My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend the Minister for his response to my Amendment 56. If I understand it correctly, he attributes to the professions legislation considerable complexity; for example, the supplementary delegated powers memorandum that the department submitted referenced the Dentists Act—a mix of primary legislation and secondary legislation. If this House accepted that there are practical reasons for providing a power of this kind to enable the amendment of both primary and secondary legislation, will my noble friend say that the Government will not use it as a precedent in relation to future legislation or future arrangements for the approval of trade agreements and other international agreements? There is a principle here: in future, as these trade agreements come through, where they impact on primary legislation, they should be implemented through primary legislation. Does my noble friend accept that this will not be cited as a precedent?
Professional Qualifications Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Lansley
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 14 June 2021.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Professional Qualifications Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
812 c1697 
Session
2021-22
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2021-10-12 16:23:26 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2021-06-14/21061428000097
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2021-06-14/21061428000097
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2021-06-14/21061428000097