The first amendment refers to the power in Clause 193 about the withdrawal of a reference. Clause 193 provides a power for the Secretary of State to make regulations concerning the withdrawal of a reference by an ethical standards officer to the adjudication panel. The circumstances in which it would be right for a case to be withdrawn might include one where, for example, after the ethical standards officer had decided that the case should be referred to the adjudication panel for determination, further evidence emerged that indicated that there was no case to answer, or where the pursuit of the case would not be in the public interest, such as where somebody involved suddenly contracted a terminal illness. The clause allows for personal circumstances of that sort. We need to keep that flexibility.
Amendment No. 238ZFA would require the Secretary of State to make regulations allowing the withdrawal of a reference to the panel in cases where such a referral was likely to lead to the disqualification of a member. It is unnecessary because it is already our intention that the regulations should include the possibility of the withdrawal of a case where the member would otherwise be likely to be disqualified.
Clause 193 also provides for copies of reports by an ethical standards officer following his investigation to be put to the standards committee in order to assist it in carrying out its functions. That would apply where the ethical standards officer considered that making members aware of the circumstances and outcome of a case would help them to develop their knowledge and understanding of the operation of their regime. Amendment No. 238ZFB would require the ethical standards officer to pass a copy of the report on a case to the standards committee where a referral to the panel was withdrawn. That is unnecessary because there is no particular reason why there should be a requirement to copy a report to the committee in those circumstances, as we are already proposing that a report should be given to the committee on every occasion when the officer considers that the committee would benefit from it. That would be the effect of the noble Baroness’s amendment, but it is already covered by the wider provisions.
Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Andrews
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 19 July 2007.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
694 c442-3 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:04:19 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_412854
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_412854
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_412854