Clause 23 - Duty to comply with directions under s. 21
Energy Bill [Lords]
3:00 pm
Mr Stephen Timms (Minister of State (e-Commerce & Competitiveness), Department of Trade and Industry; East Ham, Labour)
The reason for the provision is that it would not be reasonable in all circumstances for the NDA to have a direction-making power over, for example, a Ministry of Defence site for which the NDA has been given clean-up responsibilities but which is and will continue primarily to be the responsibility of the Government. Although, as my hon. Friend mentioned on Tuesday, it is unlikely that the NDA would be given responsibility for an NDA site when the MOD still had a defence-related interest in the site and the Crown or its appointee retained control, such circumstances cannot be ruled out. It is possible that parts of a site designated to the NDA for clean-up might be in use for other matters that have nothing to do with the clean-up process and in such circumstances it would not be appropriate for the NDA to be able to direct the person with control of the site on those non-clean-up matters. That is the reason for the exclusion.
The choice of the negative procedure is based on well-established precedents. The affirmative procedure is usually used in circumstances involving the exercise of powers that would substantially affect provisions in Acts of Parliament or powers to impose financial charges, other financial provisions, skeleton powers or when there is consideration of special importance. I do not think that any of those circumstances apply in this case. The sites, installations and facilities in question are those operated by or on behalf of the Crown. Either a Crown appointee or the NDA will be responsible for the activity and in determining the scope of the NDA's control in a particular set of circumstances. That does not give rise to considerations of such importance as to require debate in both Houses.
With that information, I hope that the hon. Gentleman will withdraw his amendment.