| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Public Consultation
5. Mr. Paul Clark (Gillingham): What mechanisms are available for consulting the public about specific Government initiatives. [75360]
6. Dr. Phyllis Starkey (Milton Keynes, South-West):
If he will make a statement on the ways in which the Government consult the public about new initiatives. [75361]
The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office (Mr. Peter Kilfoyle):
The Government use many mechanisms, including written consultation exercises, citizens panels and qualitative research, to consult the public about specific initiatives.
Mr. Clark:
I thank my hon. Friend for that response. I have always believed that good government requires good listening skills. My constituents appreciate the opportunities to discuss and be consulted on Government initiatives. Will my hon. Friend take the opportunity to explain what the Government will do with the results of the consultation exercise and how that feeds into policy deliberations? Does he agree that the fact that the Government listen explains why they are popular and why the Tories are in opposition?
Mr. Kilfoyle:
On the second part of my hon. Friend's question, he is self-evidently speaking good sense. As for the first part, we shall place the results of the research in the public domain--unlike the practice of the previous Government. The aim of gathering the information is to inform debate objectively so that we have evidence-based policy making.
Dr. Starkey:
I thank my hon. Friend for outlining the methods that he is using to consult the public. Will he consider the model of consensus conferences, which have been used in Denmark and the Netherlands to consult the public on the ethical and social aspects of science policy? Is he aware that consensus conferences have been run in this country--in 1994, on plant biotechnology--and produced some sensible recommendations, which, unfortunately, were not taken up by the previous Government?
Mr. Kilfoyle:
Given the overwhelming consensus behind the Government's initiatives, I can do no more than agree with my hon. Friend.
Mr. Christopher Gill (Ludlow):
By this time last year, the Government had set up 179 review bodies--after only nine months of government. After 18 months of
Mr. Kilfoyle:
The £19 billion on education, the £21 billion on the health service and the other measures revealed by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor in his Budget statement answer the hon. Gentleman's question effectively.
Mr. Nigel Evans (Ribble Valley):
How many millions of pounds are the Government spending on focus groups and people's panels? Does the Minister agree that the people would far prefer to see that money being spent on services for the people, rather than on eliciting information to try to help the Government win the next election?
Mr. Kilfoyle:
It is a mere drop in the ocean, given the £330 billion that the Government spend overall. It is well worth spending that money. [Hon. Members: "Answer the question."] "Refer to previous parliamentary answers" is my advice to Conservative Members. Informed policy making will be in marked contradistinction to what happened during 18 years of misrule by the Conservative party.
7. Jacqui Smith (Redditch):
What proposals he has for future use of the people's panel. [75363]
The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office (Mr. Peter Kilfoyle):
My Department plans to use the people's panel to carry out two further waves of quantitative research this year. The panel is also used by other Departments for various quantitative and qualitative research.
Jacqui Smith:
May I suggest that my hon. Friend ask the people's panel to consider the Government's Budget priorities? In particular, will he ask whether the panel would rather see the doubling of support for children, or the freezing of child benefit--[Hon. Members: "Hear, hear."]--whether the panel would rather see £100 support for fuel payments for all pensioner households, or an increase on VAT on fuel--[Hon. Members: "Hear, hear."]--and whether the panel believes that £40 billion extra spending on schools and hospitals is important, or reckless spending, as the Opposition believe?
Mr. Kilfoyle:
Although I admire the motivation behind my hon. Friend's question, the answer comes via the popular acclamation for the points that she raised.
Sir Patrick Cormack (South Staffordshire):
After that cringingly nauseating question, may I ask whether the people's panel is the same as the citizens' panel, which sounds like an instrument of the French revolution? How much does it cost, how is it recruited and what are its three greatest achievements to date?
Mr. Kilfoyle:
We have before us an expert in cringe. The panel, in itself, will not create something remarkable overnight, but it is a serious enterprise. Conservative Members should give credit to the fact that we are making
Sir Patrick Cormack:
And what does it cost?
Mr. Kilfoyle:
It costs, in net terms, very little to the taxpayer.
Dr. David Clark (South Shields):
My hon. Friend will recall that, when the panel was established, it was agreed that all the research would be published, as has been done. Will he consider making more of the raw research available more quickly, which would certainly be more helpful to the Opposition in deciding what their policy should be?
Mr. Kilfoyle:
We will certainly consider how to make more information available.
8. Mr. Michael Jack (Fylde):
On which regulations he has recently received representations from the Federation of Small Businesses, the Engineering Employers Federation and the Confederation of British Industry. [75364]
The Minister for the Cabinet Office (Dr. Jack Cunningham):
The better regulation task force, supported by officials in the better regulation unit of the Cabinet Office, has received representations from those organisations in the course of the reviews on long-term care, enforcement and consumer affairs.
Mr. Jack:
I am sorry that the unit has not received a representation from the Engineering Employers Federation about the difficulty that engineers are having in dealing with the implementation regulations for the wholly unnecessary and unwanted working time directive. The Minister may be aware that a 200-page document has had to be published to help them with that task, but engineers in Lancashire are still struggling with the complexities. I would be grateful for an assurance that he will dispatch an official from the better regulation task force to Lancashire straight away, to help the engineers with the task that the Government have imposed on them.
Dr. Cunningham:
The right hon. Gentleman is slightly confused: the better regulation task force is independent of the Government, and it is not for me to dispatch its staff anywhere. I can more than meet his request, however, because--although I am sure that they have had consultations with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry--if members of the Engineering Employers Federation would like to talk to me about the matter, I would be happy to see them.
9. Fiona Mactaggart (Slough):
What assessment he has made of the introduction of new IT systems across government; and if he will make a statement. [75365]
The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office (Mr. Peter Kilfoyle):
Major information technology- related initiatives have been launched across government, including in the areas of education, social security, health and crime reduction. We will publish information in the early summer about progress towards the Prime Minister's 25 per cent. target.
Fiona Mactaggart:
My concern is that my hon. Friend inherited a situation in which several very large IT projects were under way--some of them delayed under the private finance initiative--and that there is not a sufficient drawing together of the different approaches to information technology in different Departments. Is there any role that the Cabinet Office could play in getting a unified IT strategy throughout government?
Mr. Kilfoyle:
My hon. Friend should await the publication of the White Paper, in which she will find the answer to her question. She will be very pleasantly surprised by the initiatives that the Government are undertaking to tackle the problems which, as she rightly said, we inherited from the previous Government, with computer systems that were incompatible and did not speak to each other.
Mr. James Gray (North Wiltshire):
What has happened to electronic red boxes?
Mr. Kilfoyle:
Quite simply, things have moved on since then: we now have an extremely effective Government secure intranet, and we are investigating other ways of providing all members of the Government with secure electronic communications.
Mr. Tom Clarke (Coatbridge and Chryston):
In drawing up policy for access to information technology, will my hon. Friend remember the needs of disabled people, and especially those who need to use voice-activated equipment? Will he ensure that, consistent with last night's excellent presentation by the Royal National Institute for Deaf People and the Trades Union Congress, those organisations are indeed consulted?
Mr. Kilfoyle:
I can assure my right hon. Friend that the contents of the White Paper will reflect the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the Minister for the Cabinet Office for mainstreaming equal opportunities, in access to IT, as in other matters.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |