Citizens' Advice Bureaux: Funding (Hansard, 12 April 1983)

§ Lord Lyell
My Lords, with the leave of the House, I will repeat a Statement that is being made by my honourable friend in another place. The Statement is as follows:
"With permission, Mr. Speaker, I should like to make a Statement on the action I have taken on the grant-in-aid to the National Association of Citizens' Advice Bureaux. I am glad to do this since we are discussing an organisation which fulfills an important national and local role, one which the 116 Government fully support. I feel I must make that absolutely clear. We have the fullest confidence in the CAB movement as a whole. It is a fine example of volunteers and professionals working together for the good of the community.
"Our support has been shown by the rapid increase in this Government's funding: in 1979–80, £1.85 million, in 1980–81, £4.02 million, £4.91 million in 1981–82, £5.75 million in 1982–83, and now £6.04 million in 1983–84. This money does not go directly to the local bureaux which receive some £10 million from local authorities; the Government grant goes to NACAB the central body and is used to finance a range of support services for all bureaux.
"But increases of this order can have disadvantages and I felt it proper to inquire if the money was being used effectively. I started looking at this in June last year. I may say one of the difficulties which they have freely admitted to me is that they have been without a permanent director from April 1982, to February 1983.
"That is one aspect that has concerned me. The other has been allegations of changing attitudes within some CABs and the taking up of campaigns which some people have seen as going outside the generally accepted scope of the service. For example, a local chairman resigned recently after 30 years in the service and of course I asked NACAB to look into this.
"I am glad to say that NACAB now have a permanent director and I welcome this. In my letter to the chairman on 21st March I said I was not sure whether the present level of grant was correct and that I intended to authorise a six-month grant, with a review thereafter. In this context, I said I would expect the association to tell me in good time before the middle of the year how it is dealing with the various matters I have raised with the association. To ensure that the money is being effectively used I have proposed, with the full support of the association itself, an early and independent review of its staffing and efficiency. They have also agreed to draft guidelines on the need for impartiality and avoiding activities which can be seen as politically motivated.
"My aim throughout, Mr. Speaker, has been to endorse and support the giving of accurate and impartial advice and information when it is needed and to ensure that the considerable sums of public money are put to the best use. These steps have absolutely nothing to do with the current CND campaign and were first mooted some months ago. I hope the House will accept that these steps are simply a prudent exercise of responsibility."

§ Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede
My Lords, may I thank the noble Lord for repeating the Statement that is being made by the Minister in another place. It is a strange way for the Government to say that they fully support the work of the Citizens' Advice Bureaux. I would remind the noble Lord who repeated the Statement that it is the Citizens' Advice Bureaux and not the Consumers' Advice Bureaux. If allegations are 117 made against an organisation, surely it is elementary for that organisation to know what are those allegations so that it can fully investigate them. I understand that about 30 allegations have been made to the Minister and that he has not divulged what these allegations are. Therefore the citizens' advice bureaux have been unable to investigate them.
However, the Minister quoted the case of a former chairman of a bureau in Greater London who has resigned. As a former chairman of the Greater London Citizens' Advice Bureaux, I have taken the opportunity to look into the facts of the case quoted by the Minister. In a television programme the Minister named this chairman as the chairman of the Beddington and Wallington Citizens' Advice Bureaux. Apparently, this chairman wrote without consulting his committee to the present chairman of the Greater London Citizens' Advice Bureaux and the Minister making, I am told, wild allegations about the work of the Greater London Citizens' Advice Bureaux as a London organisation and about the staff of the Greater London Citizens' Advice Bureaux. His allegations were investigated by the Greater London Citizens' Advice Bureaux, and this particular chairman subsequently asked his local management committee for a vote of confidence in his action. This action of his did not get a vote of confidence, and as a consequence he resigned. The Minister referred to the fact that he was perturbed that this particular gentleman had resigned after 30 years' service. Those are the reasons how this came about.
I was glad to hear that the Minister has agreed to an early and independent review of the National Association of Citizens' Advice Bureaux. The high reputation of the CAB is not something to be treated lightly: it is important that it should be fully restored immediately. By taking the action which he has taken the Minister has served only to undermine confidence in the citizens' advice bureaux for no discernible reason. This is something which is to be regretted.

Lord Winstanley
My Lords, on behalf of my noble friends on these Benches may I, too, thank the noble Lord for repeating this very important and, to an extent, reassuring Statement. The noble Lord may care to note that we welcome the Statement in so far as it indicates continuing Government support for the CAB movement as a whole. However, we regret that the statement of an intention to authorise a six-month grant, with a review thereafter, cannot of itself end the uncertainty from which the CAB movement centrally has been suffering. Arising from that fact, may I ask the noble Lord the Minister three simple and general questions? First, do the Government accept that the need in our society for the services of the CAB has never been so great as it now is?
Secondly, is the noble Lord the Minister aware that a study, commissioned by the Department of Health and Social Security and carried out by the University of York, into the take-up level of certain benefits in different areas has shown a very close correlation between the take-up level of those benefits and the level of CAB activity within individual areas? Arising from that, if the Government are sincere in their avowed intention to do what they can to increase the take-up levels of certain benefits (I accept that the 118 Government are sincere in that intention) nothing could underline it more clearly than to take steps here and now to end the uncertainty from which the CAB movement is suffering centrally.

§ Lord Lyell
My Lords, we are grateful for the comments and the interest which has been taken by the two noble Lords in the Statement made by my honourable friend in another place which I have repeated to your Lordships. It was interesting that the noble Lord, Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede, thought that it was strange for the Government to give what he thought was somewhat qualified support to the Citizens' Advice Bureaux. I hope that I repeated this throughout my repetition of the Statement. If I made an error, I apologise to the noble Lord and to your Lordships. However, I reiterate once again that the Government strongly support the CAB movement. We believe that it is important in local communities and that it is a fine example of volunteers working with professionals. The noble Lord, Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede, said that my honourable friend had made wild allegations in a television programme.

§ Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede
My Lords, I was referring to the wild allegations made by the chairman of the Beddington and Wallington Citizens' Advice Bureaux.

§ Lord Lyell
My Lords, I think I took down fairly carefully what the noble Lord said.

Several noble Lords
No!

§ Lord Lyell
We shall see in Hansard what was said. We need not over-discuss this, but I think I got it fairly accurately that the wild allegations the noble Lord was making were in relation to a television programme which I did not see and which I do not believe that the noble Lord, Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede, saw, since he said, "I am told". Those were Lord Ponsonby's words. Allegations have been made by the chairman, possibly by my honourable friend—although I would not accept that my honourable friend made wild allegations. Various leaders in today's newspapers have referred to allegations made by my honourable friend. I believe that the allegations in the media made against him are totally unjustified. The noble Lord, Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede, pursued the affair of the chairman of one of the Greater London Citizens' Advice Bureaux. I would not want to comment further on that matter since the noble Lord seems to have the details and I would not wish to dispute them. There may be other details which we would regard as relevant, but I would not dispute the noble Lord's repetition of these facts. Once again, however, I reiterate the Government's full support of the CAB movement.
In reply to the noble Lord, Lord Winstanley, the Government thank him for his reassurance, although he mentioned that it was faint thanks. We are, all the same, very grateful to him. Perhaps I may reply briefly to the noble Lord's three questions. First, he asked whether the Government agreed that the need is great. The answer to the noble Lord's question is, Yes. In reply to the noble Lord's second question, we are grateful to him and thank him for drawing the 119 Government's attention to this report. So far as the third question is concerned, I believe that this is not necessarily part of the role of the CAB. In her first interview, the new director of the National Association of Citizens' Advice Bureaux said: The main aim of the national association is to see that individuals do not suffer through ignorance of their rights". That is a concept with which the Government fully agree.

§ Lord Harris of Greenwich
My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that both the Minister's Statement in another place and his own Statement today appear to a number of us to be almost incomprehensible? Is he aware, following the question put to him by the noble Lord, Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede, that the noble Lord was simply referring to the position of the chairman of the Beddington CAB, which was itself part of the Minister's Statement in another place justifying the wholly mistaken decision which he has now taken? Is the noble Lord further aware that he owes to the House an explanation as to whether the facts stated by the noble Lord, Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede, are correct or incorrect? If I may put a further point to the noble Lord, is he aware that the Minister's Statement, repeated here—vague allegations about changing attitudes within the CABs—will be seen by many to be a slur upon an wholly admirable organisation? Finally, is the noble Lord aware that a six-month grant is wholly unacceptable to a major organisation like the National Association of Citizens' Advice Bureaux, which requires sustained financial support if it is to do worthwhile work in the community?

§ Lord Lyell
My Lords, I can do no better than to reiterate once again, in case the noble Lord did not hear and in case the House did not hear, the Government's full support for the Citizens' Advice Bureaux and for the National Association of Citizens' Advice Bureaux in carrying out support functions and support roles for approximately 900 bureaux around the country. Certainly, any misgivings that may have been expressed in the media or elsewhere by my honourable friend can in no sense he taken as a slur on the Government's commitment to the success of the Citizens' Advice Bureaux. Nothing in the Statement and nothing said by my honourable friend can in any way be taken as a cut in the Government's financial support to the association.
The Statement stressed that approximately £10 million is raised by local authorities, which goes directly to the 900 bureaux. The £6.04 million that the Government have allocated for the current financial year will go as part of the support package to these bureaux and will also help the national association in their function. I reiterate once again that there is no question of cutting the Government's financial support to this admirable organisation.

§ Lord Elwyn-Jones
My Lords, is the noble Lord, Lord Lyell, aware of the serious uncertainty and unease which the words and action of the Minister in another place have created among those who carry on the work of the CAB throughout the country? To terminate—as the noble Lord, Lord Harris of 120 Greenwich, said—or to threaten to terminate, or to reduce financial support to a six-monthly basis, is wholly to undermine the confidence of those working in the organisation, a large number of whom are young people, although there are older people as well, giving their services freely. Is this not an extraordinary state of affairs, that instead of waiting for the outcome of an independent review, the threat of financial sanctions is made in advance of the outcome of that review? This is a sort of Alice in Wonderland situation—sentence first, trial afterwards. Is this not an intolerable situation; the situation in which the Minister and the Government have got themselves?

§ Lord Lyell
My Lords, I would hope that we certainly have not got ourselves into an Alice in Wonderland situation or, as the noble and learned Lord said, into passing sentence first and holding a trial afterwards; I would dispute that suggestion very strongly. I stressed in the original Statement this Government's commitment to giving support to the national association, which has increased from £1.85 million in the financial year when we came into office to treble that, to £6.04 million, in the current financial year.
As I mentioned, if one has increases of this order there could be disadvantages. We felt it proper to inquire—no less and no more—into whether the money was being used effectively. I went on to repeat my honourable friend's Statement that one of the difficulties which the association have freely admitted to my honourable friend is that they were without a permanent director from April 1982 to February 1983. The noble and learned Lord and the House will be aware and will be happy that the association now has a new director. My honourable friend wishes to see how the land lies and what the national association see as being their functions. We are certainly seeing that the national association may continue with their present functions and present funding until September. That is in no way making a cut, and I trust that the noble and learned Lord, Lord Elwyn-Jones, will accept that the suggestion of a cut is a misapprehension which I believe has been put about in the media. I would stress that point again to the noble and learned Lord and to all noble Lords.

§ Lord Irving of Dartford
My Lords, as a vice-chairman of the national association may I ask the noble Lord, Lord Lyell, whether he is aware that it has always been the determination of the association to ensure that their activities were entirely non-political? Therefore, they will welcome an opportunity to examine the evidence that the Minister has received. May I also ask the noble Lord whether he is aware that to give the grant for a six-monthly period will make the planning of the service and the effective use of money almost impossible?

§ Lord Lyell
My Lords, if I may take the second question first, the only thing that the national association need to do is to be in touch with my honourable friend. If the association wish to discuss this matter with him then I am sure he will be happy, when the time comes, to make suitable financial arrangements for the association's funding and planning. So far as his first question is concerned, I am afraid that I can do no 121 more than refer the comments of the noble Lord, Lord Irving of Dartford, to my honourable friend.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, in view of the supplementary questions which have been put to the noble Lord, Lord Lyell, does he not agree that it is absolutely essential that the review referred to in his honourable friend's Statement should be both early and independent? Can he therefore tell the House when the review will be commenced? Is the noble Lord in a position to tell the House who will be conducting this review, who will be the independent person, and when the review is likely to be made public?

§ Lord Lyell
My Lords, I am very grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos, for asking this particular question because it is an important point and one that I have not stressed sufficiently. I can confirm to your Lordships that this review will be undertaken either by management consultants or by our own staff inspection service; that is, by my honourable friend's department. My honourable friend will of course be consulting the National Association of Citizens' Advice Bureaux on this point before making a final decision. I am very glad that the noble Lord, Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos, has raised the important point that this investigation should be completed quickly and thoroughly. We are very confident that it will be of real value to the entire service, but we must take "quickly" and "thoroughly" into consideration too. We must always remember the proverb, more haste less speed—although I cannot put it into Welsh as the noble Lord could do so well.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, I am very grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Lyell, and I apologise for getting up again, but will he take it from me that many noble Lords from all sides of the House would not regard a review conducted by people who are within his honourable friend's own department as being an independent review?

§ Lord Lyell
I will stress again, my Lords, that my honourable friend will be consulting the national association before taking a final decision on who should conduct the review, on how the review should be conducted, and on the points it should cover.

§ Lord Melchett
My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Lyell, said in reply to my noble friend Lord Irving of Dartford that the question of the evidence on which his honourable friend the Minister had based his remarks was simply something that had to be referred to the Minister. Can the noble Lord say why that is the case? Has he seen the evidence, or not? If not, why not? If he has seen it, why not tell the House what it is?

§ Lord Lyell
My Lords, I am afraid that I do not know the remarks to which the noble Lord, Lord Melchett, is referring, or what evidence would be needed to back them up. I am afraid that I am certainly still in the dark, probably as much as my honourable friend.

§ Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede
My Lords, is it not true that officials from the Department of Trade attend every meeting of the executive committee of the 122 National Association of Citizens' Advice Bureaux and that they have never at any time raised any point with regard to the finances of the organisation?

§ Lord Lyell
My Lords, I am sorry that I was not aware that officials from the department attended; clearly the noble Lord has given me valuable instruction and I am very grateful for it. We are not questioning the finances of the organisation—nobody is doing that. I hope that the noble Lord, Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede, will be reassured on that point.

§ Baroness Serota
My Lords, if the finances of the association are not being questioned, why is the grant being held to a period of six months?

§ Lord Lyell
My Lords, the entire role of the organisation will be discussed with the new director. I stressed that in the original Statement and I stress it now once again.