The noble Lord did not quite put it like that, but that was clearly what he intended. I admit that when I first saw Amendments Nos. 3 and 4—I think that they are a pair—it seemed to me that there would be greater flexibility to the Secretary of State and the chair of the new body if they were able to keep that balance, which is essential, between continuity and turnover of people. If you can serve three terms of three years, with a total of nine years, and everyone else has three terms of three years, I believe that statistically you can achieve a balance of continuity more easily than if people can do only two terms, with half leaving every time you get to the end of the five-year period. It seems to me from a management point of view that it might be easier to do this as my noble friend suggests rather than as the Bill states.
Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Cope of Berkeley
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 21 January 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
698 c14GC 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 02:31:29 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_436760
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_436760
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_436760