§ 3.7 p.m.
§ The Chairman of Committees (Lord Boston of Faversham)My Lords, I beg to move the Motion standing in my name on the Order Paper.
Moved, That the second report from the Select Committee (HL Paper 96) be agreed to.—(The Chairman of Committees.)
Following is the report referred to:
European Communities Committee1. In our First Report, Session 1993–94, we recommended that the European Communities Committee should appoint a sixth sub-committee on the 1996 Intergovernmental Conference and indicated that the number of sub-committees to be appointed thereafter would be a matter for further review in the light of other proposals for select committee work.2. We now recommend that the European Communities Committee should be able to appoint six sub-committees for an experimental period of two years from the start of next session. This is in order to enable the Committee to improve its scrutiny of subjects which have not been satisfactorily accommodated within the existing structure of five sub-committees. We propose to review the position after two years.743Science and Technology Committee3. Our First Report, Session 1993–94, also recommended that the number of sub-committees of the Science and Technology Committee should remain at two, and indicated that this would be further reviewed. We have concluded that the number of sub-committees should continue to be two for the time being.A Foreign Affairs Committee4. The Select Committee on the Committee Work of the House (the "Jellicoe Committee") considered the possibility of appointing a sessional select committee on foreign affairs. It concluded, in paragraph 123 of its report (HL Paper 35-I, session 1991–92):We acknowledge that there are sound arguments in favour of a foreign affairs committee. There is a wealth of relevant experience in the House and in these rapidly changing times there would be no shortage of suitable subjects for enquiry. Foreign affairs is such a wide policy area that any danger of duplication with the Commons' Committee on Foreign Affairs could be overcome, given prior consultation between the two committees. We acknowledge too that there are areas of foreign policy which receive little or no detailed parliamentary scrutiny. Despite these arguments, however, we share the misgivings, which were expressed by some witnesses (paragraph 38), at the prospect of select committees in the two Houses tackling the same general policy areas; and it has to be said that very few Lords proposed a foreign affairs committee. Finally, we do not accept the argument that, without the benefit of a select committee, debates on foreign affairs in the Chamber can be unfocused or have had little influence. On balance, therefore, we have decided not to recommend the appointment of a foreign affairs committee, though we recommend that the Steering Committee review the proposal from time to time, particularly as foreign and security policies develop within the European Community.5. This Committee, which performs the functions of the Steering Committee recommended by the Jellicoe Committee, has accordingly reconsidered the matter. We do not at this stage recommend the appointment of a foreign affairs committee, but we would review the matter again if it appeared that there was significant support for it in the House.On Question, Motion agreed to.