I totally understand and agree with my hon. Friend. The TUPE provisions of the Bill are covered by the programme motion, but the only way we can arrive at discussion of them is by compressing the debate on the chief coroner proposal, which I fear could be substantial given the scale of the concern in the country.
The Opposition pressed programme motions to a Division in the House and in Committee, but the Government then told us that debate on Report would take place next Tuesday, which would have allowed time to consult stakeholders and others. On Thursday, it was suddenly decided that the debate would be squeezed in today instead. That left all the stakeholders—organisations, clients, employees and everybody else concerned with quangos—only a few working hours while the House was sitting to make representations and to suggest amendments. Thus we saw the list of amendments only yesterday.
Clearly, there has been no opportunity to consult widely on the nature of the amendments. However, the most disturbing thing is that 30 of the 62 amendments are Government amendments, some of which are far beyond merely technical amendments. Frankly, it is reprehensible that things have been handled in that way.
Public Bodies Bill [Lords] (Programme) (No. 2)
Proceeding contribution from
Jon Trickett
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 25 October 2011.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Public Bodies Bill [Lords] (Programme) (No. 2).
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
534 c183 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 19:54:57 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_776771
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_776771
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_776771