AS AN AMENDMENT TO COMMONS AMENDMENT NO. 182 (Hansard, 18 July 2000)

§ Lord Ackner
My Lords, I beg to move Amendment No. 182C as an amendment to Commons Amendment No. 182.
This amendment comes as an anti-climax. It has nothing to do with the emotional subjects which have been recently canvassed. It concerns a simple drafting amendment which is designed to ensure that, although the Secretary of State under subsection (1D) may at any time revise his guidance under subsection (1A), he must do so while adhering to the principles set out in subsection (1A).
When I drafted this amendment, I thought the answer might well be that the Secretary of State was limited by subsection (1D) in whatever new amendments he wished to make. But I was not sure. I felt the matter would be easily cleared up by adding the simple 10 words in front of subsection (1D), While adhering to the principles set out in subsection (1A)", and that would deal with the matter. The noble Baroness, with characteristic courtesy only matched by her charm, kindly sent me a photostat letter on 18th July in fact telling me the answer was precisely that; that is, that subsection (1A) conditioned and limited what the Minister could do.
877 I accept that that is arguable. But I wish to move my amendment purely on the basis that the whole of this ambiguity can be dealt with by using the less than 12 words which my amendment proposes; that is, the addition of the words, While adhering to the principles set out in subsection (1A)", and then there is no further problem.
Moved, That Amendment No. 182B, as an amendment to Commons Amendment No. 182, be agreed to.—(Lord Ackner.)

§ Baroness Blackstone
My Lords, I am a little surprised that the noble and learned Lord, Lord Ackner, did not speak to his amendment when we discussed all the amendments in this group. However, I shall be very happy to respond to it now.

§ Lord Ackner
My Lords, one of the arts of advocacy is to know when to remain silent. If I had got up when everyone was clamouring for the Minister to respond and said that I had a dull drafting amendment to put forward, I do not think that I would have been the flavour of the month.

§ Baroness Blackstone
My Lords, perhaps the noble and learned Lord is right in that respect. I have to say that I am a little daunted in the face of his expertise and experience in such matters when embarking on the explanation of what I believe to be the legal effect of the amendment. However, I hope that it will be helpful to the House if I try to clarify the position.
The new subsection (1A) sets out the requirement as to what the guidance issued by the Secretary of State must secure. Whenever the Secretary of State issues further guidance or amends it in any way, subsection (1A) is still the basis for the guidance. Therefore, it must still meet the requirements of subsection (1A). I hope that the noble and learned Lord will agree that the objective of his amendment has already been secured and that he will feel able to withdraw it.

§ Lord Ackner
My Lords, I do not look upon my amendment as being an earth-shattering one. I have the well-known case, in which I was one of the Law Lords involved, of Pepper v Hart on my side. As the Minister has said in terms that that which I was worried about is amply covered by the Bill, that seems to me to be all that I desired to achieve. I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.
Amendment No. 182C, as an amendment to Commons Amendment No. 182, by leave, withdrawn.
On Question, Motion, as amended, agreed to.