HL Deb 21 July 1981 vol 423 cc135-6

2.42 p.m.

Baroness Sharples

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 whether the abolition of 36 Quangos in the DHSS since 1979 has affected the efficiency of the National Health Service.

Lord Cullen of Ashbourne

No, my Lords, it has not. A non-departmental public body is only identified for abolition, merger or being made independent of Government when its function no longer needs to be discharged in that way.

Baroness Sharples

My Lords, while thanking my noble friend for that reply, may I ask him why nine new quangos have been started since 1979?

Lord Cullen of Ashbourne

My Lords, since the Government took office, out of 205 quangos at that time 22 have been abolished and 14 have been identified for abolition in the future. Ten new bodies have been established. One was the London Advisory Group, which has already completed its work and been disbanded. Two—the Steering Group on Health Service Information and the Working Group on Rickets—have specific short-term remits and will be wound up when they have done their job. Four are replacements of one or more previously existing bodies. An example is the Social Security Advisory Committee, which replaced the National Insurance Advisory Committee and the Supplementary Benefits Commissions for Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Lord Wallace of Coslany

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that it is about time that we got rid of this stupid expression "Quango"? A lot of well-meaning and excellent voluntary workers are being classified as parasites by the Government by the use of this stupid word. Secondly, is the noble Lord aware that the efficiency of the National Health Service is being undermined by the Government's policy of a ridiculous allocation of money, by its distribution throughout the regions and by blindly going ahead with pampering the private health service at the expense of the National Health Service?

Lord Cullen of Ashbourne

My Lords, the noble Lord is ranging rather widely, but I entirely agree with him that the word "Quango" is not a good one. There is no accepted definition and the words that we use, which are a bit of a mouthful, are "non-departmental public body". These bodies are accountable to Government but with a measure of independence, and carry out special functions at arm's length from the department.

Lord Wells-Pestell

My Lords, may I ask the noble Lord the Minister, if he accepts the figure which his noble friend has given of 36 Quangos, whether he is able to say if they are Quangos operating in the regional health committee areas or in the area health authority areas? Also, will he put in the Official Report the functions and the names of the 36 Quangos involved?

Lord Cullen of Ashbourne

My Lords, area health authorities are not Quangos, nor are they non-departmental public bodies. They are integrated into the National Health Service. I am certainly happy to produce the information for which the noble Lord has asked.

Lord Wells-Pestell

My Lords, I am aware that area health authorities are not Quangos. What I was asking was whether it was necessary to repeat some of the committees set up in regional health authorities, which were considered as Quangos and which made up the 36.

Lord Cullen of Ashbourne

My Lords, I am sorry, but I do not know the answer to that. I shall write to the noble Lord.

Lord Leatherland

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware of the fact that if he abolishes more Quangos, he will have more people unemployed to add to the extra 178,000 who are reported today as having become unemployed during the past month?

Lord Cullen of Ashbourne

My Lords, this gives me an opportunity of saying that most of the people who are employed in Quangos simply get travelling expenses and subsistence. They do a magnificent job and it is not really a question of employment.

The Lord President of the Council (Lord Soames)

My Lords, I suggest that we move on to the next Question now.