Proceeding contribution from Andrew Dismore (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 8 June 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Compensation Bill (HL).
Compensation Bill [Lords]
I cannot, because I am on a time limit. I suspect that the roots of the clause lie in the private Member’s Bill promoted by the hon. Member for Canterbury (Mr. Brazier). He seems to be proselytising the measure as a change in the law, but if that is the case, why are the Government saying that it simply restates the law? The hon. Gentleman is right to say that the measure does not restate the law; it dramatically changes it, and weakens it from the victim’s point of view. The Government should recognise that they withdrew their support from the hon. Gentleman’s Bill for good reason, because between 2000 and 2005, claims against local authorities, schools and voluntary organisations fell by 7.5 per cent., rather than increased.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 447 c461
- 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 14:09:57 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_329026
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_329026
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_329026