Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Byford (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 2 November 2005. It occurred during Committee proceeding and Debate on bill on Commons Bill [HL].


Commons Bill [HL]

I speak to Amendment No. 123, which is in this group. I should like clarification on this matter. I accept that the part of the regulations I am seeking to remove says ““may”” and that it makes provision regarding the process of converting the register. However, is this the only Bill—or is it becoming a recurrent event—where the process is defined on the face of the legislation? It seems an unusual step. I am sure that we all recognise and accept that many of our records will be moved on to electronic format, but I have not seen this sort of provision in previous legislation, stating that regulation ““may”” define it. Page 28 of the Explanatory Notes refers to the digitisation of maps for the CROW Act and to the difficulties in transferring the information from old maps. If the Government intend simply to build on the experience gained from the Countryside Agency and the Countryside Council for Wales, the use of the word ““process”” may be too wide. Can the Minister also tell me which part of the Government will be drawing up these regulations and under whose remit it will fall? Does it include anything that goes beyond the description of process included in this part of the Bill?


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
675 c75GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
ICT Access Applications Agriculture Costs Common land Functions Land use Grazing land Local government Membership Management Maps Public opinion Registration Voting rights Transitional arrangements Wildlife Rules of procedure Voluntary work Sites of special scientific interest Commons councils Village greens
Legislation
Commons Bill (HL) 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk