Show Search Form

Search Results

registered interest	true false
date	exactly: or between: and
answering body
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
hansard heading
house id
legislature	pref label
question text
tabling member constituency
tabling member printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member constituency answering member printed grouped question UIN question first answered answering member label attachment file name title previous answer version answering member constituency answering member printed answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

390405

	registered interest
	date	15/07/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	House of Commons: Catering
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Rt. Hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, how many staff in catering outlets on the Parliamentary Estate are employed on zero-hour contracts.
	tabling member constituency	Sheffield, Brightside and Hillsborough
	tabling member printed	Harry Harpham
	uin	7241
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 20/07/2015 answer text <p>The House of Commons does not offer new members of staff zero-hours contracts, and guarantees work for all its employees. There are two members of staff currently working under casual contracts in Catering Services, whose appointments pre-date this policy. They have been offered, but have declined, guaranteed hours employment contracts.</p><p>The arrangements in the House of Lords are a matter for the Administration of that House.</p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 20/07/2015 15:45:57 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4477 label Biography information for Harry Harpham

390406

	registered interest
	date	15/07/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	House of Commons: Catering
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, whether tips paid by credit or debit cards in catering outlets on the Parliamentary Estate are passed on to staff in addition to their wages.
	tabling member constituency	Sheffield, Brightside and Hillsborough
	tabling member printed	Harry Harpham
	uin	7242
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 20/07/2015 answer text <p>Tips paid by debit and credit cards are passed on to permanent front-of-house catering staff in addition to their wages.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 20/07/2015 15:46:27 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4477 label Biography information for Harry Harpham

390407

	registered interest
	date	15/07/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Divisions: Technology
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Rt. Hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, what electronic upgrades to the recording of divisions in the House (a) have been made since 2010 and (b) are under preparation in connection with proposed changes to the standing orders on English votes on English laws.
	tabling member constituency	Aberdeen North
	tabling member printed	Kirsty Blackman
	uin	7244
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 20/07/2015 answer text <p>Accurate recording of divisions and timely publication of division lists are critical business activities of the House of Commons.</p><p> </p><p>The House Service has been investigating means of electronic recording of divisions since October 2014, with a view to improving the timely publication of division lists, making division data more accessible to the public and easier to analyse, and improving accuracy. The House of Lords recently moved to recording divisions on tablet devices.</p><p> </p><p>A trial was held in the House in March 2015 in which seven divisions were recorded in part by division clerks on tablet devices.</p><p> </p><p>Full implementation of tablet recording of divisions is expected to take place later in the current Session. This change had been planned before the announcement of the Government’s proposals for English votes for English laws, although the use of tablets would make it easier and quicker to provide the results of divisions taken under the proposed ‘double-majority’ system.</p><p> </p><p>In 2013/14 the amount spent on electronic upgrades to the recording of divisions was zero.</p><p> </p><p>In 2014/15, the amount spent on electronic upgrades to the recording of divisions was £9,900. This included £5,000 for the cost of developing software and £4,900 for purchasing the tablet devices referred to above.</p><p> </p><p>The work on the project is not yet complete, but the total amount spent to date in 2015/16 is £6,700. This includes £5,000 for purchasing tablet devices and £1,700 to modify the software to enable the tablets to provide the results of divisions taken under the proposed ‘double-majority’ system.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake grouped question UIN 7245 question first answered 20/07/2015 15:48:23 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4357 label Biography information for Kirsty Blackman

390408

	registered interest
	date	15/07/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Divisions: Technology
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Rt. Hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, how much has been spent on electronic upgrades to the recording of divisions in the House in each of the last two financial years.
	tabling member constituency	Aberdeen North
	tabling member printed	Kirsty Blackman
	uin	7245
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 20/07/2015 answer text <p>Accurate recording of divisions and timely publication of division lists are critical business activities of the House of Commons.</p><p> </p><p>The House Service has been investigating means of electronic recording of divisions since October 2014, with a view to improving the timely publication of division lists, making division data more accessible to the public and easier to analyse, and improving accuracy. The House of Lords recently moved to recording divisions on tablet devices.</p><p> </p><p>A trial was held in the House in March 2015 in which seven divisions were recorded in part by division clerks on tablet devices.</p><p> </p><p>Full implementation of tablet recording of divisions is expected to take place later in the current Session. This change had been planned before the announcement of the Government’s proposals for English votes for English laws, although the use of tablets would make it easier and quicker to provide the results of divisions taken under the proposed ‘double-majority’ system.</p><p> </p><p>In 2013/14 the amount spent on electronic upgrades to the recording of divisions was zero.</p><p> </p><p>In 2014/15, the amount spent on electronic upgrades to the recording of divisions was £9,900. This included £5,000 for the cost of developing software and £4,900 for purchasing the tablet devices referred to above.</p><p> </p><p>The work on the project is not yet complete, but the total amount spent to date in 2015/16 is £6,700. This includes £5,000 for purchasing tablet devices and £1,700 to modify the software to enable the tablets to provide the results of divisions taken under the proposed ‘double-majority’ system.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake grouped question UIN 7244 question first answered 20/07/2015 15:48:24 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4357 label Biography information for Kirsty Blackman

390837

	registered interest
	date	16/07/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Divisions: Technology
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Rt. Hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, what estimate he has made of the change in the cost of electronic upgrades for recording divisions arising from proposed changes to Standing Orders on English votes on English laws.
	tabling member constituency	Aberdeen North
	tabling member printed	Kirsty Blackman
	uin	7760
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/07/2015 answer text <p>I refer the hon. Member to my answer yesterday to Questions 7244 and 7245.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 21/07/2015 09:19:26 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4357 label Biography information for Kirsty Blackman

390839

	registered interest
	date	16/07/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	House of Commons: Uniforms
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Rt. Hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, if the Commission will take steps to allow door-keeping staff a summer uniform made from lighter materials to reduce discomfort in hot weather.
	tabling member constituency	Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill
	tabling member printed	Phil Boswell
	uin	7716
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/07/2015 answer text <p>Doorkeeping staff who perform a variety of outside and inside duties have a range of uniforms to wear as appropriate. Senior Doorkeepers who exclusively perform inside duties, and predominantly around the Chamber (which has cooling), have one uniform. These uniforms are 'bespoke' and to provide a second uniform would have considerable resource implications. The Serjeant at Arms has not received any requests from the Doorkeeping staff to either create a summer version of the uniform or to 'dress down' during hotter weather.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 21/07/2015 09:20:06 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4388 label Biography information for Philip Boswell

390838

	registered interest
	date	16/07/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Select Committees: Technology
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Rt. Hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, what progress has been made on developing device independent applications for the distribution of select committee papers.
	tabling member constituency	Newcastle upon Tyne Central
	tabling member printed	Chi Onwurah
	uin	7713
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/07/2015 answer text <p>Documents for select committees are circulated to committee members electronically, predominantly in PDF format; a format that can be read on a number of different devices. Following the decision of the House of Commons Commission, 557 Members have been issued with an iPad. Support for the system of distributing papers has focused mainly on the needs of iPad users, including software to allow the synching and personal annotation of documents. Members are not restricted to using iPads and can access the folders used for distributing committee documents on a desktop or laptop computer and, if they wish, copy them onto a tablet device of their choice. Alternative methods of distributing papers are being investigated and the Liaison Committee will be consulted to ensure that the views of Members are taken into account. Device independence remains a key requirement.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 21/07/2015 10:50:37 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4124 label Biography information for Chi Onwurah

391513

	registered interest
	date	20/07/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Parliament: Hearing Aids
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Rt. Hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, pursuant to the Answer of 22 June 2015 to Question 2662, if he will extend the provision of the induction loop system to ensure people who have hearing loss or who are deaf can follow proceedings in all meeting rooms using a personal loop inducted into that system.
	tabling member constituency	Walsall North
	tabling member printed	Mr David Winnick
	uin	7923
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 07/09/2015 answer text <p>Following the hon. Member’s questions of 15 and 22 June, officials in the Department of Facilities have worked with the House of Commons audio-visual (AV) contractor to establish the costs and viability of extending the existing infra-red loop system to those meeting rooms on the Estate that do not currently have this facility. The work to install this facility in an additional twenty-one rooms across the Estate is planned to take place during the Conference Recess and be in place when the House returns in October.<br><br>An additional twenty-one rooms will be fitted with the infra-red loop system at a cost of approximately £31k. The rooms concerned are:</p><ul><li>Portcullis House : Rooms M,N,O,P,Q,R,S,T and U</li><li>Norman Shaw North: Ground Floor Interview Room</li><li>Parliament St: Rooms A,B,C and D</li><li>Millbank House: Archbishop’s Room</li><li>7 Millbank: Conference Room E and Room 11</li><li>The Palace of Westminster: Conference Room H</li><li>Tothill St: Rooms G01, G02 and G03</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 07/09/2015 14:09:40 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	316 label Biography information for Mr David Winnick

391864

	registered interest
	date	21/07/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Palace of Westminster
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Rt. Hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, whether options other than remaining in the Palace of Westminster have been considered for the long-term future of the House.
	tabling member constituency	Edinburgh North and Leith
	tabling member printed	Deidre Brock
	uin	8344
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 07/09/2015 answer text <p>An option to move Parliament out of the Palace of Westminster to a new purpose-built building was included in the Restoration and Renewal Pre-Feasibility Study of 2012. The House of Commons Commission reviewed that study on 29 October 2012. It decided to rule out the option of constructing a new building away from Westminster and agreed that no further analysis would be undertaken on this option. The House Committee of the House of Lords took a similar view.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 07/09/2015 14:10:32 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4417 label Biography information for Deidre Brock

391865

	registered interest
	date	21/07/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	House of Commons Chamber
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Rt. Hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, whether consideration has been given to ensuring that there will be adequate provision for every hon. Member to attend proceedings and take part in proceedings in the Chamber following the restoration and renewal of the Palace of Westminster.
	tabling member constituency	Edinburgh North and Leith
	tabling member printed	Deidre Brock
	uin	8348
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 07/09/2015 answer text <p>The two Houses have established a Joint Committee on the Palace of Westminster which will report and make recommendations to both Houses on the future restoration and renewal of the Palace. It will be for the two Houses to decide in due course whether or not they wish to make changes to the layout and seating arrangements of their respective Chambers in conjunction with the essential replacement of service infrastructure and other repairs to the fabric of the building. I am sure that the Joint Committee will be happy to receive the hon. Lady's ideas on this subject.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 07/09/2015 14:11:20 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4417 label Biography information for Deidre Brock

416521

	registered interest
	date	04/09/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Electronic Voting
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, pursuant to his oral statement of 2 July 2015, on English Votes on English Laws, Official Report, column 1646, what tender process was undertaken when deciding which electronic devices would be used by hon. Members for English and Welsh constituencies when casting their votes on pieces of legislation certified as being England or Wales only.
	tabling member constituency	Alyn and Deeside
	tabling member printed	Mark Tami
	uin	8688
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 11/09/2015 answer text <p>The House Service has been investigating means of electronic recording of divisions since October 2014. A trial was held in the House in March 2015 in which seven divisions were recorded in part by division clerks on two tablet devices. Those two devices had been purchased in February 2015 and a further four devices were purchased in May, in preparation for the next phase of the project. The devices chosen, for the use of House officials administering divisions, rather than hon. Members, had recently been added to the equipment catalogue for Members, so met Parliament’s requirements in terms of security, screen size and technical compatibility. They were purchased from a supplier on the Sprint procurement framework.</p><p>Full implementation of tablet recording of divisions is expected to take place later in the current Session. This change had been planned before the announcement of the Government’s proposals for English votes for English laws, although the use of tablets would make it easier and quicker to provide the results of divisions taken under the proposed ‘double-majority’ system.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 11/09/2015 12:07:56 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	1383 label Biography information for Mark Tami

417708

	registered interest
	date	08/09/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	House of Commons: Working Hours
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, what (a) overtime and (b) flexible working arrangements are in place for clerking, catering, security, Hansard and other ancillary or support staff and officers of the House during late sittings of the House.
	tabling member constituency	Glasgow North
	tabling member printed	Patrick Grady
	uin	9407
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 14/09/2015 answer text <p>The House of Commons terms and conditions of employment include provision to compensate staff for working late and/or additional hours during late sittings of the House.</p><p> </p><p>Staff in pay bands A–E (and some senior staff) required to work until the rise of the House or beyond are paid an Unsocial Hours Payment (UHP) for the commitment to work to an undefined time and a flat rate for each additional hour they work after 6pm once that have completed 8 hours work during that day. Staff who are not normally required to work to the rise of House or beyond, but agree to do so, may be eligible for paid overtime payments or time off in lieu (TOIL).</p><p> </p><p>Staff in catering pay bands are required to work until 15 minutes after the rise of the House if they are contracted to work in venues that supply services to Members. Staff who work in these areas or volunteer to work in these areas are paid overtime for any additional hours worked.</p><p> </p><p>Line managers have the discretion to agree flexibility around working hours by compensating individuals for additional hours worked by granting TOIL. Where business needs allow, TOIL can be granted to manage peaks and troughs in workloads. The extent to which TOIL is used varies between areas or roles, but is used frequently in some cases where workloads vary significantly between sitting and non-sitting periods. Work is under way to introduce a Flexible Time Management Policy.</p><p> </p><p>Security staff are employed by the Metropolitan Police Service and are paid in accordance with their terms and conditions of employment.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 14/09/2015 15:57:56 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake previous answer version 20747 answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4432 label Biography information for Patrick Grady

418062

	registered interest
	date	09/09/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Parliament: Art Works
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, how many items in the Parliamentary Art Collection are on loan outside the parliamentary estate.
	tabling member constituency	Ellesmere Port and Neston
	tabling member printed	Justin Madders
	uin	9669
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 16/09/2015 answer text <p>There are currently four objects from the Parliamentary Art Collection on loan outside the Parliamentary Estate.<br><br>The House of Commons and the House of Lords are actively committed to giving access to the Parliamentary Art Collection to as wide an audience as possible.<br><br>Loan requests are welcomed which will broaden access to the Collection and we are actively developing professional partnerships with other institutions around the UK who are organising exhibitions. In addition to this the Works of Art Committees of both Houses are working hard to raise the profile of the Parliamentary Art Collection and building to increase the number of loans outside the Parliamentary Estate.<br><br>The number of loans out changes from time to time as works are usually loaned for temporary exhibition.<br><br>As the Works of Art Committees have only recently reformed following the election we anticipate that the number of loans out may increase as pending loan requests are considered.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 16/09/2015 15:07:45 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4418 label Biography information for Justin Madders

418061

	registered interest
	date	09/09/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Parliament: Art Works
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, how many items in the Parliamentary Art Collection are (a) on and (b) not on public display.
	tabling member constituency	Ellesmere Port and Neston
	tabling member printed	Justin Madders
	uin	9668
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 17/09/2015 answer text <p>The total recorded number of works of art in the Parliamentary Art Collection (House of Commons and House of Lords) is 7,900.<br><br>On average, approximately 6,320 works, or 80% of the whole Parliamentary Art Collection is on display around the buildings of the Parliamentary Estate (Commons and Lords) at any one time. Approximately 1,500 of those works are in areas to which the public have access, including committee rooms and banqueting facilities to which guests may be taken.<br><br>The Works of Art Committees take care to ensure that the most important works in the collection are displayed in public areas on the line of route, in committee rooms and in banqueting areas to which the public have access.<br><br>Works from the collection are also drawn from other areas across the Estate for temporary displays such as the current ‘Waterloo, Wellington and Westminster’ exhibition in the Royal Gallery and the Election Artist display in Portcullis House which will accessible during the forthcoming ‘Open House’ weekend.<br><br>The public also have access to the Collection via the Parliamentary Art Collection website <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/art" target="_blank">www.parliament.uk/art</a> which also features online exhibitions, videos and lectures about the collection.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 17/09/2015 17:06:26 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4418 label Biography information for Justin Madders

418060

	registered interest
	date	09/09/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Parliament: Art Works
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, pursuant to the Answer of 30 June 2015 to Question 3834, what disposal strategy there is for the Parliamentary Art Collection.
	tabling member constituency	Ellesmere Port and Neston
	tabling member printed	Justin Madders
	uin	9732
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 17/09/2015 answer text <p>The disposals policy for the Parliamentary Art Collection was reviewed and agreed in 2013 and is published with my answer.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 17/09/2015 17:06:45 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake attachment 1 file name WoA-Disposal-Policy-2013.pdf title 4-page document
	tabling member	4418 label Biography information for Justin Madders

419569

	registered interest
	date	17/09/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	House of Commons: Pay
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, how many people employed by the House of Commons (a) directly and (b) indirectly are not receiving a wage of at least £7.85 an hour.
	tabling member constituency	Paisley and Renfrewshire North
	tabling member printed	Gavin Newlands
	uin	10568
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 12/10/2015 answer text <p>The House of Commons is an accredited London Living Wage Employer. In order to obtain our accreditation, the House has to satisfy the Living Wage Foundation that no directly employed or contracted workers engaged to work on the Parliamentary Estate are paid less than the London Living Wage (LLW), currently £9.15 an hour.</p><p>All contractors and their sub-contractors with staff based in London providing services to the House have agreed to pay at least the London Living Wage to those of their staff working on contracts for the House; or, in the case of staff working for contractors outside London, at least the Living Wage of £7.85 an hour. These contractual requirements are included within our Standard Terms and Conditions of Contract.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 12/10/2015 09:15:38 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4420 label Biography information for Gavin Newlands

418961

	registered interest
	date	15/09/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	House of Commons: Working Hours
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, pursuant to the Answer of 14 September 2015 to Question 9407, what estimate the Commission has made of the cost of overtime payments to staff resulting from late sittings of the House in each year since 2010.
	tabling member constituency	Glasgow North
	tabling member printed	Patrick Grady
	uin	10253
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 12/10/2015 answer text <p>A late sitting can refer to either an occasion when the House sits beyond its likely scheduled rise (i.e. 10.30pm on Monday, 7.30pm on Tuesday and Wednesday, 5.30pm on Thursday); or whenever the House sits beyond 10.00pm.</p><p>Two types of payments are made to staff in order to support evening sittings, including late sittings: the Unsocial Hours Payment (UHP), an annual flat-rate allowance paid across the year to staff required to work to an unspecified time during evening sittings; and the Evening Additional Hours (EAH) payment which reflects the number of additional hours worked after 6pm, paid at a standard rate from 1800 to 2230 and at a higher rate after 2230. Additionally, in certain circumstances overtime may be paid to staff which may or may not be related to the House’s sitting hours. These payments are not reflected in this answer as the records do not indicate in which circumstances they were made to support late sittings. A late night taxi service is provided to staff who are required to work late; this service is only available after 2300.</p><p>Security staff are employed by the Metropolitan Police Service and are paid in accordance with their terms and conditions of employment.</p><p>The costs of UHP, EAH and the late night taxi service in each year since 2010–11 was as follows:</p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Year</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Unsocial Hours Allowance*</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Evening hours payment*</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Travel Costs</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Total Cost</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010–2011</p></td><td><p>£373,409.48</p></td><td><p>£473,171.13</p></td><td><p>£376,892.69</p></td><td><p>£1,223,473.29</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011–2012</p></td><td><p>£345,556.57</p></td><td><p>£503,810.57</p></td><td><p>£369,859.62</p></td><td><p>£1,219,226.77</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012–2013</p></td><td><p>£334,516.90</p></td><td><p>£433,007.60</p></td><td><p>£264,314.70</p></td><td><p>£1,031,839.20</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013–2014</p></td><td><p>£333,091.84</p></td><td><p>£412,079.02</p></td><td><p>£239,546.70</p></td><td><p>£984,717.56</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2014–2015</p></td><td><p>£367,756.14</p></td><td><p>£341,638.12</p></td><td><p>£141,814.10</p></td><td><p>£851,208.36</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Total</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£1,754,303.93</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£2,163,706.44</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£1,392,427.81</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£5,310,465.18</strong></p></td></tr></tbody></table><p>* Inclusive of NI and pension contributions</p><p>It is not possible meaningfully to equate these staffing costs related to evening sittings to an average overall cost per hour of late night sittings for two reasons: firstly, costs for other types of marginal expenditure related to late sittings, such as utilities charges, are not recorded separately; secondly, the staffing costs are paid to facilitate all sittings after 6.00pm, rather than “late” sittings specifically, whether defined as after 10.00pm or beyond the likely scheduled rise.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake grouped question UIN 10254 question first answered 12/10/2015 16:41:55 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4432 label Biography information for Patrick Grady

418962

	registered interest
	date	15/09/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	House of Commons: Working Hours
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, pursuant to the Answer of 14 September 2015 to Question 9407, what the average cost per hour is of late sittings of the House.
	tabling member constituency	Glasgow North
	tabling member printed	Patrick Grady
	uin	10254
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 12/10/2015 answer text <p>A late sitting can refer to either an occasion when the House sits beyond its likely scheduled rise (i.e. 10.30pm on Monday, 7.30pm on Tuesday and Wednesday, 5.30pm on Thursday); or whenever the House sits beyond 10.00pm.</p><p>Two types of payments are made to staff in order to support evening sittings, including late sittings: the Unsocial Hours Payment (UHP), an annual flat-rate allowance paid across the year to staff required to work to an unspecified time during evening sittings; and the Evening Additional Hours (EAH) payment which reflects the number of additional hours worked after 6pm, paid at a standard rate from 1800 to 2230 and at a higher rate after 2230. Additionally, in certain circumstances overtime may be paid to staff which may or may not be related to the House’s sitting hours. These payments are not reflected in this answer as the records do not indicate in which circumstances they were made to support late sittings. A late night taxi service is provided to staff who are required to work late; this service is only available after 2300.</p><p>Security staff are employed by the Metropolitan Police Service and are paid in accordance with their terms and conditions of employment.</p><p>The costs of UHP, EAH and the late night taxi service in each year since 2010–11 was as follows:</p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Year</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Unsocial Hours Allowance*</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Evening hours payment*</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Travel Costs</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Total Cost</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010–2011</p></td><td><p>£373,409.48</p></td><td><p>£473,171.13</p></td><td><p>£376,892.69</p></td><td><p>£1,223,473.29</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011–2012</p></td><td><p>£345,556.57</p></td><td><p>£503,810.57</p></td><td><p>£369,859.62</p></td><td><p>£1,219,226.77</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012–2013</p></td><td><p>£334,516.90</p></td><td><p>£433,007.60</p></td><td><p>£264,314.70</p></td><td><p>£1,031,839.20</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013–2014</p></td><td><p>£333,091.84</p></td><td><p>£412,079.02</p></td><td><p>£239,546.70</p></td><td><p>£984,717.56</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2014–2015</p></td><td><p>£367,756.14</p></td><td><p>£341,638.12</p></td><td><p>£141,814.10</p></td><td><p>£851,208.36</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Total</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£1,754,303.93</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£2,163,706.44</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£1,392,427.81</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>£5,310,465.18</strong></p></td></tr></tbody></table><p>* Inclusive of NI and pension contributions</p><p>It is not possible meaningfully to equate these staffing costs related to evening sittings to an average overall cost per hour of late night sittings for two reasons: firstly, costs for other types of marginal expenditure related to late sittings, such as utilities charges, are not recorded separately; secondly, the staffing costs are paid to facilitate all sittings after 6.00pm, rather than “late” sittings specifically, whether defined as after 10.00pm or beyond the likely scheduled rise.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake grouped question UIN 10253 question first answered 12/10/2015 16:41:55 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4432 label Biography information for Patrick Grady

420225

	registered interest
	date	09/10/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Portcullis House: Fire Alarms
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, how many fire alarms in Portcullis House in the last 12 months (a) resulted from fires and (b) were false alarms.
	tabling member constituency	Birkenhead
	tabling member printed	Frank Field
	uin	11015
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/10/2015 answer text <p>Since October 2014 there has been one fire alarm in Portcullis House caused by a fire. There have been six false alarms: two of which were manual call point actuations and four caused by equipment defects or the inadvertent interruption of detector beams.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 19/10/2015 15:29:15 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	478 label Biography information for Lord Field of Birkenhead

423393

	registered interest
	date	22/10/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Palace of Westminster: Repairs and Maintenance
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, what progress has been made on confirming the final cost of the Options Appraisal Report into the refurbishment of the Palace of Westminster.
	tabling member constituency	Airdrie and Shotts
	tabling member printed	Neil Gray
	uin	13110
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 27/10/2015 answer text <p>This information was provided in a Written Statement made by my predecessor on 16 December 2014, cols 86–87WS:</p><p><a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmhansrd/cm141216/wmstext/141216m0001.htm#14121636000008" target="_blank">http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmhansrd/cm141216/wmstext/141216m0001.htm#14121636000008</a></p><p>The final cost of the Independent Options Appraisal was £2.02 million, excluding VAT.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 27/10/2015 16:51:05 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4365 label Biography information for Neil Gray

423604

	registered interest
	date	23/10/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	City of London Remembrancer
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, if the Commission will review the right of access for the City of London Remembrancer to the Chamber of the House.
	tabling member constituency	Sheffield, Heeley
	tabling member printed	Louise Haigh
	uin	13180
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 29/10/2015 answer text <p>I understand that the Remembrancer is one of some 17 Roll A Parliamentary Agents who work with the promoters of private Bills. Parliamentary Agents are permitted to observe proceedings from the Under Gallery in the Chamber, that is, the visitors’ seats “under the gallery” facing the Speaker, for the purposes of their work. Other visitors may also sometimes sit in the Under Gallery.</p><p>Access to the Chamber and its surroundings is not a matter for the Commission.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 29/10/2015 17:57:23 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4473 label Biography information for Louise Haigh

423603

	registered interest
	date	23/10/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Parliament: Legal Profession
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, when the Commission plans to publish the list of Roll A Parliamentary Agents for the current Parliament.
	tabling member constituency	Sheffield, Heeley
	tabling member printed	Louise Haigh
	uin	13181
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 29/10/2015 answer text <p>The current list of Roll A Parliamentary Agents as at May 2015 is available on the Parliamentary Internet at:</p><p><a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/pbagents.htm" target="_blank">http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/pbagents.htm</a></p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 29/10/2015 17:58:36 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4473 label Biography information for Louise Haigh

423849

	registered interest
	date	26/10/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	House of Commons: Credit Unions
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, what steps he is taking to promote the use of credit unions in the work of the House of Commons Commission; and if he will make a statement.
	tabling member constituency	Harrow West
	tabling member printed	Gareth Thomas
	uin	13516
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/11/2015 answer text <p>Since March 2013 staff and Members of both Houses have been able to access financial support and advice on managing their personal finances from London Mutual Credit Union (LMCU). In addition they also offer financial products such as savings and loans which can be deducted directly from employees’ salaries via payroll, and for Members via IPSA. In November 2013, the facility with LMCU was formally launched at a reception held by Mr Speaker.</p><p>LMCU is promoted on the Parliamentary intranet, in the House of Commons Staff Handbook and at new staff inductions. LMCU also have a presence at the annual Wellbeing Day.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 02/11/2015 17:31:00 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	177 label Biography information for Gareth Thomas

425142

	registered interest
	date	30/10/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Parliament: Internet
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, if he will take steps to ensure that the parliament.uk website states the country in which hon. Members' constituencies are located.
	tabling member constituency	Aberdeen North
	tabling member printed	Kirsty Blackman
	uin	14160
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 05/11/2015 answer text <p>The way that Members’ biographical information is displayed on Parliament’s website is not a matter for the Commission. I have, however, drawn the Administration Committee’s attention to the hon. Member’s request, and would advise her to approach the Chair of that Committee directly to discuss her proposal. The Administration Committee can then decide whether to offer advice on this matter to the authorities of the House.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 05/11/2015 11:26:43 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake previous answer version 27856 answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4357 label Biography information for Kirsty Blackman

424633

	registered interest
	date	28/10/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Acts: Publishing
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, what discussions the Commission has had with archival experts (a) within and (b) outside Parliament on ending the use of vellum for printing Acts of Parliament.
	tabling member constituency	Washington and Sunderland West
	tabling member printed	Mrs Sharon Hodgson
	uin	13880
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/11/2015 answer text <p>The House of Lords is responsible for the printing of two record copies of each Act, both printed on vellum in accordance with the Resolutions agreed by both Houses in February 1849. The Commission does not incur any expenditure on the printing of these copies, and has therefore undertaken no inquiry into, or consultation on, the proposal from the Chairman of Committees in the House of Lords to move to the use of archival paper. It has also therefore not sought to assess alternative options, nor undertaken any analysis of relative storage or care costs of vellum as opposed to archival paper. The House of Lords agreed in 1999 to vary its resolution and that vellum should cease to be used. The predecessor Administration Committee had considered arguments in support of a similar proposal from the House of Lords in June 1999. That Committee recommended in a report (<a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199899/cmselect/cmadmin/539/53903.htm" target="_blank"><em>Record Copies of Acts</em>, HC 539</a>) to the House that the proposal to end the use of vellum be accepted. However, following a debate on 1 November 1999, on a motion that the Commons agree with the Lords in their resolution, the proposal was rejected by the Commons. [Deb HC: 1 November 1999, Col 32ff].</p><p>In his letter to the Administration Committee of 17 September, printed with the Committee’s Report (<a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmselect/cmadmin/521/521.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Record Copies of Acts</em>, HC 521</a>), the Chairman of Committees stated that the average annual cost of printing vellums is around £100,000 a year. I understand that the current estimate of the savings arising from a switch to archival paper are about 80%, amounting to around £800,000 of savings to public funds over the next ten years. These arise from the greater ease of printing on paper rather than vellum, as well as the raw material costs. The exact level of savings to public funds will depend on the number of Acts passed, and number of pages per Act, per year, and the precise specification and contractual arrangements agreed for future printing. The Commission has made no assessment of the breakdown of savings arising.</p><p>The Chairman of Committees records in his letter the view that high quality archival paper would maintain durability and print quality. I understand that the National Archives has already informed Parliament that it does not require a vellum copy, and that it takes the view that archival quality paper is sufficient to maintain the public record. It also maintains a comprehensive database of legislation, both “as originally enacted” and “as amended”, on <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk" target="_blank">www.legislation.gov.uk</a>. Private Acts have been printed on archival paper since 1956. There are internationally recognised ISO standards for archival paper, and for archival quality ink and printing processes.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake grouped question UIN 13881 13882 13883 13884 13885 13957 13958 14164 question first answered 09/11/2015 11:47:58 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	1521 label Biography information for Mrs Sharon Hodgson

424634

	registered interest
	date	28/10/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Acts: Publishing
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, what advice the Commission has received on the comparative longevity of archival paper and vellum.
	tabling member constituency	Washington and Sunderland West
	tabling member printed	Mrs Sharon Hodgson
	uin	13881
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/11/2015 answer text <p>The House of Lords is responsible for the printing of two record copies of each Act, both printed on vellum in accordance with the Resolutions agreed by both Houses in February 1849. The Commission does not incur any expenditure on the printing of these copies, and has therefore undertaken no inquiry into, or consultation on, the proposal from the Chairman of Committees in the House of Lords to move to the use of archival paper. It has also therefore not sought to assess alternative options, nor undertaken any analysis of relative storage or care costs of vellum as opposed to archival paper. The House of Lords agreed in 1999 to vary its resolution and that vellum should cease to be used. The predecessor Administration Committee had considered arguments in support of a similar proposal from the House of Lords in June 1999. That Committee recommended in a report (<a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199899/cmselect/cmadmin/539/53903.htm" target="_blank"><em>Record Copies of Acts</em>, HC 539</a>) to the House that the proposal to end the use of vellum be accepted. However, following a debate on 1 November 1999, on a motion that the Commons agree with the Lords in their resolution, the proposal was rejected by the Commons. [Deb HC: 1 November 1999, Col 32ff].</p><p>In his letter to the Administration Committee of 17 September, printed with the Committee’s Report (<a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmselect/cmadmin/521/521.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Record Copies of Acts</em>, HC 521</a>), the Chairman of Committees stated that the average annual cost of printing vellums is around £100,000 a year. I understand that the current estimate of the savings arising from a switch to archival paper are about 80%, amounting to around £800,000 of savings to public funds over the next ten years. These arise from the greater ease of printing on paper rather than vellum, as well as the raw material costs. The exact level of savings to public funds will depend on the number of Acts passed, and number of pages per Act, per year, and the precise specification and contractual arrangements agreed for future printing. The Commission has made no assessment of the breakdown of savings arising.</p><p>The Chairman of Committees records in his letter the view that high quality archival paper would maintain durability and print quality. I understand that the National Archives has already informed Parliament that it does not require a vellum copy, and that it takes the view that archival quality paper is sufficient to maintain the public record. It also maintains a comprehensive database of legislation, both “as originally enacted” and “as amended”, on <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk" target="_blank">www.legislation.gov.uk</a>. Private Acts have been printed on archival paper since 1956. There are internationally recognised ISO standards for archival paper, and for archival quality ink and printing processes.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake grouped question UIN 13880 13882 13883 13884 13885 13957 13958 14164 question first answered 09/11/2015 11:47:59 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	1521 label Biography information for Mrs Sharon Hodgson

424629

	registered interest
	date	28/10/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Acts: Publishing
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, whether the Commission consulted (a) users and (b) makers of vellum on ending the use of vellum for printing Acts of Parliament.
	tabling member constituency	Washington and Sunderland West
	tabling member printed	Mrs Sharon Hodgson
	uin	13882
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/11/2015 answer text <p>The House of Lords is responsible for the printing of two record copies of each Act, both printed on vellum in accordance with the Resolutions agreed by both Houses in February 1849. The Commission does not incur any expenditure on the printing of these copies, and has therefore undertaken no inquiry into, or consultation on, the proposal from the Chairman of Committees in the House of Lords to move to the use of archival paper. It has also therefore not sought to assess alternative options, nor undertaken any analysis of relative storage or care costs of vellum as opposed to archival paper. The House of Lords agreed in 1999 to vary its resolution and that vellum should cease to be used. The predecessor Administration Committee had considered arguments in support of a similar proposal from the House of Lords in June 1999. That Committee recommended in a report (<a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199899/cmselect/cmadmin/539/53903.htm" target="_blank"><em>Record Copies of Acts</em>, HC 539</a>) to the House that the proposal to end the use of vellum be accepted. However, following a debate on 1 November 1999, on a motion that the Commons agree with the Lords in their resolution, the proposal was rejected by the Commons. [Deb HC: 1 November 1999, Col 32ff].</p><p>In his letter to the Administration Committee of 17 September, printed with the Committee’s Report (<a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmselect/cmadmin/521/521.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Record Copies of Acts</em>, HC 521</a>), the Chairman of Committees stated that the average annual cost of printing vellums is around £100,000 a year. I understand that the current estimate of the savings arising from a switch to archival paper are about 80%, amounting to around £800,000 of savings to public funds over the next ten years. These arise from the greater ease of printing on paper rather than vellum, as well as the raw material costs. The exact level of savings to public funds will depend on the number of Acts passed, and number of pages per Act, per year, and the precise specification and contractual arrangements agreed for future printing. The Commission has made no assessment of the breakdown of savings arising.</p><p>The Chairman of Committees records in his letter the view that high quality archival paper would maintain durability and print quality. I understand that the National Archives has already informed Parliament that it does not require a vellum copy, and that it takes the view that archival quality paper is sufficient to maintain the public record. It also maintains a comprehensive database of legislation, both “as originally enacted” and “as amended”, on <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk" target="_blank">www.legislation.gov.uk</a>. Private Acts have been printed on archival paper since 1956. There are internationally recognised ISO standards for archival paper, and for archival quality ink and printing processes.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake grouped question UIN 13880 13881 13883 13884 13885 13957 13958 14164 question first answered 09/11/2015 11:47:59 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	1521 label Biography information for Mrs Sharon Hodgson

424630

	registered interest
	date	28/10/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Acts: Publishing
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, what alternative media for printing Acts of Parliament the Commission has considered.
	tabling member constituency	Washington and Sunderland West
	tabling member printed	Mrs Sharon Hodgson
	uin	13883
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/11/2015 answer text <p>The House of Lords is responsible for the printing of two record copies of each Act, both printed on vellum in accordance with the Resolutions agreed by both Houses in February 1849. The Commission does not incur any expenditure on the printing of these copies, and has therefore undertaken no inquiry into, or consultation on, the proposal from the Chairman of Committees in the House of Lords to move to the use of archival paper. It has also therefore not sought to assess alternative options, nor undertaken any analysis of relative storage or care costs of vellum as opposed to archival paper. The House of Lords agreed in 1999 to vary its resolution and that vellum should cease to be used. The predecessor Administration Committee had considered arguments in support of a similar proposal from the House of Lords in June 1999. That Committee recommended in a report (<a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199899/cmselect/cmadmin/539/53903.htm" target="_blank"><em>Record Copies of Acts</em>, HC 539</a>) to the House that the proposal to end the use of vellum be accepted. However, following a debate on 1 November 1999, on a motion that the Commons agree with the Lords in their resolution, the proposal was rejected by the Commons. [Deb HC: 1 November 1999, Col 32ff].</p><p>In his letter to the Administration Committee of 17 September, printed with the Committee’s Report (<a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmselect/cmadmin/521/521.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Record Copies of Acts</em>, HC 521</a>), the Chairman of Committees stated that the average annual cost of printing vellums is around £100,000 a year. I understand that the current estimate of the savings arising from a switch to archival paper are about 80%, amounting to around £800,000 of savings to public funds over the next ten years. These arise from the greater ease of printing on paper rather than vellum, as well as the raw material costs. The exact level of savings to public funds will depend on the number of Acts passed, and number of pages per Act, per year, and the precise specification and contractual arrangements agreed for future printing. The Commission has made no assessment of the breakdown of savings arising.</p><p>The Chairman of Committees records in his letter the view that high quality archival paper would maintain durability and print quality. I understand that the National Archives has already informed Parliament that it does not require a vellum copy, and that it takes the view that archival quality paper is sufficient to maintain the public record. It also maintains a comprehensive database of legislation, both “as originally enacted” and “as amended”, on <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk" target="_blank">www.legislation.gov.uk</a>. Private Acts have been printed on archival paper since 1956. There are internationally recognised ISO standards for archival paper, and for archival quality ink and printing processes.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake grouped question UIN 13880 13881 13882 13884 13885 13957 13958 14164 question first answered 09/11/2015 11:47:59 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	1521 label Biography information for Mrs Sharon Hodgson

424631

	registered interest
	date	28/10/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Acts: Publishing
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, what estimate the Commission has made of the potential savings from ending the use of vellum for printing Acts of Parliament; and on what basis that estimate was made.
	tabling member constituency	Washington and Sunderland West
	tabling member printed	Mrs Sharon Hodgson
	uin	13884
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/11/2015 answer text <p>The House of Lords is responsible for the printing of two record copies of each Act, both printed on vellum in accordance with the Resolutions agreed by both Houses in February 1849. The Commission does not incur any expenditure on the printing of these copies, and has therefore undertaken no inquiry into, or consultation on, the proposal from the Chairman of Committees in the House of Lords to move to the use of archival paper. It has also therefore not sought to assess alternative options, nor undertaken any analysis of relative storage or care costs of vellum as opposed to archival paper. The House of Lords agreed in 1999 to vary its resolution and that vellum should cease to be used. The predecessor Administration Committee had considered arguments in support of a similar proposal from the House of Lords in June 1999. That Committee recommended in a report (<a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199899/cmselect/cmadmin/539/53903.htm" target="_blank"><em>Record Copies of Acts</em>, HC 539</a>) to the House that the proposal to end the use of vellum be accepted. However, following a debate on 1 November 1999, on a motion that the Commons agree with the Lords in their resolution, the proposal was rejected by the Commons. [Deb HC: 1 November 1999, Col 32ff].</p><p>In his letter to the Administration Committee of 17 September, printed with the Committee’s Report (<a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmselect/cmadmin/521/521.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Record Copies of Acts</em>, HC 521</a>), the Chairman of Committees stated that the average annual cost of printing vellums is around £100,000 a year. I understand that the current estimate of the savings arising from a switch to archival paper are about 80%, amounting to around £800,000 of savings to public funds over the next ten years. These arise from the greater ease of printing on paper rather than vellum, as well as the raw material costs. The exact level of savings to public funds will depend on the number of Acts passed, and number of pages per Act, per year, and the precise specification and contractual arrangements agreed for future printing. The Commission has made no assessment of the breakdown of savings arising.</p><p>The Chairman of Committees records in his letter the view that high quality archival paper would maintain durability and print quality. I understand that the National Archives has already informed Parliament that it does not require a vellum copy, and that it takes the view that archival quality paper is sufficient to maintain the public record. It also maintains a comprehensive database of legislation, both “as originally enacted” and “as amended”, on <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk" target="_blank">www.legislation.gov.uk</a>. Private Acts have been printed on archival paper since 1956. There are internationally recognised ISO standards for archival paper, and for archival quality ink and printing processes.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake grouped question UIN 13880 13881 13882 13883 13885 13957 13958 14164 question first answered 09/11/2015 11:47:59 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	1521 label Biography information for Mrs Sharon Hodgson

424632

	registered interest
	date	28/10/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Acts: Publishing
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, how much the use of vellum for printing Acts of Parliament cost in each year since 1999.
	tabling member constituency	Washington and Sunderland West
	tabling member printed	Mrs Sharon Hodgson
	uin	13885
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/11/2015 answer text <p>The House of Lords is responsible for the printing of two record copies of each Act, both printed on vellum in accordance with the Resolutions agreed by both Houses in February 1849. The Commission does not incur any expenditure on the printing of these copies, and has therefore undertaken no inquiry into, or consultation on, the proposal from the Chairman of Committees in the House of Lords to move to the use of archival paper. It has also therefore not sought to assess alternative options, nor undertaken any analysis of relative storage or care costs of vellum as opposed to archival paper. The House of Lords agreed in 1999 to vary its resolution and that vellum should cease to be used. The predecessor Administration Committee had considered arguments in support of a similar proposal from the House of Lords in June 1999. That Committee recommended in a report (<a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199899/cmselect/cmadmin/539/53903.htm" target="_blank"><em>Record Copies of Acts</em>, HC 539</a>) to the House that the proposal to end the use of vellum be accepted. However, following a debate on 1 November 1999, on a motion that the Commons agree with the Lords in their resolution, the proposal was rejected by the Commons. [Deb HC: 1 November 1999, Col 32ff].</p><p>In his letter to the Administration Committee of 17 September, printed with the Committee’s Report (<a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmselect/cmadmin/521/521.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Record Copies of Acts</em>, HC 521</a>), the Chairman of Committees stated that the average annual cost of printing vellums is around £100,000 a year. I understand that the current estimate of the savings arising from a switch to archival paper are about 80%, amounting to around £800,000 of savings to public funds over the next ten years. These arise from the greater ease of printing on paper rather than vellum, as well as the raw material costs. The exact level of savings to public funds will depend on the number of Acts passed, and number of pages per Act, per year, and the precise specification and contractual arrangements agreed for future printing. The Commission has made no assessment of the breakdown of savings arising.</p><p>The Chairman of Committees records in his letter the view that high quality archival paper would maintain durability and print quality. I understand that the National Archives has already informed Parliament that it does not require a vellum copy, and that it takes the view that archival quality paper is sufficient to maintain the public record. It also maintains a comprehensive database of legislation, both “as originally enacted” and “as amended”, on <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk" target="_blank">www.legislation.gov.uk</a>. Private Acts have been printed on archival paper since 1956. There are internationally recognised ISO standards for archival paper, and for archival quality ink and printing processes.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake grouped question UIN 13880 13881 13882 13883 13884 13957 13958 14164 question first answered 09/11/2015 11:47:59 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	1521 label Biography information for Mrs Sharon Hodgson

424635

	registered interest
	date	28/10/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Acts: Publishing
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, what estimate the Commission has made of the average cost of the reproduction of an Act of Parliament on archival paper once it has deteriorated.
	tabling member constituency	Washington and Sunderland West
	tabling member printed	Mrs Sharon Hodgson
	uin	13957
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/11/2015 answer text <p>The House of Lords is responsible for the printing of two record copies of each Act, both printed on vellum in accordance with the Resolutions agreed by both Houses in February 1849. The Commission does not incur any expenditure on the printing of these copies, and has therefore undertaken no inquiry into, or consultation on, the proposal from the Chairman of Committees in the House of Lords to move to the use of archival paper. It has also therefore not sought to assess alternative options, nor undertaken any analysis of relative storage or care costs of vellum as opposed to archival paper. The House of Lords agreed in 1999 to vary its resolution and that vellum should cease to be used. The predecessor Administration Committee had considered arguments in support of a similar proposal from the House of Lords in June 1999. That Committee recommended in a report (<a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199899/cmselect/cmadmin/539/53903.htm" target="_blank"><em>Record Copies of Acts</em>, HC 539</a>) to the House that the proposal to end the use of vellum be accepted. However, following a debate on 1 November 1999, on a motion that the Commons agree with the Lords in their resolution, the proposal was rejected by the Commons. [Deb HC: 1 November 1999, Col 32ff].</p><p>In his letter to the Administration Committee of 17 September, printed with the Committee’s Report (<a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmselect/cmadmin/521/521.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Record Copies of Acts</em>, HC 521</a>), the Chairman of Committees stated that the average annual cost of printing vellums is around £100,000 a year. I understand that the current estimate of the savings arising from a switch to archival paper are about 80%, amounting to around £800,000 of savings to public funds over the next ten years. These arise from the greater ease of printing on paper rather than vellum, as well as the raw material costs. The exact level of savings to public funds will depend on the number of Acts passed, and number of pages per Act, per year, and the precise specification and contractual arrangements agreed for future printing. The Commission has made no assessment of the breakdown of savings arising.</p><p>The Chairman of Committees records in his letter the view that high quality archival paper would maintain durability and print quality. I understand that the National Archives has already informed Parliament that it does not require a vellum copy, and that it takes the view that archival quality paper is sufficient to maintain the public record. It also maintains a comprehensive database of legislation, both “as originally enacted” and “as amended”, on <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk" target="_blank">www.legislation.gov.uk</a>. Private Acts have been printed on archival paper since 1956. There are internationally recognised ISO standards for archival paper, and for archival quality ink and printing processes.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake grouped question UIN 13880 13881 13882 13883 13884 13885 13958 14164 question first answered 09/11/2015 11:47:59 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	1521 label Biography information for Mrs Sharon Hodgson

424636

	registered interest
	date	28/10/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Acts: Publishing
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, what estimate the Commission has made of the annual cost of the (a) storage, (b) continued care and maintenance and (c) re-printing of archival paper.
	tabling member constituency	Washington and Sunderland West
	tabling member printed	Mrs Sharon Hodgson
	uin	13958
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/11/2015 answer text <p>The House of Lords is responsible for the printing of two record copies of each Act, both printed on vellum in accordance with the Resolutions agreed by both Houses in February 1849. The Commission does not incur any expenditure on the printing of these copies, and has therefore undertaken no inquiry into, or consultation on, the proposal from the Chairman of Committees in the House of Lords to move to the use of archival paper. It has also therefore not sought to assess alternative options, nor undertaken any analysis of relative storage or care costs of vellum as opposed to archival paper. The House of Lords agreed in 1999 to vary its resolution and that vellum should cease to be used. The predecessor Administration Committee had considered arguments in support of a similar proposal from the House of Lords in June 1999. That Committee recommended in a report (<a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199899/cmselect/cmadmin/539/53903.htm" target="_blank"><em>Record Copies of Acts</em>, HC 539</a>) to the House that the proposal to end the use of vellum be accepted. However, following a debate on 1 November 1999, on a motion that the Commons agree with the Lords in their resolution, the proposal was rejected by the Commons. [Deb HC: 1 November 1999, Col 32ff].</p><p>In his letter to the Administration Committee of 17 September, printed with the Committee’s Report (<a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmselect/cmadmin/521/521.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Record Copies of Acts</em>, HC 521</a>), the Chairman of Committees stated that the average annual cost of printing vellums is around £100,000 a year. I understand that the current estimate of the savings arising from a switch to archival paper are about 80%, amounting to around £800,000 of savings to public funds over the next ten years. These arise from the greater ease of printing on paper rather than vellum, as well as the raw material costs. The exact level of savings to public funds will depend on the number of Acts passed, and number of pages per Act, per year, and the precise specification and contractual arrangements agreed for future printing. The Commission has made no assessment of the breakdown of savings arising.</p><p>The Chairman of Committees records in his letter the view that high quality archival paper would maintain durability and print quality. I understand that the National Archives has already informed Parliament that it does not require a vellum copy, and that it takes the view that archival quality paper is sufficient to maintain the public record. It also maintains a comprehensive database of legislation, both “as originally enacted” and “as amended”, on <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk" target="_blank">www.legislation.gov.uk</a>. Private Acts have been printed on archival paper since 1956. There are internationally recognised ISO standards for archival paper, and for archival quality ink and printing processes.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake grouped question UIN 13880 13881 13882 13883 13884 13885 13957 14164 question first answered 09/11/2015 11:47:59 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	1521 label Biography information for Mrs Sharon Hodgson

425143

	registered interest
	date	30/10/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Acts: Publishing
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, what estimate the Commission has made of the savings from ending the printing of Acts of Parliament on vellum; and what proportion of those savings arises from (a) William Cowley and (b) other costs from the use of vellum.
	tabling member constituency	Washington and Sunderland West
	tabling member printed	Mrs Sharon Hodgson
	uin	14164
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/11/2015 answer text <p>The House of Lords is responsible for the printing of two record copies of each Act, both printed on vellum in accordance with the Resolutions agreed by both Houses in February 1849. The Commission does not incur any expenditure on the printing of these copies, and has therefore undertaken no inquiry into, or consultation on, the proposal from the Chairman of Committees in the House of Lords to move to the use of archival paper. It has also therefore not sought to assess alternative options, nor undertaken any analysis of relative storage or care costs of vellum as opposed to archival paper. The House of Lords agreed in 1999 to vary its resolution and that vellum should cease to be used. The predecessor Administration Committee had considered arguments in support of a similar proposal from the House of Lords in June 1999. That Committee recommended in a report (<a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199899/cmselect/cmadmin/539/53903.htm" target="_blank"><em>Record Copies of Acts</em>, HC 539</a>) to the House that the proposal to end the use of vellum be accepted. However, following a debate on 1 November 1999, on a motion that the Commons agree with the Lords in their resolution, the proposal was rejected by the Commons. [Deb HC: 1 November 1999, Col 32ff].</p><p>In his letter to the Administration Committee of 17 September, printed with the Committee’s Report (<a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmselect/cmadmin/521/521.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Record Copies of Acts</em>, HC 521</a>), the Chairman of Committees stated that the average annual cost of printing vellums is around £100,000 a year. I understand that the current estimate of the savings arising from a switch to archival paper are about 80%, amounting to around £800,000 of savings to public funds over the next ten years. These arise from the greater ease of printing on paper rather than vellum, as well as the raw material costs. The exact level of savings to public funds will depend on the number of Acts passed, and number of pages per Act, per year, and the precise specification and contractual arrangements agreed for future printing. The Commission has made no assessment of the breakdown of savings arising.</p><p>The Chairman of Committees records in his letter the view that high quality archival paper would maintain durability and print quality. I understand that the National Archives has already informed Parliament that it does not require a vellum copy, and that it takes the view that archival quality paper is sufficient to maintain the public record. It also maintains a comprehensive database of legislation, both “as originally enacted” and “as amended”, on <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk" target="_blank">www.legislation.gov.uk</a>. Private Acts have been printed on archival paper since 1956. There are internationally recognised ISO standards for archival paper, and for archival quality ink and printing processes.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake grouped question UIN 13880 13881 13882 13883 13884 13885 13957 13958 question first answered 09/11/2015 11:47:59 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	1521 label Biography information for Mrs Sharon Hodgson

427243

	registered interest
	date	09/11/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Palace of Westminster: Repairs and Maintenance
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, if he will take steps to ensure the inclusion in budgetary provisions for a programme to restore and renew the Palace of Westminster proposals for commemorating Augustus Pugin at St Augustine's Church, Ramsgate.
	tabling member constituency	South Thanet
	tabling member printed	Craig Mackinlay
	uin	15347
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 17/11/2015 answer text <p>It would go beyond the statutory remit of the House of Commons Commission to make budgetary provision for the project in Ramsgate. However, the Commission is well aware of the contribution that Augustus Welby Pugin made to the design of the Palace of Westminster and is delighted that it was possible last year to donate some original encaustic tiles from the Palace for public display in St. Augustine’s Church.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 17/11/2015 11:37:09 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4529 label Biography information for Craig Mackinlay

427782

	registered interest
	date	10/11/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Palace of Westminster: Fire Prevention
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, for what reasons a fire safety contract with Norland Managed Services, London has been awarded outwith the Restoration and Renewal project for the Palace of Westminster.
	tabling member constituency	Airdrie and Shotts
	tabling member printed	Neil Gray
	uin	15695
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/11/2015 answer text <p>This contract is one element of a wider programme to achieve compliance with the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 by the end of 2018, in accordance with a commitment the House made in 2011 to the Crown Premises Inspection Group.</p><p>Achieving compliance will reduce the risk of fire causing loss of life or injury to individuals, destroying or damaging the building, or disrupting the work of Parliament.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 19/11/2015 12:11:31 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4365 label Biography information for Neil Gray

428828

	registered interest
	date	17/11/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Parliament: Security
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, if he will provide an update on whether there are plans for a review of security protocols for the Parliamentary Estate and what communication the Serjeant at Arms office has had with relevant government departments on increasing the security of the House and the safety of staff.
	tabling member constituency	Dumfries and Galloway
	tabling member printed	Richard Arkless
	uin	16656
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 20/11/2015 answer text <p>It is a long-standing practice that we do not comment in public on the security of Parliament. However, I can assure the hon. Member that arrangements are kept under continual review and those working on the Estate are advised of any changes. If he has particular concerns the Parliamentary Security Director and the Serjeant at Arms would be happy to meet with him.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 20/11/2015 10:37:47 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4387 label Biography information for Richard Arkless

428826

	registered interest
	date	17/11/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Parliament: ICT
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, how many incidents of (a) hacking, (b) viruses and (c) data breaches were reported to the Parliamentary Digital Service in the last 12 months.
	tabling member constituency	Newcastle upon Tyne Central
	tabling member printed	Chi Onwurah
	uin	16688
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 20/11/2015 answer text <p>We do not comment on matters of digital or physical security. I understand the Director of the Digital Service has discussed the matter with the hon. Member.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 20/11/2015 12:39:33 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4124 label Biography information for Chi Onwurah

428827

	registered interest
	date	17/11/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Members' Constituency Work: Data Protection
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, what steps the Parliamentary Digital Service is taking to protect constituency casework data.
	tabling member constituency	Newcastle upon Tyne Central
	tabling member printed	Chi Onwurah
	uin	16678
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 20/11/2015 answer text <p>We do not comment on matters of digital or physical security. I understand the Director of the Digital Service has discussed the matter with the hon. Member.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 20/11/2015 14:51:01 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4124 label Biography information for Chi Onwurah

433263

	registered interest
	date	30/11/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	House of Commons: Electronic Voting
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, what consideration has been given to moving to digital voting in the House.
	tabling member constituency	Dumfries and Galloway
	tabling member printed	Richard Arkless
	uin	18132
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/12/2015 answer text <p>The Commission has given no formal consideration to a move to digital voting in the House. Its responsibility in this matter is limited to any financial or staffing implications of any change to the present system, were a change to be agreed by the House.</p><p>In January 2015 the Speaker’s Commission on Digital Democracy recommended that the House should move to record votes using Members’ security passes but retain the tradition of walking through division lobbies. The House has not yet been invited to respond to this recommendation. House officials have undertaken some preparatory studies in the event of the House deciding to endorse this proposal. Members wishing to pursue the issue can seek a debate via the Backbench Business Committee or raise it with the Procedure Committee. It would also be open to Ministers to bring forward proposals.</p><p>Accurate recording of divisions and timely publication of division lists are critical business activities of the House of Commons. The House Service has therefore been investigating means of electronic recording of divisions since October 2014, with a view to improving the timely publication of division lists, making division data more accessible to the public and easier to analyse, and improving accuracy. A trial was held in the House in March 2015 in which seven divisions were recorded in part by division clerks on tablet devices. Full implementation of tablet recording of divisions is expected to take place early in 2016. In the meantime, any divisions held under the new English votes for English laws procedure will be recorded on tablet devices, because the tablets can generate the results required under the ‘double-majority’ system. Electronic recording of votes by division clerks will not in itself alter the requirement for Members to vote by walking through the lobbies.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 08/12/2015 16:09:48 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4387 label Biography information for Richard Arkless

436304

	registered interest
	date	08/12/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	House of Commons: Food
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, what proportion of unused and uneaten food produced or bought to be served on the parliamentary estate is (a) recycled, (b) sent to landfill and (c) donated to food aid providers.
	tabling member constituency	Great Grimsby
	tabling member printed	Melanie Onn
	uin	19255
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 14/12/2015 answer text <p>All catering food waste segregated at the kitchens and food preparation areas is recovered offsite by means of anaerobic digestion to produce methane fuel and fertiliser. No catering waste from Parliament is sent to landfill, and no uneaten food is donated to food aid providers.</p><p>We are continuing to identify opportunities to reduce the amount of food waste and to increase the proportion we do generate that goes for recovery. A food waste audit to support this is due to take place later this month in the House of Commons.</p><p>Food waste from prepared dishes in House of Commons catering outlets is 3% against sales. This is well below the national average for the catering industry of 5%; the Sustainable Restaurant Association has rated the House of Commons as a good practice organisation in respect of food waste.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 14/12/2015 16:00:01 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4464 label Biography information for Melanie Onn

438716

	registered interest
	date	15/12/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	House of Commons: Repairs and Maintenance
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, what assessment the Commission has made of the effect of reductions in the number of hon. Members in 2020 on its Estates planning.
	tabling member constituency	Bassetlaw
	tabling member printed	John Mann
	uin	20301
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/01/2016 answer text <p>Officials keep the assumptions that guide planning for the Parliamentary Estate under constant review. It is not expected that a reduction in the number of Members from 2020 will have any significant impact on our Estates planning, as it will not be a sufficient number to allow us to release any buildings. It may provide better accommodation for some Members, and alleviate the overcrowding of Members’ staff and House staff in a number of existing office spaces.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 08/01/2016 11:50:13 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	1387 label Biography information for Lord Mann

438717

	registered interest
	date	15/12/2015
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Palace of Westminster: Offices
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, how many members of (a) the House of Commons and (b) the House of Lords have offices within the historic core of the Palace of Westminster.
	tabling member constituency	Bassetlaw
	tabling member printed	John Mann
	uin	20303
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 11/01/2016 answer text <p>193 Members of the House of Commons have their offices located in the Palace of Westminster. Provision of offices for Peers is not a matter for the Commission but is the responsibility of the House of Lords.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 11/01/2016 15:07:45 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	1387 label Biography information for Lord Mann

443824

	registered interest
	date	11/01/2016
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	House of Commons: UK Membership of EU
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, what contingency arrangements the House of Commons Commission has made for the eventuality of a majority leave vote in the upcoming EU referendum.
	tabling member constituency	East Worthing and Shoreham
	tabling member printed	Tim Loughton
	uin	21947
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 18/01/2016 answer text <p>The House of Commons Commission has made no contingency arrangements in the eventuality of a majority leave vote in the upcoming EU referendum.</p><br /> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 18/01/2016 12:45:22 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	114 label Biography information for Tim Loughton

445172

	registered interest
	date	15/01/2016
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	House of Commons: Pay
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, what the average salary is for employees of the House of Commons.
	tabling member constituency	Great Grimsby
	tabling member printed	Melanie Onn
	uin	22750
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 20/01/2016 answer text <p>The average salary (basic pay) of staff employed by the House of Commons was £36,784 as at 31 December 2015.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 20/01/2016 16:57:42 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4464 label Biography information for Melanie Onn

446384

	registered interest
	date	18/01/2016
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	House of Commons: Nurseries
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, what steps he is taking to provide crèche services for the children of hon. Members.
	tabling member constituency	Livingston
	tabling member printed	Hannah Bardell
	uin	903184
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/01/2016 answer text <p>Following consultation with Members, a nursery model of childcare was determined as best fulfilling their needs and the needs of the children. The Nursery opened in 2010. A crèche would need to be separate from the nursery, and would require appropriate accommodation. The Nursery Governance Committee discussed this at its meeting in October 2015 and was not persuaded of the case for a crèche.</p><p>However, I am sure that the Commission would welcome fuller consideration of the case for such services, and of an appropriate funding model.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 21/01/2016 10:48:35 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4486 label Biography information for Hannah Bardell

451348

	registered interest
	date	08/02/2016
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	Parliament: Cycling
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, pursuant to the Answer of 18 June 2015 to Question 2241, what the reasons are for there being no assessment undertaken of the safety implications of excluding cyclists from the Northern Entrance to the parliamentary estate; and if he will review that policy to take account of the forthcoming opening of the segregated cycle superhighway along the Embankment.
	tabling member constituency	Kingston upon Hull North
	tabling member printed	Diana Johnson
	uin	26355
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 23/02/2016 answer text <p>A generic risk assessment for the movement of pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles around the Parliamentary Estate was undertaken in August 2015; the assessment considered the risk of collisions between vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians. A dedicated cycle entry gate has been installed at Derby Gate as this entrance has the width to allow safe vehicle, cycle and pedestrian access, whereas the Northern Entrance does not. This is under constant review by the relevant House Authorities.</p><p>An assessment of the implications for both vehicle and bicycle entry at the Northern Entrance is planned to be conducted to reflect the construction of the East-West Bicycle Superhighway. The results will be reported to the hon. Lady by the Serjeant at Arms, once the work is complete.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 23/02/2016 17:34:11 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	1533 label Biography information for Dame Diana Johnson

451550

	registered interest
	date	09/02/2016
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	BBC Parliament: Hearing Impairment
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, if the Commission will discuss with the BBC Parliament channel improving the provision of (a) subtitles and (b) an in-vision interpreter for hearing impaired people.
	tabling member constituency	The Wrekin
	tabling member printed	Mark Pritchard
	uin	26466
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 23/02/2016 answer text <p>The audience share for BBC Parliament is below the Ofcom threshold for Access Service provision. However, we have committed to subtitling 100% of live Commons on the channel by 2019. We will reach this figure by increasing the amount of subtitling by 5% each year and this year will subtitle 85% of live Commons sittings.</p><p>The year to date figure for the total provision of subtitling on BBC Parliament against the total broadcast hours of the channel is 12.05%.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 23/02/2016 17:36:16 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	1576 label Biography information for Mark Pritchard

453804

	registered interest
	date	22/02/2016
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	House of Commons: Catering
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, what the Commission's policy is on the allocation of service charges paid by card to (a) permanent and (b) contracted canteen and hospitality staff working on the parliamentary estate.
	tabling member constituency	Hampstead and Kilburn
	tabling member printed	Tulip Siddiq
	uin	27612
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 29/02/2016 answer text <p>Service charges paid by debit and credit cards are passed on to catering staff employed by the House of Commons in addition to their wages through the House of Commons payroll system. They are shared equally amongst staff working on a particular day in a given venue.</p><p>Agency (contracted) workers do not receive service charge amounts as there is no mechanism for these to be paid to the individual as the agencies are paid separately to the House of Commons payroll system.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 29/02/2016 16:03:43 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4518 label Biography information for Tulip Siddiq

457189

	registered interest
	date	29/02/2016
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	House of Commons: Broadcasting Programmes
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, what the Commission's policy is on the use of House broadcast footage in programmes of a satirical nature.
	tabling member constituency	Ealing Central and Acton
	tabling member printed	Dr Rupa Huq
	uin	903894
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 03/03/2016 answer text <p>Members decided not to allow televised coverage of the House for satirical purposes as part of the broadcasting arrangements which came into place in 1989. This followed recommendations made by the Select Committee on Televising of Proceedings of the House (<em><a href="https://4l32cg.dm2302.livefilestore.com/y3mCcGtmxNmToTk66kML7D-mt3-XG-FtGiyMmOLALgp_nvg0Re1QX8R_cp9ZSetfXuDq2Byq-cTSuKedsdihya86s9M30VpDwUmxIt5E8RpCpguNX_WAFqYhibSw-gtFm923F-GR6rD1tDXR4MtNWVQDQ/Broadcasting%20Committee%20First%20Report%2089-89%20HC%20141-I.pdf?psid=1" target="_blank">First Report 1988–89, HC 141-I</a>, para 50</em>).</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 03/03/2016 12:20:03 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	4511 label Biography information for Dr Rupa Huq

457087

	registered interest
	date	02/03/2016
	answering body	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept id	18
	answering dept short name	House of Commons Commission
	answering dept sort name	House of Commons Commission
	hansard heading	House of Commons: Catering
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Rt. hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington representing the House of Commons Commission, how many contracted canteen and hospitality staff worked on the parliamentary estate in each year since 2009.
	tabling member constituency	Rhondda
	tabling member printed	Chris Bryant
	uin	29566
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/03/2016 answer text <p>The number of Contracted (Agency) staff is difficult to calculate due to the number of different agencies used and the often short term, varied work they are engaged to do. The number of contracted (agency) staff compared to the number of permanent staff is relatively low and accounts for less than 10% of the workforce costs with most contracted (agency) staff covering <em>ad hoc</em> operational requirements.</p><p>The percentage of workforce costs that represent agency staff for the years 2009 to 2015 were as follows:</p><table><tbody><tr><td><p>2009/10</p></td><td><p>2.84% of staff costs</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010/11</p></td><td><p>2.17% of staff costs</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011/12</p></td><td><p>4.11% of staff costs</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012/13</p></td><td><p>4.34% of staff costs</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013/14</p></td><td><p>6.00 % of staff costs</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2014/15</p></td><td><p>8.11% of staff costs</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p>Along with growing guaranteed hours staff, contracted (Agency) staff have helped with the flexibility of the business needs since the directorate restructured to a smaller core team in 2011 and 2013 and in response to a growing banqueting and events business through income generation initiatives. As a result total staff costs have been much better controlled by being able to have a flexible resource which resources up to peaks in demand rather than having too many staff during quieter periods.</p> answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake question first answered 09/03/2016 15:38:41 answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake previous answer version 49623 answering member constituency Carshalton and Wallington answering member printed Tom Brake answering member 151 label Biography information for Tom Brake
	tabling member	1446 label Biography information for Sir Chris Bryant