HC Deb 05 March 1993 vol 220 cc344-6W
Mr. Austin Mitchell

To ask the President of the Board of Trade (1) what proposals he has to modify the contents of the annual returns filed by companies with the Registrar of Companies;

(2) how many times in 1989, 1990 and 1991, companies have filed a statement in respect of auditor removal in respect of section 391(2) of the Companies Act 1985;

(3) how many companies failed to file an annual return in each year since 1985.

Mr. Hamilton

These are matters for Companies house. I have asked the chief executive to write to the hon. Member.

Letter from D. Durham to Mr. Austin Mitchell, dated 4 March 1993. You tabled three Parliamentary Questions on 1 March, concerning matters which are my responsibility as Registrar of Companies. The questions concerned proposals for modifying the annual returns provided by companies; the number of companies which have failed to file such returns since 1985; and the number of times in 1989, 1990 and 1991 that auditors were removed under S391(2) of the Companies Act 1985. I will answer the points seriatim. We have at the present time no specific proposals to modify the annual return. As I explained in my letter of 22 February 1993 in answer to your previous Parliamentary Question, about checks made on annual returns, we now have a "shuttle" annual return form. The information it contains is mostly pre-printed by Companies House, and a company either confirms the information or amends the details as necessary. The "shuttle" systems is relatively new, and as we and companies gain greater experience in using it, we may wish to propose changes if they appear necessary or desirable. However, the annual return is prescribed by regulations, and any changes would, of course, require Parliamentary approval. Turning to your second question, the figures you require on the number of companies failing to file an annual return are as follows:—

Number
1985 266,000
1986 93,000
1987 93,000
1988 103,000
1989 126,000
1990 100,000
1991 138,000
1992 101,000

These figures are calculated up to the end of June in each year: those for 1985, 1986 and 1987 relate to England and Wales only. All the figures have been derived from the number of companies in default for an annual return, in relation to the number of companies assumed to be active.

Your final question was about removal of auditors. The figures are as follows:

Number
1989 596
1990 665
1991 2,507

These are calendar year figures, and relate to Great Britain.

Mr. Austin Mitchell

To ask the President of the Board of Trade what actions he takes after referring the criticisms of auditors in his Department's inspectors' reports to the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales.

Mr. Neil Hamilton

As a recognised supervisory body, the ICAEW is responsible for taking any disciplinary or regulatory action against an auditor registered with it. The institute keeps my Department informed of the progress in considering relevant information in inspectors' reports.

Mr. Austin Mitchell

To ask the President of the Board of Trade, pursuant to his answer of 4 November 1992,Official Report, column 310, how many of the accountancy firms listed by him currently act as auditors to public bodies sponsored by his Department.

Mr. Neil Hamilton

Two of the accountancy firms listed in the previous answer currently act as auditors to public bodies sponsored by my Department—Coopers and Lybrand, and Ernst and Young.