Question follow-through · 21144
National Audit Office: Training
To ask the Chairman of the Public Accounts Commission, with reference to the National Audit Office contract, Executive Coaching 2026/27, for £24,000, published 6 August 2026, what the business case was for the expenditure on executive coaching; and which
About this written question
A written question asks a government minister for information in writing. Parliament publishes the question and any answer.
- Answering body
- Public Accounts Commission
- Tabled
- 28 Aug 2026
- Target answer date
- 2 Sept 2026
- Answer
- 7 Sept 2026 · 10 calendar days after tabling
Elapsed calendar days describe the record timeline, not whether Parliament considers an answer on time.
Votes on this topic
- Draft Code of Practice on Electronic and Workplace Ballots for Statutory Trade Union Ballots · 15 Jul 2026
- Draft Trade Unions (Permissible Means of Voting) and Employment Rights (Unfair Dismissal) (Amendment) Order 2026 · 15 Jul 2026
- Taxation (Energy and Vehicles) Bill Committee: New Clause 5 · 1 Jul 2026
These Commons divisions share a topic label. The question did not necessarily lead to a vote.
Recorded timeline
28 Aug 2026
Question tabled
To ask the Chairman of the Public Accounts Commission, with reference to the National Audit Office contract, Executive Coaching 2026/27, for £24,000, published 6 August 2026, what the business case was for the expenditure on executive coaching; and which
2 Sept 2026
Target answer date
Date supplied by the official written-questions record.
7 Sept 2026
Answer published
The National Audit Office (NAO) provides coaching to senior leaders to support effective leadership and organisational performance. Most coaching is delivered through internal provision. This contract is in place to provide additional specialist support s...
Official data retrieved 28 Sept 2026.
Later records
Possible follow-up questions
Strong links require the same MP, department and exact heading. Other same-department questions are shown as unreviewed candidates, not as confirmed follow-ups. No debate link is asserted unless a stable source relationship exists.
No later same-department questions indexed.
This is an absence in covered public data, not evidence that no follow-up occurred elsewhere.