Proceeding contribution from Desmond Turner (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 20 April 2006. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Forensic Science.
Forensic Science
: I was about to name the hon. Gentleman. He referred to forensic science as a natural monopoly. That is true—again, just like air traffic control. Forensic science is basically a natural monopoly, although perhaps with a few niche areas around it. My hon. Friend the Member for Bolton, South-East has also seriously questioned the validity of the concept of a market in forensic science services. At present, there seems to be something slightly naive—this came across in evidence—about the Home Office intention that somehow the new PPP would bring in a lot of foreign business because it had been turned into a PPP. I doubt that. It will attract foreign custom if it offers the high-quality forensics that people need, and if it uses cutting-edge techniques. In my view, being a PPP would not help that. I am still very worried about the Government response to our clear recommendation that the transition to PPP should not be axiomatic. The GovCo should be given an adequate chance to demonstrate its viability, and the criteria should be transparent. I am glad that the criteria have been published, although I have not seen them yet, so I cannot comment on them.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 445 c166WH
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- Westminster Hall
- Subjects
- Forensic science
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-05 23:11:29 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_315768
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_315768
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_315768