It seems to deal with what should be excluded rather than what should be included. Due to the way that legislation is constructed, however, I am told that by referring to what should not be considered, the link to what should be considered is there by implication and hard-wired into Clause 5, which is the critical provision on how the main duty is to be performed. I am advised by the experts on these matters that we have in the Bill what is technically necessary to make the link through to the Government’s economic policy. Further to that, we have to be careful—this very much relates to the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Burns—because there are a lot of other matters in here that may come and go, to which the main duty of must have regard. Yes, it relates to economic policy, but what about the Government’s taxation and expenditure policies? What about the potential for the impact of external shocks? There is a danger here that if we agreed to the amendment, it would boilerplate the importance the duty being carried out, "““in the light of the Government’s economic policy””."
I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Burns; how could it be any other way?
Budget Responsibility and National Audit Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Sassoon
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 1 December 2010.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Budget Responsibility and National Audit Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
722 c221GC Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 20:44:25 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_688246
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_688246
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_688246