Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lembit Opik (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 19 April 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Northern Ireland (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill.


Northern Ireland (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill

The Minister can give a more complete answer later, but it is a bit of a moot point anyway. The core question is why create two separate pieces of legislation when one will do. As we have said before, we support the provisions in the clause, and it is obvious that the amendments tabled by the hon. Member for North Down (Lady Hermon) are probing amendments. She made clear their purpose. We are simply trying to establish why there was not more joined-up thinking in Departments on how the provision’s objectives are to be achieved. If the point behind new clause 1 makes sense to the Government, they can still take it on board. That does not mean a great victory or defeat for anybody, but it would at least ensure consistency. Producing separate legislation always runs the risk of unintended consequences and those consequences could quite simply be avoided by adopting the methodology of new clause 1.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
445 c138-9 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Devolved matters Fraud Elections Ministerial powers Northern Ireland Public appointments Public interest Political parties Registration Chief Electoral Officer for Northern Ireland
Legislation
Northern Ireland (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk