Parliament and Central Government: Relocation

Debate between Baroness Chisholm of Owlpen and Lord Greaves

Tuesday 29th November 2016 Lords Chamber

[Lord Greaves]

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the case for moving Parliament and central departments to the north of England.

[Baroness Chisholm of Owlpen (Con)]

The Government have made no assessment of moving Parliament to the north of England. This is a matter for Parliament to decide. Government departments determine their workforce requirements and the Civil Service has a significant UK-wide presence, including in the north of England.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Greaves]

—the geographical centre of the country, in the Midlands or the north? That would provide a new centre of government for the country, taking power to the powerhouse out of this congested place we are in, together with a new home for Parliament. Only by something as radical and visionary as this will we ever tackle the problem of imbalance that so affects us all.

[Baroness Chisholm of Owlpen]

Well, my Lords, this is a radical suggestion. I feel that Parliament should really be in the capital city but your Lordships will be relieved to hear that it is not up to me. Indeed, it is not even up to the Government to decide. It is a decision for both Houses following recommendations from the Joint Committee. The House of Commons Commission and the House of Lords made the decision in 2012 that the Palace of Westminster should remain where it is.

Food Safety: Glyphosate

Debate between Baroness Chisholm of Owlpen and Lord Greaves

Monday 21st March 2016 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Chisholm of Owlpen]

What my noble friend says is true. There are arguments for glyphosate. It is highly effective. It adds to the yields. You need to sow less, which leaves more headland, hedges, et cetera, for the environment. What my noble friend says is certainly true.

[Lord Greaves (LD)]

My Lords, there is a dispute among scientists about glyphosate. As I think the noble Countess alluded to, the International Agency for Research on Cancer last year said that products containing glyphosate are “probably carcinogenic to humans”. Is it the case, as is being alleged, that some of the research that the European food standards agency is relying on has not been published or peer-reviewed? Should not such research studies and reports be in the public domain so that all those who are experts can look at them and assess them?

[Baroness Chisholm of Owlpen]

UK experts certainly participated in the EFSA’s detailed review of the health data. The EFSA concluded that,

“glyphosate is unlikely to pose a carcinogenic hazard”.

and we agree with that conclusion. A wealth of studies is taking place. There have been huge studies in America and studies in various places in the world. From all these studies, the majority of experts concluded that there was very little evidence for an association between glyphosate-based formulations and cancer.