Proceeding contribution from Lord Jenkin of Roding (Conservative) 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
moved Amendment No. 2: Page 1, line 8, at end insert ““in the exercise of a regulatory function”” The noble Lord said: My Lords, as the noble Lord, Lord Goodhart, mentioned, the Bill had a very inauspicious start in another place. It aroused widespread suspicion and was christened by some as the ““Abolition of Parliament Bill””. The Government have now wisely and quickly recognised that, despite earlier attempts to legislate in this way by order, this Bill was not going to get through Parliament. Nevertheless, because that was its origin, one has to look at what is left of the Bill—the Government have introduced it in the Lords in a substantially modified form—with extreme care and some suspicion. Even with the amendments that the Government have made or will make, this is still effectively a ministerial law-making Bill and Parliament must look extremely carefully at the powers conferred and their purpose. Ministers are relying altogether too heavily on the limited safeguards built into the Bill, such as the vetoes of Committees of either House and the Government’s undertakings, which they have given fairly freely, about what they intend to do with the Bill. But undertakings do not bind successive Governments. The Bill will be on the statute book for all successive Governments, and we need to make certain that its wording and purpose are clearly defined so that it is clear what orders are to be permitted under the Bill. Therefore, I suggest that we include a provision that the purpose is to deal with regulatory functions, as defined later in the Bill. The amendment would restrict the Bill to the exercise of regulatory functions. It is important that this should be recognised in the Bill as its purpose. I regard the amendment as very important, and I hope that the Government may be persuaded to accept it. If not, perhaps we may have to return to the matter. Why not put in the Bill what the Government have said in their oral undertakings to this House—that the purpose is to deal with regulation? I beg to move.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 685 c1292-3
- 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
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 20:55:24 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_355262
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_355262
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_355262