DOCSLIB.ORG

Constitution Committee the Legislative Process

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Constitution Committee the Legislative Process Constitution Committee The Legislative Process: Preparing Legislation for Parliament Oral and written evidence Contents Alliance for Useful Evidence—Written evidence (LEG0026) .............................. 4 Alliance for Useful Evidence—Oral evidence (QQ 16-28) .................................. 9 The Bar Council of England and Wales—Written evidence (LEG0009) .............. 31 Sir David Bean, Chairman, the Law Commission—Oral evidence (QQ 102-112) 36 Better Government Initiative—Written evidence (LEG0001) ........................... 46 Better Government Initiative—Oral evidence (QQ 1-15) ................................ 50 Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law: Part 1—Written evidence (LEG0016) ....... 51 Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law: Part 2—Written evidence (LEG0017) ....... 68 The British Academy—Written evidence (LEG0022) ...................................... 95 The Rt Hon. Professor Paul Burstow, former MP and Minister of State for Health, and Chair of the Joint Committee on the Draft Care and Support Bill— Oral evidence (QQ 76-88) ........................................................................ 99 Chartered Institute of Taxation—Written evidence (LEG0018) ...................... 100 Judge Michael Clements, President of the First-tier Tribunal, Immigration and Asylum Chamber—Oral evidence (QQ 42-48) ............................................ 110 David Cook, Second Parliamentary Counsel—Oral evidence (QQ 89-101) ...... 111 Dr Conor Farrington, University of Cambridge—Written evidence (LEG0012) .. 112 Dr Ruth Fox, Hansard Society—Oral evidence (QQ 1-15) ............................. 118 Elizabeth Gardiner, First Parliamentary Counsel—Oral evidence (QQ 89-101) . 145 Dr Mark Goodwin, Lecturer in Politics, University of Birmingham & Dr Stephen Bates, Lecturer in Politics, University of Birmingham—Written evidence (LEG0006) .. 146 Daniel Greenberg, former Parliamentary Counsel—Oral evidence (QQ 49-56) 150 Dr David Halpern, Behavioural Insights Team—Written evidence (LEG0028) .. 159 Dr David Halpern, Behavioural Insights Team, Cabinet Office—Oral evidence (QQ 16-28) .......................................................................................... 164 Mr Martin Hoskins, former Specialist Adviser to the Joint Committees on the Draft Investigatory Powers Bill and the Draft Communications Data Bill— Oral evidence (QQ 76-88) ...................................................................... 165 Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association—Oral evidence (QQ 36-41) ......... 166 Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association—Written evidence (LEG0029) ...... 177 Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW)— Written evidence (LEG0024) ................................................................... 194 Institute for Government, the Alliance for Useful Evidence and Sense about Science—Written evidence (LEG00008) .................................................... 203 Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants (JCWI)—Written evidence (LEG0027)207 The Law Commission of England and Wales—Supplementary written evidence (LEG0032) ........................................................................................... 211 The Law Society of England and Wales—Oral evidence (QQ 57-62) ............... 214 The Law Society of Scotland—Written evidence (LEG0025) .......................... 215 The Law Society of Scotland—Oral evidence (QQ 57-62) ............................. 223 Sir Stephen Laws, former First Parliamentary Counsel—Oral evidence (QQ 63-75)234 Professor Cristina Leston-Bandeira, University of Leeds, and Dr Louise Thompson, University of Surrey—Written evidence (LEG0011) ..................................... 243 Liberal Democrat Constitutional Affairs Team—Written evidence (LEG0021) ... 246 Rt Hon. David Lidington MP, Leader of the House of Commons—Written evidence (LEG0010) ........................................................................................... 252 Rt Hon David Lidington MP, Leader of the House of Commons—Oral evidence (QQ 89-101) ........................................................................................ 255 Emran Mian, Social Market Foundation—Oral evidence (QQ 29-35) ............... 280 MillionPlus—Written evidence (LEG0004) .................................................. 291 Nesta—Written evidence (LEG0007) ......................................................... 296 Professor David Ormerod, Law Commissioner for Criminal Law and Evidence—Oral evidence (QQ 102-112) .......................................................................... 300 Judge Julian Phillips, Resident Judge of the First-tier Tribunal, Immigration and Asylum Chamber—Oral evidence (QQ 42-48) ............................................ 301 Mark Ryan, Coventry University—Written evidence (LEG0005) ..................... 302 Sir Ernest Ryder, Senior President of Tribunals—Oral evidence (QQ 42-48) ... 305 Professor Richard Susskind OBE FRSE—Written evidence (LEG0031) ............ 314 Professor Richard Susskind OBE FRSE—Oral evidence (QQ 113-121) ............ 319 Tobacco Manufacturers’ Association—Written evidence (LEG0014) ............... 338 Rt Hon. Valerie Vaz MP, Shadow Leader of the House-Written evidence (LEG0030) .......................................................................................................... 349 Andrew Walker QC, Vice Chairman-Elect of the Bar Council and the Vice Chairman of the Bar Council Law Reform Committee—Oral evidence (QQ 57-62) .......... 353 Chris Walker, Independent Housing Consultant—Oral evidence (QQ 29-35) ... 354 The Rt Hon. Steve Webb, former MP and Minister of State for Pensions —Oral evidence (QQ 76-88) .................................................................... 355 Dr Edgar A. Whitley, London School of Economics and Political Science; and co–chair Cabinet Office Privacy and Consumer Advisory Group (PCAG): Part 1— Written evidence (LEG0019) ................................................................... 375 Dr Edgar A. Whitley, London School of Economics and Political Science and member of the Quality Assurance Group for the Consultation on Better use of data in government, part of the Open Policy Making Process: Part 2—Written evidence (LEG0023) 381 Alliance for Useful Evidence—Written evidence (LEG0026) Alliance for Useful Evidence—Written evidence (LEG0026) 1. The Alliance for Useful Evidence champions the use of high quality evidence to inform decisions on policy and practice in the UK and beyond. We do this through research, training, advice and advocacy. With a growing network of 3,000 individuals, we work with allies in government, local authorities, and charities. Core funding comes from the Big Lottery Fund, the Economic and Social Research Council, and Nesta. Please note that we have also made a submission on the Evidence Transparency Framework with Sense about Science and the Institute for Government. 2. There are many factors that influence the creation of government policy and legislation. One factor is research evidence. We recommend that there is more use of trustworthy research evidence when preparing legislation for parliament. Research evidence can help diagnose the problem that needs to be addressed, and also look at what might me the most effective (and cost- effective) policy options.1 What is vital is that policymakers use the most appropriate evidence to answer their questions – rather than just following any type of study that looks credible.2 3. It is no longer the case that research evidence is hard to locate and lost in academic journals. There are many sources of high quality research and social science – summarised in a way that is actionable by policymakers involved in pre-legislation. As well as the support of the House of Commons and House of Lords Libraries, there are other freely available resources open to all policymakers. Links to a range of sources of evidence can be found in our infographic of the UK evidence ecosystem.3 4. When gathering research evidence to prepare legislation, it is essential not to rely on single studies. The single study could be a ‘flash in the pan’ and not replicated elsewhere. Policymakers should look for trusted bodies of evidence. A tried-and-tested approach, now commonplace in health, is the systematic review. When preparing legislation for parliament, policymakers should use more systematic reviews. Reviews are less well known outside of healthcare. But they can provide significant insights into social, environmental, transport and economic policy. They are NOT literature reviews, but something 1 For more about the range of benefits evidence can have to policy making, see Section C of Using Research Evidence; A Practice Guide, Alliance for Useful Evidence, 2016. http://www.alliance4usefulevidence.org/assets/Using-Research-Evidence-for-Success-A- Practice-Guide-v6-web.pdf This guide informs our Evidence Masterclass training. We are also piloting this training with the Parliamentary Office for Science and Technology for Peers, MPs and staff, as part of the cross-Commons working group working on Members Professional Development. 2 See Appendix A on matching different types of evidence to policy needs This model was adopted from DEFRA , but can be translated into the pre-introduction legislation for other policy areas. 3 https://www.alliance4usefulevidence.org/infographic/ Alliance for Useful Evidence—Written evidence (LEG0026) more robust. The approach that is effectively described by Ben Goldacre, the scientist and writer: ‘Instead of just mooching
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Europe and Eurasia
    E u r o p e a n d E u r a s i a 1 4 European Union Law L u d w i g K r ä m e r ( A ) I n t r o d u c t i o n Th e European Union legal system 1 4 . 0 1 Th e European Union (‘EU’) is a regional integration organisation consisting at present of twenty-seven European Member States that have transferred part of their sovereignty to the EU. Th e EU is based on international treaties – the Treaty on European Union (‘TEU’) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘TFEU’) – and its power to act is laid down in the various provisions of these treaties; there is no ‘common law’ applicable to it. In this regard, the EU is similar to a civil law country. 1 4 . 0 2 A n u m b e r o f s p e c i fi c features distinguish the EU from traditional international organisations. First, the TEU and TFEU address not only the relations between the Member States and the EU insti- tutions, but also establish rights and obligations for individuals. Second, though legislative decisions in climate change matters are taken by majority vote in the European Parliament – whose members are directly elected – and the Council, which consists of the governments of the twenty-seven Member States, the adop- tion of legislation on climate change is only possible on the basis of a proposal by the European Commission. Th e Commission oversees the application of EU law in the Member States, and has the duty to act in the general interest of the EU rather than in the interest of the individual Member States.
    [Show full text]
  • JUDGMENT AXA General Insurance Limited and Others (Appellants)
    Michaelmas Term [2011] UKSC 46 On appeal from: [2011] CSIH 31 JUDGMENT AXA General Insurance Limited and others (Appellants) v The Lord Advocate and others (Respondents) (Scotland) before Lord Hope, Deputy President Lord Brown Lord Mance Lord Kerr Lord Clarke Lord Dyson Lord Reed JUDGMENT GIVEN ON 12 October 2011 Heard on 13, 14 and 15 June 2011 Appellant 1st Respondent Richard Keen QC Alan Dewar QC Jane Munro James Mure QC (Instructed by Brodies (Instructed by Scottish LLP) Government Legal Directorate Litigation Division) 2nd Respondent 3rd-10th Respondents Ruth Crawford QC Aidan O’Neill QC John MacGregor Chris Pirie (Instructed by Office of (Instructed by Thompsons the Solicitor to the Solicitors Glasgow Advocate General for Scotland) Scotland Intervener (First Minister Intervener (Attorney of Wales) General for Northern Ireland) Theodore Huckle QC John F Larkin QC Clive Lewis QC Donal Sayers BL (Instructed by Welsh (Instructed by Solicitors Assembly Government for the Attorney General Legal Services for Northern Ireland) Department, Cardiff) Intervener (Friends of the Intervener (Department of Earth Scotland Ltd) Finance and Personnel (Northern Ireland)) Simon Collins Paul Maguire QC Paul McLaughlin BL (Instructed by Patrick (Instructed by Campbell & Co Solicitors) Departmental Solicitor’s Office) LORD HOPE 1. The appellants are insurance companies, whose business includes the writing of employers’ liability insurance policies. They undertake to indemnify the employer in respect of any liability incurred by it for harm or injury arising out of the employer’s negligence. They have brought these proceedings to challenge the lawfulness of an Act of the Scottish Parliament which was passed on 11 March 2009, received the Royal Assent on 17 April 2009 and came into force on 17 June 2009.
    [Show full text]
  • Southampton Student Law Review 2011 Volume 1, Issue 1
    Southampton Student Law Review 2011 volume 1, issue 1 5 Southampton Student Law Review University of Southampton School of Law Published in the United Kingdom By the Southampton Student Law Review School of Law University of Southampton SO17 1BJ In affiliation with the University of Southampton School of Law All rights reserved. Copyright© 2011 University of Southampton. No part of this publication may be reproduced, transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, recording or otherwise, or stored in any retrieval system of any nature, without the prior, express written permission of the Southampton Student Law Review and the author, to whom all requests to reproduce copyright material should be directed, in writing. The views expressed by the contributors are not necessarily those of the Editors of the Southampton Student Law Review. Whilst every effort has been made to ensure that the information contained in this journal is correct, the Editors do not accept any responsibility for any errors or omissions, or for any resulting consequences. The Editors wish to thank Dr. Oren Ben Dor, Dr. Alun Gibbs and Ms Johanna Hjalmarsson. © 2011 Southampton Student Law Review ISSN 2047 - 1017 This volume should be cited (2011) 1 S.S.L.R. Editorial Board 2011 Editor Harry East Associate Editors Ross W Martin Emma Nottingham Thomas Webber Editorial Board Semande Ayihongbe Aysegul Bugra Dingjing Huang Haedong Jeon Assad Khan Konstantinos Kofopoulos Miao Li Ioanna Magklasi Siven Pillay Rungien Meixian Song Valerio Torti Jingbo Zhang Academic Advisors Dr. Oren Ben Dor Dr. Alun Gibbs Ms Johanna Hjalmarsson The editors wish to thank all members of the University of Southampton School of Law who have helped in the creation of this volume Table of Contents Foreword ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • MOTOR VEHICLE REPORTS Sixth Series/Sixi`Eme S´Erie Recueil De Jurisprudence En Droit Des V´Ehicules A` Moteur
    MOTOR VEHICLE REPORTS Sixth Series/Sixi`eme s´erie Recueil de jurisprudence en droit des v´ehicules a` moteur VOLUME 4 (Cited 4 M.V.R. (6th)) EDITOR-IN-CHIEF/REDACTEUR´ EN CHEF Murray D. Segal, B.A., B.C.L., LL.B. Deputy Attorney General Province of Ontario ASSOCIATE EDITORS/REDACTEURS´ ADJOINTS Justice Rick Libman Ontario Court of Justice (Provincial Division) Toronto, Ontario John C. Pearson, B.A., LL.B., LL.M. Liz Rice, B.A., LL.B. Director, Crown Operations Barrister & Solicitor Central West Region Toronto, Ontario Ministry of Attorney General Ontario CARSWELL EDITORIAL STAFF/REDACTION´ DE CARSWELL Jeffrey D. Mitchell, B.A., M.A. Director, Editorial Production and Manufacturing Graham B. Peddie, LL.B. Product Development Manager Sharon Yale, LL.B., M.A. Julia Fischer, B.A.(HON.), LL.B. Supervisor, Legal Writing Acting Supervisor, Legal Writing Dionne Chambers, B.A., LL.B. Jim Fitch, B.A., M.A., LL.B. Senior Legal Writer Senior Legal Writer Peggy Gibbons, B.A.(HON.), LL.B. Natasha Major, B.A., LL.L. Senior Legal Writer Senior Legal Writer Anne Simpson, B.A., M.L.S., LL.B. Eden Nameri, B.A., LL.B. Senior Legal Writer Legal Writer Martin-Fran¸cois Parent, LL.B., Jackie Bowman LL.M., DEA (PARIS II) Content Editor Bilingual Legal Writer MOTOR VEHICLE REPORTS, a national series of topical law reports, is Recueil de jurisprudence en droit des v´ehicules a` moteur, une s´erie na- published 12 times per year. Subscription rate $362.00 per bound volume in- tionale de recueils de jurisprudence sp´ecialis´ee, est publi´e 12 fois par ann´ee.
    [Show full text]
  • Regulatory Reform – the New UK Regime: Law-Now Alerts, Tools and Latest News
    Regulatory reform – the new UK regime: Law-Now alerts, tools and latest news Law-Now alerts and other tools Chart: International, European and UK institutions (the 2013 position) (3/07/13) Law-Now: “ The Banking Standards Report: The new offence of reckless misconduct ” (18/07/13) Law Now: “ The Government responds to the Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards Report ” (12/07/13) Law-Now: “ Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards Final Report ” (25/06/13) Click here to access archived Law-Now alerts and other tools Latest news Topics covered UK FSCS reform UK The Financial Services (Banking Reform) Act 2013 (Commencement No. 4) Order 2014/823 (C.32) This Order brings into force certain provisions of the Act relating to the competition functions given to the Payment Services Regulator (established under this Act) concurrently with CMA (established under the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013). This is the fourth commencement order to be made under the Act. (Date in force: 1/04/14) (27/03/14) http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2014/823/pdfs/uksi_20140823_en.pdf The Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Consumer Credit) (Transitional Provisions) (No. 2) Order 2014/835 This Order makes various supplemental and transitional provisions in consequence of provisions made by the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Regulated Activities) (Amendment) (No.2) Order 2013/1881) (“the RAO Amendment No. 2 Order”). Article 2 amends the RAO Amendment No. 2 Order. Part 20 FSMA provides an exemption from the need for authorisation for members of professional bodies who carry on regulated activity which is merely incidental to the provision of professional services; such regulated activity must be the only regulated activity the member firm undertakes.
    [Show full text]
  • Corpus Christi College the Pelican Record
    CORPUS CHRISTI COLLEGE THE PELICAN RECORD Vol. LII December 2016 i The Pelican Record Editor: Mark Whittow Design and Printing: Lynx DPM Published by Corpus Christi College, Oxford 2016 Website: http://www.ccc.ox.ac.uk Email: [email protected] The editor would like to thank Rachel Pearson, Julian Reid, Joanna Snelling, Sara Watson and David Wilson. Front cover: Detail of the restored woodwork in the College Chapel. Back cover: The Chapel after the restoration work. Both photographs: Nicholas Read ii The Pelican Record CONTENTS President’s Report .................................................................................... 3 Carol Service 2015 Judith Maltby.................................................................................................... 12 Claymond’s Dole Mark Whittow .................................................................................................. 16 The Hallifax Bowl Richard Foster .................................................................................................. 20 Poisoning, Cannibalism and Victorian England in the Arctic: The Discovery of HMS Erebus Cheryl Randall ................................................................................................. 25 An MCR/SCR Seminar: “An Uneasy Partnership?: Science and Law” Liz Fisher .......................................................................................................... 32 Rubbage in the Garden David Leake .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Conservative Agenda for Constitutional Reform
    UCL DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE The Constitution Unit Department of Political Science UniversityThe Constitution College London Unit 29–30 Tavistock Square London WC1H 9QU phone: 020 7679 4977 fax: 020 7679 4978 The Conservative email: [email protected] www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit A genda for Constitutional The Constitution Unit at UCL is the UK’s foremost independent research body on constitutional change. It is part of the UCL School of Public Policy. THE CONSERVATIVE Robert Hazell founded the Constitution Unit in 1995 to do detailed research and planning on constitutional reform in the UK. The Unit has done work on every aspect AGENDA of the UK’s constitutional reform programme: devolution in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and the English regions, reform of the House of Lords, electoral reform, R parliamentary reform, the new Supreme Court, the conduct of referendums, freedom eform Prof FOR CONSTITUTIONAL of information, the Human Rights Act. The Unit is the only body in the UK to cover the whole of the constitutional reform agenda. REFORM The Unit conducts academic research on current or future policy issues, often in collaboration with other universities and partners from overseas. We organise regular R programmes of seminars and conferences. We do consultancy work for government obert and other public bodies. We act as special advisers to government departments and H parliamentary committees. We work closely with government, parliament and the azell judiciary. All our work has a sharply practical focus, is concise and clearly written, timely and relevant to policy makers and practitioners. The Unit has always been multi disciplinary, with academic researchers drawn mainly from politics and law.
    [Show full text]
  • Constitution Unit Monitor 53 February 2013
    CONSTITUTION UNIT MONITOR 53 FEBRUARY 2013 Commission on a Bill of Rights reports The Commission on a Bill of Rights delivered its report to the repeating their commitment (first announced by Cameron in 2006) government in December. It did not offer a strong or unanimous to repeal the Human Rights Act and replace it with a UK Bill of way forward. Rights; and Labour and the Lib Dems committed to its retention. On the central issue, seven of the commission’s nine members came Sir Leigh Lewis, chairman of the Commission on a Bill of Rights, down in favour of a UK Bill of Rights. Such a bill would incorporate talked about the report at a Constitution Unit Seminar on and build on all of the UK’s obligations under the European 24 January – see website. Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and would provide no less protection than is contained in the current Human Rights Act and the devolution settlements. Some of the majority also believed EXECUTIVE that a UK Bill of Rights could define more clearly the scope of some rights, and adjust the balance between different rights. The most powerful arguments for a new constitutional instrument were the lack of ownership by the public of the existing Human Rights Act, and the opportunity which a UK Bill of Rights would offer to The Cabinet Office review of the Committee for Standards in provide greater protection against possible abuses of power. Public Life The two members opposed to this conclusion – Helena Kennedy The Committee for Standards in Public Life (CSPL) was established QC and Prof Philippe Sands – felt that the time was not ripe for in response to the Cash for Questions scandal in 1994.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Security Act 2000
    c i e AT 5 of 2000 SOCIAL SECURITY ACT 2000 Social Security Act 2000 Index c i e SOCIAL SECURITY ACT 2000 Index Section Page 1 Application to the Island of Acts of Parliament etc ................................................... 5 1A Power to make other provision in respect of social security .................................... 6 2 Orders: supplemental provisions ................................................................................. 7 3 Interpretation ................................................................................................................... 7 4 Short title etc .................................................................................................................... 8 SCHEDULE 1 9 ACTS OF PARLIAMENT TO WHICH SECTION 1 APPLIES 9 SCHEDULE 2 11 ENACTMENTS REPEALED OR REVOKED 11 ENDNOTES 13 TABLE OF LEGISLATION HISTORY 13 TABLE OF RENUMBERED PROVISIONS 13 TABLE OF ENDNOTE REFERENCES 13 c AT 5 of 2000 Page 3 Social Security Act 2000 Section 1 c i e SOCIAL SECURITY ACT 2000 Received Royal Assent: 2 March 2000 Passed: 21 March 2000 Commenced: 21 March 2000 AN ACT to provide for the application to the Island of certain Acts of Parliament and statutory instruments relating to social security; and for connected purposes. 1 Application to the Island of Acts of Parliament etc (1) The Treasury may by order apply to the Island as part of the law of the Island, subject to such exceptions, adaptations and modifications as may be specified in the order, any legislation of the United Kingdom to which this
    [Show full text]
  • Constitution Unit Monitor 68 / March 2018
    1 Constitution Unit Monitor 68 / March 2018 Theresa May with EU Council President Donald Tusk at a meeting to discuss A constitution in flux progress of the Brexit negotiations, 8 December 2017 The UK is experiencing a period of deep constitutional The government’s preferred path will face stiff uncertainty. In at least four key areas, structures of resistance in parliament too. In late February Jeremy power and governance are in flux. Corbyn signalled that Labour wants a UK–EU customs union (an issue also central to the conclusions reached The first of these, of course, is the nature of the UK’s by the Citizens’ Assembly on Brexit). Consequently future relationship with the European Union, to which the government now risks defeat on an amendment to the Brexit negotiations will shortly turn. The degree to the Trade Bill pursuing the same objective, tabled by which the UK continues to pool its sovereignty with Conservative backbencher Anna Soubry. Beyond that, other European countries depends on the form of an amendment to the EU (Withdrawal) Bill passed in the that relationship: how far, and on what issues, the UK House of Commons in December (see p.3) guarantees continues to adhere to EU rules, align closely with them, that the deal between the UK and the EU agreed through or follow its own separate path. Theresa May set out the Brexit negotiations will need to be endorsed by an her most detailed proposals yet in a speech at Mansion Act of Parliament in the UK. Brexit’s opponents are House on 2 March, advocating close alignment outside increasingly vocal and organised, and occupy a strong the structures of the EU Single Market and Customs position in Westminster.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Research in the UK Parliament
    The Role of Research in the UK Parliament Dr Caroline Kenny Dr Abbi Hobbs Research Associate, Department of Science, Senior Research Associate at UCL Technology, Engineering and Public Policy, STEaPP and Head of the Social UCL (UCL STEaPP) and Social Science Adviser, Science Section, POST Parliamentary Office of Science Dr Chris Tyler and Technology (POST) Director of Public Policy, UCL STEaPP, Dr David Christian Rose Co-Investigator and former Director Lecturer in Human Geography, University of POST of East Anglia and former Research Dr Jason Blackstock Associate at UCL STEaPP Head of Department, UCL STEaPP and Principal Investigator Volume one Please cite this report as: Kenny, C., Rose, D.C., Hobbs, A., Tyler, C. & Blackstock, J. (2017) The Role of Research in the UK Parliament Volume One. London, UK, Houses of Parliament. Contents Acknowledgements 6 Members of Parliament 7 Parliamentary representatives 7 External representatives 7 1. Executive summary 8 1.1 Context 1.2 The UK Parliament 8 1.3 Project Overview 9 1.4 Key Findings 10 1.4.1 Definition of research and evidence in Parliament 10 1.4.2 Usefulness of research in Parliament 10 1.4.3 Types and sources of research used in Parliament 10 1.4.4 Purpose of research use in Parliament 11 1.4.5 Factors affecting the use of research in Parliament 11 1.4.6 Next steps 11 2. Project aims 14 2.1 Research focus 14 2.2 Background 15 2.3 Understanding parliamentary processes and the people involved 16 2.4 Methodology 19 2.5 Data interpretation and presentation 22 3.
    [Show full text]
  • 201 2010 the Publications Listed in This Bulletin Have Been Recently to Obtain More Added to CPA’S Library
    ISSN 0140-2447 New Literature on Old Age editor Gillian Crosby volume number 34 201 2010 The publications listed in this bulletin have been recently To obtain more added to CPA’s library. Readers who wish to obtain any of the information documents cited should order from their usual bookseller about AgeInfo (or direct from addresses given) or arrange to borrow them and access to through public and academic libraries. In case of difficulty, CPA library staff will be pleased to advise. CPA’s library, please contact CPA’s full bibliographic collection can be accessed through AgeInfo on CD-ROM and on the web. Gillian Crosby. New Literature on Old Age is published and distributed by CPA to whom all orders should be sent. The subscription rate is £30.00 per annum in the UK (additional subscriptions to the same address £21 per annum) and £36 for overseas. Details of back issues are available from CPA. Centre for Policy on Ageing 25-31 Ironmonger Row London ec1v 3qp Telephone: +44 (0)20 7553 6500 Facsimile: +44 (0)20 7553 6501 Email: [email protected] Web: www.cpa.org.uk Information Service Contents for vol 34 no 201, 2010 Subject Headings Page Abuse 1 Advance directives 3 Age discrimination 3 Ageing (general) 4 Alcohol and drug misuse 4 Arts and music 5 Assessment 5 Assistive technology 6 Carers and caring 7 Crime 8 Death and dying 8 Dementia 8 Demography and the demographics of ageing 12 Design 13 Diet and nutrition 13 Disability 14 Employment 14 End-of-life care 15 Epidemiology 17 Ethical issues 17 Falls 18 Family and informal care 18 Government
    [Show full text]