It will be interesting to know the Minister’s view on that one. I support the noble Lord in the view he has expressed. I welcome the fact that sub-paragraphs 1(1)(a) and (b) of Schedule 1 both require the Treasury Committee of the House of Commons to be involved. As I said at Second Reading, I think it is true to say that this is the first time that a Treasury committee in this sort of role has ever appeared in legislation. But like the noble Lord who moved the amendment, I am puzzled as to why the Treasury Committee should be involved in the case of the first two groups and not in the case of the third. It seems appropriate that it should be involved in all three. It is certainly appropriate that it should be involved in the appointment of the chairman, because the chairman plays a crucial role between the parliamentary side of things and the Executive nowadays, so that is very good.
I also remain puzzled as to why, under sub-paragraph (c) of Schedule 1, the two members are to be nominated by the OBR and then appointed by the Chancellor, whereas those under sub-paragraphs (a) and (b) are simply appointed by the Chancellor. No doubt the Minister can explain why the OBR should be in the nomination of the third group.
Budget Responsibility and National Audit Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Higgins
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 1 December 2010.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Budget Responsibility and National Audit Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
722 c185GC Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 21:05:57 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_688128
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_688128
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_688128