Proceeding contribution from Jack Straw (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 16 November 2006. It occurred during Business statement on Business of the House.
Business of the House
It is all very amusing to discover that legislation made between 1235 and 1947 fits into less shelf space than that made in the past 10 years. Is the hon. Gentleman seriously arguing that we should go back to the conditions for people in 1947, let alone 1235? He needs to explain what his point is. Much of the legislation that has been passed since 1947—[Hon. Members: ““Too much legislation.””] The Conservatives say that, but they have welcomed all but two of the proposed Bills, so they need to be clear about this. It is also time for the Liberal Democrats to spell out which pieces of legislation they do not like. Did they object to the National Health Service Act 1946 or to many of the other major social changes that were encapsulated in very large Acts? Are they saying that we should get rid of those? Are they saying that we should get rid of the minimum wage legislation or the other major improvements that have followed as a result of legislation? The Liberal Democrats say that they would repeal some legislation, but the total volume proposed would fill a tiny amount of shelf space as they are proposing to repeal not whole Acts, but sections. For example, they are proposing to repeal 10 sections of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 and sections 9 and 10 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. I hope that every voter whose support the Liberal Democrats are seeking will receive a leaflet through their door explaining the terrible consequences that would arise from the Liberal Democrat commitment to remove the power to hold DNA samples taken at the time of arrest. That power has led to the conviction of dangerous criminals, including rapists. The consequence of the Liberal Democrat proposal would be that such people would end up going free. On the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the marine conservation Bill— [Interruption] I shall be quick. We are proposing a draft Bill on marine conservation. On parliamentary questions, I wholly refute what the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome (Mr. Heath) says about the system of traffic lights used in the Department for Work and Pensions. The system was introduced so that the Department could better cope with the huge increase in written and oral questions, and to ensure that difficult questions requiring a full answer received one on time.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 453 c133-4
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Department for Work and Pensions Legislation Nature conservation Parliamentary procedure Seas and oceans Queen's speech Parliamentary questions
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 12:43:15 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/Hansard/PARLIAMENTARY_QUESTION_1184940/answer
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/Hansard/PARLIAMENTARY_QUESTION_1184940/answer
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/Hansard/PARLIAMENTARY_QUESTION_1184940/answer