Perhaps I might ask the Minister to confirm that, contrary to some of the comments that have been made, she is not introducing some major constitutional change today but that the rule in Pepper v Hart remains; it is a rule of law. All that she is confirming, as I understand it—the noble and learned Lord, Lord Judge, will say if he disagrees—is that the existence of the Pepper v Hart rule that in the case of ambiguity the courts can look at what was said by the mover of an amendment or a particular provision does not justify ambiguous legislation. It does not justify loose drafting. I think that that is all that the Minister is confirming.
Trade Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Pannick
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 20 March 2019.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Trade Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
796 c1453 
Session
2017-19
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2019-03-25 15:14:55 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2019-03-20/19032074000064
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2019-03-20/19032074000064
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2019-03-20/19032074000064