My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, with whom I am having an extremely constructive working relationship, gave a trailer that I might say something, so I feel some obligation to do so.
I will remind the Minister of the words he used at Second Reading in response to this issue, which was raised by a number of noble Lords. He said:"““We have obligations to prohibit and restrict ambush marketing, but we recognise the point made by the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee and reinforced by the noble Lord, Lord Brooke, and other noble Lords who contributed to the debate, that we need to consult. I recognise that that obligation is enjoined on us and we intend to ensure that we have the framework for it. I cannot go into a great detail of detail at this late hour without producing a speech of inordinate length, but I recognise the force and legitimacy of the challenges that have been articulated this evening and I give earnest of intent that we have both thought through the issues and intend to reply to them during the Bill’s passage. That will guarantee that advertising is a fruitful and important area of discussion in Committee””.—[Official Report, 11/1/06; col. 288.]"
My impression from the Minister’s response to the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee was that he gave a similar assurance to that committee. Working on the assumption that what I have just said is accurate and that what the Minister said is accurate, I assume that at some stage the Government will bring forward a means of giving credence to the statement that they need to consult.
In his reply to Amendment No. 60, which was moved and withdrawn by the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, a few moments ago, the Minister said that the Government would be consulting on the regulations. I assume that that also relates to the regulations under Clause 19 and that the assurances which were given at Second Reading and to the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee apply to Amendment No. 60 as well as to Amendment No. 61.
London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Brooke of Sutton Mandeville
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 2 February 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
678 c227-8GC Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 02:07:20 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_297702
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_297702
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_297702