My Lords, perhaps I may intervene briefly. We can put it simply if we say that during the course of our various debates today some concerns, to say the least, have been expressed about Clause 12. We are grateful for the fact that the noble Lord has promised in particular to reflect on Clause 12(1)(a), the paragraph about which we have the most concern. In my view, there are slightly fewer concerns about subsections (1)(b) and (1)(c). We are glad that the Minister will consider bringing forward something before Report stage, which is now just under three weeks away, so he has a certain amount of time to consult colleagues in the rest of the Government.
He also gave a firm promise to produce the Government’s response to the Select Committee’s report, which will in effect be part of the Government’s reflection on the general concerns about Clause 12. Again, we are grateful that we now have a firm promise that we will have that before Report. At that stage, we would want to consider what was appropriate about that clause. On this side, our concerns were more about Clause 12(1)(a) than about 12(1)(b) or 12(1)(c).
Bribery Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Henley
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 13 January 2010.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Bribery Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
716 c112GC 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 01:43:43 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_608420
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_608420
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_608420