All 2 Debates between Stephen Metcalfe and Maria Miller

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Stephen Metcalfe and Maria Miller
Monday 14th February 2011

(13 years, 2 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Maria Miller Portrait Maria Miller
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank the hon. Lady for her question—I think. I would reiterate the point that I made earlier, which is that the changes to disability living allowance finances that we are talking about would mean keeping expenditure the same as it was last year, after eight years of a 30% increase. Overall, she has to keep that in mind. What we will do is ensure that we remove any expenditure overlaps, as she would expect us to do, and as I had hoped the previous Government would do.

Stephen Metcalfe Portrait Stephen Metcalfe (South Basildon and East Thurrock) (Con)
- Hansard - -

14. How many new businesses he expects to be created as a result of the new enterprise allowance in the first 12 months of its operation.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Stephen Metcalfe and Maria Miller
Monday 22nd November 2010

(13 years, 5 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Maria Miller Portrait Maria Miller
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman knows from the recent spending review settlement that Remploy’s modernisation plan and funding are in place, and we will continue to monitor its performance against that. I have already met trade union officials about Remploy’s future, and I will continue to do so as we move forward with the modernisation plan.

Stephen Metcalfe Portrait Stephen Metcalfe (South Basildon and East Thurrock) (Con)
- Hansard - -

I, like many other hon. Members, have been contacted by a number of constituents whose pension provision has been seriously affected by the collapse of the former Ford UK parts manufacturer, Visteon. Will the Secretary of State meet me to explore how we might best help those who have been most adversely affected?