§ Mr. Andrew SmithTo ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much has been spent on external consultants in the tendering process of the private finance initiative in each year since its introduction(a) in real terms and (b) in cash terms disaggregated by (i) legal fees, (ii) publicity costs, (iii) accountancy fees and (iv) management consultancy fees. [10974]
§ Mr. Jack[holding answer 22 January 1996]: The information requested for the Chancellor's Department, expressed in thousands of pounds, is as follows:
£000 (i) Legal fees — (ii) Publicity costs 4 (iii) Accountancy fees — (iv) Management consultancy fees 75 Total 79 The overwhelming majority of the expenditure was incurred in the last financial year, so the difference between real and cash terms is insignificant. Conventional procurement often involves such costs too.
§ Mr. SmithTo ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what have been the running costs relating to the tendering process of the private finance initiative in each year since its introduction(a) in real terms and (b) in cash terms disaggregated by (i) staff costs, (ii) information technology and (iii) other costs. [10975]
§ Mr. Jack[holding answer 22 January 1996]: The information requested for the Chancellor's Departments, expressed in thousands of pounds, is as follows:
£000 (i) Staff costs 61 (ii) Information technology — (iii) Other costs — Total 61 The overwhelming majority of the expenditure was incurred in the last financial year, so the difference between real and cash terms is insignificant.
In the case of individual projects, if the private finance route had not been the route preferred, traditional public sector procurement methods would, in any case, have incurred tendering costs. The important issue is that the chosen method should be that which provides best overall value for money for the taxpayer.