Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Peyton of Yeovil (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 3 July 2006. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill.


Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill

moved Amendment No. 12: Page 1, line 13, leave out ““, criminal or otherwise,”” The noble Lord said: I remind your Lordships, particularly the Minister, that Clause 1(3)(d) refers to, "““a sanction, criminal or otherwise, for doing or not doing anything in the course of any activity””." In the interest of economy of space—this is not a complicated point—it might be nice to leave out the words ““or otherwise”” and leave the provision referring to ““a sanction””. Can the Minister please explain, in words I can understand, what is added to the Bill by the inclusion of those two very simple words ““or otherwise””? My contention is that the words ““a sanction”” have the same meaning, so ““or otherwise”” could safely be left out. This is one of the very few times in my life when I am really confident that the Minister cannot resist the argument to leave out these two words, but of course my life is one of perpetual disappointment in this context. I beg to move.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
684 c60 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Devolved matters Crime Business Delegated legislation Legislation Ministerial powers Scotland Regulation Wales Taxation Legislative reform orders
Legislation
Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk