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

The advice is that, whatever the nature of the secondary legislation, Ministers have to comply and the legislation has to be compatible. In light of the noble Lord’s comments, we should look at that again. If his point was right that may well change the position. No Minister may, by virtue of Section 6, ever make incompatible secondary legislation. Perhaps we should follow this up outside our debate. While I stand by our undertakings, I would not wish to enshrine in statute a procedure that is, with the greatest respect to those undertakings, confirming something that is already compulsory. Indeed, it could even give the false impression that it would be legitimate for the Minister to make secondary legislation that he considers to be incompatible with convention rights. While I understand completely the intention behind Amendments Nos. 84 and 85, and while I reiterate the undertakings that the Government have given, I invite the noble Lord to withdraw the amendment.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
684 c1372 
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