I almost feel like saying, ““Before the Minister sits down””, because I am very grateful for that explanation. The noble Lord began by welcoming the amendment and then he took a large bucket and rightly poured cold water over it. I knew that there were questions of detail that needed to be fleshed out if this was to be included in the Bill, so that came as no surprise at all. Then he indulged in some obfuscation and tried to prove that the Bill said it all already. He did not succeed. Then he invited me to write to him, which is almost unprecedented. If that is an offer of discussions before we get to Report, I welcome it, because we need to think about this. It should be explicit. I am sure that we could find a simple form of words that would make Amendment No. 107D more effective.
Amendment No. 110X, which I agree is much further on in the Bill but on the other hand is on entirely the same principle, may be less significant. If we have put it into the Bill once, we do not need to repeat it. I look forward to further discussions, and I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clauses 124 to 126 agreed to.
Clause 127 [Directions]:
Housing and Regeneration Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Dixon-Smith
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 16 June 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Housing and Regeneration Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
702 c339-40GC 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 02:26:11 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_481952
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_481952
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_481952