§ [No. 9]
§
Clause 9, page 9, line 17, at end insert—
( ) The said Act of 1931 shall have effect subject to the provisions of Schedule (Licensing of bulls) to this Act, being provisions amending and modifying that Act in various respects and enabling its operation to be suspended by order.
EARL FERRERSMy Lords, I beg to move that this House doth agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 9, and, if I may, I would suggest that we might consider No. 21 at the same time. After the Bill left your Lordships' House, consultations on the detail of the new veterinary-based bull licensing arrangements continued with the profession and the livestock industry. These pointed to the need for additional statutory requirements which are incorporated in these Amendments. Briefly, these Amendments enable Ministers to grant or to refuse a licence on consideration of a certificate issued by a veterinary surgeon accredited for this purpose by the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons and the British 844 Veterinary Association. These powers are enabling powers; the details will be spelt out in Regulations which will be subject to annulment by either House of Parliament.
Ministers are also given power to suspend bull licensing by order. I should emphasise that these are only reserve powers which we do not contemplate using without good reason. I beg to move.
§ Moved, That this House doth agree with the Commons in the said Amendment.—(Earl Ferrers.)
§ LORD HOYMy Lords, it is true that this Amendment brings the position up to date, but when the noble Earl says that it will be spelt out in regulations, and that an order will be subject to the Negative Resolution procedure I wonder whether in fact this is the correct way to do it. I should have thought that when a Government is taking this power it means a change and that it would then be the duty of the Government to spell it out by an order requiring Affirmative Resolution. I suppose it is a little too late to take this step, and I rise simply to make it clear that in my view the Government should have proceeded by way of the Affirmative rather than the Negative Resolution procedure.
EARL FERRERSMy Lords, in a number of places in this legislation the practice is to proceed by way of the Negative Resolution procedure. Possibly it is rather more simple to proceed in this way. In any event, I have noted the noble Lord's point, though I hope he will be agreeable to accepting the Amendment as it stands.