Show Search Form

Search Results

human indexable	true false
published	true false
registered interest	true false
answer date	exactly: or between: and
date	exactly: or between: and
date tabled	exactly: or between: and
ddp created	exactly: or between: and
ddp modified	exactly: or between: and
answering body
question status
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
hansard heading
house id
identifier
legislature
parliament number
question first answered
question first ministerially corrected
question text
session
session number
tabling member printed
title
type
uin
version
written parliamentary question type
answer	answer text attachment file name
creator	label
publisher
tabling member	label

Search

100049

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	04/11/2014
	date	21/10/2014
	date tabled	21/10/2014
	ddp created	21/10/2014 20:53:38
	ddp modified	06/02/2015 19:14:19
	answering body	Department for Transport
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	27
	answering dept short name	Transport
	answering dept sort name	Transport
	hansard heading	East Coast Main Line
	house id	2
	identifier	HL2255
	legislature	25277
	parliament number	55
	question first answered	28/10/2014 15:24:42
	question first ministerially corrected	12/01/2015 16:11:35
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the long-term access rights for Grand Central on the East Coast Main Line require them to pay the same access charge as Intercity East Coast; and, if not, why not.
	session	2014/15
	session number	4
	tabling member printed	Lord Bradshaw
	title	House of Lords Tabled Parliamentary Question 2014/15 HL2255
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	HL2255
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>Grand Central will not pay the same access charges as Intercity East Coast as Open Access Operators do not pay Fixed Track Access Charges (FTAC). However, both Franchised and Open Access Operators pay Variable Track Access Charges (VTAC) since these are set to reflect the direct ‘wear and tear’ costs that train services impose on the network when they are run.</p><p> </p><p>For Control Period 5 (CP5) the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) has held <ins class="ministerial">the Capacity Charge element of VTAC at CP4 levels for services currently run by existing passenger Open Access Operators, however they will pay CP5 rates for any additional or new services whilst any new entrant Open Access Operator will pay CP4 rates on services below a set threshold and CP5 rates on services above that threshold. </ins><del class="ministerial">Open Access (both passenger and freight) VTAC at CP4 levels, whilst</del> Franchised Operators pay the new, higher CP5 rates<del class="ministerial">.</del> <ins class="ministerial">for both existing and new services.　 However, this is the only element of VTAC that is calculated on a different basis.</ins></p><p> </p>
	creator	2483 label Biography information for Lord Bradshaw
	publisher	25277
	tabling member	2483 label Biography information for Lord Bradshaw

100630

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	06/11/2014
	date	23/10/2014
	date tabled	23/10/2014
	ddp created	23/10/2014 19:36:17
	ddp modified	06/02/2015 19:17:41
	answering body	Department for Transport
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	27
	answering dept short name	Transport
	answering dept sort name	Transport
	hansard heading	Railways: North West
	house id	2
	identifier	HL2361
	legislature	25277
	parliament number	55
	question first answered	30/10/2014 12:12:57
	question first ministerially corrected	05/11/2014 12:17:05
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the case for improving inter-regional rail links in the North West of England, particularly between East Lancashire and Greater Manchester.
	session	2014/15
	session number	4
	tabling member printed	Baroness Massey of Darwen
	title	House of Lords Tabled Parliamentary Question 2014/15 HL2361
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	HL2361
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>The case for improving inter-regional rail links in the North West of England has been assessed in a number of studies including the Northern Hub and Network Rail’s Lancashire and Cumbria and North-West Route Utilisation strategies. The case will be further addressed in respect of Network Rail’s Control Period 6 (2019-20<ins class="ministerial">2</ins><del class="ministerial">1</del>4) and beyond through the Northern Route Study as part of Network Rail’s Long Term Planning Process to inform decisions on the Government’s Rail Investment Strategy for Control Period 6.</p>
	creator	2489 label Biography information for Baroness Massey of Darwen
	publisher	25277
	tabling member	2489 label Biography information for Baroness Massey of Darwen

155706

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	01/12/2014
	date	17/11/2014
	date tabled	17/11/2014
	ddp created	17/11/2014 23:44:06
	ddp modified	06/02/2015 19:32:10
	answering body	Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	26
	answering dept short name	Business, Innovation and Skills
	answering dept sort name	Business, Innovation and Skills
	hansard heading	Overseas Trade: Cuba
	house id	2
	identifier	HL2890
	legislature	25277
	parliament number	55
	question first answered	24/11/2014 14:31:48
	question first ministerially corrected	24/11/2014 16:42:00
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what has been the level of trade between Cuba and the United Kingdom in each of the last 10 years.
	session	2014/15
	session number	4
	tabling member printed	Lord Hutton of Furness
	title	House of Lords Tabled Parliamentary Question 2014/15 HL2890
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	HL2890
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p><del class="ministerial">Sources are:</del></p><p> </p><p><del class="ministerial">Data on trade in goods with Cuba is available from HMRC and trade in services from the ONS. Services data on the most recent basis are not available before 2007. The goods and services data are on a different basis as figures on the same basis are not available. This information has not been adjusted for inflation.</del></p><p><ins class="ministerial">The data we have is as below. Please see notes for further explanation.</ins></p><p>Value of UK Trade (exports plus imports) with Cuba: current prices (£ million)</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p>Year</p></td><td><p>Goods</p></td><td><p>Services</p></td><td><p>Goods + Services</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2004</p></td><td><p>24</p></td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td><p>2005</p></td><td><p>25</p></td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td><p>2006</p></td><td><p>29</p></td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td><p>2007</p></td><td><p>23</p></td><td><p>149</p></td><td><p>172</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2008</p></td><td><p>25</p></td><td><p>155</p></td><td><p>180</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2009</p></td><td><p>19</p></td><td><p>171</p></td><td><p>190</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010</p></td><td><p>21</p></td><td><p>196</p></td><td><p>217</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011</p></td><td><p>69</p></td><td><p>145</p></td><td><p>214</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012</p></td><td><p>62</p></td><td><p>188</p></td><td><p>250</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013</p></td><td><p>138</p></td><td><p>213</p></td><td><p>351</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Sources are:</p><p>Goods: HMRC, Overseas Trade Statistics (OTS) database, figures are on a border basis, not seasonally adjusted.</p><p> </p><p>Services: ONS, special request from the ONS, figures are on a balance of payments (BPM6) basis, seasonally adjusted.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Data on trade in goods with Cuba is available from HMRC and trade in services from the ONS. Services data on the most recent basis (new balance of payments method) are not available before 2007. The goods and services data are on a different basis as figures on the same basis are not available. This information has not been adjusted for inflation.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p>
	creator	494 label Biography information for Lord Hutton of Furness
	publisher	25277
	tabling member	494 label Biography information for Lord Hutton of Furness

164499

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	08/12/2014
	date	24/11/2014
	date tabled	24/11/2014
	ddp created	24/11/2014 22:41:43
	ddp modified	06/02/2015 19:37:29
	answering body	Department of Health
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	17
	answering dept short name	Health
	answering dept sort name	Health
	hansard heading	NHS: Negligence
	house id	2
	identifier	HL3092
	legislature	25277
	parliament number	55
	question first answered	04/12/2014 16:04:05
	question first ministerially corrected	13/01/2015 14:37:59
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government by how much the provision for clinical negligence claims against the National Health Service has grown in the last year; why it has grown; and what strategy is in place for reducing that amount.
	session	2014/15
	session number	4
	tabling member printed	Lord Sharkey
	title	House of Lords Tabled Parliamentary Question 2014/15 HL3092
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	HL3092
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>As at 31 March 2014, the National Health Service Litigation Authority (NHS LA) estimates that it has potential liabilities of £26.1 billion, of which £25.7 billion relates to clinical negligence. This is an increase of £3.1 billion from 31 March 201<del class="ministerial">4<ins class="ministerial">3</ins></del>, which can mainly be attributed to a continual rise in clinical negligence claims over recent years. There are a number of factors driving this increase, including the rise in the number of patients cared for and in the complexity of their care; and the general rise in litigation across a number of sectors including the NHS, driven in part by ‘no win, no fee’ agreements. It is anticipated that the effect of the latter is likely to diminish as a result of the Government’s Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act of 2012.</p><p> </p><p>The Department believes the best way to reduce negligence claims is to improve patient care and safety. In March 2014, the Secretary of State for Health issued a call to action to make the NHS the safest healthcare system in the world and achieve a three-year goal to halve avoidable harm and save 6,000 lives. The Sign up to Safety campaign embodies the ambition of the NHS to build a culture of safety, bringing together individuals and organisations with a contribution to make towards the patient safety goal. Elements of this campaign will focus on a reduction in avoidable harm that can lead to compensation claims. Organisations that sign up are setting out what they will do to strengthen patient safety, including a safety improvement plan which shows how their organisation intends to save lives and reduce harm for patients over the next three years. The NHS Litigation Authority, which already provides a “safety and learning service” to trusts<strong>,</strong> will support those organisations which have patient safety improvement plans that show a likely reduction in their higher volume, higher value claims.</p><p> </p>
	creator	4196 label Biography information for Lord Sharkey
	publisher	25277
	tabling member	4196 label Biography information for Lord Sharkey

172628

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	21/01/2015
	date	07/01/2015
	date tabled	07/01/2015
	ddp created	07/01/2015 23:07:46
	ddp modified	06/02/2015 19:59:03
	answering body	The Lord Chairman of Committees
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	200
	answering dept short name
	answering dept sort name	Chairman of Committees (HoL)
	hansard heading	House of Lords: Unpaid Work
	house id	2
	identifier	HL3962
	legislature	25277
	parliament number	55
	question first answered	21/01/2015 15:25:47
	question first ministerially corrected	03/02/2015 17:40:13
	question text	To ask the Chairman of Committees how many internships are offered by the House of Lords Administration.
	session	2014/15
	session number	4
	tabling member printed	Lord Storey
	title	House of Lords Tabled Parliamentary Question 2014/15 HL3962
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	HL3962
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p><del class="ministerial">The House of Lords Administration offers three internships: one in the Committee Office and two in the library. These posts are salaried. In addition, the Administration offers an apprenticeship in the library and up to 24 work experience placements for school students.</del></p><p><ins class="ministerial">The House of Lords Administration does not offer any internships. The three posts erroneously identified as internships are Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology (POST) fellowships usually for PhD students, funded by the UK Research Councils, learned societies and charities. Further details of that scheme are available from the Parliamentary website: <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/offices/bicameral/post/fellowships/" target="_blank">http://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/offices/bicameral/post/fellowships/</a></ins></p><p> </p>
	creator	4238 label Biography information for Lord Storey
	publisher	25277
	tabling member	4238 label Biography information for Lord Storey

174084

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	29/01/2015
	date	15/01/2015
	date tabled	15/01/2015
	ddp created	15/01/2015 21:23:46
	ddp modified	20/02/2015 11:57:00
	answering body	Department for Communities and Local Government
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	7
	answering dept short name	Communities and Local Government
	answering dept sort name	Communities and Local Government
	hansard heading	Domestic Waste: Waste Disposal
	house id	2
	identifier	HL4187
	legislature	25277
	parliament number	55
	question first answered	12/02/2015 14:39:13
	question first ministerially corrected	16/02/2015 17:33:13
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government which local authorities in England have taken part in the Weekly Collection Support Scheme; how many authorities took part in the expression of interest process; which have subsequently received financial support, and how much; and of those, which have reinstated weekly collections of general (“grey” or “residual”) waste, which have used the support to collect food waste separately, and which have used it in other ways.
	session	2014/15
	session number	4
	tabling member printed	Lord Greaves
	title	House of Lords Tabled Parliamentary Question 2014/15 HL4187
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	HL4187
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>In March 2012, my Department received initial expressions of interest from 151 lead local authorities, which resulted in bids from 113 local authorities. Some local authorities submitted multiple expressions of interest which were consolidated before final bid stage. The final bids were then assessed in line with the published criteria, and recipients then awarded funding.</p><p>A detailed table listing the schemes that are being supported is attached and on my Department’s website.</p><p> </p><p>It may be helpful to the noble Lord to outline what this Government has delivered since 2010:</p><p> </p><ul><li>Safeguarded weekly collections for 6 million households through the Weekly Collection Support Scheme as well as championing innovation and best practice; the answer of 14 May 2014, <em>Official Report</em>, House of Commons 646W, outlined how 14 million households in England have some form of weekly collection of smelly rubbish.</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Issued the first ever Whitehall guidance on weekly bin collections, demolishing the myths that fortnightly bin collections are needed to save money or increase recycling. This best practice was directly informed by the Weekly Collections Support Scheme;</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Supported over 40 innovative reward schemes to back recycling through the Weekly Collection Support Scheme (as pledged in the Coalition Agreement); the winning bids for a further Recycling Rewards Scheme for 2015-16 will be announced shortly;</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Stopped the Audit Commission inspections which marked down councils who do not adopt fortnightly rubbish collections, and rejected the Audit Commission guidance which advocated fortnightly collections (“Waste Management: The Strategic Challenge and Waste Management Quick Guide”);</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Abolished the Local Area Agreements and National Indicator 191 imposed by Whitehall which created perverse incentives to downgrade waste collection services;</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Scrapped the Whitehall requirement for municipal Annual Efficiency Statements, which allowed a reduction in the frequency of a household rubbish collection service to qualify as a “valid efficiency” and allowed revenue from bin fines to classed as a “cashable efficiency gain”;</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Scrapped the imposition of eco-towns which would have had fortnightly bin collections and/or bin taxes as part of the “eco-standards”;</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Through the Localism Act, revoked the 2008 legislation that allowed for the imposition of new bin taxes;</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Issued guidance to stop the imposition of illegal ‘backdoor bin charging’ on households bins;</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Stopped funding the ‘Waste Improvement Network’ which told councils to adopt fortnightly collections as best practice;</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Challenged the incorrect interpretation by some bodies that European Union directives require fortnightly collections, and resisted the imposition of bin taxes by the European Union;</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Removing powers of entry and snooping powers from bin inspectors and scrapped guidance telling councils to rifle through families’ bins;</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Changed building regulations and planning guidance to tackle ‘bin blight’, and worked with the NHBC Foundation to produce new best practice guidance for house builders;</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><ul><li>Changing the law through the Deregulation Bill to scrap unfair bin fines.</li></ul><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Without our active support, Ministers are clear that weekly collections would have disappeared across England. This Government’s approach can be contrasted with the devolved Labour-led Administration in Wales, where fortnightly bin collections are official policy, and pilots of monthly bin collections are being actively encouraged.</p> attachment 1 file name PQ HL4187 List of successful bidders to the Weekly Collection Support Scheme.xls
	creator	2569 label Biography information for Lord Greaves
	publisher	25277
	tabling member	2569 label Biography information for Lord Greaves

177981

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	18/02/2015
	date	04/02/2015
	date tabled	04/02/2015
	ddp created	05/02/2015 00:20:12
	ddp modified	18/03/2015 08:51:20
	answering body	Department of Health
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	17
	answering dept short name	Health
	answering dept sort name	Health
	hansard heading	Passive Smoking
	house id	2
	identifier	HL4692
	legislature	25277
	parliament number	55
	question first answered	17/02/2015 16:08:25
	question first ministerially corrected	12/03/2015 12:34:25
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their estimate of the number of people who died as a result of passive smoking in each of the last five years.
	session	2014/15
	session number	4
	tabling member printed	Lord Laird
	title	House of Lords Tabled Parliamentary Question 2014/15 HL4692
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	HL4692
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>Exposure to secondhand smoke is a serious health hazard. More than 50 carcinogens have been identified in secondhand smoke.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The report of the United States Surgeon General titled “<em>The health consequences of involuntary exposure to tobacco smoke”</em> concluded that secondhand smoke causes premature death and disease in children and adults who do not smoke. The scientific evidence indicates that there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke. Children exposed to secondhand smoke are at an increased risk for sudden infant death syndrome, acute respiratory infections, ear problems and more severe asthma. Smoking by parents causes respiratory symptoms and slows lung growth in children. Exposure of adults to secondhand smoke has immediate adverse effects on the cardiovascular system and causes coronary heart disease and lung cancer. Legislation to stop smoking in vehicles carrying children will come into force in England on 1 October 2015.</p><p> </p><p><br /> The report of the Royal College of <ins class="ministerial">Physicians </ins><del class="ministerial">Surgeons</del> titled “<em>Going smoke-free: The medical case for clean air in the home, at work and in public places”</em> included estimates that secondhand smoke exposure caused approximately 12<del class="ministerial">2</del>,200 deaths in the United Kingdom in 2003, and that the majority of these deaths occurred as a result of exposure to secondhand smoke in the home. These estimates were made prior to the introduction of smokefree legislation in England in 2007. Over the past decade, the proportion of smokers who say that they do not smoke in the home has increased.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The evidence is clear that smokefree legislation in England has had beneficial effects on health, as set out in the report “<em>The Impact of smokefree legislation in England: evidence review”</em> which was published alongside the Government’s <em>“Tobacco Control Plan for England”</em> in March 2011.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The reports referred to have been placed in the Library.</p><p> </p>
	creator	2479 label Biography information for Lord Laird
	publisher	25277
	tabling member	2479 label Biography information for Lord Laird

178680

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	23/02/2015
	date	09/02/2015
	date tabled	09/02/2015
	ddp created	09/02/2015 23:18:30
	ddp modified	12/03/2015 08:56:35
	answering body	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	13
	answering dept short name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept sort name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	hansard heading	European Union
	house id	2
	identifier	HL4830
	legislature	25277
	parliament number	55
	question first answered	23/02/2015 13:02:07
	question first ministerially corrected	11/03/2015 13:09:46
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the total cost of the Review of the Balance of Competences between the United Kingdom and the European Union to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and its associated agencies, broken down by (1) staff time, (2) printing costs, (3) running of engagement events, (4) witness expenses, (5) publicity of the reports, and (6) any and all other associated costs.
	session	2014/15
	session number	4
	tabling member printed	Baroness Scott of Needham Market
	title	House of Lords Tabled Parliamentary Question 2014/15 HL4830
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	HL4830
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>Defra was responsible for the following reports as part of the Balance of Competences Review:</p><ul><li>Animal Health and Welfare and Food Safety (which was produced jointly with the Food Standards Agency);</li><li>Environment and Climate Change (which was produced jointly with DECC);</li><li>Agriculture; and</li><li>Fisheries.</li></ul><p> </p><p>1) Staff costs</p><p>The cost of the Defra team which led on producing the four reports between 2012 and 2014 was approximately £500,000. The team drew on expert advice from staff across the Department. Providing a full breakdown of all staff time and costs would exceed the disproportionate cost threshold.</p><p> </p><p>2) Printing costs</p><p>Defra paid approximately £13<del class="ministerial">0</del>,000 to print and publish the four reports.</p><p> </p><p>3) Running engagement events</p><p>Engagement events were held in Brussels, various locations in all parts of the UK, and at Defra’s London and York offices. The total cost of events, including refreshments and Defra staff travel, was approximately £4,000. To provide a full breakdown of staff time and costs would exceed the disproportionate cost threshold.</p><p> </p><p>4) Witness expenses</p><p>Defra did not incur any expenses for witnesses.</p><p>5) Publicity</p><p>Defra did not incur expenses for publicity of the reports.</p><p> </p><p>6) All other associated costs</p><p>There were no other associated costs.</p>
	creator	2542 label Biography information for Baroness Scott of Needham Market
	publisher	25277
	tabling member	2542 label Biography information for Baroness Scott of Needham Market

178691

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	23/02/2015
	date	09/02/2015
	date tabled	09/02/2015
	ddp created	09/02/2015 23:19:08
	ddp modified	12/03/2015 08:56:37
	answering body	Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	26
	answering dept short name	Business, Innovation and Skills
	answering dept sort name	Business, Innovation and Skills
	hansard heading	European Union
	house id	2
	identifier	HL4840
	legislature	25277
	parliament number	55
	question first answered	19/02/2015 16:48:27
	question first ministerially corrected	10/03/2015 16:18:58
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the total cost of the Review of the Balance of Competences between the United Kingdom and the European Union to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and its associated agencies, broken down by (1) staff time, (2) printing costs, (3) running of engagement events, (4) witness expenses, (5) publicity of the reports, and (6) any and all other associated costs.
	session	2014/15
	session number	4
	tabling member printed	Baroness Quin
	title	House of Lords Tabled Parliamentary Question 2014/15 HL4840
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	HL4840
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>As you will be aware, the Balance of Competences Review concluded in December. It was the most comprehensive analysis of the UK’s relationship with the EU ever undertaken. The review involved a large number of Departments across Whitehall to produce 32 reports. The Review was based on the evidence and views received through widespread consultation with interested parties from across society. Across the whole review, departments received close to 2,300 evidence submissions. Departments held over 250 events, attended by around 2,100 stakeholders.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>It was important that what is an unprecedented examination of EU membership was done with appropriate time and care. But the government is also very conscious of the need to ensure value for money in everything it does.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>(1) Staff time</p><p> </p><p><strong>Between 2012-2013, the Balance of Competences Review Team in the Department was staffed by the equivalent of one Grade 7 (salary range £47, 545 - £55,882), and one intern (salary range £23,869 – £27, 281) dedicating 100% of their time to the review to project manage 7 BIS led reports and 1 joint report. Between 2013 – 2014 this was reduced to one Grade 7. Between 2012 – 2014 one Deputy Director (salary range £62,000 - £117,800) dedicated 20% of their time as the senior reporting officer for the review. All other work on the review was allocated, according to need, to existing staff within the Department. Therefore, providing a full breakdown of staff time and costs would exceed the disproportionate cost threshold.</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>(2) Printing costs</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>Printing and publication for the 8 Departmental reports, was coordinated centrally but paid for by the Department, with the exception of the Single Market Report which was printed in-house. Printing and publication costs for all 8 reports totalled £32,821.94. The costs for all 32 reports was £133, 053 </strong><ins class="ministerial"> This figure was a partial figure, covering the printing of some, but not all, reports across the whole review.</ins></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>(3) Running of Engagement events</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>Each policy team in the Department held a wide range of engagement events over the 2 years; the department did not incur any costs for the running of these events. The facilities for hosting these events were either provided by other Government Departments or by business partners or were held on department premises at no extra cost to the department. </strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>(4) Witness </strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>From centrally held figures, we understand that across the whole of the Balance of Competences Review witness expenses amounted to approximately £2,255.00.</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>(5) Publicity</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>The Department did not incur any publicity costs as we published the reports and the call for evidence via email, social media and the Government website.</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>(6) All other associated costs</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>Between 2012 – 2014 the Department commissioned research and analysis to form part of the literature review to provide the reports with legal analysis to ensure the reports were neither too analytical or too speculative and political, but instead adhere to the agreed treaties. The cost for all 8 reports was £108, 738.28. </strong></p><p> </p><p><strong><br /> Department officials incurred some additional associated costs due to travel to meetings and stakeholder events in the UK. Some officials also incurred costs related to events in Brussels. We estimate that the additional travel costs incurred amounted to less than £300.</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p>
	creator	518 label Biography information for Baroness Quin
	publisher	25277
	tabling member	518 label Biography information for Baroness Quin

178697

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	23/02/2015
	date	09/02/2015
	date tabled	09/02/2015
	ddp created	09/02/2015 23:19:31
	ddp modified	24/02/2015 00:58:33
	answering body	Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	26
	answering dept short name	Business, Innovation and Skills
	answering dept sort name	Business, Innovation and Skills
	hansard heading	European Union
	house id	2
	identifier	HL4846
	legislature	25277
	parliament number	55
	question first answered	19/02/2015 16:52:19
	question first ministerially corrected	23/02/2015 15:09:02
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the total cost of the Review of the Balance of Competences between the United Kingdom and the European Union to UK Export Finance and its associated agencies, broken down by (1) staff time, (2) printing costs, (3) running of engagement events, (4) witness expenses, (5) publicity of the reports, and (6) any and all other associated costs.
	session	2014/15
	session number	4
	tabling member printed	Lord Tugendhat
	title	House of Lords Tabled Parliamentary Question 2014/15 HL4846
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	HL4846
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p><del class="ministerial">I refer my Noble Lord to the answer as given for <strong>HL4840</strong></del></p><p> </p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial">I refer the noble Lord to HL4847 for the combined answer.</ins></p><p> </p><p> </p>
	creator	1705 label Biography information for Lord Tugendhat
	publisher	25277
	tabling member	1705 label Biography information for Lord Tugendhat