The Secretary of State was not originally responsible for this. The issue that my right hon. Friend the Member for North Somerset (Dr Fox) raises was first raised on 23 March 2020 when we were first putting the Coronavirus Act into law. The point made at the time was that the Act is not necessary, because it replicates many other pieces of legislation, and that the Act alone allows the Government to act without recourse to the House, which is not true of the Civil Contingencies Act 2004 or the Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984. That is why it is wrong: because it does not have to come back to the House every time it takes away another piece of British freedom.
Coronavirus Act 2020 (Review of Temporary Provisions) (No. 3)
Proceeding contribution from
David Davis
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 19 October 2021.
It occurred during Debate on Coronavirus Act 2020 (Review of Temporary Provisions) (No. 3).
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
701 c651 
Session
2021-22
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2022-09-20 09:48:59 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2021-10-19/21101950000629
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2021-10-19/21101950000629
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2021-10-19/21101950000629