Proceeding contribution from Lord Kingsland (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 24 July 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Government of Wales Bill.
Government of Wales Bill
My Lords, I am most grateful to the Minister for responding in his characteristically generous way. He demonstrated the difference between us in a very short phrase, when he referred to ““unjustifiable detriment””. We believe that the key to making retrospectivity acceptable in this case is that there should be no detriment. Yet the Government, themselves, in forming the order, would take a view about whether the detriment would be justifiable and whether, therefore, an existing private right could justifiably stand. In my submission, that is totally against the rule of law and therefore to us wholly unacceptable. I listened with care to what the noble Lord, Lord Thomas of Gresford, said. He and I have worked together on many occasions and, although we represent different political parties, I think that we can say that we are good colleagues. When the noble Lord stood up at Third Reading, he said in the first sentence of his observations, ““We support this amendment””. Indeed, it is fair to say that we discussed its terms before I finally decided on the text. He has now indicated that he will not support it in the Lobby, although he also said that he would not vote against it. When he was in full flight at Third Reading, he checked and swerved. He was perfectly entitled to do that; but, in doing so, again he undermines any chance that we have of winning a vote on the amendment now. So, despite the fact that we believe very strongly in the principles that the Government are now undermining, we shall not press the amendment to a Division. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. On Question, Motion agreed to. 18: Clause 103, page 57, line 37, leave out from ““Parliament”” to end of line 44 The Commons disagree to this amendment for the following reason- 18A: Because it is important that the Secretary of State should have discretion to refuse to lay before Parliament an Order in Council for a referendum about the commencement of the Assembly Act provisions which has been requested by the National Assembly for Wales
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 684 c1571-2
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Constituencies Audit Candidates Committees Elections Legislative competence Electoral systems National Assembly for Wales Political parties Referendums Wales Additional member systems National Assembly for Wales Commission Statutory instruments Retrospective legislation National Assembly for Wales members
- Legislation
- Government of Wales Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 11:28:34 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_340630
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_340630
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_340630