DOCSLIB.ORG

LIAISON COMMITTEE the Review of Investigative and Scrutiny Committees Written Evidence Contents

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
LIAISON COMMITTEE the Review of Investigative and Scrutiny Committees Written Evidence Contents LIAISON COMMITTEE The Review of Investigative and Scrutiny Committees Written evidence Contents Lord Alton of Liverpool – Written evidence (RIS0002) ................................................................................. 1 Lord Alton of Liverpool – Supplementary written evidence (RIS0078) ........................................................ 2 Elizabeth Arbon-Stuckle - Written evidence (RIS0017) ................................................................................ 3 Association of British Insurers – Written evidence (RIS0051) ...................................................................... 4 Australian Senate – Written evidence (RIS0059) .......................................................................................... 8 Lord Balfe – Written evidence (RIS0052) .................................................................................................... 16 Anouk Berthier and Hugh Bochel - Written evidence (RIS0014) ................................................................ 17 Lord Best - Written submission (RIS0007) .................................................................................................. 22 Lord Best, Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope, Lord Porter of Spalding and Baroness Warwick of Undercliffe – Written evidence (RIS0069) ........................................................................................................................ 23 Biochemical Society – Written evidence (RIS0018) .................................................................................... 24 Bishop of Birmingham and the Convenor of the Lords Spiritual –Written evidence (RIS0066) ................. 25 Lord Birt – Written evidence (RIS0037) ...................................................................................................... 27 Eirik Bjorge, Arabella Lang and Ewan Smith – Written evidence (RIS0034) ............................................... 28 The Rt Hon the Lord Blencathra – Written evidence (RIS0009) ................................................................. 39 Lord Blunkett – Written evidence (RIS0004) .............................................................................................. 65 Dr Catherine Bochel – Written evidence (RIS0016) .................................................................................... 68 Hugh Bochel and Anouk Berthier - Written evidence (RIS0014) ................................................................ 71 Baroness Brown of Cambridge - Written evidence (RIS0025) .................................................................... 72 Lord Bruce of Bennachie, Lord Butler of Brockwell, Lord Cavendish of Furness, Lord de Mauley, Lord Desai, Baroness Falkner of Margravine, Lord Giddens, Baroness Liddell of Coatdyke, The Earl of Lindsay, Baroness Neville-Rolfe, Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd and Lord Vaux of Harrowden: Members of the EU Financial Affairs Sub-Committee- Written evidence (RIS0071) .................................................................. 73 Lord Butler of Brockwell, Lord Bruce of Bennachie, Lord Cavendish of Furness, Lord de Mauley, Lord Desai, Baroness Falkner of Margravine, Lord Giddens, Baroness Liddell of Coatdyke, The Earl of Lindsay, Baroness Neville-Rolfe, Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd and Lord Vaux of Harrowden: Members of the EU Financial Affairs Sub-Committee- Written evidence (RIS0071) .................................................................. 75 Canadian Senate – Written evidence (RIS0057) ......................................................................................... 76 Lord Cavendish of Furness, Lord Bruce of Bennachie, Lord Butler of Brockwell, Lord de Mauley, Lord Desai, Baroness Falkner of Margravine, Lord Giddens, Baroness Liddell of Coatdyke, The Earl of Lindsay, Baroness Neville-Rolfe, Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd and Lord Vaux of Harrowden: Members of the EU Financial Affairs Sub-Committee- Written evidence (RIS0071) .................................................................. 79 Thomas Caygill, Doctoral Candidate in the School of Geography, Politics and Sociology, Newcastle University – Written evidence (RIS0008) .................................................................................................... 80 Lord Clement-Jones – Supplementary written evidence (RIS0061) ........................................................... 85 Lord Cormack – Written evidence (RIS0045) .............................................................................................. 89 Bruce Crawford MSP – Written evidence (RIS0076) ................................................................................... 90 Lord Curry of Kirkharle and Lord Trees – Written evidence (RIS0080) ....................................................... 92 Lord de Mauley, Lord Bruce of Bennachie, Lord Butler of Brockwell, Lord Cavendish of Furness, Lord Desai, Baroness Falkner of Margravine, Lord Giddens, Baroness Liddell of Coatdyke, The Earl of Lindsay, Baroness Neville-Rolfe, Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd and Lord Vaux of Harrowden: Members of the EU Financial Affairs Sub-Committee- Written evidence (RIS0071) .................................................................. 93 Baroness Deech – Written evidence (RIS0024) .......................................................................................... 94 Baroness Deech – Supplementary written evidence (RIS0062) ................................................................. 95 Lord Desai, Lord Bruce of Bennachie, Lord Butler of Brockwell, Lord Cavendish of Furness, Lord de Mauley, Baroness Falkner of Margravine, Lord Giddens, Baroness Liddell of Coatdyke, The Earl of Lindsay, Baroness Neville-Rolfe, Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd and Lord Vaux of Harrowden: Members of the EU Financial Affairs Sub-Committee- Written evidence (RIS0071) ...................................................... 96 Lord Dholakia – Written evidence (RIS0081) .......................................................................................... 97 Doteveryone – Written evidence (RIS0021) ............................................................................................... 98 The Earl of Dundee and John Howell MP – Written evidence (RIS0075) ................................................. 105 Lord Empey – Written evidence (RIS0043) ............................................................................................... 107 Alun Evans and Lord Stern of Brentford – Written evidence (RIS0039) ................................................... 108 Baroness Falkner of Margravine, Lord Bruce of Bennachie, Lord Butler of Brockwell, Lord Cavendish of Furness, Lord de Mauley, Lord Desai, Lord Giddens, Baroness Liddell of Coatdyke, The Earl of Lindsay, Baroness Neville-Rolfe, Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd and Lord Vaux of Harrowden: Members of the EU Financial Affairs Sub-Committee- Written evidence (RIS0071) ................................................................ 109 The Rt Hon Frank Field MP – Supplementary written evidence (RIS0067) .............................................. 110 Professor Matthew Flinders – Written evidence (RIS0005) ..................................................................... 114 Professor Matthew Flinders – Supplementary written evidence (RIS0060) ............................................ 118 Baroness Fookes – Written evidence (RIS0031) ....................................................................................... 119 Lord Forsyth of Drumlean – Written evidence (RIS0053) ......................................................................... 123 Lord Forsyth of Drumlean – Supplementary written evidence (RIS0063) ................................................ 127 Foundation for Democracy and Sustainable Development (FDSD) - Written evidence (RIS0019) .......... 128 Lord Giddens, Lord Bruce of Bennachie, Lord Butler of Brockwell, Lord Cavendish of Furness, Lord de Mauley, Lord Desai, Baroness Falkner of Margravine, Baroness Liddell of Coatdyke, The Earl of Lindsay, Baroness Neville-Rolfe, Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd and Lord Vaux of Harrowden: Members of the EU Financial Affairs Sub-Committee- Written evidence (RIS0071) ................................................................ 133 Hansard Society – Written evidence (RIS0048) ........................................................................................ 134 Lord Harris of Haringey – Written evidence (RIS0027) ............................................................................. 144 Lord Hodgson of Astley Abbots – Supplementary written evidence (RIS0070) ....................................... 145 Lord Hollick – Written evidence (RIS0047) ............................................................................................... 147 House of Commons Petitions Committee – Written evidence (RIS0074) ................................................ 148 House of Lords European Union Committee - Written evidence (RIS0012) ............................................. 160 Houses of Parliament Education and Engagement Service – Written evidence (RIS0003) ...................... 168 Lord Howell of Guildford – Written evidence (RIS0038) .......................................................................... 174 Lord Howell of Guildford – Supplementary evidence (RIS0060) .............................................................. 177 John Howell MP and the Earl of Dundee – Written evidence (RIS0075) .................................................. 178 Lord Inglewood - Written evidence (RIS0026) .........................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • STUDENT LIAISON COMMITTEE Terms of Reference
    STUDENT LIAISON COMMITTEE Terms of Reference 1 Constitution and purpose 1.1 The University recognises that, in the interests of staff and students, it is important to continually advance the excellence of the student experience and the teaching, learning and research environment it provides. The voice of the student community is represented by the Students’ Union. 1.2 To this end and, in accordance with the provisions of the Articles of Government (paragraph 5.4), the University’s Governing Body has established a Student Liaison Committee (SLC). 1.3 The SLC provides a forum for students to raise views with the Board of Governors and members of the Academic Board and to: • consider and inform (the Board of Governors) on matters of concern and to advise the student body (Articles of Government paragraph 5.4); • receive reports on student satisfaction and the student experience and report to the Board of Governors; • provide communication channels between the student community and Governors; 2 Remit 2.1 To advise the University’s governing body on its statutory obligations with regard to the Students’ Union (SU), particularly the requirements of the Education Act 1994, and specifically: a) all matters concerning the SU’s Constitution which the SLC should review every five years (last reviewed 2011); b) all matters concerning the UWL/SU Code of Practice which the SLC should review every five years (last reviewed 2011); c) receive reports on the election of Officer Trustees in accordance with requirements of the Education Act 1994 (it has been agreed that these reports will only be brought forward if a substantial item needs to be brought to the Board’s attention).
    [Show full text]
  • Government Response to the House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee Report HC 109-1 of Session 2013-14 Reforming the Scrutiny System in the House of Commons
    Government Response to the House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee Report HC 109-1 of Session 2013-14 Reforming the Scrutiny System in the House of Commons Presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs by Command of Her Majesty July 2014 Cm 8914 Government Response to the House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee Report HC 109-1 of Session 2013-14 Reforming the Scrutiny System in the House of Commons Presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs by Command of Her Majesty July 2014 Cm 8914 © Crown copyright 2014 You may re-use this information (excluding logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence v.2. To view this licence visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/2/ or email [email protected] Where third party material has been identified, permission from the respective copyright holder must be sought. This publication is available at www.gov.uk/government/publications. Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at [email protected]. Print ISBN 9781474109796 Web ISBN 9781474109802 Printed in the UK by the Williams Lea Group on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. ID P002659226 42260 07/14 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum. Government Response to the House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee 24th Report HC 109-1 of Session 2013-14, Reforming the Scrutiny System in the House of Commons The Government welcomes the European Scrutiny Committee’s Inquiry into Reforming the Scrutiny System in the House of Commons and the detailed consideration the Committee has given this important issue.
    [Show full text]
  • Hansard Society Evidence to the House of Lords Liaison Committee: Review of Investigative and Scrutiny Committees
    Hansard Society evidence to the House of Lords Liaison Committee: Review of investigative and scrutiny committees Submitted: May 2018 Authors: Dr Ruth Fox (Director) and Dr Brigid Fowler (Senior Researcher) 2 Summary This submission covers: • Strengths and weaknesses of the current House of Lords committee structure • Possible changes to the current structure, focusing on: the quality of the legislative process; devolution; and policy foresight/horizon-scanning • Brexit-related considerations • Trade policy • Public engagement We recommend: • On the quality of the legislative process: the creation of a Legislative Standards Committee and a Post-Legislative Scrutiny Committee, and that the remit of the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee be amended • On devolution, the creation of a new permanent committee • On policy foresight/horizon-scanning, the creation of a new ‘Future Forum’ or Committee • On Brexit-related matters, that the European Union Committee will need to continue to operate during any post-Brexit transition period as provided for in the draft UK-EU Withdrawal Agreement • On trade policy, that the Lords committee structure will need to change to accommodate scrutiny of this new policy area, and that the House will need to develop a view, ideally sooner rather than later, on how this might best be effected, in cooperation with the Commons. Submission Strengths and weaknesses of the current House of Lords committee structure 1. The House of Lords committee structure has a number of important strengths that should be retained in any reformed system: • It is more flexible than the Commons’ system: the fact that the committee structure is not tied to the shadowing of government departments allows the Upper House more discretion.
    [Show full text]
  • Report of the Select Committee on the Reduction of Standing Committees of Tynwald
    REPORT OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE REDUCTION OF STANDING COMMITTEES OF TYNWALD t i I. • REPORT OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE REDUCTION OF STANDING COMMITTEES OF TYNWALD To the Honourable Noel Q Cringle, President of Tynwald, and the Honourable Members of the Council and Keys in Tynwald assembled PART 1 INTRODUCTION 1. Background At the sitting of Tynwald Court on 21st May 2002 it was resolved that a Select Committee of five members be established to - "investigate and report by no later than July 2003 on the feasibility of reducing the number of Standing Committees of Tynwald along with any recommendations as to the responsibilities and membership and any proposals for change." 2. Mr Karran, Mr Lowey, Mr Quayle, Mr Quine and Mr Speaker were elected. At 4, the first meeting Mr Speaker was unanimously elected as Chairman. 3. The Committee has held four meetings. C/RSC/02/plb PART 2 STRATEGY 2.1 The Committees of Tynwald that would be examined were determined as: Committee on Constitutional Matters; Committee on the Declaration of Members' Interests, Ecclesiastical Committee; Committee on Economic Initiatives; Joint Committee on the Emoluments of Certain Public Servants; Committee on Expenditure and Public Accounts; Tynwald Ceremony Arrangements Committee; Tynwald Honours Committee; Tynwald Management Committee; Tynwald Members' Pension Scheme Management Committee; and Tynwald Standing Orders Committee of Tynwald. A brief summary of the membership and terms of reference of each standing committee is attached as Appendix 1. 2 C/RSC/02/plb 2.2 In order to facilitate its investigation your Committee also decided that - (a) Comparative information on committee structures in adjacent parliaments should be obtained.
    [Show full text]
  • Liaison Committee
    Liaison Committee House of Commons London SW1A 0AA Tel: 020 7219 5675 Email: [email protected] Website: https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/103/liaison-committee-commons From Sir Bernard Jenkin MP, Chair Rt Hon Jacob Rees-Mogg MP Leader of the House House of Commons London SW1A 0AA 17 February 2021 Dear Jacob, In anticipation of the announcement of the end of the current Parliamentary Session, I am writing on behalf of Select Committee Chairs to highlight a number of pieces of legislation which are awaiting time in the Government’s legislative programme. The Government’s legislative programme has been understandably impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic, but there are a number of outstanding proposals which Committees are keen to see brought forward or where further action or information is required: • Passing the Environment Bill should be a Government priority, given the gap that now exists in environmental governance following the end of the transition period. Provisions in the Bill respond to recommendations the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee and the Environmental Audit Committee have made across a range of inquiries in recent years. Both Committees conducted pre-legislative scrutiny of the first part of the Bill in 2019 and have continued to monitor its progress during the current Session. • The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee have also conducted pre-legislative scrutiny on the Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Bill, which increases sentences for some animal cruelty offences. This Bill will implement recommendations from the Committee dating back to 2016. The Committee completed pre-legislative scrutiny on the relevant provisions in 2018 but the Bill has yet to complete passage through the House.
    [Show full text]
  • Parliamentary Committees: Single/Lower House
    Parliamentary committees: Single/lower house Coverage for data collection 2020 Country English name National name BEIS EU Member States Belgium National defence DÉFENSE NATIONALE B JUSTICE JUSTICE B FOREIGN RELATIONS RELATIONS EXTÉRIEURES B CONSTITUTION AND INSTITUTIONAL CONSTITUTION ET RENOUVEAU B RENEWAL INSTITUTIONNEL INTERIOR, SECURITY, MIGRATION AND INTÉRIEUR, SÉCURITÉ, MIGRATION ET B ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS MATIÈRES ADMINISTRATIVES ENERGY, ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE ENERGIE, ENVIRONNEMENT ET CLIMAT I ECONOMY, CONSUMER PROTECTION AND ÉCONOMIE, PROTECTION DES E DIGITAL AGENDA CONSOMMATEURS ET AGENDA NUMÉRIQUE FINANCE AND BUDGET FINANCES ET BUDGET E MOBILITY, PUBLIC ENTERPRISES AND MOBILITÉ, ENTREPRISES PUBLIQUES ET I FEDERAL INSTITUTIONS INSTITUTIONS FÉDÉRALES SOCIAL AFFAIRS, EMPLOYMENT AND AFFAIRES SOCIALES, EMPLOI ET PENSIONS SC PENSIONS HEALTH AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY SANTÉ ET EGALITÉ DES CHANCES SC COVID-19 COVID-19 SC Bulgaria Committee on Legal Affairs B Foreign Policy Committee B Defense Committee B Committee on the Internal Security and B Public Order Committee on Anti-Corruption, Conflict of B Interests and Parliamentary Ethics Committee on European Affairs and B Oversight of the European Funds Committee for Control of the Security B Services, the Application and Use of the Special Intelligence Means and the Data Access under the Electronic Communications Act Committee on the Policies for Bulgarians B Abroad Committee on Budget and Finance E Committee on Economic Policy and Tourism E Committee on Agriculture and Foods E Monitoring
    [Show full text]
  • Departmental Select Committees Are Cross-Party Non-Departmental Committees 6 Groups of Mps Responsible for the Scrutiny of Liaison Committee 6 Government Departments
    Factsheet P2 House of Commons Information Office Procedure Series Departmental Select Revised August 2010 Committees Contents This Factsheet has been archived so the content Background 2 and web links may be out of date. Please visit The Chairman and Membership 2 Select Committee staff 3 our About Parliament pages for current Meetings 3 information. How committees work 4 Inquiries 4 Evidence 4 Reports 5 Government replies 5 Debates on reports 5 Departmental select committees are cross-party Non-departmental Committees 6 groups of MPs responsible for the scrutiny of Liaison Committee 6 government departments. There are 19 such Public Accounts Committee 6 European Scrutiny Committee 6 committees, with between 11 and 14 members Environmental Audit Committee 6 each, as laid out in Standing Order No. 152 of Public Administration Select Committee 7 the House of Commons. Regional Committees 8 Annex 1 - The Departmental Select Select committees have been used by the House Committee system 8 Further reading 9 for centuries for many different purposes. A small Contact information 10 group of Members can gather information and Feedback form 11 produce detailed reports much more easily than the House as a whole. The present system of committees monitoring government departments was established in 1979. Modifications to the titles and remits of the committees have been regularly made since then to reflect changes in government departments, but the structure remains essentially the same. Their role is to examine the ‘expenditure, administration and policy' of the relevant government department and its 'associated public bodies': those public bodies include, for example, the NHS, regulators and quangos Committees determine their own subjects for November 2009 FS No.P2 Ed 3.6 inquiry, gather written and oral evidence (and ISSN 0144-4689 sometimes information from visits in the UK or overseas) and make reports to the House which © Parliamentary Copyright (House of Commons) 2010 are printed and placed on the Internet.
    [Show full text]
  • Programme for Committee Clerks of the Parliament of Guyana
    0 1021CBP/GUYANA15 CPA UK & Parliament of Guyana Capacity Building Programme Activity 1: Programme for Committee Clerks of the Parliament of Guyana 16-19 November 2015, Houses of Parliament, London Report 1 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2 2. AIM & OBJECTIVES 3 3. FACILITATORS AND DELEGATION 3 4. PROGRAMME DETAILS 4 5. PROGRAMME COMMENTS 7 WIDENING THE SCOPE AND IMPACT OF COMMITTEE INQUIRIES 7 LIAISON COMMITTEE 8 THE RESPECT POLICY 8 PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND OUTREACH 9 SECURITY SENSITIVE COMMITTEES 9 MINUTES, BRIEFS AND REPORTS 10 RESEARCH 11 6. PROGRAMME BUDGET 12 7. OUTCOMES AND FOLLOW-UP ACTIVITIES 12 8. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 13 9. ABOUT CPA UK 13 ANNEX A. PARTICIPANT BIOGRAPHIES 14 B. SPEAKER BIOGRAPHIES 16 1 2 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.01 In October 2015, CPA UK and the Parliament of Guyana embarked on a seven-month Capacity Building Programme jointly funded by CPA UK and the British High Commission, Georgetown. The aims of the wider programme are to: • Enhance the Assembly’s ability to conduct its business effectively • Work with the Assembly’s parliamentary committees to enhance their oversight capacity • Work with the Parliamentary Leadership, to strengthen its administrative, financial, and procedural independence • Work with parliamentary officials to support the functioning of the Assembly • Address the challenges of maintaining a successful coalition government • Support the interaction between UK, Guyanese and Caribbean Parliamentarians to discuss issues of regional interest; sustainability, energy and development 1.2 The first agreed activity of the Capacity Building Programme was a Workshop for Committee Clerks of the Parliament of Guyana based in Westminster. 1.3 The Programme involved two Committee Clerks and four Assistant Committee Clerks.
    [Show full text]
  • The Public Engagement Strategy in the UK Parliament Since 2006
    Date submitted: 03/07/2010 The Public Engagement Strategy in the UK Parliament since 2006 John Pullinger Chairman Group on Information for the Public and Librarian and Director General Information Services House of Commons London, United Kingdom Elizabeth Hallam Smith Director of Information Services and Librarian House of Lords London, United Kingdom Meeting: 141. Library and Research Services for Parliaments WORLD LIBRARY AND INFORMATION CONGRESS: 76TH IFLA GENERAL CONFERENCE AND ASSEMBLY 10-15 August 2010, Gothenburg, Sweden http://www.ifla.org/en/ifla76 Abstract: Improving levels of public engagement with the UK Parliament has been an increasing priority for the administration in recent years. This paper reviews progress in the period 2006 to 2009. The paper outlines a vision for how Parliament should be seen by citizens and describes the strategy adopted to realise the vision. It elaborates a “three-legged stool” comprising engagement online (using the web), engagement on site (welcoming visitors) and engagement on the territory of others (outreach initiatives). A review of progress indicates that there have been valuable gains in terms of the quality of engagement and its reach. The overall impact is harder to assess given that broader public perceptions of Parliament are influenced by many factors not just those directly associated with the engagement strategy. For the future the challenge remains to extend reach from the tens of thousands who choose to engage to the tens of millions who do not yet do so. This will require innovative thinking and a rigorous approach to evaluation to assess which activities make the biggest difference. 1 Background 1.
    [Show full text]
  • House of Lords
    THE STANDING ORDERS OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS RELATING TO PUBLIC BUSINESS 2016 PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS HL Paper 3 THE STANDING ORDERS OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS RELATING TO PUBLIC BUSINESS Ordered to be printed 18 May 2016 PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS HL Paper 3 © Parliamentary copyright House of Lords 2016. Re-use of this material is permitted under the terms of the Open Parliament Licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site- information/copyright/open-parliament-licence/ Please address enquiries to the Clerk of the Journals, House of Lords, London SW1A 0PW. These Standing Orders are also published at www.parliament.uk/business/publications/house-of-lords- publications/rules-and-guides-for-business/ 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Standing Order Page Arrangements when Her Majesty is present 1. Arrangements when Her Majesty present 7 Lords and the manner of their introduction 2. Lords not to sit in Parliament before twenty-one 8 3. Peers by descent not to be introduced 8 4. No fee to be paid on introduction 8 5. Difference in form or style of writs 8 6. Bishops Lords of Parliament to be introduced 8 7. Lords’ higher titles to be used 8 8. Precedency 8 Excepted Hereditary Peers 9. Hereditary peers 9 10. Hereditary peers: by-elections 10 11. Register of hereditary peers 10 Expulsion or suspension of a member 12. Expulsion or suspension of a member 11 The House and its arrangements 13. Right to be present in House when sitting 12 14. Duties and powers of Black Rod 12 15.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Investigative and Scrutiny Committees: Strengthening the Thematic Structure Through the Appointment of New Committees
    HOUSE OF LORDS Liaison Committee 5th Report of Session 2019–21 Review of investigative and scrutiny committees: strengthening the thematic structure through the appointment of new committees Ordered to be printed 10 December 2020 and published 15 December 2020 Published by the Authority of the House of Lords HL Paper 193 Liaison Committee The Liaison Committee advises the House on the resources required for select committee work and allocates resources between select committees; reviews the select committee work of the House; considers requests for ad hoc committees and reports to the House with recommendations; ensures effective co-ordination between the two Houses; and considers the availability of Lords to serve on committees. Membership The Members of the Liaison Committee are: Lord Bradley Lord Low of Dalston Lord Davies of Oldham Lord McFall of Alcluith (Chair) Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town Lord Smith of Hindhead Earl Howe Lord Tyler Lord Judge Baroness Walmsley Lord Lang of Monkton Declaration of interests See Appendix 1. A full list of Members’ interests can be found in the Register of Lords’ Interests: http://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/standards-and-interests/register-of-lords- interests Publications All publications of the Committee are available at: http://www.parliament.uk/lords-liaison Parliament Live Live coverage of debates and public sessions of the Committee’s meetings are available at: http://www.parliamentlive.tv Further information Further information about the House of Lords and its Committees, including guidance to witnesses, details of current inquiries and forthcoming meetings is available at: http://www.parliament.uk/business/lords Committee staff The staff who worked on this inquiry were Philippa Tudor (Clerk), Lucy Molloy (Research Assistant) and Heather Fuller (Committee Assistant).
    [Show full text]
  • A Tale of Two Houses?
    This article from European Journal of Law Reform is published by Eleven international publishing and made available to anonieme bezoeker A Tale of Two Houses? Post-Legislative Scrutiny in the UK Parliament Tom Caygill* Abstract In the last decade a more systematic approach to post-legislative scrutiny has been taken by both the UK Government and Parliament. Currently, owing to a lack of systematic analysis we do not know how both Houses of the UK Parliament are undertaking post-legislative scrutiny. The aim of the article is to determine the similarities and differences between the House of Commons and the House of Lords when undertaking post-legislative scrutiny. The article addresses this gap in knowl‐ edge through the use of four case studies, which address how legislation is selected for review, what recommendations are produced and how government responses are followed up. The article finds that there are a number of differences in the way legislation is selected by both Houses and also highlights the differences between them in terms of the output of their recommendations. Overall, this article contrib‐ utes to our knowledge of the processes available to the UK Parliament for the undertaking of post-legislative scrutiny. This is important as post-legislative scru‐ tiny, as a formalized activity, is relatively new, and there is a contribution to be made here in terms of how such procedures can be utilized in other legislatures. Keywords: Post-legislative scrutiny, committees, recommendations, UK Parlia‐ ment. A Introduction Post-legislative scrutiny is one of the core tasks of departmental select committees in the House of Commons.1 In the last decade a more systematic approach has been taken by both the UK Government and UK Parliament.
    [Show full text]