No, I am not specifically worried about judicial challenge. I just think that it is reminiscent of debates I am becoming increasingly used to in your Lordships' House. I am sure many noble Lords are much more familiar than I am with these arguments that regularly come up: if it so obvious, we do not need to put it in because everybody understands it; or, if it is so clear and everybody accepts it, let us put it in. I have suggested to your Lordships that the criteria, based on the limited discussion that we have had here, are widely accepted. They should be debated if your Lordships want to debate them properly.
We do not have the opportunity here, and have not had it in Committee, to debate the criteria in detail because we have a ““take it or leave it”” provision to put them in. I believe that the proportionate, appropriate and sensible way forward is to set them out in the first report that we will require, if the House agrees, under Amendment 29. At that point, if your Lordships want it, there could be a specific debate on the criteria.
Scotland Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Sassoon
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 28 March 2012.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Scotland Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
736 c1492 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 16:51:38 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_822489
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_822489
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_822489