Baroness Taylor of Bolton (Lab)

My Lords, Amendment 39 is grouped with Amendments 41, 46 and 48. This is a pretty straightforward amendment, simply seeking to change in the Bill the word “may” to “must”. For context, the Bill as it stands says that a non-executive member of the board “may” be removed from office in certain circumstances. That is clearly appropriate and something that we should expect. Similarly, the Bill says that an executive member “may” be removed in certain circumstances. Again, that is something that we should expect and is totally appropriate. However, the circumstances in which such a removal can take place are actually rather serious. They are laid out quite clearly as being when the person is “guilty of serious misconduct … has a conflict of interest … has failed to comply with paragraph 6(4)”, which is about information on conflicts of interest, and “is unable, unfit or unwilling to carry out their functions”. I think we would all agree that, whether we are talking about a non-executive or executive member of the board, we need to take such issues seriously. That is why I ask the Minister why it is only “may” be removed and not “must” be removed, because these circumstances would seem to justify removal. If anybody falls foul of the items identified here, there really has to be a presumption that they will be removed, and so the word “must” might be more appropriate.