---

Lord Borrie: My Lords, like my noble friend Lord Dubs I, too, oppose the amendment. I do so for three reasons. The first is rather similar to the points made

22 Nov 2001 : Column 1299

by my noble friend. Here we are appointing a regulatory body. We are not, apropos the last remarks of the noble Baroness, Lady Miller, appointing a tribunal. Ofcom will be a regulatory body whose members—as distinct from the staff of that body, who no doubt will need to hold this or that qualification—will need to reach decisions. It would be wholly wrong in principle to insist on particular professional qualifications for some, even if not for all, the members of the board.

My second reason for opposing the amendment is that Ofcom will be a body which the noble Baroness, Lady Anelay, stated will start with a minimum membership of three people and a maximum of six. Out of those three to six members, it is being suggested that two should hold very specific qualifications.

The third reason for opposing the amendment is, as I have said, that the qualifications required are extremely specific. I believe that my noble friend on the Front Bench would have some difficulty in locating such experts when fishing for suitable candidates in what will be a small pool of those who are not only lawyers of a certain standing, but who also have experience and knowledge of a discrete area of law—competition law—which most lawyers would not even admit is a separate topic. It forms part of the larger subject of commercial law. It would be extremely difficult to track down suitable candidates to take on those roles. Thus I believe that there are several reasons for opposing the amendment.

Lord Brooke of Sutton Mandeville: My Lords, I have been absorbed by and have understood the points made by the noble Lords, Lord Dubs and Lord Borrie. In particular I admire the first point made by the noble Lord, Lord Dubs. In that context, I think that he has forgotten the episode of the television production, "Yes, Minister", in which my noble friend Lady Thatcher appeared in person on a proposition that economics should be abolished. In those circumstances, my noble friend has been extraordinarily prudent, in terms of the theology of our party, not to ascribe specific qualifications to economists.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, the last thing I want to do is to offend lawyers or economists, since we are surrounded by them in this House. I was once a university Fellow in Economics at an American university, and I must be the only person to get a second-class degree with three gamma minuses, one of which was in the theory of economics. I also remind the House that one can become a Fellow of the Royal Economic Society and place it after your name simply by subscribing to its journal; not many people know that.

We have always said that, so long as it can operate effectively, we want the board of Ofcom to be as small and flexible as possible. It will need the right mix of experience and skills to cover the range of Ofcom's responsibilities. In the initial preparatory stage, the board will consist of between three and six members. Particular skills and experience, perhaps involving

22 Nov 2001 : Column 1300

change of management or human resources issues, may be of greater relevance to the board in the early stages. We may need to enlarge the board when Ofcom starts to take on its regulatory functions. It may be necessary to have members with direct experience of competition law and practice, but Ofcom may also find that it needs board experience covering other areas of its responsibilities. The needs of the board may change; other types of experience and skills could be required. We cannot make that sort of provision in advance. I am glad that the noble Baroness, Lady Miller, has recognised that this is and should be a probing amendment.

Baroness Miller of Hendon: My Lords, first, I thank my noble friend Lord Brooke for riding to the rescue and giving such a happy and friendly example to your Lordships to demonstrate that the comments made by the noble Lord, Lord Dubs, are quite irrelevant. With regard to the way in which the noble Lord, Lord Dubs, suggested that I had no idea how to describe an economist, I have now learned a good deal from the Minister.

This is a probing amendment. One advantage of a probing amendment is that one can ask questions and find out that one is right or completely wrong in what one says. Having previously received a few compliments from the noble Lord, Lord Thomson, and agreement having been expressed with some of the things that I have done, I believe that I can stand up quite bravely and say that I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Baroness Blackstone moved Amendments Nos. 39 and 40:

Page 7, line 30, leave out "non-staff" and insert "non-executive"

Page 7, line 32, leave out "non-staff" and insert "non-executive"

On Question, amendments agreed to.

[Amendment No. 41 not moved.]

Baroness Blackstone moved Amendments Nos. 42 to 77:

Page 7, line 35, leave out "non-staff" and insert "non-executive"

Page 7, line 37, leave out "non-staff" and insert "non-executive"

Page 8, line 11, leave out "non-staff" and insert "non-executive"

Page 8, line 14, leave out "non-staff" and insert "non-executive"

Page 8, line 18, leave out "non-staff" and insert "non-executive"

Page 8, line 24, leave out "non-staff" and insert "non-executive"

Page 8, line 27, leave out "non-staff" and insert "non-executive"

Page 8, line 28, leave out "a staff" and insert "an executive"

Page 8, line 30, leave out "non-staff" and insert "non-executive"

Page 8, line 31, leave out "staff" and insert "executive"

Page 8, line 32, leave out "non-staff" and insert "non-executive"

Page 8, line 34, leave out "non-staff" and insert "non-executive"

Page 9, line 3, leave out "non-staff" and insert "non-executive"

Page 9, line 10, leave out "staff" and insert "executive"

Page 9, line 12, leave out "staff" and insert "executive"

Page 9, line 13, leave out "staff" and insert "executive"

22 Nov 2001 : Column 1301

Page 9, line 15, leave out "non-staff" and insert "non-executive"

Page 9, line 17, leave out "non-staff" and insert "non-executive"

Page 9, line 18, leave out "staff" and insert "executive"

Page 9, line 24, leave out "non-staff" and insert "non-executive"

Page 9, line 25, leave out "a staff" and insert "an executive"

Page 9, line 28, leave out "non-staff" and insert "non-executive"

Page 9, line 30, leave out "non-staff" and insert "non-executive"

Page 9, line 32, leave out "a staff" and insert "an executive"

Page 9, line 35, leave out "a staff" and insert "an executive"

Page 9, line 38, leave out "a staff" and insert "an executive"

Page 9, line 39, leave out "a staff" and insert "an executive"

Page 9, line 41, leave out "staff" and insert "executive"

Page 9, line 45, leave out "staff" and insert "executive"

Page 10, line 9, leave out "a staff member or a non-staff" and insert "an executive member or a non-executive"

Page 12, line 24, leave out "non-staff" and insert "non-executive"

Page 12, line 26, leave out "non-staff" and insert "non-executive"

Page 12, line 28, at end insert—

"(3A) Ofcom shall publish, in such manner as they consider appropriate, any arrangements which they make under this paragraph."
Page 12, line 29, at end insert—

"15A Ofcom shall make arrangements for the keeping of proper records—
(a) of their proceedings;
(b) of the proceedings of any committee established by them;
(c) of the proceedings at any meeting of the chairman and other non-executive members of Ofcom; and
(d) of anything done by an employee or member of Ofcom under paragraph 17(a)."
Page 12, line 33, leave out "non-staff" and insert "non-executive"

Page 12, line 42, leave out "non-staff" and insert "non-executive"

On Question, amendments agreed to.

The Deputy Speaker (Viscount Simon): My Lords, as Amendments Nos. 78 and 79 have been marshalled incorrectly, I have to call Amendment No. 79 before calling Amendment No. 78.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns moved Amendment No. 79:

Page 13, line 3, at end insert—

"( ) In the case of a resolution made under sub-paragraph (3)(a), Ofcom shall publish within 30 days a statement of the interest and the reasons why it was appropriate to disregard it."

The noble Baroness said: My Lords, for the convenience of the House and to save time, I shall refer to the government amendment that we had thought was Amendment No. 78 at the same time as I speak to Amendment No. 79.

I welcome government Amendment No. 78. It fully meets a concern that I expressed in Committee. The reason that I have tabled Amendment No. 79 is to probe one remaining matter about which I am concerned regarding the way in which financial interests shall be declared by members of the Ofcom board and of Ofcom's committees. We are at the tail end of this Report stage, and I am very aware that my

22 Nov 2001 : Column 1302

Amendment No. 79 is a tail-end amendment, too. It is a minor matter about which I hope the Government can give an assurance.

Part of my Amendment No. 79 is met by the government's Amendment No. 78. I tabled mine before they tabled theirs. Since it is a probing amendment, I felt that it was not worth taking up your Lordships' time by withdrawing my amendment and retabling something else.

The Government have made some significant improvements to the Bill today with regard to the declaration of financial interests. But, even with the benefit of those amendments and I hope the benefit of the government's Amendment No. 78 when we come to it, the public will not know why the board or committee felt it appropriate to disregard the declaration of interest and then allow the person involved to remain for the decision-making process from which they could possibly obtain financial benefit.

Amendment No. 79 seeks to correct that omission by providing transparency. My amendment would ensure that if someone declared a financial interest and was then allowed to take part in the decision-making process, Ofcom would simply have to publish a statement of the financial interest and the reasons why all the other members agreed to disregard it. It would be given 30 days within which to publish such a statement.

The government's Amendment No. 78 has also given rise to another question which I shall address now in the interests of saving time later. The new clause tabled by the Minister, to which we spoke earlier, gives us the reassurance that the public will be able to gain access to a record of the financial interests of the members of the board. But does that also give them the right to have access to a record of the financial interests of the members of Ofcom's committees, who, of course, need not be members of the board?

If the new clause does not provide that right with regard to committee members' interests, we could find ourselves faced with a position in which a member of a committee who was not a board member was able to benefit financially from a decision taken by the committee that he or she had attended, but the public would have no way of discovering that he or she had participated in that decision in which he or she had a financial interest. It would therefore seem appropriate to extend the provisions of my Amendment No. 79 to the proceedings of committees.

This is a probing amendment at this stage. It may be that the Government can give me some assurance that this problem is covered in another part of the Bill.I should be grateful if the Minister would address that matter. I beg to move.

---