Proceeding contribution from Lord Redwood (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 7 November 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill.
Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill
When I first came into the House, there was a doctrine that not only did any item of constitutional significance go through a full legislative process, but all stages took place on the Floor of the House. I do not think that what constituted such an item was ever codified or written down. It was rather like an elephant: it was difficult to define, but we would recognise one when we saw it. People in those days handled constitutional significance in that way. As a compromise, would it not be possible for the Minister to accept that perhaps the Speaker, on the advice of the House authorities, should decide whether an item is of constitutional significance? Then it would be treated appropriately.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 451 c749
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Bureaucracy Devolution Committees Constitutional and administrative law Legislative process Exemptions Legislative competence Functions Legislation Law Commission Powers Parliamentary scrutiny Regulation Taxation 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 21:44:46 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_358633
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_358633
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_358633