Linked Data API

Show Search Form

Search Results

1170327
registered interest false more like this
date less than 2020-01-13more like thismore than 2020-01-13
answering body
House of Commons Commission more like this
answering dept id 18 more like this
answering dept short name House of Commons Commission more like this
answering dept sort name House of Commons Commission more like this
hansard heading Big Ben more like this
house id 1 more like this
legislature
25259
pref label House of Commons more like this
question text To ask the hon. Member representing the House of Commons Commission, if the Commission will allow Big Ben to chime at 11pm GMT on 31 January 2020 to mark the UK leaving the EU; what estimate has been made of the cost of activating the clock mechanism to enable those chimes; and if he will make a statement. more like this
tabling member constituency Lichfield more like this
tabling member printed
Michael Fabricant more like this
uin 2417 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction false more like this
date of answer less than 2020-01-15more like thismore than 2020-01-15
answer text <p>The Speaker has indicated that this is a matter for Members of the House of Commons. The House of Commons Commission will respond to any decision of the House on this matter. In the absence of any such decision, the Commission's position on the sounding of Big Ben remains unchanged.</p><p>For the Bell to ring on 31 January, the temporary striking mechanism used for Remembrance Sunday and New Year's Eve would need to be reattached and tested to ensure the timing is correct. Alongside this work, a temporary floor of the belfry where Big Ben is housed would also need to be installed, as extensive work is currently taking place in this area. The cost for the temporary floor and installing, testing and striking Big Ben would be approximately £120,000.</p><p>In addition to the set-up, the delay to work in the belfry would push back the planned programme of works by two to four weeks, with each week of delays costing approximately £100,000 a week. As such, the minimum cost of sounding Big Ben would be £320,000 but could be much higher (up to £500,000). These costs are based on a notice period of approximately two weeks. Should the project team be required to strike the bell with less notice, these costs would increase substantially.</p>
answering member constituency Mole Valley more like this
answering member printed Sir Paul Beresford more like this
question first answered
less than 2020-01-15T23:47:42.177Zmore like thismore than 2020-01-15T23:47:42.177Z
answering member
103
label Biography information for Sir Paul Beresford more like this
tabling member
280
label Biography information for Michael Fabricant more like this
1170507
registered interest false more like this
date less than 2020-01-13more like thismore than 2020-01-13
answering body
House of Commons Commission more like this
answering dept id 18 more like this
answering dept short name House of Commons Commission more like this
answering dept sort name House of Commons Commission more like this
hansard heading Big Ben: Festivals and Special Occasions more like this
house id 1 more like this
legislature
25259
pref label House of Commons more like this
question text To ask the hon. Member representing the House of Commons Commission, what the cost was of Big Ben chiming on (a) Remembrance Sunday 2019 and (b) New Year's Eve 2019. more like this
tabling member constituency Rayleigh and Wickford more like this
tabling member printed
Mr Mark Francois more like this
uin 2442 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction true more like this
date of answer less than 2020-01-16more like thismore than 2020-01-16
answer text <p>The costs associated with striking Big Ben on Remembrance Sunday and New Year's Eve in 2019 were £14.2k including VAT <ins class="ministerial">in total.</ins> <del class="ministerial">on each occasion.</del></p><p>The striking of Big Ben on these occasions was coordinated around the planned works so as to minimise the impact on the project costs and to ensure it did not result in any delay. If the project team are required to strike the bell with less notice, the costs would substantially increase due to the unexpected impact on the project schedule.</p> more like this
answering member constituency Mole Valley more like this
answering member printed Sir Paul Beresford more like this
question first answered
less than 2020-01-16T20:09:42.277Zmore like thismore than 2020-01-16T20:09:42.277Z
question first ministerially corrected
less than 2020-02-19T08:40:44.973Zmore like thismore than 2020-02-19T08:40:44.973Z
answering member
103
label Biography information for Sir Paul Beresford more like this
previous answer version
1393
answering member constituency Mole Valley more like this
answering member printed Sir Paul Beresford more like this
answering member
103
label Biography information for Sir Paul Beresford more like this
tabling member
1444
label Biography information for Mr Mark Francois more like this
347366
registered interest false more like this
date less than 2015-05-28more like thismore than 2015-05-28
answering body
House of Commons Commission more like this
answering dept id 18 more like this
answering dept short name House of Commons Commission more like this
answering dept sort name House of Commons Commission more like this
hansard heading Members: Postal Services more like this
house id 1 more like this
legislature
25259
pref label House of Commons more like this
question text To ask the hon. Member for Mole Valley representing the House of Commons Commission, when and how it was decided to stop using Royal Mail to deliver parliamentary mail to hon. Members. more like this
tabling member constituency Blaydon more like this
tabling member printed
Mr David Anderson more like this
uin 329 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction false more like this
date of answer less than 2015-06-03more like thismore than 2015-06-03
answer text <p>The House of Commons spends approximately £500k per annum on the mail forwarding service for Members, and, in compliance with UK Procurement Regulations, is required to seek competition for the service, and to award the contract to the supplier that represents the best overall value for money, taking service, quality and cost factors into account.</p><p>In accordance with the Regulations, and the House’s procurement rules, the mail forwarding contract was tendered using a framework set up by the Crown Commercial Service. Invitation to Tender was in September 2014 with an award of contract made in December 2014. Royal Mail submitted a bid, but were not the best overall value for money supplier; that was DX (Group), who met all the service requirements and will realise savings of between 15% to 20% on the previous arrangements.</p> more like this
answering member constituency Mole Valley more like this
answering member printed Sir Paul Beresford more like this
question first answered
less than 2015-06-03T16:01:06.243Zmore like thismore than 2015-06-03T16:01:06.243Z
answering member
103
label Biography information for Sir Paul Beresford more like this
tabling member
1486
label Biography information for Mr David Anderson more like this
348261
registered interest false more like this
date less than 2015-06-03more like thismore than 2015-06-03
answering body
House of Commons Commission more like this
answering dept id 18 more like this
answering dept short name House of Commons Commission more like this
answering dept sort name House of Commons Commission more like this
hansard heading Parliament: Asbestos more like this
house id 1 more like this
legislature
25259
pref label House of Commons more like this
question text To ask the hon. Member for Mole Valley representing the House of Commons Commission, what recent progress has been made on the operation of Parliament's Asbestos Management Plan; and if he will make a statement. more like this
tabling member constituency Scunthorpe more like this
tabling member printed
Nic Dakin more like this
uin 1032 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction false more like this
date of answer less than 2015-06-09more like thismore than 2015-06-09
answer text <p>Owing to its historic nature, asbestos deposits are present within the Palace of Westminster. The Parliamentary Estates Directorate operates an Asbestos Management Plan which it uses to safely manage asbestos across the whole of the parliamentary estate, in full compliance with the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012.<br><br>During the successful installation of new, modern equipment in the plant room that supplies the Chamber and adjacent offices, a series of asbestos reassurance tests have been carried out. Traces of asbestos were recently found in the ventilation trunking, but extensive sampling at the vents has provided very high confidence that it is not becoming airborne.<br><br>Professor R J Willey, Managing Director of ACS Physical Risk Control Ltd has undertaken an urgent review of the evidence, and concluded: “It is my considered Opinion that, after the discovery, proper procedures were timeously followed. Detailed investigation of the results of air tests taken, over a considerable period following the discovery, show quite conclusively that there was negligible risk to any persons supplied with air from the duct system. Providing current conditions are maintained, there will be negligible risk to any persons supplied with air in the future from the duct system.”<br><br>The Commission and the House authorities regard the safety of Members, staff and the visiting public as their highest priority. Steps have therefore been taken to ensure that the ventilation system is not disturbed in any way. Steps will also be taken to eradicate the asbestos in the trunking by the end of 2015, but in the meantime we are content with this authoritative advice that there is no reason to stop using the Chamber, or the adjacent offices and spaces.</p>
answering member constituency Mole Valley more like this
answering member printed Sir Paul Beresford more like this
question first answered
less than 2015-06-09T12:44:37.607Zmore like thismore than 2015-06-09T12:44:37.607Z
answering member
103
label Biography information for Sir Paul Beresford more like this
tabling member
4056
label Biography information for Nic Dakin more like this
348263
registered interest false more like this
date less than 2015-06-03more like thismore than 2015-06-03
answering body
House of Commons Commission more like this
answering dept id 18 more like this
answering dept short name House of Commons Commission more like this
answering dept sort name House of Commons Commission more like this
hansard heading Members: Travel more like this
house id 1 more like this
legislature
25259
pref label House of Commons more like this
question text To ask the hon. Member for Mole Valley representing the House of Commons Commission, what proportion of hon. Members travel from their constituency address to the House in (a) less than one hour, (b) more than one but less than two hours, (c) more than two but less than three hours, (d) more than three but less than four hours and (e) more than four hours. more like this
tabling member constituency Isle of Wight more like this
tabling member printed
Mr Andrew Turner more like this
uin 955 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction false more like this
date of answer less than 2015-06-08more like thismore than 2015-06-08
answer text <p>The House does not collect information on which it could base an answer to this question. Responsibility for repayment of Members’ costs for travel between their constituencies and Westminster transferred to the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority in 2010.</p> more like this
answering member constituency Mole Valley more like this
answering member printed Sir Paul Beresford more like this
question first answered
less than 2015-06-08T15:58:27.453Zmore like thismore than 2015-06-08T15:58:27.453Z
answering member
103
label Biography information for Sir Paul Beresford more like this
tabling member
1426
label Biography information for Mr Andrew Turner more like this
349227
registered interest false more like this
date less than 2015-06-09more like thismore than 2015-06-09
answering body
House of Commons Commission more like this
answering dept id 18 more like this
answering dept short name House of Commons Commission more like this
answering dept sort name House of Commons Commission more like this
hansard heading Parliament: Hearing Impairment more like this
house id 1 more like this
legislature
25259
pref label House of Commons more like this
question text To ask the hon. Member for Mole Valley representing the House of Commons Commission, if the Commission will consider what facilities can be made available to hon. Members and staff who are hard of hearing in non-public meetings in rooms on the Estate; and if he will make a statement. more like this
tabling member constituency Walsall North more like this
tabling member printed
Mr David Winnick more like this
uin 1510 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction false more like this
date of answer less than 2015-06-15more like thismore than 2015-06-15
answer text <p>A number of meeting rooms on the estate do not currently have any microphone facilities and hence have no induction loops. Low spill induction loop systems would not be practical as the rooms are close together and would pick up easily what is being discussed in the adjacent rooms. Following the hon. Member’s question, officials in the Department of Facilities will work with the House of Commons audiovisual (AV) contractor to provide costings for a solution to address the issue he has raised and will keep the hon. Member informed of progress.</p> more like this
answering member constituency Mole Valley more like this
answering member printed Sir Paul Beresford more like this
question first answered
less than 2015-06-15T14:24:09.79Zmore like thismore than 2015-06-15T14:24:09.79Z
answering member
103
label Biography information for Sir Paul Beresford more like this
tabling member
316
label Biography information for Mr David Winnick more like this
349339
registered interest false more like this
date less than 2015-06-09more like thismore than 2015-06-09
answering body
House of Commons Commission more like this
answering dept id 18 more like this
answering dept short name House of Commons Commission more like this
answering dept sort name House of Commons Commission more like this
hansard heading Palace of Westminster: Repairs and Maintenance more like this
house id 1 more like this
legislature
25259
pref label House of Commons more like this
question text To ask the hon. Member for Mole Valley representing the House of Commons Commission, how much has been spent on repair, renovation and restoration of the Palace of Westminster in each financial year from 2005 to 2015. more like this
tabling member constituency Airdrie and Shotts more like this
tabling member printed
Neil Gray more like this
uin 1774 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction false more like this
date of answer less than 2015-06-15more like thismore than 2015-06-15
answer text <p>The two Houses spent the following amounts on repair, renovation and restoration of the Palace of Westminster in each financial year from 2007/08 to 2014/15. Figures before 2007/08 are not available.</p><p>2007/08 - £27.6m<br>2008/09 - £18.4m<br>2009/10 - £31.6m<br>2010/11 - £29.2m<br>2011/12 - £29.3m<br>2012/13 - £36.3m<br>2013/14 - £42.2m<br>2014/15 - £48.7m (Provisional, subject to audit)</p> more like this
answering member constituency Mole Valley more like this
answering member printed Sir Paul Beresford more like this
question first answered
less than 2015-06-15T14:22:38.367Zmore like thismore than 2015-06-15T14:22:38.367Z
answering member
103
label Biography information for Sir Paul Beresford more like this
tabling member
4365
label Biography information for Neil Gray more like this
349340
registered interest false more like this
date less than 2015-06-09more like thismore than 2015-06-09
answering body
House of Commons Commission more like this
answering dept id 18 more like this
answering dept short name House of Commons Commission more like this
answering dept sort name House of Commons Commission more like this
hansard heading Palace of Westminster: Repairs and Maintenance more like this
house id 1 more like this
legislature
25259
pref label House of Commons more like this
question text To ask the hon. Member for Mole Valley representing the House of Commons Commission, by what process the Commission procures repair and renovation work for the Palace of Westminster. more like this
tabling member constituency Airdrie and Shotts more like this
tabling member printed
Neil Gray more like this
uin 1775 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction false more like this
date of answer less than 2015-06-15more like thismore than 2015-06-15
answer text <p>The process by which repair and renovation of the Palace of Westminster is procured – whether for the purpose of the longer-term Restoration and Renewal Programme, the Medium Term Investment Plan, or otherwise:</p><ol><li>is shaped by objectives specified in an Outline Business Case produced in accordance with the Treasury Green Book Five Case model;</li><li>is resolved by a contract awarded through an open and competitive tender procedure that is compliant with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015;</li><li>takes into consideration whether compliant collaborative procurement options, where available, are a viable option according to the scope of the work;</li><li>includes a specification and range of award criteria which are representative of, and will be capable of realising, the value-for-money objectives determined by the respective Outline Business Case;</li><li>may be considered within a higher level Gateway Review Assurance process where considered appropriate.</li></ol><p><br>The default position in the Houses’ Procurement Policy is to set evaluation criteria weightings of 70% for price and 30% for quality. We expect these ratios to be applied when procuring repair and renovation works. The House Procurement Policy goes on to provide a waiver process by which a justification and recommendation can be made to vary these weightings according to circumstances and value-for-money considerations specific to a given procurement. A contract that looks to transfer a higher level of responsibility and liability for design to the contractor is a common example of where the balance in weighting may be moved towards quality as a consequence of a waiver application.</p><p>The need for repairs is determined with reference to a number of factors: condition surveys of the Estate; an annual exercise to prioritise the portfolio of projects; inspections carried out on a quadrennial basis; advice from the House’s Design Authority; and calls to the PED Helpdesk. In particular:</p><ol><li>A comprehensive condition survey of the Estate was carried out in 2008/09, the results of which fed into a 25-year plan. This survey identified a significant number of defects, the works for which were all priced and given recommended completion dates. These tasks were then packaged minor or major projects and added to the scope of existing works within the 25-year plan.</li><li>Following on from this comprehensive survey, there is a rolling programme of condition surveys every two years, which similarly identifies defects and further work.</li><li>An annual exercise is undertaken by senior managers, including the Director General of Facilities and the Finance Director, to assess and prioritise the portfolio of projects in order to inform the Medium Term Investment Plan for the following four-year period. Projects are prioritised, taking the following factors into account:</li></ol><ul><li>compliance with legislative or contractual requirements;</li><li>business objectives;</li><li>mitigation of the risk of failure to services;</li><li>conservation of the fabric of the buildings.</li></ul><p><br>The Medium Term Investment Plan is then considered by the Finance Committee before being approved by the House of Commons Commission.</p><ol><li>The Palace of Westminster is a Grade 1 listed building, and PED follows best practice by ensuring that an inspection is carried out every four years by the Conservation and Architectural Team. These inspections identify tasks which should be carried out to ensure the fabric of the building is maintained properly.</li><li>The PED Design Authority, established in 2011, is committed to “ensure consistent standards, value for money, statutory compliance and user satisfaction”. Practically, it concentrates on the lifecycle of the engineering assets, ensuring that initial and replacement capital costs are balanced with the ongoing operating and maintenance costs, and with identified business needs. It acts as a Central Engineering department, and advises on the requirements for works and systems and services across the Parliamentary Estate.</li><li>PED has a helpdesk system which receives and handles building faults reported by Members, Members’ staff, and staff of the House. These faults are prioritised according to service level agreements.</li></ol><p><br>The Director General of Facilities would be happy to brief the hon. Member in more detail, should he wish.</p>
answering member constituency Mole Valley more like this
answering member printed Sir Paul Beresford more like this
grouped question UIN
1776 more like this
1777 more like this
question first answered
less than 2015-06-15T11:46:30.457Zmore like thismore than 2015-06-15T11:46:30.457Z
answering member
103
label Biography information for Sir Paul Beresford more like this
tabling member
4365
label Biography information for Neil Gray more like this
349341
registered interest false more like this
date less than 2015-06-09more like thismore than 2015-06-09
answering body
House of Commons Commission more like this
answering dept id 18 more like this
answering dept short name House of Commons Commission more like this
answering dept sort name House of Commons Commission more like this
hansard heading House of Commons: Repairs and Maintenance more like this
house id 1 more like this
legislature
25259
pref label House of Commons more like this
question text To ask the hon. Member for Mole Valley representing the House of Commons Commission, what weighting the Commission gives to best value for money in its repairs and renovations procurement policy. more like this
tabling member constituency Airdrie and Shotts more like this
tabling member printed
Neil Gray more like this
uin 1776 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction false more like this
date of answer less than 2015-06-15more like thismore than 2015-06-15
answer text <p>The process by which repair and renovation of the Palace of Westminster is procured – whether for the purpose of the longer-term Restoration and Renewal Programme, the Medium Term Investment Plan, or otherwise:</p><ol><li>is shaped by objectives specified in an Outline Business Case produced in accordance with the Treasury Green Book Five Case model;</li><li>is resolved by a contract awarded through an open and competitive tender procedure that is compliant with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015;</li><li>takes into consideration whether compliant collaborative procurement options, where available, are a viable option according to the scope of the work;</li><li>includes a specification and range of award criteria which are representative of, and will be capable of realising, the value-for-money objectives determined by the respective Outline Business Case;</li><li>may be considered within a higher level Gateway Review Assurance process where considered appropriate.</li></ol><p><br>The default position in the Houses’ Procurement Policy is to set evaluation criteria weightings of 70% for price and 30% for quality. We expect these ratios to be applied when procuring repair and renovation works. The House Procurement Policy goes on to provide a waiver process by which a justification and recommendation can be made to vary these weightings according to circumstances and value-for-money considerations specific to a given procurement. A contract that looks to transfer a higher level of responsibility and liability for design to the contractor is a common example of where the balance in weighting may be moved towards quality as a consequence of a waiver application.</p><p>The need for repairs is determined with reference to a number of factors: condition surveys of the Estate; an annual exercise to prioritise the portfolio of projects; inspections carried out on a quadrennial basis; advice from the House’s Design Authority; and calls to the PED Helpdesk. In particular:</p><ol><li>A comprehensive condition survey of the Estate was carried out in 2008/09, the results of which fed into a 25-year plan. This survey identified a significant number of defects, the works for which were all priced and given recommended completion dates. These tasks were then packaged minor or major projects and added to the scope of existing works within the 25-year plan.</li><li>Following on from this comprehensive survey, there is a rolling programme of condition surveys every two years, which similarly identifies defects and further work.</li><li>An annual exercise is undertaken by senior managers, including the Director General of Facilities and the Finance Director, to assess and prioritise the portfolio of projects in order to inform the Medium Term Investment Plan for the following four-year period. Projects are prioritised, taking the following factors into account:</li></ol><ul><li>compliance with legislative or contractual requirements;</li><li>business objectives;</li><li>mitigation of the risk of failure to services;</li><li>conservation of the fabric of the buildings.</li></ul><p><br>The Medium Term Investment Plan is then considered by the Finance Committee before being approved by the House of Commons Commission.</p><ol><li>The Palace of Westminster is a Grade 1 listed building, and PED follows best practice by ensuring that an inspection is carried out every four years by the Conservation and Architectural Team. These inspections identify tasks which should be carried out to ensure the fabric of the building is maintained properly.</li><li>The PED Design Authority, established in 2011, is committed to “ensure consistent standards, value for money, statutory compliance and user satisfaction”. Practically, it concentrates on the lifecycle of the engineering assets, ensuring that initial and replacement capital costs are balanced with the ongoing operating and maintenance costs, and with identified business needs. It acts as a Central Engineering department, and advises on the requirements for works and systems and services across the Parliamentary Estate.</li><li>PED has a helpdesk system which receives and handles building faults reported by Members, Members’ staff, and staff of the House. These faults are prioritised according to service level agreements.</li></ol><p><br>The Director General of Facilities would be happy to brief the hon. Member in more detail, should he wish.</p>
answering member constituency Mole Valley more like this
answering member printed Sir Paul Beresford more like this
grouped question UIN
1775 more like this
1777 more like this
question first answered
less than 2015-06-15T11:46:30.6Zmore like thismore than 2015-06-15T11:46:30.6Z
answering member
103
label Biography information for Sir Paul Beresford more like this
tabling member
4365
label Biography information for Neil Gray more like this
349342
registered interest false more like this
date less than 2015-06-09more like thismore than 2015-06-09
answering body
House of Commons Commission more like this
answering dept id 18 more like this
answering dept short name House of Commons Commission more like this
answering dept sort name House of Commons Commission more like this
hansard heading House of Commons: Repairs and Maintenance more like this
house id 1 more like this
legislature
25259
pref label House of Commons more like this
question text To ask the hon. Member for Mole Valley representing the House of Commons Commission, how the Commission decides when repairs and renovations to the parliamentary estate are required. more like this
tabling member constituency Airdrie and Shotts more like this
tabling member printed
Neil Gray more like this
uin 1777 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction false more like this
date of answer less than 2015-06-15more like thismore than 2015-06-15
answer text <p>The process by which repair and renovation of the Palace of Westminster is procured – whether for the purpose of the longer-term Restoration and Renewal Programme, the Medium Term Investment Plan, or otherwise:</p><ol><li>is shaped by objectives specified in an Outline Business Case produced in accordance with the Treasury Green Book Five Case model;</li><li>is resolved by a contract awarded through an open and competitive tender procedure that is compliant with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015;</li><li>takes into consideration whether compliant collaborative procurement options, where available, are a viable option according to the scope of the work;</li><li>includes a specification and range of award criteria which are representative of, and will be capable of realising, the value-for-money objectives determined by the respective Outline Business Case;</li><li>may be considered within a higher level Gateway Review Assurance process where considered appropriate.</li></ol><p><br>The default position in the Houses’ Procurement Policy is to set evaluation criteria weightings of 70% for price and 30% for quality. We expect these ratios to be applied when procuring repair and renovation works. The House Procurement Policy goes on to provide a waiver process by which a justification and recommendation can be made to vary these weightings according to circumstances and value-for-money considerations specific to a given procurement. A contract that looks to transfer a higher level of responsibility and liability for design to the contractor is a common example of where the balance in weighting may be moved towards quality as a consequence of a waiver application.</p><p>The need for repairs is determined with reference to a number of factors: condition surveys of the Estate; an annual exercise to prioritise the portfolio of projects; inspections carried out on a quadrennial basis; advice from the House’s Design Authority; and calls to the PED Helpdesk. In particular:</p><ol><li>A comprehensive condition survey of the Estate was carried out in 2008/09, the results of which fed into a 25-year plan. This survey identified a significant number of defects, the works for which were all priced and given recommended completion dates. These tasks were then packaged minor or major projects and added to the scope of existing works within the 25-year plan.</li><li>Following on from this comprehensive survey, there is a rolling programme of condition surveys every two years, which similarly identifies defects and further work.</li><li>An annual exercise is undertaken by senior managers, including the Director General of Facilities and the Finance Director, to assess and prioritise the portfolio of projects in order to inform the Medium Term Investment Plan for the following four-year period. Projects are prioritised, taking the following factors into account:</li></ol><ul><li>compliance with legislative or contractual requirements;</li><li>business objectives;</li><li>mitigation of the risk of failure to services;</li><li>conservation of the fabric of the buildings.</li></ul><p><br>The Medium Term Investment Plan is then considered by the Finance Committee before being approved by the House of Commons Commission.</p><ol><li>The Palace of Westminster is a Grade 1 listed building, and PED follows best practice by ensuring that an inspection is carried out every four years by the Conservation and Architectural Team. These inspections identify tasks which should be carried out to ensure the fabric of the building is maintained properly.</li><li>The PED Design Authority, established in 2011, is committed to “ensure consistent standards, value for money, statutory compliance and user satisfaction”. Practically, it concentrates on the lifecycle of the engineering assets, ensuring that initial and replacement capital costs are balanced with the ongoing operating and maintenance costs, and with identified business needs. It acts as a Central Engineering department, and advises on the requirements for works and systems and services across the Parliamentary Estate.</li><li>PED has a helpdesk system which receives and handles building faults reported by Members, Members’ staff, and staff of the House. These faults are prioritised according to service level agreements.</li></ol><p><br>The Director General of Facilities would be happy to brief the hon. Member in more detail, should he wish.</p>
answering member constituency Mole Valley more like this
answering member printed Sir Paul Beresford more like this
grouped question UIN
1775 more like this
1776 more like this
question first answered
less than 2015-06-15T11:46:30.733Zmore like thismore than 2015-06-15T11:46:30.733Z
answering member
103
label Biography information for Sir Paul Beresford more like this
tabling member
4365
label Biography information for Neil Gray more like this