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 previous answer version answering member constituency answering member printed answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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