My Lords, I am not in the least concerned about the precise drafting of amendments, because all our proceedings in Committee are exploratory. The central point is that the staff of the OBR should be simply the staff of the OBR—end of story. It needs to be made clear that they are not other staff. The purpose of the amendment is to say categorically that these staff are now the staff of the OBR. I take it for granted that they will be full-time rather than part-time staff. This has nothing to do with the chairman or others choosing the best people; it is to do with the status of the staff. That is all the amendment is about. They should be the staff of the OBR and therefore, unless the law is changed, they will not be the staff of the Treasury or of anywhere else. My noble friend Lord Barnett and I would like a simple answer from the Minister. Are the staff the staff of the OBR? That can be answered with a yes or no.
Budget Responsibility and National Audit Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Peston
(Labour)
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 c196-7GC Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 21:12:15 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_688168
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_688168
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_688168