Proceeding contribution from Lord Bates (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 5 May 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Political Parties and Elections Bill.
Political Parties and Elections Bill
We, too, very much agree with the amendment—or perhaps I should say not "very much", in the sense that an additional capability is being offered here. However, if as the Minister stated on Report in the Commons on 9 February, and as the Minister has repeated in this Committee this afternoon, it does not absolve officeholders from responsibility for compliance with their obligations under Schedule 7 to PPERA, I question the need for an additional compliance officer to be appointed. By all means someone can be appointed to handle the paperwork, but does it need to be another person who is registered if the person who stands for elective office is ultimately responsible for what happens?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 710 c177GC
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords Grand Committee
- Subjects
- Costs Finance Elections Donors Expenditure Electoral Commission Members Political parties Loans Regulation Trade unions Tax allowances Taxation
- Legislation
- Political Parties and Elections Bill 2007-08 to 2008-09
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-22 02:35:56 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_553520
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_553520
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_553520