Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Ashton of Upholland (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 13 December 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Bill [HL].


Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Bill [HL]

I am only taking it away because I did not clear its acceptance. I had not heard what the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland, had to say until now. I am not taking it away with a view to doing anything strange with it; it is simply that the rules of the game are that before I accept something on the hoof, which is what I appear to be about to do, I need to check that I have not added anything in by accident. I do not think that the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland, will mind if I do this and I hope that my noble friend does not mind. I am not seeking to wriggle in any way, shape or form; I merely need to be absolutely certain. The argument against putting-in the words in the amendment is that it is in inherent in all the things that tribunals do, which I think noble Lords accept. There is no suggestion that we need this provision because it is not there. I think that what the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland, is saying is that sometimes declaratory words can be important.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
687 c73GC 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Appeals Asylum Finance Legal aid scheme Judiciary Immigration Judgements Qualifications Membership Public appointments Tribunals Council on Tribunals Tribunals Service
Legislation
Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Bill (HL) 2006-07
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk