Proceeding contribution from Lord Rowlands (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 12 July 2016. It occurred during Debates on delegated legislation on Telecommunications Restriction Orders (Custodial Institutions) (England and Wales) Regulations 2016.
Telecommunications Restriction Orders (Custodial Institutions) (England and Wales) Regulations 2016
But surely, when one reads the list in Section 80, a regulation which allows a court to withhold evidence from a party to proceedings is more significant and important than even those in Section 80. Why was it not at least included in the original Act in those sections? I suggest to the Minister and the Committee that it is quite serious. If this precedent goes through, government departments will be able to use this loose, imprecise regulation to introduce the most wide-reaching changes by regulation, which were not included in the original Act. A quite fundamental point is at stake here.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 774 c77GC
- Session
- 2016-17
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords Grand Committee
- Subjects
- Courts Evidence Prisons Mobile phones Telecommunications
- Legislation
- Telecommunications Restriction Orders (Custodial Institutions) (England and Wales) Regulations 2016
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on hansard.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2017-02-17 09:56:42 +0000
- URI
- http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2016-07-12/16071282000021
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2016-07-12/16071282000021
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2016-07-12/16071282000021