Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord McKenzie of Luton (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 19 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

We are dealing with the amendments that are before us and not with amendments to those amendments. It is important that we deal with the Bill as it is currently drafted. Let us assume that the order has been made. In this circumstance, if the fears about market security prove justified, those whose economic interests were adversely affected would be able to seek a judicial review of the order, and it would be within a court’s powers, if it deemed the Minister’s opinion irrational, to strike the order down. So while an order could amend or abolish the functions of an economic regulator, this would clearly be possible only where the evidence, including economic arguments and cost benefit analysis, clearly demonstrated that the removal or modification of those functions was for the purpose of removing or reducing burdens, where the important preconditions in Clause 4 were satisfied and where the order did not breach the Government’s undertaking to preserve the independence of regulators.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
684 c1342 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Devolved matters Accountability Delegated legislation Committees Constitutional and administrative law Human rights Judiciary Exemptions Government departments Functions Legislation Powers of entry Parliamentary procedure Parliamentary scrutiny Regulation Utilities Voting rights Taxation Speaker Statutory instruments
Legislation
Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk