Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from William Cash (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

I did not predicate my argument on the basis that there would be infraction proceedings; rather, I said that they could be a consequence. The stability and growth pact is an example of the rule of law in Europe being destroyed by the attitudes of individual member states. What I am saying is that, where there is an Act of Parliament that is express and unambiguous, even if it is inconsistent with the European Communities Act 1972, and where the words ““notwithstanding the 1972 Act”” are included in such legislation, the legislative supremacy of this House requires the judiciary to give effect to that legislation. That is the simple point that I am making, and it is unchallengeable.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
446 c783-4 
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