Does my hon. and learned Friend share my surprise at the intervention by the Secretary of State on Second Reading, when he chided me for misconstruing clause 9, which I said, on any view, imputes a test of dishonesty? He said it did not and that was one of the distinctions between it and the Fraud Act 2006. I do not think that he had in mind section 17 of the Theft Act 1968, albeit I am sure that he is a highly experienced criminal practitioner. Does my hon. and learned Friend agree that clause 9(1), if it does nothing else, at least imputes a test of dishonesty?
Parliamentary Standards Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Garnier
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 1 July 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Parliamentary Standards Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
495 c367 Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 12:25:34 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_572984
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_572984
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_572984