Proceeding contribution from Lord Lester of Herne Hill (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 19 October 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill on Equality Bill [HL].
Equality Bill [HL]
My Lords, I have no objection to the amendments but, as I understood what the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor was saying, there could be circumstances in legal proceedings where the court would be able to decide whether the disclosure was necessary in the public interest. As I understand it, that would be the position, but I entirely agree with the scope of the amendments as they stand. I have one further point. I may be being completely stupid—I probably am—but Clause 6(3)(g), which does not relate specifically to the point that we are discussing, states that the subsection authorises a disclosure made,"““if the information was acquired by the Commission more than 70 years before the date of the disclosure””." On the face of it, that seems a very odd idea, and I wonder whether there is a printing error.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 674 c784
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disability Children Disclosure of information Codes of practice Age Disability Rights Commission Commission for Racial Equality Civil proceedings Equality Human rights Gender Equality and Human Rights Commission Equal Opportunities Commission Public appointments Monitoring Religion Sexuality
- Legislation
- Equality Bill (HL) 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 19:48:10 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_268167
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_268167
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_268167