HL Deb 29 April 1982 vol 429 cc956-7

3.8 p.m.

Lord Orr-Ewing

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government what personnel reductions in numbers and percentages have been made at the Department of the Environment since May 1979 and how these figures compare with the overall reductions in the same period by local authorities.

The Earl of Avon

My Lords, the relevant manpower figures for June 1979 and December 1981 show that there has been a reduction in staff in post in the Department of the Environment, including the Property Services Agency, of 9,146 full-time equivalents, or 18.3 per cent., in that period, and an overall reduction of 80,145, or 4.1 per cent., in full-time equivalent staff employed by local authorities in England.

Lord Orr-Ewing

My Lords, while I thank my noble friend for that reply, can he say what the average is for the whole Civil Service? We recognise that the Department of the Environment is an outstandingly good example, but what is the average? Can the Government say whether we are still aiming at the target of reducing the total number of civil servants from 720,000 down to 630,000? If we are doing so, are we on target at this stage in the Government's term of office?

The Earl of Avon

My Lords, in the period from 1st April 1979 to 1st January 1982, the Civil Service as a whole has been reduced by 56,860—that is, 7.8 per cent. This is on target; in fact it is slightly ahead of the targets set for the Government by themselves at the beginning of their term.

Lord Winstanley

My Lords, while congratulating the Government on the reduction of personnel in the Department of the Environment, can the noble Earl tell the House how many of those 9,146 civil servants who have gone were at assistant secretary or undersecretary level?

The Earl of Avon

My Lords, this is a difficult problem because, as lower paid staff are rather more numerous in the department than higher paid staff, it is obviously difficult to compare. But the policy of reviewing the department's work, function by function, will mean that, as functions are cut, senior and junior posts will go.

Lord Molloy

My Lords, can the noble Earl say whether there is any corresponding figure for the Department of Employment to meet the requirements of the civil servants who are dismissed and are unemployed? Is he aware of any scheme that helps them, when they lose their jobs, to obtain other forms of gainful employment?

The Earl of Avon

My Lords, I do not have in front of me any comparable figures for the other departments. But, of course, it is the policy that redundancies should be by normal wastage wherever possible. In point of fact, of the figures that I have produced for your Lordships, only 3 per cent. were redundancies.

Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos

My Lords, will the noble Earl be good enough to say what percentage of the total was attributable to wastage; what percentage was attributable to compulsory redundancy; and what percentage was attributable to voluntary redundancy?

The Earl of Avon

My Lords, it is the figure which I have just given the noble Lord, Lord Molloy: it is 3 per cent. of the total of 9,000 which I gave earlier for the Department of the Environment.

Lord Orr-Ewing

My Lords, can my noble friend say whether the 4.1 per cent. cut in the local authority numbers is disappointing? Can he say, as this is an average for the whole country, what are the variations between the good, careful and economical authorities and the less good and spending authorities who may have cut or not increased their total numbers since May 1979?

The Earl of Avon

My Lords, it is important to recognise the difference in the functions, duties and responsibilities of central and local government when we are making these comparisons. However, there are some district councils, such as Eastbourne, which has reduced by 23 per cent., and Blackburn, which has reduced by 22 per cent., which lead one to think that some of the others must have had very small savings or virtually none at all. The Government believe that there is scope for greater reductions in local government manpower overall, which can be achieved by improved economy and efficiency.