My Lords, I support the amendment. As I understand the structure of the Bill, it restricts the appeal that a university or higher education provider would have to call in question the decision to destroy it. As my noble and learned friend Lord Judge said, destruction of a university involves a lot of people apart from the university, but it deals with the university in the most destructive way possible. Therefore, it seems to me that a full appeal is the least that could be expected. The jurisdiction is to a tribunal—a First-tier Tribunal—not to the High Court. My noble and learned friend’s amendment accepts that but says that full examination of the merits must be allowed. The only way in which that can be done is to do what my noble and learned friend suggested. It is abundantly plain that this must be right.
Higher Education and Research Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Mackay of Clashfern
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 8 March 2017.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Higher Education and Research Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
779 c1416 Session
2016-17Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2017-03-23 08:57:01 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2017-03-08/17030866000056
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2017-03-08/17030866000056
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2017-03-08/17030866000056