Political Parties and Elections Bill

I am grateful for the Minister’s response. He has listened to the Committee. I think it is worth reiterating the point that I made, which has been supported elsewhere. The requirement to respond has no bearing on the content of the Minister’s response. It is up to the Minister to determine how to respond, and therefore he is not being required to give a substantive response on policy. The six-month requirement is covered by the second part of the proposed new clause, which allows the Minister to say, "I require more time", if that is necessary, but at least then the commission will be clear on that. Therefore, there is flexibility on the part of the Minister; the amendment merely requires his response. The other point to stress is transparency. To some extent, the Minister spoke as though the commission reports were not published, but they are. It is for the Minister to respond but what that response is is entirely at the Minister’s discretion. The amendment does not tie the Minister’s hands except in ensuring that there is a response, which from the commission’s point of view, given the seriousness of the issues with which it deals and the amount of work that it does, is important. On some issues, the department can say, "This is not a matter for us", but I think that it is an important discipline and therefore I am very grateful for what the Minister has just said. In the mean time, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment 79 withdrawn.