Parliamentary Search

Proceeding contribution from Lord Garnier (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 1 July 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Parliamentary Standards Bill.

Parliamentary Standards Bill

Does my hon. and learned Friend share my surprise at the intervention by the Secretary of State on Second Reading, when he chided me for misconstruing clause 9, which I said, on any view, imputes a test of dishonesty? He said it did not and that was one of the distinctions between it and the Fraud Act 2006. I do not think that he had in mind section 17 of the Theft Act 1968, albeit I am sure that he is a highly experienced criminal practitioner. Does my hon. and learned Friend agree that clause 9(1), if it does nothing else, at least imputes a test of dishonesty?

Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
495 c367 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Complaints Disciplinary proceedings Data protection Codes of practice Conduct Allowances House of Commons Legal aid scheme Members Members' interests Parliamentary privilege Standards Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority Sunset clauses
Legislation
Parliamentary Standards Bill 2008-09
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk