Civil Contingencies Act 2004 (Contingency Planning) Regulations 2005

rose to move, That the Grand Committee do report to the House that it has considered the Civil Contingencies Act 2004 (Contingency Planning) Regulations 2005 (S.I. 2005/2042) [8th Report from the Merits Committee]. The noble Lord said: Some Members of the Committee will recall that when the Civil Contingencies Bill was considered in the House there was a good deal of discussion on how the different organisations would be consulted. They focused not only on consultation in the event of emergency, as mentioned in the description of the Bill, but also on consultation before and after an emergency. It is perhaps opportune and sobering that we are considering the implementation of the Act in a year in which there have been many applicable events. We had the Boscastle flood in September 2004 and the events in London in July this year. There have been similar events in other parts of the world, including the floods in New Orleans, the earthquake in Pakistan and the tsunami. In all those events, there was great loss of life and economic activity and many personal tragedies. There is a good case to be made that many examples of local, expert knowledge were not used. In Pakistan, for instance, the young boys who survived were those who hid under their desks. In some countries, that is a common emergency training activity. In the west of England, some people batten down their tiles so that they are never lost in high winds, while other people do not do that. There are many examples of ways in which much more could be done. The important question is whether the organisations that will participate in working with local authorities and emergency services are being empowered and consulted. We discussed that privately and on the Floor of the House. I hope that the Minister will provide some answers. In private discussions with my noble friend Lord Bassam, I suggested that a significant public conference should be held after the passage of the Bill to review how the Act is being implemented and for the many contributing organisations of the UK to discuss how best they could contribute. One can understand that there were differences of opinion among local authorities and emergency organisations about being bogged down by an excessive bureaucratic process of having to consult everyone, but there is a difference between that and, as it were, non-consultation. That is most important. In particular, consultation, information and providing people with advice and training before emergencies are very important. I think that still in our schools we do not have the training for children that there is in many countries with the same level of susceptibility to emergencies. Finally, this is the half-year in which the UK holds the presidency of Europe. A conference will be held at the Thames Barrier, London, on 15 and 16 December, involving the Civil Contingencies Secretariat and the Environment Agency. When the Government make their statement at that conference, it would be very good if they would emphasise how we are proceeding in terms of consultation in this sphere. Perhaps that could be discussed across Europe, so that best practice is implemented. I beg to move. Moved, That the Grand Committee do report to the House that it has considered the draft Civil Contingencies Act 2004 (Contingency Planning) Regulations 2005. (S.I. 2005/2042) [8th Report from the Merits Committee].—(Lord Hunt of Chesterton.)