Proceeding contribution from Baroness Howarth of Breckland (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 26 October 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill.
Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill
My Lords, I simply want to ask a question about this amendment and raise some issues. It seems inappropriate that an amendment such as this should be limited to economic regulators. The same principles apply to other regulators across the board. If this amendment were accepted for economic regulators, some of us in other fields might come forward at Third Reading with further suggestions. I declare an interest as a regulator, being on the board of the Food Standards Agency and the deputy chair of the Meat Hygiene Service. The Food Standards Agency welcomes the structures introduced by the Government to develop better regulation. Even so, we were extremely concerned about the Bill in its earlier form. We accept assurances, which we hope that the Minister will reiterate, that the powers in the Bill will not be used to substantially amend or abolish the powers of any regulator without proper parliamentary scrutiny and consultation. I have heard the Minister say that on a number of occasions, having sat through the debate this morning. It is not only the economic regulators that wish to retain their independence. The Food Standards Agency is held in high regard and respect by the public and there is greater confidence in food standards. That position was reached through the FSA’s transparency and focus on consumers. The FSA has a statutory foundation and statutory powers. I do not need to remind the House of the lack of confidence in food following the BSE crisis and the work that has been undertaken to take us to the position that we are in now. In no way should the Bill favour economic regulators. If it is going to provide for independence, it should look across the board at regulators that have highly successful records, which are monitored in tables of success. We look for a level regulatory playing field. If the Minister can assure us about that in his reply, we may not come forward with further proposals, but if this amendment is accepted, we will be back at Third Reading.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 685 c1347-8
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Crime Bureaucracy Delegated legislation Church of England Human rights EU law Government departments Legislation European communities Ministerial powers Railways Mergers Parliamentary procedure Regulation Utilities Reform Taxation European economic area
- Legislation
- Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 21:05:11 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_355322
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_355322
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_355322