Debates between Andrew Percy and Greg Knight during the 2015-2017 Parliament

Fri 24th Mar 2017
Local Audit (Public Access to Documents) Bill
Commons Chamber

3rd reading: House of Commons & Report stage: House of Commons

Local Audit (Public Access to Documents) Bill

Debate between Andrew Percy and Greg Knight
Andrew Percy Portrait The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (Andrew Percy)
- Hansard - -

I welcome the opportunity to speak on behalf of the Government, in place, I am sad to say, of the Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, my hon. Friend the Member for Nuneaton (Mr Jones), who has responsibility for local government. I know that he would be delighted to be here, were he not otherwise engaged. I, too, would be delighted if he were here, knowing as I do of his passion for the Bill.

Andrew Percy Portrait Andrew Percy
- Hansard - -

I will, of course, give way to my fellow east Yorkshire colleague.

Greg Knight Portrait Sir Greg Knight
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Has my hon. Friend any information to relate to the House about why not a single Liberal Democrat is here?

Andrew Percy Portrait Andrew Percy
- Hansard - -

Sadly not, other than that the public seemed to diminish Liberal Democrat numbers somewhat at the last general election, proving once again that members of the public are very sensible individuals, on the whole.

I welcome the opportunity to comment briefly on the amendments tabled by my hon. Friends the Members for Bury North (Mr Nuttall) and for Christchurch (Mr Chope), and on the important points made thus far. I had the privilege of stepping in for the Local Government Minister in Committee, when I offered the Government’s support for the important principles behind the Bill.

The amendments have been tabled with the best of intentions—the Bill’s promoter, my hon. Friend the Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton), will deal with them in more detail—but I want to set out the Government’s view on why we do not think agreeing to them would be a good idea. The Bill’s virtue is its simplicity. By seeking to clarify what is meant in the legislation by where material may be published, amendment 1 may unintentionally—we know that it is unintentional from the speech made by my hon. Friend the Member for Bury North—narrow the places where such articles may be published. Sometimes, a less precise phrase in law permits a helpfully wider interpretation, and I believe that is the case here.