Asked by: Stephen Kinnock (Labour - Aberafan Maesteg)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how much his Department spent on mandatory reconsiderations of Personal Independence Payment claims in each year since 2021.
Answered by Mims Davies - Shadow Minister for Women and Equalities
The information for the financial years covered by the request are detailed in the tables below:
PIP | 2021-22 (£m) | 2022-23 (£m) | 2023-24 (£m) |
Mandatory Reconsiderations | £28.5 | £22.8 | £22.9 |
Cost figures are rounded to the nearest £0.1m
Data Source: ABM
The cost figures quoted are estimated DWP level 1 operating costs, including both direct delivery staff and non-staff costs. Non-staff costs are only those costs incurred in local cost centres, relating to direct delivery staff.
Please note that the data supplied is from the Departmental Activity Based Models. This data is derived from unpublished management information, which was collected for internal Departmental use only and has not been quality assured to National Statistics or Official Statistics publication standards. It should therefore be treated with caution. The Departmental Activity Based staffing models are a snapshot of how many people were identified as undertaking specified activities as assigned by line managers.
The 2023/24 model is still in DRAFT and these are not the final approved figures.
Asked by: Stephen Kinnock (Labour - Aberafan Maesteg)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what the average cost to his Department was of a Personal Independence Payment tribunal appeal in each year since 2021.
Answered by Mims Davies - Shadow Minister for Women and Equalities
The information requested is not collated centrally and could only be provided at disproportionate cost.
The department holds information relating to the initial appeals process and that can be provided for financial years 2021/22 to 2023/24 but would only include Direct Operating costs and not any wider DWP overheads. The costs of processing the Appeals would include the costs of DWP Presenting Officer who attend some Tribunals.
The full cost of a tribunal cannot be ascertained. This is because appeals are a joint process between DWP and HM Courts and Tribunals Service. DWP do not handle tribunals for appeals; the cost of handling appeal tribunals sits with HM Courts and Tribunal Service (HMCTS), and we do not hold their cost information. If this information were required, we would suggest that this element of your request be submitted to HMCTS.
Asked by: Stephen Kinnock (Labour - Aberafan Maesteg)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether there are (a) formal and (b) informal arrangements between the UK and Republic of Ireland governments on the (i) provision of biometric and other data on asylum seekers and (ii) removal of asylum seekers from the Republic of Ireland to the UK.
Answered by Tom Pursglove
The Home Office has a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Irish Department of Justice for information sharing to preserve and enhance the operation of the Common Travel Area. This enables data sharing about asylum seekers.
We have no legally binding agreement with Ireland on the return of asylum seekers. In 2020, we agreed operational arrangements which allow for the return and readmission of asylum seekers where this is agreed by both participants. Ireland has not returned anyone to the UK under these arrangements, and we have only returned one person.
Asked by: Stephen Kinnock (Labour - Aberafan Maesteg)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many asylum claimants, excluding foreign national offenders, have been subject to electronic monitoring as a condition of immigration bail since 1 January 2024.
Answered by Tom Pursglove
The information requested is not available from published statistics.
The Home Office does not electronically monitor asylum claimants as a matter of course. However, Schedule 10 of the Immigration Act 2016 provides a discretion for the SSHD or the First Tier Tribunal to impose such a condition which may mean that a small number of individuals who have claimed asylum may be subject to electronic monitoring as a condition of bail. In such instances, an individualised assessment of the claimant’s suitability for electronic monitoring would be undertaken either by the Home Office, the relevant Immigration Judge, or both.
Asked by: Stephen Kinnock (Labour - Aberafan Maesteg)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what information his Department holds on the number of asylum seekers that have (a) entered the Republic of Ireland by crossing the land border from Northern Ireland and (b) been returned to the UK from the Republic of Ireland at the request of the Irish Government in the most recent period for which figures are available.
Answered by Tom Pursglove
In 2020, we agreed operational arrangements which allow for the return and readmission of asylum seekers where this is agreed by both participants. Ireland has not returned anyone to the UK under these arrangements.
The UK does not operate routine immigration controls on journeys from within the Common Travel Area, with no immigration checks being undertaken on the Northern Ireland-Ireland land border. We do not routinely collect data on asylum seekers entering Ireland.
Asked by: Stephen Kinnock (Labour - Aberafan Maesteg)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the speech entitled Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s statement on the plan to stop the boats, published by the Prime Minister’s office on 22 April 2024, what the evidential basis is for the statement that the judiciary have identified 150 judges who could provide over 5,000 sitting days to deal with challenges to the removal of asylum seekers from the UK under the provisions of the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act 2024.
Answered by Mike Freer
The Illegal Migration Act 2023 (IMA) provides for First-tier Tribunal judges to be deployed to sit in the Upper Tribunal to hear IMA appeals. As the Lord Chancellor set out in his Written Ministerial Statement of 16 January 2024: “The judiciary have identified relevant judges, which could provide over 5,000 additional sitting days. The decision on whether to deploy additional judges temporarily to the Upper Tribunal, including when they sit and the courtrooms they use, is for the independent judiciary and will be taken by the relevant leadership judges at the time and in the interests of justice”.
It is standard practice not to comment on discussions between Ministers and the judiciary. However, the Ministry of Justice is working closely with the judiciary in preparation for implementation of the Illegal Migration Act and I refer you to the Lord Chancellor’s Written Ministerial Statement of 16 January 2024, which addressed the topic (https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-statements/detail/2024-01-16/hcws188).
Asked by: Stephen Kinnock (Labour - Aberafan Maesteg)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what recent discussions he has had with the (a) Lady Chief Justice and (b) Senior President of Tribunals on the deployment of judges to deal with cases specifically related to the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act 2024.
Answered by Mike Freer
The Illegal Migration Act 2023 (IMA) provides for First-tier Tribunal judges to be deployed to sit in the Upper Tribunal to hear IMA appeals. As the Lord Chancellor set out in his Written Ministerial Statement of 16 January 2024: “The judiciary have identified relevant judges, which could provide over 5,000 additional sitting days. The decision on whether to deploy additional judges temporarily to the Upper Tribunal, including when they sit and the courtrooms they use, is for the independent judiciary and will be taken by the relevant leadership judges at the time and in the interests of justice”.
It is standard practice not to comment on discussions between Ministers and the judiciary. However, the Ministry of Justice is working closely with the judiciary in preparation for implementation of the Illegal Migration Act and I refer you to the Lord Chancellor’s Written Ministerial Statement of 16 January 2024, which addressed the topic (https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-statements/detail/2024-01-16/hcws188).
Asked by: Stephen Kinnock (Labour - Aberafan Maesteg)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what information his Department holds on the number of Afghan nationals who are family members of individuals resettled to the UK under pathway 1 of the Afghan Citizens Resettlement Scheme who have (a) applied for and (b) been granted (i) entry clearance under refugee family reunion rules, (ii) leave outside those rules and (iii) leave to enter or remain in the UK under other immigration routes.
Answered by Tom Pursglove
The Government continues to work with partners in the region to evacuate eligible people and are committed to bringing more Afghans to the UK in the long term. This includes eligible immediate family members of those being resettled under both the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (ARAP) and the Afghan Citizens Resettlement Scheme (ACRS).
Public data giving the requested breakdown of family members is not available; however, the latest published statistics, summarised at Afghan Resettlement Programme: operational data - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk), show that, at the end of December 2023, 10,520 have been relocated under ACRS, with 9,706 individuals resettled under Pathway 1 of this scheme so far.
For those evacuated from Afghanistan under ACRS Pathway 1 without their immediate family members, the Home Secretary has committed to establishing a route for separated families to be reunited in the first half of this year. Further details will be provided in due course.
Asked by: Stephen Kinnock (Labour - Aberafan Maesteg)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to the oral contribution of the then Minister for Immigration of 17 October 2023, Official Report, column 54WH, what recent progress the Government has made on establishing a specific route to family reunion for Afghan nationals who are family members of individuals resettled to the UK under pathway 1 of the Afghan Citizens Resettlement Scheme.
Answered by Tom Pursglove
For those evacuated from Afghanistan under Pathway 1 of the Afghan Citizens Resettlement Scheme (ACRS) without their immediate family members, the Home Secretary has committed to establishing a route for separated families to be reunited in the first half of this year.
Further details will be provided in due course.
Asked by: Stephen Kinnock (Labour - Aberafan Maesteg)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if he will publish details on the (a) level of financial and (b) other incentives his Department plans to offer to asylum seekers to encourage them to voluntarily relocate to Rwanda.
Answered by Michael Tomlinson
Voluntary relocation to Rwanda builds on our already widely used voluntary returns scheme – details of this can be found at the following link:- Voluntary and assisted departures.docx (publishing.service.gov.uk).