Proceeding contribution from Lord Lucas (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 26 January 2010. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Digital Economy Bill [HL].
Digital Economy Bill [HL]
No, my Lords, but eventually it seems to draw useful answers out of the Government. The fact that one has to ask the same question five or six times to get the answer that one is seeking is, I am afraid, just a characteristic of the way that Governments work sometimes. The word "proportionality" in my Amendment 161 is important. I understand that the Government resist its inclusion. Since I was arguing yesterday against the inclusion of the word "proportionality" in a Bill and was successful in that, I suppose I should be content to be consistent. I hope that this means at least that the Government are converted as a result of the reverses they suffered yesterday. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment 161 withdrawn. Amendments 162 to 167 not moved. Amendment 168 Moved by
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 716 c1310
- Session
- 2009-10
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Codes of practice Costs Computer networks Copyright Communication ICT EU law Film Libraries Internet Higher education Electronic commerce Mobile phones Ofcom Music Radio frequencies Registration Universities Technology Video piracy Subscriptions Internet service providers Statutory instruments
- Legislation
- Digital Economy Bill (HL) 2009-10
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2025-01-05 10:22:56 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_615166
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_615166
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_615166