Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Chris Bryant (Labour) in the House of Commons on Friday, 11 February 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Legislation (Territorial Extent) Bill.


Legislation (Territorial Extent) Bill

No, it is an argument against it. I remember clearly the rows that took place in both the Chamber and the Clerk's Office about whether the way in which the amendments to a health Bill were being selected would mean that Wales was or was not covered. Because most Members wanted to remove the provision that would allow the Secretary of State to exempt private members' clubs in England, they actually removed the provision that allowed an exemption for private members' clubs in Wales. It may well be that the Welsh Assembly would have wanted to do that itself anyway, but it had no choice. It could not make such a provision. I can tell the hon. Lady that that row was quite vociferous. My point is this: I do not think it is possible to be clear. The original legislation might be clear, but people might want to amend it, and why should they not be able to do so? If the parliamentary draftspeople say, ““This Bill will cover only England””, the number of Bills going through the House will have to be doubled, if not trebled, because there will have to be a separate Wales Bill and a separate Scotland Bill.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
523 c615 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Devolved matters Devolution Legislative process Jurisdiction Legislation England Northern Ireland Northern Ireland Assembly National Assembly for Wales Scotland Wales Scottish Parliament West Lothian question English votes for English laws
Legislation
Legislation (Territorial Extent) Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk