Proceeding contribution from Baroness Andrews (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 28 January 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [HL].
Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [HL]
If I had been allowed to continue my argument I think the noble Lord would have been satisfied on that point. We have built in strict controls around the provision. We clearly do not want this to create an excuse for a kangaroo court or witch hunt, or harassment or bullying, and the best people to decide how these provisions should work in the context of the petition scheme will be the local authorities. That is why, for example, the petition scheme has to specify how many signatures will be needed before an officer can be required to attend a public meeting. It will be for the officers to determine which officers are liable to be called to account in this way.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 707 c129GC
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords Grand Committee
- Subjects
- Children Children in care Accountability Councillors County councils ICT Internet District councils Local government Public consultation Young people Local strategic partnerships Local area agreements
- Legislation
- Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill (HL) 2008-09
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-22 02:02:15 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_523802
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_523802
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_523802