Next Steps Agencies: Accountability (Hansard, 20 February 1992)

§ The Lord Privy Seal (Lord Waddington)
My Lords, Next Steps agencies are already fully accountable to Parliament through their respective Ministers; the Next Steps initiative has enhanced the Government's accountability both to Parliament and the general public through its requirement for agencies to publish their framework documents, annual targets, annual reports and accounts, and, where appropriate, their corporate and business plans. In addition, agency chief executives are accounting officers and as such are answerable to the Public Accounts Committee for the use of resources allocated to them.

§ Lord Hughes
My Lords, I thank the noble Lord the Leader of the House for that reply. That does not go as far as his opposite number did in another place in November when in a Written Answer (cols. 558–559) he stated: The Government have therefore decided to propose to the House authorities that the House should publish all replies from chief executives which are placed in the Library. The Government consider that the replies should be published 1364 regularly and frequently, so that the information they contain is current and useful; that the publication should be available to individuals and organisations outside the House on a similar basis to the Official Report". The Leader of the House in another place proposed to put the proposals before the House of Commons Administration Sub-committee before the general election, although at that time (November) the Government had not finalised what they would put before the House of Commons Administration Sub-committee. Has anything been placed before the House of Commons Administration Sub-committee? If not, will that be done within the next few weeks?

§ Lord Waddington
My Lords, the matter raised by the noble Lord is of the greatest importance, but it is not germane to the Question on the Order Paper. He is right: it is important that those replies should not just be placed in the Library of the House, but should be readily accessible to anyone who wants to see them. Within the next day or two, the Government will put formal proposals to the House of Commons Administration Sub-committee as to how those replies might be published so as to make them generally accessible. One possibility would be to see that they were published as an annex to the Official Report.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, has not the Institute for Public Policy Research sharply criticised the agency, first, because of the constraints placed by the Treasury upon the agency; and, secondly, because of the lack of parliamentary accountability? Further, are there not 48 agencies covering a vast range of different interests, from social security to forensic science, for example? The reports are not coming before Parliament. Is not that a valid criticism? Will the Minister take up this issue with his right honourable friends to ensure that Parliament knows precisely what those agencies are doing? They cannot go on free-wheeling around the country in secrecy.

§ Lord Waddington
My Lords, I find it difficult to accept the criticisms levelled by the noble Lord, Lord Cledwyn. Surely the government machine is too big, and its activities too diverse, to be managed as one unit. The success of the Next Steps initiative is that it has improved management in government. It ensures that available resources are used to greatest effect and that the best service is given to the public. There are no problems about parliamentary accountability. The chief executive is accountable to the Minister who, in turn, is accountable to Parliament.

§ Lord Holme of Cheltenham
My Lords, as a supporter of the concept of the Next Step agencies, perhaps I may ask the noble Lord the Leader of the House the following questions: first, whether the chief executives of the agencies are being sought from outside Whitehall—whether any who come from a business background have been appointed. Secondly, given that, as the noble Lord said, they have objectives, business plans and resources, is the remuneration of the chief executives of the Next Step agencies results-related?

§ Lord Waddington
My Lords, I can tell noble Lords that it is thought that it may be desirable to move in 1365 that direction. There are more and more examples where chief executives have been recruited as a result of open competition.

§ Baroness Hollis of Heigham
My Lords, my noble friend the Leader of the Opposition and I are certainly not opposed to Next Step agencies. Will the noble Lord the Leader of the House agree that it is difficult to scrutinise public policy, as is shown by the following examples? A Written Question on 24th January in the other place asked how many people were having their poll tax deducted from their benefits. That is a major public policy issue. No Answer was printed in Hansard, but merely a reference to a letter from the chief executive of the benefits agency which was subsequently placed in the Library of the House of Commons. Does the noble Lord agree that it is doubly difficult for your Lordships to track such policies when Answers to Written Questions are not only not printed in Hansard but are not available in your Lordships' Library?

§ Lord Waddington
My Lords, the position is that chief executives who have direct operational responsibility are best placed to give a full, prompt and helpful reply to honourable Members in another place or to noble Lords. They have all the necessary delegated authority to take appropriate action as swiftly as possible. One must face the reality. If the system were not used, all that would happen would be that an official in the relevant department would contact the agency and obtain the reply from the chief executive which would then be repeated by the Minister. It is surely far better that one should go to the fountainhead, the chief executive, who has administrative responsibility, and obtain a reply from him so that he can take the necessary actions.
The question about the publication of the answers is entirely different. I believe that I fully answered it in my reply to the noble Lord, Lord Hughes. We have always acknowledged that it is a problem. It would be difficult to have the replies printed in Hansard because Hansard is a record of what is said in Parliament by honourable Members or by Ministers. However, it should surely be possible to find a way of making the replies more accessible than they are at present. That is why various ideas have been floated, such as their being printed in an annex to the Official Report.

§ Lord Hughes
My Lords, to return to the Question, I thank the Minister for the way in which he replied. As the noble Lord indicated, it is desirable to have something similar to ministerial replies to Written Parliamentary Questions. If something along those lines were done, either in Hansard or as an annex to that publication, it would be available to Members of both Houses of Parliament.

§ Lord Waddington
My Lords, the noble Lord has made a helpful suggestion, and he is thinking along the same lines as me.