PARLIAMENTARY COMMISSIONER FOR THE NATIONALISED INDUSTRIES (Hansard, 11 May 1976)

§ Mr. Tony Durant (Reading, North)

I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to appoint a Parliamentary Commissioner for the Nationalised Industries; and for purposes connected therewith. Since the war the growing power of the State and its remoteness from the citizen has led to the necessity for Parliament to appoint Parliamentary Commissioners. We began with a Parliamentary Commissioner for various Civil Service Departments and we moved on to other Commissioners. My Bill seeks to add another Parliamentary Commissioner, namely one for the nationalised industries.

Initially, Parliament was reluctant to introduce a Parliamentary Commissioner at all. Some hon. Members felt that this would take away the rights of individual Members of Parliament to 239 raise matters and there was some reluctance to act on this score for a considerable period of time. However, eventually, in 1967 the House agreed to appoint a Parliamentary Commissioner. What was envisaged was an impartial, traditional type of office whose occupant would examine and investigate problems and report back to the hon. Member who raised the matter and also to the Select Committee on the Parliamentary Commissioner. That procedure was established in 1967 and as a result some very successful work has been undertaken.

In 1973, following the reorganisation of the National Health Service, a Parliamentary Commissioner was introduced with responsibilities in respect of the NHS and his duties were to deal with maladministration within that service. I admit that that office is as yet in its infancy and that there are still problems. We face the problem that clinical decisions are separated from administrative decisions. But at least the system exists and is growing in success.

Following the reorganisation of local government in 1972, we set up the Local Government Commission on a regional basis. That is also in its infancy but it is achieving reasonable success.

However, there is one important area in which no Parliamentary Commissioner operates, and that is in relation to the nationalised industries. Members of Parliament in all parts of the House receive a considerable number of complaints about the nationalised industries, and they wish to air those complaints in the most effective way. The normal method of following up the complaints is to write to the chairman of the nationalised industry concerned and to put the problem before him. Sometimes these matters are dealt with expeditiously. In other cases hon. Members can contact consumer councils or advisory committees. Once again, matters can be handled expeditiously. But one always ends with the remainder of cases in which one does not receive a satisfactory answer.

Generally, consumer councils and advisory committees tend to be involved, in policy matters in the nationalised industries in terms of pricing or broader view than that contained within whatever it may be, and take a 240 an individual case. Therefore, in that respect a Member of Parliament may find it difficult to extract a satisfactory answer.

The Select Committee on Nationalised Industries also examines the general running of the nationalised industries, but once again not in detail. The citizen, in my opinion, requires some direct machinery by means of which his parliamentary representative may raise matters relating to the nationalised industries.

Let me give a simple example in my own constituency. A number of houses were damaged as a result of floods and a month later the flooding happened yet again. The cause was traced to a blockage in a drain. The water authority officials said that it had nothing to do with them because the local authority was their agent. The local authority officials said it was nothing to do with them because it was a water authority drain. Therefore, the poor citizens were left in the middle. Nobody would take responsibility for the matter. Nobody would take the decision to examine the problem and say who was responsible. The people concerned could only succeed as a result of a difficult, laborious and expensive process—and even then they did not know whether they would succeed.

The Select Committee on Nationalised Industries investigated the subject of the Parliamentary Commissioner, and indeed took evidence from the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration. I wish to quote from a memorandum submitted by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration to the Select Committee, in which he made three important points. The memorandum said: The Ombudsman is a supplement to other methods of handling complaints and righting wrongs; but not an alternative. He has considerable powers to investigate in depth. I believe that that point is most important. The memorandum also said: He has a status of complete independence, assured by the method by which he is appointed and the terms on which he holds office. In other words, the Commissioner acts as an independent investigator. I believe that the consumer councils are not strong enough for the task I have in mind and do not go as far as an independent Ombudsman would go. My Bill seeks to fill the gap.