The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2016-03-03.
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, whether the Government plans to require National Lottery distributors to include conditions relating to advocacy when they deliver funding on behalf of government departments.
Matthew Hancock
The new clause is applicable to exchequer-funded grants, whether awarded direct or via an Arm’s Length Body.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2016-09-02.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, if he will publish a list of all secondees to his Department from (a) PwC, (b) Deloitte, (c) Ernst and Young, (d) KPMG and (e) other consulting firms in the last three financial years; and what the role was of each of those secondees.
Mr John Hayes
The total number of secondees to the Department from (a) PWC, (b) Deloitte, (c) Ernst and Young, (d) KPMG and (e) other consulting firms in the last three financial years is 4.
Due to the low number of secondees, we are unable to be more specific in the information so as to protect individuals from being identified personally.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2016-09-02.
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, how many times her Department has used the services of (a) PwC, (b) Deloitte, (c) Ernst and Young, (d) KPMG and (e) other consulting firms in the last three financial years; and what (i) work was undertaken and (ii) the cost to the public purse was on each such occasion.
George Eustice
The attached information shows contracts for consultancy, by company, in the years 2013 – 2016, lists the description of work carried out for Defra and the contractually committed spend by contract.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2016-10-11.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 2 September 2016 to Question 44352, for what contracts the largest three total payments were made to (a) PwC, (b) Deloitte, (c) Ernst and Young and (d) KPMG in the last three years.
Harriett Baldwin
Details of the Ministry of Defence contracts with the highest expenditure over the past three years, with PwC, Deloitte, Ernst and Young, and KPMG are provided in the following table.
|
Contract title |
Supplier |
Total expenditure – 2013-14 to 2015-16 £ |
|
MANAGED SERVICE PROVIDER CONTRACT FOR HUMAN RESOURCES |
PWC LLP |
11,866,144 |
|
PROVISION OF EXTERNAL SUPPORT TO DEFENCE INTERNAL AUDIT |
PWC LLP |
7,453,821 |
|
SUPPLY OF CONSULTANCY SERVICES TO SUPPORT THE DELIVERY OF DE&S RECRUITMENT AND DELIVERY PROGRAMME |
PWC LLP |
7,395,956 |
|
EXTERNAL ASSISTANCE FOR THE PROVISION OF IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT FOR THE DEFENCE INFRASTRUCTURE ORGANISATION TRANSFORMATION LOT 1 & 2 |
DELOITTE LLP |
11,274,792 |
|
HUMAN RESOURCES EXTERNAL SUPPORT FOR DE&S |
DELOITTE LLP |
3,900,000 |
|
EXTERNAL ASSISTANCE TO SUPPORT THE DELIVERY OF THE DE&S OUTPUT REVIEW PROGRAMME |
DELOITTE LLP |
3,360,000 |
|
INVENTORY MANAGEMENT TRANSFORMATION PHASE 3 |
ERNST & YOUNG LLP |
38,215,660 |
|
EXTERNAL ASSISTANCE SUPPORT FOR LOGISTIC COMMODITIES AND SERVICES INVENTORY MANAGEMENT OPTIMISATION PHASE 2 PROJECT |
ERNST & YOUNG LLP |
7,000,888 |
|
EXTERNAL ASSISTANCE SUPPORT FOR LOGISTICS, COMMODITIES AND SERVICES PROJECT |
ERNST & YOUNG LLP |
3,546,641 |
|
MOD COST ASSURANCE AND ANALYSIS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME |
KPMG LLP |
56,484,928 |
|
MATERIEL STRATEGY-PROVISION OF FINANCIAL ADVISOR |
KPMG LLP |
18,161,930 |
|
COST ASSURANCE AND ANALYSIS SERVICE (CAAS) DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME – COST ESTIMATING |
KPMG LLP |
4,905,124 |
The information provided reflects the fact that we are making fundamental changes to the way we manage the business of Defence, and independent experts with specialist skills are making a valuable contribution to this work. They benefit our permanent workforce by making us more self-reliant and resilient in providing the cutting-edge capabilities our Armed Forces need to keep our country safe.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2015-11-04.
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to the Answer of 8 July 2015 to Question 5430, whether similarly effective systems for central registries of beneficial ownership in the Overseas Territories includes legitimate public access in line with the Fourth EU Anti Money Laundering Directive.
Mr Hugo Swire
I refer the Right Honourable Lady to my Hon Friend, the Member for South West Hertfordshire (David Gauke MP), the Financial Secretary to the Treasury to his answers of 16 October 2015(PQ10437, PQ10438 and PQ10448), which set out the criteria we expect the Overseas Territories to meet in relation to their central register of company beneficial ownership, or similarly effective system.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2016-03-15.
To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many non-taxpaying individuals have been required by HM Revenue and Customs to repay tax paid to charities under Gift Aid in the last (a) 12 months and (b) five years; and what the total value was of the required repayments in those periods.
Mr David Gauke
During the period between February 2015 to January 2016, HM Revenue and Customs recovered some £858,261.00. In 2014/15 it was £700,000, in 2013/14 £844,646.00 and in 2012/13 £398,020. All of these figures reflect amounts recovered from both non-taxpaying individuals and tax payers. We do not hold figures for periods before 2012/13.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2016-09-02.
To ask the Secretary of State for Wales, if he will publish a list of all secondees to his Department from (a) PwC, (b) Deloitte, (c) Ernst and Young, (d) KPMG and (e) other consulting firms in the last three financial years; and what the role was of each of those secondees.
Guto Bebb
The Wales Office had no secondees from PwC, Deloitte, Ernst & Young and KPMG or other consulting firms in the last three financial years.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2016-09-02.
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if she will publish a list of all secondees to her Department from (a) PwC, (b) Deloitte, (c) Ernst and Young, (d) KPMG and (e) other consulting firms in the last three financial years; and what the role was of each of those secondees.
George Eustice
The Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has had no secondees from PwC, Deloitte, Ernst & Young, KPMG or any other consultancy firm in the last three financial years.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2016-10-11.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 2 September 2016 to Question 44352, for what contracts the largest three total payments were made to (a) PwC, (b) Deloitte, (c) Ernst and Young and (d) KPMG in the last three years.
David Mowat
Information on all contracts as identified from the largest three total payments made to the top four consulting firms across financial years 2013-14 to 2015-16 are contained in the attached table.
Values for all four suppliers relate to cash payments made against purchase orders as per Crown Commercial Services requirements and is not comparable with any consultancy expenditure data that may be published annually by the Department, which are resource (accruals) based.
The speech made by Margaret Hodge, the Labour MP for Barking, in the House of Commons on 7 December 2022.
Mr Speaker, thank you very much for granting this urgent question. I thank the Minister for his reply. However, after listening to it, I would simply say to him that the Government have constantly talked about taking back control, and if there is one issue on which they should take back control it is this: ensuring that no British company invests in Russia.
Today is the 286th day of Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. In February, three days after the war started, BP said it
“will exit its 19.75% shareholding in Rosneft”,
Russia’s main oil company. Despite this promise, BP remains one of the largest shareholders. According to the excellent research by Global Witness, it is set to receive £580 million in dividends on the back of bumper profits fuelled by the war. Does the Minister agree with me that it is utterly shameful that a large, publicly listed British company profits from the sale of oil that is funding Putin’s war?
Does the Minister further agree with the words of Mr Ustenko, President Zelensky’s economic adviser? He wrote to BP and said:
“This is blood money, pure and simple, inflated profits made from the murder of Ukrainian civilians.”
BP’s claim that it is locked in as a shareholder is both laughable and easily solved. To put this into perspective, BP’s dividends are equivalent to over one quarter of the total military and humanitarian aid provided by the UK Government to Ukraine.
Does the Minister agree with Mr Ustenko that BP and any other company still invested in Russia’s fossil fuels must donate the entirety of its wartime profits to the victims of the war? Does he further agree that it is our duty to ensure that companies are not damaging Britain’s national interest? Will this Government therefore work to persuade BP to donate the entirety of its Russian dividends to the reconstruction of Ukraine, and if that fails, will the Minister commit to acting and forcing it to do so through a special windfall tax?
James Cartlidge
I am grateful to the right hon. Lady and pay tribute to her for her long-standing record of holding Governments to account on issues such as sanctions and international finance—I was previously Justice Minister when we had the strategic lawsuits against public participation issue. She has been very active, including across party lines.
I entirely understand why people feel so strongly on this subject, and I feel strongly too—what Putin has done in Ukraine is appalling—but I am not going to comment on a specific UK company or taxpayer or their commercial decisions. I have set out the range of measures we are taking, and it is important to stress that while we all want companies that have committed to divesting to do so, there are of course issues. I do not say this with specific prejudice to any individual, firm or company, but, for example, should a firm divesting from Russia by selling its shares sell them in such a way that they returned to an individual entity that was sanctioned, there would rightly be condemnation of that. This is not a straightforward process—and I repeat that I do not say that in reference to any specific company.
I totally agree that we should do everything possible to support the people of Ukraine, and we can be very proud of the enormous effort our country has made. The right hon. Lady rightly talked about our duty, and I believe we have a duty to support Ukraine. We are second only to the United States in the amount of aid we have given to the people of Ukraine, now totalling over £6 million, and, as I understand it, we have been training its soldiers—22,000 of them—since 2015. This country has done its bit in relation to Ukraine. We are proud of that, and of course we want to do more and go further, which is why we work with our partners; that is why only on Monday we announced a decision in partnership with G7 states and Australia in relation to Russian oil across the piece. We have a record of taking decisive action, and in terms of the Treasury, of the most powerful sanctions against Russia on record, which is hitting its economy. We of course have no dispute with the Russian people, who will feel the impact of that, but we are doing everything possible, bar direct military action, to support the people of Ukraine.