On Amendment 35, is the Minister saying that he is absolutely confident that, within our normal arrangements, this amendment is not needed because it would be inconceivable for the office to refuse to appear before the Economic Affairs Committee of your Lordships’ House on the grounds that it was none of its business? Is he saying categorically that he knows that it could not refuse—to use my noble friend Lord Eatwell’s word—a reasonable request from the Economic Affairs Committee to appear before it? Is he absolutely certain that is so, because the amendment went down to get a reply that said it is not needed?
Budget Responsibility and National Audit Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Peston
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 29 November 2010.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Budget Responsibility and National Audit Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
722 c109GC Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 20:51:36 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_686554
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_686554
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_686554