Asked by: Anneliese Dodds (Labour (Co-op) - Oxford East)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, how many (a) Scottish, (b) English and (c) Northern Irish Partnerships have been prosecuted each year since 2009 under Section 15.6 of The Partnerships (Accounts) Regulations 2008, for failure to make their accounts available (a) to Companies House, (b) at their Principal Place of Business and (c) through mechanisms provided in other EEA countries.
Answered by Kelly Tolhurst
No Scottish, English and Northern Irish Partnerships have been prosecuted in each of the past three years, the latest years for which information is available, for failure to make their accounts available (a) to Companies House, (b) at their Principal Place of Business (c) through mechanisms provided in other EEA countries.
Asked by: Anneliese Dodds (Labour (Co-op) - Oxford East)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, what the total contribution to the public purse has been from fines charged to (a) Scottish, (b) English and (c) Northern Irish Partnerships under Section 15.6 of The Partnerships (Accounts) Regulations 2008 for failure to make their accounts available either to Companies House, at their Principal Place of Business or through mechanisms provided in other EEA countries in each year from 2009.
Answered by Kelly Tolhurst
There has been no contribution to the public for fines charged to Scottish, English and Northern Irish Partnerships in each of the past three years, the latest years for which information is available, for failure to make their accounts available either to Companies House, at their Principal Place of Business or through mechanisms provided in other EEA countries..
Asked by: Anneliese Dodds (Labour (Co-op) - Oxford East)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, with reference to previous cases brought by the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) against retailers under Chapter 1, Section 2, Subsection 2 of the Competition Act 1998, what discussions he has had with the OFT on the treatment of joint working between supermarkets to enable food security in the event of the UK leaving the EU without a deal.
Answered by Kelly Tolhurst
The Office of Fair Trading was abolished in 2014 with its former functions being transferred to the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), the UK’s independent competition authority. The Government has regular discussions with the CMA to prepare for the UK’s exit from the European Union.
Asked by: Anneliese Dodds (Labour (Co-op) - Oxford East)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, how many Scottish Limited Partnerships have maintained that they are unable to declare their Persons of Significant Control in each month since July 2017 due to the SLP stating that (a) it has no PSC because none of its partners has more than a 20 per cent stake, (b) it has not completed taking reasonable steps to identify its PSC, (c) it has a PSC but the required particulars have not all been confirmed, (d) it has a PSC that is another company or partnership that has no PSC and (e) it declares a non-registrable PSC which is not subject to the PSC disclosure requirement.
Answered by Kelly Tolhurst
The Hon Member raises five points. In relation to the first three, Companies House only holds information for the past 12 months, as detailed in the table below. With respect to her first question the information provided refers to SLPs with partners who have more than a 20% stake, whereas the nature of PSC control is based on partners who have 25% stakes.
| Number of SLPs | |||||||||||
PSC Statement Type | Nov 17 | Dec 17 | Jan 18 | Feb 18 | Mar 18 | Apr 18 | May 18 | Jun 18 | Jul 18 | Aug 18 | Sep 18 | Oct 18 |
(a)There is no PSC (partnership) | 1183 | 1234 | 1309 | 1361 | 1412 | 1451 | 1531 | 1593 | 1631 | 1661 | 1663 | 1678 |
(b) The partnership has not yet completed taking reasonable steps to find their PSC | 4932 | 4925 | 4920 | 4921 | 4913 | 4638 | 4488 | 4432 | 4341 | 4206 | 3731 | 3542 |
(c) The partnership has identified a PSC but their required particulars have not all been confirmed | 722 | 725 | 722 | 712 | 686 | 706 | 728 | 667 | 659 | 650 | 645 | 635 |
In relation to the Hon Member’s fourth point, Companies House is not able to report this information.
In relation to the Hon Member’s fifth point, Companies House do not have figures available for the number of SLPs who have declared a non-registrable PSC. This is an area that Companies House are working closely with civil society groups on to identify possible inaccuracies. Any potential issues that are, or have been, identified or reported to Companies House are followed up to seek clarification and/or to correct filings. Any cases where compliance is not achieved will be considered for possible prosecution action.
There are no SLPs that fall under the Hon Member’s fourth point (point d).
Asked by: Anneliese Dodds (Labour (Co-op) - Oxford East)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, how many Scottish Limited Partnerships have maintained that they are unable to declare their Persons of Significant Control in each month since July 2017 due to the SLP stating that (a) it has no PSC because none of its partners has more than a 20 per cent stake, (b) it has not completed taking reasonable steps to identify its PSC, (c) it has a PSC but the required particulars have not all been confirmed, (d) it has a PSC that is another company or partnership that has no PSC and (e) it declares a non-registrable PSC which is not subject to the PSC disclosure requirement.
Answered by Kelly Tolhurst
The Hon Member raises five points. In relation to the first three, Companies House only holds information for the past 12 months, as detailed in the table below. With respect to her first question the information provided refers to SLPs with partners who have more than a 20% stake, whereas the nature of PSC control is based on partners who have 25% stakes.
| Number of SLPs | |||||||||||
PSC Statement Type | Nov 17 | Dec 17 | Jan 18 | Feb 18 | Mar 18 | Apr 18 | May 18 | Jun 18 | Jul 18 | Aug 18 | Sep 18 | Oct 18 |
(a)There is no PSC (partnership) | 1183 | 1234 | 1309 | 1361 | 1412 | 1451 | 1531 | 1593 | 1631 | 1661 | 1663 | 1678 |
(b) The partnership has not yet completed taking reasonable steps to find their PSC | 4932 | 4925 | 4920 | 4921 | 4913 | 4638 | 4488 | 4432 | 4341 | 4206 | 3731 | 3542 |
(c) The partnership has identified a PSC but their required particulars have not all been confirmed | 722 | 725 | 722 | 712 | 686 | 706 | 728 | 667 | 659 | 650 | 645 | 635 |
In relation to the Hon Member’s fourth point, Companies House is not able to report this information.
In relation to the Hon Member’s fifth point, Companies House do not have figures available for the number of SLPs who have declared a non-registrable PSC. This is an area that Companies House are working closely with civil society groups on to identify possible inaccuracies. Any potential issues that are, or have been, identified or reported to Companies House are followed up to seek clarification and/or to correct filings. Any cases where compliance is not achieved will be considered for possible prosecution action.
There are no SLPs that fall under the Hon Member’s fourth point (point d).
Asked by: Anneliese Dodds (Labour (Co-op) - Oxford East)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, what assessment his Department has made of the prevalence of disability discrimination related to (a) mental health and (b) other disabilities against whistleblowers in the public sector.
Answered by Kelly Tolhurst
Employment Tribunal Statistics show that the number of claims related to Public Interest Disclosures brought to an Employment Tribunal hearing have increased from 1,489 in 2007/08 to 2,191 in 2017/18. Figures are not available to indicate how many of these claims related to public sector employers, nor to mental health or other disabilities.
Asked by: Anneliese Dodds (Labour (Co-op) - Oxford East)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, pursuant to the Answer of 2 May 2018 to Question 140867 on fire regulations, whether the previously-set business impact target still applies when setting regulations.
Answered by Andrew Griffiths
The Business Impact Target for the 2015-2017 Parliament does not still apply to regulations that come into force during the current Parliament. The Government is currently considering its approach to setting the scope for the Business Impact Target for the current Parliament.
Asked by: Anneliese Dodds (Labour (Co-op) - Oxford East)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, pursuant to the Answer of 30 April 2018 to Question 138105, whether regulations pertaining to fire safety are included within those assessed for the business impact target.
Answered by Andrew Griffiths
The Government is currently considering its approach to setting the scope for the Business Impact Target for the current Parliament.
Asked by: Anneliese Dodds (Labour (Co-op) - Oxford East)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, which areas of Government policy are subject to the one-in-two-out rule for new regulations.
Answered by Andrew Griffiths
The One-In-Two-Out policy applied for the duration of the 2010-2015 Parliament. The Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Act 2015, introduced the business impact target to monitor regulatory costs. The Government is currently considering its approach to setting a target for the current Parliament.
Asked by: Anneliese Dodds (Labour (Co-op) - Oxford East)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, what steps he has taken since 2015 to increase compliance with minimum wage regulations by employers.
Answered by Andrew Griffiths
Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) enforce the National Minimum Wage (NMW) on behalf of the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. We are clear that anyone entitled to be paid the minimum wage should receive it.
The enforcement budget has been increased to £25.3m for 2017/18 up from £13 million in 2015/2016. We have also doubled the fines for firms who break the rules from 100% to 200% of the arrears owed to the worker, up to a maximum of £20,000 per worker.
In addition to proactive targeted enforcement activity and a £1.75 million communications campaign last year to raise employer awareness, HMRC follows up on every complaint it receives; including those made to the ACAS helpline and via the online complaint form.