Member

More fundamentally, these amendments speak to the integrity of the oversight process itself. The independent reviewer must not be directed by the very body they are reviewing. If Ministers can tell reviewers what periods they may examine or withhold information, that reviewer’s independence is only performative; it exists in name, not in substance. The Government have already accepted this argument in principle, and as I said earlier, they have accepted that “may” should become “must” in relation to Clauses 66 and 76. All we are asking is that the same logic, the same standard and the same commitment to genuine accountability be applied to Clause 89.