Proceeding contribution from Lord Garnier (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 5 June 2007. It occurred during Debate on bill on Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill.
Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill
I am probably being obtuse, but I simply do not understand how the Minister, on behalf of the Government, can accept the principle on custody that the other place has put into the Bill, yet seem to be arguing as though delaying the provision, or never adopting it, and wanting things to bed down—whatever that may mean—in other aspects of the criminal justice system is a principle of almost equal importance to the first one. Listening to the Minister this afternoon, we have no idea what is stopping him, in real terms, introducing what the Lords have agreed to. In a couple of sentences, can he explain the guts of his argument, in so far as it is sustainable, and then we might be able to make progress?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 461 c151
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Death Crown immunity Corporate manslaughter Hospitals Liability Health and safety Government departments Infectious diseases Immunity from prosecution Prosecutions Prisons Police custody MRSA Clostridium Prisons and Probation Ombudsman
- Legislation
- Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill 2005-06 to 2006-07
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 11:30:19 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_400681
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_400681
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_400681