|
Clause 9
Monitoring by Government
Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.
Mr. Allan: It is worth pausing for a brief moment on clause 9, because we referred earlier to how we will know that local government and all the authorities referred to are actually doing what they should be doing. How can we maintain some kind of quality control over contingency planning, which will be spread around the country?
I am curious about clause 9. The explanatory notes say that clause 9 will allow the Government–Scottish Ministers or a Minister of the Crown, in the case of England and Wales–
''to require a Category 1 or Category 2 responder to provide information which relates to the performance of their functions under Part 1 of the Bill. It is likely that this power will be used to support the functions of making secondary legislation under Part 1 and of taking enforcement action under clauses 10 and 11.''
What seems curious is that that is a generic power. The Liberal Democrats have called for assurances that there will be an inspection and performance monitoring regime. However, no detail is given. The explanatory notes say:
''It is likely that this power will be used''.
The clause therefore says that the Government will have the power to act, but we have no detail on how they envisage things actually happening or how such powers will be used. Can the Minister give an early indication of the Government's proposed monitoring regime for part 1?
Patrick Mercer: Clause 9 strikes me as being in direct opposition to clause 7, which talks in such detail about ''urgency''. Clause 9 strikes me as micro-management of the worst sort. It lacks an understanding of the nature of an emergency and makes something of a mockery of clause 7.
Mr. Alexander: In terms of the requirements of monitoring and measuring performance for public sector organisations, the Government propose that performance should be monitored through the usual auditing mechanisms, such as the Audit Commission for local authorities and the fire services inspectorate for fire brigades. If that proves insufficient, further action may be necessary. Clause 9 is designed to enable the Government and, in Scotland, Scottish Ministers, to obtain information from responders about the performance of their duties under part 1. It will support the legislation-making powers conferred by the Bill and will facilitate enforcement. I hope that I have answered the hon. Gentleman's query: I recollect that the Joint Committee recommended an entirely separate audit regime, but the Government remain
Column Number: 122
minded to say that standing procedures, principally the Audit Commission, will be adequate for the task.
Question put and agreed to.
Clause 9 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clauses 10 to 13 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 14
Scotland: consultation
Mr. Alexander: I beg to move amendment No. 66, in
The Chairman: With this it will be convenient to discuss Government amendments Nos. 67 to 70.
Mr. Alexander: As the Committee will be aware, the Government, working closely with the devolved Administrations, seek to ensure that civil protection is offered in a coherent fashion throughout the UK. Clear and broad duties to consult will ensure that each regime is compatible with the others, and clauses 14 and 15 will achieve that. The amendments follow further discussions between the Government and the Scottish Executive. We have reconsidered the circumstances in which Scottish and UK Ministers should consult each other before exercising powers under part 1, and have concluded that the range of circumstances in which consultation is required should be extended.
Amendment No. 66 requires a Minister to consult with Scottish Ministers before adding a new responder with functions in Scotland. That reflects the existing obligation on a Minister, before we exercise other powers under part 1 in relation to responders that have functions in Scotland; currently, they are the Maritime and Coastguard Agency, the British Transport police and the Health and Safety Executive.
Amendments Nos. 67 to 70 require Scottish Ministers to consult a Minister before exercising any powers under part 1. The current obligation to consult is limited to the exercise of particular powers and excludes certain responders. The combined effect of the amendments is to ensure that, while the UK Government and Scottish Executive have responsibilities in the Bill that reflect the devolution settlement, they will exercise those responsibilities in a consistent way.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendments made: No. 67, in
clause 14, page 9, line 38, at end insert–
'(a) '.
No. 68, in
clause 14, page 9, line 40, after 'Part', insert '2 or'.
No. 69, in
No. 70, in
Column Number: 123
Clause 14, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clauses 15 to 17 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Schedule 1
Category 1 and 2 Responders
5 pm
Mr. Alexander: I beg to move amendment No. 71, in
schedule 1, page 22, line 33, after 'Ambulance', insert 'Service'.
In the light of further consideration, it has become apparent that one technical amendment is required to schedule 1. Paragraph 16 specifies the Scottish ambulance board as a category 1 responder. The body's correct title is, of course, the Scottish Ambulance Service Board, and the amendment corrects that regrettable oversight.
Amendment agreed to.
Question proposed, That this schedule, as amended, be the First schedule to the Bill.
Mr. Carmichael: The Minister said earlier that he had written to me, but I have checked with my office, and there is no record of a letter having been received. If I have misunderstood schedule 1, this might be a helpful juncture at which to enlighten me.
Mr. Alexander: This has been a very busy week for the Government, but I can assure the hon. Gentleman that the letter should be with him. I do not have a copy in front of me, but I am endeavouring to be provided with one so that I can read it out in full. Suffice it to say that I went through the letter before signing it, and it explained the Government's clear rationale. It also made it clear that the hon. Gentleman's contribution had not brought to light an error. It should have arrived at his office by now, and if he has any further comments, I will endeavour to give them due consideration. The advice that we received was entirely in order.
I have now been handed a copy of the letter, so let me help the hon. Gentleman by addressing a number of points. The letter notes that he wrote to me with several questions about schedule 1 and that I promised to write to him. It continues:
''Determining how part 1 of the Bill should apply in the devolved administrations has given rise to a number of difficult issues.''
Those have been the subject of a range of discussions between the Government and the Scottish Executive, as well as devolved authorities elsewhere. It goes on:
''The two guiding principles have been coherence across the UK and consistency with the devolution settlements. This has been achieved by adopting an approach which differs in each constituent part of the UK as the devolution settlements themselves do, but that will achieve the same practical effect''.
Given the hon. Gentleman's and, indeed, my own constituency considerations, I shall deal first with Scotland. The letter says that
Column Number: 124
''civil protection is a largely devolved matter. Most of the bodies which are responders in England and Wales are, in Scotland, bodies which exercise devolved functions'',
such as the Scottish Ambulance Service Board. The letter adds that, as a result of the consultation process that I mentioned
''the Executive asked the Government to extend Part 1 of the Bill to Scotland. The Scottish Executive propose to bring a Sewel motion before the Scottish Parliament shortly'',
I anticipated that motion earlier in our discussions. The letter continues:
''In light of the devolution status of most of the responders in Scotland, it is appropriate for the Scottish Ministers to make secondary legislation in relation to their activities and to issue guidance to them. This is what the Bill provides.
To clarify which bodies are within the jurisdiction of the Scottish Ministers and which responders are within the jurisdiction of the UK Ministers, the draftsman has split Schedule 1 (list of Category 1 and 2 responders) into four parts. Part 1 lists those Category 1 responders who will be subject to secondary legislation and guidance issued by a Minister of the Crown. Part 2 list those Category 1 responders who will be subject to secondary legislation and guidance issued by the Scottish Ministers. Parts 3 and 4 list those Category 2 responders who will be subject to legislation and guidance issued by a Minister of the Crown and Scottish Ministers respectively.
However, there are certain bodies which exercise functions on a UK-wide basis which are primarily reserved. These bodies are the Maritime and Coastguard Agency, the Health and Safety Executive and the chief constable of the British Transport Police Force.''
That is the matter that precipitated the hon. Gentleman's question. The letter continues:
''The Government has agreed with the Scottish Executive that it should be for a Minister of the Crown to make secondary legislation and guidance in relation to these bodies. As a result, these bodies are listed in Parts 1 and 3 of Schedule 1. In light of the fact that these bodies do exercise functions in Scotland, Parts 1 and 3 are headed 'General' rather than 'England, Wales and Northern Ireland' or anything similar.''
That is the point the hon. Gentleman raised. The letter continues:
''Legislation and guidance made by a Minister of the Crown will apply to the activities of these bodies in Scotland. UK and Scottish Ministers will consult each other when making regulations or giving directions so as to promote a common framework across Great Britain.''
That deals with the nub of the point that was raised. If it would be helpful to the hon. Gentleman, I should be happy to narrate the circumstances that relate to Northern Ireland. The letter explains both the title that was used–''General'' rather than ''England and Wales''–and indicates the careful thought and consideration that has been given in the amendment to the appropriate relationship between the Scottish Executive and the UK Government in those matters.
|
