I enthusiastically support amendment No.5. With no collusion, my right hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst and I filed amendments in exactly the same terms. That must show something, although I am not quite sure what. I hope the House will take the view that it shows that we are working on the right lines.
Amendment No. 5 is important as it removes one of the worst and most oppressive elements of the Bill, which offends against all the principles of natural justice. I am not convinced about amendments Nos. 6 and 20.
I shall devote most of my remarks to the support of amendment No. 16, which proposes leaving out the words ““2nd December 2004”” and inserting instead ““11th October 2005””; in other words it substitutes the date when the Paymaster General made her written statement to the House for the date when the Bill was published and thus available for inspection of its contents. Although ideally, retrospection should not take effect before the date of a Bill’s enactment, it is a well-established convention for Finance Bills that retrospection can apply from the date when the Bill was published.
National Insurance Contributions Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Christopher Chope
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Thursday, 15 December 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills on National Insurance Contributions Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
440 c1508 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 14:01:53 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_287244
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_287244
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_287244