– in the House of Lords at 11:00 pm on 10 March 2005.
rose to move, That this House do not insist on its Amendments Nos. 27, 31 and 32 in respect of which the Commons have insisted on their disagreement, and do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 27C and 27D in lieu thereof.
My Lords, I shall treat this as speaking to all four Motions. We have spoken to them in detail. This Motion deals with the review clause. The positions have not changed. All of the remarks that I made at the beginning apply. Therefore, I beg to move Motion B, which deals with Lords Amendments Nos. 27, 31 and 32.
Moved, That this House do not insist on its Amendments Nos. 27, 31 and 32 in respect of which the Commons have insisted on their disagreement, and do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 27C and 27D in lieu thereof.—(Lord Falconer of Thoroton.)
My Lords, I beg to move Amendment B1 as an amendment to Motion B. I shall be uncompromisingly telegraphic in my remarks. I wish to speak to Motions B and C at the same time. Your Lordships might be forgiven for believing that your Lordships have just voted on the sunset clause. In fact, your Lordships have voted on the judicial process clause.
We now come to the remaining two clauses. The first concerns the role of the Privy Counsellors and the second concerns the sunset clause. As I have had the opportunity to say earlier in the day, the two clauses are inextricably linked. The one ineluctably follows from the other.
Moved, as an amendment to Motion B, leave out from "House" to end and insert "do insist on Lords Amendments Nos. 27, 31 and 32 and do disagree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 27C and 27D in lieu thereof".—(Lord Kingsland.)