As set out in the Government’s response to the report of the noble Lord, Lord Sharman, arrangements are already in place to deal with the audit of companies owned by local government and these arrangements are being reviewed by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.
As the noble Baroness said, there are significant differences between the functions and structures of the Auditors General and the Audit Commission that need to be carefully considered. I understand that the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister is discussing these issues with the Audit Commission, with a view to addressing them at the next legislative opportunity relating to local government. I think that it would be more appropriate to address the issues in that context, after they have been given the careful consideration they merit, rather than in this Bill. That consideration would potentially go wider than just audit issues.
Obviously, it is impossible to pre-empt the timing of legislation but, as I say, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister is discussing these issues. We think that is probably the best route through which to tackle the issue.
Company Law Reform Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord McKenzie of Luton
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 30 March 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Company Law Reform Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
680 c421GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-12-17 19:40:12 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_314273
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_314273
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_314273