I have no intention of refereeing between parliamentary counsel and the Law Commission to decide who employs the better draftspeople. Any drafting changes made by the commission to draft legislation would be subject to consultation, and it could reflect on the responses.
A Minister may wish to make a material change. Provided that the order remains an order to implement Law Commission recommendations, they should be able to do so. The change proposed might be as a result of consultation after the publication of the report. It might be that a change is proposed to make the recommendations of the commission more generally accepted. Indeed, as I said earlier, the scrutiny Committees themselves might wish some changes to be made. The correct approach is not to rule out changes, but to allow the proposals to come forward and be considered by the Committees. For that reason, I ask the House to resist amendment (b) to new clause 21.
Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Bridget Prentice
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 15 May 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
446 c800-1 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 10:21:04 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_323712
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_323712
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_323712