Civil Service Draft Bill (Hansard, 17 June 2004)

§ Lord Bassam of Brighton
My Lords, the Government are committed to publishing a draft Civil Service Bill for consultation in this parliamentary Session.

§ Lord Sheldon
My Lords, I welcome the reply from my noble friend, but it is three years since the Government were firmly committed to a Bill. So there has been some obvious reluctance. Will the Bill remove the situation where some special advisers are more powerful than many members of the Cabinet? Will there be specific 862 legislation on the role of special advisers—not just Orders in Council, which Parliament can only accept or reject? Parliament must be able to consider and decide on what those powers should be. Does my noble friend accept that the Civil Service should not be the property of the Government; it should be the property of Parliament on behalf of the people of this country?

§ Lord Bassam of Brighton
My Lords, I am sure that we all readily agree with the last point. Returning to my noble friend's initial questions, the answer to his first question is that, as I understand it, there is no intention at present to limit the number of special advisers with executive powers. It is the case that there is only one in the Government's employ; that will remain the case. As for the general issue of special advisers, we have had some useful discussion and debate in your Lordships' House recently—indeed, very recently. We are intent on consulting on that through the draft Bill which, as I said, we will introduce during the current parliamentary Session.

§ Lord Peyton of Yeovil
My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that both his noble friend and the Question that he asked deserved a great deal more than the rather cursory reply that was all that the Minister could manage in the first instance? The noble Lord has today confirmed the impression that the Government do not regard this subject as urgent or important, but as something that can be easily brushed off. If the noble Lord does feel like that, I hope that he will soon correct his view.

§ Lord Bassam of Brighton
My Lords, it is not something that we take lightly. We take this matter very seriously, and we have had some useful and valuable discussions in your Lordships' House about the Civil Service Bill in draft form. Questions have been raised by the noble Lords, Lord Lester and Lord McNally, who asked an interesting question the other day about the Phillis review. We dealt with many of these issues. We do not take the matter lightly, and it is not something that we dismiss.
I remind the noble Lord that his party was in government for 18 years, and it chose to take absolutely no action on this issue at all. We are committed to consultation and, as I have made plain, we intend to bring forward a draft Bill for consultation in the current parliamentary Session.

§ Lord McNally
My Lords, I have considerable sympathy for the Minister having regularly to come here and play the dead bat on these questions. Does he agree that the real problem is where it has always been, in No. 10 Downing Street, with a Prime Minister who has consistently resisted permanent secretary advice to bring in a Civil Service Act? Will he send the message back to the Prime Minister that any hope of restoring 863 trust in himself and his administration relies on him carrying through the purge of spin in his Government that was recommended by Phillis? That will take place only if civil servants are given the protection that only a Civil Service Act can provide.

§ Lord Bassam of Brighton
My Lords, I listened carefully to what the noble Lord said in your Lordships' House today, and I listened carefully to what the noble Lord said a couple of days ago when we were debating the Phillis review. I rather thought that the noble Lord, Lord McNally, thought that the Phillis review was valuable. He congratulated the Government on our work in that regard. I made it plain then, as I have done on previous occasions, that we are committed to implementing the Phillis review, and we have made some steady progress in that direction.
As to the Prime Minister's view, it is clearly not for me to tell the Prime Minister what to do; that would be quite wrong. The Prime Minister made an important speech earlier this year on the Civil Service, and I thought that the speech was admirable for its radicalism and its commitment to the Civil Service. It made plain this Government's commitment to the values of the Civil Service and the important, impartial way in which the Civil Service operates. All Members of your Lordships' House have signed up to that, and it is something to be cherished and valued in public life in this country.

§ Lord Hurd of Westwell
My Lords—

§ Lord Cope of Berkeley
My Lords, does the Minister recognise that this Government have politicised the Civil Service by the introduction of huge numbers of special advisers and by the positions that they have been given, in charge of civil servants in some cases? That is what is causing a lot of the trouble. In order to try to reassure my noble friend Lord Peyton, and others who are concerned about the Government dragging their feet over this, will the Minister tell us not only when we will have a draft Bill—in this Session, he says—but when we will have a real Bill?

§ Lord Bassam of Brighton
My Lords, we are committed to a draft Bill. I will not be making an announcement as to when we will have a "real" Bill in your Lordships' House. That would be quite wrong, as it would be prejudging what might be in the Queen's Speech. Our Government have clarified the position of special advisers. The noble Lord admitted to having been one himself. I am not sure whether in those days it would have been made clear what the roles and responsibilities of special advisers were. It was not until this Government came into office that model contracts and a code of conduct were issued, so that there were greater lines of demarcation and clarity about the role of special advisers in government.

§ Lord Hurd of Westwell
My Lords—

§ Lord Lester of Herne Hill
My Lords, in the passage of my Bill through this House, the noble Baroness, Lady Prashar, made the important suggestion, which seemed to find some favour, that there should be a Joint Select Committee of both Houses, which might consider both the Government's draft Bill and the Bill passed by this House as well as the Bill introduced in the other place by Tony Wright's committee. Can serious consideration be given to that notion, so that the matter can be properly considered with all these issues properly debated and scrutinised?

§ Lord Bassam of Brighton
My Lords, the noble Lord invites me simply to confirm what I have said before. We will give consideration to that valuable suggestion. I am most grateful to the noble Lord for repeating it today, because it gives me the opportunity to repeat our commitment to giving that consideration.

§ Lord Hurd of Westwell
My Lords, has the noble Lord not actually, while appearing to shuffle forward, taken a step backwards today? In his original Answer to the noble Lord, Lord Sheldon, did he say that the Government have decided not to include in the proposed legislation any measures to limit either the number or the scope of the powers of special advisers to whom executive powers are given?

§ Lord Bassam of Brighton
My Lords, I thought that I was fairly clear in saying that we were obviously going to consult through the draft Bill on the position of special advisers. I also made it plain that we had no intention to limit the number of special advisers with executive powers. I have made that position plain before.

§ Lord Armstrong of Ilminster
My Lords, on that last point, the greatest possible assurance would be given to civil servants about the Government's commitment to the values of the Civil Service if the Government were to withdraw the power of special advisers to exercise executive or directorial powers over career civil servants. The Minister appeared to suggest that as there was only one of them, that was only a little baby, and we did not need to worry about it, but it is the principle that is involved. I do not know how much use is made of that power by the one individual concerned. I sincerely ask him—will he look at this in earnest? As a sign of good intent, to remove that power would be one of the best things that the Government could do.

§ Lord Bassam of Brighton
My Lords, obviously I hear what the noble Lord says. His advice and guidance on these matters is greatly respected by your Lordships' House and has been greatly respected by this Government and previous governments. Clearly, the role of special advisers is taken seriously, and we will consult on it through the draft legislation.

§ Lord Tordoff
My Lords—

§ Lord Davies of Oldham
My Lords, I am sorry, we need to move on.