UK Parliament / Open data

Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill

I am not sure that that is a valid point. The powers in the Bill may well have been narrowed, but that has been done only in line with what Ministers said the purpose of the Bill would be anyway. Ministers have introduced provisions that achieve what they told us, through assurances, that the Bill would be used for. I do not accept the point that the right hon. Lady is making. We do not want to widen the veto, but we think that it should be exercised as was indicated by the former Minister when he gave evidence to the Procedure Committee: if a measure is controversial—although controversy is outwith the scope of the veto—a Committee should be able to veto it. That would not stop the Government getting their legislation through. As the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome said, we are merely suggesting that we should be able to say to the Government that the fast-track procedure is not appropriate in a specific case, so the measure should be subject to greater scrutiny. With the greatest respect to the right hon. Lady, she did not make a valid point at all. If the Government are not ratting on a promise, they are certainly guilty of backsliding on an unequivocal ministerial assurance given to a Select Committee of the House. I hope that we will be able to vote on amendment (a) to Government amendment No. 46. Quite simply, the House should not put up with this.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
446 c913 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Back to top