My Lords, I would like to ask the noble Baroness the Leader of the House two questions. First, if she accepts that it is perfectly open to her to table a Motion to extend the carryover date, would she stop waving around the paper tiger of the Bill lapsing, when it is entirely in her hands to prevent it doing so? Secondly, does she accept that, if no date is inserted, it is perfectly open to the Government never to bring forward an order putting into effect the clause relating to manslaughter and custody? Even if the Government bring forward some form of order, they could do so containing any form of exceptions, restrictions or limitations that they like that rendered the duty virtually irrelevant. The House would have no choice but to either reject the order in its entirety or pass it with all those exclusions and limitations. If she accepts that, does she not accept that it is necessary for her, the noble Lord, Lord Ramsbotham, and others to get together and devise something—if she does not like the amendment—that means that, within a reasonable time, the Government must bring this clause into effect, subject only to any genuine restrictions that they really need to impose?
Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Viscount Bledisloe
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 17 July 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
694 c144 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:44:24 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_411431
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_411431
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_411431