1-15 of 15 results for subject:Reviews
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.198 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.004 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Reviews
- We searched for
- subject_t:Reviews OR subject_ses:12492
Type
House
Session
Month
Department
Member
Primary member
Answering member
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Ministers (15)
Publisher
My Lords, it is all very well for the code to cover Ministers en poste. Does the Minister agree that the trouble, surely, is that there is no sanction for Ministers post poste?
My Lords, it is all very well for the code to cover Ministers en poste. Does the Minister agree that the trouble, surely, is that there is no sanction for Ministers post poste?
Asked by
Lord Skelmersdale
(Conservative)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
14 December 2005
My Lords, strictly speaking that is true, but no doubt people will form a judgment on people’s behaviour which will affect their future careers and aspirations. That is a very important check.
Subjects
Codes of practice; Conduct; Committee on Standards in Public Life; Ministers; Reviews
Date
14 December 2005
Reference
676 c1252
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, does the Minister agree that, though of course the Prime Minister should have complete freedom of action, no past Prime Minister has been so bereft of talent that he has been obliged to re-appoint people who have departed from his Cabinet so very soon afterwards, not once but twice?
My Lords, does the Minister agree that, though of course the Prime Minister should have complete freedom of action, no past Prime Minister has been so bereft of talent that he has been obliged to re-appoint people who have departed from his Cabinet so very soon afterwards, not once but twice?
Asked by
Lord Tugendhat
(Conservative)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
14 December 2005
My Lords, I am sure that the noble Lord is really not asking that question seriously. I think that our Government have been full of talent. They continue to do the job which the public expect and to command widespread public support.
Subjects
Codes of practice; Conduct; Committee on Standards in Public Life; Ministers; Reviews
Date
14 December 2005
Reference
676 c1250
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, I cannot agree with the noble Lord. It is a matter very much for the Prime Minister to decide who forms part of his government. To seek to constrain the formation of government in the way the noble Lord suggests would deny the Prime Minister the ability to appoint those with the ability to do the job in the right way.
My Lords, I cannot agree with the noble Lord. It is a matter very much for the Prime Minister to decide who forms part of his government. To seek to constrain the formation of government in the way the noble Lord suggests would deny the Prime Minister the ability to appoint those with the ability to do the job in the right way.
Answered by
Lord Bassam of Brighton
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord Jopling
(Conservative)
Type
Oral answers to questions
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. Is it not clear to everyone, including the chairman of the committee, that the code and the practice need urgently to be reviewed? When will the Government’s familiar policy of dither, delay and review over a number of things end? Should we not be thinking of going further? Do the Government really think it is right that Ministers, whose behaviour causes them to resign, seem too often to go through a period of prosperous penitence and then get re-appointed to important positions in the public sector? Does the Minister agree that there would be more respect for the code and more public respect for both Parliament and politicians if the rule for Ministers who resign in these circumstances is ““once out, stay out””?
Subjects
Codes of practice; Conduct; Committee on Standards in Public Life; Ministers; Reviews
Date
14 December 2005
Reference
676 c1250
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, why do we not simply transfer responsibility for policing the Ministerial Code to the Commissioner for Standards in the House of Commons, who is an officer of Parliament, and have an end to all this argument about enforcement?
My Lords, why do we not simply transfer responsibility for policing the Ministerial Code to the Commissioner for Standards in the House of Commons, who is an officer of Parliament, and have an end to all this argument about enforcement?
Asked by
Lord Campbell-Savours
(Labour)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
14 December 2005
My Lords, as the Prime Minister has made pretty clear on a number of occasions, the Prime Minister must be the ultimate judge of the standard of behaviour expected of a Minister.
Well, my Lords, I think rightly so because, ultimately, the Prime Minister should be held to account for the actions of his Ministers. I would have thought that was a very important principle in the way we govern our country.
Subjects
Codes of practice; Conduct; Committee on Standards in Public Life; Ministers; Reviews
Date
14 December 2005
Reference
676 c1250
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, I was about to suggest that we went back to basics on this, but another Conservative government brought that term into disrepute. Why is it that we get into a muddle on this? It has always been clear in the British constitution, under successive governments, that the Prime Minister is responsible for appointing Ministers and for their conduct in office. But Parliament is and remains responsible for the conduct of Members of Parliament. If you confuse those two, you confuse the whole concept of the constitution because the Government are drawn from Parliament and governments answer to Parliament, not the other way round.
My Lords, I was about to suggest that we went back to basics on this, but another Conservative government brought that term into disrepute. Why is it that we get into a muddle on this? It has always been clear in the British constitution, under successive governments, that the Prime Minister is responsible for appointing Ministers and for their conduct in office. But Parliament is and remains responsible for the conduct of Members of Parliament. If you confuse those two, you confuse the whole concept of the constitution because the Government are drawn from Parliament and governments answer to Parliament, not the other way round.
Asked by
Lord Soley
(Labour)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
14 December 2005
My Lords, not for the first time I find myself in agreement with my noble friend Lord Soley.
Subjects
Codes of practice; Conduct; Committee on Standards in Public Life; Ministers; Reviews
Date
14 December 2005
Reference
676 c1251-2
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, not for the first time I find myself in agreement with my noble friend Lord Soley.
My Lords, not for the first time I find myself in agreement with my noble friend Lord Soley.
Answered by
Lord Bassam of Brighton
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord Soley
(Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
My Lords, I was about to suggest that we went back to basics on this, but another Conservative government brought that term into disrepute. Why is it that we get into a muddle on this? It has always been clear in the British constitution, under successive governments, that the Prime Minister is responsible for appointing Ministers and for their conduct in office. But Parliament is and remains responsible for the conduct of Members of Parliament. If you confuse those two, you confuse the whole concept of the constitution because the Government are drawn from Parliament and governments answer to Parliament, not the other way round.
Subjects
Codes of practice; Conduct; Committee on Standards in Public Life; Ministers; Reviews
Date
14 December 2005
Reference
676 c1251-2
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, as the Prime Minister has made pretty clear on a number of occasions, the Prime Minister must be the ultimate judge of the standard of behaviour expected of a Minister.
Well, my Lords, I think rightly so because, ultimately, the Prime Minister should be held to account for the actions of his Ministers. I would have thought that was a very important principle in the way we govern our country.
My Lords, as the Prime Minister has made pretty clear on a number of occasions, the Prime Minister must be the ultimate judge of the standard of behaviour expected of a Minister.
Well, my Lords, I think rightly so because, ultimately, the Prime Minister should be held to account for the actions of his Ministers. I would have thought that was a very important principle in the way we govern our country.
Answered by
Lord Bassam of Brighton
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord Campbell-Savours
(Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
My Lords, why do we not simply transfer responsibility for policing the Ministerial Code to the Commissioner for Standards in the House of Commons, who is an officer of Parliament, and have an end to all this argument about enforcement?
Subjects
Codes of practice; Conduct; Committee on Standards in Public Life; Ministers; Reviews
Date
14 December 2005
Reference
676 c1250
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, I am sure that the noble Lord is really not asking that question seriously. I think that our Government have been full of talent. They continue to do the job which the public expect and to command widespread public support.
My Lords, I am sure that the noble Lord is really not asking that question seriously. I think that our Government have been full of talent. They continue to do the job which the public expect and to command widespread public support.
Answered by
Lord Bassam of Brighton
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord Tugendhat
(Conservative)
Type
Oral answers to questions
My Lords, does the Minister agree that, though of course the Prime Minister should have complete freedom of action, no past Prime Minister has been so bereft of talent that he has been obliged to re-appoint people who have departed from his Cabinet so very soon afterwards, not once but twice?
Subjects
Codes of practice; Conduct; Committee on Standards in Public Life; Ministers; Reviews
Date
14 December 2005
Reference
676 c1250
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, strictly speaking that is true, but no doubt people will form a judgment on people’s behaviour which will affect their future careers and aspirations. That is a very important check.
My Lords, strictly speaking that is true, but no doubt people will form a judgment on people’s behaviour which will affect their future careers and aspirations. That is a very important check.
Answered by
Lord Bassam of Brighton
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord Skelmersdale
(Conservative)
Type
Oral answers to questions
My Lords, it is all very well for the code to cover Ministers en poste. Does the Minister agree that the trouble, surely, is that there is no sanction for Ministers post poste?
Subjects
Codes of practice; Conduct; Committee on Standards in Public Life; Ministers; Reviews
Date
14 December 2005
Reference
676 c1252
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, it is normal practice for the Ministerial Code to be updated and reissued after an election. A revised Ministerial Code was published in July 2005. It took account of comments and recommendations made by the Committee on Standards in Public Life and the Public Administration Select Committee. The Government do not see a need for a further review of the code.
My Lords, it is normal practice for the Ministerial Code to be updated and reissued after an election. A revised Ministerial Code was published in July 2005. It took account of comments and recommendations made by the Committee on Standards in Public Life and the Public Administration Select Committee. The Government do not see a need for a further review of the code.
Answered by
Lord Bassam of Brighton
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord Jopling
(Conservative)
Type
Oral answers to questions
Whether any action has been taken to review the Ministerial Code, in the light of the reported comments of the chairman of the Committee on Standards in Public Life that the code needs immediate review.
Subjects
Codes of practice; Conduct; Committee on Standards in Public Life; Ministers; Reviews
Date
14 December 2005
Reference
676 c1249-50
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, I rather like my noble friend Lord Soley. I think that he tends to be right on most issues, actually. I have known him for a long time, as I am sure the noble Lord has.
Let us start with the Sir Patrick Brown review. The Prime Minister commissioned a review from Sir Patrick Brown. That review has been completed. The report has been submitted and we are giving it very careful consideration and will respond in due course. The Business Appointment Rules are important. They were set up during the Conservative administration in the mid-1990s and have worked well to date. We do not expect that there will be great problems with the way they work. They have been very helpful and will continue to be helpful.
The noble Lord asked about the independent adviser on ministerial interests. Again, we have done a great deal, as government, to strengthen the handling of Ministers’ financial interests, including the requirement to provide Permanent Secretaries with a list of those interests. It is not an easy appointment to fill. Whoever is appointed will need to understand how government and Parliament work. On the noble Lord’s first question, obviously it is for the Prime Minister to determine who are members of his Government and to make judgments about their suitability. It is also a matter for Parliament.
My Lords, I rather like my noble friend Lord Soley. I think that he tends to be right on most issues, actually. I have known him for a long time, as I am sure the noble Lord has.
Let us start with the Sir Patrick Brown review. The Prime Minister commissioned a review from Sir Patrick Brown. That review has been completed. The report has been submitted and we are giving it very careful consideration and will respond in due course. The Business Appointment Rules are important. They were set up during the Conservative administration in the mid-1990s and have worked well to date. We do not expect that there will be great problems with the way they work. They have been very helpful and will continue to be helpful.
The noble Lord asked about the independent adviser on ministerial interests. Again, we have done a great deal, as government, to strengthen the handling of Ministers’ financial interests, including the requirement to provide Permanent Secretaries with a list of those interests. It is not an easy appointment to fill. Whoever is appointed will need to understand how government and Parliament work. On the noble Lord’s first question, obviously it is for the Prime Minister to determine who are members of his Government and to make judgments about their suitability. It is also a matter for Parliament.
Answered by
Lord Bassam of Brighton
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord McNally
(Liberal Democrat)
Type
Oral answers to questions
My Lords, the Minister has just given a significant reply. The noble Lord, Lord Solely, last week pontificated that this was a matter for Parliament. Will the noble Lord confirm that responsibility for the Ministerial Code is the Prime Minister’s direct responsibility? That being so, he does not need the Leader of the House to tell him. The Prime Minister himself takes great pride in being the Minister responsible. Why, therefore, is the Prime Minister refusing to publish Sir Patrick Brown’s report? Why is the Prime Minister rejecting the ninth report of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, which asks for an independent adviser for this code? Why is the Prime Minister refusing a Standing Committee to examine breaches of the code? Will he now admit that the problems are at the Prime Minister’s door and that the noble Lord, Lord Solely was—not for the first time in his political career—wrong?
Subjects
Codes of practice; Conduct; Committee on Standards in Public Life; Ministers; Reviews
Date
14 December 2005
Reference
676 c1250-1
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
Whether any action has been taken to review the Ministerial Code, in the light of the reported comments of the chairman of the Committee on Standards in Public Life that the code needs immediate review.
Whether any action has been taken to review the Ministerial Code, in the light of the reported comments of the chairman of the Committee on Standards in Public Life that the code needs immediate review.
Asked by
Lord Jopling
(Conservative)
Answered by
Lord Bassam of Brighton
(Labour)
Oral questions - Lead
Status
Answered
For answer on
14 December 2005
Answered on
14 December 2005
My Lords, it is normal practice for the Ministerial Code to be updated and reissued after an election. A revised Ministerial Code was published in July 2005. It took account of comments and recommendations made by the Committee on Standards in Public Life and the Public Administration Select Committee. The Government do not see a need for a further review of the code.
Subjects
Codes of practice; Conduct; Committee on Standards in Public Life; Ministers; Reviews
Date
14 December 2005
Reference
676 c1249-50
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, the Minister has just given a significant reply. The noble Lord, Lord Solely, last week pontificated that this was a matter for Parliament. Will the noble Lord confirm that responsibility for the Ministerial Code is the Prime Minister’s direct responsibility? That being so, he does not need the Leader of the House to tell him. The Prime Minister himself takes great pride in being the Minister responsible. Why, therefore, is the Prime Minister refusing to publish Sir Patrick Brown’s report? Why is the Prime Minister rejecting the ninth report of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, which asks for an independent adviser for this code? Why is the Prime Minister refusing a Standing Committee to examine breaches of the code? Will he now admit that the problems are at the Prime Minister’s door and that the noble Lord, Lord Solely was—not for the first time in his political career—wrong?
My Lords, the Minister has just given a significant reply. The noble Lord, Lord Solely, last week pontificated that this was a matter for Parliament. Will the noble Lord confirm that responsibility for the Ministerial Code is the Prime Minister’s direct responsibility? That being so, he does not need the Leader of the House to tell him. The Prime Minister himself takes great pride in being the Minister responsible. Why, therefore, is the Prime Minister refusing to publish Sir Patrick Brown’s report? Why is the Prime Minister rejecting the ninth report of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, which asks for an independent adviser for this code? Why is the Prime Minister refusing a Standing Committee to examine breaches of the code? Will he now admit that the problems are at the Prime Minister’s door and that the noble Lord, Lord Solely was—not for the first time in his political career—wrong?
Asked by
Lord McNally
(Liberal Democrat)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
14 December 2005
My Lords, I rather like my noble friend Lord Soley. I think that he tends to be right on most issues, actually. I have known him for a long time, as I am sure the noble Lord has.
Let us start with the Sir Patrick Brown review. The Prime Minister commissioned a review from Sir Patrick Brown. That review has been completed. The report has been submitted and we are giving it very careful consideration and will respond in due course. The Business Appointment Rules are important. They were set up during the Conservative administration in the mid-1990s and have worked well to date. We do not expect that there will be great problems with the way they work. They have been very helpful and will continue to be helpful.
The noble Lord asked about the independent adviser on ministerial interests. Again, we have done a great deal, as government, to strengthen the handling of Ministers’ financial interests, including the requirement to provide Permanent Secretaries with a list of those interests. It is not an easy appointment to fill. Whoever is appointed will need to understand how government and Parliament work. On the noble Lord’s first question, obviously it is for the Prime Minister to determine who are members of his Government and to make judgments about their suitability. It is also a matter for Parliament.
Subjects
Codes of practice; Conduct; Committee on Standards in Public Life; Ministers; Reviews
Date
14 December 2005
Reference
676 c1250-1
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. Is it not clear to everyone, including the chairman of the committee, that the code and the practice need urgently to be reviewed? When will the Government’s familiar policy of dither, delay and review over a number of things end? Should we not be thinking of going further? Do the Government really think it is right that Ministers, whose behaviour causes them to resign, seem too often to go through a period of prosperous penitence and then get re-appointed to important positions in the public sector? Does the Minister agree that there would be more respect for the code and more public respect for both Parliament and politicians if the rule for Ministers who resign in these circumstances is ““once out, stay out””?
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. Is it not clear to everyone, including the chairman of the committee, that the code and the practice need urgently to be reviewed? When will the Government’s familiar policy of dither, delay and review over a number of things end? Should we not be thinking of going further? Do the Government really think it is right that Ministers, whose behaviour causes them to resign, seem too often to go through a period of prosperous penitence and then get re-appointed to important positions in the public sector? Does the Minister agree that there would be more respect for the code and more public respect for both Parliament and politicians if the rule for Ministers who resign in these circumstances is ““once out, stay out””?
Asked by
Lord Jopling
(Conservative)
Oral questions - 1st Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
14 December 2005
My Lords, I cannot agree with the noble Lord. It is a matter very much for the Prime Minister to decide who forms part of his government. To seek to constrain the formation of government in the way the noble Lord suggests would deny the Prime Minister the ability to appoint those with the ability to do the job in the right way.
Subjects
Codes of practice; Conduct; Ministers; Reviews; Resignations; Re-employment; Committee on Standards in Public Life
Date
14 December 2005
Reference
676 c1250
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, which minister in his Department approved for publication the document Review of Road Traffic Offences involving Bad Driving; on what date and at what time copies of the published version of the Review of Road Traffic Offences involving Bad Driving were received...
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, which minister in his Department approved for publication the document Review of Road Traffic Offences involving Bad Driving; on what date and at what time copies of the published version of the Review of Road Traffic Offences involving Bad Driving were received...
Asked by
David Wilshire
(Conservative)
Answered by
David Jamieson
(Labour)
Answering body
Department for Transport
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
3 February 2005
For answer on
8 February 2005
Answered on
8 February 2005
Mr. Wilshire: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) which Minister in his Department approved for publication the document
Review of Road Traffic Offences involving Bad Driving; [215182]
(2) on what date and at what time copies of the published version of the Review of Road Traffic Offences involving Bad Driving were
received in his Department; [215183]
(3) on what date (a) he and (b) each Minister in his Department first saw a copy of the published version of the
document, Review of Road Traffic Offences involving Bad Driving. [215184]
Mr. Jamieson: The Secretary of State agreed to its publication through the relevant Cabinet Committee in the usual manner. Ministers
were therefore fully aware of its contents prior to publication.
Thereafter, the document was published by the Home Office at 9.30 am on Thursday 3 February. Copies were collected from the
Home Office by Department for Transport officials at 9.15 am on Thursday 3 February 2005 and taken direct to the House of
Commons where my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State and I received them at the same time as members of the
Standing Committee. The final document was provided to the offices of the Secretary of State and Minister of State subsequently.
Subjects
Department for Transport; Ministers; Publishing; Road traffic offences; Official publications; Review of Road Traffic Offences Involving Bad Driving
Date
8 February 2005
Reference
430 c1450W; 215182;215183;215184
House
House of Commons