| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mark McCormack
Mr. Maude: To ask the Minister without Portfolio (1) what fee Mark McCormack of International Management Group will receive from the Millennium Commission; [8026]
- (2) if he will make a statement on the provisions of the contract which he recently signed with Mr. McCormack of International Management Group to raise money for the Millennium Exhibition at Greenwich. [8027]
Mr. Mandelson: None. His contract is with the New Millennium Experience Company. The fees paid to Mark McCormack's International Management Group (IMG) will be on a sliding scale of 4 per cent. to 15 per cent. of the sponsorship raised, reflecting the fact that their task will become more difficult as the sponsorship total rises. All IMG's fees will be success related and they will bear all their own costs: i.e. no sponsorship, no fee.
Jenny Page
Mr. Maude: To ask the Minister without Portfolio what salary Jenny Page is being paid as chief executive of Millennium Central. [8032]
Mr. Mandelson: Miss Page's remuneration package includes a salary of £150,000 p.a., a pension of 15 per cent. and a bonus of up to 30 per cent. dependent on completing the term of the contract and subject to meeting performance targets set by the Board of the operating company, which is now called the New Millennium Experience Company.
LORD CHANCELLOR'S DEPARTMENT
Corruption
Mr. Forth:
To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if he will list for the review of the Law Commission proposal for reform of the law on corruption (a) the expected completion date and (b) the cost of conducting the review. [8257]
17 Jul 1997 : Column: 328
Mr. Hoon:
The Law Commission issued consultation paper No. 145 "Legislating the Criminal Code--Corruption" on 18 March 1997. The closing date for responses was 30 June 1997. Work began on the project in May 1996 and the Law Commission expects to produce a report by June 1998. The cost of the project to date is not available.
Dr. Cable:
To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what are the 10 transaction criteria questions in audits of legal aid firms which most often result in non-compliance; and what proportion of firms fail to comply with each. [8118]
Mr. Hoon:
This information is not available and could be derived only at disproportionate cost.
Dr. Cable:
To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how many auditors the Legal Aid Board currently employs to carry out transaction criteria audits on legal aid firms; what was the estimated cost of employing (a) these auditors and (b) all Board staff concerned with franchising, including auditors and liaison managers in 1996-97; and what are the projected costs for 1997-98. [7908]
Mr. Hoon:
The Legal Aid Board currently employs the full-time equivalent of 39.38 quality Auditors to carry out franchise related duties, including transaction criteria audits, with a current annual budget of approximately £600,000. In 1996-97, the cost of all aspects of franchising to the Legal Aid Board was approximately £4,000,000.
Planned expenditure for the maintenance and expansion of franchising in 1997-98 is £5,000,000.
Dr. Cable:
To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department in how many instances the results of transaction criteria audits on legal aid firms have led to quality concerns being registered against the firm. [8119]
Mr. Hoon:
The Legal Aid Board uses transaction criteria as the process measure of service delivery in a specific case or proceeding type, and would use evidence of systematic omissions of information recorded, advice given, or steps taken, to raise quality concerns with the organisation, with a view to improving service provision. Since 1 April 1995 (when a new system was installed to provide details of all non-compliancies) 86 major (d) non-compliancies (this is where the organisation is not able to comply with one of number of mandatory franchise requirements) have been recorded as a result of transaction criteria audits.
Dr. Cable:
To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how many transaction audits have been conducted for each of the Legal Aid Board's franchise categories; what is (a) the average number of files read and (b) the average number of person hours spent in respect of each audit; in how many instances the raw data have revealed a compliance rate below the minimum compliance rate established by the Legal Aid Board; and in how many instances the compliance rate has fallen below the established minima once the appropriate statistical significance test has been applied. [7905]
17 Jul 1997 : Column: 329
Mr. Hoon:
(a) The Legal Aid Board has informed me that during the financial year 1996-97, the relevant information was as follows:
| Franchise category | Audits conducted | Average number of files audited |
|---|---|---|
| Consumer and general conduct | 300 | 2.3 |
| Crime | 958 | 5.2 |
| Debt | 266 | 2.8 |
| Employment | 235 | 2.7 |
| Housing | 382 | 3.2 |
| Immigration | 55 | 3.0 |
| Matrimonial and family | 1,498 | 5.1 |
| Personal injury | 1,279 | 4.5 |
| Welfare benefits | 95 | 2.7 |
(b) The average length of time spent auditing case files against the transaction criteria was 9.6 hours per audit. This was the time taken to conduct the actual transaction criteria audit only, and did not include selection of files, recording results, producing reports, providing feedback to the organisation, or any other time which is associated with the audit.
In 691 audits, the average compliance rate of the sample of case files was found to fall below the standard compliance for that franchise category.
Following the application of the statistical technique used during the transaction criteria audit, 70 audits were found to have a compliance range which the upper confidence interval fell below the standard compliance rate for that franchise category.
Mr. Campbell-Savours:
To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department on what occasions (a) Ministers and (b) officials have refused to (i) arrange and (ii) attend meetings with hon. Members to discuss matters relating to interests registered by those Members under categories 1, 2, 3, 4(b), 8 and 9 in the Register of Members' Interests. [8081]
Mr. Hoon:
The first report from the Committee on Standards in Public Life (Cm 2850) made it clear that when Members are meeting Ministers or others on topics on which they have an interest, the onus is on the Member to declare that interest not the Minister to know (paragraph 63 of Cm 2850). It is not practicable for Ministers and officials, amongst their other duties, to vet requests for meetings against the Register of Members' Interests. Should evidence of non-declaration, or contravention of the Resolution of the House relating to delegations to Ministers emerge the matter would be brought to the attention of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards.
Mr. Campbell-Savours:
To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if he will ensure that (a) Ministers and (b) officials in his Department refuse requests from hon. Members to (i) arrange and (ii) attend meetings relating to interests held by those Members under categories 1, 2, 3, 4(b), 8 and 9 in the Register of Members' Interests. [8078]
Mr. Hoon:
The first report from the Committee on Standards in Public Life (Cm 2850) recognised the value of enabling members to retain interests outside the House,
17 Jul 1997 : Column: 330
provided that these were properly declared, both in the Register of Members' Interests and on other occasions. Subject to these requirements, and to the rules of the House relating to delegations to Ministers, Members are free to seek meetings with Ministers and officials, who will consider such requests alongside the many other approaches from individuals and organisations concerned to press their own interests and those of others.
Mr. Forth:
To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if he will give for the Review of Civil Justice and Legal Aid Reforms (a) the expected completion date and (b) the cost of conducting the Review. [8232]
Mr. Hoon:
The Lord Chancellor has asked Sir Peter Middleton to produce a preliminary report by the end of September. Any further work will depend on the terms of that preliminary report. The Review is expected to cost around £75,000 to the end of September.
Mr. Nigel Jones:
To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what plans he has to outlaw the practice known as gazumping; and if he will make a statement. [7996]
Mr. Hoon:
Work has now begun across a number of Government Departments co-operating together which will, amongst other things, look closely at the problem of gazumping and will lead to detailed proposals which will be in the interests of everybody involved in the sale and purchase of homes. A ministerial task group will steer the work to ensure that it is carried through efficiently and effectively.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |