Parliamentary Search

Proceeding contribution from Lord McCluskey (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 2 February 2012. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Scotland Bill.

Scotland Bill

I did not speak to that amendment. I agree that it may not be entirely necessary. However, as the noble and learned Lord knows, many a time have we put something in statute to make a clear point. Because there has been debate, including among lawyers, about whether the High Court of Justiciary is the final court except in relation to compatibility issues, there is something to be said for putting this in the Bill. I felt that that would be a way to do it. That was why I tabled the amendment. The intention was to underline a point that is implicit elsewhere in the Act and, as the noble and learned Lord said, is stated expressly in other Acts.

Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
734 c1773 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Criminal proceedings Devolved matters Appeals BBC Broadcasting Devolution Airguns Antarctic Certification Housing Fees and charges Licensing Firearms Human rights Judiciary EU law Energy Legislative competence Housing associations Insolvency Health professions Higher education Franchises Powers Public appointments Nuclear power Railways Loans Ministers Lord Advocate Scotland Regulation Scottish Parliament Supreme Court Students ScotRail BBC Trust Scottish Government Legislative consent motions British students abroad
Legislation
Scotland Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk