 2 (April – June) 2024. However, classification priorities can change quickly, and the expected dates of completion are only indicative. Our forward work plan 3 is updated each month to reflect changes in priorities. Table 1 shows the expected timetable for the classification review.
Table 1: Expected timetable for the classification review of universities [3]
Name of case | Expected date of completion |
Universities (Scotland) | Quarter 2 (Apr to Jun) 2024 |
Universities (Northern Ireland) | Quarter 3 (Jul to Sep) 2024 |
Universities (Wales) | Quarter 3 (Jul to Sep) 2024 |
Universities (England) | Quarter 1 (Jan to Mar) 2025 |
Source: Forward Work Plan December 2023 (19 December 2023)
The ONS has not yet made an assessment of the fiscal consequences of universities being reclassified as public bodies. Within our forward work plan, for each of the four cases involved, we have provided an indication that the impact on fiscal aggregates could be small (less than £100 million change).
The ONS is not responsible for making an assessment of the non-statistical impacts of classification decisions. Therefore, no such assessment has been made of other consequences.
Yours sincerely,
Professor Sir Ian Diamond
[1] Classification review of universities in the UK - Office for National Statistics (ons.gov.uk)
[3] Economic statistics sector classification – Forward Work Plan dataset (XLSX, 128KB)
Asked by: Lord Stevens of Birmingham (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what (1) diplomatic, (2) defence, and (3) other support, they will provide to the government of Guyana, following Venezuela's referendum proposing the illegal annexation of Guyana's Essequibo region.
Answered by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
We are concerned by the recent steps taken by Venezuela. We are clear that the border was settled in 1899 through international arbitration. The Foreign Secretary has reassured President Ali of this. We continue to work with regional partners and international bodies to de-escalate tensions.
Minister Rutley visited Guyana on 18 December. He met with President Ali, Foreign Secretary Todd, National Security Advisor Captain Gerry Gouveia, Defence Force Chief of Staff Brigadier Omar Khan and the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) Secretary General Dr Carla Barnett to show UK support for Guyana's territorial integrity.
Asked by: Lord Stevens of Birmingham (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether The Equipment Plan 2023–2033, published on 4 December, includes comprehensive cost estimates for the Royal Marines' Future Commando modernisation programme.
Answered by Earl of Minto - Shadow Minister (Defence)
The Commando Force modernisation programme is delivering a transformational change to the UK's amphibious capability. The programme will be delivered in two investment increments, called OPERATE and FIGHT.
OPERATE will deliver a transformation of 3 Commando Brigade's operational capability on land. This element is fully funded with cost estimates being included in the Equipment Plan 2023-2033.
FIGHT will deliver the additional capabilities required to conduct ship-to-shore operations in a contested maritime environment. Estimates for this increment are not included in the Equipment Plan but will be considered within the 2025 Defence Review investment decisions.
Asked by: Lord Stevens of Birmingham (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask His Majesty's Government why The Equipment Plan 2023–2033, published on 4 December, includes full predicted costs for the Royal Navy and RAF but not British Army capabilities required to deliver (1) the Integrated Review Refresh 2023, published in March, and (2) the Defence Command Paper: Defence's response to a more contested and volatile world, published in July.
Answered by Earl of Minto - Shadow Minister (Defence)
The Equipment Plan 2023-33 is based on data from the close of financial year 2022-23 and does not reflect the policy intent set out in the Defence Command Paper Refresh published this July. The department's operating model, where responsibility for managing the equipment plan is delegated to Top Level Budgets, allows them to have different financial positions and to be at different stages of addressing their financial pressures.
Asked by: Lord Stevens of Birmingham (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether The Equipment Plan 2023–2033, published on 4 December, includes full predicted costs for their proposed development and acquisition of new ground-launched, long range, precision-guided weapons; and if not, why.
Answered by Earl of Minto - Shadow Minister (Defence)
The development and acquisition of new ground-launched, long range, precision-guided weapons are included in the Equipment Plan 2023-2033.
All Land Deep Fires Programme costs have been included except for Land precision strike, for which funding has not yet been committed.
Asked by: Lord Stevens of Birmingham (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what representations they have made to the government of Venezuela regarding the territorial integrity of Guyana.
Answered by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
The UK Government does not recognise the legitimacy of the Maduro regime. We are concerned by the recent steps taken by Venezuela. We are clear that the border was settled in 1899 through international arbitration. The Foreign Secretary has reassured President Ali of this. We continue to work with regional partners and international bodies to de-escalate tensions.
Minister Rutley visited Guyana on 18 December to show UK support for its territorial integrity. He met with President Ali, Foreign Secretary Todd, National Security Advisor Captain Gerry Gouveia, Defence Force Chief of Staff Brigadier Omar Khan and The Caribbean Community (CARICOM) Secretary General Dr Carla Barnett to show UK support for Guyana's territorial integrity.
Asked by: Lord Stevens of Birmingham (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government, given that the Independent Review of the Mental Health Act was published five years ago and that the most recent Conservative manifesto included a promise to legislate in this Parliament, why a bill on Mental Health Act reform was not mentioned in the King's Speech.
Answered by Lord Markham - Shadow Minister (Science, Innovation and Technology)
We recognise that the absence of a Mental Health Bill in the King’s Speech is disappointing to many people. It remains our intention to bring forward a Mental Health Bill when Parliamentary time allows.
We continue to take forward non-legislative commitments to improve the care and treatment of people detained under the Act, including continuing to pilot models of Culturally Appropriate Advocacy, which will provide tailored support to hundreds of people from ethnic minorities to better understand their rights when they are detained under the Mental Health Act. NHS England has launched the Patient and Carer Race Equality Framework for all mental health trusts in the National Health Service to embed across England. We are also investing over £400 million of funding between 2020/21 and 2023/24 to eradicate dormitories and give patients the privacy of their own ensuite bedroom.
NHS England is taking forward a new Mental Health, Learning Disability and Autism Inpatient Quality Transformation Programme to support cultural change and a new bold, reimagined model of care for the future across all NHS-funded mental health, learning disability and autism inpatient settings. This programme will complement and further support our existing commitments to improve the quality of community care and reduce the need for inpatient care.
Asked by: Lord Stevens of Birmingham (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the threat posed by recent developments in (1) Russian, and (2) Chinese, hypersonic missile technology.
Answered by Baroness Goldie - Shadow Minister (Defence)
Russia and China continue to progress in the development and deployment of hypersonic missiles and technologies and these weapons pose an increasing threat to international stability.
Asked by: Lord Stevens of Birmingham (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask His Majesty's Government by what date they plan to have equipped the Royal Navy surface fleet with adequate capabilities to defend itself from hypersonic missile attack.
Answered by Baroness Goldie - Shadow Minister (Defence)
The Royal Navy is constantly reviewing and updating their offensive and defensive capabilities based upon intelligence and threat analysis.
Due to the sensitive nature of these assessments, it is inappropriate to discuss the specific nature of our capabilities and the operational analysis being conducted
Asked by: Lord Stevens of Birmingham (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Markham on 9 February (HL 5339), whether NHS England and integrated care board aggregate NHS mental health expenditure would still be expected to increase as a share of their total expenditure in 2023/24 compared with 2022/23 if "non-recurrent" expenditure had not been excluded from the baseline calculation; and if not, to itemise and quantify expected "non-recurrent" expenditure in both years.
Answered by Lord Markham - Shadow Minister (Science, Innovation and Technology)
The non-recurrent expenditure excluded from the baseline calculation is the specific funding provided at Spending Review 2021 for costs relating to COVID-19. Central funding for pensions costs is also excluded as this cannot be split between staff working on mental health and other areas. However, making no adjustments, mental health expenditure as a share of total National Health Service expenditure is still expected to increase, from 8.3% in 2022/23 to 8.5% in 2023/24.