Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Warner (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 1 December 2010. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Public Bodies Bill [HL].


Public Bodies Bill [HL]

The noble Viscount may wish to interpret this as a Second Reading speech, but I thought that I was asking a very serious question about why some of these bodies are in Schedule 1 when they are fundamentally not that much different from the Audit Commission, which is not in Schedule 1. I am trying to understand the Government’s criteria for including some bodies but not others in this Bill. That is the whole purpose of my speech. I say to him, with the greatest respect, that debating the detail of an order some many months after the passing of this Bill will be too late. Those of us who have experience of chairing and being a member of staff of some of these public bodies would say to him that, once you have signed the death warrant—that is what the Bill is—you have no hope of retaining a great deal of talent in some of these bodies. That melts away. It is a perfectly rational, human response to a death warrant being signed on the organisation that you work for. It is a bit late in the day, when we get to the order, to start having the debate about whether it was a good idea in the first place.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
722 c1552 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Devolved matters Audit Agriculture Broadcasting Costs Closures Audit Commission Legislation Horticulture Pay Minimum wage Public sector Public bodies Redundancy Non-departmental public bodies Migrant workers Wales Tenants Rented housing Tenants' rights Agricultural Wages Board Tied housing BBC Trust
Legislation
Public Bodies Bill (HL) 2010-12
Rent (Agriculture) Act 1976
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk