I wonder whether the amendment is necessary. My understanding of the getting-on-for-two-years-old public appointment rules is that two terms is normally the maximum and that one has to make a very special case to the commissioner for anything more. That could be six years or two times four or two times five, but it would be in defiance of the OCPA rules to go beyond 10 years.
When a new body is set up, all the members are appointed at the same time, but you may want flexibility at the first renewal process to start staggering the end of members’ appointments. You may therefore offer someone a one-, two-, three- or four-year extension to ensure a reasonable turnover of members; otherwise everyone leaves at the same time. An inspection of the OCPA appointments rules will deal with the point raised in the amendment.
Statistics and Registration Service Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Turnbull
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 24 April 2007.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Statistics and Registration Service Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
691 c608 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:27:35 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_391713
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_391713
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_391713