New clause 21 would enable a Minister to make orders to implement"““recommendations of…the…Law Commissions, with or without changes.””"
I accept that the Law Commissions are very important, responsible and respectable bodies, and there is no doubt that too few of their recommendations have become law, but one cannot deny that they consider some important and controversial areas. The Minister touched on tenants’ rights, provocation in the law of murder and other areas. The question is not the Minister’s motives, about which I have not the slightest doubt—[Interruption.] I heard something sotto voce which I will not repeat. Bearing in mind the ability of Ministers to change recommendations, if a Minister did not agree with the full Law Commission proposal, expanded it and wished to continue with it, there is nothing in the Bill that would entitle the House to have the full debate and scrutiny that it would wish for. In those circumstances, I cannot be satisfied with what is proposed.
New clause 10, which I do not intend to press, would have limited the extent of orders based on the Law Commission recommendations. I welcome the Minister’s amendments Nos. 23 and 27, which to some extent deal with the point that was made in Committee.
Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Oliver Heald
(Conservative)
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 c805 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 10:21:07 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_323729
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_323729
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_323729