I am most grateful to you for your guidance, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
In conclusion, the Minister has resisted the new clauses on every point, yet on every point he has accepted the principle. He has said again and again that the proposals are unnecessary, because he claims that the Bill will have no force after switchover has been achieved, and that switchover assistance is narrowly defined in the measure. As I said in my opening remarks, there are two points of view. The first is that the Bill will die a natural death and there is no need for a sunset clause to put an end to it. The alternative view, which I suspect is more instinctive on the Conservative Benches, where we are reluctant to pass unnecessary legislation and certainly reluctant to keep otiose legislation on the statute book, is that if the Bill is redundant, we should let a sunset clause hasten it on its way.
Given that the Minister accepts the principle and that the Secretary of State—his boss—was tempted by it and set me down the path, I am surprised that he continues to resist. However, I do not want to put the House to further inconvenience. I have made my points, so I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion.
Motion and clause, by leave, withdrawn.
Digital Switchover (Disclosure of Information) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Vaizey of Didcot
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 29 January 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Digital Switchover (Disclosure of Information) Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
456 c48 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:41:49 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_373902
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_373902
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_373902