Session 2010-12 Volume 244
Journal for 14 December 2010
Prayers were read by the Lord Bishop of Bristol.
Select Committee Reports
1
European Union
The following Reports from the Select Committee were made and ordered to be printed:
Annual Report 2010 (3rd Report, HL Paper 70)
Government and Commission Responses Session 2009–2010. (4th Report, HL Paper 72)
2 Merits of Statutory Instruments
The following Report from the Select Committee was made and ordered to be printed:
15th Report, on the following negative instruments:
Housing Benefit (Amendment) Regulations 2010
Rent Officers (Housing Benefit Functions) Amendment Order 2010. (HL Paper 76)
Public Business
3 European Union: repatriation of powers A question was asked by Lord Spicer and answered by Lord Howell of Guildford.
4 Remembrance Sunday A question was asked by Lord Davies of Coity and answered by Baroness Wilcox.
5 British Indian Ocean Territory A question was asked by Baroness Whitaker and answered by Lord Howell of Guildford.
6 Houses of Parliament: access during demonstrations A question was asked by Lord Soley and answered by Lord Strathclyde.
7 Post Office Network Subsidy Scheme (Amendment) Order 2010 Baroness Wilcox moved that the draft Order laid before the House on 10 November be approved. The motion was agreed to.
8 National Minimum Wage (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2010 Baroness Wilcox moved that the draft Order laid before the House on 2 November be approved. The motion was agreed to.
9 Public Bodies Bill [HL] The bill was further considered in Committee, beginning with amendment 24. Amendment 26 was agreed to (see division list 1). The House resumed.
10 Higher Education (Basic Amount) (England) Regulations 2010 Lord Henley moved that the draft Order laid before the House on 29 November be approved. Then Lord Triesman moved, as an amendment to the original motion, to leave out from "that" to the end and insert: "this House regrets that the Government has failed to consult adequately with parents, students, higher education bodies, employers and local authorities on raising student tuition fees and to convince many people of the fairness and sustainability of its proposals for funding higher education; urges the Government to undertake more public consultation on the issue, including consultation with future graduates and their families who did not contribute to the consultation over the Browne review; further considers that there should be an independent impact assessment on (a) the financial consequences of the proposed fees on students from both lower and middle income families, and (b) the financial consequences of the proposed fees on women, including a full assessment of the impact of the fees on equalities and fairness, and further calls on Her Majesty’s Government to commission new research to analyse the probable impact on demand for university courses of fees being increased to the range of £6,000 to £9,000 per annum from students from lower and middle income families and women; and further considers that, prior to contemplating any increase to the basic amount specified in section 24 of the Education Act 2004, the Government should publish a White Paper on reform of higher education funding, allowing for consultation and for consideration of alternative proposals." After debate, the amendment was disagreed to (see division list 2). Then the original motion was agreed to.
11 Section 24 of the Higher Education Act 2004 Lord Henley moved that, for the purpose of section 24 of the Higher Education Act 2004, the higher amount should be increased to £9,000, and to £4,500 in the cases described in regulation 5 of the draft regulations in Command Paper Cm 7986, and that the increase should take effect from 1 September 2012. Then Lord Triesman moved, as an amendment to the original motion, to leave out from "that" to the end and insert: "this House regrets that the Government has failed to consult adequately with parents, students, higher education bodies, employers and local authorities on raising student tuition fees and to convince many people of the fairness and sustainability of its proposals for funding higher education; urges the Government to undertake more public consultation on the issue, including consultation with future graduates and their families who did not contribute to the consultation over the Browne review; further considers that there should be an independent impact assessment on (a) the financial consequences of the proposed fees on students from both lower and middle income families, (b) the financial consequences of the proposed fees on women, including a full assessment of the impact of the fees on equalities and fairness, and further calls on Her Majesty’s Government to commission new research to analyse the probable impact on demand for university courses of fees being increased to the range of £6,000 to £9,000 per annum from students from lower and middle income families and women; and further considers that, prior to contemplating any increase to the higher amount specified in section 24 of the Education Act 2004, the Government should publish a White Paper on reform of higher education funding, allowing for consultation and for consideration of alternative proposals." The amendment was disagreed to (see division list 3). Then the original motion was agreed to.
12 Superannuation Bill The bill was returned from the Commons with the Lords amendments agreed to.
The House adjourned at 8.33pm until Wednesday 15 December at 3.00pm.