Asked by: Helen Maguire (Liberal Democrat - Epsom and Ewell)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, if she will implement a mechanism for people to report delays and overcrowding on Great British Railway trains.
Answered by Keir Mather - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)
Great British Railways will have a duty to promote high standards of performance, and will be relentless in delivering for passengers, freight customers and taxpayers across the country. If passengers encounter any issues, they will be able to raise these with GBR in the first instance. The Passenger Watchdog will ensure all passengers have access to a fair and independent alternative dispute resolution service (the Rail Ombudsman) to resolve disputes with operators where passengers have been let down.
For the first time, we have made station-specific performance information available to passengers. This shows reliability and punctuality at each station, rather than aggregated averages by operator or region. Providing this transparency allows the public to hold us to account and will help rebuild trust as we tackle the root causes of delays and cancellations.
Asked by: Kevin Hollinrake (Conservative - Thirsk and Malton)
Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, pursuant to the Answer of 25 April 2025 to Question 45800 on Press: Misconduct, what steps her Department is taking to help ensure that arbitration schemes operated by press regulators are available to provide timely and effective redress before the Government directs members of the public to them in guidance.
Answered by Ian Murray - Minister of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)
The UK has a self-regulatory system for the press, which is independent from Government. This is vital to ensure the public has access to accurate and trustworthy information from a range of different sources. The Government therefore does not intervene in or evaluate the work of independent press regulators.
However, under Section 179 of the Data Protection Act every three years the Secretary of State must lay before Parliament a report on the use and effectiveness of alternative dispute resolution procedures, such as arbitration, in cases involving a failure or alleged failure by relevant media organisations to comply with data protection legislation. The most recent report was presented to Parliament in May 2024 and was carried independently of DCMS by David Rossington, as the Independent Reviewer. The report is published on the Gov.uk website:
Asked by: Martin Wrigley (Liberal Democrat - Newton Abbot)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how the Legal Aid Agency monitors whether legally aided housing cases are being actively resolved.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The scope of legal aid for housing matters is set out under paragraphs 33-35 of Schedule 1 to Part 1 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. This includes civil legal services relating to loss of home and ancillary housing, debt and welfare benefit service, provision of accommodation and assistance to an individual who is homeless or at risk of homelessness and risk to health and safety in rented accommodation.
Legal aid for housing matters may be provided as Legal Help which includes advice and assistance on the matters set out above or Legal Representation which would include representation before a court or tribunal. The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) also funds the Housing Loss Prevention Advice Service (HLPAS) which covers early legal advice on housing, debt and welfare benefits issues to individuals with evidence showing they are at risk of possession proceedings, loss of their home or illegal eviction; and on-the-day emergency advice and advocacy to anyone facing possession proceedings.
Eligibility for legal aid subject to strict statutory criteria and the provision of and payment for legal aid services is governed by Contracts with legal aid providers. Both legal aid legislation and the Contracts contain a number of provisions to ensure that public funds are used proportionately and appropriately.
Legal aid provided under Legal Help or Legal Representation is subject to a strict financial eligibility test and a legal merits test as set out in the Civil Legal Aid (Merits Criteria) Regulations 2013. To qualify for Legal Representation in respect of any housing matter the proportionality test as described at regulation 8 must be met and continue to be met throughout the duration of proceedings.
Regulation 40 of the Civil Legal Aid (Procedure) Regulations 2012 requires all legal aid providers to report to the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) any changes in circumstances which would materially affect a client’s eligibility for Legal Representation alongside other matters which may impact on eligibility, for example, failure to accept an offer to settle or to use and alternative dispute resolution method or issues relating to the client’s conduct. The LAA may withdraw a determination that the individual qualifies for Legal representation if it concludes the eligibility criteria are no longer met or it is satisfied that the client is requiring proceedings to be conducted unreasonably so as to incur unjustifiable expense.
Legal Representation is subject to scope and cost limitations setting out what work may be undertaken and the maximum amount of legal aid costs that may be claimed. To extend either scope or costs an application must be made to the LAA setting who will consider whether the additional funding should be authorised with reference to the applicable regulations. This ensures appropriate and proportionate use of legal aid funding.
Clause 2.4 of the Standard Civil Contract 2024 Standard Terms requires legal aid providers to work with the LAA to achieve value for money and to ensure that public money is spent with probity, accountability and in the public interest.
Additionally, any claims for payment for legal aid work are subject to assessment in accordance with the provisions of the Standard Civil Contract 2024. In particular under paragraph 6.9 sets our hat all assessments of Contract Work are to be on the Standard Basis as defined by Civil Procedure Rules (CPR).
CPR 44.3(2) states that: “Where the amount of costs is to be assessed on the standard basis, the court will— (a) only allow costs which are proportionate to the matters in issue. Costs which are disproportionate in amount may be disallowed or reduced even if they were reasonably or necessarily incurred.”
The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) does not play an active role in case progression where all providers of legal aid services are independent providers of services who are bound to act in the best interest of the client taking into account the provisions of their legal aid contract and any relevant professional body rules. However, in addition to the reporting obligations referred to above, automatic enquiries are triggered on Legal Representation cases that have had no legal aid activity for a period of more than 365 days. Failure to respond to these enquiries may result in the withdrawal of legal aid. Furthermore, the LAA has a representations process which allows opponents (or other third parties) to report to the LAA circumstances which may affect an individual’s eligibility for legal aid.
There is no specific guidance on “appropriate use of public funds for disputes that do not materially affect housing safety or security”. However, statutory and contractual provisions governing the appropriate use of public funds in all civil cases are set out in the Regulations and Contract referred to above. Supporting guidance on the application of the statutory and contractual framework is set out in the Lord Chancellor’s Guidance under s.4 LASPO and the Costs Assessment Guidance both of which legal aid providers have a contractual obligation to comply with when carrying out legal aid work.
The average cost of a housing case under each legal aid scheme for the last five financial years is set out in the table below. These costs will include all housing cases within scope of legal aid as set out above. Average costs have been broken down by the type of legal aid provided.
Financial Year | In-court housing advice under HLPAS or its predecessors | Legal Help | Legal Representation |
2020-21 | £87 | £433 | £3,444 |
2021-22 | £107 | £376 | £3,963 |
2022-23 | £110 | £354 | £3,694 |
2023-24 | £103 | £337 | £3,531 |
2024-25 | £99 | £313 | £3,508 |
Asked by: Martin Wrigley (Liberal Democrat - Newton Abbot)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the average cost to the Legal Aid Agency was per housing dispute in each of the last five years.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The scope of legal aid for housing matters is set out under paragraphs 33-35 of Schedule 1 to Part 1 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. This includes civil legal services relating to loss of home and ancillary housing, debt and welfare benefit service, provision of accommodation and assistance to an individual who is homeless or at risk of homelessness and risk to health and safety in rented accommodation.
Legal aid for housing matters may be provided as Legal Help which includes advice and assistance on the matters set out above or Legal Representation which would include representation before a court or tribunal. The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) also funds the Housing Loss Prevention Advice Service (HLPAS) which covers early legal advice on housing, debt and welfare benefits issues to individuals with evidence showing they are at risk of possession proceedings, loss of their home or illegal eviction; and on-the-day emergency advice and advocacy to anyone facing possession proceedings.
Eligibility for legal aid subject to strict statutory criteria and the provision of and payment for legal aid services is governed by Contracts with legal aid providers. Both legal aid legislation and the Contracts contain a number of provisions to ensure that public funds are used proportionately and appropriately.
Legal aid provided under Legal Help or Legal Representation is subject to a strict financial eligibility test and a legal merits test as set out in the Civil Legal Aid (Merits Criteria) Regulations 2013. To qualify for Legal Representation in respect of any housing matter the proportionality test as described at regulation 8 must be met and continue to be met throughout the duration of proceedings.
Regulation 40 of the Civil Legal Aid (Procedure) Regulations 2012 requires all legal aid providers to report to the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) any changes in circumstances which would materially affect a client’s eligibility for Legal Representation alongside other matters which may impact on eligibility, for example, failure to accept an offer to settle or to use and alternative dispute resolution method or issues relating to the client’s conduct. The LAA may withdraw a determination that the individual qualifies for Legal representation if it concludes the eligibility criteria are no longer met or it is satisfied that the client is requiring proceedings to be conducted unreasonably so as to incur unjustifiable expense.
Legal Representation is subject to scope and cost limitations setting out what work may be undertaken and the maximum amount of legal aid costs that may be claimed. To extend either scope or costs an application must be made to the LAA setting who will consider whether the additional funding should be authorised with reference to the applicable regulations. This ensures appropriate and proportionate use of legal aid funding.
Clause 2.4 of the Standard Civil Contract 2024 Standard Terms requires legal aid providers to work with the LAA to achieve value for money and to ensure that public money is spent with probity, accountability and in the public interest.
Additionally, any claims for payment for legal aid work are subject to assessment in accordance with the provisions of the Standard Civil Contract 2024. In particular under paragraph 6.9 sets our hat all assessments of Contract Work are to be on the Standard Basis as defined by Civil Procedure Rules (CPR).
CPR 44.3(2) states that: “Where the amount of costs is to be assessed on the standard basis, the court will— (a) only allow costs which are proportionate to the matters in issue. Costs which are disproportionate in amount may be disallowed or reduced even if they were reasonably or necessarily incurred.”
The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) does not play an active role in case progression where all providers of legal aid services are independent providers of services who are bound to act in the best interest of the client taking into account the provisions of their legal aid contract and any relevant professional body rules. However, in addition to the reporting obligations referred to above, automatic enquiries are triggered on Legal Representation cases that have had no legal aid activity for a period of more than 365 days. Failure to respond to these enquiries may result in the withdrawal of legal aid. Furthermore, the LAA has a representations process which allows opponents (or other third parties) to report to the LAA circumstances which may affect an individual’s eligibility for legal aid.
There is no specific guidance on “appropriate use of public funds for disputes that do not materially affect housing safety or security”. However, statutory and contractual provisions governing the appropriate use of public funds in all civil cases are set out in the Regulations and Contract referred to above. Supporting guidance on the application of the statutory and contractual framework is set out in the Lord Chancellor’s Guidance under s.4 LASPO and the Costs Assessment Guidance both of which legal aid providers have a contractual obligation to comply with when carrying out legal aid work.
The average cost of a housing case under each legal aid scheme for the last five financial years is set out in the table below. These costs will include all housing cases within scope of legal aid as set out above. Average costs have been broken down by the type of legal aid provided.
Financial Year | In-court housing advice under HLPAS or its predecessors | Legal Help | Legal Representation |
2020-21 | £87 | £433 | £3,444 |
2021-22 | £107 | £376 | £3,963 |
2022-23 | £110 | £354 | £3,694 |
2023-24 | £103 | £337 | £3,531 |
2024-25 | £99 | £313 | £3,508 |
Asked by: Martin Wrigley (Liberal Democrat - Newton Abbot)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what guidance is issued to Legal Aid providers on the appropriate use of public funds for disputes that do not materially affect housing safety or security.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The scope of legal aid for housing matters is set out under paragraphs 33-35 of Schedule 1 to Part 1 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. This includes civil legal services relating to loss of home and ancillary housing, debt and welfare benefit service, provision of accommodation and assistance to an individual who is homeless or at risk of homelessness and risk to health and safety in rented accommodation.
Legal aid for housing matters may be provided as Legal Help which includes advice and assistance on the matters set out above or Legal Representation which would include representation before a court or tribunal. The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) also funds the Housing Loss Prevention Advice Service (HLPAS) which covers early legal advice on housing, debt and welfare benefits issues to individuals with evidence showing they are at risk of possession proceedings, loss of their home or illegal eviction; and on-the-day emergency advice and advocacy to anyone facing possession proceedings.
Eligibility for legal aid subject to strict statutory criteria and the provision of and payment for legal aid services is governed by Contracts with legal aid providers. Both legal aid legislation and the Contracts contain a number of provisions to ensure that public funds are used proportionately and appropriately.
Legal aid provided under Legal Help or Legal Representation is subject to a strict financial eligibility test and a legal merits test as set out in the Civil Legal Aid (Merits Criteria) Regulations 2013. To qualify for Legal Representation in respect of any housing matter the proportionality test as described at regulation 8 must be met and continue to be met throughout the duration of proceedings.
Regulation 40 of the Civil Legal Aid (Procedure) Regulations 2012 requires all legal aid providers to report to the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) any changes in circumstances which would materially affect a client’s eligibility for Legal Representation alongside other matters which may impact on eligibility, for example, failure to accept an offer to settle or to use and alternative dispute resolution method or issues relating to the client’s conduct. The LAA may withdraw a determination that the individual qualifies for Legal representation if it concludes the eligibility criteria are no longer met or it is satisfied that the client is requiring proceedings to be conducted unreasonably so as to incur unjustifiable expense.
Legal Representation is subject to scope and cost limitations setting out what work may be undertaken and the maximum amount of legal aid costs that may be claimed. To extend either scope or costs an application must be made to the LAA setting who will consider whether the additional funding should be authorised with reference to the applicable regulations. This ensures appropriate and proportionate use of legal aid funding.
Clause 2.4 of the Standard Civil Contract 2024 Standard Terms requires legal aid providers to work with the LAA to achieve value for money and to ensure that public money is spent with probity, accountability and in the public interest.
Additionally, any claims for payment for legal aid work are subject to assessment in accordance with the provisions of the Standard Civil Contract 2024. In particular under paragraph 6.9 sets our hat all assessments of Contract Work are to be on the Standard Basis as defined by Civil Procedure Rules (CPR).
CPR 44.3(2) states that: “Where the amount of costs is to be assessed on the standard basis, the court will— (a) only allow costs which are proportionate to the matters in issue. Costs which are disproportionate in amount may be disallowed or reduced even if they were reasonably or necessarily incurred.”
The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) does not play an active role in case progression where all providers of legal aid services are independent providers of services who are bound to act in the best interest of the client taking into account the provisions of their legal aid contract and any relevant professional body rules. However, in addition to the reporting obligations referred to above, automatic enquiries are triggered on Legal Representation cases that have had no legal aid activity for a period of more than 365 days. Failure to respond to these enquiries may result in the withdrawal of legal aid. Furthermore, the LAA has a representations process which allows opponents (or other third parties) to report to the LAA circumstances which may affect an individual’s eligibility for legal aid.
There is no specific guidance on “appropriate use of public funds for disputes that do not materially affect housing safety or security”. However, statutory and contractual provisions governing the appropriate use of public funds in all civil cases are set out in the Regulations and Contract referred to above. Supporting guidance on the application of the statutory and contractual framework is set out in the Lord Chancellor’s Guidance under s.4 LASPO and the Costs Assessment Guidance both of which legal aid providers have a contractual obligation to comply with when carrying out legal aid work.
The average cost of a housing case under each legal aid scheme for the last five financial years is set out in the table below. These costs will include all housing cases within scope of legal aid as set out above. Average costs have been broken down by the type of legal aid provided.
Financial Year | In-court housing advice under HLPAS or its predecessors | Legal Help | Legal Representation |
2020-21 | £87 | £433 | £3,444 |
2021-22 | £107 | £376 | £3,963 |
2022-23 | £110 | £354 | £3,694 |
2023-24 | £103 | £337 | £3,531 |
2024-25 | £99 | £313 | £3,508 |
Asked by: Martin Wrigley (Liberal Democrat - Newton Abbot)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what checks and balances are in place to ensure that Legal Aid funding in housing disputes is used proportionately.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The scope of legal aid for housing matters is set out under paragraphs 33-35 of Schedule 1 to Part 1 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. This includes civil legal services relating to loss of home and ancillary housing, debt and welfare benefit service, provision of accommodation and assistance to an individual who is homeless or at risk of homelessness and risk to health and safety in rented accommodation.
Legal aid for housing matters may be provided as Legal Help which includes advice and assistance on the matters set out above or Legal Representation which would include representation before a court or tribunal. The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) also funds the Housing Loss Prevention Advice Service (HLPAS) which covers early legal advice on housing, debt and welfare benefits issues to individuals with evidence showing they are at risk of possession proceedings, loss of their home or illegal eviction; and on-the-day emergency advice and advocacy to anyone facing possession proceedings.
Eligibility for legal aid subject to strict statutory criteria and the provision of and payment for legal aid services is governed by Contracts with legal aid providers. Both legal aid legislation and the Contracts contain a number of provisions to ensure that public funds are used proportionately and appropriately.
Legal aid provided under Legal Help or Legal Representation is subject to a strict financial eligibility test and a legal merits test as set out in the Civil Legal Aid (Merits Criteria) Regulations 2013. To qualify for Legal Representation in respect of any housing matter the proportionality test as described at regulation 8 must be met and continue to be met throughout the duration of proceedings.
Regulation 40 of the Civil Legal Aid (Procedure) Regulations 2012 requires all legal aid providers to report to the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) any changes in circumstances which would materially affect a client’s eligibility for Legal Representation alongside other matters which may impact on eligibility, for example, failure to accept an offer to settle or to use and alternative dispute resolution method or issues relating to the client’s conduct. The LAA may withdraw a determination that the individual qualifies for Legal representation if it concludes the eligibility criteria are no longer met or it is satisfied that the client is requiring proceedings to be conducted unreasonably so as to incur unjustifiable expense.
Legal Representation is subject to scope and cost limitations setting out what work may be undertaken and the maximum amount of legal aid costs that may be claimed. To extend either scope or costs an application must be made to the LAA setting who will consider whether the additional funding should be authorised with reference to the applicable regulations. This ensures appropriate and proportionate use of legal aid funding.
Clause 2.4 of the Standard Civil Contract 2024 Standard Terms requires legal aid providers to work with the LAA to achieve value for money and to ensure that public money is spent with probity, accountability and in the public interest.
Additionally, any claims for payment for legal aid work are subject to assessment in accordance with the provisions of the Standard Civil Contract 2024. In particular under paragraph 6.9 sets our hat all assessments of Contract Work are to be on the Standard Basis as defined by Civil Procedure Rules (CPR).
CPR 44.3(2) states that: “Where the amount of costs is to be assessed on the standard basis, the court will— (a) only allow costs which are proportionate to the matters in issue. Costs which are disproportionate in amount may be disallowed or reduced even if they were reasonably or necessarily incurred.”
The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) does not play an active role in case progression where all providers of legal aid services are independent providers of services who are bound to act in the best interest of the client taking into account the provisions of their legal aid contract and any relevant professional body rules. However, in addition to the reporting obligations referred to above, automatic enquiries are triggered on Legal Representation cases that have had no legal aid activity for a period of more than 365 days. Failure to respond to these enquiries may result in the withdrawal of legal aid. Furthermore, the LAA has a representations process which allows opponents (or other third parties) to report to the LAA circumstances which may affect an individual’s eligibility for legal aid.
There is no specific guidance on “appropriate use of public funds for disputes that do not materially affect housing safety or security”. However, statutory and contractual provisions governing the appropriate use of public funds in all civil cases are set out in the Regulations and Contract referred to above. Supporting guidance on the application of the statutory and contractual framework is set out in the Lord Chancellor’s Guidance under s.4 LASPO and the Costs Assessment Guidance both of which legal aid providers have a contractual obligation to comply with when carrying out legal aid work.
The average cost of a housing case under each legal aid scheme for the last five financial years is set out in the table below. These costs will include all housing cases within scope of legal aid as set out above. Average costs have been broken down by the type of legal aid provided.
Financial Year | In-court housing advice under HLPAS or its predecessors | Legal Help | Legal Representation |
2020-21 | £87 | £433 | £3,444 |
2021-22 | £107 | £376 | £3,963 |
2022-23 | £110 | £354 | £3,694 |
2023-24 | £103 | £337 | £3,531 |
2024-25 | £99 | £313 | £3,508 |
Asked by: Shaun Davies (Labour - Telford)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of his Department's progress on increasing the processing capacity of the court system.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Government has made significant progress in increasing the processing capacity of the courts and tribunals system and remains committed to reducing backlog.
In the Crown Court for this financial year, we have allocated 111,250 sitting days - the highest number of sitting days on record and over 5,000 more than the previous Government funded for the last financial year.
In the Family Courts, reforms are already delivering results. Courts operating under the private law Pathfinder model are achieving some of the lowest case durations nationally, in South East Wales, for example, average duration fell from 37 weeks to 12 weeks on average. In addition, the Department for Education invested £10 million in 2024/25 to fund pilots aimed at reducing delays in family proceedings, with evaluation due to conclude in 2026.
Across the tribunals system, we are taking a comprehensive approach to improve productivity. Sitting day capacity has been set at or close to the maximum deliverable level. We are also promoting early dispute resolution to reduce unnecessary demand, including judicial Alternative Dispute Resolution pilots in the Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal.
The Deputy Prime Minister and Lady Chief Justice continue discussions on allocation for 2025-26 and we will say more in due course.
Asked by: Edward Morello (Liberal Democrat - West Dorset)
Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:
To ask the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, what assessment her Department has made of the potential merits of increasing the powers of the Communications Ombudsman.
Answered by Kanishka Narayan - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)
The Government has not assessed the potential merits of increasing the powers of the Communications Ombudsman and has no plans to expand its remit.
Ofcom, the independent regulator of communications services, approves Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) schemes for UK communication and postal services, including the Communications Ombudsman. Ofcom is required to assess whether the schemes it has approved still meet the requirements under the relevant regulations and Ofcom can modify conditions of approval or withdraw approval at any time.
Asked by: Edward Morello (Liberal Democrat - West Dorset)
Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:
To ask the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, whether she plans to bring forward proposals to expand the remit of the Communications Ombudsman.
Answered by Kanishka Narayan - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)
The Government has not assessed the potential merits of increasing the powers of the Communications Ombudsman and has no plans to expand its remit.
Ofcom, the independent regulator of communications services, approves Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) schemes for UK communication and postal services, including the Communications Ombudsman. Ofcom is required to assess whether the schemes it has approved still meet the requirements under the relevant regulations and Ofcom can modify conditions of approval or withdraw approval at any time.
Asked by: Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Labour - Clapham and Brixton Hill)
Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:
To ask the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, what recent assessment her Department has made of the adequacy of the (a) impartiality and (b) evidential handling procedures used by the communications ombudsman when determining complaints.
Answered by Kanishka Narayan - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)
The Government has not undertaken any recent assessment of the Communications Ombudsman and has no plans to do so. It is Ofcom’s duty under the Communications Act 2003 to approve and review Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) schemes for UK communication and postal services. One of the two schemes Ofcom currently approves is the Communications Ombudsman.
Ofcom undertook a formal review of the ADR schemes, concluding in July, and found both were working well for consumers. This review included research among consumers to understand their experience of using ADR. Ofcom’s full statement is available on its website.
Ofcom also monitors the schemes’ performance against a set of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and publish the results on its website quarterly.