§ Mr. Peter BradleyTo ask the President of the Council what mechanism exists to verify the certificates by independent auditors that Short money has been properly spent. [139026]
§ Mrs. BeckettThe certificates presented by the auditors are subject to audit by the National Audit Office, as part of their examination of House of Commons expenditure.
§ Mr. Peter BradleyTo ask the President of the Council how much Short money the main opposition party received in each year from 1995. [139023]
§ Mrs. BeckettThe figures are as follows:
£ Labour Party 1995–96 1,489,749.12 1996–97 1,530,190.51 1997–981 129,017.97 Conservative Party 1997–982 986,762.82 1998–99 1,112,885.74 1999–20003,4 3,377,670.28 2000–015 3,465,131.69 1Part year 1 April 1997–1 May 1997 2Part year 2 May 1997–31 March 1998 3Includes £500,000 for Leader of the Opposition's Office 4In line with the recommendations of the Neill Committee 5Includes £513,000 for Leader of the Opposition's Office
§ Mr. Peter BradleyTo ask the President of the Council what recent amendments have been made to the arrangements for paying Short money; who requested these changes; what consultations took place regarding them; and under what authority they were made. [139337]
§ Mrs. BeckettNo changes have been made to the arrangements for paying Short money.
However, I understand that there was concern about the meaning of parliamentary business and the National Audit Office had also proposed that a letter should accompany the pro-forma audit report, to assist auditors. The Fees Office accordingly issued Notes for Auditors for the first time.
The definition of parliamentary business contained in those notes had been approved by the Clerk of the House, as Accounting Officer, and the National Audit Office. The Clerk was acting under the authority given him by the Resolution of the House of 26 May 1999 to determine the form in which auditors report.