I do not believe that my noble friends Lord Cope or the Leader of the Opposition are actually on opposing sides of this; they are both addressing the same point. I strongly support my noble friend’s amendment for all the reasons that I set out, I think quite powerfully, in my Second Reading speech, which I do not intend to repeat today.
There is another reason for supporting my noble friend Lord Cope. A large number of Members of the other place pressed for a similar amendment there, and many argued on exactly the same grounds that he has that this should be registered, if for no other reason than to show the preposterous and deeply damaging nature of the existing code. We are in difficulty here because, regrettably, that code was of course agreed by the parties before the Bill came before them. It is one of the most damaging things that has happened to the other place for a very long time. I set out in my Second Reading speech my reasons for thinking that.
If either of these amendments emphasises and draws attention to the damage that has potentially been done by the existing code and the preposterous nature of that code, brilliantly exposed by Mr Frank Field in his speeches in the other place, it will be all for the good. One thing that cheers me up about all this is that Clause 5 starts by saying, ""The IPSA must prepare a code"."
My hope is that that will be a completely new code of financial interests that will not contain these damaging and preposterous rules which mean that people have to declare every single contract, exactly how much time they have spent on it and exactly how much they have been paid for it.
If those rules are to be observed, it is highly desirable that an amendment of this kind should go into the Bill, if only so that one’s constituents can then understand the facts of the situation and the fact that most Ministers are probably more heavily committed to work other than the straightforward parliamentary work of a constituency Member than anyone with a second job outside.
This is a valuable amendment. If it prompts IPSA, when it comes to consider these matters, to re-examine the whole issue of detailed declarations required by the existing code, we will have made a real advance. I support my noble friend.
Parliamentary Standards Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Crickhowell
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 14 July 2009.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Parliamentary Standards Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
712 c1132-3 Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 12:51:06 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_577520
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_577520
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_577520