§ Mr. ByersTo ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what was the amount paid in performance-related bonuses for 1994–95 for each training and enterprise council. [40930]
§ Mr. Paice[holding answer 2 November 1995]: The following table shows the amount of performance-related funding earned by individual TECs in respect of their performance in 1994–95. These amounts are subject to final audit and will be paid to TECs in April 1996.
949W
1994–95 performance-related funding awards TEC name Points Award (£) West Midlands Birmingham 3 244,185 Central England 7 164,001 Coventry and Warwickshire 7 434,777 Dudley 5 119,290 HAWTEC (Hereford and Worcester) 7 217,958 950W
1994–95 performance-related funding awards TEC name Points Award (£) Sandwell 6 181,314 Shropshire 6 180,712 Staffordshire 6 450,121 Walsall 4 77,116 Wolverhampton 7 165,095 South East Hampshire 4 272,534 Heart of England 7 205,261 Isle of Wight 7 56,006 Kent 7 663,766 Milton Keynes and North Bucks 7 204,691 Surrey 3 88,330 Sussex 2 105,196 Thames Valley Enterprise 7 624,686 London AZTEC 5 202,348 CENTEC (Central London) 5 386,750 CILNTEC (City and Inner London North) 3 207,249 London East 3 369,450 North London 7 425,770 North West London 4 132,815 SOLOTEC (South London) 3 191,677 West London 7 460,040 Eastern Bedfordshire 6 175,818 CambsTEC 4 69,883 Essex 7 543,132 Greater Peterborough 7 174,596 Hertfordshire 6 276,416 Norfolk and Waveney 5 283,563 Suffolk 7 246,293 South West Devon and Cornwall 7 610,951 Dorset 7 213,570 Gloucestershire 7 221,072 Somerset 7 185,166 Westec (formerly Avon) 5 280,067 Wiltshire 7 170,570 East Midlands Greater Nottingham 7 266,588 Leicestershire 7 344,677 Lincolnshire 7 333,345 North Derbyshire 7 154,478 North Nottinghamshire 7 239,139 Northamptonshire 7 191,616 South Derbyshire 6 221,148 Yorkshire and Humberside Humberside 7 522,535 North Yorkshire 6 200,476 Wakefield 5 108,550 Sheffield 6 260,878 Rotherham 7 166,782 Barnsley/Doncaster 6 317,336 Leeds 5 200,847 Bradford and District 7 267,886 Calderdale/Kirklees 7 307,020 North West Bolton/Bury 7 301,598 Manchester 3 360,861 METROTEC (Wigan) Ltd 6 189,864 Oldham 4 102,826 Rochdale 6 156,700 South and East Cheshire 7 303,552 Stockport/High Peak 7 248,763 Cumbria 5 321,495
1994–95 performance-related funding awards TEC name Points Award (£) ELTEC (East Lancashire) 7 486,075 LAWTEC (Lancashire Area West) 5 496,326 NORMIDTEC (North and Mid Cheshire) 7 359,517 Merseyside Merseyside 3 442,205 QUALITEC (St. Helens) Ltd. 3 73,548 North East County Durham 6 323,382 Northumberland 7 216,600 Sunderland City 4 131,345 Teeside 7 449,314 Tyneside 7 576,216 Total award for 1994–95 performance 19,925,723
Mr. Robert AinsworthTo ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what proportion of the budget for each training and enterprise council in England is spent on administration costs. [41667]
§ Mr. PaiceThe list shows administration costs as a percentage of turnover for each of the training and enterprise councils in England. The information has been extracted from TECs' statutory accounts for 1993–94. I am unable to provide information for 1994–95 as TECs' statutory accounts are not yet in the public domain.
Many TECs do not draw down all their available budgets, so my Department does not calculate administrative costs as a percentage of budget.
951W
TEC administration costs as a percentage of turnover (Source—1993–94 Statutory Accounts) 1993–94 Per cent. Northern County Durham 8.24 Northumberland 9.03 Teesside 6.46 Tyneside 6.07 Sunderland (Wearside) 11.75 North West Bolton/Bury 10.10 Manchester 12.03 METRO 11.20 Oldham 15.42 Rochdale 8.16 South and East Cheshire 4.41 Stockport and High Peak 7.89 Cumbria 10.71 ELTEC 10.41 LAWTEC 0.00 NORMIDTEC 7.89 Merseyside CEWTEC 9.11 Merseyside 10.51 QUALITEC 10.48 Yorks and Humber Barnsley/Donacaster 13.57 Bradford 8.67 Calderdale and Kirklees 9.78 Humberside 10.09 Leeds 10.74 North Yorkshire 11.51 952W
TEC administration costs as a percentage of turnover (Source—1993–94 Statutory Accounts) 1993–94 Per cent. Rotherham 10.81 Sheffield 6.62 Wakefield 11.98 Eastern Bedfordshire 13.00 Cambridgeshire 11.95 Essex 8.55 Greater Peterborough 10.53 Hertfordshire 8.36 Norfolk and Waverney 12.81 Suffolk 8.87 East Midlands Greater Nottingham 5.99 Leicester 10.49 Lincolnshire 5.44 Northamptonshire 9.78 North Derbyshire 10.74 North Nottinghamshire 7.49 South Derbyshire 15.59 West Midlands Birmingham 7.4 Central England 8.38 Coventry/Warwick 4.84 Dudley 12.42 HAWTEC 12.60 Sandwell 8.38 Shropshire 9.37 Staffordshire 10.22 Walsall 16.13 Wolverhampton 10.73 South West Avon (WESTEC) 9.61 Devon/Cornwall 10.24 Dorset 9.35 Gloucester 12.75 Somerset 12.87 Wiltshire 11.30 London AZTEC 12.45 CENTEC 11.83 CILNTEC 10.65 LETEC 11.78 North London 10.85 North West London 11.35 SOLOTEC 11.98 South Thames 0.00 West London 11.88 South East Hampshire 7.65 Isle of Wight 12.87 Kent 8.47 Milton Keynes/North Buckinghamshire 13.02 Heart of England 15.60 Surrey 13.70 Sussex 11.76 Thames Valley Ent. 8.56 1 The regional average for north-west for 1993–94 does not include LAWTEC as all their expenditure was classed as adminsitration in 1993–94.