Skip to main content

1-20 of 69 results for member:"David Howarth"

Subject X
Tribunals

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

More

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

More
Tribunals (69)

Publisher


Show detailed: On Off
Results: 10 20 50 100
Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

In a way that is a rather disturbing answer, because clause 38 already states:""The Comptroller and Auditor General continues by that name to be a corporation sole."" I am still concerned about what the precise necessity is for the clause. It might be a belt-and-braces approach, but I still cannot...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 November 2009
Reference
498 c943
House
House of Commons

I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time. It is something of a shame that a new clause that looks modest but would have the effect of changing our system of Government entirely comes before the Committee with only seven minutes to go before the knife....

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 November 2009
Reference
498 c958-9
House
House of Commons

That explains things, and I thank the Minister. Obviously the issue here is whether someone could be made such a big offer of such a big job and such a large salary that they might be tempted by it, even with a two-year delay. I recognise that that is somewhat...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 November 2009
Reference
498 c953
House
House of Commons

Yes, of course I will seek leave to withdraw amendment 29, and I thank the Government and the Father of the House for the explanation offered as to the change. It makes sense for this provision to be more flexible and to take into account the chance that the appropriate...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 November 2009
Reference
498 c953
House
House of Commons

The amendments relate to discrepancies between the contents of the Bill and the Public Accounts Commission report. I want to give the Government an opportunity to explain the difference between the two. Amendments 29 and 30 are simply about who is to be consulted before the Comptroller and Auditor General...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 November 2009
Reference
498 c950-1
House
House of Commons

I beg to move amendment 29, page 20, line 33, leave out 'specified person' and insert 'Advisory Committee on Public Appointments'.

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 November 2009
Reference
498 c950
House
House of Commons

May I say that I was immensely reassured by the speech of the Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee? It is vital that the Comptroller and Auditor General remains absolutely independent in judgment. Whatever the governance arrangements and administrative structure built up behind the Comptroller and Auditor General, his judgments—perhaps...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 November 2009
Reference
498 c932-3
House
House of Commons

I want to ask about the necessity of this clause. The Father of the House might correct me, but I do not remember its being referred to in the Public Accounts Commission's report. Whenever one sees a clause that creates powers to do something that has been done for a...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 November 2009
Reference
498 c943
House
House of Commons

The hon. Gentleman must have covered the point by now, but will he clarify that he did not mean that there was any doubt, from the legislation's drafting, that the Comptroller and Auditor General's functions of audit, examination and inspection, which are central to his job, would be in any...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 November 2009
Reference
498 c940
House
House of Commons

That is absolutely right. The purpose is thought to be only to audit the Government Department and not to have any access to the private body, but I think that is a problem under current arrangements. As I remember it—I might be wrong on this—if a Minister agrees and the...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 November 2009
Reference
498 c933
House
House of Commons

At this point, will the Minister clear up one particular problem with the drafting of clause 37? Clause 37(1) says:""The office of the Comptroller and Auditor General is to continue"," but it does not say that the person currently in office will continue to hold that position. Can the Minister...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 November 2009
Reference
498 c934
House
House of Commons

I accept that point from the Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee. In fact, many of these considerations are themselves legislative, because they are all to do with issues such as, for instance, which bodies are listed in schedule 4 to the National Audit Act 1983. There has not been...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 November 2009
Reference
498 c933
House
House of Commons

I am now a little concerned by the hon. Gentleman's argument, because it seems to me that it means that, whatever the current tasks of the chief executive, under the new clause those tasks will be transferred to the president of the court. Has the hon. Gentleman made any estimate...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 November 2009
Reference
498 c913
House
House of Commons

May I support the Minister even further? It is clear to those who have studied the judiciary over long periods that the quality of judicial appointments under the old system was highly dependent on the quality of the Lord Chancellor of the day. There were some immensely good Lord Chancellors,...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 November 2009
Reference
498 c908
House
House of Commons

Who?

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 November 2009
Reference
498 c901
House
House of Commons

I am not sure whether I can speak on behalf of the old Liberal party, of which I used to be a member, but I can certainly speak on behalf of the Liberal Democrats. I would urge Liberal Democrat Members to support the amendment if it is pressed to a...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 November 2009
Reference
498 c801-2
House
House of Commons

I wish to raise two points and ask two questions about the schedule. Both points relate to the independence of the commission and both were raised by either the Joint Committee or the Public Administration Committee in their deliberations on the Bill. The first point is about the power of...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 November 2009
Reference
498 c797
House
House of Commons

I thank my hon. Friend, who is absolutely right: the phrase is "exceptional cases", which raises a further question about what kind of case is involved. Does this mean a case brought before the commission on a particular complaint? What other kind of case is it? [Interruption.]

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 November 2009
Reference
498 c795
House
House of Commons

I was going to raise exactly the same point, and would simply add this. Who decides whether a case is "exceptional"? If the commissioners decide what is exceptional, the amendment of the hon. Member for Cannock Chase (Dr. Wright) does not achieve very much, because it is purely within the...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 November 2009
Reference
498 c794
House
House of Commons

Yes, that is a very good point. I apologise, Sir Nicholas—I was attempting to make a speech even shorter than that of the hon. Member for Epping Forest (Mrs. Laing). I failed to do so, but I support the amendment.

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 November 2009
Reference
498 c795
House
House of Commons