Proceeding contribution from Lord Henley (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 6 December 2011. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Protection of Freedoms Bill.
Protection of Freedoms Bill
My Lords, obviously at this stage I cannot define ““recreational”” as used by my noble friends in their amendments. It is not for me to define it; an explanation will have to come from noble Lords themselves as they move their amendments. The subsidiary point to that—the concerns expressed by my noble friend—may be best addressed by my noble friend Lady Hamwee’s comments when she talked about the difficulty of getting it down to just one or two words. She talked about the need to get this consultation, and the guidance ensuing from it, which is exactly right. I hope that my noble friend now accepts that that is what we are trying to do. That is why I want to make sure that the consultation is out before the next stage of the Bill. I see the noble Baroness, Lady Farrington, twitching to get up, so I shall give way.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 733 c635
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Children Disclosure of information Criminal records Crime Employment Licensing Further education Harassment Offenders Personal records Northern Ireland Protection Police cautions Taxis Rehabilitation Registration Vetting Vulnerable adults Young people Safety Sports Voluntary work Stalking Criminal Records Bureau
- Legislation
- Protection of Freedoms Bill 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 14:29:49 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_792328
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_792328
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_792328