My Lords, there are three short amendments here. The first simply reaffirms previous amendments, which would leave out the possibility of a negative as opposed to an affirmative order. The second is slightly different in character and deals with the Clause 8 reference to an eligible parish council on which the general power might be conferred, eligibility being to be determined by the Secretary of State under Clause 8(2). The point of the amendment is to focus attention on the fact that at this stage we have no idea what would constitute an eligible parish council and to invite the Minister either to get that on the face of the Bill or to make the intention clear. It would be ridiculous, in our submission, if we were to leave the Bill in a state whereby a tiny parish council would have the full range of general powers of competence. I realise that that is not the intention, but it should be clarified during this legislative process.
Finally, Amendment 28 again refers to the issue of the affirmative rather than negative procedure. I will not again rehearse those arguments. I beg to move.
Localism Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Beecham
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 20 June 2011.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Localism Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
728 c1126 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 16:37:11 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_750839
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_750839
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_750839