DoE Appointments: Members' Spouses (Hansard, 10 February 1994)

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, although the background of potential appointees is looked into before an appointment is made, details of spouses are not requested by the Department of the Environment because this is irrelevant to a candidate's suitability. With over 900 current members of DoE boards appointed by the Secretary of State, even an exhaustive search of individual appointment records could not reliably provide information on members' marital status. We consider that such a search would be disproportionately expensive.

§ Lord Bonham-Carter
My Lords, I thank the noble Earl for his risible reply. May I ask him why it is possible for the Department of Health to supply those answers and not the Department of the Environment?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, first, I do not think it is at all a risible reply. It is absolutely genuine in this context. To suggest otherwise is not becoming or worthy of the noble Lord. As regards the point on the Department of Health, I make it perfectly clear that the Department of the Environment keeps no central record of the personal details of public appointees. Appointment details are held in offices throughout the country in headquarters and regions. But even an exhaustive search of the files may not provide details of spouses. As I have already said, that information is not requested of the candidates. I understand that the Department of Health had already carried out a search of its records last year so that most of the information was ready to hand. In the Department of the Environment's case a search would be disproportionately expensive.

§ Lord Marsh
My Lords, assuming that the Minister was able, given notice, to obtain the information, which would no doubt be of interest, does he agree that the assumption behind the Question is at best quaintly old-fashioned and at worst offensively sexist?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, perhaps I may reply to that by saying that the noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter, is quite an expert on NDPBs. He and many other noble Lords in the House know that he served with great distinction as chairman of the Race Relations Board and chairman of the Community Relations Commission from 1971 to 1977. He was chosen because of his suitability for the job.

§ Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone
My Lords, is not one of the difficulties that the Question is intrinsically obscure? It does not say whether it means those who were spouses at the date of appointment, those who became spouses of Members of Parliament 1696 after the date of appointment or those who have ceased to be spouses. It is impossible to answer; it is a non-Question.

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, I cannot hold myself accountable for the defectiveness of any Question in your Lordships' House.

§ Lord Jenkins of Hillhead
My Lords, is the noble Earl aware that when the noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter, served in those two positions, and also served with distinction as vice-chairman of the BBC, he was on all three occasions appointed by Ministers not of his own party; and that is a practice which has now almost completely disappeared under a government who have done more political jobbery than any other government for at least 142 years, since the Trevelyan-Northcote reforms?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, frankly, that is unworthy also of the noble Lord. I would expect a little better of him. If he is trying to say that these appointments are made through political bias, he is very wrong indeed.

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, if it is the case that the Secretary of State for the Environment and his colleagues do not know the identity of the spouses of those who are put forward for public appointment in their department, how is it that when my wife was interviewed by head hunters for appointments by the Secretary of State for the Environment, and was, I believe, recommended for those appointments, the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, knew enough to accost me in the Chamber and refer to the fact that she had been so interviewed?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, I cannot account for that episode. As the noble Lord probably knows very well, neither political affiliation nor marital status is required on the DoE form.

§ Lord Renton
My Lords, does my noble friend agree that when spouses of Members of either House happen to be appointed to a public position, it enables the Members concerned to become even better informed about public affairs than most of them already are?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, my noble friend speaks with great sense and wisdom. I have not yet said this afternoon to your Lordships that those who serve on public bodies deserve our gratitude. They give up a lot of their time, and family time, in order to serve with skill and quite often very little pay.

Lord Bruce of Donington
My Lords, is the noble Earl aware that in the absence of more definite information in reply to the Question, the impression may well be that the Department of the Environment has followed the pattern favoured by the Minister for Health, where the overwhelming mass of appointments are from Members of the party opposite or their spouses?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, I do not believe that that is the case. The noble Lord ought to think of 1697 colleagues on his own side. I single out the noble Lords, Lord Cocks and Lord Dormand, and the noble Baroness, Lady Lockwood.

§ Lord Jenkins of Putney
My Lords, if the noble Earl cannot answer the Question on the Order Paper, or does not wish to, can he at least tell us how many of the positions are paid and how many are not paid?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, first, I can answer the Question on the Order Paper, and have already done so. I should like to make that perfectly clear. Secondly, my understanding is that about 90 per cent. receive some remuneration, however great or small.

§ Lord Stoddart of Swindon
My Lords, for a Government who are becoming increasingly famous for sleaze—

Noble Lords
Oh!

§ Lord Stoddart of Swindon
Yes, indeed, my Lords. We see it every day in the newspapers.

§ Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone
That means that it is true, of course.

§ Lord Stoddart of Swindon
My Lords, would it not be as well if the Government were now to ensure that they keep such a record? It is a matter of public importance when wives, husbands or other relatives of Members of Parliament and Peers are appointed to remunerative posts. Does the noble Earl agree that it is much more important that the public know about such matters than who they slept with the previous night?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, I think that the sleaziness is in the eye of the beholder.

§ Lord Bonham-Carter
My Lords, I do not wish to continue this indefinitely. But did I hear the noble Earl say that those people were paid very little? If so, is he aware that the part-time chairman of the Totalisator Board is paid £92,000 a year? Is that very little money?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, in that particular case, no, it is not very little money, but he does an extremely good job. I ask the noble Lord to look at those who perform equal service for very much less money.