Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Christopher Chope (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 21 April 2009. It occurred during Legislative debate on Manchester City Council Bill [Lords] and Bournemouth Borough Council Bill [Lords].


Manchester City Council Bill [Lords] and Bournemouth Borough Council Bill [Lords]

My right hon. Friend is noted for his contrariness on such occasions, and it is important that that point should be put on the record—it does not appear that anyone else will do so. My response would be that the relatively small fees associated with the placing of a private Bill in Parliament are modest compared with the costs of giving evidence and providing support during the Committee stage in respect of parts of the Bill that subsequently come to be regarded as redundant or incapable of achieving enactment. My right hon. Friend's background and knowledge as a distinguished lawyer show that he is without self-interest in these matters. He is always as keen to minimise costs to members of the public as he used to be to his clients. In summary, I have some strong reservations about the merits of reviving the Bills, and I hope that I am not the only Member who has such reservations.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
491 c182-3 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Costs Direct selling Bournemouth Licensing Greater Manchester Local government Manchester City Council Street trading Bournemouth Borough Council
Legislation
Bournemouth Borough Council Bill (HL) 2006-07 to 2009-10
Manchester City Council Bill (HL) 2006-07 to 2009-10
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk