Proceeding contribution from Lord Whitty (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 28 March 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Public Bodies Bill [HL].
Public Bodies Bill [HL]
My Lords, my apologies for my premature intervention earlier. I will not repeat everything that my colleagues have said, but we have a potential dilemma here. People are in broad terms in favour of a merger, subject to certain caveats, but the consultation paper indicates that the total approach to competition policy and consumer policy in which this new merged body would operate has yet to be determined. Many of the options in the paper—changes in the mergers procedures and in the relationship between the new Competition and Markets Authority and the sector economic regulators—would indeed, as my noble friend Lord Dubs implies, normally require primary legislation. Changes in the ability of people to raise super-complaints probably do not require primary legislation but the implication of giving that right to SMEs is that some of this is about monopsony and oligopsony as well as monopoly and oligopoly. That certainly requires some explanation and some primary legislative change. The reality is that the arrival of this document a few days ago indicates that the Government’s strategy of introducing a new competition institution by the merger of these two bodies can be properly assessed by Parliament only if you have the totality of the change to the competition regime as a whole. It ought to have been a principle of this Bill that bodies whose basis will require primary legislation should not therefore be dealt with solely on the basis of secondary legislation provided for by this Bill. We saw a smaller example of this the other night when the Government withdrew in effect the proposals for the Security Industry Authority, which will require primary legislation to change to where the Government wish to go. There is a bit of a constitutional issue here that the Government should be aware of. In general, it is a good idea and I do not propose to oppose it, but the Government are in a bit of a dilemma here and in reality we will have to have a competition Act before we can deliver the new body that the Government are envisaging.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 726 c989
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Consumers Administration of justice BBC Closures Competition Competition Commission Finance Donors Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority Libraries Ministerial powers Protection Organs Public bodies Mergers Passengers Office of Fair Trading Non-departmental public bodies Ofcom National parks National park authorities Scotland Standards Tribunals Young offenders Transport Wales Welsh language Research Television S4C Youth justice Broads Authority Civil Justice Council Human Tissue Authority National Archives Youth Justice Board Passenger Focus Administrative Justice and Tribunals Council Advisory Council on Public Records Advisory Council on National Records and Archives Norfolk and Suffolk Broads
- Legislation
- Public Bodies Bill (HL) 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 15:48:48 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_731525
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_731525
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_731525