Page 2948 - Week 10 - Thursday, 7 October 2021

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video

---

I make the observation that Mr Cain has talked about various levels of scrutiny. A disallowable instrument does require six sitting days in this place. I think it is worth noting that, under the standing orders, I could put a bill through this parliament in fewer than six sitting days.

Mrs Jones: Not normally.

MR RATTENBURY: I could. I could bring it in on Thursday—

Mrs Jones: By agreement—

MR RATTENBURY: Mrs Jones is unnecessarily interjecting, because I am actually being very straightforward here about the rules of this place.

Mrs Jones: So you choose when I am allowed to say something.

MR RATTENBURY: She is now trying to talk over the top of me for reasons that are entirely inexplicable. The standing orders are very clear. I could bring a bill into this Assembly on a Thursday of a normal sitting week—remember the pre-COVID days when we just sat Tuesday to Thursday—and I could then seek to have it passed on the Tuesday of the next sitting period, whereas a disallowable instrument has six sitting days to sit in this place. I am simply making an observation of the standing orders. I am not arguing anything other than to point out the timing measures available here.

I note that the scrutiny committee specifically considered these provisions, and whether they inappropriately delegate legislative powers. The committee raised no objections; it did not require a response in the chamber. Mr Cain has raised some important points around scrutiny, but I think he has misconstrued this legislation in the sense that it actually places a higher level of scrutiny on some powers that currently exist, which could be passed with a notifiable instrument or without any notification requirements at all. So, whilst I think he is right to raise concerns about line of sight for the Assembly on these matters, my case to this Assembly is that this bill improves a range of notification requirements and gives the Assembly a line of sight that it does not currently have. I commend the amendments to the Assembly.

Question put:

That clauses 24 to 40 be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—

---

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video