I am most grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving way, and for his earlier back-handed tribute. The two points to which he has referred are, of course, inextricably linked. The case for having ““may”” rather than ““shall”” is that the Bill contains the enormously wide and rather vague term ““desirable activities””. Had we had a narrower term—as I think the hon. Gentleman would have wanted, and as we certainly did—there would have been a case for ““shall””.
Compensation Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Julian Brazier
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 17 July 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Compensation Bill (HL).
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
449 c116-7 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 10:03:38 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_338102
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_338102
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_338102