Proceeding contribution from Lord Neill of Bladen (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 5 May 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Political Parties and Elections Bill.
Political Parties and Elections Bill
Is the choice of language, "without reasonable excuse", based upon a settled body of case law in other statutes where the words have been used, or are we out in open seas? By using it in different contexts, you are going to get different interpretations. For example, on the issue of failure to deliver a proper statement of accounts, it could be a fairly good answer to say, "They were scrutinised by a firm of chartered accountants of high standing and it made a mistake. We only submitted them". The excuse for not making a full report by a particular date may be of a different order from where you are relying on the expert evidence of someone like an accountant. How solid is this as statutory language?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 710 c170GC
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords Grand Committee
- Subjects
- Costs Finance Elections Donors Expenditure Electoral Commission Members Political parties Loans Regulation Trade unions Tax allowances Taxation
- Legislation
- Political Parties and Elections Bill 2007-08 to 2008-09
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-22 02:13:32 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_553508
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_553508
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_553508