Climate Change Bill [HL]

Clause 67 is perfectly straightforward. We are dealing with the United Kingdom body here; with the four institutions that will take the joint decisions: the Scottish Executive, the Welsh Assembly, the Northern Ireland Assembly, and in effect the UK Government. The UK Government is the Secretary of State, hence the four national authorities. That is all it is. There is nothing special here. Nor is there anything new about it, but I hope that that answers the noble Lord’s question. As I said, there is nothing new here. There is a natural suspicion, but honestly it is not justified. The power to give a direction to a non-departmental public body is perfectly standard and applies to all the NDPBs, but it is important to ensure good governance and financial probity. The power will not undermine the committee’s independence in any way. Therefore, the clause states explicitly that the committee cannot be given directions on the content of advice, but it is important that the national authorities have the power to issue directions in the case of any non-departmental public body. This is to provide a degree of control over a publicly funded body by government as a reserve power. In what circumstances would the Government issue directions to the committee? In example 1, the Government may choose to issue directions for the committee’s financial records to be checked by an independent party or person if there were concerns over accounting irregularities. In example 2, in requesting advice under Clause 30, the national authorities may also wish to direct the committee to provide information by a specific deadline to ensure that it is received within the timescale needed by the authority. We are doing no more than what is done with all non-departmental public bodies. There is nothing new here, but it is good governance and financial probity.