I have two things to say very briefly about this. On Second Reading, I think I made it clear that I did not approve of Clause 18. I did not think that it was needed, as it seemed to me purely declaratory. It did not add anything or take anything away from the law; it was a statement of what the law was—and it is perfectly clear that we all knew what the law was, and we all know what it is. So I was a little surprised to see the terms of the amendment proposed by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Mackay of Clashfern. If we have to have a declaratory clause of this sort on this issue, I would vastly prefer his drafting than the original government drafting, but I accept and would vote for the amendment with some considerable reluctance. In my limited experience of declaratory clauses, which is not as great as that of the noble and learned Lord, on the whole clauses that are meant to clarify the law very frequently have precisely the opposite effect. I am doubtful about it and do not like it, but in the end I will support it.
European Union Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Richard
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 15 June 2011.
It occurred during Debate on bills on European Union Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
728 c795 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 16:39:00 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_749419
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_749419
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_749419