Yes, I do, but given the way the amendment is drafted, a whole series of other statistics that we do not know about might not be included in the definition.
Secondly, subsection (2) of amendment No. 48, which defines ““public good””, includes this wonderful paternalist wording that could have been written by a civil servant in the late 1940s. The public good is defined in the context of"““informing the public about social and economic matters””,"
and of"““the development and evaluation of public policy.””"
In other words, the Minister is defining public good as the good of Whitehall. My amendment is a little simpler and a little more forthright. It makes it clear that the whole exercise should simply be for the public good, and that we should not try to confine it to what is in the best interests of Whitehall.
However, I want to be charitable today to the Minister. He has included in amendment No. 48 the one phrase that perhaps saves him—““includes in particular””. So the amendment does not exclude other issues; it could go wider, and I believe that it should.
Statistics and Registration Service Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Michael Fallon
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 13 March 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Statistics and Registration Service Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
458 c175 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:15:46 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_384610
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_384610
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_384610