Asked by: Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by the Minister of State for the Department for Work and Pensions on 21 April (151226), what is the timetable for the review on the stewardship regime for professional use of second generation anticoagulant rodenticides, including Brodifacoum.
Answered by Baroness Stedman-Scott
The review process for the UK’s Anticoagulant Rodenticide Stewardship Regime is ongoing.
The Government Oversight Group and the industry’s representative body, the Campaign for Responsible Rodenticide Use will meet in November 2022 to discuss the Review and will agree a timetable.
Asked by: Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the latest findings by the Campaign for Responsible Rodenticide Use (CRRU) regarding the presence of rodenticide in barn owls; and what plans they have, if any, to prohibit the purchase and use of Second Generation Anticoagulant Rodenticides (SGARs) by non-professional users who are not formally trained in their use.
Answered by Baroness Stedman-Scott
Second Generation Anticoagulant Rodenticides (SGARs) were developed to address public health and other concerns arising from increasing resistance among rats and mice to the longstanding use of existing rodenticides. The approval for these substances was renewed under EU Biocidal Products Regulations (EU BPR) in 2016, and are now regulated under corresponding regulations, the Great Britain Biocidal Products Regulation (GB BPR). During the product authorisation process, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) conducts rigorous evaluations for safety and efficacy using scientific data, with restrictions placed on authorisations as appropriate.
A stewardship regime is in place in the UK for professional use of SGARs. A cornerstone of the stewardship scheme is the Campaign for Responsible Rodenticide Use (CRRU) Code of Best Practice, which sets out guidance on the safe use of rodenticides. It is a legal requirement to comply with this code. The scheme also supports the monitoring of exposure of barn owls and red kites to SGARs (as a sentinel species) led by the UK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (CEH). Alongside the stewardship scheme, restrictions are placed on non-professional (“amateur”) use of rodenticides to further limit the risks to non-target animals and birds. Rodenticide use by amateur users is restricted to use in and around buildings, with the majority of amateur use restricted to indoor use only.
The stewardship scheme is overseen by a Government Oversight Group (GOG) led by HSE with representatives of other government stakeholders. This year the GOG is conducting a review of the stewardship scheme, including the restrictions placed on amateur use, after five years of operation. HSE is aware of the key findings of the latest report from the CEH, and these will be taken into account as part of the ongoing review, the results of which will be published in due course.
Asked by: Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to carry out a full risk safety assessment into the use of the rodenticide Brodifacoum; and what consideration they have given to having its approval for outdoor use discontinued.
Answered by Baroness Stedman-Scott
Second Generation Anticoagulant Rodenticides (SGARs), including brodifacoum, were developed to address public health and other concerns arising from increasing resistance among rats and mice to the longstanding use of existing rodenticides.
During the authorisation process, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) conducts rigorous evaluation for safety and efficacy using scientific data, with restrictions placed on authorisations as appropriate. In order to avoid secondary poisoning risks to non-target species, current product authorisations restrict the use of SGARs in open areas to farmers, gamekeepers and other trained professionals where other integrated pest management approaches fail to control rodent populations. Some SGARs, including brodifacoum, can only be used in sewers and in and around buildings. There has been no change in the authorised areas of use of brodifacoum products since the renewals of their authorisations from 2017.
A stewardship regime is in place in the UK for professional use of SGARs, including brodifacoum. A cornerstone of the stewardship scheme is the Campaign for Responsible Rodenticide Use (CRRU) Code of Best Practice, which sets out guidance on the safe use of rodenticides. It is a legal requirement to comply with this code.
The stewardship scheme is overseen by a Government Oversight Group (GOG) led by HSE with representatives of other government stakeholders, who meet annually to assess its impact. This year the GOG is conducting a review of the stewardship scheme after five years of operation and will publish its findings in due course. The review will look at the performance of the scheme in three key areas: the governance of the supply chain, improving workforce competence and the monitoring of compliance. The latter includes considering the monitoring of exposure arrangements and looking in more detail at monitoring data.
Asked by: Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what estimate she has made of the cost to the public purse of overpaid benefits in each of the last five years.
Answered by Justin Tomlinson
The Monetary Value of Fraud and Error estimates provide information on overpayments and underpayments in the benefit system.
Levels of fraud and error, both overpayments and underpayments, remain low in percentage terms. Figures for the last 5 years are as follows:
Year | Overpayments | Expenditure | Underpayments | Expenditure |
2012/13 | £3.5bn | 2.1% | £1.6bn | 0.9% |
2013/14 | £3.4bn | 2.1% | £1.5bn | 0.9% |
2014/15 | £3.0bn | 1.8% | £1.5bn | 0.9% |
2015/16 | £3.3bn | 1.9% | £1.7bn | 1.0% |
2016/17 | £3.6bn | 2.0% | £1.7bn | 1.0% |
We do not publish information on the total number of benefit claimants who have been underpaid benefits, but the stats publications offer information on the percentage of cases overpaid and underpaid by client group and error type.
Final fraud and error estimates for 2017/18 will be available later this year.
Asked by: Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many cases of underpaid benefits have occurred in each of the last five years.
Answered by Justin Tomlinson
The Monetary Value of Fraud and Error estimates provide information on overpayments and underpayments in the benefit system.
Levels of fraud and error, both overpayments and underpayments, remain low in percentage terms. Figures for the last 5 years are as follows:
Year | Overpayments | Expenditure | Underpayments | Expenditure |
2012/13 | £3.5bn | 2.1% | £1.6bn | 0.9% |
2013/14 | £3.4bn | 2.1% | £1.5bn | 0.9% |
2014/15 | £3.0bn | 1.8% | £1.5bn | 0.9% |
2015/16 | £3.3bn | 1.9% | £1.7bn | 1.0% |
2016/17 | £3.6bn | 2.0% | £1.7bn | 1.0% |
We do not publish information on the total number of benefit claimants who have been underpaid benefits, but the stats publications offer information on the percentage of cases overpaid and underpaid by client group and error type.
Final fraud and error estimates for 2017/18 will be available later this year.
Asked by: Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what the total cost of underpaid benefits has been to the public purse in each of the last five years.
Answered by Justin Tomlinson
The Monetary Value of Fraud and Error estimates provide information on overpayments and underpayments in the benefit system.
Levels of fraud and error, both overpayments and underpayments, remain low in percentage terms. Figures for the last 5 years are as follows:
Year | Overpayments | Expenditure | Underpayments | Expenditure |
2012/13 | £3.5bn | 2.1% | £1.6bn | 0.9% |
2013/14 | £3.4bn | 2.1% | £1.5bn | 0.9% |
2014/15 | £3.0bn | 1.8% | £1.5bn | 0.9% |
2015/16 | £3.3bn | 1.9% | £1.7bn | 1.0% |
2016/17 | £3.6bn | 2.0% | £1.7bn | 1.0% |
We do not publish information on the total number of benefit claimants who have been underpaid benefits, but the stats publications offer information on the percentage of cases overpaid and underpaid by client group and error type.
Final fraud and error estimates for 2017/18 will be available later this year.
Asked by: Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many food bank referrals have been made by jobcentres in each of the last 10 years.
Answered by Damian Hinds - Minister of State (Education)
Jobcentre Plus does not make direct referrals to foodbanks but has offered a signposting service since 2011 to those who have expressed an interest in using a foodbank. No data is held on the number using the signposting service.
Asked by: Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, with reference to the Written Ministerial Statement of 6 December 2010, Official Report, column 7WS, what consideration his Department has given to the articles of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child when making new policy and legislation since May 2015.
Answered by Caroline Nokes
Analysis of the impact of policies in relation to particular groups is carried out in a range of ways, particularly through engagement with civil society and professionals.
Assessments are regularly undertaken where the child may be directly or indirectly affected by proposed changes.
Rights, freedoms and protections for children are considered throughout policy-making, but we have also put in place extra checkpoints – across government – where we think these are useful and important. These include the Equalities Analysis, which enables decision-makers to understand the impact on protected groups, one of which is age.
In the Department for Work and Pensions (“DWP”) we consider the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child as part of our Equality Analysis when the Department is considering changing, developing or delivering policies or programmes or services that may affect children either directly or indirectly. An example of this is the impact assessment carried out in respect of the welfare reforms set out in the Welfare Reform and Work Bill. In undertaking its analysis, where applicable, DWP took into account the UNCRC.
A Family Test for the development of policy was introduced by the UK Government in 2014, led by DWP. The objective of the test is to introduce a family perspective to the policy making process, and to ensure that the potential impacts on family relationships and functioning, both positive and negative, are made explicit and recognised in the process of developing new policy.
Asked by: Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what his policy is on the removal of asbestos from public buildings.
Answered by Penny Mordaunt - Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons
Under the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012, responsibility for managing the risk from asbestos in non-domestic (including public) buildings rests with the individual duty holder. This is the owner or person with responsibility for maintaining the building. The duty holder must assess for the presence of asbestos and put in place a plan to manage any resulting risk. This includes: monitoring the condition of asbestos-containing materials; arranging for repair or enclosure/encapsulation if required; or, in those cases where the assessment shows this to be necessary, arranging for their safe removal.
Asked by: Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, with reference to paragraph 1.7 of his Department's response to the consultation on aids and appliances and the daily living component of personal independence payments, published in March 2016, if he will publish the equality analysis referred to in that paragraph.
Answered by Justin Tomlinson
As confirmed by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State in his statement to the House on 21 March, the proposed changes to PIP will not be going ahead.
We spend around £50bn every year on benefits alone to support people with disabilities or health conditions, with spending on Personal Independence Payment (PIP) and Disability Living Allowance (DLA) having increased by more than £3 billion since 2010. The government is committed to talking to disabled people, their representatives, healthcare professionals and employers to ensure the welfare system works better with the health and social care systems and provides help and support to those who need it most.