Proceeding contribution from Baroness Quin (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 23 March 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Public Bodies Bill [HL].
Public Bodies Bill [HL]
My Lords, Amendment 5 relates to the advisory committees on pesticides and hazardous substances. The Minister will remember that we debated these committees in Committee. A number of questions were asked by my noble friends Lord Whitty, Lord Knight and Lord Berkeley, and by me. Since we feel that our questions were not properly answered, we will take this opportunity to press the Minister for further information. My noble friend Lord Whitty asked why the two bodies had been chosen. He mentioned a number of other bodies that have similar functions. He was not advocating that they should be abolished, but was questioning whether the Government were being consistent. The bodies concerned deal with very sensitive public issues—pesticides and hazardous substances—that raise concerns for us all. They have done a good job in dealing with these issues, and have impressive arrangements for the accountability of their proceedings and the publication of their decisions, including electronically on websites. My noble friends and I also felt that the issue went beyond the two bodies to wider issues about the role of advisory committees and the role of independent advice to Ministers. All of us who spoke strongly stressed this. The Minister acknowledged that the committees had provided independent, expert and impartial advice to Governments of all political persuasions. As he knows, Ministers are required to consult these bodies in certain circumstances. Will those requirements to consult on such issues remain in the new structures that the Government are proposing? How will the new structures be better than what is already in place, given that it seems that no money is being saved in the process? We are aware of how valuable the work of the committees has been up to now. How will openness, independence and accountability be strengthened by any of the arrangements? We urge the Minister to reply more fully this time to the questions that I have raised, that others may raise and that were raised in Committee. I beg to move.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 726 c744-5
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Complaints Access Disability Consumers Agriculture Assets Closures Finance Environment protection Hazardous substances Ministerial powers Protection Pay Property transfer Minimum wage Public bodies Property Mergers Pesticides Non-departmental public bodies Scotland Tribunals Training Transport Regulation Safety Wales Valuation Rural areas Science Security guards Agricultural Wages Board Citizens Advice Advisory Committee on Pesticides Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee Plant Varieties and Seeds Tribunal Security Industry Authority Valuation Tribunal Service Citizens' advice bureaux Commission for Rural Communities East Midlands Development Agency Citizens Advice Scotland Consumer Focus Local enterprise partnerships Advisory Committee on Hazardous Substances Advisory Committee on Pesticides for Northern Ireland
- Legislation
- Public Bodies Bill (HL) 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-09-05 11:36:09 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_730582
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_730582
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_730582