Tag: Baroness McIntosh of Pickering

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness McIntosh of Pickering on 2015-12-07.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the reply by Lord Gardiner of Kimble on 3 December (HL Deb, col 1205), how much of the estimated £600 million additional partnership funding” has been received from private sources; and from which sources.”

Lord Gardiner of Kimble

Six months into a six-year programme, £250 million has been secured. A further £350 million of potential contributions has been identified. Of the £250 million secured to date, £61 million comes directly from private sources.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness McIntosh of Pickering on 2016-04-22.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government why they have chosen not to implement provisions relating to joint audit and increased tendering as set out in EU Directive 2014/56/EU and Regulation 537/2014 on statutory auditing.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe

The Government does intend to implement provisions relating to increased tendering as part of the implementation of the EU Audit Regulation and Directive. This is in line with the recommendations of the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA).

The provision on joint audit in the EU Regulation would act as an exemption from having to retender with the frequency envisaged by the CMA. The government consulted on the implementation of the audit directive including this option, and concluded the option should not be taken up.

Joint audit is not a practice followed in the UK, though it is expressly permitted by the Companies and legislation on some other entities. The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills has consulted on whether to take up this derogation. In response to our discussion document in December 2014 on auditor regulation, only 4 of 25 respondents supported its implementation.

It is unclear that increased joint audit would encourage competition. The option in the EU Regulation could result in prolonged audit engagements (up to 24 years) and fewer changes in auditor. This would be contrary to the objective of the CMA and the Regulation, which is to increase retendering and rotation of auditors not less.

The CMA considered the impact of joint audits on competition and concluded that promoting joint audits would have little effect on barriers to entry, expansion and selection. The CMA’s conclusions were based on views provided by a range of stakeholders. The CMA was not able to quantify the potential cost of imposing joint audits, but did state that they believed that across the market the costs would be potentially significant. They state that a lot of weight was placed on the views of investors, who were almost universally opposed to joint audits on the grounds of additional costs and risks to audit quality.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness McIntosh of Pickering on 2015-12-16.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have to match revenue spending on flood defence and protection measures to capital spending, and whether they plan to move towards a total expenditure budget for such measures.

Lord Gardiner of Kimble

We are investing £2.3 billion in 1,500 flood defence improvement schemes over the next six years. This will provide better protection to at least 300,000 households, up to 420,000 acres of agricultural land, over 200 miles of railway and 340 miles of roads. The Government has confirmed that flood maintenance funding will be protected in real terms for the duration of this Parliament.

There are no plans to move towards a total expenditure budget for flood defence and protection in this Parliament. The Environment Agency have advised us that the current funding is an optimal mix of resources funding (for maintaining defences) and capital funding to rebuild and improve defences as set out in the 6 year investment programme. We do not believe that there would be significant additional benefits from this flexibility at this stage.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness McIntosh of Pickering on 2016-04-22.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of EU Directive 2014/56/EU and Regulation 537/2014 on statutory auditing, what assessment they have made of the impact of implementing the provisions relating to joint audit on the creation of a more competitive market and limiting market dominance by the largest professional services networks.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe

The Government does intend to implement provisions relating to increased tendering as part of the implementation of the EU Audit Regulation and Directive. This is in line with the recommendations of the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA).

The provision on joint audit in the EU Regulation would act as an exemption from having to retender with the frequency envisaged by the CMA. The government consulted on the implementation of the audit directive including this option, and concluded the option should not be taken up.

Joint audit is not a practice followed in the UK, though it is expressly permitted by the Companies and legislation on some other entities. The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills has consulted on whether to take up this derogation. In response to our discussion document in December 2014 on auditor regulation, only 4 of 25 respondents supported its implementation.

It is unclear that increased joint audit would encourage competition. The option in the EU Regulation could result in prolonged audit engagements (up to 24 years) and fewer changes in auditor. This would be contrary to the objective of the CMA and the Regulation, which is to increase retendering and rotation of auditors not less.

The CMA considered the impact of joint audits on competition and concluded that promoting joint audits would have little effect on barriers to entry, expansion and selection. The CMA’s conclusions were based on views provided by a range of stakeholders. The CMA was not able to quantify the potential cost of imposing joint audits, but did state that they believed that across the market the costs would be potentially significant. They state that a lot of weight was placed on the views of investors, who were almost universally opposed to joint audits on the grounds of additional costs and risks to audit quality.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness McIntosh of Pickering on 2015-12-21.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the impact of the delay in the introduction of Flood Re on those houses recently flooded in Cumbria and elsewhere.

Lord Gardiner of Kimble

Until Flood Re becomes operational, the insurance industry is continuing to make insurance available to those policy holders at high flood risk, as agreed to in the Statement of Principles.

Flood Re has submitted a comprehensive application for authorisation to the financial regulators, and is engaging with them. Flood Re is continuing to build and implement the systems necessary to support the operational launch of the scheme in April 2016.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness McIntosh of Pickering on 2016-04-22.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of EU Directive 2014/56/EU and Regulation 537/2014 on statutory auditing, what assessment they have made of the potential impact of joint audit on levels of competition across the UK auditing sector.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe

The Government does intend to implement provisions relating to increased tendering as part of the implementation of the EU Audit Regulation and Directive. This is in line with the recommendations of the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA).

The provision on joint audit in the EU Regulation would act as an exemption from having to retender with the frequency envisaged by the CMA. The government consulted on the implementation of the audit directive including this option, and concluded the option should not be taken up.

Joint audit is not a practice followed in the UK, though it is expressly permitted by the Companies and legislation on some other entities. The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills has consulted on whether to take up this derogation. In response to our discussion document in December 2014 on auditor regulation, only 4 of 25 respondents supported its implementation.

It is unclear that increased joint audit would encourage competition. The option in the EU Regulation could result in prolonged audit engagements (up to 24 years) and fewer changes in auditor. This would be contrary to the objective of the CMA and the Regulation, which is to increase retendering and rotation of auditors not less.

The CMA considered the impact of joint audits on competition and concluded that promoting joint audits would have little effect on barriers to entry, expansion and selection. The CMA’s conclusions were based on views provided by a range of stakeholders. The CMA was not able to quantify the potential cost of imposing joint audits, but did state that they believed that across the market the costs would be potentially significant. They state that a lot of weight was placed on the views of investors, who were almost universally opposed to joint audits on the grounds of additional costs and risks to audit quality.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness McIntosh of Pickering on 2016-02-08.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the impact on farmers and rural businesses of poor broadband provision in rural areas.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe

This Government recognises that all businesses need access to reliable, fast broadband to compete, innovate, increase productivity and have access to Government digital services. Superfast broadband now covers almost 90% of UK premises and this will increase to 95% by the end of next year as a result of the Government’s Superfast Broadband Programme and further commercial delivery. Premises everywhere including rural areas which do not have speeds of at least 2 Megabits per second are able to access a subsidised broadband service, usually delivered through a satellite connection, which can deliver speeds of 10Mbps or more.

The Prime Minister has also announced the Government’s intention to implement a new broadband Universal Service Obligation (USO) and our ambition to set this at 10Mbps. This new broadband USO will give people the legal right to request an affordable broadband connection, at a minimum speed, up to a reasonable cost threshold, no matter where they live.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness McIntosh of Pickering on 2016-05-03.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the delays by the Rural Payments Agency in making basic farm payments claimed in 2015, and of the causes of those delays.

Lord Gardiner of Kimble

The Basic Payment Scheme (BPS), implementing the new Common Agricultural Policy, with its requirements and administrative checks, has created a number of challenges. The Rural Payments Agency focus has always been to pay as many claims as promptly as possible from the opening day of the payment window in December 2015. 99% of BPS 2015 claims have now received a payment.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness McIntosh of Pickering on 2016-02-23.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what estimate they have made of the cost to the NHS of opening hospitals seven days a week.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Spending Review provided the National Health Service in England with £10 billion in real terms additional funding by 2020-21. This fully funds the NHS’s Five Year Forward View, including delivering urgent and emergency hospital services which are of the same high quality at the weekend as during the week.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness McIntosh of Pickering on 2016-05-03.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what percentage of basic farm payments claimed during 2015 had been paid as of 30 April.

Lord Gardiner of Kimble

As at 2 May, the first working day following 30 April, 98% of Basic Payment Scheme claimants had received a payment.