Previous Section Index Home Page

16 Jan 2003 : Column 746W—continued


Small Suppliers (Video)

Mr. Andrew Turner: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the cost of preparation and distribution of the Office of Government Commerce's video XSmaller Supplier...Better value?" was; how many were produced in each format; and how many have been distributed. [89593]

Mr. Boateng: The XSmaller Supplier ... Better Value?" video was launched in November 2002, following a commitment to the Public Accounts Committee at the Improving Public Services through e-Government hearing held on 13 May 2002. The preparation costs were shared equally between the Office of Government Commerce (OGC) and the Small Business Service (SBS).

To reduce the postage and packaging costs this video was sent to some organisations as part of a larger mailing, sent in bulk for others to distribute using their existing networks and some were distributed at no cost. As these distribution costs are not held centrally this information could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.


Matthew Taylor: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer pursuant to the answer of 16 December 2002, Official Report, columns 587–88W, on cigarettes, what method of calculation was used; and if he will place the calculations in the Library. [90313]

16 Jan 2003 : Column 747W

John Healey: The allowance made in the pre-Budget report public finance forecast is based on assumptions about changes to cross-border shopping behaviour following the October launch of the next stage of the Government's long-term strategy to tackle tobacco smuggling.

The assumptions focus on effects that can be quantified with a degree of certainty. EU shoppers have always been allowed to bring back as much tobacco as they like, as long it is for their own use, and the revisions to the tobacco indicative levels as part of the October package do not affect that entitlement. Data from Customs and Excise's survey of cross-Channel travellers show that the majority of travellers made no purchases of cigarettes, and that, of those who did make purchases, two thirds purchased below the previous indicative level of 800 cigarettes, and that a further 15 per cent. purchased above. The recent change to the levels can be expected to have little effect on the shopping patterns of these travellers.

The assumptions for the public finance forecasts relate to the impact on behaviour of those remaining travellers purchasing at the previous indicative levels for tobacco. Those assumptions include:

Devolved Administration Finance

Mr. Rosindell: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what funds will be transferred from the Treasury to the (a) Scottish Parliament, (b) Welsh Assembly and (c) Greater London Assembly in the next financial year. [91327]

Mr. Boateng: Figures for the grants paid to the Scottish consolidated fund and the NAW in 2003–04 will be published in the 2003–04 main supply estimates for the Scotland Office and the Wales Office in due course.

The 2003–04 figure for GLA funding is not yet available. GLA funding comes from a range of sources and is not a single grant as in the case of Scotland and Wales. A large percentage of GLA funding comes from the local government revenue support grant, and the police grant. The Home Secretary and the Minister for Local Government announced a consultation on proposals for these amounts to the House on the 5 December. Further funding to the GLA comes through the GLA transport grant.


Pete Wishart: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many drugs seizures, broken down by type of drug, have HM Customs in Scotland made by (a) financial value and (b) weight in each of the last five years. [90611]

John Healey: Details of Customs' drug seizures are published in their annual reports, copies of which are available in the House of Commons Library. Drugs seized by Customs are destined for all parts of the UK,

16 Jan 2003 : Column 748W

and there is little direct importation of class A drugs into Scotland. For this reason it is not policy to break down seizure information to the constituent parts of the UK.

Employment Costs

Mr. Prisk: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the employment costs are, including benefits, of (a) Ministers representing the Office of Government Commerce and (b) special advisers and their supporting staff retained by the Office of Government Commerce. [90562]

Mr. Boateng: Treasury Ministers and special advisers spend a proportion of their time on OGC business. Their employment costs are borne by the Treasury.

Energy Efficiency

Mr. Sayeed: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what amounts were claimed by companies under the Enhanced Capital Allowances scheme for each qualifying energy efficiency technology and product type in the last year for which figures are available. [90802]

Dawn Primarolo: The information requested is not yet available.

Government Contracts

Mr. Prisk: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will list government contracts, including those with SMEs, and PFI and PPP contracts, where there has been an identified cost saving greater than 5 per cent. as a result of the services provided by the Office of Government Commerce. [90567]

Mr. Boateng: Information on cost savings in individual Departmental contracts is not held centrally. The total value for money gains in Government procurement reported by central civil government bodies for the years 2000–01 and 2001–02 is #815 million.

Greater London Authority

Mr. Rosindell: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what recent discussions he has had with the Mayor of London on the GLA proposed budget for 2003–04. [91338]

Mr. Boateng: I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer given by the Chancellor on 11 February 2002, Official Report, columns 114–15W.


Norman Baker: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what his policy is on the use of hypothecation to improve environmental performance. [91535]

John Healey: The Government considers on a case by case basis whether the revenues from individual environmental taxes should be targeted at complementary spending measures.

The Government published alongside the recent pre-Budget report its paper XTax and the Environment—using economic instruments", a copy of which is available in the Library of the House. This provides further guidance on how the Government considers the case for revenue recycling of environmental taxes

16 Jan 2003 : Column 749W

North Sea Oil

Norman Baker: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much has been received in oil revenues from extraction of oil from the UK section of the North Sea in each year from 1974 in (a) gross and (b) net

16 Jan 2003 : Column 750W

terms, allowing for grants and other payments to the oil industry. [90788]

Dawn Primarolo: Government revenues from UK oil and gas production are given in the table. Separate figures for just oil are not available.

# million

Corporation tax (CT)
Of which:
Financial yearLicence fees(15)RoyaltySPD(16)PRT(17)Total before ACT set-off(18)ACT set-off(19)Mainstream CT(20)Total revenues


1. Licence fees include receipts from fees for onshore and offshore petroleum exploration and production licenses, including initial and periodic payments and tender receipts from offshore licensing of #37 million from the 4th round in 1971–72, #33 million the 8th round in 1982–83 and #121 million from the 9th round in 1984–85.

2. Supplementary Petroleum Duty (SPD) was introduced with effect from 1 January 1981 by the 1981 Finance Act and lapsed after 31 December 1982; it was payable at the rate of 20 per cent. on the gross value of oil and gas produced under UK licences less an allowance per field of one million tonnes per year; it did not apply to PRT-exempt sales of gas to the British Gas Corporation.

3. Advance Petroleum Tax (APRT) is included with PRT. The net PRT repayment in 1991–92 and low net receipts in 1992–93 resulted from high tax-relievable expenditure claimed on some fields.

4. The level of Corporation Tax receipts in 1993–94 reflected low liabilities in 1992 (paid in the following financial year) and repayment resulting from lower settlements for earlier years.

5. The ACT (Advance Corporation Tax) Set-off is estimated because the dividends attributable to UK oil and gas cannot be separately identified from other dividends.

6. Mainstream Corporation Tax (CT) equals CT before the ACT Set-off less the estimated ACT Set-of.

There have been no significant grants or other payments to the oil industry and hence the net revenues are the same as the gross revenues.

Next Section Index Home Page