Proceeding contribution from Lord Davies of Oldham (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 18 January 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill on Video Recordings Bill.
Video Recordings Bill
I am not in a position to comment on every instance. The noble Lord will fully appreciate the basis on which we are enacting this fast-track legislation. The courts still potentially have a role to play because of the timing of cases, but I have indicated our expectation of the likely judgments. The noble Lord raised compensation and local authorities. We do not keep data on how many prosecutions have been dropped. There were 111 ongoing cases in September 2009. They all had to be dropped because the law was not valid. We are not keeping a regular audit on this. We found out about this situation in August because the three-month notification period finished in September, and that is why we collected those figures. I am not able to identify the issues in the court cases involved. In response to the comments made by the noble Lord, Lord Pannick, I can identify the principles on which we expect the courts to proceed. They will not reopen cases for compensation in circumstances where they conducted their proceedings entirely fairly and reached their judgments in accordance with that. This short interim period between when the Act was found to be invalid and when we obtain Royal Assent presents some difficulties on which we are not able to be definitive. We can, however, identify the principles on which action is taken. The noble Lord, Lord Luke, asked whether there is an audit of the procedure by which the departments are alerted to this. The answer is no; the departments’ concern about the issues is as good as, if not better than, any formal audit. I can add to the points that I made to the noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale. I have had a note to the effect that we notified the European Commission between 15 September and 15 December. That is why it has taken some time since we discovered the problem and brought it to Parliament. We did not identify the issue until then: hence the difficulty in acting. I am aware that this is a difficult situation that rightly prompted questions in some detail as well as questions about process. We are grateful to the Constitution Committee for having considered these matters, and we very much bear in mind its pertinent points, the most important of which the noble Lord, Lord Pannick, reinforced to a degree today. I hope the House will feel that the Government have acted in the most able way they could to deal with what is undoubtedly a most unfortunate but, so far as we can identify, unique occurrence. Bill read a second time and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 716 c787-8
- Session
- 2009-10
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Children Censorship EU law Standards Video games Video recordings Classification schemes
- Legislation
- Video Recordings Bill 2009-10
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 23:18:20 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_609966
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_609966
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_609966