I apologise for delaying my right hon. Friend’s probing, and I intervene as one who is not a lawyer, eminent or otherwise.
I suspect that the Government’s response will be that part of their rationale was today’s statement on Afghanistan. They felt that they must constrain the House’s time in some way. Even if we allow what I believe may be the Government’s justification, however, and given that both Front Benchers and Back Benchers have described the Bill as a relatively non-controversial measure, should this not have been one of those cases in which the business is allowed to find its own level?
Criminal Defence Service Bill [Lords] (Programme) (No. 2)
Proceeding contribution from
Mark Francois
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Thursday, 26 January 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Criminal Defence Service Bill (HL).
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
441 c1552 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberLibrarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-16 20:37:59 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_294781
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_294781
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_294781