My Lords, I spent two years reading Roman law, but it has not been a lot of use to me since. My point does not follow from that. I think that I made this important drafting point at Second Reading. Clause 5(2) reads as if each of the three requirements has to be satisfied, but logic tells me that that cannot be the case. Paragraph (c) states that, ""the person having control of the premises has agreed … the entry","
which is at odds with the other provisions. In the next Parliament, when the noble Lord brings this Bill back—I suspect that he will, because he has a fine track record of pursuing this matter—perhaps he will look at the drafting of Clause 5(2) to make it clear whether paragraph (c) should be read with the word "or" or "and". I read it as "and", but I am not sure that that is correct.
Powers of Entry etc. Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Hamwee
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Friday, 5 March 2010.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Powers of Entry etc. Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
717 c1668 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 20:12:51 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_627079
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_627079
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_627079