Asked by: Tom Randall (Conservative - Gedling)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what steps he is taking to ensure that the infected blood interim payment process for bereaved parents and children is (a) transparent and (b) efficient.
Answered by John Glen - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office
On 17th April, the Government tabled amendments to the Victims and Prisoners Bill which include a statutory duty to make interim payments of £100,000 to estates of the deceased infected people who were registered with existing or former support schemes (where previous interim payments have not already been made to infected individuals or their bereaved partners). This is an important step forward to get substantial compensation into the hands of families of victims of infected blood.
Asked by: Karl McCartney (Conservative - Lincoln)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what his planned timeframe is for establishing the arms-length body that will manage the compensation payments stemming from the Infected Blood Inquiry.
Answered by John Glen - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office
The Government has committed to update Parliament through an oral statement on next steps within 25 sitting days following the publication of the final report on 20 May, and it is our intention to make this statement as soon as possible. Additionally, we will bring forward amendments at Report Stage of the Victims and Prisoners Bill in the Other Place with the intention of speeding up the implementation of the Government’s response to the Infected Blood Inquiry.
Asked by: Sharon Hodgson (Labour - Washington and Sunderland West)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how often he has discussions with the Infected Blood Inquiry on the implementation of compensation recommendations.
Answered by John Glen - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office
I, and my predecessors in this role, have not had formal discussions with members of the Infected Blood Inquiry team, to protect the Inquiry’s independence from Government. The Government has committed to update Parliament through an oral statement on next steps within 25 sitting days following the publication of the Inquiry’s final report on 20 May, and it is our intention to make this statement as soon as possible.
Asked by: Julian Knight (Independent - Solihull)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what data his Department holds on the number of people who did not respond to the 2021 Census; and what steps were taken by the Office for National Statistics for non-compliance.
Answered by John Glen - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office
The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority.
A response to the hon. Member’s Parliamentary Questions of 12.04.24 are attached.
Asked by: Julian Knight (Independent - Solihull)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many and what proportion of respondents to the 2021 Census responded (a) digitally and (b) by post.
Answered by John Glen - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office
The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority.
A response to the hon. Member’s Parliamentary Questions of 12.04.24 are attached.
Asked by: Philip Davies (Conservative - Shipley)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what assessment he has made of trends in the level of (a) GDP growth and (b) the value of exports in each year since 1 February 2021.
Answered by John Glen - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office
The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority.
A response to the Hon gentleman’s Parliamentary Question of 12/04/2024 is attached.
Asked by: Matthew Offord (Conservative - Hendon)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many (a) full time and (b) part time civil service personnel there were in each of the last five years.
Answered by John Glen - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office
The number of civil servants working full time and part time in each year from 2019 to 2023 on the stated reference date were:
Reference date | Full-time | Part-time |
2019/03/31 | 344,050 | 102,020 |
2020/03/31 | 350,790 | 104,850 |
2021/03/31 | 392,140 | 112,940 |
2022/03/31 | 409,040 | 102,060 |
2023/03/31 | 418,170 | 102,400 |
Figures are from the ONS public sector employment statistics publications. The total may differ slightly from other published figures due to rounding.
Asked by: Karl McCartney (Conservative - Lincoln)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, who has been appointed to the Infected Blood Inquiry expert group.
Answered by John Glen - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office
Professor Sir Jonathan Montgomery has been appointed as the chair of the expert group to advise on the Government’s response to the Infected Blood Inquiry’s recommendations on compensation. The names of the other members of the expert group have not been disclosed to safeguard the privacy and ability of experts to continue their frontline clinical roles whilst advising on Government policy.
Asked by: Gen Kitchen (Labour - Wellingborough)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what recent assessment he has made of trends in the level of life expectancy in Wellingborough constituency.
Answered by John Glen - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office
The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority.
A response to the Hon lady’s Parliamentary Question of 12/04/2024 is attached.
Asked by: Emily Thornberry (Labour - Islington South and Finsbury)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, with reference to his Department's Evaluation Task Force Output and Outcome Indicators March 2024, if he will publish the (a) Evaluation Accelerator Fund projects rated red and (b) Evaluation Task Force priority projects without robust evaluation plans.
Answered by John Glen - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office
The Evaluation Task Force (ETF) committed to publicly report on a series of output and outcome indicators in response to recommendations featured in the ‘Evaluating Government Spending’ NAO report in 2022 and the Public Accounts Committee’s recommendation for the ETF to establish quantifiable metrics on the scale and quality of evaluation across government. These indicators of progress can be viewed in the ETF evaluation strategy published in 2022 here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-evaluation-task-force-strategy-2022-2025
The indicators are not wholly controlled or ‘owned’ by the ETF. Driving progress towards the targets outlined in the ETF strategy are dependent on cross-government partners working together to build an improved evaluation ecosystem which creates more and higher quality evaluation in government.
The PQ references two indicators:
1.4 Proportion of Evaluation Accelerator Fund projects on track (RAG rated 'Green')
1.6 Proportion of ETF priority projects with robust evaluation plans (cumulative)
The ETF Output and Outcome Indicators (March 2024) report has also published its Technical Annex alongside the main report. This details the number of projects rated Red, Amber and Green across these portfolios and provides a detailed explanation of how these ratings were assessed. This is summarised in the background section below.
Departments and What Works Centres who lead either EAF or priority projects understand they are part of the ETF’s broader portfolio of work and that although regular indicators of evaluation progress in government are published, there have been no plans to publish the details of specific projects as part of the reporting.
The ETF has established good working relationships with departments who (particularly within the context of EAF and priority projects) are delivering complex evaluations in high profile policy areas. The departments openly share their work with the ETF and this transparency has enabled the ETF to provide high quality advice and support to teams. Using the information provided to the ETF to specifically publicly name projects, separately from other projects, risks damaging this important working relationship.
The ETF instead has been working to ensure transparency on a larger more sustainable scale, for all projects not just ETF priority areas. The Cabinet Office and the ETF will soon be publicly launching the Government Evaluation Registry. The Registry will bring together all planned, live and completed evaluations from Government Departments in a single accessible location, providing an invaluable tool for understanding “what works” in Government. Due to the importance of transparency and improving evaluation across Departments, the Government has decided to make use of the Registry mandatory. As such, Departments and What Works Centres responsible for EAF funded and priority projects will publish plans and findings on the Registry in due course. This will then be available to the public, along with the plans and reports for the rest of the department’s portfolio.