My Lords, I will start with consultation and explain what we did. I will not repeat what I said on the previous SI, but the important thing is that, although we were not able to consult fully in the way one might have wished, the IPO has engaged with businesses on the implications of exit ever since the referendum result. We have sought to maximise continuity in the no-deal scenario and in the early stages of negotiation on the future partnership. As I said earlier, revealing the details of our continuity approach through public consultation might have risked that. The individuals who took part in the technical review did so in a personal capacity; we invited all sorts and I hope we had a representative group. They were chosen because of their past experience as representatives of various stakeholder bodies which usually engage in consultation with the IPO.
Designs and International Trademarks (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Henley
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 4 March 2019.
It occurred during Debates on delegated legislation on Designs and International Trademarks (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
796 c96GC Session
2017-19Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2022-12-26 17:40:56 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2019-03-04/19030446000076
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2019-03-04/19030446000076
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2019-03-04/19030446000076