My Lords, I wish to be brief and I am slightly hesitant about whether I should move the amendment. It was pressed on us by ACOR. It concerns the definition of dependants, and the suggestion is that rather than live with the definition we have, which I think is based on what is set out in the 1979 Act, we should pick up the definition used in the Damages (Scotland) Act 2011, which ACOR suggests is fairer, more flexible and less prescriptive. It includes, for example, siblings, grandparents and grandchildren. It seems to me that this can cut both ways. The wider the group of dependants, the less each will get, although the wider the group, the more likely it is that a dependant will be spotted and available to benefit. On balance, living with the existing definition is probably the better route, but perhaps the Minister will give us the benefit of his wisdom. I beg to move.
Mesothelioma Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord McKenzie of Luton
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 10 June 2013.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Mesothelioma Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
745 c320GC Session
2013-14Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2015-03-26 19:29:27 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2013-06-10/13061044000123
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2013-06-10/13061044000123
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2013-06-10/13061044000123