Proceeding contribution from Viscount Astor (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 24 April 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on National Lottery Bill.
National Lottery Bill
My Lords, the Minister will wonder whether he has had any support from his Benches or whether he has been thoroughly torpedoed below the waterline—which I suspect is the case. The noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, is right. If it worked to have it in Clause 7 at new subsection (3C)(e) where the only difference is the words ““if any””—it is unlikely that a Secretary of State could not find anybody to consult but it is theoretically possible—then it is even more appropriate that it should be in Clause 8. As the noble Lord said, we must have consistency in legislation. I fully support the amendment tabled by the right reverend Prelate.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 681 c31
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Devolution Annual reports Artworks Finance Distribution Grants Historic buildings Investment income Economic regions Ministerial powers Powers Public appointments National Lottery Distribution Fund Lotteries National Lottery Publicity National Heritage Memorial Fund Big Lottery Fund
- Legislation
- National Lottery Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 12:09:16 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_316755
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_316755
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_316755