Some UK quangos are ‘a law unto themselves’, Commons committee chair warns

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.

UK arm’s-length bodies lack accountability and some have become a “law unto themselves”, the new chair of parliament’s public administration committee has warned, as he set out plans for an inquiry into scores of quangos.

Conservative MP and former minister Simon Hoare told the Financial Times that the House of Commons public administration and constitutional affairs committee would examine NHS England, Highways England and other bodies that operate outside direct ministerial control.

The inquiry would look at which bodies “are broken” and “which either require total scrapping or rebuilding from scratch”, said Hoare, warning that swaths of daily life had been “passported off to bodies which are not accountable either through the ballot box or the despatch box”.

He added: “At the moment, I think many of them are . . . almost a law unto themselves . . . I think the balance has gone a little bit out of kilter.”

In his first interview since being elected chair, Hoare complained that officials had been unable to confirm the exact number of quangos in operation.

The last audit four years ago recorded 295 such bodies, which play a wide-ranging role in the administration of the state, from advising government to delivering and regulating public services and organisations.

The 295 figure included 38 executive agencies, such as the corporate registry Companies House, Defence Science and Technology Laboratory, and the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency.

It spanned 237 non-departmental public bodies, such as the British Council, Environment Agency, and Health and Safety Executive. The tally also included 20 non-ministerial departments, such as the Crown Prosecution Service, Charity Commission and Food Standards Agency.

Hoare said successive Tory and Labour governments had intended to outsource responsibility for key areas of policy, regulation and delivery by creating these bodies, which report into sponsoring Whitehall departments but tend to enjoy a greater degree of independence from government control.

While “passing the buck is not a new political phenomenon”, Hoare said the move threatened political reprisals: he suggested voters do not take into account when it is arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) that are responsible for poor performance and instead blame the government of the day.

Britons should be “alarmed by the lack of accountability and transparency” of many ALBs and the fact ministers “cannot direct” their activities, he said. In a warning to politicians, he added: “Trust is very easily bruised and broken, and trust in governance and politics is at a very low point.”

Hoare said his cross-party committee would examine whether some ALBs were “still needed”, “evolving quickly enough”, “analogue in a digital age”, and whether they had sufficient “teeth” to perform their duties.

Greater scrutiny was needed to ensure good performance, he suggested. But he also indicated that improvement was possible, citing the “enormous step change” from the Passport Office and DVLA after heavy criticism about backlogs and inefficiency in the wake of the pandemic.

Government figures indicate privately that the future of some ALBs may be affected by the spending review, which is due to report in spring next year.

While the Cabinet Office provides guidance on their set-up and oversight, critics have long complained about ALBs’ accountability, transparency and value for money.

They became a target for savings during the 2010-2015 Tory-Liberal Democrat coalition government, which scrapped 300 in its “bonfire of the quangos”. Subsequent Conservative administrations also suggested their number could be cut further to save cash.

A government spokesperson said: “We are entirely focused on driving efficiency across government, rebuilding our public services and delivering sustained economic growth. It is right people expect public bodies to be held accountable, run effectively and aligned with the government’s priorities.”