UK Parliament / Open data

Public Bodies Bill [Lords]

Proceeding contribution from John McDonnell (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 12 July 2011. It occurred during Debate on bills on Public Bodies Bill [Lords].
I want briefly to make two simple but related points. Elected Governments—even unelected coalitions—have the right to determine the administrative arrangements they consider best suited to implementing their policies. However, there is such a thing as good governance. As the Public Administration Committee's original report set out, good governance involves undertaking a proper review of structures, consulting the organisations and individuals involved, clarifying objectives and then having good, clear drafting of the legislation. The hon. Member for Harwich and North Essex (Mr Jenkin) is not in his place, but I think that he hid his light behind a bushel, because last December's PAC report was one of the most hard-hitting reports that I have ever seen in this House. It referred to the review process as ““poorly managed””, and said that ““no meaningful consultation”” had been undertaken, that the criteria and tests set for the reform were ““not clearly defined”” and that the Bill was ““badly drafted””, so it is no wonder it received a mauling in the House of Lords. In addition, the Committee said—I have never seen this sentence in a Select Committee report before—that the Government had"““failed to recognise the realities of the modern world.””" One element of that was the need for thorough consultation, a point that I want to discuss in relation to the staff. Whatever the structures of government, whatever they determine those structures should be and whatever reforms to those structures they want to undertake, any Government will need an essential ingredient: well trained, professionally competent and motivated staff. However, in this Bill the staff are barely mentioned or considered, if at all. I chair the PCS trade union group, which involves Members of all parties in this House. The PCS has 30,000 members in non-departmental bodies, many thousands of whom are affected by this Bill. Many of those staff are facing compulsory redundancy, forced relocation, a deleterious impact on their terms and conditions and their pensions, an almost certain increase in their work loads and the end of job security—all in a situation of absolute uncertainty. The most common thing that I have heard from members of staff whom I have met in those bodies is that they are completely in the dark about their futures. There is a complete lack of clarity about what role their organisations and they as individual professionals will be playing, and they are worried about the future of the services that they deliver.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
531 c256-7 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Back to top