I want to finish and let other people speak. The situation is something of a hologram. We are saying that IPSA is independent, but for other purposes we are saying that there is parliamentary control. We are also saying that IPSA will have a shelf-life of one year, and if we do not like what it does, we can dispose of it completely. How we are meant to recruit people of competence and credibility to the authority on that basis I do not know. With a sunset clause, there is the danger that we might be saying, "This is temporary for a year. It could change next year." Do Members of this House want to fight a general election on the issue of expenses and how they are managed and controlled? That would be a very dangerous virus to come into a general election campaign. That is the danger of a sunset clause.
Parliamentary Standards Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Mark Durkan
(Social Democratic & Labour Party)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 1 July 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Parliamentary Standards Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
495 c403 Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 12:19:47 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_573084
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_573084
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_573084