Proceeding contribution from Lord Bassam of Brighton (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
moved AmendmentNo. 116: Page 21, leave out lines 25 to 40 and insert- ““(2) In this Act ““regulatory function”” means- (a) a function under any enactment of imposing requirements, restrictions or conditions, or setting standards or giving guidance, in relation to any activity; or (b) a function which relates to the securing of compliance with, or the enforcement of, requirements, restrictions, conditions, standards or guidance which under or by virtue of any enactment relate to any activity. (3) In subsection (2)(a) and (b) the references to a function- (a) include a function exercisable by or on behalf of the Crown; (b) do not include- (i) any function exercisable by any body of, or any person holding office in, the Church of England; or (ii) any function of conducting criminal or civil proceedings. (4) In subsection (2)(a) and (b) the references to an activity include- (a) providing goods and services; and (b) employing or offering employment to any person.”” The noble Lord said: I can deal with the amendment fairly briefly. It exempts the Church of England from the provisions in Part 2 on the exercise of regulatory functions, and ensures that the order-making power in Clause 2 cannot be used in relation to the regulatory functions of the Church. This is consistent with the long-standing constitutional convention that the Government will not legislate on anything within the competence of the Church of England, which has de facto delegated powers, without first reaching agreement with it. My understanding, as one would expect, is that the amendment is very agreeable to the Church of England. The right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Coventry raised the issue on Second Reading. Officials have been in discussion with the Church authorities on this point for some time, and my understanding is that the Church is entirely happy with the proposition. I beg to move. On Question, amendment agreed to. Clause 34, as amended, agreed to. Clauses 35 to 37 agreed to. Schedule [Repeals]:
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 684 c1401-2
- 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
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 10:53:56 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_339446
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_339446
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_339446