I have not disagreed with the noble Lord, Lord Judd, so far in our debates, but on this occasion I do. I strongly support my noble friend.
I had the privilege of serving on the council of English Nature for six years—two three-year appointments. We received a small salary, but there was no mention of a pension. A considerable number of people who served on that council were not particularly well off. I have made the point before that they did it because it was an honour and a privilege to serve on the council. That should be the overriding reason why people accept such appointments.
The job is not that onerous. We are talking only about several days a month. If it means reflecting that through an increase in salary, that is the way to go about it. Principally, I think that pensions should be restricted exclusively to the chairman, and possibly the deputy chairman. To extend it to members of councils or boards of such bodies is wrong, and I thoroughly support my noble friend.
Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Earl Peel
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 8 February 2006.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
678 c707 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 12:43:57 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_299009
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_299009
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_299009