UK Parliament / Open data

Budget Responsibility and National Audit Bill [HL]

My Lords, it would be a great mistake to regard being opposed to sin as the sole prerogative of the Church of England. I hope that the whole Committee is opposed to sin. I have some sympathy with the Minister on this. My problem with this part of the schedule is that it feels too in-house to me—too much the same. The Chancellor of the Exchequer is involved in the appointments and perhaps the Select Committee will be involved. I should have thought that the office needs a certain amount of diversity; its independence requires a greater diversity. It strikes me that the schedule is too tightly constrained as it is and to constrain it further by saying that the Select Committee of the other place has to be involved each time feels odd. I would almost expect the Governor of the Bank of England to nominate a member. We need a greater sense of diversity and independence in what is supposed to be an arm’s-length body. This body is in danger of not being sufficiently arm’s length from government. On that ground alone, I support the Minister’s resistance. However, I have a problem in that the whole thing seems a bit too in-house as it is.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

722 c187-8GC 

Session

2010-12

Chamber / Committee

House of Lords Grand Committee
Back to top