UK Parliament / Open data

Serious Crime Bill [HL]

Proceeding contribution from Lord Henley (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 26 March 2007. It occurred during Debate on bills on Serious Crime Bill [HL].
I thank the noble Lord, Lord Dear, for offering his support, particularly at this late hour. I also thank the Minister for responding on behalf of the Government. Over the years, I have heard a great many government responses to amendments—I have also given a great many in my time—and I can recognise the ones that have written at the top of them, as most of them do, the word ““resist””. That response did, despite the fact that these are very small amendments that ask for one very small thing: the greater involvement of the Information Commissioner. We tabled them because we believe that it is important for the Information Commissioner to be named in the Bill; if he is not, the Bill might be interpreted to mean that the mere fact that he is not mentioned means that he ought to be excluded. I am sure that that is not the intention of the Government and that the Audit Commission would always want to involve him, but I think that it would be better if the Government mentioned the Information Commissioner in the Bill. We will leave the amendment in that form at this stage so that over the ensuing weeks the Government can ponder this matter to see whether they wish to include the Information Commissioner. They may bring forward their own amendment on Report to include him or her, as proposed by us and the Liberal Democrats and as supported by the noble Lord, Lord Dear. This is something that we will probably wantto come back to. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

690 c1544-5 

Session

2006-07

Chamber / Committee

House of Lords chamber
Back to top