Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government how much was invested by the (1) Principal Civil Service Pension Scheme, (2) NHS Pension Scheme, (3) Teachers’ Pension Scheme, (4) Local Government Pension Scheme, (5) Firefighters’ Pension Scheme, and (6) Armed Forces Pension Scheme, into (a) Huawei Technologies Co., LTD., (b) Huawei Investment & Holding Co., LTD., and (c) Hangzhou Hikvision Digital Technology Co., LTD, in the period between 2014 and 2020.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
The main unfunded public service pension schemes have not invested in any of the mentioned companies.
Most Public Service Pension schemes are unfunded Defined Benefit pension schemes, with the exception of the Local Government Pension Scheme. Members’ pension benefits are set out in statute and there is no fund of assets from which pension benefits are paid. Employer and employee contributions are paid to the relevant public service pension scheme, but these contributions are not invested. Instead, the public service pension scheme uses the contributions to meet the cost of pensions in payment. Where there is a difference between pensions in payment and total contributions, the difference is made up by HMT through Annually Managed Expenditure (AME).
The Local Government Pension Scheme is a funded scheme in which all the assets are owned by the administering authorities, which are responsible for the management of their investments. The data requested is not held centrally.
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to implement full foreign exchange price transparency by financial institutions.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
Since April 2020, provisions of the amended Cross Border Payments Regulation (also known as CBPR2), which require transparency of currency conversion fees and charges for certain payments, have applied in the United Kingdom. This regulation is intended to enable consumers to make informed decisions when purchasing currency conversion services. Amendments to this regulation were made by the Securities Financing Transactions, Securitisation and Miscellaneous Amendments (EU Exit) Regulations 2020.
The FCA is the relevant regulatory authority with responsibility for monitoring and enforcing the requirements of the onshored UK legislation. Should the FCA have concerns regarding firms’ compliance with the requirements, it will take appropriate action as necessary.
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether (1) HSBC, (2) Standard Charter, (3) Jardine Matheson, or (4) the Swire Group, have benefited from (a) the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme, (b) the Recovery Loan Scheme, (c) the COVID-19 Corporate Financing Facility provided by the Bank of England, or (d) business rates relief.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
For claims since 1 December 2020, HMRC publishes information about employers who claim through the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (CJRS) on a monthly basis, on gov.uk.
The Recovery Loan Scheme (RLS) launched on 6 April 2021 and is administered by the British Business Bank via a diverse network of accredited commercial lenders, of which HSBC are one.
None of these firms are or have previously been listed in the Bank of England’s published data on firms with outstanding commercial paper in the COVID-19 Corporate Financing Facility (CCFF). This data is available on the Bank of England’s website.
The Government has also provided business rates relief to eligible properties in the retail, hospitality and leisure sectors, and nurseries. It is for local authorities to determine eligibility for reliefs having regard to guidance issued by the Government. Central government does not hold any information on which businesses are in receipt of relief.
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government on what dates meetings between the Treasury and any representative of the government of China have taken place since January 2020; who participated in those meetings; and what agreements have been made between the government of China - including Chinese State Owned Enterprises - and the UK in that period.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
HM Treasury ministers and officials meet regularly with representative of the government of China in the course of international business, on a bilateral and multilateral basis.
Agreements between the Treasury and the Chinese government are usually made at the UK-China Economic and Financial Dialogue (EFD). Given an EFD has not occurred in the period from January 2020, no agreements have been made between the Treasury and the Chinese government during this period.
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of Burma Campaign’s response to the Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation Annual review April 2019 to March 2020, published on 9 October, in particular, the concerns of that Campaign that sanctions targeting 16 individuals from the Burmese military and security services have not resulted in any reported assets being frozen; whether they intend to publish details of any assets frozen as the result of those sanctions; and if not, why not.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
HM Treasury received correspondence from Burma Campaign UK regarding the Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI)’s Annual Review on 13 October 2020, and will respond directly to the Campaign in due course.
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the findings in the report by McKinsey & Company COVID-19 in the United Kingdom: Assessing jobs at risk and the impact on people and places that (1) “UK Gross Domestic Product in 2020 is expected to shrink by 9 per cent”, (2) “7.6 million jobs are at risk”, (3) “people and places with the lowest incomes are the most vulnerable to job loss… with nearly 50 per cent of all the jobs at risk are in occupations earning less than £10 per hour”; and what measures they intend to put in place to address those findings.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
The UK, along with the rest of the world, is continuing to face significant economic disruption in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic, with both the OBR and Bank of England publishing scenarios that are consistent with significant falls in GDP this year.
The Government has announced unprecedented support for the economy, including via the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme, the Self-Employment Income Support Scheme, the Coronavirus Business Interruption Loan Schemes and the Bounce Back Loan Scheme. However, despite these policies, there will be challenging times ahead, and we will not be able to protect every single job or save every single business.
The Government is committed to supporting the lowest paid workers and helping unemployed people go back into work and so is continuing to review what can be done to support those most vulnerable to job loss and to aid the UK’s economic recovery. We are working to ensure our labour market policy response is appropriate and effective.
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the answer by Baroness Williams of Trafford on 20 July (HL Deb, col 1413), what estimate they have made of (1) the savings in social and other state costs of free care provided for siblings living in sibling-couple households, and (2) the annual income to HM Treasury as a result of the tax applied to siblings when one sibling-couple partner dies.
Answered by Lord Bates
The government does not have an estimate of the savings in social care from free care provided by siblings living in these circumstances.
The government has not assessed the inheritance tax liabilities in these circumstances. All individuals benefit from a £325,000 tax free threshold for inheritance tax.
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they intend to respond to calls from the Association of Accounting Technicians to reduce the use of single-use plastics by (1) encouraging the development of alternatives, and (2) penalising the use of single-use plastic through (a) taxation, (b) charges, and (c) incentivising behaviour change.
Answered by Lord Bates
At Spring Statement, the Chancellor launched a call for evidence, aimed at tackling the plastic problem. This call for evidence will explore how the tax system or charges can be used to reduce single-plastic waste and make the production and consumption of single-use plastics more sustainable.
The Chancellor further supported this goal by committing £20m to businesses and universities, acting now to stimulate new thinking and develop alternative solutions in this area.
The call for evidence closes on 18 May. The government will outline how it plans to proceed once we have analysed the responses
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government under what circumstances they would consider relieving the government of Sudan of its sovereign debt to the UK.
Answered by Baroness Neville-Rolfe - Shadow Minister (Treasury)
Before the Government can support debt relief, Sudan would need to meet the requirements of the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) initiative. This includes a commitment to poverty reduction and a track record of reform and sound policies through an International Monetary Fund programme. The Government would also require Sudan to demonstrate commitment to and evidence of peace building, of upholding human rights and of respecting freedoms.
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the impact on the families affected by the underpayment of tax credits to families whose children qualified for Disability Living Allowance during 2011–14.
Answered by Lord Young of Cookham
Claimants were able to claim the higher rate of Child Tax Credits (CTC) by informing HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) of eligibility at the time an initial claim for or renewal of CTC was made. Accompanying guidance provided details of the eligibility requirements for this. In addition, claimants could call the relevant HMRC helpline at any time. Between April 2011 and April 2014, the number of working families claiming the disabled child element increased from 145,000 to 152,000, and has since risen to 169,000.
It is the claimants’ responsibility to inform HMRC of their eligibility to the higher element of CTC. To help claimants claim the right amount, HMRC’s backup practice is to take information from Department for Work and Pensions to automatically update tax credit awards. However, for the period in question, this information sharing process proved unreliable. Although legally HMRC are only required to backdate claims for 31 days on receipt of a notification or claim, at the Autumn Statement, the Government announced that HMRC would make corrections for this year for the customers it has identified who have not claimed. Customers will receive a lump sum payment to reflect entitlement since 6 April 2016, and an on-going higher award.
A higher level of CTC is awarded to parents of disabled children. The disabled child part of CTC is worth up to £3,140 per year on top of the standard child element, and the severely disabled element is an additional £1,275. The maximum amount a family receives is dependent on their personal circumstances and household income.