Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Clarke of Nottingham (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 16 May 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill.


Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill

My hon. Friend is making sound points in criticising the adequacy of the veto offered. Will he reflect on whether a veto is totally reassuring? As my right hon. Friend the Member for East Yorkshire (Mr. Knight) just pointed out, the former Minister repeatedly gave assurances in various forums that nothing that was controversial would be taken through in this way. I take that to mean that a substantial number of Members of the House saying that a measure should be subject to the parliamentary process should be adequate to stop the procedure being used. If all that is offered can simply be overridden by the working majority of the Government of the day, very controversial measures could be taken through using this simple, scarcely parliamentary procedure. Just a bare majority of Members of the House of Commons would make sure that an unsuitable process was used to override a significant section of public and parliamentary opinion.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
446 c894 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Accountability Administration Business Bureaucracy Delegated legislation Legislative process EU law Legislative competence Government departments Legislation Members Parliamentary procedure Parliamentary scrutiny Reform Statutory instruments Legislative reform orders Sunset clauses
Legislation
Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk