Laws and sausages

­There is a quote whose origins allegedly range from Otto von Bismarck to an unknown Illinois State Senator that rings painfully true about the last year of the Public Bodies Bill: there are two things you never want to let anyone see you make – laws and sausages. Quite. The process by which Ministers have gone about reducing the number of quangos in the UK has been messy, and in many ways circumvented the norms of parliamentary process.

I don’t disagree in principle with the aims of the Bill. Indeed, in March 2010 we set out almost £500m of new savings by reducing the number of arms length bodies by 123 by 2012/13. Labour inherited 1,128 quangos in 1997 and axed almost 400 of them by the time we left office. There is certainly scope for consolidating them to reduce overheads but retain functions.

But the way in which this process has proceeded has been characterised by the same hasty, ill-thought-through approach to governing that we can see across all Government departments.  The ideology of cutting without thinking, swinging without looking, with a lack of clear vision or philosophy on the functions of government, pervades the very core of this Bill.

The majority of the bodies in the Bill were set up as a result of reasoned and detailed debate in Parliament. The only appropriate way to consider abolition is with the same reasoned and detailed debate.  Cabinet Office ministers claim that detailed debate on each body will come at a later stage, but we know that secondary legislation isn’t typically dwelled on in Parliament to the extent that some of these bodies would deserve.

In the Lords, the Public Bodies Bill dwelled for what seemed like an eternity, where members laid hundreds of amendments and condemned it as a mass enabling act that circumvented the proper due process of parliament by which most of these bodies were established in the first place.  And that criticism came not just from Labour benches, but across the spectrum.

Tuesday night was a lesson in how not to do government.  Only six hours of debate on a Bill which covers a huge spectrum of the public sphere, with most of the bodies included not even referenced.  We managed to properly discuss only three key issues, each of which had wide ranging implications.

The Agricultural Wages Board, which protects 152,000 workers in England and Wales to make sure agricultural workers are treated fairly. But the Tory-led Government shot down the amendment to keep it.

The Youth Justice Board which oversees the interaction between various youth organisations and makes sure young people are protected when taken into police custody. Without the Youth Justice Board, it would have been nearly impossible to open the courts on 24-hour basis during the August disturbances. But the Tory-led Government shot down the amendment to keep it.

The Office of Chief Coroner, which was to be set up to oversee the coronial system and make sure that all bereaved families and their loved ones are treated with respect and sensitivity. At present the coronial system needs leadership and direction to make sure we do not let families down. But the Tory-led Government shot down the amendment to keep it.

We didn’t even have time to discuss S4C, the Welsh-speaking channel that many fought for years to establish, helps to keep the Welsh language alive and is viewed and enjoyed by many who speak Welsh or are learning to speak the language.

Also, we have had no time to discuss other important issues, such as the Equality and Human Rights Commission, Regional Development Agencies and the Human Embryology and Fertilisation Authority; this is unacceptable.  My otherwise patient demeanour was tested beyond what I had deemed possible.

And then there is the shambles on cost savings.  We have seen wildly different estimations coming from Government quarters on the actual savings.  Francis Maude said £20bn. Two days later, David Cameron said it would save £30bn. In committee, David Heath said it would be £2.6bn. This Government cannot give a straight answer.

No legislation is ever perfect, as hard as we may strive to make it so. But what the Tory-led Government has done here is to simply give themselves more power, centralise more functions and create gross uncertainty for the hard working employees of the bodies contained in the Bill.  That is why we chose to vote against it on Tuesday night, and that’s why I believe the House of Lords, on their final consideration of the amendments made on Tuesday, will give the Government another uncomfortable ride.

As I said, there are two things you never want to let people see you make, at least under this Government.