Debates between Lord Lexden and Baroness Stowell of Beeston during the 2010-2015 Parliament

Select Committee Reports: Government Responses

Debate between Lord Lexden and Baroness Stowell of Beeston
Tuesday 13th January 2015

(9 years, 10 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Lexden Portrait Lord Lexden
- Hansard - -



To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have any plans to improve the quality and timeliness of their responses to reports from Select Committees of this House.

Baroness Stowell of Beeston Portrait The Lord Privy Seal (Baroness Stowell of Beeston) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, departments aim to provide considered responses to Select Committee reports within two months of their publication, as set out in the Osmotherly rules. Where delays occur or where a committee is dissatisfied with the quality of the response it has received, I stand ready to assist in taking up individual cases with my colleagues in government.

Lord Lexden Portrait Lord Lexden (Con)
- Hansard - -

Would my noble friend accept that, in the interests of the House as a whole, the Government might strengthen their commitment to their own undertaking, included in the handbook,

“to respond in writing to the reports of select committees, if possible, within two months of publication”?

Is she aware that, when responses arrive late, they are not always accompanied by the serious explanation of the delay that politeness demands? Finally, as regards the variable quality of the responses, may I invite my noble friend to read the short, rather perfunctory response to the Constitution Committee’s very substantial report on the constitutional implications of coalition government, for which the committee waited nearly 10 months?

Baroness Stowell of Beeston Portrait Baroness Stowell of Beeston
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I certainly understand the frustration expressed by my noble friend with the Government’s response on this occasion. I am pleased that the Minister for the Constitution apologised, quite rightly, to the committee for the prolonged delay. On that particular report, because it covered and inquired into the inner workings of coalition government, I do not think it is that surprising that the Government wanted to give it careful consideration before responding. However, I disagree with my noble friend’s description of the Government’s response. I know that the committee was disappointed with some specific aspects and has written further to the Minister concerned, but I think that the report, as a whole, was adequate. Certainly the delay that was experienced in the context of this report is not systemic in the Government’s responses to Select Committee reports.