Amendment No. 121, which is tabled in my name, is contained in this group. If it is convenient, I shall speak to my amendment now and comment on the amendment tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Livsey, after the Minister has responded.
My amendment would delete subsection (6) of Clause 23. There are a number of points to support it. First, I am concerned about the lack of clarity in the wording. The definition of,"““a person to discharge any (or all) of the functions of a commons registration authority””"
seems lacking. Does it mean that a person’s duties would not be defined and that they would not be responsible for their position? Does making provision for ““the appropriate national authority”” to appoint a person to discharge functions of a commons registration authority mean that neither the so-called ““appropriate national authority”” nor the commons registration authority is wholly responsible for the applications and proposals? I am uncertain where that leaves us.
Further, the subsection merely ““may”” make provisions, and those come from secondary legislation. There seems to be a severe lack of clarity in this wording and wording throughout the Bill. As it keeps coming up again and again, the reliance on regulations leaves us wondering at the ability of the Bill to have any practical effect whatever.
Commons Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Byford
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 25 October 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Commons Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
674 c275GC Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeLibrarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 01:47:30 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_269622
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_269622
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_269622