Previous Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page


Lord Dholakia: My Lords, I am delighted that the eagle eye of the noble Lord, Lord Hodgson, has once again discovered some discrepancies. If he is right that we cannot amend the order at this stage, the obvious alternative is to start the exercise again. I should be grateful if the Minister would explain what will now happen.

I was rather puzzled by the relevant article in the House Magazine in which one always learns something new. There was considerable emphasis on how we "vacated" the order. Will we face the same situation today? Could we approve the order in its present defective form? If not, what is the alternative?

I do not want to repeat the two points I made last time. I thank the noble and learned Lord for having the courtesy to reply to me; I received his reply today. I am

11 Mar 2003 : Column 1303

grateful for the information. I have nothing to add other than to say "Well done" to the noble Lord, Lord Hodgson. Let us see how the Minister responds.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, I express my profound gratitude to the noble Lord, Lord Hodgson. I wish that he was employed in the Home Office to deal with this sort of matter with—I say this quite genuinely—the alacrity and efficiency he displayed today. He raises a very important point. As one would expect, he is absolutely right to identify that in paragraph 16 on page 23 of the relevant code, the reference to paragraphs 33 and 31 is intended to be a reference to paragraphs 3.30 and 3.31. Does that

11 Mar 2003 : Column 1304

require the further revocation of the order? Happily, it does not. It can be dealt with by placing an erratum slip in the printed copies that will be supplied by the Stationery Office. Happily, that approach coincides with common sense.

I turn to the other two points that were raised. The date of the warrant would be the date at the time of signature; that is the date at which the time would start running. "Clean" means clean; it will almost invariably mean "new". It is hard to imagine that it could mean anything other than new because if it was not new it would not be clean.

On Question, Motion agreed to.

        House adjourned at twenty-seven minutes before eight o'clock.

11 Mar 2003 : Column 1303


Next Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page