Asked by: Lord Lester of Herne Hill (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they intend to provide for a member of the House of Lords, as well as members of the House of Commons, to be entitled under the draft Public Service Ombudsman Bill to make a complaint to the Ombudsman if authorised by the affected person to act on the affected person's behalf.
Answered by Baroness Chisholm of Owlpen
Clause 5 of the draft Public Service Ombudsman Bill entitles any person who is authorised by the affected person to make a complaint to the Ombudsman on their behalf, including a member of the House of Lords.
Asked by: Lord Lester of Herne Hill (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government why the draft Public Service Ombudsman Bill, Cm 9374, published on 5 December, does not make provision for findings of maladministration and recommendations to be made binding on government departments and other public bodies.
Answered by Baroness Chisholm of Owlpen
The draft Bill requires the Ombudsman to send a statement setting out her findings and any recommendations to the department or public body in question. As now, it will be for the department or public body to decide whether and how to give effect to any such recommendations. The legislation retains existing powers that allow the Ombudsman to draw attention to unremedied hardship or injustice where she considers it has not been or will not be put right.
This is a significant power that includes the ability to require information about how a designated authority will respond to the Ombudsman's findings and to bring that information to the attention of others – for example, by laying the report before Parliament or sending it to members of a local authority.
Asked by: Lord Lester of Herne Hill (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of whether local authorities that engage in foreign boycotts risk acting in breach of the common law as well as the UK's regime of procurement rules.
Answered by Lord Bridges of Headley
On 17 February, the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) published procurement guidance for public authorities that makes clear that boycotts in public procurement are inappropriate outside where formal legal sanctions, embargoes and restrictions have been put in place by the UK Government.
This new guidance gives no consideration to matters of common law, which is a matter for the courts. However, the guidance makes it clear that local level boycotts can be unlawful and lead to severe penalties against the contracting authority and the Government.
Asked by: Lord Lester of Herne Hill (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will give guidance to local authorities about the limits on their powers to engage in political boycotts overseas.
Answered by Lord Bridges of Headley
On 17 February, the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) published procurement guidance for public authorities that makes clear that boycotts in public procurement are inappropriate outside where formal legal sanctions, embargoes and restrictions have been put in place by the UK Government.
This new guidance gives no consideration to matters of common law, which is a matter for the courts. However, the guidance makes it clear that local level boycotts can be unlawful and lead to severe penalties against the contracting authority and the Government.
Asked by: Lord Lester of Herne Hill (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Bridges of Headley on 3 February (HL4852), whether they aim to release the official records from 1987 relating to the ban on the publication of <i>Spycatcher</i> that year; and if not, when they expect those records will be released to the National Archives under the 20-year rule.
Answered by Lord Bridges of Headley
As set out in my answer to the noble Lord on 3 February, the Cabinet Office is actively reviewing its remaining 1987 and 1988 files and is seeking to complete this work as quickly as possible. It would be premature to comment about what will be released until this work is complete.
Asked by: Lord Lester of Herne Hill (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government why the official records from 1987 relating to the ban on the publication of <i>Spycatcher</i> by Peter Wright have not been released to the National Archives under the 20-year rule.
Answered by Lord Bridges of Headley
Moving from a 30 year to 20 year rule has meant a doubling of the amount of information to be considered for release. The Cabinet Office is actively reviewing the remaining 1987 and 1988 records and will complete this work as quickly as possible.
Asked by: Lord Lester of Herne Hill (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what criteria they use to process requests for the disclosure of information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
Answered by Lord Bridges of Headley
The Government is committed to transparency and the Freedom of Information Act. Requests for information are examined on a case-by-case basis in accordance with the requirements of the Act.