Perhaps I may just clarify an issue. Certain assumptions were made in what I said earlier, and I need to make clear the basis on which they were made. That relates to the order-making power. Members of the Committee will know that the power to amend or enact something to Schedule 1 is affirmative. The power to set requirements under Clause 5 for applications is negative.
The requirement to notify changes under Clause 12 is by negative resolution. I hope noble Lords will have noticed that the Select Committee on Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform made no adverse comment on Clause 5, but recommended that the first regulations be by affirmative resolution. We have made no decision on that. But speaking entirely for myself—always dangerous for a Minister to do from the Dispatch Box—it seems there may be real merit in making the first regulations by affirmative resolution. I would be anxious to come back to the House to confirm that is the view the Government have taken. Some of my comments earlier today might have predicated that decision which has not yet been taken. Noble Lords know I am not the policy Minister and of course it would be appropriate for us to discuss any change in the Government’s current stance before I can confirm that to the House. I hope that is a helpful indication for me to have made.
Identity Cards Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Scotland of Asthal
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 16 November 2005.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Identity Cards Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
675 c1177-8 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 10:30:26 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_280047
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_280047
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_280047