Taking Britain Further Heathrow’S Plan for Connecting the UK to Growth

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Taking Britain Further Heathrow’S Plan for Connecting the UK to Growth VOLUME 1 Taking Britain further Heathrow’s plan for connecting the UK to growth #BritainsHeathrow Disclaimer This document has been prepared by Heathrow Airport Limited solely in response to an invitation from the Airports Commission. It should not be used for any other purpose or in any other context and Heathrow Airport Limited accepts no responsibility for its use in that regard Contents Volume 1 - Technical submission Contents ........................................................................................................................ 3 Foreword ....................................................................................................................... 8 Executive Summary ................................................................................................... 11 Connecting for growth ................................................................................................................... 12 Listening to what our stakeholders say ........................................................................................... 18 Our vision for a world-class hub airport ........................................................................................... 20 Connecting all of the UK ................................................................................................................ 24 Building a sustainable Heathrow ..................................................................................................... 29 The deliverable solution .................................................................................................................. 34 Part 1 – Connecting for growth ............................................................................... 41 1.1 Connecting for growth ........................................................................................................ 41 1.2 Unique role of a hub airport ................................................................................................. 44 1.3 Why hubs matter ................................................................................................................. 47 1.4 Direct flights support economic growth ............................................................................... 56 1.5 Britain as a competitive hub .................................................................................................. 62 1.6 Heathrow is the best option ................................................................................................. 66 1.7 Heathrow delivers the greatest socio-economic benefits ....................................................... 78 1.8 Meeting the Commission’s objectives .................................................................................... 98 References .......................................................................................................................... 100 © Heathrow Airport LImited 2014 Taking Britain further | Page 3 Part 2 – What our stakeholders say ....................................................................... 103 2.1 What our stakeholders say ................................................................................................. 103 2.2 What our local communities say .........................................................................................104 2.3 What our local businesses say ........................................................................................... 115 2.4 What the regions say ........................................................................................................ 121 2.5 What our passengers say .................................................................................................. 130 2.6 What our airlines say .......................................................................................................... 141 2.7 What our statutory stakeholders say .................................................................................. 144 2.8 What elected representatives say ....................................................................................... 145 References ......................................................................................................................... 147 Part 3 – Our vision for a world class hub .............................................................. 149 3.1 Our vision for a world-class hub airport ............................................................................. 149 3.2 Planning for growth ........................................................................................................... 156 3.3 How our scheme has changed ........................................................................................... 160 3.4 Airfield ................................................................................................................................ 171 3.5 Airspace ............................................................................................................................. 176 3.6 Single airport campus ........................................................................................................ 181 3.7 Transfers ............................................................................................................................. 185 3.8 Integrated transport ............................................................................................................ 190 3.9 Land use planning .............................................................................................................. 193 3.10 Green space ........................................................................................................................ 199 3.11 Future flexibility ................................................................................................................... 201 References .......................................................................................................................... 203 Part 4 – Connecting all of the UK ........................................................................... 205 4.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 205 4.2 Our surface access strategy ................................................................................................. 211 4.3 Connectivity benefits ......................................................................................................... 225 4.4 Surface access demand and mode share ............................................................................ 232 4.5 Capacity assessment .......................................................................................................... 237 References ......................................................................................................................... 243 Page 4 | Taking Britain further © Heathrow Airport LImited 2014 Part 5 – A new approach to sustainabilty ............................................................. 245 5.1 A sustainable Heathrow ..................................................................................................... 245 5.2 A quieter Heathrow ............................................................................................................ 251 5.3 Improving air quality .......................................................................................................... 268 5.4 Quality of life ..................................................................................................................... 276 5.5 Enhancing the natural environment ................................................................................... 286 5.6 Understanding our heritage ............................................................................................... 310 5.7 Managing our carbon ......................................................................................................... 318 5.8 A resource efficient Heathrow ............................................................................................ 323 5.9 Sustainable drainage .......................................................................................................... 327 5.10 Dealing with existing contamination .................................................................................. 332 References ......................................................................................................................... 335 Part 6 – The deliverable solution ........................................................................... 337 6.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 337 6.2 Funding plans .................................................................................................................... 340 6.3 Our timetable .................................................................................................................... 354 6.4 Obtaining consent ............................................................................................................. 367 6.5 Consultation & engagement .............................................................................................. 377 6.6 Transition ........................................................................................................................... 381 6.7 How we innovate ..............................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Heathrow Economics Study Expansion of Heathrow Airport
    Heathrow Economics Study Expansion of Heathrow airport GLA September 2006 Heathrow Economics Study Expansion of Heathrow airport Heathrow Economics Study Expansion of Heathrow airport Contents Page FOREWORD I SUMMARY II Background ii Methodology ii Main Findings ii 1. INTRODUCTION 3 1.1 Background 3 1.2 Objective of the study 3 1.3 Methodology 4 1.4 Structure of report 4 2. TRANSPORT COSTS AND BENEFITS 5 2.1 Introduction 5 2.2 General Assumptions 5 2.3 Passenger Demand Forecasts 7 2.4 Capacity Constraint 8 2.5 Benefits 10 2.6 Costs 12 2.7 Government Revenue 12 2.8 Conclusions 13 3. WIDER ECONOMIC BENEFITS 14 3.1 Introduction 14 3.2 Employment and regeneration 14 3.3 Agglomeration (Productivity and Business) 15 3.4 Tourism 15 3.5 Conclusion 15 4. EFFECTS ON THE SCALE OF CAPACITY REQUIRED 17 4.1 Introduction 17 4.2 Transport appraisal 17 4.3 Making more efficient use of existing capacity 17 4.4 Conclusion 20 5. EFFECTS ON THE CHOICE OF LOCATION 21 5.1 Introduction 21 5.2 Transport benefits 21 5.3 Environmental issues 22 5.4 The need for a transport hub 22 5.5 Conclusion 23 6. IMPACT ON THE AVIATION INDUSTRY AND REGIONS 24 6.1 Introduction 24 6.2 The impact of a third runway at Heathrow compared to an additional runway elsewhere in the South East 24 6.3 The impact of providing additional capacity in the South East compared to constrained capacity 24 Heathrow Economics Study Expansion of Heathrow airport 6.4 Conclusion 25 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Systems Integration at London Heathrow Terminal 5
    CMR 420, 02/01/09 Winter 2009 | Vol.51, No.2 | REPRINT SERIES CaliforniaReview Management Innovation in Megaprojects: Systems Integration at London Heathrow Terminal 5 Andrew Davies David Gann Tony Douglas © 2009 by The Regents of the University of California Innovation in Megaprojects: SYSTEMS INTEGRATION AT LONDON HEATHROW TERMINAL 5 Andrew Davies David Gann Tony Douglas growing number of infrastructure projects are being proposed and built throughout the world. A megaproject is an investment of $1B or more to build the physical infrastructures that enable people, resources, and information to move within buildings and betweenA locations throughout the world. Organizations responsible for produc- ing megaprojects face a “performance paradox.” Despite the growth in number and opportunities to benefit from learning, megaprojects continue to have poor performance records.1 Most are unsuccessful measured against their original time, cost, quality, and safety objectives, as well as their expected revenue predictions. The construction of airport infrastructure provides examples of how megaprojects can go wrong. When Denver’s $5B international airport opened in 1995, it was almost 200 per cent over the original budget, 16 months late, and passenger traffic achieved only half the predicted revenues. The opening of the airport was plagued by problems with the baggage handling system, which was eventually abandoned in August 2005. Although Hong Kong’s $20B Chek Lap Kok airport opened on time in July 1998, severe disruptions were experienced for six months after opening due to computer problems with the baggage han- dling system. The authors thank Jennifer Whyte, Catelijne Coopmans, and Tim Brady, who worked on a larger study of the T5 project with us, and four anonymous referees who helped to develop our conceptual approach.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of BAA
    House of Commons Transport Committee The future of BAA Fourth Report of Session 2007–08 Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 5 March 2008 HC 119 Published on 14 March 2008 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 The Transport Committee The Transport Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration and policy of the Department for Transport and its associated public bodies. Current membership Mrs Gwyneth Dunwoody MP (Labour, Crewe and Nantwich) (Chairman) Mr David Clelland MP (Labour, Tyne Bridge) Clive Efford MP (Labour, Eltham) Mrs Louise Ellman MP (Labour/Co-operative, Liverpool Riverside) Mr Philip Hollobone MP (Conservative, Kettering) Mr John Leech MP (Liberal Democrat, Manchester, Withington) Mr Eric Martlew MP (Labour, Carlisle) Mr Lee Scott MP (Conservative, Ilford North) David Simpson MP (Democratic Unionist, Upper Bann) Mr Graham Stringer MP (Labour, Manchester Blackley) Mr David Wilshire MP (Conservative, Spelthorne) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publications The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at www.parliament.uk/transcom. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Tom Healey (Clerk), Annette Toft (Second Clerk), Richard Ward (Assistant Clerk, Scrutiny Unit), David Davies (Committee Specialist), Tim Steer (Committee Specialist), Alison Mara (Committee Assistant), Ronnie Jefferson (Secretary), Gaby Henderson (Senior Office Clerk) and Laura Kibby (Media Officer).
    [Show full text]
  • South West Herts Economy Study
    South West Hertfordshire Economic Study A Final Report by Regeneris Consulting and GL Hearn South West Hertfordshire Councils South West Hertfordshire Economic Study February 2016 Regeneris Consulting Ltd www.regeneris.co.uk South West Hertfordshire Economic Study Contents Page Executive Summary i Purpose of the Study and Approach i Functional Economic Market Area (FEMA) i Policy Context ii Economic Baseline ii Market Assessment iii Growth Scenarios iv 1. Introduction and Purpose of Study 1 2. Defining the Functional Economic Area 4 Housing Market Area 6 Local Enterprise Partnership Geographies 9 Flow of Goods, Services and Information 13 Service Market for Consumers 16 Cultural and Social Well-Being Catchments 19 Transport Network 21 Future Considerations 22 The FEMA of South West Herts 24 3. Policy Context 27 4. The South West Herts Economy: An Overview 37 Size of the South West Herts Economy 37 Geography of the South-West Hertfordshire Economy 39 Recent Economic Performance 41 Labour Market 44 Broad Sectoral Composition 46 Sector Strengths 49 Structure of Business Base 57 Enterprise 60 5. Commercial Property Market Assessment 63 South West Hertfordshire Economic Study National Economic Conditions 63 Office Market Review 63 Industrial Sector Review 71 Commercial Agents Consultations 76 Summary 78 6. Future Growth Scenarios 80 Higher Growth Scenario 102 Conclusions on Preferred Scenario 108 7. Relationship with London 111 Introduction 111 Migration 112 8. Supply of Employment Land 120 Introduction 120 Site Assessment Methodology 120 Sites in Dacorum 122 Sites in Hertsmere 124 Sites in St Albans 141 Sites in Three Rivers 145 Sites in Watford 151 Conclusion 158 9.
    [Show full text]
  • The Business of Heathrow Airport Limited
    CAP 1133 Appendix C: The business of Heathrow Airport Limited APPENDIX C The business of Heathrow Airport Limited C1 This appendix provides an overview of the current ownership and history of Heathrow and the business of Heathrow Airport Limited (HAL). In particular, this appendix examines the: . services HAL provides to different users; and . sources of HAL's revenue. The ownership of Heathrow C2 Heathrow is owned by Heathrow Airport Holdings Limited (previously BAA), which is privately managed on behalf of its shareholders, with the major shareholders currently being: . FGP Topco Limited, a consortium owned and led by the infrastructure specialist Ferrovial S.A.– 33.6 per cent; . Qatar Holding LLC – 20.0 per cent; . Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec –13.3 per cent; . the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation – 11.9 per cent; . Alinda Capital Partners –11.2 per cent; and . China Investment Corporation – 10 per cent.1 The development of Heathrow2 C3 Heathrow has two parallel east-west runways and is located around 14 miles west of London.3 It sits on a site that covers 1,227 hectares. C4 The airport started operations in 1930 as a private airport to assemble and test aircraft. 1 HAL, Company Information, http://www.heathrowairport.com/about-us/company-news-and- information/company-information (accessed 30 October 2013). 2 HAL, http://www.heathrowairport.com/about-us/facts-and-figures/heathrow's-history (accessed 30 October 2012). 3 Liaison Group of UK Airport consultative committees, http://www.ukaccs.info/profiles.htm#LHR (accessed 20 December 2012). 1 CAP 1133 Appendix C: The business of Heathrow Airport Limited C5 In 1944, as part of the World War Two war effort, it was requisitioned by the Air Ministry for development into a Royal Air Force transport base.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Accessibility in Passengers' Choice of Airports
    JOINT TRANSPORT RESEARCH CENTRE Discussion Paper No. 2008-14 August 2008 The Role of Accessibility in Passengers' Choice of Airports Marco KOUWENHOVEN Significance The Hague, Netherlands JOINT TRANSPORT RESEARCH CENTRE Discussion Paper No. 2008-14 Prepared for the Round Table of 2-3 October 2008 on Airline Competition, Systems of Airports and Intermodal Connections The Role of Accessibility in Passengers' Choice of Airports Marco KOUWENHOVEN Significance The Hague Netherlands August 2008 The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent positions of Significance, the OECD or the International Transport Forum. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 5 1.1. Growth of regional airports .............................................................................. 5 1.2. Implications for policy makers ......................................................................... 6 1.3. Objective of this paper ..................................................................................... 7 2. DEFINITIONS OF ACCESSIBILITY ........................................................................... 8 3. ACCESS MODE CHOICE .......................................................................................... 9 3.1. Observed access mode shares ....................................................................... 9 3.2. Factors influencing access mode choice behaviour .....................................
    [Show full text]
  • Supplementary Report: Commercial and Financial Analysis of the Iog Option Based on KPMG’S Analysis
    Inner Thames Estuary Feasibility Study Response to Airports Commission Call for Evidence The Mayor of London’s Submission: Supporting technical documents 23 May 2014 Title: Supplementary Report: Commercial and Financial Analysis of the IoG option based on KPMG’s analysis Author: Ernst and Young (EY) Purpose of paper: To identify the key assumptions used in the Airports Commission’s / KPMG’s analysis of the commercial viability of an Inner Thames Estuary hub airport, and adjust this analysis in light of market practice and precedents of regulated airports and other utilities. Key message: The threefold increase in landing charges claimed by the Airports Commission is a significant overestimate, and based on flawed financial and commercial assumptions. Isle of Grain Hub Airport Supplementary Report: Commercial and Financial Analysis of the IoG option based on KPMG’s analysis 22 May 2014 Ernst & Young LLP Ernst & Young LLP Tel: + 44 207 951 2000 1 More London Place Fax: + 44 207 951 1345 London ey.com SE1 2AF Tel: 023 8038 2000 Transport for London 22 May 2014 Windsor House 42-50 Victoria Street, London SW1H 0TL Dear Sirs, A new Hub airport – the required increase in aeronautical charges In accordance with our appointment to provide services under the terms and conditions of our Framework Agreement with TfL (reference number TfL 90400), we have prepared this supporting document as per TfL’s instructions to perform a high level financial analysis to identify the key assumptions used in AC/KPMG’s analysis of the commercial viability of the IoG Hub. Then, based on market practice and precedents of regulated airports and other utilities, adjust AC/KPMG’s analysis.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Some Airport-Rail Links Get Built and Others Do Not: the Role of Institutions, Equity and Financing
    Why some airport-rail links get built and others do not: the role of institutions, equity and financing by Julia Nickel S.M. in Engineering Systems- Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2010 Vordiplom in Wirtschaftsingenieurwesen- Universität Karlsruhe, 2007 Submitted to the Department of Political Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Political Science at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY February 2011 © Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2011. All rights reserved. Author . Department of Political Science October 12, 2010 Certified by . Kenneth Oye Associate Professor of Political Science Thesis Supervisor Accepted by . Roger Peterson Arthur and Ruth Sloan Professor of Political Science Chair, Graduate Program Committee 1 Why some airport-rail links get built and others do not: the role of institutions, equity and financing by Julia Nickel Submitted to the Department of Political Science On October 12, 2010, in partial fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Political Science Abstract The thesis seeks to provide an understanding of reasons for different outcomes of airport ground access projects. Five in-depth case studies (Hongkong, Tokyo-Narita, London- Heathrow, Chicago- O’Hare and Paris-Charles de Gaulle) and eight smaller case studies (Kuala Lumpur, Seoul, Shanghai-Pudong, Bangkok, Beijing, Rome- Fiumicino, Istanbul-Atatürk and Munich- Franz Josef Strauss) are conducted. The thesis builds on existing literature that compares airport-rail links by explicitly considering the influence of the institutional environment of an airport on its ground access situation and by paying special attention to recently opened dedicated airport expresses in Asia.
    [Show full text]
  • The Public Health Impact of the Buncefield Oil Depot Fire the Public Health Impact of the Buncefield Oil Depot Fire
    The Public Health Impact of the Buncefield Oil Depot Fire The Public Health Impact of the Buncefield Oil Depot Fire Report prepared by the Chief Executive’s Office, Health Protection Agency in collaboration with the Dacorum and Watford and Three Rivers Primary Care Trusts. Prof. Pat Troop Chief Executive, Health Protection Agency With thanks to The Buncefield Health Surveillance Steering Group and Tina Endericks, Health Protection Agency, for co-ordinating and editing this report. Please direct any queries concerning this report to: [email protected] This report is available at: www.hpa.org.uk www.watford3r-pct.nhs.uk www.dacorum-pct.nhs.uk ISBN: 0 901144 82 7 PAGES_01_TO_15 14/7/06 00:03 Page 1 T HE P UBLIC H EALTH I MPACT OF THE B UNCEFIELD O IL D EPOT F IRE - 2006 Appendix 1 Contents Chief Executive’s Foreword 3 Executive Summary 4 Summary of the Buncefield Oil Depot Fire 6 Assessing the Public Health Impact 8 Key Findings 10 Appendices 1 Environmental Impacts of the 17 Buncefield Oil Depot Explosion 2 Study of Accident and Emergency Attendances 51 in Hemel Hempstead and Watford 3 Buncefield Follow up Population Survey 71 4 Atmospheric Modelling and Monitoring 89 1 PAGES_01_TO_15 14/7/06 00:03 Page 2 T HE P UBLIC H EALTH I MPACT OF THE B UNCEFIELD O IL D EPOT F IRE - 2006 2 PAGES_01_TO_15 14/7/06 00:03 Page 3 T HE P UBLIC H EALTH I MPACT OF THE B UNCEFIELD O IL D EPOT F IRE - 2006 Chief Executive’s Foreword This report is important as it is the first time this type of public health follow-up study has been undertaken and reported following a major environmental incident in the UK.
    [Show full text]
  • Access Our Libraries Online
    News from your council September/October 2019 How we’re improving your air Access our Get involved in libraries online Recycle Week Plus refurbishments How you can on the way become a Street Champion OPEN HOUSE CULTURE BITE VOLUNTEERS advertisements people Contents September/October 2019 ▸ Cover stories 4 Heathrow expansion appeal am delighted that one of our local MPs, Boris Johnson, is Date set for fresh legal challenge. now the Prime Minister. He has already given instructions that there should be a review of the viability and value of the ▸ 12 Get involved in Recycle Week I Why it’s more important than ever. HS2 project and stated that he will be closely following the legal challenge against the proposal to expand Heathrow. An expanded Heathrow would damage our borough’s ▸ 14 We say thank you to our Street Champions Event celebrates volunteers who are the eyes and environment immensely, through the loss of homes, the ears of our community. destruction of protected habitats and an increase in air and noise pollution. It would also significantly impact the health ▸ 16 ‘Appy Families of our residents, particularly the elderly and young. Residents of all ages are enjoying our libraries’ The next stage of the legal challenge, which may take some digital services. years to conclude, will commence in the Court of Appeal on 22 ▸ 20 How we’re improving your air October where the presiding judge, overturning the decision of Find out about our air quality action plan and the Divisional Court to not grant an appeal hearing stated: “The claim your free trees.
    [Show full text]
  • Breaking New Ground 2017 Annual Report
    BREAKING NEW GROUND 2017 Annual Report Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Year Ended December 31, 2017. Our Mission Meet the critical transportation infrastructure needs of the bi-state region’s people, businesses, and visitors by providing the highest-quality and most efficient transportation and port commerce facilities and services to move people and goods within the region, provide access to the nation and the world, and promote the region’s economic development. Our mission is simple: to keep the region moving. 2 THE PORT AUTHORITY OF NY & NJ TABLE OF CONTENTS I ntroductory Section 2 Origins of The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey 3 Letter of Transmittal to the Governors 4 Board of Commissioners 5 Leadership of the Port Authority Our Core Business Imperatives 9 Investment 10 Safety and Security 11 Integrity 12 Diversity and Inclusion 13 Sustainability and Resiliency Major Milestones By Business Line 15 2017 at a Glance 16 Aviation 20 Tunnels, Bridges & Terminals 24 Port of New York and New Jersey 28 Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corporation (PATH) 30 World Trade Center Financial Section 32 Chief Financial Officer’s Letter of Transmittal to the Board of Commissioners 35 Index to Financial Section Corporate Information Section 126 Selected Statistical, Demographic, and Economic Data 127 Top 20 Salaried Staff as of December 31, 2017 The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Year Ended December 31, 2017 Prepared by the Marketing and Comptroller’s departments of The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey 4 World Trade Center, 150 Greenwich Street, 23rd Floor, New York, NY 10007 www.panynj.gov BREAKING NEW GrounD 1 The Port District includes the cities of New York and Yonkers in New York State; the cities of Newark, Jersey City, Bayonne, Hoboken, and Elizabeth in the State of New Jersey; and more than 200 other municipalities, including all or part of 17 counties, in the two states.
    [Show full text]
  • New Dimension— Enhancing the Fire and Rescue Services' Capacity to Respond to Terrorist and Other Large-Scale Incidents
    House of Commons Public Accounts Committee New Dimension— Enhancing the Fire and Rescue Services' capacity to respond to terrorist and other large-scale incidents Tenth Report of Session 2008–09 Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 9 February 2009 HC 249 [Incorporating HC 1184–i, Session 2007–08] Published on 12 March 2009 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 The Public Accounts Committee The Committee of Public Accounts is appointed by the House of Commons to examine “the accounts showing the appropriation of the sums granted by Parliament to meet the public expenditure, and of such other accounts laid before Parliament as the committee may think fit” (Standing Order No 148). Current membership Mr Edward Leigh MP (Conservative, Gainsborough) (Chairman) Mr Richard Bacon MP (Conservative, South Norfolk) Angela Browning MP (Conservative, Tiverton and Honiton) Mr Paul Burstow MP (Liberal Democrat, Sutton and Cheam) Mr Douglas Carswell MP (Conservative, Harwich) Rt Hon David Curry MP (Conservative, Skipton and Ripon) Mr Ian Davidson MP (Labour, Glasgow South West) Angela Eagle MP (Labour, Wallasey) Nigel Griffiths MP (Labour, Edinburgh South) Rt Hon Keith Hill MP (Labour, Streatham) Mr Austin Mitchell MP (Labour, Great Grimsby) Dr John Pugh MP (Liberal Democrat, Southport) Geraldine Smith MP (Labour, Morecombe and Lunesdale) Rt Hon Don Touhig MP (Labour, Islwyn) Rt Hon Alan Williams MP (Labour, Swansea West) Phil Wilson MP (Labour, Sedgefield) The following member was also a member of the committee during the parliament. Mr Philip Dunne MP (Conservative, Ludlow) Powers Powers of the Committee of Public Accounts are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 148.
    [Show full text]