Lord Howe of Aberavon: My Lords, in the light of the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Borrie, has the Minister noticed that the expenditure, for example, of the Electoral Commission has risen from £6 million four years ago to £25 million in the latest year? Is that not a body which is considering, with less wisdom, the same questions that might have been considered by Speakers' Conferences of Parliament rather than by an independent quango? Is it not a very good example of a quango which we could do without?

Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I am slightly surprised by the noble and learned Lord's approach to this issue. Inevitably the Electoral Commission spends more now than when it was established, but the party opposite was very supportive of its development. Having read the Conservative Party's attack on public bodies at the time of the general election, conducted by John Redwood MP, I did not notice that the Electoral
 
30 Nov 2005 : Column 214
 
Commission was one of those organisations which the Conservatives would abolish, had they won the election.

Lord Maclennan of Rogart: My Lords, what progress has been made towards the achievement of the Government's target for these bodies of 50 per cent representation by women by the end of this year?

Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, during the lifetime of the Government we have made steady progress in that regard. Roughly speaking, I believe that women represent about 35 per cent of the membership of those bodies. In the past year that figure has stalled, but we continue to encourage, through the process of appointment, an increase in the number of women represented on those organisations.

Lord Morgan: My Lords, does my noble friend agree that the Government have in part dealt with the problem of quangos through democracy; that is, dealing with a vast array of quangos in Scotland and Wales through devolution—which was so misguidedly opposed by the party opposite, whose rescue is now apparently coming from Mr Cameron?

Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, the noble Lord makes an extremely valuable contribution to this debate and I entirely agree with him. Noble Lords would not expect me to do otherwise.

Lord Hurd of Westwell: My Lords, does the Minister agree that there is no magic in the process of merging quangos, which he praised, if the quangos concerned do not have a great deal in common? Does he further agree that in the case of criminal justice inspectorates, the Government seem to be merging bodies producing not a saving in cost but a small increase and considerably decreasing their effectiveness?

Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, we approach the subject of merging bodies, as the noble Lord described it, with great care. Where interests, particularly in the criminal justice field, seem to us to be easily aligned and to work together, it makes good sense to effect a merger. I am sure that the noble Lord, with his interest in ensuring good governance, would encourage that process, not just in the criminal justice field but in all other fields of public policy.

Lord Campbell-Savours: My Lords, what constraints do we have in place to ensure that quangos do not expand unnecessarily?

Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, they have to account to the Minister and to the department. They can also be brought before the Public Accounts Committee with their chief executive, and they have to properly operate within the effective constraints on public expenditure.

Lord Taverne: My Lords, do the Government agree that the powers of some quangos should perhaps be
 
30 Nov 2005 : Column 215
 
strengthened in the light of the previous subject discussed in this House? Is there not a case for having a Press Complaints Commission with proper teeth and a chairman who is truly independent of the press?

Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, it is a generous invitation offered by the noble Lord. He makes an important point, which has been part of our debates. No doubt those points will continue to be made.

Lord Skelmersdale: My Lords, the Minister sang the Government's praises at reducing the number of quangos from 1,128 to 910 over the lifetime of this Government; but he is not comparing like with like, because the 910 as of 31 March this year exclude those in the devolved bodies. Much more importantly, he may remember that on 20 May last year the then Secretary of State for Health promised a 50 per cent reduction in quangos saving half a billion pounds with a reduction of 25 per cent of posts. Which ones have been abolished?

Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, there are too many for me to list. As the noble Lord made a direct reference to health, I understand from my noble friend Lord Warner that only today the noble Lord has launched a review of, for instance, the strategic health authorities, with a commitment to seek to make more efficient use of their energies and expertise.

Gas Supply

3.1 pm

Lord Ezra asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether the United Kingdom-continental gas interconnector is being used to the full to help meet the current demands for gas in Great Britain.

Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, since the additional import capacity on the Belgium-UK gas interconnector was commissioned on 8 November, the interconnector has been importing in response to price signals. However, it has not been importing at its full capacity. It has typically been operating at between 53 and 63 per cent of capacity, with a maximum of 72 per cent on 17 November. The reason for that under-utilisation is not clear. Both the Government and Ofgem are pursuing this at the European level.

Lord Ezra: My Lords, is it not disturbing that the interconnector should not have been operating at full capacity, bearing in mind that the spot prices for gas in the UK are substantially higher than on the Continent? Does that not suggest that our link with the European gas network is insecure, and that in the future, although the interconnector capacity might increase, we could still be vulnerable at times of peak demand? Is that not a serious situation, in view of our increased requirements for imports of gas?

 
30 Nov 2005 : Column 216
 
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, it is a serious situation, which is why the Minister for Energy—my honourable friend in the other place—intends to raise this issue when he chairs the Energy Council tomorrow. It is also why the chairman of Ofgem has written to the European Commission indicating why the situation is utterly unsatisfactory. It is also why key figures in the European Commission have indicated that the imperfections in the market are not tolerable.

Lord Crickhowell: My Lords, is the noble Lord aware of the considerable concern among heavy fuel users at the lack of transparency in the present arrangements and the scope that there may be for suppliers to manage them to the disadvantage of this country? That fear is reinforced by the granting of licences for LNG terminals that exclude third-party use and which seem guaranteed to ensure that Britain pays the highest price in the market or has its supplies diverted elsewhere. Is he leaving this matter entirely to the Commission, or are the Government prepared to take action about the matters that are under their control?

Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, the methods we are pursuing at the European Commission are the appropriate channels for effective action, and we have made it absolutely clear that we expect action to be taken. The noble Lord is right that there are anxieties for the very big consumers of gas in view of the shortages. We expected the interconnector to bring more gas into the UK than has proven to be the case. The noble Lord is right that the price being offered is high enough and competitive. Therefore, there are imperfections in the market which alone explain why this gas is not available.

It is important to the Government that there has been substantial private investment in terminals for LNG because we will be dependent on additional storage facilities, and we are pleased to record the fact that several major terminals will come on stream in the very near future.

Lord O'Neill of Clackmannan: My Lords, does my noble friend agree that two inquiries previously conducted by the European Commission have been unable to discern anything other than the illiberalisation of the German grid system as the simple and obvious reason why we cannot get adequate supplies of gas through Europe from the Caspian and other areas? Is it not up to the Commission to take proper action against the German authorities, who wish to introduce neither proper liberalisation nor effective regulation of the throughput of gas through their grid system?
 
30 Nov 2005 : Column 217