Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Standing Committee B.'s Books

Sir Paul Kennedy's review of the conclusion of the Committee's 7th report of session 2009-10 concurs that the level of Mr Cohen's culpability is high and that what he did should still be regarded as a particularly serious breach of the rules of the House, notwithstanding new evidence. In Sir Paul's view it was entirely appropriate for him to have been required to apologise by means of a personal statement on the floor of the House. He was also satisfied with the factual conclusions previously drawn. As to the Committee's recommendation that the full amount of Mr Cohen's £65,000 resettlement grant should be withheld there is only the question of the balance of about £4,000 remaining after the £61,000 received to which Mr Cohen was not entitled. If interest on the money wrongly claimed were to be taken into account the total debt the total debt shown to be recoverable would be well in excess of the £65,000 resettlement grant. Mrs Cohen's serious health problems and the devastating effect of the investigation, whilst recognised, do not render the Committee's recommendation in relation to the resettlement grant disproportionate.

About a proposed Order published

This report builds on work undertaken in the previous Parliament. It contains three sets of recommendations which share a common aim of improving the effectiveness of parliamentary scrutiny. Firstly the Committee recommends that select committees be allowed to table in their own amendments to bills and motions on the floor of the House. Secondly it is recommended that during this Parliament Members and opposition spokespeople be encouraged to table explanatory statements on amendments to bills and that the Government use this facility to provide explanatory statements to clarify the origin of amendments and new clauses proposed on report. Thirdly the Committee recognises that whilst written parliamentary questions are a vital part of parliamentary scrutiny, there is a danger that their value is being eroded by the record numbers being tabled which also imposes significant costs on the public purse. The Committee therefore proposes a three month trial of applying a daily quota of five and an earlier deadline of 6.30 pm from Monday to Thursday and 2.30 pm on sitting Fridays to questions for written answer submitted electronically. They also recommend that, to assist Members, the Government deliver all answers to parliamentary questions to the Member concerned by email at the same time as the answer is delivered to the House

Incorporating HC 1849-i-v, session 2010-12. Additional written evidence is contained in Volume 3, available on the Committee website at www.parliament.uk/justicecttee

The Scottish Government's plan to negate the future effects of the bedroom tax in Scotland is inadequate, and further that the route they have identified - using Discretionary Housing Payments (DHPs) - is flawed. The Committee has taken evidence in Scotland and Westminster on the impacts of the bedroom tax but also on the best and most effective ways of mitigating those effects. The Committee reiterates its call for the Scottish Government to meet all the bedroom tax charges for Scottish tenants, write off all the arrears, and refund all the payments that have been made, as the only fair and workable way forward.

The volume of EU legislation and the significance of its impact means that it is essential for the House to have an effective means of scrutiny. Although the current system has its strengths, there are weaknesses in that it tends to be seen as a minority activity, of interest to only a few members. The Committee hope that the recommendations of this report will reinvigorate the consideration of EU business. They want to see a system that: examines the negotiating stance adopted by the UK Government; examine EU proposals at an early stage; provide a free flow of information; be well integrated with the other activities of Parliament.

The Department for International Development's (DFID) doubling of support to the African Development Bank (AfDB) is an affirmation of early successes in the Bank's reform programme. The Bank's President and his staff are overseeing critical changes - notably the decentralisation and 'results' agendas - that can help the AfDB fulfil its potential.

Minutes of proceedings on the Pensions Bill : [Tuesday 9 March 2004 - Tuesday 27 April 2004]

Book's by Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Standing Committee B.

Mr Harry Cohen - review by Sir Paul Kennedy

Mr Harry Cohen - review by Sir Paul Kennedy

Draft Legislative Reform (Health and Safety Executive) Order 2008

Draft Legislative Reform (Health and Safety Executive) Order 2008

Improving the effectiveness of parliamentary scrutiny: (a) Select committee amendments (b) Explanatory statements on amendments (c) Written parliamentary questions

Improving the effectiveness of parliamentary scrutiny: (a) Select committee amendments (b) Explanatory statements on amendments (c) Written parliamentary questions

Post-legislative scrutiny of the Freedom of Information Act 2000

Post-legislative scrutiny of the Freedom of Information Act 2000

House of Commons - Scottish Affairs Committee: The Impact of the Bedroom Tax in Scotland: Plan B-Charges, Arrears and Refunds; Incorporating the Government Response to the Committee's Fourth Report of Session 2013-14 - HC 937

House of Commons - Scottish Affairs Committee: The Impact of the Bedroom Tax in Scotland: Plan B-Charges, Arrears and Refunds; Incorporating the Government Response to the Committee's Fourth Report of Session 2013-14 - HC 937

Scrutiny of European Business

Scrutiny of European Business

DFID and the African Development Bank: Oral and written evidence

DFID and the African Development Bank: Oral and written evidence

Minutes of Proceedings on the Pensions Bill

Minutes of Proceedings on the Pensions Bill

Username

Password

Username

Password

Password again

Birthday

Email