I find it difficult to support this amendment. I understand what the noble Lord, Lord Greaves, means, but I have always interpreted this part as being the end of a long road. Most people will put up with quite a lot, but eventually somebody breaks and says, ““I can’t go on””. There must be a system whereby they can appeal to somebody else. The fact that the Standards Board is now being repatriated and brought back into a more local focus on the council means that these questions can be dealt with by the local standards board—the council and the independent member of that standards board—in an immediate and far less public way. It has always seemed to me that going to the Standards Board for England is a step too far. It is far too important and far too over the top. However, local standards boards or committees can handle something like this. Where there is evidence, or even just a feeling, that somebody is being treated badly and that there is a history of that, a mechanism such as this is necessary, so I do not support the amendment.
Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Hanham
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 19 July 2007.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
694 c421-2 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:04:11 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_412807
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_412807
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_412807