As I suggested in an earlier discussion, I welcome the amendment, together with most of these groups of amendments, because they are all positive Government responses to representations made by myself and other hon. Members in Committee. Amendment No. 23 is extremely sensible. It shifts the balance, as the Minister said.
It might help, however, if the Minister would say precisely how he envisages the provision operating. I do not think that he intended those using the rights to have a right of veto, but has he had any discussions about how he would apportion more weight to them, particularly—I shall not reopen an earlier debate—given that non-users but holders of rights may vastly outnumber those who exercise their rights? There may only be two or three people who exercise their rights; there could be dozens or—as in the example of development that I used earlier—tens if not hundreds of people who hold rights but do not exercise them. It would be useful if the Minister explained in more detail how he envisages that balance working out, bearing in mind what could be a considerable numerical imbalance.
Commons Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
James Paice
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Thursday, 29 June 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Commons Bill (HL).
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
448 c445-6 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 22:51:51 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_333839
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_333839
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_333839