Asked by: Tony Lloyd (Labour - Rochdale)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what estimate she has made of the number of prosecutions of registered sex offenders who fail to inform the police of their name change in a timely manner.
Answered by Sarah Dines
The UK has some of the toughest powers in the world to deal with sex offenders and those who pose a risk, and we are committed to ensuring that the system is as robust as it can be.
Data on the number of convictions for breaches of the notification requirements for registered sex offenders is published by the Ministry of Justice in the Multi-Agency Public Protection arrangements (MAPPA) annual report, which is available here: MAPPA_Annual_Report_2022.pdf (publishing.service.gov.uk). The most recent report showed that the number of offenders cautioned or convicted for breaches of their notification requirements in 2021-2 was 1,905.
Data on the number of prosecutions of registered sex offenders who fail to inform the police of their name change the number who have had restrictions placed on them relating to name change are not collated centrally. The courts can, however, place a range of restrictions or requirements on offenders through sexual harm prevention orders and sexual risk orders to mitigate the risk of sexual harm.
Asked by: Tony Lloyd (Labour - Rochdale)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what information his Department collects on the caseloads of social care workers in each local authority.
Answered by Helen Whately - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Department does not measure the caseloads of social care workers.
Asked by: Tony Lloyd (Labour - Rochdale)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will make an assessment of the impact of the 10-year route to settlement on levels of integration in the period since 2012; and if she will make a statement.
Answered by Robert Jenrick
Those who meet all eligibility and specified evidential requirements of the Family Immigration Rules are granted on a five-year route to settlement (granted in two periods of 30 months, with a third application for indefinite leave to remain). Those who cannot or do not meet these requirements, or seek to rely on their private life, instead have a 10 year route to settlement (granted in four periods of 30 months, with a fifth application for indefinite leave to remain). This reflects our obligations under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The 10 year route provides additional time for those applicants to better integrate into British society by being able to achieve an appropriate knowledge of the English language which, in turn, will enable them to obtain employment and take a full and active part in their community.
We are in the process of simplifying the immigration system, including the 10 year routes to settlement. As part of this simplification the impact of existing policies will be taken into account.
Asked by: Tony Lloyd (Labour - Rochdale)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, if he will take steps to provide individuals who receive means-tested Council Tax support with cost of living support payments.
Answered by Mims Davies - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
The Cost of Living Payments are targeted at low-income households in receipt of a qualifying means tested benefit. Low income households who are in receipt of Council Tax support are able to apply for one of these qualifying means-tested benefits which may provide them with entitlement to a Cost of Living Payment.
To receive a Cost of Living Payment the individual must be entitled to payment of a qualifying means-tested benefit during the qualifying periods, or a payment of Universal Credit for an assessment period ending within the qualifying periods.
Asked by: Tony Lloyd (Labour - Rochdale)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether she has made an assessment of the potential merits of introducing a fee waiver for applications for indefinite leave to remain.
Answered by Robert Jenrick
The right to stay indefinitely is one of the most valuable entitlements offered for those seeking to enter or remain in the UK, and it is right that the fee should be higher than most for migrants staying temporarily in the UK.
A grant of indefinite leave to remain is not necessary to enable people to remain in the UK on the basis of their Article 8 or other ECHR rights, as these can be met through a grant of limited leave to remain. The provision of an affordability-based waiver for limited leave on family and private life routes allows an individual or family to remain here lawfully, and to then apply for settlement and pay the fee when the funds become available. As such, there are no plans to waive the fee for indefinite leave to remain.
Asked by: Tony Lloyd (Labour - Rochdale)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many people are waiting for the outcome of an application for further leave to remain; and how many and what proportion of those people have limited leave to remain on the 10-year route to settlement on the basis of their family or private lives.
Answered by Robert Jenrick
We do not currently hold any information regarding the proportion of these people who might have limited leave to remain in the UK and are consequently awaiting a decision on a visa extension application are on the ten-year route to settlement.
Asked by: Tony Lloyd (Labour - Rochdale)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will make an estimate of the number of people who are expected to apply for indefinite leave to remain after completing the 10-year route based on their family or private life in the next five years.
Answered by Robert Jenrick
The data requested is not available in a reportable format.
Asked by: Tony Lloyd (Labour - Rochdale)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether she plans to take steps to ensure that all actors and intermediaries recruiting workers for the seasonal workers scheme are licensed by the Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority.
Answered by Robert Jenrick
It is a requirement to be licensed with the Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority at all times as a scheme operator on the Seasonal Worker immigration route.
The operators are responsible for managing all aspects of the recruitment and placement of workers on UK farms, and ensuring their welfare in the UK. This includes ethical recruitment practices, in line with Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority regulations.
Asked by: Tony Lloyd (Labour - Rochdale)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps she is taking to help ensure the welfare of people using Seasonal Worker visas (a) at their point of recruitment in their countries of origin and (b) recruited through licenced scheme operators; and if she will take steps to provide additional welfare protections for people recruited through third party recruiters used by licenced scheme operators.
Answered by Robert Jenrick
The sponsor licence regime places a broad range of responsibilities on Scheme Operators to ensure that the rights of migrant workers are protected.
The UK government however has no legal jurisdiction to regulate recruitment taking place outside of the United Kingdom. Although the Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority (GLAA) has no remit to investigate labour abuse and exploitation in other countries, it nonetheless works through our Embassies to put relevant regulatory bodies in contact with their opposite numbers.
We have made ongoing enhancements to the worker welfare protections throughout the lifetime of the Seasonal Work route and we are continuing to keep the route under close review.
Asked by: Tony Lloyd (Labour - Rochdale)
Question to the Leader of the House:
To ask the Leader of the House, what the Government's policy is on replies to hon. Members' correspondence being made in the name of civil servants rather than be signed by a Minister.
Answered by Penny Mordaunt - Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons
As set out in the Cabinet Office Guide to Handling Correspondence (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/handling-government-correspondence-guidance) all correspondence to Ministers from MPs should be signed off at an appropriate ministerial level. Official replies to letters from MPs should only occur where the correspondent has written about the day-to-day operations of an executive agency or a non-departmental public body, in which case the relevant Chief Executive may be asked to reply, or where a Minister determines that the particular circumstances mean an official reply would be more appropriate.