Skip to main content

1-20 of 127 results for subject:Email

Year X
2018

Type

House

Session

Month

Department

Member

More

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

More

Publisher


Show detailed: On Off
Results: 10 20 50 100
Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many Government Departments use (a) a domain message authentication reporting and conformance cybersecurity system (b) a system for identifying external emails to recipients and (c) a protocol for timely staff reporting of suspicious emails.

Asked by
Jo Platt (Labour; Co-operative Party)
Answering body
Cabinet Office
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Date
20 December 2018
Reference
202801
House
House of Commons

Motion to consider. Agreed to on question.

Lead member
John Glen
Answering member
Anneliese Dodds
Department
Treasury
Type
Debates on delegated legislation; Delegated Legislation Committee proceedings
Committee
Sixth Delegated Legislation Committee
Date
12 December 2018
House
House of Commons

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what steps her Department has taken to ensure that disabled people have access to a customer service email address for personal independence payment assessments.

Asked by
Marsha De Cordova (Labour)
Answering body
Department for Work and Pensions
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Date
11 December 2018
Reference
199924
House
House of Commons

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether claimants are given the option of receiving all correspondence from her Department via email if they have provided their email address.

Asked by
Lord Field of Birkenhead (Independent (affiliation))
Answering body
Department for Work and Pensions
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Date
10 December 2018
Reference
198187
House
House of Commons

Lords motion to approve. Agreed to on question.

Lead member
Lord Bates
Answering member
Lord Tunnicliffe
Department
Treasury
Type
Debates on delegated legislation
Date
28 November 2018
Reference
794 cc696-702
House
House of Lords

My Lords, for most people in the UK, their largest financial asset will be their pension, which unfortunately makes pensions an attractive target for fraudsters. As I am sure the House is aware, pension scams have had devastating consequences. Scams can leave people to face retirement with limited income, unable...

Member
Lord Bates (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
28 November 2018
Reference
794 cc696-8
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I welcome these regulations, which restrict firms in cold-calling individuals regarding their pension schemes. The Explanatory Memorandum was clear and helpful in setting matters out. This was a point of considerable concern during the passage of the Financial Guidance and Claims Act 2018, when the Government gave a...

Member
Baroness Drake (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
28 November 2018
Reference
794 cc698-9
House
House of Lords

My Lords, first, I again thank the noble Lord, Lord Bates, for his introduction; it makes a change not to be the expert in the room. I greatly welcome this legislation and have just a few points to make, some of which follow up on those made by the noble...

Member
Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
28 November 2018
Reference
794 cc699-700
House
House of Lords

My Lords, subject to a satisfactory response from the Minister to the queries by the two noble Baronesses, I warmly welcome these regulations. I am sure many people will value the fact that cold calling is reduced, particularly in this important area.

Member
Lord Tunnicliffe (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
28 November 2018
Reference
794 c700
House
House of Lords

I thank noble Lords for their questions. I will try to address the points that were raised. The noble Baronesses, Lady Drake and Lady Bowles, asked why we have not considered banning all cold calls. Pensions cold calling is a special case where levels of consumer detriment are particularly high....

Member
Lord Bates (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
28 November 2018
Reference
794 cc701-2
House
House of Lords
Laid by
Margot James
Department
Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport
Type
Statutory instruments
Date
16 November 2018
Reference
SI 2018/1189
House
House of Lords; House of Commons

To ask the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, whether his Department has any plans to extend the availability of the National Cyber Security Centre's Mail check tool to those with private sector email addresses.

Asked by
Jo Platt (Labour; Co-operative Party)
Answering body
Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Date
14 November 2018
Reference
189794
House
House of Commons
Laid by
John Glen
Department
Treasury
Type
Statutory instruments
Date
1 November 2018
Reference
SI 2018/1396; SI 2018/
House
House of Lords; House of Commons

To ask Her Majesty’s Government how much UK Visas and Immigration charges its customers applying from outside the United Kingdom for making enquiries by (1) telephone, and (2) email; and how much money they have collected from those charges since 1 June 2017.

Asked by
Lord Harris of Haringey (Labour)
Oral questions - Lead
Status
Answered
Date
18 October 2018
Reference
793 cc563-5
House
House of Lords

My Lords, forgive me. This is like buses: nothing happens and then two come along at the same time.

For overseas customers, UK Visa and Immigration has a chargeable call rate of £1.37 per minute and a £5.48 email charge. The Home Office has a contract in place with Sitel UK Ltd for the provision of contact services for both UK and international inquiries. It is not possible to provide data requested on how much money has been collected since 1 June 2017 due to commercial sensitivity.

Answered by
Baroness Manzoor (Conservative)
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
18 October 2018
Reference
793 c564
House
House of Lords

My Lords, £1.37 per minute plus the carrier costs and £5.48 for an email? This issue was drawn to my attention by a postgraduate researcher based in India seeking to clarify their visa position. The costs are not insignificant to such a person. The Minister mentioned commercial sensitivity because this is a privatised service. Presumably that means that, in this case, a graduate student would not even be talking to Home Office officials to get the answers they wanted. Can she place on record the equality impact assessment that was carried out when this was introduced, and tell us where the liability lies in the event of bad advice being given? Is it with the Home Office, the contractor or the graduate student in India?

Asked by
Lord Harris of Haringey (Labour)
Oral questions - 1st Supplementary
Status
Answered
Date
18 October 2018
Reference
793 c564
House
House of Lords

My Lords, certainly if a quality impact assessment has been done we will make that available. To be clear, I should say that the Government believe that it is right for those who use and benefit directly from the UK immigration system to make an appropriate contribution towards meeting the costs. Fees set by the Home Office border, immigration and citizen services are set at a level that partially funds the immigration system; the remainder is funded through general taxation.

Answered by
Baroness Manzoor (Conservative)
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
18 October 2018
Reference
793 c564
House
House of Lords

My Lords, does UKVI see itself as a service? Also, large as these sums may be to the individual, as the noble Lord said, they are very small in the context of government. What is the cost of collecting such amounts? Can that be shown as a set-off against the income derived? Indeed, does UKVI successfully collect that income?

Asked by
Baroness Hamwee (Liberal Democrat)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Date
18 October 2018
Reference
793 c564
House
House of Lords

My Lords, it is a service, and many people believe it is a good service. International call and email charges are levied to fund the commercial contract, and the new service is delivered at a much lower cost to UKVI than previously. Before 2014,

there were 32 centres fragmented across the country. The new contract offers a modern, streamlined service which service users find helpful.

Answered by
Baroness Manzoor (Conservative)
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
18 October 2018
Reference
793 c564
House
House of Lords

Why do not the Government run this inquiry service directly themselves instead of outsourcing it? Presumably the claimed difficulties over commercial confidentiality would then not arise over answering questions about the income arising from the charges made and the cost of providing the service. The reality is that the arrangements into which the Government have entered deny the public information and, conveniently for the Government, reduce their accountability.

Asked by
Lord Rosser (Labour)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Date
18 October 2018
Reference
793 c565
House
House of Lords