SIR CHRISTOPHER KELLY KCB

10 JANUARY 2008

  Q100  Julie Morgan: How did you come to become Chairman of the NSPCC?

  Sir Christopher Kelly: By a happy accident. One of the trustees at the time was a member of a major firm of head-hunters who happened to know me in another context and suggested me to the then board.

  Q101  Julie Morgan: I also noticed that you chaired the serious case review of the Ian Huntley case.

  Sir Christopher Kelly: I did.

  Q102  Julie Morgan: Obviously that was a very important review. What would you say you had learned from that which you would bring to this post?

  Sir Christopher Kelly: This was a much lower profile review that went on at the same time as Michael Bichard was doing his review of the role of the police. I was effectively reviewing the role of the other statutory agencies in their contacts with those young women whom Ian Huntley was sexually exploiting before he moved to Soham. Since a lot of those young women with whom he had relationships were vulnerable, it is not surprising that quite a lot of them were known to social services. What did I learn that was of relevance to this post?

  Q103  Julie Morgan: I suppose all experience you have would impact in some way, but I wonder whether there is anything specific.

  Sir Christopher Kelly: Nothing immediately springs to mind. That whole episode, again, shows poor leadership and inadequate systems, leading to fairly significant failures of a duty of care.

  Q104  Julie Morgan: Will you be looking for that sort of experience from your fellow Committee members?

  Sir Christopher Kelly: For the new Committee members there is an interesting choice. I certainly am looking to make sure there is a representation of broad areas of experience, so I will not be looking for someone who looks to be a duplicate of myself. I will be looking for different types of experience, and there is certainly that in the field we are looking at.

  Q105  Julie Morgan: There always is a tendency for people to reproduce themselves in appointments.

  Sir Christopher Kelly: Indeed.

  Q106  Julie Morgan: You are aware of that danger.

  Sir Christopher Kelly: I am aware of that danger and I shall try to make sure that none of them are boring!

  Q107  Julie Morgan: Just one other point: obviously there are strong links to government from the Committee but there has been quite a delay in producing government responses to Committee reports.

  Sir Christopher Kelly: Yes.

  Q108  Julie Morgan: What do you feel about that?

  Sir Christopher Kelly: Certainly my predecessor was irritated that it took so long for replies to come. I do not know whether it is true that it was longer than in the early days. It may be that some of the subjects with which the Committee have been dealing are more complex in nature than some of the earlier reports. A note has just been passed to me that says there have also been long delays in response to your own reports, so I am not sure that we are being singled out in this respect.

  Q109  Julie Morgan: Do you propose to try to improve the timescale?

  Sir Christopher Kelly: I do not know how much influence we will have. One of the things I would certainly say to the Prime Minister if I do indeed see him regularly as he promises, is to emphasise the importance of fairly rapid responses, while recognising that some issues do require a lot of thought.

  Q110  Mr Walker: Sir Christopher, you mentioned briefly MPs' pay and allowances. Would you elaborate on your level of interest in that, because it is very topical at the moment.

  Sir Christopher Kelly: Indeed, it is. I mention it as one of the obvious things which we ought to think about.

  Q111  Mr Walker: In what context do you want to think about it or should you be thinking about it?

  Sir Christopher Kelly: The issue is whether it would be helpful for the Committee to get involved in what clearly is a very complex and difficult subject but which clearly does have repercussions for the level of trust.

  Q112  Mr Walker: What would you see as your role if there were a role? What would be a scenario for interest?

  Sir Christopher Kelly: It is very difficult for anyone to say that MPs ought to be paid more, given the constraints on that. I have a personal view—and I would emphasise that it is very much a personal view—that part of the difficulty with allowances is that in the past—and it may be that is no longer the case—MPs allowances were set higher than they would have been in some other walks of life, partly because of guilt at the level of pay that MPs had. Whether it is time for someone independent to have a look at that and make recommendations which would rebalance it, I do not know. I am conscious that if we were to embark on that road, we would almost certainly make enemies of almost everyone.

  Q113  Mr Walker: I am sure you would not.

  Sir Christopher Kelly: I am certainly not saying that that is going to be the very first subject.

  Q114  Mr Walker: Given your interest in raising the standards in public life and trust of people, one of the things you might perhaps like to look at is whether it really is sustainable for Members of Parliament to be expected to vote on setting their own pay rates—which is invidious. I am sure you would not like to have the final decision on what you were paid.

  Sir Christopher Kelly: That is certainly one of the areas I had in mind.

  Q115  Mr Walker: I think you might find you would gain some support from unsuspected quarters if you were to investigate that.

  Sir Christopher Kelly: That is an interesting point.

  Q116  Mr Prentice: I have a private Member's bill coming up shortly which would disqualify from membership of Parliament people who are tax exiles. You think that is a good bill, do you not? You would agree with it?

  Sir Christopher Kelly: I have absolutely no idea whether I should agree with it.

  Q117  Mr Prentice: Let me rephrase it. You are the man in charge of the Committee on Standards in Public Life. Do you think it is acceptable that people sit in the United Kingdom Parliament who do not pay UK taxes? It is a very straightforward question.

  Sir Christopher Kelly: I think this is an area on which I would want to hear what the arguments and counterarguments are. I would not want to jump in.

  Q118  Mr Prentice: That is a jaw-dropping answer.

  Sir Christopher Kelly: Is it?

  Q119  Mr Prentice: I think so.

  Sir Christopher Kelly: It is jaw-dropping because I say I prefer to hear the arguments before reaching a decision?