I regret that I must disappoint the noble and learned Lord in that I do not accept that the terms of Clause 2(1)(c) provide an argument as to why Clause 3(2) is somehow lacking in relevance. The point that Clause 3(2) seeks to get across is that where an exclusively public function is concerned, an exemption should apply. Per contra, Clause 2(1)(c) sets out descriptions of items which are plainly not within the notion of public function. We may simply have to agree to differ on this point. One needs to draw a particular line in relation to public authorities when one moves into the area of public policy.
Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Davidson of Glen Clova
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 15 January 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
688 c226GC Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:48:44 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_369284
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_369284
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_369284