Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Jonathan Djanogly (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Monday, 15 May 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill.


Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill

That sounds like good law to me. The Minister will, of course, tell me if he thinks otherwise. My hon. Friend the Member for Buckingham (John Bercow) and the hon. Members for Stoke-on-Trent, Central (Mark Fisher) and for Cambridge (David Howarth) expressed concern that the Bill could be used for a wider purpose than striking out business regulations. An example given was the abolition of jury trials. The Minister, fairly, showed the lack of clarity in the 2001 Act and how clauses 5 and 6 answered the important points made, but he did not go far enough. There is more to come out in that respect, probably in the other place. Following an intervention from my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Rushcliffe (Mr. Clarke), it turned out that the restrictions relating to tax relate only to increases in tax. The right hon. Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston (Andrew Miller)—I congratulate him on being appointed a Privy Councillor—


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
446 c779 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Administration Costs Business Delegated legislation Juries EU law Government departments Legislation Law Commission Ministerial powers Northern Ireland Powers Public sector Parliamentary scrutiny Small businesses Regulation Reform Trials Taxation Legislative reform orders
Legislation
Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk