I assume the error was made by whoever typed up the written notes: ““6”” and ““4”” can look similar.
My other questions are to the Government. New Sections 309B and 309C require that the health adviser and the deputy health adviser are senior civil servants. I assume it is left as a matter of common sense that the health adviser who is appointed will be more senior in the Civil Service than the deputy health adviser, otherwise there could be a very strange position. It does not seem entirely likely.
I was intrigued by new Section 390A(5), which requires the health adviser to authorise the deputy health adviser. I accept that that can be general authorisation rather than specific authorisation, but is that the normal way of expressing that, or is there something particular in there? If it is particular, one might want to think further about it.
Greater London Authority Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Hamwee
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 2 May 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Greater London Authority Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
691 c103GC Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:48:16 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_394205
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_394205
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_394205