This was published under the 2010 to 2015 Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition government
Detail of outcome
On the 15th May the government announced the Triennial Review of the Fuel Poverty Advisory Group (FPAG) and is seeking the views of stakeholders.
This consultation ran from
Triennial Reviews of Non-Departmental Public Bodies (NDPBs) are part of the government’s commitment to ensuring accountability in public life.
FPAG is an advisory NDPB, its remit is to provide independent scrutiny and advice to the Department of Energy and Climate Change and to:
- consider and report on the effectiveness of current policies aiming to reduce fuel poverty
- consider and report on the case for greater co-ordination
- identify barriers to reducing fuel poverty and to developing effective partnerships - and to propose solutions
- consider and report on any additional policies needed to achieve a reduction in fuel poverty
- encourage key organisations to tackle fuel poverty
- consider and report on the results of work to monitor fuel poverty.
The aims of the review are to:
- challenge the continuing need for FPAG to carry out this role - both its functions and form; - and if it is agreed it should remain as an advisory NDPB
- review FPAG’s control and governance arrangements to ensure it is complying with recognised principles of good corporate governance.
In support of these aims we would welcome input and evidence from stakeholders, focussed on three main issues.
Stakeholders are invited to respond to the following questions:
Do the key functions performed by FPAG continue to be necessary and appropriate in scrutinising Government policy aiming to tackle fuel poverty?
You might wish to consider issues such as: is independent scrutiny and advice necessary for the successful long- term approach to tackling fuel poverty?; is stakeholder engagement and transparency of information important?
If you consider that FPAG’s functions remain valid, are these functions best delivered by a Non-Departmental Public Body (NDPB)?
You might wish to consider issues such as: could delivery of the functions be taken in house and performed by civil servants or the wider public service?; could the functions be delivered through more informal ad hoc arrangements?;could the functions be merged with another NDPB?
If you consider that an advisory NDPB is the right delivery mechanism for the functions of FPAG, what improvements could be made to support the effective and efficient delivery of FPAG’s remit?
You might wish to consider issues such as: does FPAG do a good job - does it offer value for money?; is FPAG politically impartial?; do you trust FPAG as a source of independent advice and authoritative information?; Has FPAG the necessary skills and experience to fulfil its remit?