Proceeding contribution from Lord Young of Norwood Green (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 20 December 2010. It occurred during Debates on delegated legislation on Export Control (Amendment) (No. 3) Order 2010.
Export Control (Amendment) (No. 3) Order 2010
My Lords, I do not think that we will detain noble Lords for long on this order. I welcome the Government’s full explanation and clarification that the order will require a Secretary of State licence, whether it is direct or indirect control, which is important. I also welcome the assurance that there will be a monitoring and review process. I cannot help but ask one question, as a result of my O-level chemistry that I never got. Like the Minister and the Explanatory Memorandum, I always refer to the drug as sodium thiopental, but I notice that the order reverses that and refers to thiopental sodium. From mere curiosity, I am wondering why that is the case. I hope that those behind the Minister who know the answer to everything will tell us why the words have been reversed. That aside, I welcome the Government’s decision.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 723 c112GC
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords Grand Committee
- Subjects
- Capital punishment Exports Drugs Export controls USA Anaesthetics
- Legislation
- Export Control (Amendment) (No. 3) Order 2010
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 21:08:31 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_695297
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_695297
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_695297