Excess votes in 2010-11
Excess votes in 2010-11

Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Committee of Public Accounts

Publisher: The Stationery Office

Published: 2012-02-02

Total Pages: 20

ISBN-13: 9780215041586

DOWNLOAD EBOOK

The Committee of Public Accounts scrutinises the reasons behind individual Departments exceeding their allocated resources, and reports to the House of Commons on whether it has any objection to the amounts needed to rectify the reported excesses. The Committee may also make recommendations to Departments concerning the causes of these excesses. In 2010-11, two bodies breached their expenditure limits: The Department for Transport breached its Net Cash Requirement by £335.2 million, primarily because of weaknesses in monitoring its budget for the operation of its rail franchises; The Teachers' Pension Scheme (England & Wales) breached its Net Cash Requirement by £11.9 million because the Department for Education underestimated the number of members that would retire in 2010-11 and overestimated the contributions that would be collected from employers. On the basis of an examination of the reasons why these two bodies exceeded their voted provisions, the Committee has no objection to Parliament providing the necessary amounts by means of an Excess Vote. Nevertheless, it expects both bodies to set out what actions they have taken to improve their financial management and avoid exceeding their allocated resources in the future.

Excess Votes in 2011-12
Excess Votes in 2011-12

Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Committee of Public Accounts

Publisher: The Stationery Office

Published: 2013-02-07

Total Pages: 22

ISBN-13: 9780215054050

DOWNLOAD EBOOK

Excess Votes 2012-13 - HC 1068
Excess Votes 2012-13 - HC 1068

Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Committee of Public Accounts

Publisher: The Stationery Office

Published: 2014-04-30

Total Pages: 20

ISBN-13: 0215071778

DOWNLOAD EBOOK

The Committee of Public Accounts scrutinises the reasons behind individual departments exceeding their allocated resources, and reports to the House of Commons on whether it has any objection to the amounts needed to rectify the reported excesses. In 2012-13 two bodies breached their expenditure limits: the Department for Communities and Local Government and the Food Standards Agency. The Ministry of Defence also required a token increase because of a Defence Votes A excess. On the basis of the examination of the reasons why these bodies exceeded their voted, the Committee has no objection to Parliament providing the necessary amounts by means of an Excess Vote. Nevertheless, it expects the Department for Communities and Local Government to set out what actions it has taken to improve their financial management and avoid exceeding their allocated resources in the future. And, as recommended last year, HM Treasury, as the UK's Ministry of Finance, should ensure departments are fully aware of the need to operate within their voted provisions. HM Treasury should continue to regularly monitor the progress departments are making against their Estimates during the year and, where possible, take appropriate action to prevent departments exceeding their provision.

Model Rules of Professional Conduct
Model Rules of Professional Conduct

Author: American Bar Association. House of Delegates

Publisher: American Bar Association

Published: 2007

Total Pages: 216

ISBN-13: 9781590318737

DOWNLOAD EBOOK

The Model Rules of Professional Conduct provides an up-to-date resource for information on legal ethics. Federal, state and local courts in all jurisdictions look to the Rules for guidance in solving lawyer malpractice cases, disciplinary actions, disqualification issues, sanctions questions and much more. In this volume, black-letter Rules of Professional Conduct are followed by numbered Comments that explain each Rule's purpose and provide suggestions for its practical application. The Rules will help you identify proper conduct in a variety of given situations, review those instances where discretionary action is possible, and define the nature of the relationship between you and your clients, colleagues and the courts.

Department for Education
Department for Education

Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Committee of Public Accounts

Publisher: The Stationery Office

Published: 2012-05-11

Total Pages: 48

ISBN-13: 9780215044075

DOWNLOAD EBOOK

The Department for Education is distributing £56.4 billion in 2011-12 to schools, local authorities and other public bodies for the delivery of education and children's services in England. The Department has set out how it intends to provide Parliament with assurance about the regularity, propriety and value for money in an Accountability System Statement (the Statement) of which the Committee has now seen three drafts. Responsibility for value for money is shared by the Department with schools, academy trusts, local authorities, the Young People's Learning Agency and the Department for Communities and Local Government. However, the Statement does not yet clearly describe the specific responsibilities of each body, how these will interact, or how the Department will assess value for money across the entire education system. The Department relies on local authorities and the YPLA to exercise financial oversight over local authority maintained schools and academies respectively. However, oversight by some local authorities is currently weak and could worsen as many authorities reduce the resources they devote to overseeing their schools. There are also concerns about whether the YPLA will have the right skills, systems and capacity to oversee the rapidly increasing numbers of academies expected in coming years. More consistent requirements for data and data returns must be applied to all schools so that academic and financial performance can be benchmarked, and all schools can be held accountable. The Department needs to enforce these requirements more stringently, particularly given previous problems with lack of compliance

Sessional Returns
Sessional Returns

Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons

Publisher: The Stationery Office

Published: 2012-09-14

Total Pages: 442

ISBN-13: 9780215048387

DOWNLOAD EBOOK

On cover and title page: House, committees of the whole House, general committees and select committees

Ministry of Defence
Ministry of Defence

Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Committee of Public Accounts

Publisher: Stationery Office

Published: 2013-05-14

Total Pages: 40

ISBN-13: 9780215057419

DOWNLOAD EBOOK

The Ministry of Defence has now reported on the affordability of its ten-year forward plan to purchase and support military equipment (the Equipment Plan) totalling some £159 billion, as well as its progress on delivering its largest projects in 2012. The Department has made a good start but there are concerns about over-optimistic assumptions, the completeness and robustness of support cost estimates, and risks to capability. The affordability of the Plan is based on an agreement between the Department and HM Treasury that it will receive a one per cent annual increase in its equipment budget over the period from 2015-16 to 2020-21. If this is now not achieved in the current fiscal circumstances then the current plan may well be unaffordable. The addition of a contingency provision of £4.8 billion is a positive step, however this may not be sufficient to absorb cost growth. In addition, the Department lacks a robust understanding of the support costs, and the associated risks, including the size of the budget that may be required to recover equipment from Afghanistan. The Department also faces a particular challenge in delivering projects to agreed timescales. Ultimately, the Department bears the risk of these delays in terms of military capability and we need greater transparency on these risks and how they are mitigated. This includes the Department being clear on the impact on capability if the £8 billion that is currently unallocated in the budget cannot be used for purchasing new equipment because it is needed to absorb cost growth

The London 2012 Olympic Games and Paralympic Games
The London 2012 Olympic Games and Paralympic Games

Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Committee of Public Accounts

Publisher: The Stationery Office

Published: 2013-04-19

Total Pages: 56

ISBN-13: 9780215056818

DOWNLOAD EBOOK

The success of the London 2012 Games demonstrates that it is possible for government departments to work together and with other bodies effectively to deliver complex programmes. The £9.298 billion Public Sector Funding Package for the Games is set to be underspent. The Department is also committed to reflect on what more it can do to present costs in a way that goes further and brings out those costs associated with the Games and the legacy that are not covered by the Funding Package. The notable blemish on planning for the Games was venue security. Also, during the Games a large number of accredited seats went unused at events for which the public demand for tickets could not be met. International sports bodies and media organisations wield a lot of power but demands should be challenged. It is now up to the London Legacy Development Corporation to attract investment in the Olympic Park and generate the promised returns to funders. There is concern that the lottery good causes do not have any clear influence over decisions about future sales, despite these decisions directly affecting how much will be available to them and when. On the wider legacy, we look to the Cabinet Office to provide strong leadership to ensure delivery of the longer term benefits. The Government also needs to do all it can to learn and disseminate lessons and to encourage volunteering opportunities both within sport and beyond

Parliamentary Debates (Hansard).
Parliamentary Debates (Hansard).

Author: Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons

Publisher:

Published: 1919

Total Pages: 514

ISBN-13:

DOWNLOAD EBOOK

Contains the 4th session of the 28th Parliament through the session of the Parliament.