HC Deb 01 February 1995 vol 253 cc715-6W
Mr. Peter Bottomley

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment (1) what indicators were available, and when, to providers to South Thames TEC in respect of its insolvency;

(2) when the state of solvency of the South Thames TEC was at such a point as to render it advisable for providers to ask for cash in advance.

Mr. Paice

I understand that the board of South Thames training and enterprise council invited my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State to appoint a receiver as soon as it became apparent to them that the TEC was insolvent. This was as a result of a report by a team of accountants acting on behalf of the Department, a copy of which has been placed in the Library.

Before that point the terms on which providers contracted with the TEC were a matter for their commercial judgment. I have no direct knowledge of the indicators available to providers prior to the appointment of the receiver though I understand that the appointment was preceded by a period of difficulty in relations between TEC and its providers when, for example, payments to some providers were delayed.

Mr. Peter Bottomley

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what alternatives to the South Thames TEC existed for providers of training opportunities guaranteed by Government before the insolvency of the TEC.

Mr. Paice

The Government do not guarantee that training opportunities will be contracted to any provider of training. The extent to which training providers had alternatives to their commercial contracts with South Thames training and enterprise council will have depended on the nature of their business. Many providers will also have contracts with other TECs in London and elsewhere.

Mr. Peter Bottomley

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many training providers were not paid by(a) the Manpower Services Commission at the time it was wound up and (b) the South Thames TEC.

Mr. Paice

At the time the Manpower Services Commission ceased to exist, its contractual responsibilities on training were transferred to the Training Commission and business continued as normal. As for South Thames training and enterprise council, it is for the receiver to specify what number of training providers have not been paid as a result of it's receivership.