| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
4 Mar 2009 : Column 1646W—continued
We are currently analysing the information we do hold, so that we can give you as helpful a breakdown as possible of the fees charged. I will write to you again by 6 March, providing this information for the period from 2003 to 2007. Audit fees for 2007/08 audits will only be finalised when it is clear that all audit work for that financial year has been completed, when all variations from the scale fee will need to be approved formally by the Commission Board.
A copy of this letter will be placed in Hansard.
Mr. Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how much the Audit Commission charged each public service in each region in (a) value added tax, (b) fixed element fees, (c) fees based on gross expenditure and (d) total in respect of audit fees in each year since 1997. [259569]
John Healey: This is an operational matter for the Audit Commission and I have asked the Chief Executive of the Audit Commission to write to the hon. Member direct.
I have been asked to respond to your Parliamentary Question about how much the Audit Commission has charged each public service in each region since 1997.
We cannot provide detailed information back to 1997, as we are required to retain financial records for six years only.
The way we have constructed scales of audit fees over the period has varied. In 2000/01 we moved from a per diem, input-based scale to an output based approach, known as ‘fee for the audit’.
It is not possible to provide an analysis of audit fees in the form you have requested. While the statutory scale fee is made up of a fixed element and an element that varies according to gross expenditure, the actual fees charged to each audited body may vary from the scale fee, reflecting the auditor’s professional assessment of risk and the complexity of the audit.
We cannot provide complete information on Value Added Tax paid, as it is payable on audit fees at the prevailing rate at the time that a fee, or part thereof, is invoiced. We do not hold billing information for the approximately one third of audits where firms are the appointed auditors.
However, we are currently analysing the information we do hold, so that we can give you as helpful a breakdown as possible of the fees charged. I will write to you again with this information by 13 March.
A copy of this letter will be placed in Hansard.
Local Government Finance: Greater London
Ms Buck: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what the percentage change in the rate support grant settlement for each London local authority in (a) cash and (b) real terms has been since 1990. [259570]
John Healey: It is not possible to provide these data on a like for like (that is, comparable) basis.
The Department only holds data on year-on-year changes in formula grant on a like-for-like basis from 1997-98. This is because it only became necessary to make these calculations when guarantees were introduced to ensure that no authority could lose grant year-on-year on a like-for-like basis.
It is not possible to provide data on the change across the period 1997-98 to date since we do not adjust data earlier than the previous year on a like-for-like basis.
Local Government Services: Essex
Paddy Tipping: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (1) what assessment her Department has made of the likely effects of Transformational Services and Delivery Support, the procurement exercise being proposed by Essex county council, on service delivery; and if she will make a statement; [259956]
(2) what discussions her Department has had with representatives of Essex county council on its proposed Transformational Services and Delivery Support procurement exercise; [259957]
(3) what assessment she has made of the extent to which Essex county council's proposed procurement exercise, Transformational Services and Delivery Support, complies with her Department's guidance on involving the workforce in transfer issues in Best Value contained in Annex C of ODPM circular 2003/03. [259958]
John Healey: Subject to their legal duties, including the duty of Best Value and public procurement law, local authorities are responsible for taking their own procurement decisions. The Department has no plans to assess the likely effects of the procurement exercise being proposed by Essex county council. However, the Department has sought factual background information from the council on its procurement proposals.
In undertaking their procurement activities, local authorities will need to have regard to relevant guidance, including that on workforce matters in ODPM Circular 03/2003 and on Best Value in Creating Strong, Safe and Prosperous Communities: Statutory Guidance (July 2008). Any concerns that a local authority has not achieved best value should be addressed to the auditor in the first instance.
Microgeneration: Planning Permission
Mr. Peter Ainsworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (1) how many micro-generation installations on non-domestic buildings required full planning permission in (a) 2006, (b) 2007 and (c) 2008. [260602]
(2) pursuant to the answer of 23 February 2009, Official Report, column 118W, on microgeneration, when she first advised the micro-power industry of plans to consult on the introduction of permitted development rights on the installation of micro-generation units on non-domestic buildings; and if she will make a statement. [260667]
Mr. Iain Wright: Planning applications for the installation of non-domestic micro-generation installations are considered by local planning authorities on a case-by-case basis and information on the number of such installations that required planning permission is not available centrally.
A commitment was made in the White Paper Planning for a Sustainable Future published in May 2007 to review and wherever possible extend permitted development rights on microgeneration to non-renewable uses including commercial and agricultural development. The White Paper also proposed consultation on detailed proposals.
The Killian Pretty Review: Planning applications: A faster and more responsive system published in November 2008 recommended that the Government should consult on the scope for extending permitted development further allowing opportunities for small-scale renewable facilities on non-domestic buildings and land.
The answer given by my hon. Friend, the Member for Tooting, (Mr. Khan) given on 23 February 2009, Official Report, column 118W stated that we aim to consult on proposals this summer.
Roads: Canvey Island
Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government if she will make an assessment of the effects on (a) socio-economic development, (b) regeneration and (c) traffic flow of the Roscommon Way Extension, Canvey Island Phase I; and what assessment she has made of progress on Phase II. [259640]
Margaret Beckett: A planning application for Roscommon Way Extension with a full environmental impact assessment has been submitted to Essex county council. It would not be appropriate for CLG to review at this time. CLG has thus made no assessment on the progress on Phase II.
Written Questions: Government Responses
Mr. Maples: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government when she expects to reply to Question 257080, on the proposed Middle Quinton eco-town, tabled on 10 February 2009. [261215]
Margaret Beckett: I replied to the hon. Member's Question on 2 March 2009, Official Report, column 1227W.
Zero Carbon Delivery Unit
Paul Rowen: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how much funding has been allocated to the zero-carbon hub since its inception. [260668]
Mr. Iain Wright: Budget 2008 announced that the Government would provide pump-priming funding for a new delivery unit to guide, monitor and coordinate the zero-carbon homes programme. The Zero Carbon Hub, a company limited by guarantee, was launched in June 2008 to take on this role and is now fully functioning. In 2008-09, the Department has agreed to allocate up to £500,000 to the Zero Carbon Hub on a match funding basis and subject to a satisfactory business plan.
International Development
Africa: Overseas Aid
Mr. Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of state for International Development what recent steps the Government has taken to support humanitarian relief in Africa. [260313]
Mr. Ivan Lewis: The UK Government provided £205 million in Africa for humanitarian relief in the financial year 2007-08. Further details on the Department for International Development’s (DFID) humanitarian strategy in Africa can be obtained from the Department for International Development publication “DFID Humanitarian Allocations in Africa 2007/2008” which is available in the publications section of the DFID website:
Asia: Development Aid
Mr. Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what steps the Government has taken to support developing countries in Asia in the last 12 months. [260314]
Mr. Michael Foster:
The Department for International Development (DFID) provided around £930 million in bilateral aid to Asia during 2007-08. Between 2008-11, UK bilateral aid will grow by over 13 per cent. This
assistance is targeted at the public service agreement (PSA) countries in Asia—Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Nepal, Pakistan, Vietnam, and to a lesser extent the Non PSA countries, Burma, China, Indonesia. We also make a contribution through humanitarian assistance and the cross-government conflict prevention pool in Sri Lanka.
Examples include the following:
In India, home to a third of the world poor, DFID is providing £410 million for education between 2003-10. This has helped to reduce the number of out of school children from 25 million to less than 10 million.
In Nepal £20 million is allocated to the Safe Motherhood Programme during 2004-09 contributing to an almost halving of maternal mortality rates in the country.
In Vietnam DFID support to the national poverty reduction programme has helped half a million people escape poverty, increased school enrolment rates to 90 per cent., helped open 4,000 new primary schools and given 600,000 more people access to clean drinking water.
Further information on DFID’s strategy in Asia is available on the DFID website and also in the annual report which is available in the Library of the House and online:
Civil Society Challenge Fund
Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what the (a) longest and (b) mean length of time was for decisions to be made on applications to the Civil Society Challenge Fund in each of the last three funding rounds. [260423]
Mr. Michael Foster: The deadline for submission of full proposals to the Civil Society Challenge Fund (CSCF) is 31 July every year. In order to allow rigorous appraisal of the high numbers of proposals received, guidelines published for the 2006, 2007 and 2008 rounds indicated that applicants would be notified of decisions in the following March (up to 246 days after submission).
In the last three funding rounds, decisions were announced on the following dates:
| Round | Date decision was announced |
The longest time for decisions to be announced was therefore 266 days in 2007. The mean time for decisions to be announced was 246 days.
Departmental Art Work
Mr. Vara: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development which works of art from the Government Art Collection each Minister in his Department has selected for display in a private office. [259446]
Mr. Michael Foster:
My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for International Development has the following works of art from the Government art collection on display in his private office: ‘Zoom’ by Richard Smith;
‘Composition of Figures’ by Robert Medley; ‘Night Dreams’ by John Reginald Brunsdon; and ‘Untitled’ by John Hoyland.
No other Ministers at the Department for International Development (DFID) have artwork from the Government Art Collection on display in their private offices.
Departmental Consultants
Mr. Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what the (a) salary and (b) other costs of employment were for the Communications Officer provided for his Department to support the Sudan Darfur—Darfur Dialogue and Consultation by Coffey International Development Ltd in 2008. [259465]
Mr. Ivan Lewis: The post of communications officer to support the Darfur Darfur dialogue and consultation (DDDC) is provided through a Framework Agreement between the Department for International Development (DFID) and Coffey International (Coffey) and was awarded following competition. As the communications officer is an employee of Coffey, rather than DFID, DFID does not hold details of the officer’s salary or other employee remunerations. DFID pays Coffey a fee rate of £795 per day, as set out in the Framework Agreement.
Departmental Disclosure of Information
Mr. Crabb: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development (1) how often he plans to aggregate data from his Department's country office template reports to provide an overall analysis of expenditure on HIV and related issues; [260478]
(2) whether data from his Department's country office template reports will be made publicly available. [260479]
Mr. Ivan Lewis: In December 2008, the UK Government released a document on monitoring performance and evaluating impact which sets out how progress against the commitments in “Achieving Universal Access” will be assessed and reported. The Government will publish biennial reports over the seven-year lifetime of the strategy which will ensure transparency and accountability for its implementation. This document can be found on the Department for International Development (DFID) website,
The biennial reports will present and analyse data from a series of templates, primarily focusing on our efforts at country level, but also on our wider efforts and in the context of global progress.
Departmental Film
Mr. Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development on what dates and on which channels the Nile Basin Documentary Film produced by Wild Dog Ltd with funding from his Department has been broadcast. [259468]
Mr. Ivan Lewis: The Nile Basin documentary film has not been broadcast to an external audience to date. It was produced for use by the Nile Basin Initiative (a programme of water resource cooperation led by the Nile Basin countries) and for the Nile Basin Discourse (a parallel civil society engagement programme). The film is to be used as part of their broader communications strategy and will be linked with other communication materials.
The Department for International Development (DFID) is contributing funding to both organisations and has encouraged them to strengthen understanding and support for improved management of the Nile’s water resources through the media. We are regularly in contact and will continue to support them as they develop their communications.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |