Debates between Lord Collins of Highbury and Lord Falconer of Thoroton during the 2017-2019 Parliament

Tue 12th Dec 2017
Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Bill [HL]
Lords Chamber

Committee: 4th sitting (Hansard): House of Lords

Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Bill [HL]

Debate between Lord Collins of Highbury and Lord Falconer of Thoroton
Lord Falconer of Thoroton Portrait Lord Falconer of Thoroton
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am sure he is noble.

Lord Collins of Highbury Portrait Lord Collins of Highbury
- Hansard - -

He is a noble Lord who is a Minister.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton Portrait Lord Falconer of Thoroton
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I apologise to him. The noble Lord who is also a Minister—I of all people should know that—means well in his intentions and assurances. From experience in the Executive, we reach for the legislation and read it as it is. My anxiety is that unless we get it right in the Bill, we will give the Executive huge powers. As the noble Baroness, Lady Kramer, said, when we voted to leave the European Union, we never intended to do anything other than leave the European Union. We did not intend to change completely the balance of the constitution and give the Executive that degree of extra power. I am talking not only about this Bill, but the whole balance of the constitution. This is happening because everything is necessarily having to be done in a hurry. The oddity about this Bill is that it is an early stage Brexit consequential. It is not adequate in the balance it has struck between the Executive and the legislature. If this Bill has got it wrong, then things will get worse as the pressure builds on parliamentary draftsmen, Ministers and policymakers. We must stand firm as a House to send a message that future Bills must be more accurate than this one in terms of the balance between the Executive and the legislature.

I support the amendment of my noble and learned friend Lord Davidson and my noble friend Lord Collins because it is inconceivable to me, in the light of the number of changes that we have sought, that everything will be put right on Report. The Bill should be time-limited for five years so that the Government have to come back with a further shot at it. We will need this sort of Bill indefinitely, but the balance in this one is so badly wrong that I think a separate clause is appropriate.