DOCSLIB.ORG

Minutes of Proceedings

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

House of Lords House of Commons Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments Minutes of Proceedings Session 2005–06 Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments The Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments (JCSI) is appointed to consider all statutory instruments made in exercise of powers granted by Act of Parliament. Instruments not laid before Parliament are included within the Committee's remit; but local instruments and instruments made by devolved administrations do not fall to be considered by JCSI unless they are required to be laid before Parliament. The Joint Committee is empowered to draw the special attention of both Houses to an instrument on any one of a number of grounds specified in the Standing Order under which it works; or on any other ground which does not impinge upon the merits of the instrument or the policy behind it. Membership during 2005-06 Session House of Lords Lord Brougham and Vaux CBE (Conservative) Lord Dykes (Liberal Democrat) Baroness Gale (Labour) Baroness Goudie (Labour) (discharged 15.2.06) Lord Gould of Brookwood (Labour) (added 15.2.06) Lord Greenway (Cross Bench) Lord Howard of Rising (Conservative) Lord Mancroft (Conservative) House of Commons David Maclean MP (Conservative, Penrith and The Border) (Chairman) (added 12.6.06) Dr Roberta Blackman-Woods MP (Labour, City of Durham) Mr Peter Bone MP (Conservative, Wellingborough) Mr Jeffrey M. Donaldson MP (Democratic Unionist, Lagan Valley) (discharged 24.10.05) Mr Eric Forth MP (Conservative, Bromley and Chislehurst) (Chairman) (died: 17.05.06) Michael Jabez Foster MP (Labour, Hastings and Rye) Mr David Kidney MP (Labour, Stafford) Mr John MacDougall MP (Labour, Central Fife) David Simpson MP (Democratic Unionist, Upper Bann) (added 24.10.05) Powers The full constitution and powers of the Committee are set out in House of Commons Standing Order No. 151 and House of Lords Standing Order No. 74, available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publications The reports of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of both Houses. All publications of the Committee are available on the Internet from www.parliament.uk. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Mick Hillyard (Commons Clerk), Kath Kavanagh (Lords Clerk), and Jacqueline Cooksey (Committee Secretary) Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments, Delegated Legislation Office, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA. The telephone number for general inquiries is: 020 7219 2830; the Committee's e–mail address is: [email protected]. Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments: Minutes of Proceedings, Session 2005-06 1 Proceedings of the Committee Tuesday 5 July 2005 Present: Lord Brougham and Vaux Dr Roberta Blackman-Woods MP Lord Dykes Mr Peter Bone MP Baroness Gale Mr Eric Forth MP Mr David Kidney MP Mr John MacDougall MP Mr Allan Roberts, Mr Peter Milledge, Mr Alan Preston and Mr Anwar Akbar in attendance. The Orders of Reference are deemed to have been read. Members declared their interests, pursuant to the resolution of the House of 13 July 1992 (see Appendix). It is moved that Mr Eric Forth do take the Chair —(Lord Brougham and Vaux). The same is agreed to. The Joint Committee deliberate. Resolved, That the special attention of both Houses be drawn to the Adoptions with a Foreign Element Regulations 2005 (S.I. 2005/392) on the ground that the instrument is defectively drafted. Resolved, That the special attention of both Houses be drawn to the Pension Protection Fund (Hybrid Schemes) (Modification) Regulations 2005 (S.I. 2005/449) on the ground that the instrument requires elucidation. Resolved, That the special attention of both Houses be drawn to the Register of Fines (Amendment) Regulations 2005 (S.I. 2005/485) on the ground that the instrument is defectively drafted. Ordered, That the written evidence submitted in relation to the instruments be reported to both Houses. A draft Report is laid before the Committee by the Chairman. Resolved, That the Report be the First Report of the Committee. 2 Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments: Minutes of Proceedings, Session 2005-06 Ordered, That the Chairman do make the Report to the House of Commons and that the Report be made to the House of Lords. Ordered, That the Joint Committee be adjourned to Tuesday 12 July. ______________________ Tuesday 12 July 2005 Present: Lord Brougham and Vaux Mr Eric Forth MP (Chairman) Baroness Gale Mr Peter Bone MP Baroness Goudie Michael Jabez Foster MP Lord Greenway Mr David Kidney MP Lord Howard of Rising Mr John MacDougall MP Mr Allan Roberts, Mr Peter Milledge, Mr Alan Preston and Mr Peter Brooksbank in attendance. The Order of Adjournment is read. The proceedings of Tuesday 5 July are read. The Joint Committee deliberate. Resolved, That the special attention of both Houses be drawn to the Sea Fishing (Restriction on Days at Sea Order) 2005 (S.I. 2005/393) on the grounds that the instrument fails to implement properly a provision of the relevant Council Regulation and is defectively drafted. Resolved, That the special attention of both Houses be drawn to the National Health Service (General Ophthalmic Services Supplementary List) and (General Ophthalmic Services Amendment and Consequential Amendment) Regulations 2005 (S.I. 2005/480) on the grounds that the instrument is defectively drafted and makes an unexpected use of the enabling power. Resolved, That the special attention of both Houses be drawn to the Fines Collection (Amendment) Regulations 2005 (S.I. 2005/484) and the Collection of Fines (Pilot Schemes) (Amendment) Order 2005 (S.I. 2005/487) on the grounds that the instruments are defectively drafted. Resolved, That the special attention of both Houses be drawn to the Family Proceedings (Amendment No. 3) Rules 2005 (S.I. 2005/559) on the grounds that copies of the instrument that were supplied to the Committee and the version originally published were incomplete. Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments: Minutes of Proceedings, Session 2005-06 3 Resolved, That the special attention of both Houses be drawn to the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (Fast Track Procedure) Rules 2005 (S.I. 2005/560) on the grounds that the instrument does not comply with proper drafting practice. Ordered, That the written evidence submitted in relation to the instruments be reported to both Houses. A draft Report is laid before the Committee by the Chairman. Resolved, That the Report be the Second Report of the Committee. Ordered, That the Chairman do make the Report to the House of Commons and that the Report be made to the House of Lords. Ordered, That the Joint Committee be adjourned to Tuesday 19 July. ______________________ Tuesday 19 July 2005 Present: Lord Brougham and Vaux Mr Eric Forth MP (Chairman) Baroness Gale Mr Peter Bone MP Lord Greenway Mr Jeffrey M Donaldson MP Michael Jabez Foster MP Mr David Kidney MP Mr John MacDougall MP Mr Peter Milledge, Mr Alan Preston and Mr Anwar Akbar in attendance. The Order of Adjournment is read. The Proceedings of Tuesday 12 July are read. The Joint Committee deliberate. Resolved, That the Committee notes that Deputy Counsel, Alan Preston, is retiring in September; and records its appreciation for the way in which he has served the Committee with great distinction. Resolved, That the special attention of both Houses be drawn to the Road Traffic (NHS Charges) Amendment Regulations 2005 (S.I. 2005/475) on the ground that the instrument is defectively drafted. Resolved, That the special attention of both Houses be drawn to the National Health Service (Pharmaceutical Services) Regulations 2005 (S.I. 2005/641) on the ground that the instrument is defectively drafted and requires elucidation. 4 Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments: Minutes of Proceedings, Session 2005-06 Ordered, That the written evidence submitted in relation to the instruments be reported to both Houses. Ordered, That the written evidence submitted in relation to the Criminal Procedure Rules 2005 (S.I. 2005/384) be reported to both Houses. Ordered, That the written evidence submitted in relation to the Pensions Regulator Tribunal Rules 2005 (S.I. 2005/690) be reported to both Houses. A draft Report is laid before the Committee by the Chairman. Resolved, That the Report be the Third Report of the Committee. Ordered, That the Chairman do make the Report to the House of Commons and that the Report be made to the House of Lords. The Joint Committee further deliberate. A draft Report [Departmental Returns, 2004] is laid before the Committee by the Chairman. Ordered, That the draft Report be read a second time, paragraph by paragraph. Paragraphs 1 to 9 are read and agreed to. Resolved, That the Report be the First Special Report of the Committee to each House. Several papers were ordered to be appended to the Report. Ordered, That the Chairman do make the Report to the House of Commons and that the Report be made to the House of Lords. Resolved, That the Chairman write to a number of Departments requesting further information on certain S.I.s specifically mentioned in the report. Ordered, That the Joint Committee be adjourned to Wednesday 12 October. ______________________ Wednesday 12 October 2005 Present: Baroness Gale Mr Eric Forth MP (Chairman) Baroness Goudie Mr David Kidney MP Lord Howard of Rising Mr John MacDougall MP Mr Peter Milledge, Mr Peter Davis and Mr Peter Brooksbank in attendance. Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments: Minutes of Proceedings, Session 2005-06 5 The Order of Adjournment is read. The Proceedings of Tuesday 19 July are read. The Joint Committee deliberate. Resolved, That the Committee welcome new Counsel Peter Davis. Resolved, That the special attention of both Houses be drawn to the Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2005 (S.I. 2005/894) on the ground that the instrument is defectively drafted.
Recommended publications
  • Parliamentary Debates (Hansard)

    Parliamentary Debates (Hansard)

    Thursday Volume 506 25 February 2010 No. 45 HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) Thursday 25 February 2010 £5·00 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2010 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Parliamentary Click-Use Licence, available online through the Office of Public Sector Information website at www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/ Enquiries to the Office of Public Sector Information, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 4DU; e-mail: [email protected] 427 25 FEBRUARY 2010 428 Dr. Alan Whitehead (Southampton, Test) (Lab): Does House of Commons my hon. Friend accept that a large element of fuel poverty relates to the energy efficiency of the homes in Thursday 25 February 2010 which fuel-poor people live? Does he also accept that efforts to ensure that those homes are made properly energy efficient are a vital part of our attack on fuel The House met at half-past Ten o’clock poverty? What is his assessment of the likely impact of community energy response teams, community energy saving programmes, and other schemes, such as the PRAYERS Great British Refurb, on improving the energy efficiency of homes? [MR.SPEAKER in the Chair] Mr. Kidney: I agree that the most sustainable way of BUSINESS BEFORE QUESTIONS helping people to stay out of fuel poverty is to ensure that their homes are energy efficient. That is why we have concentrated so much on the energy companies’ LONDON LOCAL AUTHORITIES BILL [LORDS] obligation, under which more than 6 million homes (BY ORDER) have been insulated. Another 2 million have been insulated Second Reading opposed and deferred until Thursday under Warm Front.
  • None of the Above: the UK House of Commons Votes on Reforming the House of Lords, February 2003

    None of the Above: the UK House of Commons Votes on Reforming the House of Lords, February 2003

    d:/1polq/74-3/mclean.3d ^ 24/6/3 ^ 16:6 ^ bp/sh None of the Above: The UK House of Commons Votes on Reforming the House of Lords, February 2003 IAIN MCLEAN, ARTHUR SPIRLING AND MEG RUSSELL The preamble to the UK's Parliament Act cent) of the members of a future house be 1911 (1 & 2 Geo. 5 c.13) states that that Act elected, but rejected the Royal Com- is a temporary measure only: mission's proposal that all appointed members be chosen by an independent Whereas it is intended to substitute for the House of Lords as it at present exists a Second appointments commission. Chamber constituted on a popular instead of This White Paper had a poor reception. hereditary basis, but substitution cannot be The Lord Chancellor's Department, immediately brought into operation . which issued it, later analysed the re- sponses to it. Of the 82 per cent of Attempts to bring the substitution into respondents who discussed election, operation in 1949 and 1968 failed. The 89 per cent `called for a house that was Labour Party's 1997 manifesto states: 50per cent or more elected'. Of the 17 per The House of Lords must be reformed. As an cent of respondents who discussed the initial, self-contained reform, not dependent future of the Church of England bishops, on further reform in the future, the right of 85 per cent opposed their continued pre- hereditary peers to sit and vote in the House sence in the house. Of the 12 per cent of of Lords will be ended by statute.
  • A Modern Parliament in a Modern Democracy

    A Modern Parliament in a Modern Democracy

    A Modern Parliament in a Modern Democracy State of the Union Annual Lecture by Rt Hon. Robin Cook MP Leader of the House December 2001 Published by The Constitution Unit School of Public Policy UCL (University College London) 29–30 Tavistock Square London WC1H 9QU Tel: 020 7679 4977 Fax:020 7679 4978 Email: [email protected] Web: www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/ ©The Constitution Unit, UCL 2001 This report is sold subject to the condition that is shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, hired out or otherwise circulated without the publisher’s prior consent in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition including this condition being imposed on the subsequent purchaser. First Published December 2001 A Modern Parliament in a Modern Democracy State of the Union Annual Lecture Rt Hon. Robin Cook MP, Leader of the House Chancellor’s Hall, Senate House, University of London It is an honour to be invited to give this lecture to the Constitution Unit on the publication of their report on the State of the Nations. One of the unequal contests between government and opposition is the difficulty of an opposition to obtaining quality advice in preparing its plans for government. It is for that reason that after taking office in 1997 we trebled the amount of Short Money available to the opposition parties. It has long been clear that a high priority for the incoming Labour Government would be constitutional reform. Indeed our first Parliament witnessed a degree of constitutional reform which probably has no match in terms of breadth or significance since the great reform acts of the nineteenth century.
  • The Conservative Parliamentary Party the Conservative Parliamentary Party

    The Conservative Parliamentary Party the Conservative Parliamentary Party

    4 Philip Cowley and Mark Stuart The Conservative parliamentary party The Conservative parliamentary party Philip Cowley and Mark Stuart 1 When the Conservative Party gathered for its first party conference since the 1997 general election, they came to bury the parliamentary party, not to praise it. The preceding five years had seen the party lose its (long-enjoyed) reputation for unity, and the blame for this was laid largely at the feet of the party’s parliamentarians.2 As Peter Riddell noted in The Times, ‘speaker after speaker was loudly cheered whenever they criticised the parliamentary party and its divisions’.3 It was an argument with which both the outgoing and incoming Prime Ministers were in agreement. Just before the 1997 general election, John Major confessed to his biographer that ‘I love my party in the country, but I do not love my parliamentary party’; he was later to claim that ‘divided views – expressed without restraint – in the parliamentary party made our position impossible’.4 And in his first address to the massed ranks of the new parliamentary Labour Party after the election Tony Blair drew attention to the state of the Conservative Party: Look at the Tory Party. Pause. Reflect. Then vow never to emulate. Day after day, when in government they had MPs out there, behaving with the indiscipline and thoughtlessness that was reminiscent of us in the early 80s. Where are they now, those great rebels? His answer was simple: not in Parliament. ‘When the walls came crashing down beneath the tidal wave of change, there was no discrimination between those Tory MPs.
  • The House of Commons Modernisation Committee: Who Needs It?

    The House of Commons Modernisation Committee: Who Needs It?

    The House of Commons Modernisation Committee: Who Needs It? British Journal of Politics and International Relation (2007), vol.9, no.1, pp.138-157. Alexandra Kelso Department of Politics and International Relations, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK. [email protected] Abstract Modernisation has been rhetorically important for the Labour government since 1997, and it found a dedicated outlet through the House of Commons Modernisation Committee. This committee has pursued a particular type of modernisation, which this article seeks to explore. It does this by focusing on three issues. First, it examines the role of the Leader of the House of Commons in the chair of the Modernisation Committee. Second, it looks at the work of the Modernisation Committee in comparison to that of the Procedure Committee. Finally, it contextualises the discussion of modernisation with reference to the distinction between efficiency reforms and effectiveness reforms, and explores what this reveals about the complexity of executive–legislative relations at Westminster, and about the course of the modernisation debate since 1997. Introduction New Labour came to power in 1997 committed to a modernising agenda informed by its adherence to the so-called Third Way, and its promise of renewing social democracy (Giddens 1998 and 2000; Clift 2001). The discourse of the Third Way signified a ‘reconfiguration of relationships between economy and state, public and private, government and people’, in which ‘modernisation was a label attached to a wide-range of institutional reforms, including those of government, party and the political process itself’ (Newman 2001, 40).
  • Holders of Ministerial Office in the Conservative Governments 1979-1997

    Holders of Ministerial Office in the Conservative Governments 1979-1997

    Holders of Ministerial Office in the Conservative Governments 1979-1997 Parliamentary Information List Standard Note: SN/PC/04657 Last updated: 11 March 2008 Author: Department of Information Services All efforts have been made to ensure the accuracy of this data. Nevertheless the complexity of Ministerial appointments, changes in the machinery of government and the very large number of Ministerial changes between 1979 and 1997 mean that there may be some omissions from this list. Where an individual was a Minister at the time of the May 1997 general election the end of his/her term of office has been given as 2 May. Finally, where possible the exact dates of service have been given although when this information was unavailable only the month is given. The Parliamentary Information List series covers various topics relating to Parliament; they include Bills, Committees, Constitution, Debates, Divisions, The House of Commons, Parliament and procedure. Also available: Research papers – impartial briefings on major bills and other topics of public and parliamentary concern, available as printed documents and on the Intranet and Internet. Standard notes – a selection of less formal briefings, often produced in response to frequently asked questions, are accessible via the Internet. Guides to Parliament – The House of Commons Information Office answers enquiries on the work, history and membership of the House of Commons. It also produces a range of publications about the House which are available for free in hard copy on request Education web site – a web site for children and schools with information and activities about Parliament. Any comments or corrections to the lists would be gratefully received and should be sent to: Parliamentary Information Lists Editor, Parliament & Constitution Centre, House of Commons, London SW1A OAA.
  • Modernisation of Language in Standing Orders Relating to Select Committees

    Modernisation of Language in Standing Orders Relating to Select Committees

    House of Commons Liaison Committee Modernisation of language in standing orders relating to select committees Fifth Special Report of Session 2007–08 Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 16 October 2008 HC 1110 Published on 23 October 2008 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 The Liaison Committee The Liaison Committee is appointed to consider general matters relating to the work of select committees; to advise the House of Commons Commission on select committees; to choose select committee reports for debate in the House and to hear evidence from the Prime Minister on matters of public policy. Current membership Mr Alan Williams MP (Labour, Swansea West) (Chairman) The Chairmen for the time being of the Select Committees listed below: Administration – Mr Frank Doran MP (Labour, Aberdeen North) Business and Enterprise – Peter Luff MP (Conservative, Mid Worcestershire) Children, Schools and Families – Mr Barry Sheerman MP (Labour/Co-op, Huddersfield) Communities and Local Government – Dr Phyllis Starkey MP (Labour, Milton Keynes South West) Culture, Media and Sport – Mr John Whittingdale MP (Conservative, Maldon and Chelmsford East) Defence – Mr James Arbuthnot MP (Conservative, North East Hampshire) Environmental Audit – Mr Tim Yeo MP (Conservative, South Suffolk) Environment, Food and Rural Affairs – Mr Michael Jack MP (Conservative, Fylde) European Scrutiny – Michael Connarty MP (Labour, Linlithgow and East Falkirk) Finance and Services – Sir Stuart Bell MP (Labour, Middlesbrough)
  • The 'Dispossessed', The'never-Possessed' and The

    The 'Dispossessed', The'never-Possessed' and The

    The ‘Dispossessed’, and the ‘Bastards’ the ‘Never-Possessed’ ‘Dispossessed’, The the‘Never-Possessed’ The ‘Dispossessed’, and the‘Bastards’ Debunking Major’s Myths of the Eurosceptics the‘Never-Possessed’ Euroscepticism within the Conservative Party has been growing steadily since the Maastricth Rebellion of 1993. And yet the lessons of those turbulent months have yet to be learned properly. This book sets out clearly the reasons why some MPs rebelled and the‘Bastards’ and others did not - and points the way to the future. Debunking Major’s Myths of the Eurosceptics Between 1992 and 1993 the Maastricht Rebellion tore apart John Major’s Conservative Government. An ever-shifting group of Eurosceptic rebels consumed hours of Parliamentary time, derailed legislation and brought the government to the brink of collapse. Major denounced the rebels as the ‘Dispossessed’, the ‘Never-Possessed’ and the ‘Bastards’. This paper rebuts the myths about the Maastricht rebels. Luke Stanley Debunking Major’s Myths of the Eurosceptics Myths of Debunking Major’s With Prime Minister Cameron’s proposed renegotiation and referendum on EU The Bruges Group membership set to take place in 2017 recognising the factors affecting MPs’ willingness to defy the party line is vital. Should Cameron secure re-election at the head of a minority or slim-majority government, the ensuing Europe debate within the Conservative Party is likely to be even more divisive than Maastricht. Understanding MPs’ behaviour on Europe will allow the pro-withdrawal faction to assess the optimum methods of convincing MPs to side with them, as well as how to counter the Europhile faction’s attempts to poach their followers.
  • 21595 Cat-2217

    21595 Cat-2217

    Vrije Universiteit Brussel Juggling three life spheres in local politics in Belgium Emery, Laura; Meier, Petra; Mortelmans, Dimitri Published in: The Work-Life Balance Bulletin Publication date: 2019 Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): Emery, L., Meier, P., & Mortelmans, D. (2019). Juggling three life spheres in local politics in Belgium. The Work- Life Balance Bulletin, 3(1), 14-17. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 03. Oct. 2021 The Work-Life Balance Bulletin A DOP Publication Vol. 3, No. 1, Summer 2019 Message from the Co-chairs Almuth McDowall & Gail Kinman Almuth McDowall Gail Kinman Work-life balance: European insights and no one stays after hours, and short HIS EDITORIAL was written as one working weeks are common. In practice, this of us (Almuth McDowall) enjoyed means that academics don’t always find it Ta visiting professorship for a month at easy to request equipment, get support with the University of Aix-Marseille in Provence, other tasks and so on, increasing workloads.
  • Estimates Memoranda

    Estimates Memoranda

    House of Commons Liaison Committee Estimates Memoranda Third Report of Session 2005–06 Report, together with appendix and formal minutes Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 26 October 2006 HC 1685 Published on 6 November 2006 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £5.00 The Liaison Committee The Liaison Committee is appointed to consider general matters relating to the work of select committees; to advise the House of Commons Commission on select committees; to choose select committee reports for debate in the House and to hear evidence from the Prime Minister on matters of public policy. Current membership Mr Alan Williams MP (Labour, Swansea West) (Chairman) The Chairmen for the time being of the Select Committees listed below: Administration – Mr Frank Doran MP (Labour, Aberdeen North) Communities and Local Government – Dr Phyllis Starkey MP (Labour, Milton Keynes South West) Constitutional Affairs – Mr Alan Beith MP (Liberal Democrat, Berwick-upon- Tweed) Culture, Media and Sport – Mr John Whittingdale MP (Conservative, Maldon and Chelmsford East) Defence – Mr James Arbuthnot MP (Conservative, North East Hampshire) Education and Skills – Mr Barry Sheerman MP (Labour/Co-op, Huddersfield) Environmental Audit – Mr Tim Yeo MP (Conservative, South Suffolk) Environment, Food and Rural Affairs – Mr Michael Jack MP (Conservative, Fylde) European Scrutiny – Michael Connarty MP (Labour, Linlithgow and East Falkirk) Finance and Services – Sir Stuart Bell MP (Labour, Middlesbrough) Foreign Affairs
  • Peerage Creations Since 1997

    Peerage Creations Since 1997

    Peerage creations since 1997 This House of Lords Library Note provides details of appointments to the House of Lords since May 1997. It provides tables showing the numbers appointed under the Prime Ministers Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and David Cameron, broken down by party affiliation at the time of appointment. It also includes a chronological list of all those appointed during this period. This Note has been authored jointly by staff in the House of Commons and House of Lords Libraries. The same paper has been published as both a House of Lords Library Note (LLN 2011/008) and House of Commons Library Standard Note (SN/PC/5867). Alex Brocklehurst and Lucinda Maer 17 February 2011 LLN 2011/008 House of Lords Library Notes are compiled for the benefit of Members of Parliament and their personal staff. Authors are available to discuss the contents of the Notes with the Members and their staff but cannot advise members of the general public. Any comments on Library Notes should be sent to the Head of Research Services, House of Lords Library, London SW1A 0PW or emailed to [email protected]. Table of Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Peerage Creations ................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Lords Spiritual ........................................................................................................ 1 1.3 Hereditary Peers ...................................................................................................
  • Download Update 28

    Download Update 28

    UPDATE NUMBER 28. WINTER 2004 - 2005 ROADS SCHEME APPROVED On September 16th, Eden District Council granted Planning Permission for the extension of the internal access roads at North Lakes Industrial Park, Flusco. This is the application which has been highlighted in “Updates” over the last 18 months. During the consultation period, the Council had received about 170 written responses - almost all of them expressing feelings against any development which would affect the trackbed of the Railway. Many pointed out that this issue affected areas outside Eden and required wider consultation. We are grateful to everyone who took the trouble to write in support of the Railway project. Few issues attract so much comment, or run so strongly against the views of the Council. Keswick Town Council had suggested that a site meeting take place before the Committee meeting, with all interested parties, as the effects of this decision would be felt far beyond Eden District. This was ignored. Members of Eden’s Planning Committee did make a site visit, but refused an offer by CKP to provide a Railway Engineer to explain the issues, and no other organisations were represented on site. A representative of CKP was allowed just 5 minutes to speak at the Committee meeting to cover all objections - by which time the Officers had already recommended approval. CKP Railways plc suggested that changing the roads layout would allow all policies to be complied with. The road layout in the application passed is quite different from that illustrated in the planning brief supplied by the developers in 2000.