Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Andrew Miller (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 15 September 2011. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Scientific Advice (Emergencies).


Scientific Advice (Emergencies)

I am grateful to all who contributed to the debate, including my hon. Friend the Member for Llanelli (Nia Griffith), the Opposition spokesperson, and the Minister. To a great extent, this area transcends party politics. Frankly, given some of the surveys published today on the public's perception of Members of Parliament, people might reflect on the fact that, just occasionally, we work in a collegiate manner towards a common goal. In this case, the common goal is improving safety and security for our citizens. It engages the best scientific brains, both here and further afield, and all political parties are committed to it as a serious priority. I hope that we can continue to work in this positive manner, and address some of the big questions and ““what happens if”” challenges thrown up by the national risk assessment. A few detailed questions remain. Once the Minister has seen the transcript of our proceedings, I hope that he will do us the honour of providing a more detailed reply—something that is a little challenging in this environment. I hope that his reply will form the basis of a continued dialogue between the Committee and the Cabinet Office on this important work. Question put and agreed to.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
532 c351-2WH 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
Westminster Hall
Subjects
Advisory services Disasters Evidence Diseases Cabinet Office Emergencies Space weather Electronic warfare Weather Science Swine flu Volcanoes Government Chief Scientific Adviser COBR
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk