HC Deb 24 July 1986 vol 102 cc360-2W
Mr. Bill Walker

asked the Secretary of State for Energy what progress has been made by the electricity supply industry in responding to the report by the Monopolies and Mergers Commission on the revenue collection system of four area electricity boards; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Goodlad

I have now received from the Electricity Council a second response to the report of the Monopolies and Mergers Commission published in January 1985 on the revenue collection systems of the East Midlands, South Eastern, North Eastern and South Western area electricity boards (Cmnd. 9427). This describes progress on steps taken by the industry to meet the commission's conclusions. I am placing copies of the response in the Library of the House.

The industry has made useful progress in considering the MMC's recommendations since my statement to the House on 25 July 1985 concerning the initital response, and has been able to reach a considered response on a number of issues. I welcome this.

The commission's central conclusions dealt with the variations which it found in boards' differing practices and procedures for revenue collection. The response indicates that the council is now well advanced in carrying through a systematic and detailed study of these differences across all 12 area boards. The study is designed to lead to the indentification and implementation of best practice wherever possible throughout the industry, taking due account of boards' local circumstances. The recent internal reorganisation of the Electricity Council mentioned in the response to conclusions 4 and 5 should assist progress towards this goal.

In conclusion 8, the commission recommended that each board should set a quantified cost objective for revenue collection as a whole with the medium term objective of achieving continued cost reduction in real terms. The reference boards have accepted this general objective and reviewed their practices and productivity accordingly. The specific objectives set by the four boards are detailed in the response. SEEB has now established an audit committee as recommended by the commission at conclusion 10. Although NEEB has not followed this example, I have noted that it is taking steps to increase the participation of non-executive members in looking at specific issues including the comparative performance of the board.

A number of other recommendations raise complex issues relevant to all 12 boards, not just the four examined, and the wider implications of these are being actively pursued by the industry. The Electricity Council is

Numbers on waiting listgeneral surgery (including urology)
Authority Sept. 1982 March 1983 Sept. 1983 March 1984 Sept. 1984 March 1985 Sept. 1985
In-patientsurgent
Clwyd 9 8 51 30 34 47 53
Dyfed 2 5 3
Pembrokeshire 97 63 57 82 128 226 306
Gwent 342 264 361 502 437 545 414
Gwynedd 44 36 4 12 13 12
Mid Glamorgan 265 151 84 71 51 39 23
Powys
South Glamorgan* 206 157 365 16 434 579 553
West Glamorgan 161 172 208 107 192 157 246
In-patientsnon-urgent
Clwyd 1,016 1,110 947 1,197 1,111 1,130 1,300
East Dyfed 429 501 547 545 464 396 427
Pembrokeshire 871 856 845 869 1,048 1,023 1,151
Gwent 1,615 1,537 1,691 1,535 1,468 1,425 1,594
Gwynedd 588 426 452 344 402 474 570
Mid Glamorgan 2,880 2,699 2,713 2,646 2,502 2,662 2,987
Powys
South Glamorgan* 1,256 1,404 1,181 1,919 1,565 1,839 1,484
West Glamorgan 1,455 1,321 1,349 1,307 954 1,021 1,021
Out-patients
Clwyd 889 860 1,066 1,061 1,158 1,071 1,347
East Dyfed 914 901 1,166 1,124 1,215 1,141 966
Pembrokeshire 239 241 275 531 328 631 558
Gwent 1,663 1,775 1,958 2,109 2,325 2,675 2,808
Gwynedd 613 608 530 495 623 558 758
Mid Glamorgan 2,227 1,985 2,406 2,399 2,331 2,600 3,692

continuing to direct and co-ordinate follow-up work to ensure that full value is taken from the investigation. I shall take a close interest in developments and have asked the council chairman to let me have a further report on progress in the course of next year, by which time I hope that follow-up action will have been completed.

In my statement of 25 July 1985 I noted that the industry had recognised the desirability of greater consistency in the application of performance indicators to revenue collection. As the commission points out, consistency is also desirable in the methods of cost allocation which underlie inter-board performance comparisons. The council's new general management committee, which has a specific duty to monitor board's corporate objectives and performance targets and to review the appropriateness and effectiveness of performance indicators, will be taking the lead in this.

I should like to take this opportunity to convey the Government's thanks to the M MC for its constructive and effective investigation. The Government value its findings in the effort to reduce costs and increase efficiency.

Forward to