I fear that I may be descending from the general to the particular, but I have just alluded, on Clause 38(2), to the second Delegated Powers Committee reference. Clause 39 provides the third and final comment about the Delegated Powers Committee in this Bill. I could wait until we get to Clause 39(3), where there is an amendment to be debated, but it may be easier if I mention it now, after the general reference by my noble friend Lady Hanham to activity.
I need to read the comment of the Delegated Powers Committee’ on Clause 39(3), to provide the background. It said: ""The new power in paragraph (bc)"—"
which, I interpolate, is at the top of page 32 of the Bill— ""inserted in Section 41(1) of the 1981 Act by clause 39(2), confers power to substitute different qualifying periods in new paragraph 4B(3) and (4), again by affirmative regulations; and the new subsection (1B) (clause 39(3)) enables that power to be exercised so as to substitute the same qualifying period, irrespective of whether or not ‘the activity condition’ is satisfied. Paragraphs 46 to 49 of the department’s memorandum"—"
which is reprinted in the third report of the Delegated Powers Committee— ""do not provide any explanation of the purpose of this power, the exercise of which would leave paragraph 4B making separate but identical provision for persons who had, and for persons who had not, satisfied ‘the activity provision’, without any advantage conferred on the former over the latter in terms of the qualifying period. While the delegated power in clause 39(3) might not necessarily be inappropriate on that ground, its exercise would seem to produce a somewhat odd result which is not explained in either the Notes or the memorandum. We"—"
that is, obviously, the Delegated Powers Committee— ""therefore draw attention to this aspect of the power, so that the House might press the Minister for more details of the circumstances in which it might be used"."
I am not seeking tonight to unsight the Minister on this Delegated Powers Committee reference, but he said on Clause 38(2) that he had the government reply with him then. It might be helpful, if he has a response to their comment on Clause 39(3) about his person now, for him to give it to the Committee this evening, rather than wait for Report, when we have plenty in store anyway.
Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Brooke of Sutton Mandeville
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 2 March 2009.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
708 c557-8 Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 09:42:27 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_533092
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_533092
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_533092