Catering and Retail Services in the House of Commons

House of Commons Administration Committee Catering and Retail Services in the House of Commons First Report of Session 2010–12 Volume I Volume I: Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Additional written evidence is contained in Volume II, available on the Committee website at www.parliament.uk/ac Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 28 March 2011 HC 560 Published on 10 May 2011 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £20.00 The Administration Committee The Administration Committee is appointed to consider the services provided to MPs by the House of Commons. It also looks at services provided to the public by Parliament, including visitor facilities, the Parliament website and education services. Current membership Rt Hon. Sir Alan Haselhurst MP (Conservative, Saffron Walden) (Chair) Geoffrey Clifton-Brown MP (Conservative, The Cotswolds) Rosie Cooper MP (Labour, West Lancashire) Thomas Docherty MP (Labour, Dunfermline and West Fife) Rt Hon. Mark Francois MP (Conservative, Rayleigh and Wickford) Mr Kevan Jones MP (Labour, North Durham) Dr Phillip Lee MP (Conservative, Bracknell) Nigel Mills MP (Conservative, Amber Valley) Tessa Munt MP (Liberal Democrat, Wells) Sarah Newton MP (Conservative, Truro and Falmouth) Bob Russell MP (Liberal Democrat, Colchester) Angela Smith MP (Labour, Penistone and Stocksbridge) Rt Hon. John Spellar MP (Labour, Warley) Mr Shailesh Vara MP (Conservative, North West Cambridgeshire) Mr Dave Watts MP (Labour, St Helens North) Mike Weatherley MP (Conservative, Hove) The following members were also members of the committee during the inquiry: Rt Hon. Frank Dobson MP (Labour, Holborn and St Pancras) Gemma Doyle (Labour/Co-op, West Dunbartonshire) Mr Tom Harris (Labour, Glasgow South) Mrs Siân C. James (Labour, Swansea East) Powers The powers of the Committee are set out in House of Commons Standing Order No 139, which is available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publication 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/ac. The Reports of the Committee, the formal minutes relating to that report, oral evidence taken and some or all written evidence are available in a printed volume. Additional written evidence may be published on the internet only. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are David Weir (Clerk), Dawn Brown (Committee Assistant) and Liz Parratt (Media Officer). Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Administration Committee, House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 4151; the Committee’s email address is [email protected]. Catering and Retail Services in the House of Commons 1 Contents Report Page 1 Introduction 3 2 Catering to the House 5 3 The Catering and Retail Service 7 The purpose of the Service 7 Who eats where? 7 Rising demand 8 Sitting hours of the House 9 4 Managing the service 10 Subsidy and savings 10 Staffing the service 10 Paying the staff 11 Staffing efficiently 13 In house or outsourced 14 Staff efficiencies 16 Gross profit levels 17 Prices 17 The impact on staff 19 Quality, value and convenience 22 Staff loyalty schemes 22 Quality 23 Service 23 Internal marketing 24 Made-to-order sandwiches 25 VAT exemption 26 5 Individual Outlets on the Estate 27 Access to facilities 27 Members only 27 Dining rooms 27 Members’ Dining Room 27 Strangers’ Dining Room, Adjournment and Churchill Room 30 Cafeterias 35 Members’ Tea Room 35 Terrace Cafeteria 37 Debate 38 Bellamy’s Cafeteria 39 7 Millbank 40 Portcullis Cafeteria 40 6th Floor Cafeteria 42 Moncrieffs 42 Moncrieffs table service 43 2 Catering and Retail Services in the House of Commons Moncrieffs Self-Service cafeteria 43 Moncrieffs cafebar 44 Despatch Box 46 Pugin Room 47 Jubilee Cafeteria 47 Bars 48 Strangers’ Bar 48 Smoking Room 49 6 Revenue raising 51 Retail 51 Souvenirs 51 Internet sales 52 The public 53 Banqueting and events 53 7 House of Lords 55 Two Houses; two services 55 Co-operation 55 Joined-up thinking 56 8 Conclusion 57 Conclusions and recommendations 58 Formal Minutes 66 Witnesses 68 List of printed written evidence 69 List of additional written evidence 69 Catering and Retail Services in the House of Commons 3 1 Introduction 1. In business terms Parliament is no ordinary institution. There are enormous capital costs involved in maintaining the fabric of a treasured national building. Allocating these costs as in any ordinary business to every activity conducted in the Palace of Westminster would produce results showing all of them to be prohibitively expensive. However, there is no serious call to vacate the Palace for a purpose-built, cost-effective 21st century meeting place elsewhere. 2. An institution which comes together in full assembly for only 34 weeks while maintaining staff costs and other overheads for 52 weeks will find it hard to break even. Of course the House has an obligation, not least in the current economic circumstances, to bear down on its running costs. But there is nothing unusual about a subsidy for catering services in a place of work. 3. Members form only a small, albeit vital, proportion of employees on the parliamentary Estate. So this report is also about the needs of many more numerous groups, be they parliamentary staff, Members’ staff, visitors, press, civil servants from Whitehall and contractors’ staff. Their needs are varied; so too are their incomes. 4. The Commons Catering and Retail Service’s aim to perform efficiently and effectively is subject to a number of influences. Being fully operational for only about 65 per cent of the year has already been noted. The hours of sitting, largely dictated by the Government, also affect the situation. The more that they are moved in what is loosely called a family friendly direction, the greater the loss of revenue to the Catering and Retail Service. If Members and staff are free to leave the precincts in the evenings, the greater the likelihood that they will go home (where that is possible) or eat out. The IPSA ruling of 2010 that 128 MPs— recently amended to 97—could no longer claim the cost of additional accommodation has already made this more of a reality.1 5. By the same token morning sittings would drastically reduce the opportunity for constituents to undertake much valued tours of the Palace. This would mean a further reduction in demand for refreshment and souvenir items. 6. The increasing need for tight security coupled with tradition has made the House very cautious about the extent to which its facilities might be subject to more open access when not required by Members. Visitors pour into the Palace for tours during parliamentary recesses. Such tours might easily be enhanced by lunches or teas. By extension lunches and teas themselves might be offered to the public without the need for Member sponsorship. To maintain a self-denying ordinance in this regard simply means that overhead costs continue to be borne without any compensating revenue. If security needs are met and accounted for in the prices charged, the House need not hold back from considering whether, in line with other prestige venues, it should not seek an outright profit. 1 Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, The MPs’ Expenses Scheme, HC 501, March 2010, p. 25; and Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority press notice of 25 March 2011. 4 Catering and Retail Services in the House of Commons 7. A report from a Commons Select Committee has to be cautious and respectful if it crosses the line which divides its responsibilities from those of the House of Lords. Yet to have two separate catering and retail operations within the same building must be a source of extra liabilities for the House. It could only be by agreement, but a merger of the two organisations would surely yield savings. An integrated service would have the potential to create a more diverse range of outlets. This might increase footfall across the Estate. 8. The sale of souvenir items raises a substantial amount of income. At the moment they can be purchased only at sites on the parliamentary Estate. The freedom of the Catering and Retail Service to choose the most advantageous sites is curtailed by English Heritage. The best place for a souvenir shop is the final point on the route followed by the visitor. In the case of the Palace of Westminster this point is unquestionably Westminster Hall. This is not an option which has to date found favour with English Heritage. There is similar disapproval of the souvenir stall which was put into St Stephen’s Hall. Whilst this produces a healthy revenue it is absolutely not in the right spot to maximise earnings from what might be termed passing trade. 9. Stately homes and other such attractions would testify that a reliable way of making money from tour groups is to provide a place of refreshment prior to the point of exit. It defies credulity that the Jubilee Cafeteria at the northern end of Westminster Hall manages to buck this trend. Part of the problem is signage. The Jubilee Cafeteria’s existence needs to be more boldly advertised. Here again English Heritage’s influence has, or is perceived to have, stood in the way. However, it is now time to make a clear decision to override this advice. 10. As this report will show, the catering subsidy cannot be controlled or reduced, let alone eliminated solely by a policy of ever-increasing prices and closure of outlets. The Catering and Retail Service will end up by chasing its tail.

Load more