I assure the noble Lord, Lord Jenkin, that the clause is as far removed from the day-to-day operations of the board as it is possible to get. The clause embraces the ultimate sanction against the board when there is a failure of such seriousness that the Chancellor acts. In acting, it is inconceivable that there would be no parliamentary response to such a dramatic development.
The clause, which the noble Lord, Lord Newby, suggested was draconian, is actually less powerful in its impact upon the body as a final sanction than exists for the Food Standards Agency, where the Secretary of State can give such directions as he may consider appropriate for the purposes of remedying a serious failure. Similarly, Section 40 of the Environment Act empowers the Secretary of State to direct the Environment Agency on the implementation of any community obligations or international agreements. That is what this clause does in the event of such neglect on the part of the board of its obligations under a European directive. Far from having anything to do with the day-to-day operations of the board, it is the final sanction when there has clearly been a complete breakdown of understanding of what it is necessary for the board to do such as to trigger the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s action. It is inconceivable that such an event would take place without the most widespread public debate and parliamentary response to it. We would be reflecting a very serious crisis in the operation of a board. Moreover, that board, more than the other bodies I referred to earlier, is recognised in terms of its independence and its performance—I refer to the individuals who have held the office of National Statistician and to the Office of National Statistics, which is due to be developed and subsumed into this board.
I assure noble Lords as strongly as I possibly can that this is the ultimate fall-back position necessary for the Minister responsible for the overall operation of the board—the final sanction that he or she has in circumstances where there has been a significant dereliction of duty and failure. Such a failure, being massively in the public domain, would need to be open to reporting. It is inconceivable within that framework that there would not be the fullest parliamentary debate upon such an act. We are describing the position of crisis in the ultimate situation, where there is a breakdown.
One or two noble Lords indicated that they hoped that this would never arise. It is highly unlikely that a body as responsible as this board would ever get into these circumstances, but there is a need for a failsafe mechanism for the Minister who is responsible for Parliament and to the people for the discharge of the functions of the board. Therefore, a reserve power is necessary. Otherwise, it must be contended, what is being suggested is that the board could get into a very serious circumstance indeed, without a Minister having any direct responsibility for putting things right.
Statistics and Registration Service Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 2 May 2007.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Statistics and Registration Service Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
691 c1150-1 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:00:58 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_394468
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_394468
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_394468