Oral Answers to Questions

Lord Maude of Horsham Excerpts

Wednesday 27th April 2011 Commons Chamber

[Amber Rudd (Hastings and Rye) (Con)]

8. What steps he is taking to increase access to Government contracts for small and medium-sized enterprises.

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

On 11 February, the Prime Minister and I announced a package of measures, including launching our Contracts Finder website, eliminating burdensome and unnecessary pre-qualification requirements from the procurement process, and introducing new ways to allow small and medium-sized enterprises to challenge contract procedures when they operate in a way that makes life difficult for them. In addition, from the end of April, all Departments will be required to publish a set of specific, targeted actions to increase their business with SMEs.

[Robert Halfon]

Will the Minister set out what steps he is taking to increase access to public contracts for smaller, grass-roots charities as well? Does he agree that for the big society to work properly, we need to build the little society too?

[Mr Maude]

My hon. Friend makes the point very well. All the measures that we are taking to enable small and medium-sized businesses to participate more fully in Government contracts will, of course, apply to the voluntary and charitable sector as well. Indeed, it is estimated that 35% to 40% of the value of the contracts recently awarded under the Department for Work and Pensions Work programme will go to organisations from the voluntary and charitable sector. We believe that that will be worth in excess of £100 million a year.

[Julian Smith]

Will the Minister take this opportunity to name and shame those Government Departments that are doing well in opening up to small businesses and those that are currently doing less well?

[Mr Maude]

I certainly do not want to shame the ones that are doing well. We have found a number of examples of procurement processes that are not meeting the new requirements. For example, Durham police recently issued an invitation to tender for a £50,000 leadership training contract. The pre-qualification questionnaire alone was 38 pages long and contained a request for 163 separate items of information plus a security vetting form. That is unacceptable, because it causes many smaller businesses to lose the will to live, and they simply do not apply.

[Mark Pawsey]

I am the former owner of a small business supplying products to the public sector. When applying to be added to a new tender list, I was often frustrated by the amount of red tape required. Will the Minister confirm that in future fewer company policies and statements will need to be provided to participate in the tendering process?

[Mr Maude]

We want to strip away all that nonsense. Under the last Government, there were 6,000 pages of guidance for some kinds of procurements. It is not surprising that smaller businesses just did not bother to apply; they knew that they were going to be excluded. There were turnover requirements and requirements for a track record of doing exactly that kind of work. The truth is that that is very bad for small businesses and we want to make things much better.

[Amber Rudd]

During a recent meeting, small and medium-sized enterprises in Hastings raised with me the difficulties not just of the paperwork, but of getting the capital requirements in this climate for procurement contracts with the Government. Will the Minister reassure us that that aspect will also be considered, as we try to make it easier for small and medium-sized enterprises to engage with the Government?

[Mr Maude]

My hon. Friend makes a good point. We are concerned that the working capital requirements should be proportionate and sensible and that the turnover requirements should be proportionate to the needs of the contract. All ridiculous requirements such as those that existed under the old regime—for example, always requiring three years of audited accounts, which automatically excluded huge numbers of new and innovative businesses—will be swept away.

[Mr Denis MacShane (Rotherham) (Lab)]

Does the Minister accept the macro-problem? In south Yorkshire, a large number of private sector enterprises depend in whole or in part on public sector contracts. So much demand is being taken out of the economy, because of the deficit reduction plans, that such businesses face serious challenges. Does he accept that small enterprises face a real problem because of his Government’s macro-economic policy?

[Mr Maude]

I acknowledge that there is a problem—and it is one caused by the Government of whom the right hon. Gentleman was a member and supported. They left Britain with the biggest budget deficit in the developed world. I am waiting for the right hon. Gentleman to apologise for that; that would be timely.

[Tessa Jowell (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)]

In looking at an increased role for small and medium-sized businesses, will the Minister let the House know when his Department will publish the public services reform White Paper? It was commissioned last October to be published early in the new year. January became February, and the Prime Minister said that it was only two weeks away. Two weeks have become more than two months and there is still no sign of the White Paper. Is that the Government’s biggest pause, or have they just given up on public services?

[Mr Maude]

I am thrilled that the right hon. Lady is waiting for the document with such obvious excitement, and I can assure her that it will be well worth waiting for. This Government are committed to breaking up the old public sector monopolies and providing diversity, particularly with the growth of public service mutuals. The document will be published later this summer, and I can promise her that she will be delighted with it.

[Lindsay Roy (Glenrothes) (Lab)]

2. Whether private sector organisations will be able to make applications to the big society bank.

--- Later in debate ---

[Andrew Selous (South West Bedfordshire) (Con)]

10. What recent progress his Department has made on establishing public sector mutuals.

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

In August last year, we launched a pathfinder programme of 21 groups of public sector workers setting up mutuals with the help of mentors. In addition, millions of public sector employees will be given rights to provide public services as mutuals, such as those recently announced in the national health service. That will free up public sector workers to innovate and provide better and more efficient services. We have committed to funding a £10 million support programme to help such new organisations get off the ground. [Interruption.]

[Andrew Selous]

Given the evidence that productivity and efficiency increase dramatically when staff are given a role in shaping services, is not the scaremongering about the proposals on mutuals unhelpful to users, taxpayers and the staff concerned?

[Mr Maude]

Anyone who visits the pathfinder mutuals, talks to the staff—now co-owners—of those organisations and sees the excitement with which they are pursuing their new vocation will give up on the scaremongering. This is a profoundly important movement that should command support from throughout the House.

[Mr Peter Bone (Wellingborough) (Con)]

T1. If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities.

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

I have overall responsibility for the work of the Cabinet Office, while the Deputy Prime Minister has specific responsibility for the Government’s programme of political and constitutional reform.

[Mr Bone]

Last week on the doorstep in Wellingborough, the hot issue was the responsibility of the Cabinet Office for implementing constitutional reform. Why is it that, under the alternative vote, British National party votes and Socialist Workers party votes in my constituency would be counted twice, but Tory votes would be counted only once?

[Mr Maude]

My hon. Friend makes a powerful point. That is no doubt why, I gather, rather more than half of Labour MPs now support first past the post.

[Teresa Pearce (Erith and Thamesmead) (Lab)]

T3. Staff at My Civil Service Pension are concerned that plans to turn the organisation into a mutual are a step towards privatisation. The Minister said in a meeting with union representatives in March that he would not act without the broad consent of the work force. Will he tell us how he has consulted those staff and whether he yet has that consent?

[Mr Maude]

We are moving down the path of freeing up My Civil Service Pension so that it can administer in the most efficient way civil service pensions to the 1.5 million members who are dependent on them. We are exploring different ways in which that might be configured, but crucially, employees will have a meaningful stake in that entity going forward.

[Julian Smith (Skipton and Ripon) (Con)]

T2. Fifty business leaders have got together to offer free mentoring advice to small and new business start-ups in my constituency. Will the big society Minister meet me to see how we can roll out that initiative beyond north Yorkshire?

--- Later in debate ---

[John Mann (Bassetlaw) (Lab)]

T5. Which Cabinet Office conferencing, translation and interpreting services have not been put out to tender for small businesses to win, and why not?

[Mr Maude]

I have not the slightest idea, but I shall find out.

[Miss Anne McIntosh (Thirsk and Malton) (Con)]

T4. When can the House expect the Public Bodies Bill? What will be in the Bill, and can we revert to the normal practice, whereby such controversial Bills begin in this House and not in the other place?

--- Later in debate ---

[John Woodcock (Barrow and Furness) (Lab /Co-op)]

T10. Why is the public sector mutual fund late in going out to tender, and when will it be ready to accept bids?

[Mr Maude]

We will announce details in due course. It would have been easy to go ahead and just flash money around, but there is not much money thanks to the legacy of the Government whom the hon. Gentleman supported. We need to ensure that the money is husbanded and spent wisely, for example by providing advice for groups of public sector workers, of whom there are very many who want to form mutuals, and by ensuring that the advice is made available to as many as possible.

[Sir Alan Beith (Berwick-upon-Tweed) (LD)]

In his discussions about public sector contracts for small business, will my right hon. Friend talk to the Ministry of Defence about its habit of bundling together contracts for multiple services, which means that an expert calibration firm in my constituency cannot offer the specialised service unless it also offers paperclips and toilet rolls?

[Mr Maude]

My right hon. Friend makes a good point, and I will take it up. It is exactly how contracts are bundled up and procurements are undertaken that has squeezed out so many really effective small businesses from the Government market. That is exactly what we now want to change.

The Prime Minister was asked—

Members' and Peers' Correspondence

Lord Maude of Horsham Excerpts

Monday 28th March 2011 Written Statements

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

I am today publishing a report on Departments’ and agencies’ performance on handling Members’ and peers’ correspondence during the calendar year 2010. Details are set out in the attached table. Correspondence statistics for 2009 can be found on 16 March 2010, Official Report, 47-50WS.

Departmental figures are based on substantive replies unless otherwise indicated.

The footnotes to the table provide general background information on how the figures have been compiled.

Election and Referendum Guidance

Lord Maude of Horsham Excerpts

Thursday 24th March 2011 Written Statements

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

Guidance has today been issued to civil servants in UK Departments on the principles which they should observe in relation to the conduct of Government business in the run up to the forthcoming elections to the Northern Ireland Assembly, the Scottish Parliament and the National Assembly for Wales, to local authorities in England and Northern Ireland, and the voting systems referendum.

The guidance sets out the principles on the need to maintain the political impartiality of the civil service, and the need to ensure that public resources are not used for party political purposes, and sets out the sensitive periods when the guidance comes into force.

Copies of the guidance have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses and on the Cabinet Office website at

http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/resource-library/election-guidance.

Public Bodies Reform Programme

Lord Maude of Horsham Excerpts

Wednesday 16th March 2011 Written Statements

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

The coalition Government are committed to reducing the number and cost of quangos and increasing accountability by transferring the responsibility for key decisions of public policy back to Ministers.

On 14 October 2010, I placed in the Libraries of both Houses a list of proposed reforms to take forward this commitment. The Public Bodies Bill has since been introduced to provide the legislative basis for reform. I have also placed in the Libraries an updated list of proposed reforms this morning.

Committees of both Houses have shown significant interest in the Government’s review. This statement accompanies our response to a report of the Public Administration Select Committee, “Smaller Government: Shrinking the Quango State”.

The Government welcome this opportunity to restate the aims and intentions of our reform programme for public bodies, and to correct some misunderstandings and inaccuracies apparent in that report.

With these reforms, we will increase accountability by putting into practice our clear presumption that functions carried out by the state should be accountable through democratically elected structures. We will ensure clear chains of democratic accountability through to Ministers, by transferring functions into a Department, or by creating a new executive agency. We will also increase accountability to local decision makers and will also support our big society, transferring functions from public bodies to local government, voluntary or charitable bodies or social enterprises.

A secondary, but important, purpose is to remove duplication and waste, save taxpayers’ money and to streamline a chaotic and confusing public bodies landscape.

PASC has criticised the Government for being unable to identify exact cost savings. We were always clear that savings would flow from this programme of rationalisation and reform. I can now announce that we estimate that cumulative administrative savings of £2.6 billion will flow from public bodies over the spending review period. When reductions in programme and capital spend are taken into account, we estimate that total spending through public bodies will be reduced by at least £11 billion per year by 2014-15, a cumulative amount of £30 billion over the spending review period. This does not include spending simply transferred elsewhere.

At the time of the October announcement, I indicated a number of reviews were still in progress, with bodies listed as “under consideration”. I publish with this statement an updated list of reform proposals, giving more certainty to the staff in those public bodies as to how the Government’s review programme will affect them.

Implementation is being taken forward by Departments, with the Cabinet Office operating as a source of support and guidance. I publish two key Cabinet Office documents today: a checklist of issues Departments need to consider in implementing public bodies reform; and a set of eight key requirements that must be followed in all cases (these requirements are annexed to the Government’s response to PASC).

The Government’s commitment to reform of public bodies does not end with the implementation of this first stage of reform proposals. I also publish today a summary of a new robust system of triennial reviews and underline our determination to take decisive action where future reviews highlight inefficiency and waste. The Government intend that the powers in the Public Bodies Bill will provide a proportionate mechanism to implement the conclusions of subsequent reviews.

Reducing the number and cost of public bodies is a coalition priority. It is important that we make progress and I make no excuse for the speed at which we have sought to realise our commitment. There is momentum and cross-party support for a radical programme of reform. We have already brought forward proposals on an unprecedented scale and with the Public Bodies Bill and our implementation plans we take those proposals to fruition. With our future process of review and reform, we will continue to ensure accountability in public life and identify and drive out inefficiency, duplication and waste.

Oral Answers to Questions

Lord Maude of Horsham Excerpts

Wednesday 2nd March 2011 Commons Chamber

[Tom Blenkinsop (Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland) (Lab)]

2. What steps he plans to take to ensure that the big society bank has a social mission as part of its statutory remit.

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

In our social investment strategy, announced on 14 February, we set out that the big society bank will be an independent institution with a locked-in social mission and initial capital provided by the banks. Sir Ronald Cohen and Nick O’Donohoe are working with us and the banks to put forward a proposal on how best and most speedily to achieve that.

[Tom Blenkinsop]

As how the big society bank will be set up and the terms on which it will receive capital from UK banks are still unclear, will the Minister explain how he will guarantee the bank’s social mission and ensure that it does not become like other mainstream lenders?

[Mr Maude]

As I said, the social remit will be absolutely built into its mission; it is a crucial part of it, so it will be locked in. I have to say that criticism comes poorly from Labour Members who have talked about creating a social investment bank for many years. Frankly, on taking office last May, I expected to find well-prepared plans, but when I opened the file, I found it pretty much empty.

[Simon Hughes (Bermondsey and Old Southwark) (LD)]

The Minister will know that I welcome the bank. What priorities will it have to fund projects associated with, and supporting, young people?

[Mr Maude]

That will be one of the bank’s priorities. The legislation allowing the money from dormant bank and building society accounts to be put into a social investment bank provides a priority for youth projects. As I say, this will be a serious priority. The bank will be able to provide wholesale funds into the already growing social investment market, for which there is a huge demand. We want to see much more money—including, over time, mainstream finance from the mainstream banks—being made available for this market.

[Tessa Jowell (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)]

We welcome the progress the Government have made in setting up the big society bank, and we note that it will be launched with £300 million-worth of capital at the end of this year. However, community projects also rely on revenue funding to support capital investment and according to estimates from the Association of Chief Executives of Voluntary Organisations, the total loss of revenue faced by civil society organisations will be at least £1.14 billion in the next financial year, rising to £3.1 billion a year by 2014-15. Does the Minister accept these figures and, if not, will he undertake to provide the Government’s own estimates of the revenue losses faced by community organisations over that period?

[Mr Maude]

The social investment bank planned by the last Government would have received a meagre £75 million of investment at best, and probably a great deal less than that.

I do not know whether the right hon. Lady noted what my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government told the conference of the National Council for Voluntary Organisations yesterday. He said that the Government had “reasonable expectations” that local authorities would not impose greater cuts in their funding for community, social and voluntary organisations than they imposed on their in-house services, and that if authorities did not follow those “reasonable expectations”, he would contemplate making them statutory.

The fact is that we face the biggest budget deficit in the developed world. As a result of the legacy of the Government of whom the right hon. Lady was a prominent member, we are spending £4 for every £3 in revenue, and we cannot carry on like that. The necessity—and it is a necessity—to eradicate the structural deficit is something for which the right hon. Lady should bear her full share of responsibility.

[John Pugh (Southport) (LD)]

3. What assessment his Department has made of the potential efficiency savings from the use of teleconferencing.

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

Teleconferencing and video conferencing are a key part of our strategy to minimise travel in the civil service. Officials have been encouraged, indeed instructed, to use alternatives. Telephone calls can be quite helpful in that regard, when possible. So far, Departments have saved £50 million in the current financial year by avoiding travel, but by the better buying of travel services we have saved an additional £50 million. We are also reducing the cost of teleconferencing itself. We have opened up fresh discussions with major suppliers, and as a result of the Crown renegotiations that I have been overseeing, one of our suppliers has already offered a significant reduction in its audio conferencing tariffs.

[John Pugh]

I thank the Minister for that full answer, but will he make it a little fuller by telling me which Departments make good use of teleconferences and which do not, and why?

[Mr Maude]

That is a very good question, to which I do not have an immediate answer. I am prompted by the hon. Gentleman’s interest to look into the matter, and I will get back to him with some answers.

[Mr Tom Watson (West Bromwich East) (Lab)]

Teleconferencing provides a key opportunity for digital policy. The head of that policy in the Minister’s Department was appointed without a fair and open competition, as a former party staffer. That was one of 30 appointments revealed by freedom of information releases this week. Can the Minister tell me who those 30 people are and what they do?

[Mr Maude]

Of course I understand why the hon. Gentleman is so outraged by the idea of people with party affiliations fulfilling a public service vocation, because of course none of that ever happened under his party’s Government—a Government who, with the hon. Gentleman as one of the principal operators, distinguished themselves by their approach to cronyism.

I can tell the hon. Gentleman that anyone who has been appointed to a civil service role has passed all the appropriate tests, which, as he will know from his experience as a Minister in my Department, are extremely rigorous.

[Peter Aldous (Waveney) (Con)]

4. What progress his Department has made in establishing a big society bank.

[Miss Anne McIntosh (Thirsk and Malton) (Con)]

5. What recent representations he has received on the big society bank; and if he will make a statement.

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

Sir Ronald Cohen and Nick O’Donohoe are working with us and with the banks to develop a proposal for the big society bank. As I have said, it will initially be capitalised by an investment from the mainstream banks. We are currently seeking to secure state aid approvals from the European Commission so that money from dormant bank and building society accounts can be directed towards the big society bank. Nothing along those lines had been done when the Government took office. In the meantime, we are working with the Big Lottery Fund to ensure that interim arrangements are in place by April, so that we can make early investments as soon as the first round of dormant bank account money becomes available in the summer.

[Peter Aldous]

Youth clubs such as the Metro, Boston Lodge and Colville House play an important role in my constituency. What guidance and financial assistance will be given to them, and to those operating new voluntary sector schemes whose aim is to take over the running of other local services such as crossing patrols and libraries, and when will that guidance and assistance be available?

[Mr Maude]

As my hon. Friend will know, a key part of our approach to public service reform will be encouraging voluntary and social enterprises to bid for the delivery of public services. They are being given a massive opportunity to develop different revenue streams and deliver public services in a responsive and agile way. The big society bank will deliver extra wholesale funding to the social investment market for start-up and development capital for such organisations. In the meantime, for some organisations the transition fund will provide bridging finance until those revenue streams become available.

[Miss McIntosh]

My question was about representations received, because there is a lot of interest in the big society bank in Thirsk, Malton and Filey, but there is also concern that if match funding is required, it will trigger the 2.5% referendum call on local government spending under the Localism Bill. Will this issue be addressed?

[Mr Maude]

I will look into that. The big society bank will provide private investment to bulk up the important social investment market. We have had numerous representations on this matter, most of them saying, “Please get on with it because we were very disappointed about waiting for so long for the last Government to do anything at all.”

[Chris Ruane (Vale of Clwyd) (Lab)]

Will the big society bank give grants as well as loans, and will the loans be set at commercial or preferential rates?

[Mr Maude]

The big society bank will not make grants. It is a bank, so it will make loans and provide investment capital for this important and growing sector. One of the problems in the social investment market has been that Futurebuilders was able to give both grants and loans, which was very distorting for the large and growing number of intermediaries in that market. The bank should be an investment organisation, not a giver of grants.

[Mark Durkan (Foyle) (SDLP)]

What steps have been taken to ensure that the big society bank will be relevant and accessible in all regions? Also, is it being impressed upon the banks that the coming arrival of the big society bank will not obviate their duty to show consideration and support for the third sector in the current challenging funding environment?

[Mr Maude]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for that relevant question. The introduction of the big society bank certainly does not obviate the broader need to support voluntary and social enterprises, in the interests of local residents. The bank’s remit will be UK-wide. The money put in by the banks will be for UK purposes, but the money coming into the big society bank in due course from dormant bank accounts will be for England only, unless the devolved Administrations decide to put their share of that money into the big society bank, which I hope they will be encouraged to do.

[Rosie Cooper (West Lancashire) (Lab)]

6. What estimate he has made of the likely change in the number of jobs in the voluntary sector in the next three years.

--- Later in debate ---

[Anas Sarwar (Glasgow Central) (Lab)]

8. What assessment he has made of the progress of the work of the big society ministerial group.

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

The informal ministerial group on the big society and decentralisation supports progress across government on cross-cutting issues, such as the role of the voluntary community and social enterprise sector in public service delivery, the progress made in vanguard areas and the compact between the voluntary sector and the state.

[Mr Speaker]

Order. The House must come to order. This is very unfair on the Minister. He is offering the House an informative answer and it must be heard.

[Anas Sarwar]

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I also thank the Minister for his answer. Given that opinion polls show that the majority of the British people have not even heard of the big society and that the majority of those who have think it is just a cover-up for the cuts, does the Minister believe that the work of the ministerial group has been a resounding success? Does he not believe that Ministers’ time would be better spent doing credible work in their own Departments?

[Mr Maude]

I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman does not think that building a bigger, stronger and more cohesive society is worth while, particularly given that the role of the state is having to retrench severely as a result of the financial incontinence of the previous Government of the party that he supports. I am sorry to have to remind him that when the coalition Government took office his Government were spending £4 for every £3 in revenue and had the biggest budget deficit in the developed world. So less money is available and building a bigger, stronger society, which I would have thought he would support, is a very worthwhile exercise for not only the whole Government, but the whole of Parliament.

[Robert Halfon (Harlow) (Con)]

Will the ministerial group examine the role of the big society bank to see whether it can be run on national credit union lines, so that it can link up with local credit unions and ensure that the money cascades down to community groups at the grass-roots level?

[Mr Maude]

The social investment market has been growing in recent years but it needs additional wholesale funds, both from the big society bank and from freeing up the guidelines on investment by trustees of big philanthropic foundations. That will grow the social investment market significantly, and the credit union movement, which is extraordinarily important and has a very important social mission, can be an important partner in that progress.

[Alison McGovern (Wirral South) (Lab)]

Will the Minister or the “Secretary of State for the big society” have a quiet word with Wirral borough council, which has closed important care and respite homes too quickly in order to let the non-government sector fill the gap? That is giving the big society a bad name.

[Mr Maude]

I refer the hon. Lady to the remarks made by the Communities Secretary yesterday. We do believe in localism; we believe in local authorities being accountable, not to Whitehall, but to their own local residents. Each local authority has to justify its decisions but, as my right hon. Friend said yesterday, we have expectations that local authorities will not impose greater cuts on their funding for voluntary organisations than they do on their own costs. We would expect them to have regard to that.

[Mr Speaker]

Order. The House must come to order. We want to hear Joseph Johnson.

[Joseph Johnson (Orpington) (Con)]

10. What steps he is taking to reduce the risk of fraud in public sector procurement.

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

The National Fraud Authority estimates that £21 billion is lost to fraud in the public sector each year, on top of which there is a so far unquantified loss from error and from uncollected debt. It is estimated that £2.4 billion of that £21 billion is lost to procurement fraud, and that is unacceptable. The Prime Minister has asked me to chair a counter-fraud taskforce comprising members from government and private sector experts to tackle the issue. We are overseeing a series of pilots, including one on procurement, to drive forward ways to tackle public sector fraud, and we will report our findings in due course.

[Joseph Johnson]

I thank the Minister for that answer. That figure of £21 billion is truly shocking. Will the Minister update the House on progress towards developing a more robust methodology for quantifying how much taxpayers’ money is being wasted in this way?

[Mr Maude]

It is actually difficult to know exactly how much is being lost. The numbers are increasing each year, but that is largely because there is a better handle on the data. The quality of much Government data is lamentably poor and it is particularly difficult to obtain accurate figures on some procurement fraud, such as collusion or bid rigging. However, in one of the taskforce pilots, the Department for Transport is using data analytics to detect overpayments from the Department’s accounts payable systems. A similar exercise undertaken by the Home Office detected and recovered no less than £4 million in overpayments as a result of fraud or error.

[Mr Speaker]

I am obliged to the Minister.

Social Investment Strategy

Lord Maude of Horsham Excerpts

Monday 14th February 2011 Written Statements

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

My hon. Friend the Minister responsible for civil society, the Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office, the hon. Member for Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner (Mr Hurd) and I are today publishing a strategy for social investment, “Growing the Social Investment Market”, which gives more detail on the role of the big society bank, alongside other measures to build the market. I am placing copies in the Libraries of both Houses and making it available on the Cabinet Office website.

Social entrepreneurs, and the social ventures they lead, bring innovative solutions to some of our most intractable social problems, by combining commitment to a clear social mission with financially sustainable business models. They are crucial to building a bigger, stronger society, as well as contributing to economic growth and employment. However, social entrepreneurs are often held back by a lack of access to investment finance, which means they find it difficult to get started, to expand their ventures and to achieve their full potential. This is particularly the case now that public spending is constrained and many organisations that may have previously relied on some grant funding to survive are having to cope with the difficult transition to a new financing landscape.

The Government therefore want to accelerate the development of the emerging social investment market, to increase the supply of capital available to social ventures. Our vision is for a market in which investors—from individual citizens to large institutions and charitable trusts and foundations—can choose to “invest for good” by putting their money into organisations that create positive social impact and a financial return. In the long term we want this to become the norm: a third pillar of funding alongside traditional giving and public service income.

The big society bank will play a crucial part in catalysing the development of this market, and some of its functions will be in place in April 2011. And we will now work with leading social investment experts to develop a proposal for the establishment of the big society bank as an independent private sector organisation, with its social mission “locked-in”. The bank will act as a wholesaler to build the market and leverage in new finance. It will operate in a transparent way, publishing annual accounts including details of the financial and social impact of its investments, and it will be financially self-sufficient—able, in time, to cover its operating costs and make investments in line with its core mission. The bank will also act as a champion for the social investment market, offering advice and assistance, and acting as a vital portal to connect social ventures with sources of investment.

Alongside establishing the big society bank, action being taken by Government—to open up public services to a wider range of providers; to empower communities to purchase and run local assets; to review the effectiveness of the current fiscal, regulatory and legal framework for social investment; and to provide financial and other support for social ventures to build their business capability—will help create the right conditions for the market to thrive and grow.

Government and the big society bank cannot achieve this alone. So the strategy also calls on others to play their part. Social ventures and other civil society organisations will need to be willing to explore new forms of financing, and prove that they have financially sustainable business models. Existing specialist intermediaries will have a critical role in developing their product ranges and support and will need to compete with new intermediaries entering the market. Charitable trusts and foundations are in a good position to free up a portion of their investment and endowment assets, which account for nearly £95 billion, for social investment. We look to mainstream financial institutions to dedicate resources to create new products, to build expertise and to leverage their distribution networks. And ultimately, we want individual citizens to start to see social investment as a core savings proposition.

Taken together this framework for action and the establishment of the big society bank will enable the great work being carried out by the innovative, committed people and organisations across the UK to have a major impact in building a better, stronger society.

Departmental Expenditure Limit (2010-11)

Lord Maude of Horsham Excerpts

Monday 14th February 2011 Written Statements

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

Subject to parliamentary approval of the spring supplementary estimate 2010-11, the Cabinet Office total departmental expenditure limit (DEL) will be increased by £17,630,000 from £559,087,000 to £576,717,000.

The impact on resources and capital is set out in the following table:

UK Statistics Authority: Departmental Expenditure Limit (2010-11)

Lord Maude of Horsham Excerpts

Monday 14th February 2011 Written Statements

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

Subject to parliamentary approval of any necessary supplementary estimate, the UK Statistics Authority’s total departmental expenditure limit (DEL) will be increased by £700,000 from £319,533,000 to £320,233,000, and the programme budget will be increased by £700,000¹.

Within the DEL change, the impact on resources and capital is as set out in the following table:

Public Bodies

Lord Maude of Horsham Excerpts

Wednesday 2nd February 2011 Ministerial Corrections

[Mr Bradshaw]

While “The King’s Speech” is rightly being feted all around the world, the right hon. Gentleman’s Government are abolishing the organisations here in Britain that helped to make that film happen, as part of what even the Conservative-dominated Public Administration Committee has described as a “botched” bonfire of the quangos. Given that he cannot even say how much, if anything, this is going to cost, is it not typical of what the Government are doing in so many areas—ill considered, ill thought through, rushed and damaging?

[Mr Maude]

Just to be clear, the purpose of these reforms is to increase accountability. The Government will not simply create incontinently new independent bodies in order to avoid Ministers having to make and defend uncomfortable decisions. Ministers should be prepared to make those decisions and defend them themselves—that is what democratic accountability is about, and that is the primary aim. However, we will save money. The changes to the public body landscape planned and announced by the previous Government, of whom the right hon. Gentleman was such a distinguished ornament, were much more minor than the changes that we are undertaking. That Government claimed that those changes would save £500 million a year; our changes are much more radical and will save a great deal more.

[Official Report, 19 January 2011, Vol. 521, c. 827.]

Letter of correction from Mr Maude:

An error has been identified in the oral answer given on 19 January 2011.

The correct answer should have been:

[Mr Maude]

Just to be clear, the purpose of these reforms is to increase accountability. The Government will not simply create incontinently new independent bodies in order to avoid Ministers having to make and defend uncomfortable decisions. Ministers should be prepared to make those decisions and defend them themselves—that is what democratic accountability is about, and that is the primary aim. However, we will save money. The changes to the public body landscape planned and announced by the previous Government, of whom the right hon. Gentleman was such a distinguished ornament, were much more minor than the changes that we are undertaking. That Government claimed that those changes would save £500 million over three years; our changes are much more radical and will save a great deal more.

Oral Answers to Questions

Lord Maude of Horsham Excerpts

Wednesday 19th January 2011 Commons Chamber

[Graham Jones (Hyndburn) (Lab)]

1. What recent progress the big society ministerial group has made in its work.

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

The Government have an ambitious agenda for the big society. We want to decentralise power and put it in the hands of local communities. We want to open up public services to small and medium-sized enterprises, voluntary organisations and mutuals, and support the growth of civil society organisations.

The ministerial group, which is co-chaired by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and myself, is helping to drive forward this agenda and has already contributed to progressing our vanguard areas, the renewed compact, the right to provide for mutuals, and our giving Green Paper.

[Graham Jones]

Hyndburn citizens advice bureau has seen a 50% cut in its funding and four job losses, and I think that it is a similar tale at Rossendale citizens advice bureau. I am waiting for its job losses, but it is expecting a 50% cut. The Minister should be mindful that his Government might leave the legacy of a little society. What warm words would he have for Rossendale and Hyndburn citizens advice bureaux?

[Mr Maude]

We urgently hope that local authorities, as they deal with the financial consequences of the budget deficit that the Labour Government left behind—when the Government were spending £4 for every £3 in revenue, having to borrow £1 out of every £4—will ensure that a disproportionate burden of those reductions does not fall on the voluntary sector. That is a matter he should take up with the local council.

[Mr Oliver Heald (North East Hertfordshire) (Con)]

Have Ministers considered how to avoid duplication in the work of existing volunteer bureaux, often supported by local councils, and the new community organisers who are being recruited by the Government?

[Mr Maude]

I would expect community organisers to work closely with those organisations and to ensure that there is no duplication of effort. These community organisers, many of whom already exist and do great work in communities, will not carry any kind of bureaucracy or organisational structure with them. Their job is to put people together, give support to organisations and make connections where they are not already being made.

[Mr Liam Byrne (Birmingham, Hodge Hill) (Lab)]

This morning, figures showed that youth unemployment has rocketed up, and this afternoon we expect the Government to confirm that they will cancel the education maintenance allowance. Without work and without study, surely we need our youth charities more than ever before, yet the National Council for Voluntary Youth Services says that three quarters are now cutting projects. Just what have the Government got against young people, and why is there such a narrow place for young people in the Government’s vision of the big society?

[Mr Maude]

I am pretty reluctant to take lectures on this from the right hon. Gentleman, because he will know, as a prominent member of the last Government, that when his Government left office there were many more young people out of work than when they took office.

[Mr Sam Gyimah (East Surrey) (Con)]

2. What steps he is taking to prevent fraudulent charity collections.

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

Stealing from charities is a repulsive crime, but a growing problem, with suspected links to organised crime. It is estimated that up to £50 million a year is lost to bogus collections, which deprive charities of vital income and damage public trust and confidence in them. We are determined to take robust action against people who carry out such crimes.

Last week the Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner (Mr Hurd), who has responsibility for civil society, and apologises for not being able to be here today, chaired a very positive meeting with charities, their collection partners, and the licensing and enforcement agencies to consider ways to tackle the issue. We want to review the licensing legislation and put much greater emphasis on the co-ordination of enforcement action to combat these criminals.

[Mr Gyimah]

I thank the Minister for his answer. What assurances can he give the House that in our efforts to clamp down on fraudulent collectors we do not create an overly burdensome system that makes it harder for volunteers, on whom many of the charities in my constituency and across the country rely, to give up their time?

[Mr Maude]

My hon. Friend raises an important point. The Charities Act 2006 is due to be reviewed, in the ordinary course of events, later this year, which we will do. It seems to us that the current laws are outdated; they date from many years ago, from a different world. They are not particularly effective at preventing fraudulent collections, yet they can already be very burdensome on legitimate charities. We want to reverse that to make the law easier for legitimate charities but more effective in controlling fraudulent collections.

[Mr Nigel Dodds (Belfast North) (DUP)]

In taking that important matter forward, what consultation does the Minister propose to have with the devolved Administrations so that best practice might be adopted in tackling that serious issue?

[Mr Maude]

I am confident that the Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner, who has responsibility for civil society and is taking the initiative forward, will want to collaborate closely with the devolved Administrations in just the way that the right hon. Gentleman suggests.

[Cathy Jamieson (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (Lab/Co-op)]

3. What proportion of the budget of the national citizen service he expects to be spent in the 50% least disadvantaged areas of the country.

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

Analysis by Cabinet Office officials shows that NCS pilots are taking place in more than 190 locations across England and that places are evenly distributed among the most and the least deprived areas of England. Just under half of the places are in the 50% least deprived areas and just over half are located in the 50% most deprived areas. The key criterion for selecting pilot providers was the quality of proposals, including their plans to attract a wide cross-section of 16-year-olds and to support disadvantaged young people to take part. The bidders themselves nominated areas where they wanted to deliver the 2011 pilots as part of the competitive commissioning that was completed in November.

[Cathy Jamieson]

I am sure that the Minister will be aware of the research published by the university of Strathclyde, since it was the Conservative party that commissioned it, which highlights the danger that the proposed NCS would in fact benefit more middle-class and well-off young people, rather than those in disadvantaged areas. What account is he taking of that research and how is he changing the programmes to deal with it?

[Mr Maude]

The essence of that programme is that it is designed to bring together young people from a genuine mix of backgrounds. It is not designed particularly to help disadvantaged young people. It will benefit all young people and help to create a much more cohesive society by bringing together people from all backgrounds at an important and formative stage in their lives, during the rites of passage to adulthood. The social mix is an absolutely crucial ingredient of the programme.

[Jon Trickett (Hemsworth) (Lab)]

Is it not true that the national citizen service requires that the voluntary sector has adequate capacity to deliver additional volunteering, which is contrary to the unequivocal statement made at the last Cabinet Office questions by the Minister of State, Cabinet Office, the right hon. Member for West Dorset (Mr Letwin), that the sector would expand? Will the Minister now admit that that statement was untrue. The latest figures for the voluntary sector show a decline of 13,000 jobs in a single quarter. Does he agree that the House was misled and that the statement—

[Jon Trickett]

Thank you, Mr Speaker. The House was inadvertently misled, even though the facts show what actually happened. Finally, would the Minister say that the job losses are a clear disaster for his big society aspirations?

[Mr Maude]

The hon. Gentleman asked in particular about the capacity of the voluntary sector in relation to the national citizen service. I can tell him that the number of interested providers massively outweighed the number of places that we were able to fund. There is huge interest in the voluntary sector in taking part in the programme. The point that my right hon. Friend the Minister was making was that our approach to public service reform will open up areas of public service delivery to the voluntary and charitable sector and to social enterprise in a way that has not been done before, for all the talk from the previous Government, and the opportunities going forward will be considerable. My right hon. Friend made the point, as we all have, that there will be a tough time immediately, and we have some steps in place to try to help over that period, but the opportunities down the track are considerable.

[Damian Collins (Folkestone and Hythe) (Con)]

4. What progress his Department’s behavioural insight team has made in its work.

--- Later in debate ---

[Gordon Banks (Ochil and South Perthshire) (Lab)]

7. What assessment he has made of the effect on public expenditure of his proposals for non-departmental public bodies.

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

The proposals for reform that I set out in the House last October are the most major change to the public bodies landscape that any Government have made in a generation. They will make a significant contribution to reducing the baseline of Government spending as part of the coalition Government’s deficit reduction plan.

[Mr Bradshaw]

While “The King’s Speech” is rightly being feted all around the world, the right hon. Gentleman’s Government are abolishing the organisations here in Britain that helped to make that film happen, as part of what even the Conservative-dominated Public Administration Committee has described as a “botched” bonfire of the quangos. Given that he cannot even say how much, if anything, this is going to cost, is it not typical of what the Government are doing in so many areas—ill considered, ill thought through, rushed and damaging?

[Mr Maude]

Just to be clear, the purpose of these reforms is to increase accountability. The Government will not simply create incontinently new independent bodies in order to avoid Ministers having to make and defend uncomfortable decisions. Ministers should be prepared to make those decisions and defend them themselves—that is what democratic accountability is about, and that is the primary aim. However, we will save money. The changes to the public body landscape planned and announced by the previous Government, of whom the right hon. Gentleman was such a distinguished ornament, were much more minor than the changes that we are undertaking. That Government claimed that those changes would save £500 million a year; our changes are much more radical and will save a great deal more.[Official Report, 2 February 2011, Vol. 522, c. 10MC.]

[Gordon Banks]

I will tell the Minister what the real effects of his proposals are going to be, according to the Public Accounts Committee. There will be no savings. In my constituency, between his actions on Consumer Focus and the Scottish National party’s actions on Waterwatch Scotland, we have a shambles of job losses, reduced protection and no gains. Is the Minister going to be a man, step up to the plate and do the right thing, or continually try to defy gravity?

[Mr Maude]

It would be quite interesting to know which of our plans for reforming quangos the hon. Gentleman disagrees with. His own party had in its manifesto a commitment to cut the number of quangos. It had such plans when it was in government, but sadly, as with so much else, it did not give effect to them. We will save money, but much more importantly, we will increase accountability, which is what this is really all about.

[Charlie Elphicke (Dover) (Con)]

Public expenditure by quangos includes expenditure on lobbying, which is an abuse of public money. Will Ministers ban quango lobbying?

[Mr Maude]

The code for public bodies already purports to make it impossible for quangos to employ lobbyists from outside in order to lobby the Government. However, that code has not been effective, and considerable amounts of taxpayers’ money have been spent by public bodies, frequently in order to lobby the Government for them to spend more taxpayers’ money. We will make absolutely certain that the code is watertight and that that becomes impossible.

[Mr Mark Williams (Ceredigion) (LD)]

One of the list of quangos to be dealt with in the Public Bodies Bill is S4C. There is genuine anxiety in Wales about the future of S4C. Although there is a debate to be had about funding, can the Minister at least assure the House of S4C’s continued existence?

[Mr Maude]

There is no question mark at all over the continued existence of S4C, which plays a valuable part in the life of the Principality. I will convey my hon. Friend’s concerns to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales. However, S4C appears in the Public Bodies Bill in the schedule to do with funding arrangements, and that has nothing to do with its continued existence. [Interruption.]

[Mr Speaker]

Order. There are far too many private conversations taking place in the Chamber, and far too much noise.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General (Mr Francis Maude)]

One of the main aims of the national citizen service is to create a more cohesive society by mixing participants from different social backgrounds. To ensure that that happens, organisations bidding to deliver national citizen service pilots this summer were scrutinised on their plans for supporting the broadest possible range of young people to participate. A number of the organisations that were successful in bidding to run the pilots have a strong track record in working with young people from disadvantaged backgrounds and we will closely monitor the success of the pilots in working with those young people.

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am grateful to the Minister for that answer. Given that education maintenance allowance is being scrapped and that the Connexions service in my constituency faces huge cuts, how can disadvantaged young people in Houghton and Sunderland South be confident that they will benefit from the national citizen service?

[Mr Maude]

The hon. Lady will be glad to know that a number of NCS pilots are taking place in and around her constituency. The Prince’s Trust is running a pilot in collaboration with local partners, including Sunderland football club, and Catch22 is running pilots in Sunderland and Washington. I hope that she will engage directly with those organisations to ensure that the widest possible range of participants is attracted to those pilots.

[Lindsay Roy (Glenrothes) (Lab)]

12. What assessment he has made of the effects on the big society initiative of the outcomes of the comprehensive spending review; and if he will make a statement.