1-20 of 257 results for primarymember:"Lord Goodhart"
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.59 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.003 seconds
- Search query
- primarymember:"Lord Goodhart"
- We searched for
- primaryMember_ses:300833
Type
+
Members' contributions (217)
-
Oral questions (217)
+
Parliamentary proceedings (11)
+
Debates (7)
+
Legislative debates (5)
-
Debates on bills (3)
-
Debates on delegated legislation (2)
-
Questions for short debate (1)
+
Parliamentary questions (246)
-
Oral questions (217)
-
Written questions (29)
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
More
Primary member
Answering member
More
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
My Lords, Transparency International UK, of which I am a member, published in June this year a document called Corruption in the United Kingdom. It concluded that corruption is a greater problem than has been recognised and is being recognised by Governments. Have the present Government considered that document and have they got the Serious Fraud Office adequately into the picture?
My Lords, Transparency International UK, of which I am a member, published in June this year a document called Corruption in the United Kingdom. It concluded that corruption is a greater problem than has been recognised and is being recognised by Governments. Have the present Government considered that document and have they got the Serious Fraud Office adequately into the picture?
Asked by
Lord Goodhart
(Liberal Democrat)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
6 September 2011
Yes, my Lords, we have studied the document, and we keep close contact with Transparency International, which does a very effective job of keeping these matters before the public and before Governments. However, in this country there are two dangers. One is to say, ““Oh, we don’t need to do anything because we are actually the ones who obey all the laws and it’s all the others who are corrupt””, and the other is to believe that we are somehow burdened down with corruption. Both extremes are wrong. There is corruption in this country, as in all countries, but it is not left untouched. As I say, the Bribery Act is in place, and my noble friend referred to the SFO, which is now playing an important part in the new structure of crime prevention set up by the Home Secretary. In consultation with law officers and other relevant colleagues, the Home Secretary is currently considering options for delivering the Government’s commitment to improve capability to tackle economic crime. The work of the Serious Fraud Office will play a key part in that strategy.
Subjects
Corruption
Date
6 September 2011
Reference
730 c116-7
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, does my noble friend agree that bribery and corruption are hugely damaging to developing countries, not least to those in North Africa and the Middle East, and that that is a very important reason why the Government should not delay any further in bringing this Act into force?
My Lords, does my noble friend agree that bribery and corruption are hugely damaging to developing countries, not least to those in North Africa and the Middle East, and that that is a very important reason why the Government should not delay any further in bringing this Act into force?
Asked by
Lord Goodhart
(Liberal Democrat)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
2 March 2011
My Lords, the Government are taking strong action on anti-corruption, including the recovery and freezing of corrupt assets in the areas the noble Lord has referred to, but the message is clear from this House that there is a matter of national reputation involved in any further delay. I duly take note of that.
Legislation
Bribery Act 2010
Date
2 March 2011
Reference
725 c1055
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
To ask the Leader of the House what consultation was undertaken regarding the decision for pre-legislative scrutiny of the draft Civil Law Reform Bill to be carried out by the Justice Committee in the House of Commons rather than by a joint committee of both Houses of Parliament.
To ask the Leader of the House what consultation was undertaken regarding the decision for pre-legislative scrutiny of the draft Civil Law Reform Bill to be carried out by the Justice Committee in the House of Commons rather than by a joint committee of both Houses of Parliament.
Asked by
Lord Goodhart
(Liberal Democrat)
Answered by
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon
(Labour)
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Answered on
24 February 2010
I wrote to the Chairman of Committees in the Lords after the Queen's Speech in November 2009 setting out the draft Bills to be published in the current Session. That letter was put to the Lords Liaison Committee at its December meeting. There were no bids from the usual channels for a Joint Committee on this draft Bill.
The Leader of the House of Commons at the same time wrote to the Chairman of the House of Commons Liaison Committee. After discussions, the chairman of that committee indicated that the Justice Committee would undertake pre-legislative scrutiny of the draft Civil Law Reform Bill.
Legislation
Draft Civil Law Reform Bill
Subjects
Parliamentary scrutiny; Justice Committee
Date
24 February 2010
Reference
2070; 717 c297WA
House
House of Lords
My Lords, does the Minister agree that bribery does enormous damage, particularly to many developing countries, and that the Bribery Bill is an essential step in helping to defeat it?
My Lords, does the Minister agree that bribery does enormous damage, particularly to many developing countries, and that the Bribery Bill is an essential step in helping to defeat it?
Asked by
Lord Goodhart
(Liberal Democrat)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
4 February 2010
Of course I agree, and I am grateful to the noble Lord for the part he has played in the Bill so far. As my noble friend mentioned a moment ago, bribery is a fact, but its corroding effect puts developing countries, in particular, back years and years.
Subjects
Corruption; Prosecutions; Overseas companies
Date
4 February 2010
Reference
717 c295
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
Does the Minister accept that the rule of law in any democracy is meaningless without access to justice and that the proposed cuts to civil litigation funding by the Government will deny many people access to justice?
Does the Minister accept that the rule of law in any democracy is meaningless without access to justice and that the proposed cuts to civil litigation funding by the Government will deny many people access to justice?
Asked by
Lord Goodhart
(Liberal Democrat)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
1 February 2010
I do not recognise that at all as being the true position. If the noble Lord is referring to cuts in legal aid, let me say to him that there are some very marginal cuts in civil justice on the books, but we are determined to make sure that the vital part of legal aid, which is spent on social welfare law—giving legal advice on debt, housing and employment matters—is maintained, particularly at a time of recession.
Subjects
Civil proceedings; Legal costs; Civil Litigation Costs Review
Date
1 February 2010
Reference
717 c9
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, will the Government consider looking more thoroughly at the libel laws? At present, they seem to be making the United Kingdom, particularly the English courts, a centre for worldwide applications to secure substantial damages by people who think that they have been libelled. Should we not try to get rid of that?
My Lords, will the Government consider looking more thoroughly at the libel laws? At present, they seem to be making the United Kingdom, particularly the English courts, a centre for worldwide applications to secure substantial damages by people who think that they have been libelled. Should we not try to get rid of that?
Asked by
Lord Goodhart
(Liberal Democrat)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
15 October 2009
There are some important considerations around the law of defamation and libel at present, particularly in relation to costs. We are aware that the costs associated with defamation proceedings have what has been described as a chilling effect, particularly where the impact of success fees under conditional fee agreements is taken into account. The question of what might properly be done to address cost issues in relation to defamation remains under consideration by the Government. These issues, as the noble Lord will know better than most, form part of the important consideration that Lord Justice Jackson is making on costs in civil proceedings generally. His final report is expected at the end of the year and will be considered with interest by all parties.
Subjects
Injunctions; Newspaper press; Parliamentary reporting
Date
15 October 2009
Reference
713 c326
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, I have always believed that we would achieve a fully or mainly elected House by the centenary of the Parliament Act. The trouble in the past few years has been over the question: which Parliament Act, 1911 or 1949? Do the Government recognise, in response to the previous intervention, that nothing will happen if they insist on consensus before taking action?
My Lords, I have always believed that we would achieve a fully or mainly elected House by the centenary of the Parliament Act. The trouble in the past few years has been over the question: which Parliament Act, 1911 or 1949? Do the Government recognise, in response to the previous intervention, that nothing will happen if they insist on consensus before taking action?
Asked by
Lord Goodhart
(Liberal Democrat)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
22 June 2009
My Lords, it is very important that we have come as far as we have on the basis of consensus. Of course, the best way is to move forward expanding on the consensus that we already have.
Legislation
Parliament Act 1911
Subjects
Anniversaries
Date
22 June 2009
Reference
711 c1347
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, 183 waterboardings in one month for one prisoner—that is, six a day—is surely torture by any standards. Do the Government agree that this will make it difficult, and perhaps impossible, to use any information obtained from prisoners at Guantanamo for prosecutions in this country?
My Lords, 183 waterboardings in one month for one prisoner—that is, six a day—is surely torture by any standards. Do the Government agree that this will make it difficult, and perhaps impossible, to use any information obtained from prisoners at Guantanamo for prosecutions in this country?
Asked by
Lord Goodhart
(Liberal Democrat)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
23 April 2009
My Lords, clearly there are difficulties, and the noble Lord will recognise the important position that the President of the United States has taken on these issues. However, the noble Lord is almost certainly right to judge that evidence submitted in any trial of individuals detained at Guantanamo Bay will, in defence terms, be subject to very serious examination in the light of that information. The noble Lord will also appreciate that it is, overwhelmingly, an issue for the American judicial authorities.
Subjects
Detainees; Terrorism; USA
Date
23 April 2009
Reference
709 c1604
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, during the debates on the 2006 Act, the Government said that they would consider what to do about individual registration. They are still considering what to do. Do they not realise that a very effective system has operated well in Northern Ireland and that it would be easy simply to import that system into the rest of the United Kingdom?
My Lords, during the debates on the 2006 Act, the Government said that they would consider what to do about individual registration. They are still considering what to do. Do they not realise that a very effective system has operated well in Northern Ireland and that it would be easy simply to import that system into the rest of the United Kingdom?
Asked by
Lord Goodhart
(Liberal Democrat)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
25 June 2008
My Lords, I do not apologise for giving this careful consideration. We have said that we see the merits of individual voter registration. However, I point out to the noble Lord that, although he is right about Northern Ireland, one of the impacts there was a reduction in the level of registration when the system was introduced. That is one of the concerns that we need to address if we are going to move to individual voter registration. Surely we all want more people in this country to take part in the democratic process. Anything that we can do to encourage that has to be welcomed.
Subjects
Fraud; Elections
Date
25 June 2008
Reference
702 c1433
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
asked Her Majesty's Government:Whether the Citizenship, Immigration and Borders Bill, included in their draft legislative programme for 2008–09, will give effect to their undertaking, given in the debate on the UK Borders Bill on 11 October 2007, to enable children born outside the United Kingdom between 1 January 1949 and...
asked Her Majesty's Government:Whether the Citizenship, Immigration and Borders Bill, included in their draft legislative programme for 2008–09, will give effect to their undertaking, given in the debate on the UK Borders Bill on 11 October 2007, to enable children born outside the United Kingdom between 1 January 1949 and...
Asked by
Lord Goodhart
(Liberal Democrat)
Answered by
Lord West of Spithead
(Labour)
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Answered on
25 June 2008
Amendments to Section 4C of the British Nationality Act 1981, to remove the requirement for a person applying for registration under that section to have been born after 7 February 1961, will be amended at the earliest appropriate legislative opportunity.
Subjects
British nationality; Eligibility
Date
25 June 2008
Reference
3970; 702 c245WA
House
House of Lords
My Lords, why should the cut-off point be 1961 rather than 1948, when the British Nationality Act was introduced? Is the Minister aware that the class involved is closed, because no new people can be added to it? It is a very small one, and I can see no possible problem with allowing them to enter the United Kingdom. Is the Minister further aware that I have tabled an amendment to the UK Borders Bill to raise this issue again?
My Lords, why should the cut-off point be 1961 rather than 1948, when the British Nationality Act was introduced? Is the Minister aware that the class involved is closed, because no new people can be added to it? It is a very small one, and I can see no possible problem with allowing them to enter the United Kingdom. Is the Minister further aware that I have tabled an amendment to the UK Borders Bill to raise this issue again?
Asked by
Lord Goodhart
(Liberal Democrat)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
3 July 2007
My Lords, I was aware that that was a likelihood, and I do not doubt that it will fall to me to deal with it as well. Whether I shall deal with it any more convincingly on that occasion than I am doing this afternoon I am not sure.
Subjects
Children; British nationality; Eligibility; Mothers
Date
3 July 2007
Reference
693 c896
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, does the Minister agree that, while getting improvement in the laws from the United Nations must be the ultimate objective, an agreement in the Council of Europe would increase pressure on the United Nations to accept laws that reduce immunity?
My Lords, does the Minister agree that, while getting improvement in the laws from the United Nations must be the ultimate objective, an agreement in the Council of Europe would increase pressure on the United Nations to accept laws that reduce immunity?
Asked by
Lord Goodhart
(Liberal Democrat)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
20 February 2007
That may well be the case, my Lords, but agreement has to be sought and found within the Council of Europe, and we are a long way from that yet.
Subjects
Crimes against humanity; Human rights; Immunity from prosecution; International law; Council of Europe; Rendition
Date
20 February 2007
Reference
689 c1001
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, does the noble and learned Lord agree that judges should not be legislators and legislators should not be judges? Having taken the decision in 2005 to get rid of the archaic anomaly of the highest court in this land being technically a committee of your Lordships’ House, would it not be ludicrous now to revoke that decision?
My Lords, does the noble and learned Lord agree that judges should not be legislators and legislators should not be judges? Having taken the decision in 2005 to get rid of the archaic anomaly of the highest court in this land being technically a committee of your Lordships’ House, would it not be ludicrous now to revoke that decision?
Asked by
Lord Goodhart
(Liberal Democrat)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
23 January 2007
My Lords, I agree with every single word of that.
Subjects
Costs; Buildings; Capital investment; Crown Court; Supreme Court
Date
23 January 2007
Reference
688 c997
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, given that many of the most important constitutional changes in this country, including the Parliament Act 1911, have been achieved without consensus, does the Lord Chancellor accept that, while consensus may be desirable, it is not essential?
My Lords, given that many of the most important constitutional changes in this country, including the Parliament Act 1911, have been achieved without consensus, does the Lord Chancellor accept that, while consensus may be desirable, it is not essential?
Asked by
Lord Goodhart
(Liberal Democrat)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
5 December 2006
My Lords, I said that it was necessary. I think that for the reform of this House, at this time, consensus is necessary.
Legislation
Parliament Act 1911; Parliament Act 1949
Subjects
House of Lords; House of Lords composition; Reform
Date
5 December 2006
Reference
687 c1058
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
Whether they intend to make any contribution to the costs incurred by the parties in the case of Barker (Respondent) v Corus (UK) plc (Appellants) (formerly Barker (Respondent) v Saint Gobain Pipelines plc (Appellants)), following the retrospective reversal by the Compensation Act 2006 of the decision of the House of...
Whether they intend to make any contribution to the costs incurred by the parties in the case of Barker (Respondent) v Corus (UK) plc (Appellants) (formerly Barker (Respondent) v Saint Gobain Pipelines plc (Appellants)), following the retrospective reversal by the Compensation Act 2006 of the decision of the House of...
Asked by
Lord Goodhart
(Liberal Democrat)
Answered by
Baroness Ashton of Upholland
(Labour)
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Answered on
17 October 2006
The Government remain ready to consider the proposal that they should make a contribution towards any costs reasonably incurred by the parties to this case in connection with the appeal to the House of Lords, where the Government's action reversed the relevant aspect of the appeal. Further consideration will be given to the matter once an order for costs has been made in the case.
Legislation
Compensation Act 2006
Subjects
Compensation; Appeals; House of Lords; Liability; Legal costs; Industrial diseases
Date
17 October 2006
Reference
7498; 685 c178WA
House
House of Lords
My Lords, does the noble and learned Lord agree that, although the Middlesex Guildhall is not a building of great merit, its location is ideal and that changes to its interior can make it far more suitable and accessible to the public than the present arrangements in your Lordships' House, which are cramped and virtually inaccessible to members of the public who wish to see what the Law Lords are up to?
My Lords, does the noble and learned Lord agree that, although the Middlesex Guildhall is not a building of great merit, its location is ideal and that changes to its interior can make it far more suitable and accessible to the public than the present arrangements in your Lordships' House, which are cramped and virtually inaccessible to members of the public who wish to see what the Law Lords are up to?
Asked by
Lord Goodhart
(Liberal Democrat)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
24 July 2006
My Lords, I agree with everything that the noble Lord said save for one thing: he is wrong to say that the Middlesex Guildhall is not a building of merit. When it becomes the Supreme Court, its merit will become even more apparent.
Subjects
Costs; Supreme Court
Date
24 July 2006
Reference
684 c1539
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, does the Minister recognise that the European Court of Human Rights plays a vital role in justice in the United Kingdom because it is the final arbiter on the interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights? In those circumstances, does the Minister agree that it is essential to have improved funding and that the Government should press for a new protocol to the European convention that would make it easier to sift out the considerable number of unjustifiable cases?
My Lords, does the Minister recognise that the European Court of Human Rights plays a vital role in justice in the United Kingdom because it is the final arbiter on the interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights? In those circumstances, does the Minister agree that it is essential to have improved funding and that the Government should press for a new protocol to the European convention that would make it easier to sift out the considerable number of unjustifiable cases?
Asked by
Lord Goodhart
(Liberal Democrat)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
13 July 2006
My Lords, I have nothing to add to the point about the financing. I have answered the House on that, whether my Answer satisfied noble Lords or not, but our view on zero real growth in the funding of this budget head should not suggest that we do not think that the court plays a valuable role as the final arbiter or that we are not committed to seeing it deal properly and effectively with the kind of cases that are brought before it. It is the primary protector of human rights in Europe. We will certainly take our part in discussions on any measures that help it to behave efficiently and make sure that the cases that come before it are the critical ones.
Subjects
Finance; European Court of Human Rights
Date
13 July 2006
Reference
684 c819-20
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, do the Government accept that human rights legislation is most important not when it is popular but when it is unpopular? Do they also accept that, given the extent to which the European Convention on Human Rights allows concerns about national security to be taken into account and permits derogations in times of crisis, human rights legislation does not inhibit any making of rational and necessary legislation against terrorism?
My Lords, do the Government accept that human rights legislation is most important not when it is popular but when it is unpopular? Do they also accept that, given the extent to which the European Convention on Human Rights allows concerns about national security to be taken into account and permits derogations in times of crisis, human rights legislation does not inhibit any making of rational and necessary legislation against terrorism?
Asked by
Lord Goodhart
(Liberal Democrat)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
10 July 2006
My Lords, I agree strongly with the last point made by the noble Lord: the Human Rights Act does not inhibit any rational and robust approach to crime and terrorism. Indeed, having a clear set of rules makes it possible to take robust measures because, with a clear set of parameters, you know where you stand, and tough measures can be taken because there are clear safeguards.
Legislation
Human Rights Act 1998
Subjects
European Convention on Human Rights; Reviews
Date
10 July 2006
Reference
684 c472-3
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
With reference to the form set out in Part 1 of the Schedule to the Representation of the People (Form of Canvass) (England and Wales) Regulations 2006, (a) what are the details that have to be provided if the box labelled ““All residents not entitled to vote due to their...
With reference to the form set out in Part 1 of the Schedule to the Representation of the People (Form of Canvass) (England and Wales) Regulations 2006, (a) what are the details that have to be provided if the box labelled ““All residents not entitled to vote due to their...
Asked by
Lord Goodhart
(Liberal Democrat)
Answered by
Baroness Ashton of Upholland
(Labour)
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Answered on
6 July 2006
(a)/(c) The purpose of this box is to allow the electoral registration officer to be satisfied that the form has been completed correctly. For example, if the form is returned with this section reading ““All residents are French””, the registration officer could return the form with an explanation that EU citizens are, in fact, entitled to vote in local and European elections. Although the exact details required in this section are not specified, there is no requirement for a person to provide the names of non-eligible people.
(b) We believe that the space provided should be adequate, although a person could use a separate sheet if they wished to do so. In addition, registration officers have some flexibility in how they use the form set in regulations and so could choose to make this box larger if they felt that this was necessary.
(d) The purpose of section 3 of the form is to ensure that a person may comply with their legal duty to respond to a request for information from a registration officer in circumstances in which no eligible electors are to be added to the form. For this reason, similar information is not required when at least one member of a household is entitled to register.
In previous years, the section did not include tick-boxes, but had the text, ““No one eligible””: ““If no one (including yourself) in your household should be included in part 2 above, please write ‘no one’ in part 2 above and give the reason””.
(e) In line with data protection principles, information provided will not be passed on to any other person or organisation.
Subjects
Electoral register; Forms; Nationality
Date
6 July 2006
Reference
684 c64-5WA; 6566
House
House of Lords
My Lords, where does the Minister get the extraordinary idea that the test of ““probable cause”” that the Americans apply is much less demanding than the test of showing that there is a case to answer, which we applied until 2003, when the Government made the new order? Is it not clear that, in the present extradition arrangements, there is a substantial unbalance that needs to be remedied? Will the Government now get around to revoking their 2003 order and the 2003 treaty itself?
My Lords, where does the Minister get the extraordinary idea that the test of ““probable cause”” that the Americans apply is much less demanding than the test of showing that there is a case to answer, which we applied until 2003, when the Government made the new order? Is it not clear that, in the present extradition arrangements, there is a substantial unbalance that needs to be remedied? Will the Government now get around to revoking their 2003 order and the 2003 treaty itself?
Asked by
Lord Goodhart
(Liberal Democrat)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
4 July 2006
My Lords, no. The noble Lord and I enjoyed ourselves enormously during the 2003 debates on that Bill, as did a number of noble Lords. We went through the matter again and again. Nothing appears to have changed since we enjoyed those lengthy debates.
Subjects
Extradition; Treaties; USA
Date
4 July 2006
Reference
684 c135
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords