Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Goodhart (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 26 October 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill.


Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill

My Lords, I have always accepted that the subjective test is a real test but, equally, it is plainly not as strong a test as an objective test. The Minister has based a good deal of his argument on the proposition that the amendment would enable the courts to override a Minister and Parliament, but they can do that anyway. It has always been recognised that secondary legislation can be quashed even if it is an affirmative instrument which has received parliamentary attention. This goes way back in history because only primary legislation is exempt from review by the courts. So, therefore, whether or not these amendments are accepted, the judges will have potentially the ultimate decision. We are concerned here with a much more limited question—that is, whether the test should be a subjective or objective one. For the reasons I gave in opening the debate on these amendments, I believe that it should be an objective test. I wish to take the opinion of the House. On Question, Whether the said amendment (No. 1) shall be agreed to? Their Lordships divided: Contents, 103; Not-Contents, 116.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
685 c1290-1 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Devolved matters Accountability Crime Bureaucracy Civil service Delegated legislation British constitution EU law Government departments Legislation European communities Local government Ministerial powers Northern Ireland Parliamentary scrutiny Scotland Social security benefits Small businesses Regulation Reform Wales European economic area Legislative reform orders
Legislation
Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk