That information is not known to my Department or to me. The implication behind the question shows the essentially puerile approach of the hon. Lady and her party to the serious need to reduce business costs as a means of reducing unemployment.
I was concerned to know only how to improve the competitiveness of British industry by getting rid of redundant regulations and making more cost effective those that are necessary, and hence reducing unemployment. Unfortunately, the hon. Lady is more interested in playing party games.
The difference between us and the Labour party is that it, as a wholly owned subsidiary of the trade union movement, is concerned to load extra costs on British business and to destroy jobs, whereas we are concerned to listen to the voice of experience in British business, to reduce those costs and to promote employment.
Is the Minister satisfied that he gets good value for the millions of pounds that his Department spends on company investigations, bearing in mind that, although there have been 82 published reports, only four directors, and no company auditors, have been disbarred? Is he concerned about the fact that, to investigate companies, his Department has often been known to hire accountants from companies that are themselves the subject of investigations, and that—[HON. MEMBERS: "Too long."]—partners from companies that have been criticised by his Department often sit on the disciplinary panels—
In deciding whether to pursue prosecutions against those who have breached company law, we follow the normal rules by which all parties in government have always operated. We take proper legal advice, and we believe in acting by due process of law.