Proceeding contribution from Oliver Heald (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 8 June 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Compensation Bill (HL).
Compensation Bill [Lords]
The hon. Gentleman is right to support me in saying that we need education, but wrong to say that we do not need clause 1. It has a declaratory effect so that people know what the law is, and know that it is set out in statute. I cannot imagine why the hon. Gentleman is trying to nitpick over the wording of the clause when it has been made clear from the outset that its purpose is to declare what the existing law is, and to spread that knowledge more widely. To read the clause as though it is supposed to be a complete codification of the law, or anything of that sort, is a complete mistake.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 447 c434
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Complaints Compensation Consumers Accountability Courts Companies Advisory services Fees and charges Liability Exemptions Legal opinion Marketing Negligence Voluntary organisations Regulation Trade unions Voluntary work Claims management services
- Legislation
- Compensation Bill (HL) 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 23:04:10 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_328952
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_328952
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_328952