My Lords, the Minister referred to the draftsman of the Bill as the current editor of Craies, but the noble Lord will know—and anyone in this House, and there are many, will know—that the parliamentary draftsman acts upon the instructions he receives from the Government.

My Lords, the Minister referred to the draftsman of the Bill as the current editor of Craies, but the noble Lord will know—and anyone in this House, and there are many, will know—that the parliamentary draftsman acts upon the instructions he receives from the Government.

My Lords, this amendment conveniently follows the previous group. It proposes leaving out subsection (8). Alternatively, Amendment 57 proposes leaving out subsection 8(c) and (d). Subsection (7)(b) provides that an order, "““may not be made unless a draft has been laid before and approved by resolution of each House of...

My Lords, this amendment conveniently follows the previous group. It proposes leaving out subsection (8). Alternatively, Amendment 57 proposes leaving out subsection 8(c) and (d). Subsection (7)(b) provides that an order, "““may not be made unless a draft has been laid before and approved by resolution of each House of...

Amendment 56 56: Clause 75, page 39, line 39, leave out subsection (8)

Amendment 56 56: Clause 75, page 39, line 39, leave out subsection (8)

My Lords, I am a little disappointed that the Minister has once again waved his shroud. Every time an objection is made to the structure of the clause, we seem to be told that the whole financial system will collapse into ruins unless we can do without Parliament. Subsection (8)...

My Lords, I am a little disappointed that the Minister has once again waved his shroud. Every time an objection is made to the structure of the clause, we seem to be told that the whole financial system will collapse into ruins unless we can do without Parliament. Subsection (8)...

My Lords, the Minister has said that debate on this aspect can continue at Third Reading, on the understanding that there should be a good reason for doing so. I remind him that we are not talking about what has been going on since 1946, which is that prospective orders...

My Lords, the Minister has said that debate on this aspect can continue at Third Reading, on the understanding that there should be a good reason for doing so. I remind him that we are not talking about what has been going on since 1946, which is that prospective orders...

My Lords, I am most grateful to the Minister for giving those three examples, but they are all examples where the retrospective power could properly be said to be necessary. They would not need the words ““or desirable”” in order to have that power. Can the Minister draw that distinction...

My Lords, I am most grateful to the Minister for giving those three examples, but they are all examples where the retrospective power could properly be said to be necessary. They would not need the words ““or desirable”” in order to have that power. Can the Minister draw that distinction...

My Lords, my name is on the Marshalled List and I strongly support what my noble friend Lord Goodlad and the noble and learned Lord, Lord Morris of Aberavon, said, as well as what my noble friend Lord Howard of Rising said in opening this matter. Clause 75(3) says: "““An...

My Lords, my name is on the Marshalled List and I strongly support what my noble friend Lord Goodlad and the noble and learned Lord, Lord Morris of Aberavon, said, as well as what my noble friend Lord Howard of Rising said in opening this matter. Clause 75(3) says: "““An...

I apologise for taking part in the debate now, not having been at the whole debate for medical reasons. I raise one point for clarification. The Explanatory Notes say that if these powers have to be used in an emergency—in other words, if they are brought into effect before there...

I apologise for taking part in the debate now, not having been at the whole debate for medical reasons. I raise one point for clarification. The Explanatory Notes say that if these powers have to be used in an emergency—in other words, if they are brought into effect before there...

I support what my noble friend has said from the Front Bench. I recognise, as the Government say, that we are in very difficult waters, but they are made more dangerous by abandoning these profound and longstanding principles, particularly regarding retrospection. I ask the Government to think most carefully again....

I support what my noble friend has said from the Front Bench. I recognise, as the Government say, that we are in very difficult waters, but they are made more dangerous by abandoning these profound and longstanding principles, particularly regarding retrospection. I ask the Government to think most carefully again....

The Committee will appreciate that we are in somewhat uncharted waters—and in a sense the Government are using that argument. They are saying, ““Here we are without a chart. We might think it desperately important to do something immediately and we must be allowed to do it””. But we live...

The Committee will appreciate that we are in somewhat uncharted waters—and in a sense the Government are using that argument. They are saying, ““Here we are without a chart. We might think it desperately important to do something immediately and we must be allowed to do it””. But we live...

The Minister was kind enough to refer to what I said, but he said that I was talking in great generalities. We are talking about the banking and financial systems of the United Kingdom, their stability, public confidence in their stability, the protection of depositors and the protection of public...

The Minister was kind enough to refer to what I said, but he said that I was talking in great generalities. We are talking about the banking and financial systems of the United Kingdom, their stability, public confidence in their stability, the protection of depositors and the protection of public...

Just for myself, I am most grateful to the Minister for his clarification. He is all for retrospective legislation and that is the issue on which he stands.

Just for myself, I am most grateful to the Minister for his clarification. He is all for retrospective legislation and that is the issue on which he stands.

I do not think that the Minister is deliberately missing the point, but I am fearful that he does not understand it. The Bill says that, "““the lapse of an order under paragraph (b) does not invalidate anything done under or in reliance on the order before the lapse””." That...

I do not think that the Minister is deliberately missing the point, but I am fearful that he does not understand it. The Bill says that, "““the lapse of an order under paragraph (b) does not invalidate anything done under or in reliance on the order before the lapse””." That...

Yes, help is coming. The point is, if when the matter eventually gets to be debated by the House, either or both Houses decline to approve the order, do things that have been done under the order remain valid or do they lapse and cease to be valid? I am...

Yes, help is coming. The point is, if when the matter eventually gets to be debated by the House, either or both Houses decline to approve the order, do things that have been done under the order remain valid or do they lapse and cease to be valid? I am...

I am very grateful to hear what the Minister said. This was the point that I raised when I apologised for speaking, having come late to the debate, in the very first intervention that I made. My reading of Clause 75(8)(c) is perfectly clear. If the order decides something or...

I am very grateful to hear what the Minister said. This was the point that I raised when I apologised for speaking, having come late to the debate, in the very first intervention that I made. My reading of Clause 75(8)(c) is perfectly clear. If the order decides something or...