Proceeding contribution from Lord Bach (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 13 January 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Bribery Bill [HL].
Bribery Bill [HL]
I am sorry for interrupting the noble Lord, but the reason why I have made the argument about an authorisation after the bribery is to be found in paragraph 13 of the Constitution Committee’s report: ""Even in the event that compelling evidence is brought forward demonstrating a clear need for the defences in clause 12(1)(a) and clause 12(1)(b), the use of these defences should be made dependent upon prior authorisation"."
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 716 c106GC
- Session
- 2009-10
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords Grand Committee
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Armed forces Corruption Intelligence services GCHQ National security Police Public interest Public service MI6 MI5 Bribery
- Legislation
- Bribery Bill (HL) 2009-10
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-22 02:07:25 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_608399
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_608399
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_608399