|Previous Section||Back to Table of Contents||Lords Hansard Home Page|
(a) the Lord President of the Court of Session and the Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland,
(b) the persons that the Secretary of State thinks likely to be affected by the regulations (or persons who represent such persons), and
(c) such other persons as the Secretary of State thinks fit.
(2) If, following the consultation under subsection (1), the Secretary of State proposes to make regulations under section [Power to make provision about injunctions preventing access to locations on the internet], the Secretary of State must lay before Parliament a document that-
(a) explains the proposal and sets it out in the form of draft regulations,
(b) explains the reasons why the Secretary of State is satisfied in relation to the matters listed in section [Power to make provision about injunctions preventing access to locations on the internet](3)(a) to (c), and
(c) contains a summary of any representations made during the consultation under subsection (1).
(3) During the period of 60 days beginning with the day on which the document was laid under subsection (2) ("the 60-day period"), the Secretary of State may not lay before Parliament a draft statutory instrument containing regulations to give effect to the proposal (with or without modifications).
(4) In preparing draft regulations under section [Power to make provision about injunctions preventing access to locations on the internet] to give effect to the proposal, the Secretary of State must have regard to any of the following that are made with regard to the draft regulations during the 60-day period-
(a) any representations, and
(b) any recommendations of a committee of either House of Parliament charged with reporting on the draft regulations.
(5) When laying before Parliament a draft statutory instrument containing regulations to give effect to the proposal (with or without modifications), the Secretary of State must also lay a document that explains any changes made to the proposal contained in the document laid before Parliament under subsection (2).
Lord Young of Norwood Green: My Lords, this is the privilege amendment. This is one of the last amendments and, before I conclude my remarks, this is a fitting moment for me to pay tribute to my Bill team-or part of it-over there in the Box, ably led by Colin Perry. They have performed a marathon task with great ability and, on occasions, humour as well, which has made my task that much more pleasant. I beg to move that the amendment made in the other place is agreed to.
Lord Clement-Jones: My Lords, I do not want to delay the House, as I can see serried ranks around me-unusually for the Digital Economy Bill. I thank the Minister for his courtesy throughout the passage of the Bill. We have had our disagreements, most latterly over the product of the wash-up. That has been common across a number of Bills, so my criticism was not directed at him in particular. He has dealt with a great swathe of the Bill with good humour, and many amendments to it have been made. Sadly, it is not yet good enough, but I hope that, in making the regulations, the Government will mitigate some of its worst impacts.
Lord Trefgarne: My Lords, I have the utmost respect for the Minister. It is not a rule, I think, that the privilege amendment is moved by a privy counsellor, but it is the usual custom. Although the Minister is enormously distinguished, I do not think that he is yet a privy counsellor. It is a pity that the amendment was not so moved.
Lord Young of Norwood Green: I thank noble Lords. It has been a long and winding road. I cannot quite agree with the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, about the nature of the finished product. The Bill may not be perfect, but in doing its best to protect the creative economy, which is what is at its core, it is a step in the right direction. Of course, time will tell whether that analysis is right. I thank noble Lords for the way in which they have participated in our debate. I think that we would all agree that it has been one for the connoisseurs.
A message was brought from the Commons, That they agree to the amendments made by the Lords to the Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill with an amendment, to which they desire the agreement of your Lordships.
Lord Tunnicliffe: My Lords, the only amendment made in the other place was to delete a redundant cross-reference to the disclaimer of peerage. The provisions to which it originally related are no longer in the Bill, and this consequential amendment removes the reference.
It is probably appropriate that I am here to apologise for detaining the House on this amendment, because it is through my error that it has arisen. What we are seeking to remove applies to Clause 57, with which we agreed not to proceed last night. It was with us last night as Amendment 118. During the many constructive discussions that we had yesterday, for which I thank all noble Lords on behalf of the Government, it was
8 Apr 2010 : Column 1735
Lord McNally: My Lords, I am not sure that there was such slackness when the noble Lord, Lord Tunnicliffe, was chairman of bar at University College, London, Students' Union more than 40 years ago, and I am sorry that this has slipped into his behaviour. I wait to hear from the noble Lord, Lord Trefgarne, but I fear that this may well unstitch the whole of the agreement that we came to yesterday, and I await the noble Lord's guidance on this.
Lord Trefgarne: I, too, have sat on the government Front Bench in the sort of role filled by the noble Lord, Lord Tunnicliffe, and I have huge sympathy for him. I immediately forgive him for his one and only very modest error. But there is a lesson to be learnt. The difficulty of putting major legislation through in this way, as we have been doing, opens the way for inadvertent errors of this kind and is no doubt one lesson that will be learnt for the future.
Lord Henley: I add my voice to that. I saw the noble Lord, Lord Tunnicliffe, getting to his feet and thought, "Where is the noble Lord, Lord Bach, who has been dealing with this Bill?". However, I think that we would all accept the noble Lord's apology. It is very difficult. Like the noble Lord, Lord Trefgarne, I have been in that position before; we all make mistakes as we watch the amendments go through, particularly in the so-called wash-up. The Government and any future Government should learn some lessons from this about what they do about wash-up. They might think very carefully about what Bills go into it. I leave the noble Lord with that-but I think that the whole House is grateful to him for making his gracious apology for a mistake that his Government made in proceeding with the Bill.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, as proceedings in this Parliament draw to a close, I briefly draw your Lordships' attention to the start of the next. The new Parliament will meet on Tuesday 18 May and there will be two swearing-in days for this House, on that day at 2.30 pm and Wednesday 19 May at 3 pm.
Before this Parliament finishes, I take this opportunity on behalf of the usual channels and, I am sure, all Members of the House, to express my thanks to all the staff of the House. In particular, I pay tribute to those staff who played a part in supporting the House in sitting until 2.50 am this morning. That includes the attendance of the police, one of whom wandered into the Not-Contents Lobby during a vote very enthusiastically, Clerks, Librarians, catering staff, the Government Chief Whip's Office, which did a brilliant job in marshalling the business, the Public Bill Office and the administrative and support staff. They all helped to sustain us through the evening and the night with good grace and good humour. We should all be very grateful to them.
I also place on record my thanks to my own Whip's team and to the Whip's Offices for the opposition parties, particularly the noble Baroness, Lady Anelay, and the noble Lord, Lord Shutt, for the way in which they conducted themselves throughout the wash-up period. I give my thanks, too, to the Cross-Benchers. The House thankfully no longer sits into the wee hours on a regular basis, so it is all the more impressive that on rare occasions like this, when it does happen, staff are still able to deliver the same old late-night magic. I am sure that we are all eternally grateful.
Baroness Anelay of St Johns: My Lords, it is with pleasure that I thank the noble Lord the Captain of the Gentlemen at Arms for giving us information about the ceremonies that start the new Parliament and for his reflection on the privilege that we have in working with staff in this Palace who look after us throughout every hour of the day and, last night, throughout the night. He mentioned all those in the Public Bill Office and beyond who help us. They do so on a regular basis but during wash-up they are under particular pressure-including, as he so rightly remarked, in the Government Whips' Office-to turn round information and new Marshalled Lists and to ensure that all noble Lords, whether we attend regularly on the Front Benches or, particularly on particular Bills, on the Back Benches, are well and promptly informed.
I am also aware that Hansard had to be with us until particularly late this morning. One of my colleagues, my noble friend Lord Hunt, reminds me that he indeed received the official record of this morning's proceedings promptly at 7.30 this morning. It is a record of service to us all that we are fortunate to see.
Lord Shutt of Greetland: My Lords, I, too, would like to add my thanks to the staff for the work that was done yesterday. I left this place at 3 am, and it was then a matter of getting home. Getting home is a matter for everybody, and if public transport exists at that hour, it is also a matter of getting home from where public transport ends. I am not to know-none of us is to know-where all of our staff live or the detail of those journeys, but there will have been very tortuous journeys at very strange hours of the day in terms of transport. So we certainly thank them all for the toil of yesterday and the difficulties that they may well have had in getting home.
As we have had the announcement of the signing-in days, it occurs to me that, beyond that, we also have expectations that Her Majesty the Queen will be coming.
8 Apr 2010 : Column 1737
Lord Trefgarne: My Lords, I do not know whether I am allowed to speak very briefly, but perhaps I may just add a word to the staff. I had enormous assistance from the staff in the Public Bill Office, as your Lordships can imagine, in connection with one of the measures that we were considering yesterday. I am most grateful to them.
Lord Tunnicliffe: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do now adjourn during pleasure. The House will resume to receive a message from the Commons and the time will be displayed on the Annunciators.
A message was brought from the Commons that they have agreed to the amendments made by the Lords to the Children, Schools and Families Bill without amendment; that they have agreed to the amendments made by the Lords to the Energy Bill without amendment; that they have agreed to the amendments made by this House to the Financial Services Bill without amendment; and that they have agreed to the amendments made by this House to the Flood and Water Management Bill without amendment.
|Next Section||Back to Table of Contents||Lords Hansard Home Page|