Proceeding contribution from Lord Cope of Berkeley (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 23 January 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [HL].
Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [HL]
I will defend my drafting in one respect at least. I grant the noble Lord, Lord Borrie, his point that I should perhaps have said something about the LBRO’s ““relevant functions”” in drafting the amendment. That is clearly what I had in mind and what I think the noble Lord, Lord Haskins, had in mind on that occasion. On ““must give advice”” rather than ““may””, I was following the precedent of Clause 9(2), which concerns advice to a Minister, rather than Clause 9(1), which concerns advice that the LBRO chooses to give.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 698 c129GC
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords Grand Committee
- Subjects
- Business Anti-social behaviour Charity Commission Gambling Commission Franchises Highways Agency Local government Office of Fair Trading Regulation Local Better Regulation Office
- Legislation
- Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill (HL) 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 02:36:50 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_437726
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_437726
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_437726