Proceeding contribution from William Cash (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 7 April 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill on Debt Relief (Developing Countries) Bill.
Debt Relief (Developing Countries) Bill
My question is really only about the accuracy of language. When we use the expression "sunset clause", we usually mean that as a result of various procedures, and after a period of time, a provision will cease to have effect. However, there is some confusion, as exactly the opposite seems to be provided for by clause 9 because it can give the Bill permanent effect, rather than causing it to cease. To make things clearer, may we use an expression other than "sunset clause"—perhaps by referring to a "sunlight clause"?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 508 c1049
- Session
- 2009-10
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Debts Developing countries Debts written off Sunset clauses
- Legislation
- Debt Relief (Developing Countries) Bill 2009-10
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 20:58:51 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_637363
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_637363
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_637363