SIR CHRISTOPHER KELLY KCB

10 JANUARY 2008

  Q80  Paul Rowen: How do you see your Committee assisting that change in the political culture?

  Sir Christopher Kelly: I think there is a lot to be said for a group of senior, experienced people listening to what is said to them and then making up their own minds about what needs to be done in order to produce a set of recommendations around which views can coalesce.

  Q81  Paul Rowen: You said earlier on that some people clearly have not got it.

  Sir Christopher Kelly: Yes.

  Q82  Paul Rowen: What do you mean?

  Sir Christopher Kelly: I mean that things continue to happen which make one wonder whether people have understood. If you want an example, I think it is very strange, having promoted the principle of transparency in the funding of political parties, that not just one but two political parties should think that, whether it is within the law or not, the arrangements that were made were within the spirit of what they had signed up to.

  Q83  Paul Rowen: Obviously you have to meet with your own Committee and discuss its priorities, but, if you were to set yourself three inquiries or areas that you think the Committee should pursue and put them forward for discussion to your Committee, what do you think those areas might be?

  Sir Christopher Kelly: There is a whole host, as you have said and as I have said. I am conscious that there are a number of possibilities and there are arguments in favour of each. There are three things that are around which seem to me to be worthy of investigation and about which other people have spoken. One is the Freedom of Information Act and its effect. The other is that there is now a whole host of bodies that did not exist 14 years ago: academy schools, foundation hospitals and so on. There are a number of other mechanisms set up to provide public services, whether through the voluntary sector or through local area agreements or whatever, and prima facie it does seem to me it is worth having a look to see whether the standards and arrangements of governance in all those areas are fit for purpose. Is that two or three?

  Q84  Paul Rowen: I think you have done three. You mentioned those particular issues. How do you see your relationship with the other regulatory bodies and yourself? You mentioned foundation hospitals, for example. One of the requirements they are under is to publish minutes and to meet in public.

  Sir Christopher Kelly: Yes.

  Q85  Paul Rowen: How are you going to work with the other regulatory bodies to make sure, if you like, that the culture that exists in those bodies is of the standard that you would expect?

  Sir Christopher Kelly: I think that depends on the body. I think the record of the Committee in relation to the Electoral Commission and its report demonstrates that where the Committee thinks that criticisms should be made or where there seem to be avenues of improvement, the Committee is prepared to make those recommendations, but, equally, often it may be better to work in partnership than in confrontation.

  Q86  Paul Rowen: Do you intend to scrutinise new arrangements? The Government are trying to bring together health and social care into one overarching body. There have been some concerns raised about that. Do you intend to review any new arrangements like that that come into place?

  Sir Christopher Kelly: I do not know the answer to that. I shall avoid the temptation of thinking the Committee's job is to review any new arrangement that happens anywhere, because that is clearly beyond our resources. Whether there are issues of a kind relevant to the Committee from that merger, which has been planned for a long time, I frankly do not know. I am sorry.

  Q87  Paul Rowen: Given your experience in health and your knowledge of the relationship between health care and local government, do you not believe that there is some virtue, particularly in exerting the independence of your Committee, in reviewing new proposals rather than waiting for them to be put into place?

  Sir Christopher Kelly: The Committee has a history of monitoring issues that arise and commenting on them. Whether that one is appropriate, I do not know.

  Q88  Paul Rowen: What do you think your timeframe will be for publishing your five-year plan?

  Sir Christopher Kelly: I have not yet had the first meeting of the Committee. That will happen, I think, next week. I am in the process of going around and talking to other stakeholders rather than charging in with my own ideas. I think we might take up something which has been done before, which is to arrange a seminar of interested parties to have the discussion. I am expecting on secretariat advice that we will take the decision about what the next inquiry should be at the March meeting.

  Q89  Paul Rowen: How often do you expect to see us?

  Sir Christopher Kelly: As often as you would like to see me. I will make sure I bring some party games along with me next time!

  Q90  David Heyes: You have a portfolio of chairmanships. You mentioned the NSPCC, and there is also the Financial Ombudsman Service and Compact Voice. Are you intending to maintain those other interests?

  Sir Christopher Kelly: No, I have resigned from almost everything, except the NSPCC where I have, unless they get rid of me, another three years to run, and the Financial Ombudsman Service. I have resigned from things like Compact Voice. The only other significant thing I will continue to do is that I am a member of the National Consumer Council and will be until the autumn. I would have resigned from that, but the National Consumer Council is going through a period of change into the new National Consumer Council, and it seems sensible to me that I should stay during that period of consolidation, not least because a number of the other directors are moving across to the new body and it would be quite difficult for the new Chairman to cope if all his members left at the same time.

  Q91  David Heyes: You mentioned, in answer to Paul's question, your obvious sensitivity to the thought that public service delivery is being done in all sorts of new ways, through the private sector, the public sector. I think the NSPCC, to some extent, is involved in public service delivery.

  Sir Christopher Kelly: It is—although considerably less than many other charities. We are still about 85% voluntarily funded and some of the rest of that income comes from trading activity. We have recently been given a significant amount of public funds over the next four years to develop Childline and our own helpline for adults to ring who have concerns about a child.

  Q92  David Heyes: I have no doubt that you have given some thought to the risk of the appearance of a conflict of interest between your new role and you continuing your NSPCC role. Do you have any thoughts on that?

  Sir Christopher Kelly: Yes, I have. Unless you want people on the Committee who are not involved in any other aspect of public life, then that seems to me to be a possibility to be handled rather than being one of those conflicts of interest that quite clearly means I should not be doing both jobs.

  Q93  David Heyes: That, presumably, is one of the criteria that will weigh in your decisions about the other members of the Committee whom you are in the process of recruiting

  Sir Christopher Kelly: I suspect it might. It would be a shame, would it not, if the very first inquiry under my chairmanship was one where some doubts might be raised about my impartiality?

  Q94  David Heyes: Who produced the slate of candidates? You said you had been impressed with the list, you know who the candidates are.

  Sir Christopher Kelly: Yes.

  Q95  David Heyes: Where did you get them from?

  Sir Christopher Kelly: From the usual OCPA[5] process; that is to say, public advertisement coupled with search.

  Q96 David Heyes: Head-hunters.

  Sir Christopher Kelly: Yes.

  Q97  David Heyes: Which firm of head-hunters have been used to do this? Is it one firm?

  Sir Christopher Kelly: It is one firm. I ought to remember who it is but I am afraid I cannot.

  Q98  David Heyes: The reason behind the question is that head-hunting firms very often are sub-units of larger organisations and they very often themselves are involved in either bidding for or delivering public services. What does the Committee do to assure itself that the firm of head-hunters that are producing your slate of candidates are themselves free of any risk of a conflict of interest?

  Sir Christopher Kelly: I do not know the answer to that question. I imagine some thought was given to it, but since I was not involved in any way in the process I am afraid I cannot answer that. I think the fact that there is a public advertisement is a safeguard against that.

  Q99  Julie Morgan: I wanted to ask some questions about your background. Obviously you have strong contact with the voluntary sector as Chairman of the NSPCC. What have you learned from being so closely connected with the voluntary sector that would help you in this new post?

  Sir Christopher Kelly: I think it helps considerably to have had experience of another major sector of society which does things in some different ways than others. I think it has reinforced my belief in the importance of leadership in all things, including the importance of leadership in the promotion of high standards.