Twenty-eighth report of Session 2010-12 : Documents considered by the Committee on 11 May 2011, including the following recommendations for debate, space policy; cultivation of genetically modified crops; transport policy, report, together with formal Min

The Model Rules of Professional Conduct provides an up-to-date resource for information on legal ethics. Federal, state and local courts in all jurisdictions look to the Rules for guidance in solving lawyer malpractice cases, disciplinary actions, disqualification issues, sanctions questions and much more. In this volume, black-letter Rules of Professional Conduct are followed by numbered Comments that explain each Rule's purpose and provide suggestions for its practical application. The Rules will help you identify proper conduct in a variety of given situations, review those instances where discretionary action is possible, and define the nature of the relationship between you and your clients, colleagues and the courts.

The Financial Services Bill is the most important overhaul of financial regulation ever undertaken in this country. The work of the Treasury Committee and the Joint Committee has secured improvements in some areas. They have also gained a commitment from the Government to look again at the Bank of England's current antiquated corporate governance, and its accountability to Parliament. The Bank must not be permitted to carry on with an outdated Court. Instead of drafting a fresh Bill, the Government has presented Parliament with multiple amendments to the already extremely complex Financial Services and Markets Act. The proposed legislation is therefore much more complicated than it need have been. Some of the key issues and recommendations include: that, the Court of the Bank of England should be given the statutory duty to undertake retrospective reviews of the Bank's performance; that, when public funds are at risk, the Chancellor of the Exchequer should be given the general power to direct the Bank of England; whether the Treasury Committee should have a role in the appointment and dismissal of the Governor of the Bank of England; amending the Bill to make competition an objective of the Prudential Regulation Authority; examining whether there is a way of requiring the Financial Conduct Authority in legislation to publish board minutes while not setting a precedent on the degree of intervention in how boards function; amending the Bill to ensure that Parliament may request retrospective reviews of the Financial Conduct Authority's work

On cover and title page: House, committees of the whole House, general committees and select committees. On title page: Returns to orders of the House of Commons dated 14 May 2013 (the Chairman of Ways and Means)

On cover and title page: House, committees of the whole House, general committees and select committees

The Department for Education is distributing £56.4 billion in 2011-12 to schools, local authorities and other public bodies for the delivery of education and children's services in England. The Department has set out how it intends to provide Parliament with assurance about the regularity, propriety and value for money in an Accountability System Statement (the Statement) of which the Committee has now seen three drafts. Responsibility for value for money is shared by the Department with schools, academy trusts, local authorities, the Young People's Learning Agency and the Department for Communities and Local Government. However, the Statement does not yet clearly describe the specific responsibilities of each body, how these will interact, or how the Department will assess value for money across the entire education system. The Department relies on local authorities and the YPLA to exercise financial oversight over local authority maintained schools and academies respectively. However, oversight by some local authorities is currently weak and could worsen as many authorities reduce the resources they devote to overseeing their schools. There are also concerns about whether the YPLA will have the right skills, systems and capacity to oversee the rapidly increasing numbers of academies expected in coming years. More consistent requirements for data and data returns must be applied to all schools so that academic and financial performance can be benchmarked, and all schools can be held accountable. The Department needs to enforce these requirements more stringently, particularly given previous problems with lack of compliance

The Ministry of Defence (the Department) continues to struggle with managing its equipment programme on an affordable basis, resulting in the cancellation or deferral of major projects and a damaging impact on value for money. In 2010-11 the forecast costs to complete the 15 largest defence projects increased by £466 million. Since their original approvals the estimated costs of these 15 projects have increased by £6.1 billion and now stand at approximately £60 billion (an 11.4% increase). In aggregate these 15 projects are forecast to be completed 322 months later than originally planned. Projects approved since 2002 show significantly lower cost growth than those approved before this date, which is encouraging. Now the Department faces unpalatable decisions. Decisions to cancel or slow projects and to reduce equipment numbers have added significant long-term costs to the whole defence programme and to unit costs within the programme. Capability has been affected and this has all resulted in poor value for money. Large defence equipment projects have contributed disproportionately to overall cost growth. In the past, the Department has repeatedly failed to challenge unrealistically low estimates for the largest and most complex equipment projects from suppliers. The Department is still unable to set out openly the extent of the gap between income and expenditure it still faces, and how and by when any shortfall will be resolved. The report notes little progress in reducing the turnover of the Senior Responsible Owners (SROs), who oversee individual projects.